Post by Andrea on Apr 4, 2017 18:57:18 GMT -5
Greetings expeditioners!
We'd like to offer another installment of our "pillars" of game design this week. As before, we do welcome discourse on any of these topics, so feel free to engage. And of course, if you agree with us, feel free to share these posts to spread the ideas. This one will be delving into how we designed our system to try to balance the often-tricky problem of out-of-game skill vs. in-game skill.
One of our key mantras is that LARPing is about being what you are not, or cannot be. It's all well and good if you want to play a character that is very similar to yourself, and it can certainly be effective to use skills that you as a player possess as a foundation for your character, but this is undeniably the safe route. Just like in a video game or pen-and-paper game, you may periodically want to branch out and try archetypes that you are less comfortable with, but in a LARP this can be especially challenging because you have to sell that role in every aspect. You don't just get to say "I do this" and roll a die to find out if you succeeded; you need to be able to fully act out that action with enough physical and real-time skill to pull it off.
Over the course of our respective LARP experiences, we've found that certain roles seem to be considerably more rooted in out-of-game skills than others. This often leads to an imbalance, where a player with a particular set of out-of-game skills can then take a completely different set of in-game skills and have the best of both worlds, while someone lacking that skillset is set at an inherent disadvantage. It's not that we don't value that out-of-game skill; we know it takes commitment to learn to be an excellent boffer fighter, for example, and we're comfortable with a clash between two combat-focused characters leaning in favor of the one who can carry themselves both in- and out-of-game. It's when the player with out-of-game skill decides to become a mage, but still use that out-of-game skill to carry them in combat, that this entire metaphor that is LARPing starts to fall apart and an "elite" tier begins to emerge.
It's important to note that this doesn't just apply to boffer combat; other skillsets, such as roguery, diplomacy, or performance, can also serve as an intimidating hurdle if the player lacks those skills out-of-game.
Sins of a Nation's system is designed to mitigate this problem, and ensure that a character's in-game skills trump their out-of-game ones. We want to ensure that between a good out-of-game fighter with no in-game skills, and a sub-par out-of-game fighter build for combat in-game, the latter will have the advantage. We want to make sure that anyone can jump into a role and play it sufficiently, even if it's not normally within their comfort zone. The first way that we have done this is simply by allowing enough resources that you can count on being able to use your in-game abilities whenever you need them, especially by way of rolling 15-minute resets. You should never need to rely only on your out-of-game sword arm for extended periods of time. We have also introduced a number of skills that are meant to pad out these often challenging roles, such as combat skills that allow you to "try again" if you miss with an ability. For face roles, we've implemented the Influence system to ensure that those with in-game social skills have something over those with just pure charisma on their side. And we've also tightened up on some in-game skillsets that can often be abused for their simplicity; our Arcane Magic system requires a great deal of commitment to master, and at significant enough cost that you most likely can't have the best of both worlds. Obviously this system isn't perfect, and we're always willing to explore new support systems, but we feel that we've managed to fall fairly close to equilibrium, and we've already heard some encouraging anecdotes to back it up.
But this problem is not purely a mechanical one; it's also a cultural attitude problem that can be tough to diffuse. We've been so saturated with systems that don't address this issue, that for many of us this has just become the way it's supposed to be. We want to break that expectation, and make sure that certain players are not looked down on for being less experienced or skilled. One thing that we strongly encourage is to refuse challenges that are rooted in this way of thinking; those that negate your character sheet in some way in favor of pure out-of-game skill. For example, you have every right to refuse a "no skills" or "first to five" duel in-game, and demand instead a form of contest that allows full use of your character sheet. It can be humiliating to lose to a non-combat-focused character who just happens to be piloted by a top-tier boffer fighter when you have invested your entire character into this role, and we absolutely do not want people to feel pressured into accepting this type of challenge to their detriment. Similarly, we encourage players to offer and accept Influence tokens in social scenarios where, for example, one player isn't completely sold on an idea or plan (and we've tried to ensure that Influence tokens are valuable enough for this to feel rewarding). We want people to branch out, and try things that they think are neat but have reservations about pulling off, but sometimes it can feel like there's no point as long as there are significantly better boffer fighters on the field, or more natural leaders to contend with. We're here to say that that shouldn't matter.
We know there are people that disagree with us on this one, and we welcome your perspectives. Please let us know how you feel about this balance and what you think is the best solution below.
We'd like to offer another installment of our "pillars" of game design this week. As before, we do welcome discourse on any of these topics, so feel free to engage. And of course, if you agree with us, feel free to share these posts to spread the ideas. This one will be delving into how we designed our system to try to balance the often-tricky problem of out-of-game skill vs. in-game skill.
One of our key mantras is that LARPing is about being what you are not, or cannot be. It's all well and good if you want to play a character that is very similar to yourself, and it can certainly be effective to use skills that you as a player possess as a foundation for your character, but this is undeniably the safe route. Just like in a video game or pen-and-paper game, you may periodically want to branch out and try archetypes that you are less comfortable with, but in a LARP this can be especially challenging because you have to sell that role in every aspect. You don't just get to say "I do this" and roll a die to find out if you succeeded; you need to be able to fully act out that action with enough physical and real-time skill to pull it off.
Over the course of our respective LARP experiences, we've found that certain roles seem to be considerably more rooted in out-of-game skills than others. This often leads to an imbalance, where a player with a particular set of out-of-game skills can then take a completely different set of in-game skills and have the best of both worlds, while someone lacking that skillset is set at an inherent disadvantage. It's not that we don't value that out-of-game skill; we know it takes commitment to learn to be an excellent boffer fighter, for example, and we're comfortable with a clash between two combat-focused characters leaning in favor of the one who can carry themselves both in- and out-of-game. It's when the player with out-of-game skill decides to become a mage, but still use that out-of-game skill to carry them in combat, that this entire metaphor that is LARPing starts to fall apart and an "elite" tier begins to emerge.
It's important to note that this doesn't just apply to boffer combat; other skillsets, such as roguery, diplomacy, or performance, can also serve as an intimidating hurdle if the player lacks those skills out-of-game.
Sins of a Nation's system is designed to mitigate this problem, and ensure that a character's in-game skills trump their out-of-game ones. We want to ensure that between a good out-of-game fighter with no in-game skills, and a sub-par out-of-game fighter build for combat in-game, the latter will have the advantage. We want to make sure that anyone can jump into a role and play it sufficiently, even if it's not normally within their comfort zone. The first way that we have done this is simply by allowing enough resources that you can count on being able to use your in-game abilities whenever you need them, especially by way of rolling 15-minute resets. You should never need to rely only on your out-of-game sword arm for extended periods of time. We have also introduced a number of skills that are meant to pad out these often challenging roles, such as combat skills that allow you to "try again" if you miss with an ability. For face roles, we've implemented the Influence system to ensure that those with in-game social skills have something over those with just pure charisma on their side. And we've also tightened up on some in-game skillsets that can often be abused for their simplicity; our Arcane Magic system requires a great deal of commitment to master, and at significant enough cost that you most likely can't have the best of both worlds. Obviously this system isn't perfect, and we're always willing to explore new support systems, but we feel that we've managed to fall fairly close to equilibrium, and we've already heard some encouraging anecdotes to back it up.
But this problem is not purely a mechanical one; it's also a cultural attitude problem that can be tough to diffuse. We've been so saturated with systems that don't address this issue, that for many of us this has just become the way it's supposed to be. We want to break that expectation, and make sure that certain players are not looked down on for being less experienced or skilled. One thing that we strongly encourage is to refuse challenges that are rooted in this way of thinking; those that negate your character sheet in some way in favor of pure out-of-game skill. For example, you have every right to refuse a "no skills" or "first to five" duel in-game, and demand instead a form of contest that allows full use of your character sheet. It can be humiliating to lose to a non-combat-focused character who just happens to be piloted by a top-tier boffer fighter when you have invested your entire character into this role, and we absolutely do not want people to feel pressured into accepting this type of challenge to their detriment. Similarly, we encourage players to offer and accept Influence tokens in social scenarios where, for example, one player isn't completely sold on an idea or plan (and we've tried to ensure that Influence tokens are valuable enough for this to feel rewarding). We want people to branch out, and try things that they think are neat but have reservations about pulling off, but sometimes it can feel like there's no point as long as there are significantly better boffer fighters on the field, or more natural leaders to contend with. We're here to say that that shouldn't matter.
We know there are people that disagree with us on this one, and we welcome your perspectives. Please let us know how you feel about this balance and what you think is the best solution below.
