Refining the LARP Political Structure in Larger Groups
In the previous post, I discussed the idea of dividing
characters in a LARP into 5 factions in a general pentagonal arrangement; where
factions are on corners of the pentagon, allied with those on adjacent corners
and opposed to factions on the distant corners.
An interesting court ruling has been posed by a US court,
regarding the adoption of game mechanisms by companies. So this makes me feel a
bit more at ease with the adoption of the Magic:
the Gathering colour system as a basis for this. My first thoughts
regarding the factions was the have each group midway aligned between two
colours… one white/blue, one white/green, one green/red, one red/black, one
black/blue… in some cases this seemed to work well (the cult worked well as blue/black,
criminals worked well as black/red, the university could have worked as a
blue/white, but the military didn’t really work as a white/green). I found that
the factions worked better as a straight up analogue of each colour. It also
made things easier for new players to understand, and for those who might only
have a passing knowledge of Magic: the
Gathering… simple is good when it comes to a shorthand, it gets everyone on
the same page, and complexity can develop from there. Of course, Magic has been
going for over 20 years, and has had numerous expansions sets and developments
over that time, factions of allied colours have developed, factions of opposing
colours have developed, multi-colour cards have been introduced, and then there
are also the colourless artefacts that can be used by anyone.
If we keep working
with the concepts and colours of Magic, I’m imagining that all of our
characters are basically named/Legendary 2/2 creatures who cost 2 colourless
mana to summon into the game (lesser NPCs are the 1/1 creatures who costs a
single point of mana). Once a character chooses a faction, a single point of
their colourless mana cost is transformed to match the colour of the faction
they’ve chosen to affiliate with, but they gain a benefit associated with that
faction. As they improve over the course of several games, their effective mana
cost increases, and similarly they either gain increases to their power and
toughness, or gain new special abilities that manipulate play in some way. Through
more association with a specific faction, a character finds more of their total
mana cost converted to match a specific colour. It would be fairly common for
characters to have their entire cost made up of colourless mana and that of a
single colour, some characters might convert their entire cost to a single colour.
In a few uncommon circumstances, a character might divide their effective mana
cost between two adjacent colours, and very rarely a character might divide
their colour between opposing colours (or between more than two colours); these
choices would require some kind of quest to achieve and would not be easily
available.
Different character
races might also have specific affinities with specific colours:
Green – Elves,
Shifters, Wood Elementals
Red – Dwarves, Orcs,
Goblins, Fire/Earth Elementals
Black – Undead,
Infernals, Darkness Elementals
White – Halflings?, Celestials,
Light Elementals
Blue – Merfolk,
Air/Water Elementals
The main point of this post is less about individuals and
the way they might develop as a comparison to specific cards in Magic: the Gathering, it’s more about
the way multiple characters gather together in
packs/bands/units/adventuring-parties. I’m think of this like the creation of a
deck. You can mix colours if you want, but a deck tends to work better if it’s
focused around one or two specific colours, characters all affiliated with a single
faction might have good coherence and focus but they’ll tend to lack diversity.
Such groups would be prompted into play as more players come into the group, to
add more diversity to the mix, and new ways to manipulate the political
landscape of the game.
Here’s how I’d view the single colour teams (As long as all of the characters making up
the group share that colour, they’d get some kind of colour associated bonus)…
White: a military unit/platoon (Protection? Warded armour?)
Green: a pack of tribal/nomadic hunters (Life Magic? Bonus health?)
Red: a gang/cartel of criminals (Destruction? Weapon bonus?)
Black: a coven of cultists (Death Magic? Fear effect?)
Blue: a circle of scholars/scientists (Freeze Spells? Mystical enchantment?)
Then these would be the adjacent coloured teams, where
characters would need to have one colour or the other (or a combination of the
two)…
White/Green: Honourable Rangers, Light Druids,
Green/Red: Rampaging Horde, Predators
Red/Black: Destructive Savages, Saboteurs, Coldblooded Killers
Black/Blue: Dark Mages, Cunning Ninjas
Blue/White: Light Mages, Lawkeepers
These are all very loose stereotypes, and there could easily
be numerous other types of adventuring parties that fit between two different
colours. The general idea behind this whole post is that if two characters
share a colour they’ll be inclined to work together, and if they have allied
colours they won’t necessarily go out of their way to oppose one another. And
on a larger scale, groups of characters will also be more inclined groups of
player characters share a colour, they’ll be more inclined to work together, if
they have opposing colours they be more inclined to work against one another. It’s
all about maximising the depth of the play experience without adding too much
more complexity to things.
I'm sure there will be more discussion on this as the theories are put into practice.
Comments