Hello everyone,
Thanks for being patient with me. Here in the archipelago, I've been hiking until I can't really stand anymore, which leave me with very little brain for LARP. However, in my lonely mountain retreat, I was mulling over something that has come up a couple times for me in conversation, writing, and playing... comfort zones.
(Please excuse the awkward English-- I haven't been using it at length or in any sort of formal context.)
Firstly, what is a comfort zone (and I'm sorry for the lack of a better term)? Within LARP, I'm operatively defining it as an individual player's tolerance and willingness to participate in any number of IG/OoG scenarios. For instance, PC Jenny Jones may have a comfort zone that allows her to enjoy emotional conversations with fellow PCs, political intrigue, and one-on-one combat. However, PC Jenny Jones may have a comfort zone that does not include any sort of PvP nor romantic relationships with other players (PCs or otherwise). Moreover, devoutly religious OoG, Jenny Jones may feel intensely uncomfortable if required to engage in IG religion. Superficially, this situation is easy enough-- don't send Jenny Jones any potential suitors, and make sure she gets in on any juicy usurpation plot (but avoid church stuff, or forewarn her). Seemingly, Jenny should have a fun and comfortable game.
However, when Jenny is one of 60+ players, all of whom have individual comfort zones, this can get complicated. How can the player base, including staff and non-staff, successfully navigate and address the comfort zones of every single player? Admittedly, this is a difficult question into which a lot of thought has been poured-- pregame surveys, post-event letters, and experiential learning have all contributed to helping us learn how to deal with the comfort zones of our fellow players. After all, LARP is, if nothing else, a fundamentally prosocial experience. So, some questions on comfort zones...answer any, all, or none.
What is your comfort zone? How do you make sure it is respected? Have you ever run into problems with your comfort zone/tolerance levels on an OoG level? How did you deal with the incident?
How do you mitigate your OoG comfort zone with the expectations of the IG world?
As a staff member or NPC, how do you deal with varying PC comfort levels in a game?
Are there ground rules for player interaction that facilitate an environment of mutual respect?
Are there ever times when pushing a player out of their comfort zone is ok-- even desirable? Why or why not?
Thanks for being patient with me. Here in the archipelago, I've been hiking until I can't really stand anymore, which leave me with very little brain for LARP. However, in my lonely mountain retreat, I was mulling over something that has come up a couple times for me in conversation, writing, and playing... comfort zones.
(Please excuse the awkward English-- I haven't been using it at length or in any sort of formal context.)
Firstly, what is a comfort zone (and I'm sorry for the lack of a better term)? Within LARP, I'm operatively defining it as an individual player's tolerance and willingness to participate in any number of IG/OoG scenarios. For instance, PC Jenny Jones may have a comfort zone that allows her to enjoy emotional conversations with fellow PCs, political intrigue, and one-on-one combat. However, PC Jenny Jones may have a comfort zone that does not include any sort of PvP nor romantic relationships with other players (PCs or otherwise). Moreover, devoutly religious OoG, Jenny Jones may feel intensely uncomfortable if required to engage in IG religion. Superficially, this situation is easy enough-- don't send Jenny Jones any potential suitors, and make sure she gets in on any juicy usurpation plot (but avoid church stuff, or forewarn her). Seemingly, Jenny should have a fun and comfortable game.
However, when Jenny is one of 60+ players, all of whom have individual comfort zones, this can get complicated. How can the player base, including staff and non-staff, successfully navigate and address the comfort zones of every single player? Admittedly, this is a difficult question into which a lot of thought has been poured-- pregame surveys, post-event letters, and experiential learning have all contributed to helping us learn how to deal with the comfort zones of our fellow players. After all, LARP is, if nothing else, a fundamentally prosocial experience. So, some questions on comfort zones...answer any, all, or none.
What is your comfort zone? How do you make sure it is respected? Have you ever run into problems with your comfort zone/tolerance levels on an OoG level? How did you deal with the incident?
How do you mitigate your OoG comfort zone with the expectations of the IG world?
As a staff member or NPC, how do you deal with varying PC comfort levels in a game?
Are there ground rules for player interaction that facilitate an environment of mutual respect?
Are there ever times when pushing a player out of their comfort zone is ok-- even desirable? Why or why not?
Just a brief thought during a break at work:
ReplyDeletePeople talk about comfort zones and the responsibility staff have to players and players to each other. One angle less discussed is the reasonable expectation a game has of its players. This is, basically, a question of players not playing games not right for them instead of complaining about games not bending to their whims. So, for example, if you don't want to deal with IG religions... don't play games with a heavy emphasis on them. Madrigal, for example, is a never ending stream of religious based plot. You can kind of dodge some of it, but it pervades the game to its roots. It's somewhat up to the player to gauge that level and decide if they can deal with it or not. While staff should avoid sending a player like that overt religious hooks, it wouldn't be appropriate for them to alter the entire game structure to accommodate that particular player.
These kinds of baseline expectations are part of being adults engaged in a communal activity. If it's not right for you and it's a hard part of the game/setting, it's up to you to adapt or leave.
Please keep in mind that this is in addition to games making reasonable accommodations, not instead of them.
I agree with this. While writing this, I kept thinking of Numina and Madrigal, both of which are heavily religious, or Lost Eidolons and Endgame, which are horror-based. Even though it's reasonable to have tolerance issues with religion or horror, if you play games with set themes, then you need to accept the consequences of those themes. I get a little annoyed when players come into a heavy RP game, and whine about the lack of combat (or vice versa)-- it seems like people often have a hard time accepting when a game just wasn't designed for their play-style/comfort levels. It's unfair to ask a GM/staff to rewrite a game so that one player can be 100% comfortable.
DeleteThat being said, I think it would be helpful for more games to set ground rules: I appreciate when people are straightforward about their games. When people say things like "This is a combat heavy game with dark/horror themes" I know that, in general, I will enjoy myself. If those descriptors could be expanded a little bit to include specifics (like "IG religion is an essential part of this game") then all the better.
I have a lot of thoughts on this, but almost no time to write them right now, so apologies if this is jumbled.
ReplyDeleteWhy do people always use the word "push"? Pushing is pushy, and implies disrespect for someone's boundaries, which is super-uncool. Inviting people to step out of their usual comfort zone, gently, respectfully, with an observant eye to their reaction and room for them to step to step back, is awesome. Lets do more of that. Part of the point of play is to be able to try something that you don't know if you'll like. If they say no, that's cool too. No guilt trips.
So with you on the "games should be upfront about what they are like." For some reason gamers have this terrible habit of assuming homogeneity of expectation. Some horror games are Saw, some are Scream, and some are the Haunting of Hill House. Which is yours? This has to be balanced against the desire for surprise, of course (heaven forbid you want to pull a genre-180-- good luck feeling out your players without spoiling it!).
My 10 years of larping experience tells me that most players actually couldn't articulate to you what they like in a game. I mean, they think they do, but often what they did or didn't enjoy has much more to do with some detail of the execution than with the thing itself.
Actual conversation:
"I hate political plot"
"How come-- you don't like talking?"
"Oh, no, I love talking and roleplay, I just hate nonsensical power jockeying with nothing at stake"
". . .So you hate bad writing?"
"Yeah, pretty much."
Not that as a staff you should ignore what players say they like or dislike, especially with regard to "actual play" situations. Just. . . take it with a grain of salt, especially when they're speaking in the abstract? Give them things they think they like, but give them opportunities to try different stuff as well.
Also, platypus rule FTW :D Having a way for people to cope/respond if they are uncomfortable gives you muuuuch more room to be experimental and creative without risking backing someone into a corner. Even so, ground rules and shared expectations are crucially important.
" I mean, they think they do, but often what they did or didn't enjoy has much more to do with some detail of the execution than with the thing itself."
DeleteAnother problem with this, is that players have often been "burned" by other games' bad writing. They don't want to do, say, any sort of fae plot, because, in the past, they haven't enjoyed it *at other games.* Unfortunately, we all know fae plot is AWESOME, and that, in order to enjoy any new experience, you need to check your assumptions at the door. It's like reading a book, by a writer about whom you've never heard, and assuming it will be exactly like Harry Potter because there are witches. Give it a chapter or two, then make your judgments.
I also often find that players actually say the opposite of what they like. Not because they're lying, but because they're actually that far wrong about themselves. That makes for some interesting staff meetings when you're pitching an idea directly contradictory to what a player has said they want in a PEL because you know that if you take them at their word they will be miserable and blame you.
DeleteMost commonly, I find myself out of my comfort zone when somebody starts RPing an intense emotion and I'm not at that level.
ReplyDeleteUsually this comes up when a bunch of people are hanging out during downtime being silly, and somebody begins roleplaying angst about a character issue. And it's like, okay, shit got real. So shhhhh.
I don't want to spoil their emotional moment; that's why they're here. But I am not good enough of an actor to roleplay the level of emotion that they want reciprocated. Trying to roleplay sympathy when you're still giggling about some in-joke can come off as sarcasm. So I usually just kind of back out.
I would argue that there is also some responsibility on the other parties to choose a time to express this emotion that is appropriate to the response that they would like to receive. Honestly, role playing heavy angst and woe, with a bunch of folks who have hit Nocturnus Doofus ... probably not the best choice of locales.
DeleteSometimes this is unavoidable, but, honestly, people need to not get upset if they choose to bring a rain cloud into a room full of people laughing their asses off. Or if people choose not to engage them and their heavy emotion, regardless of what it might be.