21
\$\begingroup\$

Is it okay to ask LARP specific questions?

\$\endgroup\$
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ The site faq has been edited to include LARPs. \$\endgroup\$ – mxyzplk Feb 8 '12 at 4:16
17
\$\begingroup\$

LARP and Freeform should both be in. I prefer to interpret the tabletop as saying that we aren't talking about business roleplaying, not that some of the RPGs you might see at a gaming con aren't welcome. How about changing the charter from:

Role-playing Games Stack Exchange is for players and gamemasters of tabletop role-playing games.

to

Role-playing Games Stack Exchange is for players, gamemasters, and writers of tabletop, live-action, or freeform role-playing games.

(see how RPG writers sneak into my proposal)?

\$\endgroup\$
  • 6
    \$\begingroup\$ +1. The line between writer/designer and player is blurred to the point of non-existence in significant portions of the hobby. \$\endgroup\$ – SevenSidedDie Jan 30 '11 at 17:21
14
\$\begingroup\$

Yes, I don't see why not--the demographics of the community would determine whether they get answered and how they are voted. That said, I don't know much about what kind of LARP questions there would be and how out of place they might seem.

\$\endgroup\$
  • 6
    \$\begingroup\$ +1 for "I don't see why not". LARPs are roleplaying games, too. If people want to post LARP questions, let 'em. There are a lot of games that have a LARP and a not-too-dissimilar tabletop version. If there isn't enough interest, the questions won't get answered. \$\endgroup\$ – RMorrisey Aug 25 '10 at 1:55
6
\$\begingroup\$

I'm not a LARPer; I'm a tabletopper. Still, I don't see a lot of difference between a good tabletop immersion in which everyone is in-character while sitting and a good LARP immersion in which everyone is in-character while standing and moving around. The basic premise behind what the game is meant to be seems to remain the same (of course, I could be wrong since I don't LARP). I think LARP questions should be included. A "LARP" tag will allow people to filter out the questions if they don't want to see them.

\$\endgroup\$
2
\$\begingroup\$

I don't want to be an excluder, but the original proposal explicitly states "tabletop, paper-and-pencil role-playing games".

Do we have any LARPers in the community at this point?

If yes, we should accommodate them.

If not, I think we should stick with the proposal. So far, there are no questions about LARPing (please correct me if I'm wrong) and several other users have already speculated in comments and answers that LARP could/should get its own Stack Exchange site. As such I think the silent consensus has been that this site is about tabletop, paper-and-pencil role-playing games.

But again, if there are LARPers in our community already, we should try to accommodate them; I'm not one for blatant, deliberate exclusion.

If you're a LARPer, please see the Are you a LARPer? question.

\$\endgroup\$
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ The open beta will likely shed a lot more light on this. \$\endgroup\$ – Maximillian Aug 24 '10 at 15:10
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ I think it's different enough it would be not very useful for LARPers, as 99% of the traffic would be non-LARP, and generally creep scope. Creeping scope is bad. I know everyone wants to be "inclusionary," but I've had that problem with gaming clubs before. "Oh let's include board games," "Oh let's include computer RPGs" - and you get left with a unfocused mess that everyone abandons. I would say start focused on tabletop and then if we want to branch out later that's fine. \$\endgroup\$ – mxyzplk Aug 24 '10 at 22:15
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ Seems like a semantic issue to me. What's "tabletop"? Is Baron Munchausen out of scope? Is Sherpa out of scope? What if you don't need pencil or paper? I can't see why focus would ever be an issue, since you can ignore tags outside your own area of interest. \$\endgroup\$ – Jmstar Jan 30 '11 at 15:36
  • \$\begingroup\$ It seems to me that the problem with excluding LARP is the games that are both. (Examplar case: World of Darkness. Both WoDs have popular and tightly-integrated LARP systems; it seems silly to include one and not the other.) \$\endgroup\$ – Tynam Dec 13 '11 at 18:38
2
\$\begingroup\$

I know we have at least one other LARPer who's pretty active but hasn't spoken up yet. I'd say go for it, and we'll see what happens.

\$\endgroup\$
2
\$\begingroup\$

I'm a Larper and I'm a tabletopper too. I like see both in here. =D

\$\endgroup\$
1
\$\begingroup\$

As long as all questions concerning Live Action are tagged as such, I suppose it isn't a problem. But, I don't see much overlap between the technical table-top and dramatic LARP. It falls outside the scope of the proposal.

\$\endgroup\$
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ I disagree about overlap. There's only very little overlap if you look exclusively at heavy-mechanics games like D&D and GURPS. When you look at the whole range of things that are definitely roleplaying games, the differences from larps become smaller than the differences between different styles of RPGs. \$\endgroup\$ – SevenSidedDie Aug 30 '10 at 22:10

You must log in to answer this question.