Should we update the site help to include non "pen and paper" games

Question

The consensus on Are we including LARPs? seems to be Yes!. Should I update the site help to remove the words "pen and paper"?

If so how should we distinguish between our RPGs and all the other RPGs (computer, MMO, etc) out there?

Answer 1

I don't think there's a real slipperly slope here. We're not going to be taken over by LARPers, hence there is nothing to slip on if we accept LARP questions. Ditto for questions about indie publishing, Scandinavian home-brew, or any other fringe of the roleplaying community.

CRPGs and MMOs, on the other hand, would crush us. Hence, CRPGs and the like represent a slippery cliff, with sharp rocks and stinging hornets at the bottom. Hornets with lasers strapped to their heads, with sharks strapped to the lasers.

Given that, we should be expansive as possible concerning fringe RPG elements, because there's no risk and all reward as a result. The only things that we should be careful about including in the site scope are things that could potentially take over. If something is firmly in the fringe and has no hope of displacing questions about D&D 4e, then it's not going to be a practical problem, ever.

For those worried about dilution, consider: if something is very fringe, there are only so many people who will ever view, upvote, or answer those questions, let alone ask them in the first place. They're going to be a blip among the scores of questions about RPGs that you're more interested in.

Also, we need more people. Being exclusive and cutting out fringe roleplayers is likely not going to increase our appeal to less fringe roleplayers, but word getting out that we're exclusive and picky about what kind of RPG we think "belongs" is sure to turn people off. And we want the network effect to work for us, not against us. The flipped situation—we welcome a broad range of RPG players—isn't going to drive off the core traditional roleplayers because it simply won't make much of an apparent difference to them compared to the site as it is now, while it would enhance our image as the place to go with any RPG question you have. And we do want that.

Answer 2

Arguments in favor:

• Some of our most prominent and active community members have identified themselves as LARPers.
• LARPers opens up a new demographic of potential users, which can increase views per day, which is something we need.
• LARPing and pen & paper RPGs have in common that they are much more oriented towards creativity, imagination and personal interaction between players; as such - while there is no term to bind them while excluding computer games - they are cohesive.
• It's a slippery slope. There are games that call themselves RPGs that are very much like LARPs: e.g., Montsegur 1244 and It's Complicated.

Answer 3

Having run and played a LARP for over a decade (NERO Pro, NERO ARGO) LARP issues are distinct from tabletop despite their being a roleplaying game.

The reason for this is that Live Action dominates LARP issues. Whether you are a player or running event. It is also much more collaborative especially on event management. The only area of tabletop that comes even close would questions on managing living campaigns. Only because you have to keep track of players and their characters in between sessions and there some overlap in what is considered good scenario design.

To give a specific example is that because it is Live-Action event directors are much more constrained than tabletop referee. You can't shift things around as a tabletop referee. Yet people succeeded in running fun and interesting events despite this.

I am not in favor of expanding this to include LARPs. If there is enough interest it should go through the Area51 process. As it is one of the big three of roleplaying (MMORPG, LARP, tabletop) there a chance it will get through the process if promoted.

Answer 4

Arguments against:

• There are less than 5 users who have identified themselves as LARPers on the Are you a LARPer? question... but the community is 700+ users.
• There are currently (10/2/2010) a total of only 5 questions that turn up in a search for LARP on the parent site, and none of them are specifically about LARP topics. Further, there are no questions that use a LARP tag.
  • This may or may not be due to the current inclusion of the "pen and paper" specification.
• Rather, the consensus I see on Are we including LARPs? is not so much "yes" as it is "why not?"
• Including LARPers makes the site less cohesive; there are generally 3 categories of RPGs; pen and paper, live action and computer. Even wikipedia lists those as the 3 categories and "Everything Except Electronic Media Role Playing" makes for a weak site concept.
  • ie the inclusion of LARPers undeniably affects the cohesiveness of the site, but only potentially brings substantial increase in user base.

Answer 5

We could update it to say something like, "for players and gamemasters of all RPGs, from tabletop to live-action to freeform and all shades between." (And with "no computer RPGs" in the very next section, we don't need to be more restrictive in that sentence.)

The advantage being that an explicit call-out like that is a good start to making gamers at the margins of the hobby feel included and welcomed. Otherwise it would be easy for someone to look at a generic "all roleplaying games" statement and wonder whether we really mean it, or whether we're just ignorant of the variety of RPGs and would have excluded LARPs (or whatever) had we known about them when the FAQ was written.

Answer 6

So IMO the problem with including LARPs is that it's become a pretty large, wide-ranging niche now. If we were just talking about the old school LARPs that are essentially outgrowths of specific tabletop games, like Cthulhu Live or Vampire Stand Around With Arms Crossed Thing (whatever it's called), I'd be OK with it. But what about stuff like Amtgard? Do we want questions on how to best construct your boffer weapons cluttering the site? There's a growing new segment of alternate reality games (ARGs) that are LARPish, but often tied to movie marketing schemes etc... Does content around that really help the vast majority of the site?

I believe content like this will make this site LESS desirable to its core audience, tabletop roleplayers - just like adding shared fiction or computer games would. You go to a site like this to find useful info related to what you do. If it's a fundamentally different hobby, the crossover is harmful. Don't do it.

Answer 7

I am all in favor of LARPers of any kind and genre, as long as we protect ourselves from potential deviation into this or much, much worse, this (although I approve the former for other reasons, but it's beyond the point).

Ok, ok. A drift towards cosplay is very unlikely, but just to be clear that the "game" component is fundamental, otherwise is pure cosplay (regardless of the subject).

... Although according to the definition I gave above, I wouldn't know where to classify this.