|
|
|
Knight
 
Group: Basic Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 11:08 PM
Posts: 74,
Visits: 2,196
|
|
| I've been trying to find out whatever I can about the upcoming Odyssey LARP. I'm pretty much limited to this forum and www.odysseylrp.co.uk, if there are any other online sources. I am a little worried about the accessibility of Odyssey, on an intellectual level. Many LARPers have quite impressive educational backgrounds, and are... intellectually gifted. I am not one of them. There have already been a lot of in-jokes on here that draw heavily on being able to understand latin and having knowlelge of the Classics. And lots and lots of talk about ancient historical weapons and armour. All of this goes way over my head, and is only likely to get worse as the events get closer and start. My question is this: how high is Odyssey's barrier to entry in terms of expected historical/cultural/mythological knowledge? How much does the game team expect the players to know, and how much would players expect of each other? EDIT: ps- I know the Latin you can Use thread is not to be taken seriously. It's a coincidence.
----------------------------------------
Maelstrom: Jocelyn Dumont, Tuille Traders, Freiboden
RL: Graham
|
|
|
|
|
Wag
Group: System Moderators
Last Login: Yesterday @ 10:26 PM
Posts: 1,528,
Visits: 3,647
|
|
From what I've seen, the old films will help you more than a classics degree!
- _____________________________________________________
- Riftworld:
Lyria; Morgan Doosh; 'Spanners'; Tamarind of Ruunar - Artificer: Lady Evron (Survivor!)
- M&M: Miss Emily Mortimer
- Blood Red Roses: Miss Audhild Godwinson
- Crusades: Jumanah Amal
- Odyssey: Julia Tiberillus, 'Ridea', of the Cruentus Anatidae
|
|
|
|
|
Wag
Group: System Moderators
Last Login: 2 days ago @ 11:24 PM
Posts: 3,415,
Visits: 14,016
|
|
Peregrine (1/21/2010)
There have already been a lot of in-jokes on here that draw heavily on being able to understand latin and having knowlelge of the Classics. And lots and lots of talk about ancient historical weapons and armour. All of this goes way over my head, and is only likely to get worse as the events get closer and start.
I suspect that much the same applies as applied in Maelstrom.
I think it's worth noting that the discussion is largely irrelevant when people deviate from the setting (although there's only so much Odyssey setting up at the moment!). History is something you might usefully draw on to *add to* what you've got from the shared setting - that's not something that need bother any player who doesn't want to buy into your group concept - IC differences of interpretation are something you can go into IC.
If someone tries to justify a deviation from the setting in historical terms, I think all they are doing is *removing from* what they've got from the shared setting - you can't stop them doing it, but the justification means nothing. History is just a source of useful material to pillage - it's not in any way authoritative, the setting that the organisers are presenting for the game is the only thing that's authoritative.
Some of the historical stuff comes up when people say "The setting seems opposed to Common Sense, is this a mistake I should be ignoring? Hollywood says that everyone basically gets along and cultural differences are basically trivial." - it's hard to point out that Common Sense may be misleading without defaulting to historical examples - but the lesson isn't "you must have a classics degree" but "you should take the setting at face value, if it doesn't seem to align with Common Sense that's because it's not a modern day setting.".
History is a resource you can draw on to augment your character/group design - if you want to do that, all you need to do is access to a library/wikipedia and you rip out the bits which you think augment what you're taking from the setting.
Historical references come up when people are positively excited about something cool which can be nicked - that's no different from anyone posting a potentially useful resource - if it looks like something you can use, follow it up.
Historical references also come up when someone says "I'm not sure about this bit of the setting - it doesn't seem to make sense/it can't *really* means what it says/that's not realistic.". Everyone now and then someone will be utterly convinced that no one would ever start a fight they might lose - you don't need a history degree to put "martyrs" into wikipedia. But if you're happy just engaging with the setting as it's written, there's no reason why you'd have to do that.
Marios
|
|
|
|
|
Wag
Group: System Moderators
Last Login: 2 days ago @ 11:24 PM
Posts: 3,415,
Visits: 14,016
|
|
Sarah (1/21/2010)
From what I've seen, the old films will help you more than a classics degree!
Careful - a lot of the films are quoted for costume/imagery tips and are massively at odds with the setting material/tone of the game (i.e. Xena: Warrior Princess).
There are two mutually exclusive games - one where the setting is non-negotiable (anti-Xena) and one where the setting is optional (going with the setting is fine, but so is ignoring it if you think the result is Cool). These are both perfectly valid formats, but it's one or the other - people playing one won't enjoy being stuck in the same game as someone trying to play the other.
At the point where people are looking at the system and wondering whether or not to invest, one of the main factors is probably going to be "Will everyone be on the same page?". The overwhelming message I've got from the material is that this is a game for playing within the setting - there isn't even a "Free Islands" option for people to play something exceptional - but the film references are a bit ambiguous and muddy the picture a bit. I think you only have to browse the forum to see that there are tugs in both directions (people whose interest in playing Carthaginians markedly rises of falls based on whether the last post was from someone interested in the setting or someone drawing on non-setting cliches).
Marios
|
|
|
|
|
Wag
Group: Basic Members
Last Login: Today @ 12:49 AM
Posts: 2,787,
Visits: 5,084
|
|
Peregrine (1/21/2010)
I've been trying to find out whatever I can about the upcoming Odyssey LARP. I'm pretty much limited to this forum and www.odysseylrp.co.uk, if there are any other online sources.
Not thus far. We are hard at work on the real website and the mailshot was collected from the printers in a very heavily laden van today. So soon...
I am a little worried about the accessibility of Odyssey, on an intellectual level. Many LARPers have quite impressive educational backgrounds, and are... intellectually gifted. I am not one of them.
I think Odyssey does have some accessibility issues. We're deliberately tried to set the costume goals as high as we dare and the game is very hard skills based. Those are both huge risks and will put some people off (and hopefully appeal to others), but I honestly hadn't even considered someone might be put off by not being familiar with actual history.
Thinking about it now, I'm not sure there is anything particularly unusual about the historical character of Odyssey. Maelstrom has a distinct historical period, it's anywhere from about 1300 to 1800 give or take a century. If you look at most LRP games, people in mail wielding broadswords abound - they're all set broadly in a sort of stock equivalent of medieval Europe. That's useful because you know not to turn up dressed as a stormtrooper but I think we've all learned over time to stop listening to the history pedants telling us that longbows do/don't/do/don't/do/don't go through armour because it's not relevant.
Odyssey has the same level of historical accuracy that you'll find at Maelstrom, CP or the LT - virtually none. It does have a setting, a "period" and what makes it unusual as a game is that that period is not "stock medieval Europe" but is empires of the Mediterranean some time between -250 BC and +250 AD give or take a century. I think the usual nature of the setting is what is fooling some people into thinking that history is more relevant to this game than it would be to any of the countless alternatives. But it's a red herring. This is not a reenactment game, it's a LRP game.
There have already been a lot of in-jokes on here that draw heavily on being able to understand latin and having knowlelge of the Classics. And lots and lots of talk about ancient historical weapons and armour. All of this goes way over my head, and is only likely to get worse as the events get closer and start.
Sadly I think you're right. As a team we've tried to repeatedly state as loudly and as clearly as possible that this is not a history game. It's a mythic setting. It has titans and gods, heroes and magic. If you find the history herring posts off-putting just keep reminding yourself that the design team are all saying "the game isn't about history".
However it's worth bearing in mind that at the moment not much setting material has been released, so actual history is all anyone has to go on, in guessing what the game will be like. The setting stuff will all be out by the end of the month and hopefully then there will be lots more talk about the setting, the costumes, Greek chic and Carthaginian Cheerleaders.
My question is this: how high is Odyssey's barrier to entry in terms of expected historical/cultural/mythological knowledge? How much does the game team expect the players to know, and how much would players expect of each other?
The only barriers in this regard are the ones players assume will be there. Once the game begins, unless we've really done our job wrong, it will be sufficiently cool and exciting that all talk of whether Athenian women had better property rights than Spartan women will be swept aside. Making an effort with your kit and your character will be important, knowing the precise latin phrase for punctillious pedantry will not be relevant in the slightest.
Ultimately we expect that the overwhelming majority of players will come to the game because 300 is a cool movie, because Troy is ace even despite Brad Pitt. Clash of the Titans, Rome, Gladiator. These are all inspirations for the game and they are what we expect will inspire players. But even if you've never seen any of those movies, if you read the setting material then you'll know everything you need to know to play the game.
History is an important source for LRP. Along with other works of fiction.
|
|
|
|
|
Wag
Group: Basic Members
Last Login: Today @ 12:49 AM
Posts: 2,787,
Visits: 5,084
|
|
Marios (1/21/2010)
Careful - a lot of the films are quoted for costume/imagery tips and are massively at odds with the setting material/tone of the game (i.e. Xena: Warrior Princess).
I'm a huge Xena fan. Well, mostly a fan of Lucy Lawless kicking ass actually, but still I like the tv show too. I'm not sure what part of the show you think is at odds with the setting material/tone. It's "olden times" (sorry to use this technical term), with gods and mortals clashing, with epic battles between heroes and the fate of nations hanging in the balance. Alright Xena was a bit "hey what should we throw in this week, lets visit the orient" but the core Xena stuff is pretty relevant to Odyssey. It's got centaurs and amazons so it's Greek init?
There are two mutually exclusive games - one where the setting is non-negotiable (anti-Xena) and one where the setting is optional (going with the setting is fine, but so is ignoring it if you think the result is Cool). These are both perfectly valid formats, but it's one or the other - people playing one won't enjoy being stuck in the same game as someone trying to play the other.
The setting is key to Odyssey. At the end of the day, why go to the expense and effort of playing in a game whose setting is inspired by the era unless that setting is what you want to play in? I don't see the setting as negotiable for Odyssey anymore than it is for Maelstrom. The setting clearly *isn't* Xena Warrior Princess, but neither is it Homer or Harryhausen. The writers have been inspired by the cool bits in all these things to create something new - the mythic world of Odyssey.
History is an important source for LRP. Along with other works of fiction.
|
|
|
|
|
Wag
Group: System Moderators
Last Login: 2 days ago @ 11:24 PM
Posts: 3,415,
Visits: 14,016
|
|
Matt Pennington (1/22/2010)
I'm a huge Xena fan. Well, mostly a fan of Lucy Lawless kicking ass actually, but still I like the tv show too. I'm not sure what part of the show you think is at odds with the setting material/tone. It's "olden times" (sorry to use this technical term), with gods and mortals clashing, with epic battles between heroes and the fate of nations hanging in the balance. Alright Xena was a bit "hey what should we throw in this week, lets visit the orient" but the core Xena stuff is pretty relevant to Odyssey. It's got centaurs and amazons so it's Greek init?
Simon (11/10/2009)
[quote]Marios (11/10/2009)When I see films listed as reference I'm never really sure what is meant by inspiration. I'm not a reenactor, so I'm not particularly bothered about historically inaccurate kit so long as it looks roughly right and fits the character - so Xena: Warrior Princess is fine in terms of kit.
However, I would be quite put off a game if I thought the general level of interest in playing the cultural setting (playing *as if* there were one) was at the level of Xena. That is obviously something that varies from player to player and figures very highly on whether or not I'm going to get value out of a game, so it's probably the number one consideration for how much effort/resources to invest in a game - *unfortunately* there's almost no way of knowing in advance of the first game (unless you go with a very large, previously known group).
We are not planning to deliver Xena: The LRP any more than we are Conan: The LRP or Indiana Jones: The LRP (to pick three sources mentioned). They were given as inspiration for kit "Hey, I could go for helmets like the Easterlings wear in the LotR movies for Persian warriors" or characters "Hey, I could play a reformed bandit mercenary who has a big love/hate thing with the gods and can't help but meddle with their plans" or groups "Hey, we could play a Collegia like the one Erastes Fulmen runs in HBO's Rome and terrorise other Romans until pay us protection money."
The style of game we want to run is something that is serious, but is open to lighter moments; is in a tough, uncompromising world where the gods are real and do speak their minds; where there is epic story that is 'big' rather than 'small' in its ambition; and where people fight and die for the amusement of others.
It does look like Xena: Warrior Princess wasn't terribly bothered with setting consistency (meets Homer and then at some later point meets Caesar) but - and I admit to only having seen a few episodes - the issue is more with the lack of interest in cultural setting:
While the show is typically set in ancient times, its themes are essentially modern and it investigates the ideas of taking responsibility for past misdeeds, the value of human life, personal liberty and sacrifice, and friendship. The show often addresses ethical dilemmas, such as the morality of pacifism; however, the storylines rarely seek to provide unequivocal solutions.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xena_Warrior_Princess
I want to play in a game whose themes are essentially *not* modern. I'm not saying Xena: The LRP is invalid (it's because it's valid that I think the distinction is important!), I'm just saying I wouldn't want enjoy playing it and I wouldn't enjoy the OOC conflict of attending a game where some people wanted to play that and some didn't (what I might enjoy on a forum is not what I'd enjoy at an event!).
Matt Pennington (1/22/2010)
The setting is key to Odyssey. At the end of the day, why go to the expense and effort of playing in a game whose setting is inspired by the era unless that setting is what you want to play in?
Because not everyone views setting as important. I don't think there's anything obviously invalid about Xena: The LRP - it's perfectly possible to want to play in a game which has all the things you find attractive about a setting - funky costume/kit, good physical logistics for Adventure and mythological beasts/magic - without any of the things you could justifiably find unappealing like cultural setting.
Why would you want to attend a game where players massively outnumber organisers if you don't want to engage in player-lead plot? Why would you want to play a Freibodener who has no feeling one way or the other about the Revolution?
I don't think you can be too candid about what you're trying to provide. People will perfectly rationally look at Maelstrom and see a game about pirates and tea-parties and then be horrified at the PvP/aggressive player-lead agenda if there aren't big warning signs informing people about what they are likely to run into. Ditto, people can look at the Freiboden brief and think "I like muskets but I really have no interest in playing a character affected by/in opposition to the Revolution, so I'll be from the bit that wasn't.".
Matt Pennington (1/22/2010)
I don't see the setting as negotiable for Odyssey anymore than it is for Maelstrom. The setting clearly *isn't* Xena Warrior Princess, but neither is it Homer or Harryhausen. The writers have been inspired by the cool bits in all these things to create something new - the mythic world of Odyssey.
I certainly don't have a problem with the setting presented (more please?), but one of the major tensions throughout the Maelstrom campaign was negotiation over the setting. A lot of people - people who can't be just waved away not really knowing what they liked - liked everything about Maelstrom except the setting and did view it as negotiable.
I think it's a mistake to view that as automatically unreasonable (where do the Maelstrom rules say that the setting is not negotiable?) - Maelstrom's setting is really novel for a game of that size - I think there's a general pre-existing expectation that settings will be *very* negotiable. But the upshot is that you end up with two groups of people playing different games finding themselves OOC irked at being stuck in a game with contradictory OOC expectations.
Simon (11/10/2009)
At least, that's our view. As you point out ultimately it'll be decided by the players who attend - I just hope it's more "I Claudius" than "Up Pompeii".
Indeed - a no-smoking area is only a no-smoking if no one comes and smokes in it. There are people who want to play "I Claudius" and there are people who want to play "Up Pompeii" - whether or not they sign up to Odyssey to play does, I think, depend both on the clarity and intentions of the organisers *and* what other players look like playing. I don't think it's quite symmetrical - I may not like the idea that you'll sneer at me OOC if I play "Up Pompeii" while you're playing "I, Claudius", but your IC game will cause less problems with mine than mine will with yours.
Marios
|
|
|
|
|
Wag
Group: System Moderators
Last Login: 2 days ago @ 11:24 PM
Posts: 3,415,
Visits: 14,016
|
|
Matt Pennington (1/22/2010)
It does have a setting, a "period" and what makes it unusual as a game is that that period is not "stock medieval Europe" but is empires of the Mediterranean some time between -250 BC and +250 AD give or take a century.
Not to be pedantic, but I thought (wrongly?) it was the equally blurry nebulous period just before that - 700BC - 300BC? I.e. before the period of massive cross-culture empires and Christianity (not that it would be a bad idea to rip imagery off from after that period - just so long as there's no reference to Rome's/Alexander's empire or Christianity).
Marios
|
|
|
|
|
Wag
Group: System Moderators
Last Login: Yesterday @ 10:26 PM
Posts: 1,528,
Visits: 3,647
|
|
Marios (1/22/2010)
Matt Pennington (1/22/2010)
It does have a setting, a "period" and what makes it unusual as a game is that that period is not "stock medieval Europe" but is empires of the Mediterranean some time between -250 BC and +250 AD give or take a century.Not to be pedantic, but I thought (wrongly?) it was the equally blurry nebulous period just before that - 700BC - 300BC? I.e. before the period of massive cross-culture empires and Christianity (not that it would be a bad idea to rip imagery off from after that period - just so long as there's no reference to Rome's/Alexander's empire or Christianity). Marios Dude, its not a historical game. Its fantasy. The period isnt that important, and the different empires might be inspired by different periods anyway. And 'inspired by' is the important bit.
- _____________________________________________________
- Riftworld:
Lyria; Morgan Doosh; 'Spanners'; Tamarind of Ruunar - Artificer: Lady Evron (Survivor!)
- M&M: Miss Emily Mortimer
- Blood Red Roses: Miss Audhild Godwinson
- Crusades: Jumanah Amal
- Odyssey: Julia Tiberillus, 'Ridea', of the Cruentus Anatidae
|
|
|
|
|
Heroic Knight
Group: System Moderators
Last Login: Yesterday @ 7:19 PM
Posts: 128,
Visits: 338
|
|
Marios (1/22/2010)
Not to be pedantic, but I thought (wrongly?) it was the equally blurry nebulous period just before that - 700BC - 300BC? I.e. before the period of massive cross-culture empires and Christianity (not that it would be a bad idea to rip imagery off from after that period - just so long as there's no reference to Rome's/Alexander's empire or Christianity).
Marios
Insofar as we have a period focus, it's both. Our Roman "look and feel" is Imperial, so c. the BC/AD handover. Our Persians and Carthaginians owe more to Biblical periods (700-500bc) than to the Alexandrine period. Our Egyptians could have come from anywhere from 1150bc through to 30AD and our Greeks are Alexandrine and the century before.
The message here is period doesn't matter, as long as it's in keeping with the game ethos.
----
All opinions, comments and views expressed in Rule7 posts are mine, or have been sufficiently well plagiarised that you'll never tell the difference. They may be well-informed, educated guesses or pure speculation, but they certainly do not represent any official Odyssey or PD position. As with all PD matters, definitive positions regarding Odyssey issues are best sought direct from PD through the usual official channels. Accept no substitutes!
PD - Odyssey: Campaign, Story & Quest PD - Maelstrom: Doctor Gabriel Pretorius (Ph.D Ch.D Saren), Rimici Capell Future Prospects Group
|
|
|
|