|
|
|
Apprentice
 
Group: Basic Members
Last Login: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 10:26 AM
Posts: 16,
Visits: 39
|
|
| Not sure if this is the right forum so feel free to move Was just curious how many systems have guidelines for thier referees and if so whether was worth comparing notes. In the LT we have a largely voluntary ref team with a smaller full time staff team for the mainline events. Also the ref team is only responsible for safety, running (but not writing) plot and resolving rules queries or disputes. Other departements/teams are responsible for writing plot, making rules, event logisitics etc (although sometimes its the same people) Because we have a large ref crew (150+ registered) with a variety of backgrounds, plus combat safety (or crowd control) is a very real issue with 100s 1000s of combatants we have produced written guidelines and instituted a training programme for our team. Was curious to see whether any other systems have had similar experiences or ideas
|
|
|
|
|
Overlord
Group: Administrators
Last Login: 2 days ago @ 11:11 PM
Posts: 2,014,
Visits: 5,763
|
|
Sorry meant to reply to this ages ago.
James Crollie (12/17/2008)
Not sure if this is the right forum so feel free to move
Was just curious how many systems have guidelines for thier referees and if so whether was worth comparing notes.
Its probably best to speak to Paul Wilder if you're looking for an LT/PD comparison. Or, Wookie (Nicholas ME on here) about the differences of refereeing in CP and PD. Alan Percival (Alan3) is also a good bet in terms of refereeing different systems.
James Crollie (12/17/2008)
In the LT we have a largely voluntary ref teamwith a smaller full time staff team for the mainline events. Also the ref team is only responsible for safety, running (but not writing) plot and resolving rules queries or disputes. Other departements/teams are responsible for writing plot, making rules, event logisitics etc (although sometimes its the same people)
Yes, I've heard a lot about the "new LT ref system" (Well, new since I left staff). Much as some people have lauded it, I have to say The description you've given sounds pretty much like the old system, although the plot/rules delineation wasn't quite as clear cut. That said, I'm not particularly impressed by the "no precedent" method of rules application at LT. I think by doing this it undermines trust in the application of rules and reinforces a no responsibility culture. Nor have I been particularly impressed with the refereeing at LT events over the last three years.
I always felt Marshals were a bad idea. The disadvantage of a tiered system is that it creates a percieved hierarchy of trust. Also, with all the tiers of refs at LT, the players can gauge the level of plot threat by the flourescent flavour accompanying it. In my mind, LT refs are too obtrusive. That said, its good you have a formal guide document. With the size of system and the amount of PvM plot sent out, it is essential.
James Crollie (12/17/2008)
Because we have a large ref crew (150+ registered)with a variety of backgrounds, plus combat safety (or crowd control)is a very real issue with 100s 1000s of combatants we have produced written guidelines and instituted a training programme for our team. Was curious to see whether any other systems have had similar experiences or ideas
There isn't really any other game working with all the same themes on the same scale in the UK. I think it would be interesting to make a comparison to the German fests. That said, I do think what you have at the moment is too conservative and flawed in its emphasis owing to a bit of system paranoia about PvP. Maelstrom get away with pretty large fights with much less of a referee presence. Some of that might be down to the one second rule, but I think more of it is the positive culture of the game.
That said, I have had experience of Maelstrom's non involvement refereeing going a bit too far the other way.
http://www.eoslrp.com/Flashmedia.html.
|
|
|
|
|
Prodigal
Group: Basic Members
Last Login: Today @ 12:17 AM
Posts: 596,
Visits: 1,379
|
|
Paul can give more details (if he wants to) on refereeing at Maelstrom, but there's a few points of comparison I can give.
Maelstrom has about half a dozen volunteer crew who are referees. The hierarchy is simple - referees and head referees. Their main role is answering rules questions and making sure the rules are followed. They don't have any plot responsibilities. There is a test for would-be referees. There are written guidelines for referees on how to do their job.
What else do you want to know?
____________________
"Fantasy is the artificial sweetener upon the poisoned cake of materialism." - R. J. Stewart
|
|
|
|
|
Apprentice
Group: Basic Members
Last Login: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 10:26 AM
Posts: 16,
Visits: 39
|
|
| I would agree with some of your points Alan but a certain amount of LT reffing has evolved from the original setup.
Marshals for instance result from a large percentage of the ref team coming from the club experience of sanctioned events. The larger scale battles at mainline events and the differences between the way the various factions roleplay calls for a different style of reffing that does not necessarily come intuitively.
Our aim these days tho is to make the step from marshal to full referee something that every marshal can work towards by demonstrating competence. There is no real difference in trust between the two grades these days other than reffing deaths at mainlines. Which as you say comes from past problems in PvP and handling the different styles of roleplay generated by 10+ club systems and a fest only crowd meeting up 4 times a year.
The no precedence issue is based on historical problems when different factions were given different interpretations and this caused real problems when they interacted (each playing by slightly different rules). We try to balance that by including FAQs in the ref guidelines so that everyone’s on the spot interpretation is largely the same on most issues.
I would agree that at the moment LT refs can be intrusive but our focus over the past few years has been on controlling large fights. Hoping this year to start working on the art of invisible reffing.
I think a lot of this comes from the fact in the LT PVP battles of 100+ players a side (which are common place) need a level of crowd control to prevent easily avoidable injuries. We have proved that empirically by monitoring first aid incidents during battles, which are now at an all time low. From our experience this is largely a phenomena of large PvP battles, particularly where shield walls form. We see far less problems with PvM or skirmish fights.
For example a problem we see quite often is a crush doughnut (for want of a better phrase) where an attacking force surrounds an defending force resulting in the defenders running out of ground to fall back into. Our normal way of dealing with them is to puncture the attacking ring to allow the defenders to leak out rather than having to stop the fight and reposition both lines.
Have kind of got the impression that Maelstrom fights are normally more fluid, smaller and less common than in LT but having never been am only basing this on hearsay. Likewise got the impression that CP concentrates more on PvM battles but again is only hearsay.
John’s post seems to indicate Maelstrom refs have no real responsibility for safety (and from the sound of things no real need either) plus I gather they do not run much or any encounter based plot so probably only common ground is answering rules queries. Would have expected CP reffing to have more in common with LT reffing tho.
Probably ought to go to an event or two to see for myself but never managed to find the time yet. Perhaps we could do an exchange programme!
Interested in any opinions on people that have been to the German fests and how they manage large battles.
|
|
|
|
|
Champion
Group: Basic Members
Last Login: Friday, August 13, 2010 5:26 PM
Posts: 342,
Visits: 1,660
|
|
James Crollie (3/19/2009)
Marshals for instance result from a large percentage of the ref team coming from the club experience of sanctioned events. The larger scale battles at mainline events and the differences between the way the various factions roleplay calls for a different style of reffing that does not necessarily come intuitively.
Speaking as a marshal, Allen used to be right but it's getting a lot better. When I first started the job was a pointless waste of time. Any time a rules call might need to be made (You need to take that spell, you've been -1 to the chest for 10 minutes now etc), either the player was happy to self-ref and take the hit without my intervention, or they told me to fuck off and find a ref if I wanted to tell them what to do. And under the old rules, my only option was to look around the field, see if there was a ref within shouting distance, or shrug and leave them to it because marshals had no authority. The player had no come back either because marshals weren't accountable - no identifying number, no report back, little rules testing when you apply, just a monkey in a yellow tabard. We were basically there because monsters have no character cards, or to act as battle (safety) marshals. So you needed battle marshals and refs, but not marshals.
Now however marshals have been made more accountable and it gives us a purpose. Because we're now accountable, its well known we have a rules test first and the player has a feedback channel if they want to complain about us, it becomes a lot easier for us to have rules calls accepted and actually do something useful with our time as well as the fight safety angle. I don't know if I'll go for the ref test because I hate the bow comp and don't really want to do it again but at least its worth keeping up the marshal.
Marshal 195 (I think. It's been a while since I checked)
- ---------------------
- LT -Captain Iolanthe Swan
- Riftworld - S.J MacRae
- Brighton Below - Drizzle
|
|
|
|
|
Champion
Group: Basic Members
Last Login: Friday, July 30, 2010 10:16 AM
Posts: 267,
Visits: 1,299
|
|
| There are some significant differences between PD and LT that are perhapse contribute more to the different styles of reffing. Recruitment:
Maelstrom tends to recruit people more heavily by word of mouth among existing LARP players (from what I have seen). I was certainly approached several times at the LT by various people who had begun playing Maelstrom before I made the switch. LT on the other hand tends to recruit from a much wider crowd which often includes people with no prior LARP experience. Even when non-LARPers are recruited into Maelstrom the Levels of combat:
In Maelstrom the focus is almost exclusivly on PvP whereas LT has a strong focus on PvE. "Monsters" are almost never as dangerous to fight as other players (from an IC perspective) and therefore combats tend to be short brutal skirmishes rather than ranks and battle lines. Genre:
Lorien Trust when playing appeared to me to be attempting to be everything at once without being any one specific thing. There are elements of the game world that are more PvP heavy, some more "heroic" some which focus more on the "sillier" aspects and others that deal primarily in non-combat activity. Because of this players of different factions had different expectations about the Genre of the setting it was disconcerting to encounter referees who had a different "genre" feel about them and made rules and setting calls coloured by this. This is not an easy thing to explain but I hope that somewhat makes sense. Because of the higher volume of new players, the significantly more frequent combat and the abstract nature of the setting it seems inevitable that more referees will be needed in LT, whilst in Maelstrom new player event rules allow us to run events in which combat occurs without any referee presence (Which takes some getting used to) The two cultures of referees appear so different that it would be best comparing like for like (LT vs CP) more than Maelstrom to LT.
PD: Veritas (Smith Eidolon)
M&M: Regimental Surgeon Magus Cpt. William Fairchild of the 67th Foot (second batallion)
OOC: Andy
|
|
|
|