This is related to this thread, but is unrelated enough that I felt it should be in a different thread. In this post I’m going to dive into some observations about stories, the audience, and the agency of the audience to interact with the story. These are considerations of interest in a LARP because the players drift between being actors and audience, and that drift is what makes LARP an interesting medium.

Now, it bears considering that in none of these cases is the audience captive. If you don’t like a book, movie or a game then you can just walk away. We’ve all had books that went unfinished, etc. The audience needs to be kept engaged, or they lose interest and sometimes they are quite irked at having their time wasted (looking at you, World War Z the movie!).

Zero Agency
I am going to start with mediums where the player has zero agency to change the events of the story. While everyone can come up with their own interpretation, you cannot change Lord of the Rings so that Frodo stays home. Do what you will, that’s just what happens. You are forever the observer of the story, left to consider what you see rather than exert any control. Video game cut scenes fall into this category, as the player is left to watch rather than interact.

Zero agency scenarios are great when they hold the interest of the observer. Because the observer has no agency, the author can construct very subtle moments. Narrative houses of cards stand, because there is no wind to blow them over.

Zero agency scenarios are at their worst when they tell rather than show. Wait, that’s cliche. When the art is a testament to the ego of the artist, or when they feel like a boring lecture. The audience may stick around, by their minds wander, which results in the effort of the artist being wasted.

Movies
I am not going to delve too deep into movies, but it’s worth considering that the audience has more agency in a movie then a book because the audience is a mob. The experience of The Rocky Horror Picture Show is dependant upon who you see it with. If the mob is singing along and throwing popcorn, then you will have a different experience than if they sat quietly as you are normally expected to do in a movie theatre.

Some Agency
Then there are mediums where some agency is present. I’m total going to pack in some SPOILERS for Red Dead Redemption and Telltale Game’s The Walking Dead. Walking Dead is excellent, and Redemption is ⅓ great, and ⅔ filler. Give ‘em a shot.

Video games are an interactive medium by nature. Mario does not jump unless you press a button. Storytelling in video game has come a long way since Mario, and the level of player agency in the story change from one game to the next. However, finite resources limit choice. There’s only so much anyone can code into a game. So, while the player controls the actions of John Marston, the major events of the story are unchanged. This works well for the Redemption because it keeps the player engagement high, you don’t need to chase the story if you aren’t in the mood and story events require your involvement. Dutch does not die until you hit the shoot button, and even though John’s death is inevitable the game lets you go out feeling like a badass because it lets you gun down a few dozen men in the process.

Some video games work around their limited resource by working to maintain the illusion of choice. Telltale Game’s The Walking Dead did an amazing job of this. The player does not have much control over the major events of the game, but enough small events hinge on player actions that the illusion of control is created. If the player can teach Clemintine to swear, then maybe there’s a way for Lee to survive. Maintaining the illusion of choice is a great takeaway for interactive storytelling.

Video game storytelling is at it’s best when the illusion of choice is maintained, and when the player is given control over the significance of an event since they cannot control whether the event occurs.

Video game storytelling is at it’s worst when the players expectations are dashed. Psyching the player up for an awesome decision, only to give a cut scene. Showing the player that all of their decisions in the past were not a crucial as advertised by letting them control the final outcome with a push of a button. Installing mechanics to give the player control, but then forcing the player to iterate those mechanics until a predetermined outcome is forced (ie. Quick Time Events where the outcome of failure is death, then you respawn and try again).

RPGs
This is where I skip over RPGs to go straight for LARPs. If you interested, then contrast how much board game content is included in various editions of D&D. Compare player agency in Savage Worlds to Microscope. You may also want to check out the decentralized combat of Marvel Heroic Roleplaying (whoever is running the game can often take a bathroom break without stopping a combat).

High Agency
Okay, so, let’s skip into LARP as a medium. Congratulations on reading this far by the way. I’m as shocked as you are.

In a LARP the story is unwritten, and always messy. The main character in the story, for most players, is going to be their own character. This produces many simultaneous stories, all of which consist of main characters and the tropes which are associated with main characters. Not just that, but the players fluidly change from onstage cast to audience based off of numerous cues, or just player interest. The show is mostly improv, though not without rehearsal. Nobody knows for certain how the story is going to flow, even if they know the events that are going to happen. If this is art, then it’s a Jackson Pollock.

If a game is past critical mass, then an event is always happening to draw in players who are looking to be drawn in, but too much is happening for every player to have the same experience. The events change the characters, but crucially, are change by the characters. Like being passed an unfinished drawing and being told to make up the rest.

This level of engagement, and the ability to hold the narrative reins, is something that is not easily reproducable in a tabletop RPG because the level of action need to be beyond what any one person can track in order to ensure consistent permutation of character.

LARP is at it’s best when the players are given narrative influence over the course of the many storylines. When players feel that the game is change in some part by the presence of their character, and that their actions are meaningful than players are engaged and continue to act.
Players want to play a narrative game of catch: One character acts, which gets a reaction, which allows for another action, and the process continues until interest wanes.

LARP is at it’s worst when the players are meant to observe the storyline, or take predetermined actions in order to solve the problems of the day. When players act, and find no reaction awaiting or find a reaction to which they cannot react themselves, or miss a game only to find out that little has changed then engagement starts to slip.

Hopefully this successfully posts.