My main problem is how to exactly handle non-combat challenges.

I want to use a character sheet that will look as similar as possible to oWoD sheets for easier recognition. It will probably have a bunch of skills on it, like "Occult", "Investigate", "Academics", "Computers" and so on.

These are my ideas:

#1: Skills are ranked 0-3. When a player goes up against a static challenge ("I want to hack this computer"), the GM will set a fixed skill requirement. ("To hack this computer you need the skill Computers at 2 or higher"). No random element. If two players are competing ("Let's see who can hack the server the fastest"), the one with the higher skill wins.

#2: Skills are ranked 0-5, plus a system of merits that could grant them +0 to +2 sometimes. Each player has a deck of cards ranked 1 to 10. When a player goes up against a static challenge, he draws a card and adds it to his score in the relevant skill. For normal difficulty, he needs to score a 9. If two players are competing, they compare scores.

Obviously, method #1's advantage is that it's simpler, less fiddly, more direct. However it means that some player's point investments can feel hollow if he bought a skill to, say, 2, only to hear he needs a 3. It would be more difficult to balance all the challenges in a way that players don't feel cheated or constricted.

Method #2 introduces a random element which means that there are a lot more variables. On the other hand it requires more GM supervision and introduced the "let me try too" problem, where players just try doing something whenever they feel lucky. Player A with Computers 5 fails to hack the computer? player B, with Computers 1, steps in, says "let me try too", gets lucky, and hacks it.

So, in conclusion: what would you do, /tg/? What method do you prefer? And do you have any other advice or suggestions on how to handle an oWoD Mage: the Ascension LARP?

Hungarian larpfag, if you're out there we need you.

Shoulda have put "Warhammer 40k" or "That Guy" in the title.

>>47440830
I really doesn't like WoD larps, but that's for various reasons, one of them is the playerbase here. Another one is the style of the game is just really isn't for me.

But give me a few minutes I will make some tea and skim through this

>>47441620
Capital. Thanks.

>>47440296
>When I say "small-scale", I mean that I expect about 20-30 players or so
that isn't so small in WoD larp terms, kind of average.

>2) I like the card-based resolution from the new MET books a lot more, and already used something similar once with some success.(I didn't know of MET at the time, so it wasn't the same thing, but it ended up being sort of similar).
I don't know shit about that, please elaborate a little.

>3) Combat, however, will be solved with boffer weapons for melee and NERF weapons for ranged. This is because I know my players, and they all come from the boffer LARP world and will not want combat resolution via cards, rock-paper-scissors, or other non-physical methods. If it matters, we're in Europe.
alright, trick questions: Do you know personally all the players and are considered friends of yours? because if it's really a group of friends and the game is closed or semi closed you can get away with more shit in the system.
Secondly: if you trust the players that they can resolve fights with boffers and stuff, why don't you trust them to solve the other stuffs without cards? Or are the cards purely for the magic stuff?

>The focus will be on investigative work, occult research, and politics, mostly.
another question: what will be the place where you guys play? because most of the WoD larps I've seen played in an enclosed and relatively small place.

>5) I want there to be minimal or no "social combat" systems [..]
good. rules for social combat tend to make the game retarded anyway.

>static challenge
do you mean that it's just there and isn't a player or npc or you also mean that these challenges will set before the game and you will know all of them before the game starts, like setting up interaction points beforehand and such?

Also can you tell me a little more on how you imagined the game will go, what kind of challenges will the players face? just so I get a hang of what you want, I can give you advices in that direction afterward

>>47441844
>I don't know shit about that, please elaborate a little.


The new WoD MET books have a resolution mechanic that required a deck of 10 playing cards, 1 to 10. It basically replaces dice rolls.

Sheets are almost identical to tabletop nWoD, but your result is, for example, Intelligence + Computers + card result, and the total must beat a difficulty number.

>>47441844
>Do you know personally all the players and are considered friends of yours?
Either friends, or friends of friends. Generally, I'd say it's all people I trust.

>>47441844
>Secondly: if you trust the players that they can resolve fights with boffers and stuff, why don't you trust them to solve the other stuffs without cards? Or are the cards purely for the magic stuff?

The magic system WILL have cards because randomness is pretty much required by it. I'm talking purely about mundane actions for now. Assume we're talking about 100% normal humans.

But, the cards are not a trust issue, they're a randomization issue, to guarantee that most players will have at least SOME chance to tackle most challenges present in the game, while having some players more likely than others to succeed.

>another question: what will be the place where you guys play? because most of the WoD larps I've seen played in an enclosed and relatively small place.
We're still looking. It might be a countryside house with a large garden, abandoned railway, and aviation field nearby, but it's not definitive.

>good. rules for social combat tend to make the game retarded anyway.
Agreed.

(continues)

>>47442134
so, you pull out a random card and that's your "roll"? or you can play any card you want but have to discard it for the duration of the game?

>>static challenge
>do you mean that it's just there and isn't a player or npc or you also mean that these challenges will set before the game and you will know all of them before the game starts, like setting up interaction points beforehand and such?

With "static challenge" I mean "to accomplish X, draw a card to make a skill check. You need to score Y or above to succeed".
As opposed to "opposed challenge" which is "both characters draw a card to make a skill check, and whoever scores highest wins".

I imagined it being pre-set challenges written down in the GM notes, like "If the players want to research the Society of Thule in the local library, this is what they find out if they score an 11 or more".

Of course, no plan survives first contact with the players, so I expect a lot of stuff to be improvised.

Most skills will be mental, reflecting knowledge and information-gathering abilities. Some skills will be non-combat physical, to do stuff like breaking down doors and such. I don't plan on having social skills. If you want to play a "social" character, you'll want to invest less in skills and more in backgrounds. (status, contacts, resources, etc).

(continues)

>>47442196
You pull out a random card and that's your "roll".
>Also can you tell me a little more on how you imagined the game will go, what kind of challenges will the players face? just so I get a hang of what you want, I can give you advices in that direction afterward

I don't know how much you're familiar with Mage: the Ascension, so if some of this sounds weird or incomprehensible just ask.

The idea is that I'm moving the Avatar Storm and Week of Nightmares to 21 december 2012, and making it A LOT more destructive than it was in oWoD canon, with magical societies and assets getting decimated and in massive disarray.

As the game starts, they've begun to recover. The Traditions and the Technocracy have entered an undeclared, unofficial, uneasy truce, as both have serious stuff to deal with independently: the Traditions need to rebuild their entire infrastructure and chain of command, while the Technocracy will be vaguely and ominously implied to be fighting some mysterious and incredibly dangerous threat.

The game event itself will be a summit between locally important Traditions members (played by the players who are already familiar with Mage), in a neutral ground (which will definitely hold interesting mysteries to unravel), trying to re-establish contacts and discuss about important and pressing issues.

One of the main issues will be dealing with all the people who have Awakened since the Avatar Storm (played by the players who are new to Mage), who will probably be aggressively fought over between the various Traditions.

In the middle of everything, there will be at least one Technocracy spy to keep an eye on what is going on, and i hope to base other side plots on the players' background stories and motivations.

>>47442200
>>47442257
Played the tabletop game briefly and read one book but don't know much about this avatar storm. I presume shit hit the fan heavily.

Anyway about static challenges.
There is one interesting method that worked for various larps here, although it won't be good for every kind of challange but will give you an ice touch to the game and a little "treasure hunt" feeling and reason for people to explore the place.

we call it an envelope method, basically you put pre written instructions or knowledge in an envelope and seal it, then put an instruction on the outside when should the player open it and then give it to him/her.
Like if he sees some kind of symbol he should open it, and there is the info he knows about the item that has that specific symbol.
Or if he meets XY person he should open it, and there can be an information that he feels a vague sense of uneasynes and something "wrong" with the guy.

Memories, knowledge and more can be there. There was one time that a magical parasite was introduced this way to a larp. There were instructions what the parasite wants and makes you do it and you act like it's normal for you to get it. If you can't achive those goals you can pass on the parasite to someone else by touching him when noone sees you, and you should give the envelope to him, then you act like everything you did while the parasite was inside you is totally okay and you remember like you actually wanted to do those things.
Fun times.

Anyway back to static challenges.
keep it simple. Method one is perfectly good. If you afraid that it will block some people to achive their goals you can add a method to boost their stats for a small length of time, for example by magic. Or working together with someone.

Basically any rules you add should be either subtle so people doesn't have to think and talk about numbers too much AND encourage interaction. Any kind of interaction.

>>47442457
Love the envelope idea. An old LARP i played in did something similar once, although I wasn't involved directly in that particular plotline.

But, yeah, I'm starting to feel like I should limit cards to only magical effects, and have all non-magical things be handled by discrete rules with no or minimal randomization.

I mean, since players should carry a deck of cards ANYWAY (to resolve magic), I can write in the rules a few tricks with them, but just a few. Most actions ending up being resolved in a binary way: if you have the skill, you do X. If you don't, you don't.

>>47442620
anything else you need help with?

>>47442719
Nah, I just froze in doubt if it was better to use cards to handle action resolution or to have a ranked system with no randomness. Thank you for the help.

>>47442773
randomness is good but if there is anything that stops the players thinking IN game that's a chance of them going totally out of game. And it's always looks sily if people start shuffling "non existing" cards around something