When talking about Interactive Literature games and boffer games, for many years, I have been using  five “scales”.  Each of these scales refers to an aspect of the external game design itself, not the setting or the moment-to-moment gameplay.

This way of categorizing larps is based on conversations and observations I had mostly in the mid-2000s, when the divide between the types of games run at Intercon and traditional boffer campaign games was much larger.  I think there’s a lot of interesting games to be found at various points along each of these scales, and many games exist at multiple parts on the same scale within the same game (e.g. a game that uses card-based mechanics for combat, and physical locks to represent lockpicking)

The Scales

Scale 1 – Content Creation

GM Created Characters/Content  <–> Player Created Characters/Content

This scale indicates where the majority of the writing in the game comes from.  On one end are games where the game author creates a plot web, ties characters together,  writes backgrounds, personalities, and goals, and hands out pre-written character packets to the players.  On the other hand are bring-your-own character games.  in BYOC games, the author has often provided some world background information that the players can use to generate their characters, but the majority of the character design and creation is in the hands of the player.

This scale started out referring just to ‘Characters’, but has morphed into ‘Characters/Content’ with the rise of games whose setting is determined during gameplay.

Scale 2 – Conflict Source

PvP <–> PvE

This scale shows whether the source of conflict in the game comes from opposing character goals (PvP) or from external pressure (PvE).  I use the terms PvP and PvE because they are commonly known, but in larp we most often mean to refer to Character conflict.  It is certainly possible to have player conflict in games, for example in a boffer tournament between PCs, but that’s a less common scenario.

By PvP I rarely mean direct conflict, but typically opposed goals, for example competing to become king, or to close a business deal, or recruit a new member.  Sometimes PvE is represented by a NPC threat, such as goblins, etc, and sometimes it’s more literally environmental, e.g. air running out on broken space ship.

Scale 3 – Conflict Resolution

Representative Resolution <–> Physical Resolution

This scale indicates the main way that conflict is handled in game.  Games on the Representative Resolution end of the scale use techniques like Rock Paper Scissors, dice, comparing ability cards, and dropping into a out of character space to plan resolution.  Physical resolution can be nerf or boffer combat, where out of game player skill has an impact on the outcome.  Physical Resolution can be more immersive, and faster to resolve, where Representative Resolution does not typically take player skill into account, and can be run in almost any location.

Combat is the most obvious example, but other forms of conflict can be described in this way as well.  Representative lock picking might be using an ability card, or pulling from a deck of cards until you pull one that indicates that you have succeeded, while Physical lock picking might be actually picking simple locks with real tools.

Scale 4 – Session Length

1/2/4 Hour games <–> Weekend Games <–> “10 Days” <–> Longer Games

This scale describes how long each individual session of a game lasts.  Convention games are typically around 1-8 hours, weekend games last for 2-3 days, MIT has a tradition of 10-day games, and I once played in a 5 week long ARG/Larp that was effectively one session of gameplay.

Scale 5 – Overall Game Length

One Shot <–> Campaign

The last scale shows how long the overall game lasts.  One-Shots have a single session, during which the story starts, runs its course, and then ends.  Campaign games have multiple sessions, sometimes with in game activities between sessions, stories that develop over the course of multiple sessions, and often change future sessions based on player actions.  Campaigns can be further spread on the scale between limited-run campaigns (e.g. 4, 8, 12 sessions) and unlimited campaigns, which have no specified end dates.

Closing Thoughts

As is probably clear now, what we think of as “Interactive Literature” or “Secrets and Powers” is more towards the left on all of the above scales, while a traditional fantasy boffer game is more towards the right on all of them.  There’s a lot of interesting things going on in the spaces between the extremes, and it’s certainly my hope that having some shared language around this will help people come up with ideas.  Some examples include:

• My own game, Blackout, which was specifically an attempt to introduce some PvE conflict and Physical Resolution into a more traditional Interactive Literature game.
• Musica Universalis, which is a Weekend-long Physical Resolution, one shot game with GM-created characters
• Izgon, a larp run out of Croatia, which ran for 5 weeks in a single session in 2015, with mechanics for dropping in and out of character.
• Mike Young’s Miskatonic games, which are a set of three one-shots that tell continuing stories of (mostly) the same set of characters, but may be re-cast between sessions
• and many others

A related concept is the Mixing Desk of Larp, which is a similar approach to categorizing larps on various scales, but is more focused on the gameplay and setting design itself.  It’s a great read, and a useful tool, and I highly recommend checking out the work being done there as well.