Adding Characters Mid Game

Stories often need new characters.  Sometimes the directions a story needs to take requires someone to take it in that direction.  Sometimes there's a gap that needs filling in the party.  Games often need new players.  Sometimes people find that a game doesn't fit into their life or that the style isn't a great match, or sometimes, it's just time to expand.  But adding new characters requires thought and care so they don't get lost in the shuffle or find the game inaccessible because they don't have established connections.  There are a few guidelines to follow that help make sure that new characters are able to become part of the game and have a good experience while not taking too much focus from the ongoing narrative.

Build In Opportunities for Natural Additions

Ongoing games can be tricky to add characters to.  In a tabletop dungeon crawl, it's hard to justify a new adventurer just happening to be in the same dungeon on the same mission.  So it's important to think about potential openings and let those openings be part of the process of bringing in new players.  This generally requires a bit of pre-planning and may involve a bit of waiting.  Don't rush a new player in whenever, make it an event, and when planning out a plot structure, think about those events as part of the greater plot structure.

In my current LARP, there are a few structured times where new characters can come in, and these times represent narrative shifts to the world as a whole in a way that makes new characters something special.  Which brings up the next guideline.

Have the New Bring In Something New

New character should add something missing or new to an ongoing game.  Coming in without bringing something new can make things difficult for a new player.  How can they compete with established characters who have established connections that make them more involved in the ongoing narrative.  So the solution is to have new characters come in with new connections that are interesting an appealing and help them get involved.

This can be a matter of introducing a new plot, being part of a new faction that shakes up the status quo, or bringing some new direction or power to the table.  A character that other characters are intrigued by and see as something new is one that has a path into the game, allowing them to get involved without displacing established characters.  Because the secondary aspect of this is that new characters should not try to displace existing characters.  You don't want to overhighlight the new at the expense of the existing, but find ways to let both games be improved.

Create Connections to the Ongoing

One way to do this is to create character connections for new characters that link them to ongoing characters and plots.  Leaving backstory hooks open can be a good opportunity to bring in new characters as contacts, relations, friends, enemies, etc. of existing characters in a way that makes the addition of the new characters into an event for both.  This can be a way of working with existing players who may need hooking back into the plot, or activating loose plot threads that have been dropped. 

These connections help make things more natural for the incorporation of new characters.  It can be very difficult as a new player to make connections, but having that first connection can be very useful for building others, as that gives someone to give introductions and a bit of personal momentum towards relationships.

Don't Start Characters Behind

One thing that I have seen in a lot of games and that I disagree with vehemently is the idea of starting characters behind in experience or power.  The idea that all characters need to start at some base power level and that characters that have been in game will be more powerful is a sure method to make new characters feel irrelevant.  Because how could they be more useful or interesting than characters that are much more advanced than they are?

You can have a sliding scale that characters follow, so that they don't overpower existing PCs(there's a big difference in a point spend system between 100 XP spent 5 at a time over 2 years and 100 XP spent all at once), but new characters should not be penalized for being new.

All in all, the key to the guidelines is letting new characters be a tool to add narrative momentum to games, to help create new relationships and deepen or transform old ones, to bring in new information and to expand the community.  These are people who you want to be part of the game, make sure they feel welcome.

For Everything a Season: Act Breaks in Campaign Games

One thing I love about serialized storytelling, in terms of television, comic books, movie franchises, etc., is the existence of story structure.  Many of the works that I love have very evident shifts between parts of the story.  The different 'big bads' of Buffy the Vampire Slayer, the shifting politics of Babylon 5's seasons, the changing teams and locations in Claremont's X-Men comics, even the different 'phases' of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, all of these break the story into phases that can be understand as part of a whole, but also take different tones and perspectives.

This method of storytelling can be used to great effect in campaign games, both LARP and tabletop.  But for an art form that tends in form to simply continue on a regular schedule, an Act Break may require extra effort or planning and definitely raises some important questions to address in terms of game philosophy and practice.

What is the point of (meta)plot?

Of course, Act Breaks assume the existence of an overarching landscape of plot.  Because if there isn't anything happening on a larger or direct level in the world outside of the characters actions, then strictly speaking, there isn't anything to change between Acts.  So if there isn't a metaplot, then there isn't a need for act breaks.
While I've addressed this in another post on this blog, here's a brief version that is relevant to this topic.  Metaplot is a genre-appropriate developing landscape that provides context for the choices characters make.  By my philosophy of game design, the most important thing for the Storyteller to do is frame decision points for character, essentially asking story questions that give players agency to change the world around them.  So in part, plot is about laying out crossroads so that players can choose their paths(or to wander off the path, a relevant possibility).
Beyond just framing choices, metaplot is about escalating the stakes of the story to match character development and power.  As character relationships deepen, as character power levels increase, as easy decisions play out, characters need new choices that match their current position in the story.  This isn't just about going from kobolds to dragons, but about matters of increasing consequence.
So metaplot should be this genre-appropriate developing(as in, the developments should flow from one another according to the overall genre) landscape that provides context for the choices that characters make.  And by splitting into Acts, that becomes somewhat easier.

Why have Act Breaks in game?

An Act Break is an opportunity.  An opportunity to end specific plot threads and introduce new ones, an opportunity to create entry and exit points for players and characters, a chance to tinker with underlying aspects like tone and theme.

The end of the Act should almost always correspond with the conclusion of one plot thread.  This plot thread may be loose or tight, but should encompass some of the overall theme and tones of the Act.  As things wrap up, it can be easy to create a climactic moment of confrontation and escalate drama to encourage player energy.  When players see that  choices affect the way things conclude, they can see ways of getting engaged down the line.

The end of one act and the beginning of another can be a great set of entry and exit points for players and characters.  New players often struggle with finding ways into ongoing games and the shifting context of an Act Break can often give an opportunity for new characters that have a good reason to be arriving in the game context.  It can also give an opportunity to wrap up character stories or to write out characters that may have drifted away from game.

An Act Break can also convey a shift in tone.  There are excellent examples of stories shifting genres or focuses between acts and seasons in a way that expands the understanding of the world and gives new perspectives.  The Wire shifted the focus of its investigations and focus to highlight different types of dysfunction and change the tone of individual seasons.  Other texts drop sudden revelations at Act Breaks that change the interpretation of things that came before and after.

How to Do an Act Break

So, that's why, but if you wanted to do an Act Break, how would you go about it?  I have a few guidelines about Act Breaks that I tend to follow in game design.

1. Telegraph the act break.
Don't spring an act break on players.  While I tend to have heavily structured games with every session planned out, it is possible to do a looser Act/Season structure, but the ending should never be a surprise to players.  You don't have to tell them what is happening that will change the world, but let them know that things are coming to a head so they can make decisions accordingly.  Players will take greater risks at Act Breaks if they know it's coming.

2. Have something end
It sounds simplistic, but have something really end at the end of an Act.  Certain things will be done at the end of the Act in a way that they won't return.  If nothing actually ends, it can be easy to lose the stakes of the Act Break.

3. Have some things stay
Don't throw out everything, though.  There should be some connective tissue between the Acts/Seasons.  It's more like a hinge than like two separate objects.  That connective tissue is important to keep some momentum.

4. Shift the context seriously
It should be possible by looking at it to know what Act you're in.  This can be based on the physical locations, the common adversaries, or some other aspect of the context, but there should be something marked between Acts.  In the long Changeling game I ran, you could tell what act it was based on whether there was a mirror city in the sky above Chicago.  I even had five different logos for the different acts.

5. Introduce something new
As important as ending something at the end of an Act is beginning something new with the new Act.  There should be new momentum at the start of the new context to propel people forward into the brave new world.

Pacing and Game Structure tips and questions

Beyond these guidelines, there are a few important questions to ask as part of the process.

How long should an act be?

It depends a bit on the game, but there are a few guidelines.  An Act should be short enough to be comprehensible and easily remembered.  Acts or seasons that take place over a year are hard for participants to really understand as a whole, to really see how the beginning connects to the end.  However, an Act should also be long enough to display visible themes.  My rule of thumb is 4-6 months.  

Should there be a time gap between acts?

If there is going to be a time gap between game sessions, then a time gap between acts makes sense.  Even if not, if you're trying for a larger thematic shift, a time gap may allow a more dynamic change between two Acts.  

Should all act breaks be similar?

No, for instance, as you are coming to the end of a chronicle, I would hesitate to add new players at an Act Break.

What's the border between sequels or Act Breaks?

There is no hard and fast rule.  If the break is longer than the game ran, it's definitely a sequel.  If there's a distinct player base, it's definitely a sequel.  Otherwise, call it as you see it.

Secrets and Mysteries: Information Differential in LARP

Drama almost always involves information differential, some situation where some people know something and others do not.  Dramatic tension almost always emerges from lack of information, where misunderstandings or differing access to information create different motivations.  In some stories, information differential can create conflict where everyone is acting in good faith, but at cross purposes. (admittedly, these are some of my favorites)

However, managing information differential in a LARP is a complex process with several different aspects.  A properly managed information differential involves the selective guarding and revealing of PC and NPC secrets, the encouragement of the experience of learning and discovery, and the distribution of knowledge as power.

Secrets and Rumors
One of the most straightforward engines of drama in a LARP is the secret.  Some aspect of a character that, if revealed, would change the way other characters perceive them.  This information differential is an excellent way of creating personal drama for a character, as the process of holding the secret influences the way the character is performed(I can't tell them I'm a spy for the British Government, but I have to ask some leading questions to get information).  The selective revelation of the secret becomes currency of intimacy and trust, creating or growing character relationships.

The most important aspect of secrets is that they should matter and change. Secrets should influence decisions, should motivate actions, should create drama.  And while characters may not want it to happen, all secrets should emerge over the course of a story.  The key to information differential in a story is that it should be dynamic.  It should influence the development of the story and have motion to it.  As more characters realize that one character is a vampire, they all have to make decisions as to how that affects their relationships.  If none of them ever learn, those relationships are never changed by the revelation, so the story is static.

Rumor systems can help with this, providing a method for driving the revelation of secrets in a slightly uncontrolled fashion.  This lack of control ups the drama factor of having a secret, adding doubt and fear to the process.  You never know who's going to learn about your deep, forbidden love of Chik-Fil-A.

Maintaining the Fun of Discovery
At the risk of sounding like a big nerd(too late), learning is fun.  Discovering new information and knowing more than you used to is a pleasurable experience.  It's also a key aspect of character development.  As you learn new things, you change and become different than you were.  One of the keys of managing the release of information is that the fun is important.  If you forget to reveal information, you are forgetting to add the fun, which is one of the biggest mistakes you can make. 

Revealing information is also by itself a reward for positive play, a way of giving back to those who engage with the world in a creative way.  Increased knowledge can be a way of rewarding play that also adds to the experience of those around the player, because knowledge has a tendency to spread outwards in a way that has the potential to create shared fun. 

One of the rules of thumb I use for this is to make sure that information goes out in at least two different, unrelated places.  If the key goal is to have information spread out and have unpredictable effects, having two spots can make that more likely.  It also makes the world feel a bit more alive, which is a benefit. 

In my experience, though, it is better to distribute information in pieces.  There are a few reasons for this. 
1. show don't tell: if you just give all the information at once, you are essentially just giving the outline of a story.  Which is generally less satisfying to people. 
2. allow for the complications of player input: Players will sometimes interpret story pieces in unexpected ways, focusing on certain aspects of a piece of information.  By giving it in pieces, the Storyteller allows a level of player input into the plot, creating a feedback channel for player creativity.  Don't go all Chris Carter on this and throw out clues that you have no idea what they mean and lean on the audience to interpret them, but do allow player interpretation to act as a Yes, and...
3. pace out the story: it's just more fun to have things happen over a few steps and it makes for more of a story.  Stories have beginnings, middles and ends and this is true for microstories like learning a secret as well.

Knowledge is Power
However, it's important to acknowledge that information differential is power differential and to use that responsibly.  One of my hard and fast rules of running games is to never use that power against players as an ST.  It's one thing to joke about how the things that players don't know about as dangers, but wielding that knowledge can make a game very un-fun, very quickly. Don't exploit that power to make yourself feel important. 

As part of this, it's impossible to know how simple or complex a mystery is in a game.  It may be simple to you because you see all the different parts, but your players do not have access to your brain, unless you are playing a much more complex game that I am.  By the same token, you may accidentally have a set of clues that line up with a player's master's thesis and have them solve the riddle in 30 seconds.  roll with it.  Give more clues and have a backup mystery if necessary. 

First Games and Pilots

The first game of an ongoing LARP is an experience both exhilarating and anxiety producing.  After months of preparation, the day approaches and everything changes from being completely potential energy to being kinetic.  In some ways, the first game is the most important game of a series, it can set the tone for everything else to come for better or worse.  In some ways the first game is the least important, as it is often like a dress rehearsal for game, a chance to have everyone try on their costumes and characters and see what fits.  Regardless, there are a few tips for Storytellers and Players alike to help make game 1 go as well as possible.

The ST approach to Game 1
Starting Things in Motion
One of the biggest challenges to game 1 is the lack of momentum.  Game 1 doesn’t have ongoing plots or continuing drama.  This can be a real challenge, because one of the things that really gives a game oomf is the sense of continuation.  To address this, I like to make sure that a game starts in motion.
Starting in motion is about having something propelling characters to the event that the game represents.  I think I’ve mentioned in a previous blog post how LARPs benefit from a sense of eventfulness, well the first game can set that tone by making a big deal about the initial inciting event.  A first session should feel like a big deal, a new beginning, and that involves starting things in motion.
For the game I’m starting now the inciting motion involves a major shift in the status quo.  What had been an open meeting that only NPCs attended changed by the removal of those NPCs, creating a sense of disquiet and questioning that drives the PCs to seek out answers.  This changes the dynamics of the world and also sets things up so that nobody is quite familiar with what is normal.  My hope is that this will bring characters together with a drive to create something new.

The Pilot Effect
When players come together for the first time as their characters, everybody is new and the dynamics between them are unexplored.  In many ways, this is like the pilot of a television show, a demonstration of some of the potential, but also a chance to try out things and see what works.  Some players may realize they created a character too mean or too aimless or didn’t make use of the system to represent their character properly.
As a storyteller, it’s important to embrace this and allow the first game or two to work out some of the kinks.  Let players know that they aren’t completely locked into choices made in the first game.  Don’t set up permanent choices in game 1 for social structures that may not fit down the line for the game.  Keeping an informal pilot atmosphere to things puts less pressure on players to decide everything instantly.
For the game I’m starting, there will be room during the first act to tweak certain aspects of backstory and system to better suit how character dynamics develop.  The new nature of the social structure also allows for a period of negotiated social dynamics to represent how things become rather than setting up a completely new dynamic.

Making a World Feel Lived In
While game 1 may be the first time that the characters are together in the same place, it’s rare that the world did not exist before the characters came into being.  In preparing for a first game, it’s important to make it feel like the world didn’t just appear ex nihilo(unless that’s what you’re going for).
There are multiple ways of doing this, and every game will have some degree of this from the existence of the characters, but this is not usually quite enough.  At the same time, one of the worst ways of establishing this is the creation of a 75 page text history of the world.  Because from experience, nobody is going to read the whole thing and regardless, they aren’t going to absorb it.  The best way to approach this is to make the development of the world an active pre-game and in-game activity.  People learn better by doing and may absorb information better by contributing to that information/actively engaging with it.
At the same time, one of the truest ways of living in the world is having limited knowledge.  It’s fine for people to only know their corner of the world and have the ability to discover the world around them.  Some players revel in playing the completely new person, some want to be steeped in the world’s lore ahead of time.
For this game, I did a combination of active pre-game exercises and in-game exercises to try and simulate the lived-in nature of the world’s history.  I did collaborative worldbuilding from the beginning to help people be involved in the world’s details and followed up with more detailed faction building to give people a sense of the small world in which they live.  I have also put together a pre-game/in-game exercise where players provide rumors about their characters, some true, some false, and then receive rumors about other characters at the first game.  This gives them a chance to know a bit about the world, but also gives seeds for social action, where they follow up on these rumors in some way, fueling the development of the world through interaction.

If You Love Something, Set it Free
Once game 1 runs, the storyteller has to be prepared to let go.  Before game 1, the game often feels like it belongs only to the storyteller, with everything that happens subject to storyteller approval.  But the moment that the game on statement is given, the game is no longer solely the property of the storyteller.  This can be a hard thing to accept, but it’s very important.
The Storyteller will still be one of the most influential hands steering the game, but once things start, they share control with everyone in the game.  My advice is to embrace this and watch how things develop, following the leads of the players rather than pushing back too hard.  There’s an often misinterpreted statement about product development, “the customer is always right”.  If the people in the game are telling you they want drama and you think they want comedy, you’ll have more success running a drama because they are generally right about what they want and no amount of direct pushing is going to change that.

Advice for Players in Game 1
So, as a player, how do you approach game 1?

Finding Your Voice
Well, I find that the first thing to do is to find your character’s voice and mannerisms.  Be prepared to introduce yourself a lot, and to tell people who you are.  If the game is a first meeting, this is your chance to establish details about yourself and your public image.  How do you want other characters to think about your interactions and how does that inform how you speak and act.
The exercise that I often do as a player before playing a new character or a new game is to simply practice my character’s personal introductions, “Hello, my name is Cecil Marley Philips but my friends call me Yorkie.”  “I’m Alexander Hamilton, I’m at your service, sir” “Murph.”  There’s a lot that can be conveyed in an introduction, so make it work for you.

Finding Your Friends(And Enemies)
LARPs are about relationships and how relationships influence the decisions we make.  If at all possible, come in with some established relationships before game 1, friends and allies are a great place to start, and that often brings along with it goals and motivations, why do you hang out with these people, what common interests do you have?
Even if you don’t have things set up beforehand, build bridges at game 1.  Make friends, find those who you can form relationships with and who may have your back down the line.  Find unlikely allies who you can get to know and have uncomfortable alliances with.
And make enemies.  In real life, we generally seek not to make enemies.  That’s good, you don’t actually want people to hate you in real life.  But in game, enemies can make for an interesting story.  Especially if you are nominally allies.  Find the points of contention and lean into them.  Turn those into momentum and motivation.  This will help drive your character and make game more fun for everyone.

Finding Your Style
It can be tempting to wait on costuming until you have a sense of the character.  You may have something big you want to purchase but aren’t sure it fits for the character.  That’s perfectly reasonable, but don’t take it too far.  Costuming and props are one of the best ways to establish character and can be an excellent way of getting into a character’s mindset.  Hats, wigs, props of various sorts, little things can make it feel less like you are dressed like yourself and more like you are dressed like someone else.  So even if it’s a token costume, a single prop that will carry through, definitely do something for the first game.

Everyone Has a First Day
So, what if it’s your first LARP ever and you are not sure what to do.  A piece of wisdom I have for every situation is that everyone has a first day.  Every expert you meet, everyone you see excelling at something, every person who can make something look easy had a time when they were new.  You get to be new at something, and the community should support you.
For those who are experienced, don’t drive people away who are new, keep the game open and allow the fresh perspectives to expand the world around you.  I guarantee if will make for a better game if you are more welcoming to the inexperienced.

Overall, game 1 is complicated, but those complications can be opportunities if used correctly.  The energy of game 1 is unlike anything else and while it comes with a lot of stress, you can’t get to game 2 without game 1, so embrace the chaos and move forward into the future.

LARP worldbuilding I

With a new LARP coming up, it's inevitable that I return here.  Today, it is to talk about worldbuilding.  Worldbuilding for a LARP is different than worldbuilding for a tabletop game.  While a number of the principles that I use are the same, LARPs require an extra level of collaborative development.  But over the years, I've developed some methods for building a LARP world that help promote player investment and involvement.  

Why So Collaborative

The main goal in LARP worldbuilding is establishing collaborative investment in the world.  In a tabletop game, ownership of the world is pretty squarely in the hands of the Game Master/Storyteller.  While good tabletop games provide avenues for player input into the world, the world is always constructed with the consent of the GM.  

This is much more possible in tabletop than in LARP.  In tabletop, the GM is theoretically present for every interaction and can fill in gaps of information, even reminding people of established facts of the world should they forget them.  But LARPs do not generally have that luxury.  STs cannot be present to reinforce the world all the time. 

But how to approach this problem?  The way that I try and do this is to make a collaboratively built world.  One where players help build out the world so they know its corners and nuances.  And the way I approach that is to build a world not as a fully nuanced set of details, but as a framework, an open sandbox where things can be built.  But there are tricks to it.

Building a Framework

One of my favorite principles of game design is "draw maps, leave gaps".  Make a world adaptable to the needs of the participants and of the moment.  In the context of building a LARP world, I like to construct a framework of fundamental truths.  These are the borders of the Sandbox, the immutable aspects of the world.  

This framework establishes the ground on which people can build.  On the one hand, this needs to be tight.  You want to make sure that the characters all exist in the same context where the action takes place.  Part of framework creation involves who the characters can be.  Some of this often comes from a game system.  If you are running Vampire, then your framework includes being vampires.  But this also involves things like where the characters live and work.  

On the other hand, the framework should be loose.  You want to make sure that the context doesn't excessively limit students and encourages variation.  LARPs are best with a variety of characters and the framework can be important to encourage that variety.  Some of this can be creating a variety of categories or character types that are part of the world.  

Sample Framework

So what does a framework look like?  I am in the process of preparing for a character creation session for my upcoming game and I considered what to write on one of my numerous whiteboards around the apartment and came up with the following.  

The Framework for TBD

There is a Prison in Chicago.

This Prison Holds Monsters.

This Prison is Guarded by Heroes.

These Heroes are descended from different Gods.

These Heroes are Destined to guard this Prison.

These Heroes are joined together in a Conclave.

This framework is a collection of open ended fundamental truths.  They define where the game takes place(Chicago), who the characters are(Heroes), what brings them together(Destiny).  Many of those terms are deliberately undefined.  Some of these are thematic.  But they exist as a set of frameworks, of borders into which characters should fit.  What these aren't are details.  There are a number of details beyond this, but they are not the fundamental framework.  

And within this framework, players will create characters.  Characters that define their own versions of these framework statements.  What does it mean for them to be a Hero?  How do they guard the prison?  How do they live in Chicago?  These characters will create a lot of the fundamental details.  The map is filled in by characters.

Knitting Things Together

What then is the role of the Storyteller in such a system?  If the Storyteller isn't creating the world, what is their role?  Well, part of it is allowing the creation of details while maintaining a veil of ignorance.  Part of being a player is maintaining a limited perspective.  You want to be part of the world, not overseeing it, but tying your details to other people's details requires that overview.  The Storyteller is that overview in this method.  They provide the general perspective that allows them to tie characters together.  

This is an important aspect to Worldbuilding because it allows for more organic and multi-perspective character building.  So, there's a study about brainstorming that is relevant to this process.  In the study, open brainstorming sessions were found to be dominated by early ideas rather than actually bringing in multiple foundational ideas.  When brainstorming included an initial phase of separate silent brainstorming by individuals, more foundational ideas were brought in. 

This is part of what the framework method of Worldbuilding allows.  When characters are created separately, characters are more unique and diverse.  A feedback process allows those characters to then be tied together and allows the Storyteller to build on these unique details to create a full world out of the different character ideas.  This increases player investment in the world because they explicitly helped create it.  

Conclusion

Overall, there's still a lot of complexity to the Framework method of worldbuilding that isn't included here.  There are plenty of details that need to go into the world, definitions that get expanded.  You need to make sure that there are resonant structures that people actually can invest in.  But this is a general view of the method I use.

How Long Should a Game Be?

I've participated in games that have run for vastly different time periods.  Some games I've been in or run have been epic in scale.  Some have been so fast and intense that they've been a single memorable blip.  I've been in games that ran too long, games that ended too soon, games that were unappreciated in their time, games that seemed great in the moment but were forgotten as soon as they wrapped.
Along the way, I have developed some opinions on how long a game should be.
Essentially, most of my answers are going to be somewhat vague, because different games require different things, but most of my answers will be phrased along the same lines.  What should make a game longer and what should make a game shorter.

How long should a game be?
The basic answer is simple: long enough to tell the story.  But that isn't a firm answer.  There are stories that can unfold in three sessions and stories that take five years to tell.  Overall, a game will suffer if it is compacted too much or stretched too much.  A game that's too compacted will feel rushed and can be confusing too much detail in any one point, no time for processing.  A game that's too stretched may end up losing momentum or having players not see how things fit together.  How do you know how long the story takes?  That's a hard question.  I tend to break down stories into steps or dramatic beats.  In order for the neighboring kingdom to invade, they need to manufacture a casus belli, amass troops, move those troops to the border, seize the first line of defense, the second line of defense, find a way to break through the final line of defense and then seize the capital, install a puppet government and demobilize their army except for an occupational force.  So something as simple as an invasion has 9 steps to it.  Some of those might be combined, some might require more than one game, but having the steps of the process laid out can tell you that the story of the invasion of a kingdom is going to take at least 8-10 months.  Every story can be broken into parts, some big, some small.

Beyond just the story length answer are a number of other factors.

I think a LARP should be short enough to maintain a consistent central cast.  There should be people there at the beginning who see the end.  And while a little cast rotation can be a good thing in a healthy game(eliminating those who aren't interested, adding those who found out late), a game that can maintain the continuity of a central cast is generally better than one that can't.

A game should be short enough to avoid excessive power creep.  I've spoken about the perils of experience systems.  The longer games go on, the more power tends to become consolidated/imbalanced.  This isn't just an XP problem, it can be a plot access problem.  When the older players have lots of plot-centric influence they've built over chapters 1-4, those who start in act 5 may feel marginalized.

A game should be long enough for people to settle into their characters and factions.  In games where players create their own characters, there is generally a period of settling into the character.  In games with political factions, it takes time for groups to gel.  A game should be long enough to allow that process.  Some of this can be taken care of with pre-work, but pre-work is just that, work.  It's much more interesting to play out a massive internal factional schism than to simply talk about it.

A game should be short enough to avoid staff burnout.  It takes so much work to run a game that after a while, the staff can get very tired.  Very long projects can feel stifling, as staff members(who tend to be creative project types)want to move on to the next project rather than lingering on the current one.  This can be addressed by adding new staff, but that can dilute the central vision of the game.

A game should be short enough that every part serves a purpose.  Not every game should be plot heavy episode after plot heavy episode, but there should be a minimum of filler content.  Some sessions may be designed to be light on the eventfulness, a chance for people to explore facets of their characters or mix up the general patterns of the game.  Things like bottle episodes or tabula rasa type games can be great for resets.  IC event games like weddings or funerals or holiday celebrations can be fun in a game situation.

A game should be like an ideal gas, it should expand to fit its container.  Running games in many contexts means tailoring the game to the time constraints.  If you're running a game at a con, it should be a quick one shot, set up to develop and resolve within the time slot.  If you're running a game at school, it should be able to be set up and completed in a semester.  I've tailored timelines for games based on local weather patterns.

Overall, finding the right length for a game is a complicated process.  I've already stated my opinions on bounded storytelling, but this is a great time to reiterate that.  A game should have an end.  Endless games are shapeless and memorable not as a whole, but as parts.  If you're going to treat the game as a whole, you should think about the entire shape of it.

Building a Better Player

So much of what I talk about is about running games.  But this one is for the players out there.  I have learned a lot about what makes a good player, a bad player, a great player, a problem player.  This is a brief collection of tips and recommendations for how to be a better player.  Some of these are universal, some of these are my own personal taste, but these constitute my advice on how to be a better player.

Share Focus

Multi-participant games require sharing.  That's something that you were probably taught in kindergarten, but it's a thing that is really important when it comes to gaming.  What you really need to share in the RPG, whether tabletop or LARP, is focus.  This is one of the things I picked up in improv, but basically, the narrative should shift from one character to another, from one player to another, as the story flows.  Think of it like a conversation.  Boring conversations happen when one person talks all the time and the other person can't get a word in edgewise, sharing focus in game is giving the other person time to speak.

This can be done passively, but it can also be done actively.  Some of my favorite players are those who delegate story tasks, taking players who aren't actively engaged in things and putting the focus on them.  Sometimes this can be a matter of faction leading, if you are a faction leader, having minions that you send to do things is a good methodology.  

Ideally, everyone should get to do something at some point, but part of being a good player is being willing to share focus with your fellow players.  

Yes, and...

Another concept from improv that I think makes for a better player is the incorporation of the principle of "Yes, And..."  In improv, it's about taking what someone adds to a scene and building upon it.  When someone says, "hey, look at that kangaroo"  you don't say, "there's no kangaroo"  because that sets the scene back to square one.  Instead you say, "Yea, and I think he's stealing your car!" accepting what someone gives you and going with it.  

This can be very useful because it's part of constructing the game world. Most games that I run have a framework world, one in which the large details are filled out, with the smaller details remaining nebulous until relevant.  This is the case for nearly any fictional world.  You don't know what color Harry Dresden's socks are until it matters for the story or characterization purposes.  Filling in these details and building upon them can be an excellent thing for players to do in game.  

Some Storytellers don't like when players fill things in, and that's a matter of taste, but I'm happy to have players drop in details like frequented restaurants with revolutionary themes, foul mouthed baby goats, or past experiences.  By working together to fill in and following the principle of "Yes, And..." a player can help build the world around.

Engage with the Content

That said, one of my greatest frustrations in a game is when there is well developed content that is left unengaged with.  So, as I said, I like to develop a framework world, one in which there are several overarching rules of reality, aspects of the world that are set in stone, and then collaboratively fill in details, often sharing them using a wiki or google document.  I get very frustrated when players don't engage with this important information.

Now, I'm not holding Storytellers blameless on this.  Every ST has fallen into the trap of writing an encyclopedia worth of content for a three session game and expecting players to know it backwards and forewards.  I have recently begun to hold myself to a design principle based on the first page of Grant Morrison's All Star Superman, which sums up the essentials of Kal El's story in 8 words and 4 pictures.  

But even that sometimes seems to miss the mark.  Overall, as a Player, try your best to actually engage the game world content.  Don't treat it as pointless or irrelevant.  Read the backstory, look at the map, or at the very least, create a character that doesn't know history or geography if you want to not do so.  Briefing history experts on basic history content "So George Washington is...?" slows down the flow of game and makes it less fun for everyone.   

Meta for Good, Not For Self

Metagaming is a controversial subject and may get its own blog post at some point, but as a player, there are some overall guidelines.  Metagaming is not always bad, especially if doing it improves the game for other participants and does not benefit your character too much.  This is something best provided by example.  I've had multiple occasions where a character wandered off mid action.  The rest of the party was engaged in some dramatic scene that wasn't the specialty of the character and they decided that their character would leave and go elsewhere because it wasn't 'in-character' for them to stick around.  This made it extremely difficult to maintain the game because that demand of focus split up what would otherwise be a really dramatic moment in game.  

In this case, a little meta-gaming would allow everyone to remain part of the game session for a scene and wouldn't create any advantage for the player in question.  Another model of metagaming comes in the engagement with the pace of plot.  Players can try to achieve too much in a single session in a way that would skip over important parts of a story.  Recognizing that progress is sometimes throttled in order to provide opportunities for focus sharing or to preserve a longer narrative thread can make it so more people can engage with things and help others.  But sometimes this takes an understanding of the meta-aspects of game.  

Now, don't ever meta-game for your own benefit.  If anything, meta-game against yourself.  If you the player see someone invisible in the room, don't restrict what you say, get really explicit.  Spread information around and make it interesting.  

CvC, not PvP

Games feature conflict.  That's not news.  But it's important that the conflict stay within the narrative.  Many games fall apart because the conflict within the games becomes a conflict between players.  The distinction I've seen in terms of terminology revolves around the term PvP.  The term PvP refers to Plaver versus Player and is often used to distinguish games where conflict is commonly between player characters.  However, I prefer the term CvC, Character versus Character.  Something that is important to remember as a participant in a game is that all the participants should be working towards the same goal, telling a good story.  When the characters get into conflict with each other, it should be in the service of story.  

What this means as a player is two fold.  One, Players should be selective about the conflict between characters.  Not avoidant, but try to make it a matter of character tension, not a matter of player tension.  Don't agitate against a player you don't like, follow a narrative reason for conflict.  My own tendency is to choose my friends as my enemies.  

Two, when a conflict comes to a head, make sure that you keep in mind that the person on the other end of the conflict is a person too.  When you lose, even if your character dies, recognize that the fellow player didn't set out to hurt you, but that it was part of the narrative conflict.  Even more important, when you win, recognize that the fellow player has been a good sport about things, give them that respect.  Those actions can keep things from becoming too acrimonious between players.

Trust your Fellow Participants 

Which ties into the larger principle of trust.  In an ideal world, we'd all trust each other implicitly and give nobody a reason to distrust us, but we're often in a position where we don't really know our fellow participants very well.  In these positions, I think it's very important to extend trust to people and try and craft an environment where everyone can work together.  Try and find ways to build trust with other participants and treat everyone with respect.  

Trust is one of the most essential elements to a game and there's a degree to which the level of trust limits the level of engagement in the game.  Part of that is being clear when people violate your trust, but part of it is making sure that you don't violate other people's trust.  Ultimately, one can only be accountable for one's own behavior, but as a player, that means that you should follow the golden rule of trust and not do anything that would violate someone else's trust.  

Communicate with Your Storyteller!

Which also translates to the Storyteller.  While this is one that I think sometimes depends on the player-ST relationship, but I feel that it's important to keep your Storyteller in the loop.  As a storyteller, I can't set things up for your plans to succeed if I don't know what they are.  I can't facilitate you having the dramatic confrontation with your nefarious uncle if I don't know that you want one.  Some STs use foreknowledge of plans to screw over PCs, but that's not me and that's not something I recommend.  Instead, being open with your ST allows the ST to set you up to succeed or fail or at least have an interesting experience.  

And if there's something you don't like about what's going on, communicate with your Storyteller.  I've had many games fall apart over issues that nobody mentioned.  Storytellers aren't omniscient, we don't know everything that's going on in everybody's minds/experiences.  If there is some aspect of a game that you want more or less of, if there's something going on that you wish wasn't or something not happening that you wish was, let the Storyteller know.  If someone is ruining your experience, let the Storyteller know!

And if they don't take you seriously, or treat your statements with contempt and disrespect, leave the game.  But a good Storyteller will want to respect the needs and wishes of the community.  They might explain to you some reason that things are done a certain way, some aspect of pacing or experience with a given technique that explains why they've made a certain decision, but they might also say, wow, I hadn't thought of it from that angle.  That's a very good suggestion, I'm going to think about that and maybe incorporate it.  But please, communicate with your Storyteller.