There are two things here; firstly that is its own assumption; that they're the heroes (rather than just medium or big fish in a world that contains other fish of similar and larger sizes, as well as many smaller fish). I'm guessing in the game in question, it is the case that they are the heroes.
Secondly, what do you mean by 'heroes'? The word originally meant 'demigod' to the Greeks, with no moral overtones. Whereas now it's much more associated with being a goodie, with risk and sacrifice for the greater good. I'll admit this question comes largely from my interest in Exalted, where the exaltation seeks heroes, but in that context that essentially means 'people of consequence who will make use of this power'.
I'd say if your heroes are more modern heroes, they're meant to be the good guys, then you want to disencourage PvP, at least somewhat. Whereas if they're merely people with the power to change the world, then that's more a situation where some PvP makes sense.
My personal opinions are that death in LARP should be meaningful. People get invested in their characters, often spend a lot of time and money creating kit for them.
This is less of a overall point, more of a noting of personal preference — my preferences run more to risk and realism. That in the rather Wild West setting that Maelstrom was, if you walk around on your own at night, you risk death. One of the things I always want in the LARPs and tabletop games I'm in is risk of failure, of things not going your way.
As a semi-related point, you've made me think of something I'm now curious of — you're not fond of random murder in the dark, of being mugged and sacrificed for the fact that you walked around on your own in the wrong place, but what are your thoughts on slightly more directed death?
Specifically, I'm thinking of at Maelstrom, the people who weren't considered up to standard to be initiated to the Native Religions. People that had expressed an interest in converting, but hadn't impressed the people they spoke to enough (or had actively unimpressed them in some way), and thus were taken into the forest or a tent to be initiated, the next sight of them being them walking out with their yellow armband on, having just been sacrificed.
I was never an initiator, so I have no idea of the relative success rates (and would guess it varied quite a lot by individual Native god). But it certainly happened a fair amount, and I'm wondering how someone who's not fond of mugging in the dark would view it.
no subject
There are two things here; firstly that is its own assumption; that they're the heroes (rather than just medium or big fish in a world that contains other fish of similar and larger sizes, as well as many smaller fish). I'm guessing in the game in question, it is the case that they are the heroes.
Secondly, what do you mean by 'heroes'? The word originally meant 'demigod' to the Greeks, with no moral overtones. Whereas now it's much more associated with being a goodie, with risk and sacrifice for the greater good. I'll admit this question comes largely from my interest in Exalted, where the exaltation seeks heroes, but in that context that essentially means 'people of consequence who will make use of this power'.
I'd say if your heroes are more modern heroes, they're meant to be the good guys, then you want to disencourage PvP, at least somewhat. Whereas if they're merely people with the power to change the world, then that's more a situation where some PvP makes sense.
This is less of a overall point, more of a noting of personal preference — my preferences run more to risk and realism. That in the rather Wild West setting that Maelstrom was, if you walk around on your own at night, you risk death. One of the things I always want in the LARPs and tabletop games I'm in is risk of failure, of things not going your way.
As a semi-related point, you've made me think of something I'm now curious of — you're not fond of random murder in the dark, of being mugged and sacrificed for the fact that you walked around on your own in the wrong place, but what are your thoughts on slightly more directed death?
Specifically, I'm thinking of at Maelstrom, the people who weren't considered up to standard to be initiated to the Native Religions. People that had expressed an interest in converting, but hadn't impressed the people they spoke to enough (or had actively unimpressed them in some way), and thus were taken into the forest or a tent to be initiated, the next sight of them being them walking out with their yellow armband on, having just been sacrificed.
I was never an initiator, so I have no idea of the relative success rates (and would guess it varied quite a lot by individual Native god). But it certainly happened a fair amount, and I'm wondering how someone who's not fond of mugging in the dark would view it.