Amber DRPG sans Zelazny

[jibbajibba]

While you don't "need" superpowers to make ADRP run, I think that you need to have exceptional characters and not just "average joe" types.

The problem is the lack of randomness.

If characters are amped up compared to the general population it's easy for a GM to figure out the answer to the "who would win" scenario. If they are equal, this question is a lot harder. Particularly when we move away from swords and into the realm of firearms, which tend to be more random than swords.

Star Wars works fine because Jedi tend to be a lot more cinematic and heroic, but if all of the characters are Han Solo types the game is a lot more challenging to judge fairly. Six characters and six stormtroopers in a blaster fight, who would win? It's complex because any given character and/or stormtrooper could theoretically shoot at anyone, whereas if it was a battle with swords each combatant takes on a single foe and they fight directly.

I think that the randomness of firearms messes up the elegance of ADRP. Zelazny chose a setting where gunpowder doesn't work so he avoids much of this issue.

Having done it where we were all bounty hunters worked fine. 2 guys had high force and bought jedi powers i had none but my bounty hunter was really a clone robot hybrid and had rank 1in pilot and technical. The guy with the highest warfare basically played bobba fett crossed with a samurai and we let him use a light sabre cos he had highest rank warfare.
It all worked fine to be honest. One of the force guys went dark side in the final encounter so the other one and he got in a lightsabre duel mixing it up with jedi powers and force stuff which was great to watch.  I had done a deal with the bobba fett samurai guy and triggered the explosive charges i had planted in both their comms equipment to take them both out and we left in my ship with the bounty. I had of course also fitted about 4 explosives to bobba in antisipation of the inevitable double cross and had rigged my ship to explode should my brain functions stop. But the double cross never came and we sailed off into the sunset....
We handled firefights just like you would in a regular amber game. Course all my mini robots and tech tricks held the day though the force guys would tell you it was their jedi powers and the samurai would tell you it was him jetpacking backwards down the corridor with a blaster in one hand and a light sabre in the other.... Show off.

[RPGPundit]

For the record, I've never had any problem with firearms in my game. I don't see why someone would think this is a problem with the mechanics.

RPGPundit

[Panjumanju]

For the record, I've never had any problem with firearms in my game. I don't see why someone would think this is a problem with the mechanics.

RPGPundit

I don't think they were pointing it out as a problem, just as something interesting. Guns affects player conception of "the odds", given their cultural significance, making them seem more random. That's neat. At least, that's what I got from it.

//Panjumanju

[RPGPundit]

I don't see where the randomness factors in. Its still warfare vs. warfare.

RPGpundit

[jibbajibba]

I don't see where the randomness factors in. Its still warfare vs. warfare.

RPGpundit

Yup. I think a bunch of Navy seals would hate you to think that their combat skills were random luck.

I can see that a guy with a pool of badstuff might get hit with the stray shot or a guy with a lot of goodstuff might make great use of cover e5tc. butthis is no different to a guy with a pool of badstuff slipping on a wet floor in  bar room brawl or getting their electrowhip caught on the ceiling fan.

[Sydius Mendoza]

......getting their electrowhip caught on the ceiling fan.

That old chestnut. If I had a nickle....

[Panjumanju]

I don't see where the randomness factors in. Its still warfare vs. warfare.

RPGpundit

You are right, mechanically. But I think finarvyn was talking about player and GM perceptions affecting in-character decision making.

Because clearly it does not matter if Benedict has a handgun or a toothpick.

//Panjumanju

[finarvyn]

Let me elaborate a little on the "randomness" aspect of gunplay...

First, consider a scenario in an ancient-era game where three guys take on three badduns. All six characters are armed with swords. Basically, they line up and each character goes toe-to-toe with a single adversary in a warfare v. warfare conflict. If one battle ends quickly, that character might move on to help his peer gang up on a foe, but in general each character is battling against a single opponent. Very orderly.

Now consider the same scenerio in a wild west-era game where three guys take on three badduns. All six characters are armed with colt .45 sixshooters. Instead of lining up one-on-one, the six are hiding behind objects, shooting through windows, or whatever. Any time any character sees any of the three opponents, he might take a shot at the guy. This is much less orderly.

With swords you get a continual cut-parry-thrust conflict where the best one slowly wins. With guns you get random shots at foes who happen to show themselves. I see this as a very different situation to run as a game master, and a weakness in the ADRP rules mechanic.

Just my two cents. Perhaps no one else has this problem.

[jibbajibba]

Let me elaborate a little on the "randomness" aspect of gunplay...

First, consider a scenario in an ancient-era game where three guys take on three badduns. All six characters are armed with swords. Basically, they line up and each character goes toe-to-toe with a single adversary in a warfare v. warfare conflict. If one battle ends quickly, that character might move on to help his peer gang up on a foe, but in general each character is battling against a single opponent. Very orderly.

Now consider the same scenerio in a wild west-era game where three guys take on three badduns. All six characters are armed with colt .45 sixshooters. Instead of lining up one-on-one, the six are hiding behind objects, shooting through windows, or whatever. Any time any character sees any of the three opponents, he might take a shot at the guy. This is much less orderly.

With swords you get a continual cut-parry-thrust conflict where the best one slowly wins. With guns you get random shots at foes who happen to show themselves. I see this as a very different situation to run as a game master, and a weakness in the ADRP rules mechanic.

Just my two cents. Perhaps no one else has this problem.

I think Amber does suffer an issue with gunfire but not in the scenario you define.
I can suspend belief enough to beleive that clint Eastward can gun down 4 guys in a shootout just as easily as I can believe that Bruce Lee can do it to 4 guys in a dojo, or that Michael York can do it to 4 of the cardinals guards with a rapier.
The problem I have is with assasination. It's very hard to swallow the ADRPG comments of things like eliminating the 1st rank warfare guy with a sniper's rifle for example. Not any harder that how they can sense invisible oponents of course but a lot more mundane.
Guns are an equaliser in real combat. Doesn't mean they don't take skill to use but probably does mean that the ranks between levels of skill are far closer.

[RPGPundit]

I just don't see that scenario as difficult. It MIGHT be interepreted as one where terrain and other environmental factors, as well as luck, can have a slightly bigger influence than in melee combat, but that's the only real difference.

In my two+ decades of running Amber, I've done plenty of firefights.

RPGPundit

[Panjumanju]

I can support the notion that guns conceptually influence player decision, just as any ranged weapon might, but I cannot go as far as to say it breaks anything in the game.

One of the greatest things about the game, in my mind, is that all weapons are on something of an equal playing field. They may shift contextually in their efficiency, but it's all Warfare.

If you think guns break it, how on earth would you deal with laser guns, missiles and spells that summon gouts of magma from the shadow of Hot?

//Panjumanju

[RPGPundit]

If you think guns break it, how on earth would you deal with laser guns, missiles and spells that summon gouts of magma from the shadow of Hot?

//Panjumanju

Yup. I've seen all of that in my campaigns, and no problem at all with them.

RPGPundit

[finarvyn]

In my two+ decades of running Amber, I've done plenty of firefights.

I've been running ADRP since 1991 or 1992 and have run plenty of firefights as well. I just feel more uncomfortable with the outcome. Just feels more arbitrary than swordplay, at least I think it does.

[RPGPundit]

I've been running ADRP since 1991 or 1992 and have run plenty of firefights as well. I just feel more uncomfortable with the outcome. Just feels more arbitrary than swordplay, at least I think it does.

Hmm, ok. Well, not meaning to offend, but have you considered this might just be you? I mean, some particular aspect of how you handle play as an Amber GM?

RPGPundit

[finarvyn]

I see this as a very different situation to run as a game master, and a weakness in the ADRP rules mechanic.

Just my two cents. Perhaps no one else has this problem.

Hmm, ok. Well, not meaning to offend, but have you considered this might just be you? I mean, some particular aspect of how you handle play as an Amber GM?

Why yes I have considered this, as the snip from my earlier post testifies. That's part of why I like to participate in these discussions, as I look for ways to improve on what I do in ADRP. I'd be pretty arrogant to assume that I'm the perfect GM for all situations.

There are certain aspects of the game that never seem to click right in my brain. I'm also uncomfortable with switching conflicts from Strength to Warfare, or from Warfare to Strength. Particularly in player-player conflict (as opposed to player-NPC). Not to say that I can't do it, but I wish I had a better guideline so as to be more "fair" every time.