Players who go off and "do their own thing"?

[AshenHaze]

I do as well, if their is a big scene, if they can be trumped in I try to arrange it to happen, or allow them to trump in.

[warp9]

I think that the fact that it forces the PCs to at least marginally end up coming together is the real main reason why "threats to the entire multiverse" are such popular themes for Amber campaigns; "it was in the novels" being only a secondary reason.

RPGPundit

Maybe.

Of course, that still assumes a cooperative action vs competitive action. Who says that all the PCs have to be on the side of defending the multiverse?

And it also assumes that this threat is not actually coming from one of the PCs.

[RPGPundit]

Maybe.

Of course, that still assumes a cooperative action vs competitive action. Who says that all the PCs have to be on the side of defending the multiverse?

And it also assumes that this threat is not actually coming from one of the PCs.

Yes, that's a good point. In my last game I had players all over the spectrum of sides in the multiverse-endangering situation.

RPGPundit

[Bird_of_Ill_Omen]

I like what this discussion illuminates about campaign building ideology in regards to Amber games vs. what I'll call "traditional" roleplaying games (your party-oriented D&D game, for instance).  I think one of the wonderful things that Amber gave us was an invitation to the players to contribute to the world-creation process to a degree that no other game had yet done.  In traditional RGP's, the GM created most everything.  Whatever input a player had to the world setting was mostly done during the character creation process (for instance, the player might create a new knighthood for his character, or develop the royal family his outcast adventurer was the black sheep for).  But in Amber, players get to create worlds and people to inhabit those worlds all the time.  The GM would ask the player, "Who in your shadow would know about disarming nuclear bombs?"  And it's the player who fills in this detail for the GM, instead of the other way around.  I think this is one part of what invests Amber players so deeply in their games -- certainly not the most important or only part, but it is a way for players to get creatively invested in Amber in a way they don't typically get to do in your average D&D game.

Maybe this is also part of what makes Amber players feel more comfortable "going off and doing their own thing" -- because they've been invited by the game to go and create their own circumstances.  That, combined with the game giving each individual enough personal power to make that player feel confident surviving alone, makes going off on their own seem even more acceptable.

However, Amber gives an equal invitation to the GM to handle this kind of situation if it gets problematic for the Campaign.  The GM is allowed to remind the player, "Since Shadow is whatever you want it to be, while you are there [insert name of shadow], everything goes your way.  Let me know when your character is done with that and decides to respond to either A, B, or C [insert the plot threads you've been dropping him which he'd been uninterested in or ignoring]."  If the character is uninterested in those plot threads, then chances are he's uninterested in your game.  It's like the comedian says, "These are the jokes, pal.  If you're not laughing, you're probably at the wrong show."

[RPGPundit]

Amber is a regular RPG; but if you're not using "traditional" in that sense, but in the sense of their being certain traditional "customs" to the RPG game, Amber does certain demonstrate immense innovation within the mold of the Regular RPG.

I think what does this is mainly the nature of the world (or multiverse, that is) being emulated, though.

RPGPundit

[Tolknor]

I had a player in my last game that almost never left the city of Amber. He rarely left the Castle.  In fact he spent nearly all his waking hours in the Library.  Despite this he became a very interesting part of the game, especially for me as GM.  

Two things made this happen.
One is that in real life the guy was friends with all the players, but had sort of gotten out of gaming.  He liked being around when we were playing but was always leaving or coming in late and eventually he moved out of the area.  He had an encyclopedic knowladge of scifi/fantasy.  He had years of gaming experience in the past. and he had a very eclectic general knowladge base.

Second.  So in the game he ran Arlo, a compulsive reader who had been in some very nasty things in shadow growing up and when he was finally brought to Amber he stayed in town to be safe.  (As safe as anyone staying in Amber could be of course).  But when characters were going about thier business and handling thier issues, they considered Arlo a resource for solutions, ideas, history, and would involve him that way.  "Let's see if Arlo is in the library" they would say.  Eventually i ran his character as an NPC after he faded away from the group. While Arlo was talking, leading the characters in problem-solving, i could take the nessesary personal breaks, fix a sandwhich, drag out a round of beers, or just kick back and watch him go.

He had a few of his own adventures but his heart really wasn't in it and while he liked hanging out with us he felt that having a game run for his benefit was taking time away from players who were really active.

It was an imperfect solution but it was a contribution, worthy of points sometimes, and added to the game.

[RPGPundit]

Hmm, that's interesting. Sometimes it can be difficult to discern between a player who is really just playing a "long game", and one who is not really connecting to the game or group.  Of course, the way around that is having an out-of-character talk with him.

You remind me of one of my campaigns, where one of my players was Edmund, the butler of Amber.  Like your Arlo, he almost never left the castle. But in the case of this player, I was quite familiar with him and his style, and he eventually plotted the downfall of the entire rest of the group, ending up the only survivor of that game; and all agreed that it was glorious.

RPGPundit

[Tolknor]

I would have suspected him immediatly.  Everyone knows the Butler did it....:eek:

[Malleus Arianorum]

I pre-empt the problem by mandating that all characters MUST have certain character flaws. Basicaly its all the stuff that Wujick laid out, plus an obsession or two that I handcraft for the campaign.

[RPGPundit]

I would have suspected him immediatly.  Everyone knows the Butler did it....:eek:

Yeah, the other players really screwed up on that one.

RPGPundit

[daniel_ream]

I think that the fact that it forces the PCs to at least marginally end up coming together is the real main reason why "threats to the entire multiverse" are such popular themes for Amber campaigns

I seem to recall that's explicit advice from the rulebook, isn't it?  That if you don't throw an existential threat at the PCs they'll scatter to the four [strike]winds[/strike] corners of Shadow and never work together on anything?

[RPGPundit]

I believe it is, yes... in my experience there are two things that keeps the characters unified to some extent.  the first is an "existential threat".  The second is a struggle for power in Amber.  Even if individual PCs themselves don't claim to have much of an interest in that, they'll be dragged into the conflict by the other PCs, or their parents, or siblings, or other Amberites.

RPGPundit

[Benoist]

"Players who go off and do their own thing" is kind of the point of playing a role playing game, to me. Or at least, that is *the* most desirable outcome, because this emphasizes what sets TRPGs apart from other games. If, as a GM, you are reluctant to deal with this, you must relearn how to GM in the first place, IMO.

[RPGPundit]

The difference is, in a lot of games, players go off and do their own thing TOGETHER, as a group.  In amber, they will tend to do that on their own.

RPGPundit

[Benoist]

I imagine it's kind of similar to Vampire the Masquerade when the PCs are not part of the same coterie and basically come to town for the first time with their own aims and goals and ambitions. That's basically how I run VtM. A sandbox "by Night" with the PCs coming to the city, free to do what it is they want to do. It does involve a fair share of single PCs doing their own things. It's a time management thing on my part. And yes, it means some players wait for their turn sometimes. But it leads to great games when everyone's into it.

So I guess I'd say you should have players receptive to these kinds of things in the first place. The whole adult gaming, wait for my turn thing, for one. The 'not getting mad if that involves some PvP at some point' too. That kind of thing. Mature gamers. Not in the sense artsy fartsy "white wolf mature". I mean real mature.

PS: yeah I know. I'm comparing to a WW game. I go with what I know. That's the most straightforward comparison to me. And you know I'm not into the whole "storygaming" thing - that's a given.