Ranking NPCs

[jibbajibba]

Just because its a quiet day in the office and my boss isn't back 'til Monday, I thought I would pose a little question for discussion.

How do you rank your NPCs against your PCs? The rules as written say that NPCs are secret and the GM can insert them where they wish, this is one of the mechanisms used to suprise a PC who thinks they are at the top of a stat. I am not sure about the use of this mechanism.

If a PC wants to be the strongest guy in the world and is prepared to pay the points then I am in effect preventing him from acheiving that by not putting the NPCs into the same pool.

I have a different approach. I throw the major NPCs into the auction. With a Play by post game , which is most of my experience of Amber, I will even have NPCs that I allow the players to think are PCs all bidding together.

Opine away.

[Fightzombies]

In my current game I only make players one promise:  If you bid first in an attribute, you're the best of your generation.

Since the players are youngers, that includes all NPCs that are designated as the "younger generation," including many Chaosites.

Using this idea players still feel badass when they're first ranked, but they understand that there are things out there (elders, really old lords of Chaos, etc.) that are great unknowns and pose a definite threat.

Maintaining badassitude for first ranked is very important, but you can't completely cripple your ability to make deadly NPCs as well.  And including NPCs in auction generally isn't practical for me.  I tend to make them on the fly.

[Nihilistic Mind]

What I like to do is let the players think that NPCs are better than them, or at least let them think that they have much better stats.

I'd definitely let the top psyche at the auction rival with Fiona/Brand, the highest warfare rival with Benedict, etc...

The good things about being good (stats) AND being very experienced (most NPCs will turn out to be more experienced than most PCs, not always) is that you can fake a lot of it... Benedict could be only a mere 10 points above a PC in warfare, but he knows a ton more tricks (which, in my opinion, are not necessarily reflected in the points, but rather, in the background).

I remember what Wujcik said about a Construct's superior psyche versus Fiona's psyche.

[gabriel_ss4u]

I agree...
within their GENERATION.

I also agree, that sometimes I'll put NPC bids up against the players too, this works out very interesting in game-play and come experience time.

I have an extensive supplement I created for Chaos, and within it I set 3 levels of generations for ALL the Chaosians.

I have "ELDER" Level
"Medium" Level
and Beginner level.

These can range in points, but are basically 250 points and up.
249 - 151 pts. medium
and low level 85 to 150 pts.

I ranked every Chaosian on this system and fitted them to ranks within their side of reality.
(This way, an NPC Chaosian and a PC Amberite may have the same total for a stat, but not the same ranking. / case by case basis comparison.)

[Croaker]

What I do is make ranks for each generation.

When you're, say, 4 ranks above Amber, you're equal in skill/power, whatever your generation and its ranking.
I also create artificial, "blank" ones when there's too wide a gap between 2 bids: Say, one player bids 5 points, the other 80, the second guy isn't going to be 2 ranks above amber, but, say, 4 ranks. However, if we had bids of 5, 6, 10 and 14 for the same attribute in another generation, the 14-points guy would also be 4 ranks above amber, with the same abilities as the one who invested 80 points. Tough luck.

Thus, top-ranked PCs can be a challenge for most elder amberites, although the Great Old Ones are usually a little too tough for them. Yet.

[Otha]

Croaker, that just converts a rank system into a points system, you realize that, right?

[Croaker]

Not exactly, in that the "difference" between 2 ranks stays the same, regardless of the points invested.
Say, the ranks for psyche are at 5, 10, 11, 14 and 20 character points. There's as much ranked points between the 11 and 10 guy that between the 20 and 14 guy.

You could thus have some elders having spent, from 4th to 1st: 10, 20, 25 and 40 points, while the youngsters, with a top-ranked PC at 21 points, would be as efficient as the 40-points elder.

See what I mean? This wouldn't be the case if I just used the "bid points", and is one of the ways I've found out to determine the actual difference between ranks. If you want, this is similar to arref saying that top-ranked = 2 middle ranked = 4 low ranked = 8 amberites = 16 chaosites = 32 humans.

[Malleus Arianorum]

Before the game starts, I figure out how powerful each rank is and then I auction them off. So in my games it's always a good idea to bid on slow moving attributes. First place in Strength is gonna be a tree ripping, door smashing, blow shrugging, corpse flinging son of a gun no matter how many points are spent.

In other campaigns, if everyone overbids on psyche, you had better do it too because you know from the auction that your brain is going to get kicked by 97 points of psyche anyway. In my campaigns, if everyone else overbids on psyche, just snatch up the rest of the attributes for a song and get ready for some serious nerd kicking.

[gabriel_ss4u]

Not exactly, in that the "difference" between 2 ranks stays the same, regardless of the points invested.
Say, the ranks for psyche are at 5, 10, 11, 14 and 20 character points. There's as much ranked points between the 11 and 10 guy that between the 20 and 14 guy.

Ummmm, those ranks are only for that generation, it helps build that GAP because the PLAYERS want to be head & shoulders above the next bidders, and NOT have them nipping at their heels for a while.
No where in the game does it state that it should be easy for a player to ascend ranks in some easy low point structure. This would be revised only to allow the players faster progression towards higher ranks (or point values) if that is what the GM and players want, quick progression of stats.
In Amber, That ain't suppose to be so easy all the time.

OK, I count on building a 15 or 20 pt. spread from me to the next level rank if I want to be 1st, make them work harder to compete against me in that arena...
This ain't Champions or such...

[PantherShade]

As I noted in the other, similar thread, I think that the ranking system is silly.  I have the players build their PCs blind to both the NPCs and other PCs.

If someone wants to be the 'strongest', then they'll need to spend more points than everyone else.  I find that this is the easiest way to resolve everything.

Do 2 PCs want to be the best?  Whoever spent the most is best.
How do the NPCs compare?  Whoever spent the most is best.
How do different generations compare?  Whoever spent the most is best.

Since I give more points to the older generations, they'll be better, especially if they focus.  That way, I can tell if one of the PCs has a better Warfare than Fiona.  Whoever spent the most is best.

[Croaker]

No where in the game does it state that it should be easy for a player to ascend ranks in some easy low point structure. This would be revised only to allow the players faster progression towards higher ranks (or point values) if that is what the GM and players want, quick progression of stats.
In Amber, That ain't suppose to be so easy all the time.

I'm not sure I understand you well.

IIRC, the corebook doesn't concern itself with points, but with ranks. If 5 players bid on psyche, you're gonna have a first, second, third... and that won't change, whether they bid 20-90 points or 2-11.

Thus, once the auction is off, I don't concern myself with the points spend, but with the actual ranking achieved: A first-ranked player is gonna be as powerfull, whether he spend 90 points or just 15.

[Uncle Twitchy]

That's pretty much how I've always done it, and I then increase the ladder by adding the NPCs' ranks accordingly -- "Benedict is going to effectively be rank 3.5 in Psyche, 3 ranks above rank 1 in Strength, rank 2.5 in Endurance, and 10 ranks above rank 1 in Warfare..."

Once I've done that, I give the NPCs all the powers I think they should have based on what they did in the books, add any critters/artifacts and shadows, total those points up, then figure out the points the stats need to be accordingly based on how many points I want the NPCs to be... and I generally assign the point values based on the relative ages of the elders (Benedict gets more points than Corwin, Bleys gets roughly the same as Fiona and Brand, Julian and Gérard get roughly the same as Flora, and so on).

[gabriel_ss4u]

So...... comprehend?


I have some things written, but it won't upload!!!!!!

[gabriel_ss4u]

Croaker, please let me know what ya think, I wanna come to understanding w/ you on this, I value your opinion.

Croaker
"A first-ranked player is gonna be as powerful, whether he spend 90 points or just 15."    
   WITHIN THEIR GENERATION, NOT VS. OTHERS.
Yes, this is true.
But what about those pt. values compared to the other generation??
I use the pt. values as comparison to ALL-comers.
The ranks just keep that GENERATION in structure.

I guess if I never ran into a Chaosian or some other powerful being, it might not matter.
BUT,... The multi-verse is plentiful with challenges, and these challengers tend to have pt. values.  These pt. values may not be considered into the ranking structure of 1st thru whatever place (last) of the GENERATION of players, but they are there for basic comparison with all others.
k?
So...... comprehend?

[Croaker]

Hum... Maybe you'd better understand my point of view if you considered Demonic Ranks from shadow knight.

According to these, a demon may, for exemple, invest 90 points in strength and be ranked as high as an amberite who invested, say, 70 points.

In the same spirit, I use 2 rankings. One for the PCs, one for the NPCs, based on their values. I could use more (1 for PCs, one for Elder Amberites, one for chaosites), but I am lazy, and find it unnecessary.

So, if a PC is 4 ranks above amber with 40 points, he'll be as strong as a NOC which is 4 ranks above amber with 30 points, and just as strong as a demon which is 4 ranks above amber, with 50 points.

Thus, I use points in the beginning, to establish ranks (and to make players pay for their advancment) and that's all. Once this is done, I just consider how many ranks above Amber you are.