Resolving conflict in Amber without GM favouritism

[PGiverty]

There is a small but definite possibility that Erick might post a more detailed response here. I am very excited by this possibilty. However, this thread, like many of this forum is in danger of being derailed. I've asked everyone to keep off the topic of distributed GM power models, so please, I ask again, can you stop thread crapping FOR or AGAINST these models and stick to the topic or don't post. If you want to have a go at me, or continue this debate, please please, start a new thread.

This, and this only is the subject for the thread:

Within the existing Amber RPG system, what mechanical guidelines can you suggest to adjudicate combat and similar conflicts, assuming a competent GM capable of making a judgement?

[Otha]

I think the problem is that the question is inherently flawed.

There are no mechanical guidelines for adjudicating combat within the existing Amber system.  It says "take these things into account" but never really says how.

So I can't suggest any.  The only way to suggest guidelines would be to extend the system.

Perhaps I'm not understanding the question?

[Arref]

As best I recall (don't have the book here)... EW does include some hints about the mechanical values of ranks that might improve GM judgments.

If you take EW's comments about Endurance logic and apply that across other attributes (to be simulationist about it), you would have a range of character performance to support judgment.

mortal: never regenerate
chaos: heal 100 yrs
amber: heal 20 yrs
ranked: heal 10 yrs
Corwin: heals complex eyes, 4 yrs.

What you'll notice here is that across the range of bottom to top is a factor of five for each step. Mortal healing so poor they don't live long enough to replace severed bits. Amber rank 5 times better than Chaos, Corwin five times better than Amber rank.

So a specific rulings might be:
The first rank Warfare can beat second rank and third rank together because first rank is better than twice second rank.

The first rank Pscyhe can beat five Amber rank minds, but not six; or beat 20 Chaos ranked minds, but not 15 Chaos ranked minds teamed with 3 Amber ranked minds.

I think that's about as mechanical as the rules get.

[PGiverty]

I think the problem is that the question is inherently flawed.

There are no mechanical guidelines for adjudicating combat within the existing Amber system.  It says "take these things into account" but never really says how.

So I can't suggest any.  The only way to suggest guidelines would be to extend the system.

Perhaps I'm not understanding the question?

Arref has made exactly the kind of suggestion I'm looking for - extrapolating guidelines from the rules without changing the power dynamic or the basic system premise.

Edit: Snark removed.

[Otha]

I think that's about as mechanical as the rules get.

That's correct; they don't offer any guidance on handling the non-ranking considerations; things like tactical positioning, dirty tricks, and preparation.  The book says that they can be a factor, but gives no guidance on how MUCH of a factor they should be.  For me, this lack is the most telling, because they are always present.

[PGiverty]

That's correct; they don't offer any guidance on handling the non-ranking considerations; things like tactical positioning, dirty tricks, and preparation.  The book says that they can be a factor, but gives no guidance on how MUCH of a factor they should be.  For me, this lack is the most telling, because they are always present.

This thread is not for critiques of the Amber rule set! If you can't or won't address the question or don't understand it, or think it's stupid question, please start your own thread on your own topic.

[Malleus Arianorum]

This, and this only is the subject for the thread:

Within the existing Amber RPG system, what mechanical guidelines can you suggest to adjudicate combat and similar conflicts, assuming a competent GM capable of making a judgement?

I suggest holding secret talks with the players to let them negotiate their own victory conditions. The highest ranked player gets what they asked for and the lower ranked players get sloppy seconds.

From actual play, a thronewar where there was a battle for the castle and everyone was invited. I had some house rules in effect where players could have a few elite champions, hordes of disloyal irregulars or something in between. There were no NPCs of note.

At first everyone wanted Total Victory(tm) including insta-leg chopping. Here's what the players chose (ranked by warfare) after some negotiation

1 Bill: I order my elite bodyguards to withdraw into the keep and take as few casualties as possible.
2 Andy: I order my elites to kill Bill at any cost.
3 Nathan: I order my army to trap Bill and his elites in the keep so that I can rule the surrounding countryside.
4 Lisa: I order my horde to sieze and fortify the dungeons.
5 Brian: I sail my Navy into the city and set myself up as a champion of the people. When Nathan tries to take over, I secretly offer my alliegence to him while publicly supporting Bill.
6 Susan: After my first army is slain in a failed pre-emptive strike through Arden, I return from shadow by sea with a last minute horde army. Since it's a last miniute affair the warchiefs don't take orders from me exactly, but I can kill them and order their followers on a chief by chief basis. After a sea voyage and plenty of slaying, the plan is to never ever harm citizens of Amber and if possible help Bill at the Castle.

So the results were, 1 Bill withdraws to the keep and takes few casualties. 2 Andy throws away all of his elites in a failed attempt to break in. 3 Nathan overcomitts himself and exposes his baggage train to Susan's horde.

Lisa was unopposed, and quite happy to win the dungeons and the Pattern room.

Brian's Navy forced Susan's horde to shipwreck several miles south of the city an then tricked them into attacking the city.

Susan led most of her horde out of Brian's death trap with promises of easier plunder. She happened across Nathan's baggage train, destroyed it, and then trapped him and his army between the keep and the walls of the city. Susan personaly cracked open the gates of the castle and Nathan beat a quick retreat to the city.

Later...

Bill's colors always flew alongside those of the now vanished King Oberon. Bill rulled in his place, ever hopeful for his return.

Andy's elites were completely destroyed and he was exiled from the Amber.

Nathan's Army was in tatters but the survivors escaped via Brian's Navy. Nathan was exiled but could blackmail Brian for his aid.

Lisa's Horde grew restless and dispersed ('cause that's what hordes do in my houserules) although the new fortifications and a few stragglers remained in Amber's dungeons. Eventualy she replaced them with regular troops. She publicly acknowledged Bill regent but retained control of the dungeons.

Brian was a public hero even though he secretly incited the attack he publicly repelled. Bill kept him on as a Mayor as a reward for sinking Nathan's army even though Bill suspected that Brian secretly shipped Nathan and his army to safety. (He had!)

Susan was a secret ally with Bill, although he chose to keep distance from her publicly because of her confusing role in saving the city from her own horde.

Anyway, that's what I was able to get with secret talks and some negotiation. There were some other things going on with Psyche and Strength but that's how Warfare played out. Endurance didn't see much use because players wanted quick results for the most part.

[Erick Wujcik]

I'll come back to the original question (from Jib) in a day or two.

That day or two is stretching into a week or two, but I'm still working on finding the time. This morning I took my copy of Amber Diceless with me to breakfast, and tagged a couple of relevant passages.

I'm also trying to figure how to respond without coming across as rude or insensitive...

...in the meantime, Simone Cooper, the brilliant 'Goddess of Gaming' responsible for creating both Ambercon U.K. and Ambercon Northwest (see Ambercons) recently posted a wonderful description of an Amber Diceless combat online. Visceral, gritty, and with nary a mention of Ranks:

Helena vs. Hellhounds

Erick

[Otha]

This thread is not for critiques of the Amber rule set! If you can't or won't address the question or don't understand it, or think it's stupid question, please start your own thread on your own topic.

I have done so, but I don't think "I don't understand the question" is an impertinent answer.

[The Yann Waters]

Helena vs. Hellhounds

Helena: I try.
GM: How much effort?
Helena: A lot of my little bitty amount ;-)
GM: risking fatigue and injury, or just pushing?
Helena: I don't know what that means; I just try hard, and if it's not working, I say I need more power. And try a lot harder.

Hmm. Doesn't that sound like the sort of a situation in which not only the GM but also the player might benefit from more substantial guidelines for the effects of her efforts? That is, precisely what does "effort" mean in terms of the mechanics?

[Otha]

Hmm. Doesn't that sound like the sort of a situation in which not only the GM but also the player might benefit from more substantial guidelines for the effects of her efforts? That is, precisely what does "effort" mean in terms of the mechanics?

Exactly.

[PGiverty]

That day or two is stretching into a week or two, but I'm still working on finding the time. This morning I took my copy of Amber Diceless with me to breakfast, and tagged a couple of relevant passages.

I'm also trying to figure how to respond without coming across as rude or insensitive...

If you are concerned in any way about offending me, please don't be, unless you bring my mother into it!

Incidentally, the example you post is basically improv combined with GM fiat. It looks like fun but I can do that stuff already without the need for the Amber rule set. What I want to know is how to the mechanics intersect with play in this example. Or do they not? Is there only GM fiat and improv outside of the basic rankings?

[Erick Wujcik]

Incidentally, the example your post is basically improv combined with GM fiat. It looks like fun but I can do that stuff already without the need for the Amber rule set. What I want to know is how to the mechanics intersect with play in this example. Or do they not? Is there only GM fiat and improv outside of the basic rankings?

You are confusing style with substance.

The style of Amber Diceless requires that the Game Master disguise the mechanics in order to preserve the feel of the environment. The inherently secretive world of Amber, where manipulation, intrigue and deception have to have room to play.

Of course the Game Master doesn't say things like "oh, he's two ranks higher than you, or that groom is clearly human ranked," because such things should never cross the character's mind... and the player needed be concerned with such things.

The mechanics should take place entirely in the head of the Game Master. Which doesn't make it, in any way shape or form, 'GM fiat.'

As for 'Improv' - the RPGpundit speaks of his bat, while being a Detroit boy, I instinctively reach under my seat for my trusty tire iron - are you trying to provoke me? Of course role-playing, any good role-playing, any decent role-playing, any role-playing that dreams of being something more than shoving pretty, pretty, painted miniatures around a rubber hex mat, requires that the players slip into their roles, requires that the Game Master weave a picture with words, and that we jointly work without scripts, and that, yes, yes, a thousand times yes, we do, in fact, commit the unthinkable process of improvisation.

When Corwin strikes, in the first conbat scene enacted in Nine Princes in Amber, going for a 'below the belt' knock-out, he is committing 'Improv,' and hopefully anyone who aspires to fun role-playing is doing the same. Constantly, continuously, effortlessly, and shamelessly.

As for the mechanics, it's clear that you aren't paying very much attention. Please read Simone's posting again. And again.

There are mechanics there, writ clear and plain.

I'll be back.

Erick

[Otha]

As for the mechanics, it's clear that you aren't paying very much attention. Please read Simone's posting again. And again.

There are mechanics there, writ clear and plain.

If they were there, writ clear and plain, then PG and I would be able to see them.

We're not idiots.

We're not ignorant.

We're also not telepathic.

[TonyLB]

There are mechanics there, writ clear and plain.

Yeah, y'know, Erick I've got almost twenty years of Amber experience under my belt, and I can barely see the contours of the mechanics underlying that example.

There is one (1) example of the GM asking the player to make a choice, and that one founders immediately over the fact that the question is asked in a way that doesn't convey any meaning to the player.

There are a few examples of what I'd call "implicit questions" ... when you hear the baying of Hellhounds coming closer, do you keep fighting or do you cut and run?  But I can see those as choice-points only because I am so familiar with thinking about combat in this way.

There is no reference to explicit reference to relative strengths, no explicit reference to aggressive/defensive/opportunistic stances, no explicit reference to changing the arena of combat.  All those things happen, but I can only see them because I know precisely where to look for them.

Overall, I can see the position of both sides.  Erick, I agree that the combat is influenced by the mindset of the Amber mechanics, and the GM may even be comparing statistics in her head and doing all the calculations behind the curtain (though, not being a mind-reader, I can't be sure of that).  Dave et al., I agree that there is virtually nothing mechanical being described out in the open, and that only an Amber expert would be able to decipher the slightest bit of what the hidden process here is likely to be.

Can we agree that while this is indeed an example of Amber combat mechanics in action, it is sufficiently sub rosa that it is not an example that a person would (for instance) use to illustrate those rules in order to teach them to someone unfamiliar with them?