Running Away

[RPGPundit]

One of my former Amber players, while we were trying to chat about diceless gaming to a diceless newb, pointed out something I thought was interesting.  While I was explaining how the diceless system in Amber or in Lords Of Olympus (which the newb had just acquired) was really great in encouraging very descriptive play and how that changes the game, my veteran player chipped in to add "yeah, and in Amber you run away a lot more than you would in an normal RPG".

I found that a surprising thought, but now that I consider it, that's true. At least in my campaigns, Amber players are much more likely to be willing to flee, something that in D&D or most other RPGs they're totally loathe to.

RPGPundit

[Sydius Mendoza]

Still a newb with diceless, but I would imagine that "meta-game thinking" is less prevalent in ADRPG or LoO. Not sure if you plan to release a creatures supplement for LoO, but Amber doesn't have much in the way of monster lists.

It is all open to the imagination of the GM.

[Panjumanju]

I think that the difference is this. In most "traditional" (problematic though the term may be) RPGs, you can assume that whatever challenge you are up against is scaled to your level. There may be more challenging fights, there may be easier ones - but given the structure of the game you can assume if the GM is presenting something to fight, you have a margin of success.

In Amber, you cannot make that assumption.

I often tease about Dungeons & Dragons: "It's funny...the farther I walk away from home, the stronger the monsters seem to be."

//Panjumanju

[LordVreeg]

I think that the difference is this. In most "traditional" (problematic though the term may be) RPGs, you can assume that whatever challenge you are up against is scaled to your level. There may be more challenging fights, there may be easier ones - but given the structure of the game you can assume if the GM is presenting something to fight, you have a margin of success.

In Amber, you cannot make that assumption.

I often tease about Dungeons & Dragons: "It's funny...the farther I walk away from home, the stronger the monsters seem to be."

//Panjumanju

I totally disagree.

When you build a real sandbox, in any game, one of the constants is that placement of encounters is suposed to be based on realistic placement more than any appropriate encounter ability.  I make that clear to all my pcs.

[Panjumanju]

I totally disagree.

When you build a real sandbox, in any game, one of the constants is that placement of encounters is suposed to be based on realistic placement more than any appropriate encounter ability.  I make that clear to all my pcs.

This isn't something to disagree about, Lord Vreeg.

I run my games the way you run your games. I also make the same thing clear to my PCs. That's not the point.

Most RPG systems are designed assuming matching challenge levels to the party, and that dictates the expectations players have coming into an encounter. We get to "in Amber players run away a lot", because in most other RPGS the player expectation is that you're not going to get into an encounter just to run away from it.

Besides, what is this "real sandbox" game nonsense, anyway? Nobody mentioned sandboxes. Amber CAN be a sandbox. D&D CAN be a sandbox. If it's a sandbox or not does not change the fact that "traditional" (again, a problematic term - and I think in this case it applies to anything with a scaling level system) games affect player expectation one way, and Amber Diceless another.

//Panjumanju

[finarvyn]

I would imagine that "meta-game thinking" is less prevalent in ADRPG or LoO.

I think this is true, at least in my experience.

In many RPGs, players gauge their actions based on artificial numbers like hit points. Players also tend to have a good feel for the hit points (and AC and damage, etc.) for monsters. Players see those numbers and they evaluate their options accordingly.

In ADRP they tend not to know much about the situation because they have fewer numbers to compare, and if I hint that they are in trouble they tend to look for ways to escape the situation.

[LordVreeg]

Sure it easy to disagree.
You said that in most traditional rpgs, things are scaled to level.  And I find that a symptom of newer games, not the older, 'traditional' ones.  Exactly to my point, amber and other games can be run as sandboxes.  But you will find the largest cloture of sandboxers among those gaming with older game ideals.

[Panjumanju]

I'm trying to narrow terms for clarity in pointing out a theme that contributes to Pundit's point about running away in RPGs. And I think you're being a pest about it rather than making your own point. Perhaps I should refine it to:

"In games scaled to progressive character levels the expectation is never to run away from an encounter, given the structure of challenge in the game. If a player is more accustom to such a game, then they would consider Amber DRPG a game where running away is more common."

Is that satisfactory? I feel it is too restrictive, personally.

Why are you trying to turn this into an argument about what you perceive as "old school" or "traditional" or "sandbox" - or whatever else, which has nothing to do with this point? Trying to imply that sandbox games precede any other style of play is more than a little off-topic.

Are you trying to say:

"Sandbox games encourage running away. It is only non-sandbox games that do not, so running away is actually more common in RPGs than you think?"

Because that would be relevant. And include sandboxes.

//Panjumanju

[Sydius Mendoza]

In ADRP they tend not to know much about the situation because they have fewer numbers to compare, and if I hint that they are in trouble they tend to look for ways to escape the situation.

Yes. This is exactly what I was getting at. Thank you for being more articulate, and less lazy about it than I was.

[RPGPundit]

Still a newb with diceless, but I would imagine that "meta-game thinking" is less prevalent in ADRPG or LoO. Not sure if you plan to release a creatures supplement for LoO, but Amber doesn't have much in the way of monster lists.

It is all open to the imagination of the GM.

Have you bought Lords of Olympus?
There is a moderately significant section on mythological creatures in the book.

RPGPundit

[RPGPundit]

I think that the difference is this. In most "traditional" (problematic though the term may be) RPGs, you can assume that whatever challenge you are up against is scaled to your level. There may be more challenging fights, there may be easier ones - but given the structure of the game you can assume if the GM is presenting something to fight, you have a margin of success.

In Amber, you cannot make that assumption.

I often tease about Dungeons & Dragons: "It's funny...the farther I walk away from home, the stronger the monsters seem to be."

//Panjumanju

That's very true with regards to Amber (and LoO); though some D&D DMs also don't always consistently scale in this way.  In my D&D games, I start the PCs in a relatively safer area, somewhere that the presence of man has been strong for some time; but that doesn't mean they might not encounter something over their head when close to home.

RPGPundit

[RPGPundit]

I think that Amber games are almost always sandboxes.  That's certainly one important point; another, as was said, is the difference of finding it harder to judge numbers. And that there tend to be more individual or unique enemies; a 2nd level D&D party will likely know what they're confronting when they run into 2d4 Orcs; when characters in a Lords of Olympus game run into some creature far off in the Multiverse that looks like a giant with the head of a cat and a scorpion tail with a flaming tip, they can't really judge by looking at it what its power level is going to be; they have to make a quick decision about trying to fight it or high-tailing it out; and if they fight it and find that it has some tricks up its sleeve, they will be more likely to play it safe and bug out rather than continuing to test their Luck.

RPGPundit

[Doctor Jest]

I totally disagree.

When you build a real sandbox, in any game, one of the constants is that placement of encounters is suposed to be based on realistic placement more than any appropriate encounter ability.  I make that clear to all my pcs.

This. That's exactly how I've been playing for more than 20 years now. The idea of level balanced encounters where the players are assumed to be able to "win" is pretty new from what I've seen. Even Dungeon Modules, which were written with tournament play in mind, were very deadly and victory was anything but assured.

Heck, running away was sometimes what it took to make it past the first three levels when all you had were 6 hit points and a crappy dagger.

At some point games shifted to the assumption that everything is precisely scaled to allow the pcs to win, just not TOO easily. It's a pretty new idea, relatively speaking.

[LordVreeg]

This. That's exactly how I've been playing for more than 20 years now. The idea of level balanced encounters where the players are assumed to be able to "win" is pretty new from what I've seen. Even Dungeon Modules, which were written with tournament play in mind, were very deadly and victory was anything but assured.

Heck, running away was sometimes what it took to make it past the first three levels when all you had were 6 hit points and a crappy dagger.

At some point games shifted to the assumption that everything is precisely scaled to allow the pcs to win, just not TOO easily. It's a pretty new idea, relatively speaking.

That was my point, and apologies to anyone who considered it annoying (I realy don't recall being called a pest for decades...novel).  I consider the earlier games to often be more like this, where parleying and fleeing where done regularly.  I remember a section in the fist PHB that talked about having escape plans ready.  
So I guess my feelings (and how I articulate them) may make sense to a certain generation.
To expand, I consdifer level-appropriate encounters to reduce the versimilitude since it reduces thinking about encounters from within the perspective of the setting, and metagames them by thinking about the encounter from the basis of the rules.

[RPGPundit]

I think there's one other important aspect, the diceless aspect.  In a D&D game, if things are tough but not absolutely impossible, Players might decide to have their characters try to "tough it out", consciously or subconsciously counting on the hope of great die rolls to pull them through.  In Amber or Lords of Olympus, you know that's not going to be what happens, so unless you think up a plan FAST for how to turn around a fight that isn't going your way, running is the best option.

RPGPundit