TheRPGSite

Perhaps it would make more sense if I had read the books.
On RPGPundit's advice (from his Xanga site) I got a copy of Amber Diceless, and read it. More properly, I read the character creation and task resolution sections, and (I admit) only skimmed the magic parts. The bidding mechanic was interesting, and I had hopes that I would like the game.
But I didn't. It seemed like a good two-thirds of the book could have been replaced with a page saying "Wing it" and nothing would have been lost. I kept looking at the next page, expecting a clever trick, and it didn't show up. Moreover, the play examples were irritating (not in that they existed, in their content), and the GM came off as a snide, patronizing jerk to me.
It's not the diceless aspect that bothers me, it's the lack of any meat to the system. I'm not trying to anger anyone who likes this game (I swear), I'm just wondering if I'm missing something here.

Hmmmm, could you be more specific? What kind of clever trick were you expecting but did not find? For that matter, what was irritating about the play examples? Granted, high art they ain't but they never made me angry. If you can qualify your objections a bit perhaps it will be more evident what is not working for you.

Quote from: The Worid;289945the GM came off as a snide, patronizing jerk to me.

you wanna die :lol: ;)

I would have to say Amber is light on mechanics. If you came to Amber looking for a game that was diceless but had a number of clever interlinked mechanics that fit together like peices of perfect clockwork you woudl be mistaken.
However, the Attribute auction is genius. It's genius for a lot of reasons, sets up the competition between PCs, allows stats to be open ended and in doing so sets the tone of the whole game, but mostly because it was unique and inspiringly original. How many times have you picked up a game and been able to scan the character generation because it's a variation of 3d6 for 6 stats or pools of d10 or whatever. Amber has a unique mechanism (i am a heretic as I love the aution but don't like the ranking rules).
Yes a lot of the book is background and flavour different versions of NPCs and the like. I didn't think the examples were so bad.
I actually think the rules lite nature of Amber is one of its strengths. Ambers multiverse nature would mean there were two approaches. Cover everything to do that you would need a rule book so densely packed it creaked at the seems. Systems for space dogfights, 16th century duels, modern warefare, fantasy creatures, faey, werewolves... It would need to be a combination of D&D, WoD, Twilight 2000, Traveller and Rifts. You could do that but in play it would be unweildy and, because the protagonists can alter their reality at a whim, untimately flawed as you can't cover allt eh variables. The alternative was a rules light system with a single mechanic that was universal. That is what you get. I think you can put all the Amber rules on 1 peice of paper and I think that makes a nice change.

Quote from: weilide;289985Hmmmm, could you be more specific? What kind of clever trick were you expecting but did not find? For that matter, what was irritating about the play examples? Granted, high art they ain't but they never made me angry. If you can qualify your objections a bit perhaps it will be more evident what is not working for you.

Here's a quote found early in the book:

"Develop your dream character: the one you have always wanted to play – the one you have always wanted to be."

Okay, sounds good. Yet when we get to some of the character creation examples, that has gone out the window:

"Willy: Yeah. Like I'll have these six cats, and they'll each be
eight point items, and then...
GM: NO!"

...and Willy ends up not actually making the character he set out to, replacing it with a less interesting concept that he could buy without the GM causing trouble for him.

Later on, this character shows up again, in a section about rules lawyering:

"GM: A fist-sized object comes flying into the room, shattering
the window and splashing right into the big soup bowl.
What are you doing?
Willy: Greymer is here with me, didn't I have any warning?
GM: Your lynx, Greymer, looks startled and his fur is standing
straight up on end. What are you doing?
Willy: Greymer is supposed to be psychically sensitive to
danger. Why wasn't I warned?
GM: Greymer takes off for the door, so fast you'd think his tail
was on fire. What are you doing?
Willy: I don't get it. Greymer should tell me about this stuff.
Why didn't I expect this? Is this fair?
GM: Are you asking me?
Willy: Yeah, I'm asking you.
GM: What's the question?
Willy: Why didn't Greymer warn me of this attack?
GM: Are you asking as Willy, or as Garvin?
Willy: What's the difference? Just answer the question.
GM: If you are asking as Willy, I was going to suggest that we
get to it some other time, after the session. As to Garvin,
how is Garvin going to find out the answer?"

I fail to see how wanting to know why abilities the player paid good points for are not working on the GM's whim can be called "rules lawyering"; in fact, given the rules-light nature of the game, I fail to see how significant rules lawyering can even exist.

As for the the sort of trick I was looking for, I just wanted more about Good/Bad Stuff past "They are Good/Bad". Or perhaps an expansion of the bidding concept (which I found clever) into the game at large.

ADRP is a tricky game to get the hang of, initially, but it's so smooth once you figure out how it works. The key to the whole thing is trust. You need to trust that the GM isn't really out to "screw you" but instead wants to offer some interesting situations and plotlines in which you can interract. Amber characters aren't gods, but they can do a heck of a lot. Except that their foes can also do a heck of a lot.

It's like reading a comic book. Spiderman has these neat powers and can really whup on Jimmy the Average Crook, so we don't really bother to tell those stories. What is more interesting is when Spidey goes head-to-head against Doc Oc or Green Goblin or somebody else worth a story. Amber players are super, but they aren't supposed to win every time. If they did there would be no real story to tell. In the same way, Amber players aren't supposed to lose all of the time, either. The best stories occur when players get fun situations and get swept along in the action until some resolution occurs, then they catch their breath and jump in again.

ADRP is truly diceless in that there are no randomizers or tricky equations to come up with an answer to the "who will win" question. The results of the conflict are based on the level of attribute and the ability for a player to role-play the situation, and the GM gets to use those guidelines to make things happen in a way that may be frustrating short-term but is hopefully fun long-term. Some don't like the lack of a clear mechanic because a GM could abuse the system if he wants, but that's where the trust factor comes in. If you don't trust that I'm going to try to run the best game that I can, don't play in my campaign.

As to Erick’s arrogance in the rulebook, maybe it’s just his writing style. Certainly in person he was very understanding and willing to explain and discuss things, but when he made his GM-mind up you had to accept his rulings and keep moving. I find some of the examples in the rulebook a little tedious (pages of details about specific types of injuries by getting sliced, beaten, burned, etc) so I tend to ignore those parts. Other GMs may find that these are the best parts of the book. I think that many ADRP GM’s look at the rulebook as a tool box of goodies from which to pick and choose, or to use or discard as needed in a particular campaign.

ADRP isn’t for everyone. Several posters on this very board really dislike the system and continually look for alternative ways to play Amber. For me, I think that the system is fantastic because of the auction, the simple attributes, the method of conflict resolution, and so on. I think it provides a skeletal set of guidelines as to how to run a campaign using a particular style – a style which not everyone is comfortable or enjoys. I know I didn’t really appreciate some of the subtle aspects of ADRP until I got to run a character in some of Erick’s games. If you haven’t had a chance to play ADRP, you might see if there is a game convention or gaming group nearby where you can try it firsthand.

After sleeping on it and reading your subsequent posting I think I have a better handle on our different reactions. For me it really does come down to the books. The thing is, I really love those books. And the thing in turn that I love about the RPG is that Mr. Wujcik really went out of his way to create a kind of user's manual to the universe that Zelazny created. Put another way, I don't find game mechanics (point balancing, etc) to be very interesting so I'm perfectly content to have a system that more or less gets out of the way, which Amber delivers. On the other hand, I'm obsessed with story mechanics and I love the space that Wujcik devotes to discussions of the characters, the world, character creation (as opposed to accounting), quizzes, endless hooks implicit in the novels that can be expanded into new stories, the unanswered questions, and so on. In this vein, I love the "Zelazny-as-GM" section in the followup sourcebook that really puts Zelazny the storyteller under the scalpel. Essentially I really dig the parts of ADRPG that would serve someone writing an Amber fanfic as much as a roleplayer. In short, all the generic RPG mechanics stuff (the auction system, attributes, stuff) I can kind of take or leave because for me, in the end, the source material is really where it's at. Hope that helps. And regardless of how you feel about the game, you should really give the novels a try. They're great.

I'll repeat the advice that you should try the novels.  Obviously I'm biased, but just as obviously they will help you make better sense of the game.

As for the in-book GM, some of the "style" I read as a bit tongue-in-cheek, for example the whole "Attribute X is the Most Important Attribute".  Other bits I took as a different approach to GMing; the example of the danger sense and the grenade is probably the most indicative.  In cases like this, players really need to just trust the GM and roll with it.  A lot of the game seems to be built around that.

Quote from: The Worid;290060I fail to see how wanting to know why abilities the player paid good points for are not working on the GM's whim can be called "rules lawyering"; in fact, given the rules-light nature of the game, I fail to see how significant rules lawyering can even exist.

I know what you mean. That example of rules lawyering seemed wierd to to me at first too. The GM is clearly in the wrong for forgetting about danger sense but the GM steamrollers through it anyway.
 
As I understand it now the point is not that as a GM you should never make a mistake. The point is that when a mistake occurs you should correct it and move forward without getting dragged into a rules fight.
 
It's counterintuitive but it is one of those 'tricks' you were looking for. By denying the players the opportunity to call a rules lawyering time out, you keep the story moving. Many of the GMing examples show the same senario: the player tries to stall and the GM asks "do you want to stall IN GAME?"

I suppose I shall try to read the Amber novels if I have the time. Thanks for the responses; I can see the matter more clearly now.
However, what I see is that I don't care for this game. It seems oddly restrictive in terms of character creation for such a rules-light game (for context, one of my favorite games is GURPS, despite the complexity) and quite frankly, a bit of argument over whether or not something should have happened on the occasion is part of the fun for me, because it makes the game world seem more real and less like just a narrative device. That said, if you enjoy it, play it and have fun, because that's the point.

The "Danger sense" incident, which I love because it taught me how to deal with these kinds of situations forever in the future; is not so much "rules lawyering" as it is players trying to one-up the GM.  And the GM making it clear that he's the Alpha Dog.

The Amber book teaches GMs to be brilliant majestic wonderful bastards.  If you embrace this way, World, it will not only make your life much easier as a GM but it will also make your adventures so much better.  You won't need to try to "create" a story out of your plot, but it will seem in retrospect as though you did. You will use the players' hopes and dreams against them in ways that will make them suffer immensely and they will thank you for it because it will be a far far better experience in gaming than they have ever had before.

In short, as a GM, you will become the God you are meant to be.

RPGPundit

I kinda of get what you're saying Worid but I do think that the tone of the game and the role of the GM is perfectly suited to Amber....you would get this (and I'm not trying to be sarcastic or anything) if you read the novels. I don't think it's the perfect example of what a functional GM shoud be but for Amber itself it's near perfect.

Once you understand this, Amber the rpg could be hacked for other settings. I'm going for another Zelazny book called Lord of Light : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord_of_Light.

Edit: I'd go further and say it's one of best examples of game design. A perfect union of theme, subject matter and mechanics.

Regards,
David R

And after all, who is to say that the "danger sense" episode is a matter of the GM forgetting at all? My interpretation is that the player bought some basic power for the cat, but it is highly possible that it won't work in all situations or against all potential enemies.

Maybe that makes the player feel cheated, but there may be some mega-plot happening here whereby the player will eventually find out why the cat's danger sense wasn't working.

Quote from: finarvyn;290454Maybe that makes the player feel cheated, but there may be some mega-plot happening here whereby the player will eventually find out why the cat's danger sense wasn't working.

Hence my point about "trust the GM".

That's funny.

I never understood the danger sense episode as you guys.

To me, the GM didn't forget the danger sense. But he made it manifest in the animal's reactions instead of putting it loudly to the player.

An exemple with merlin would be this:
GM: frakir pulses at your wrist
Player: I go out of the house
GM: once out set the feet out, gunfire erupts. Frakir pulses a lot. What do you do?
Player: Wait. frakir is supposed to have danger sense. Why didn't it warn me?

Simply put, to me, instead of metagaming the danger sense, the GM warned the player "in story", since, aside from this, the lynx is a normal animal and can't talk. Thus, he warns his master the only way it can.

One of my players had a violin with Danger Sense, and it would play a nice little theme it cooked up, and I would describe the general feel for the song. The longer the player waited for clues within the song, the more detailed it would get, but the closer the danger would be... Fun stuff.


Anyway, as for 'getting' Amber, here's the bottom line. The game is meant to emulate situations we find in the novels. For someone unfamiliar with the novels, it creates difficulties. Read Nine Princes in Amber (that's all you need to get started and it's damn short).
If you don't like it, don't play the game. If you do, you'll probably read the rest and want to play/run a game.

I've also never come across a game system where GMs put their own spin on the rules. It's a GM toolkit meant to be largely ignored by players so that they may immerse in the character they have built.


And I don't mean to speak badly of the GM that told you 'no' at character creation, but there are ways to handle concepts that are different from their expectations.
It reminded me of a campaign in which one of the players put 64 points in this wolf companion he had (out of 100!). The wolf became a central theme of the campaign for quite some time, during which the characters merged it with a construct, saw it evolve, and eventually embody wolf symbology throughout Shadow. After it was destroyed, wolves have largely disappeared from Shadow (much like they did on our dear Shadow Earth), and stopped being a threat.

Quote from: Nihilistic Mind;291041One of my players had a violin with Danger Sense, and it would play a nice little theme it cooked up, and I would describe the general feel for the song. The longer the player waited for clues within the song, the more detailed it would get, but the closer the danger would be... Fun stuff.


Anyway, as for 'getting' Amber, here's the bottom line. The game is meant to emulate situations we find in the novels. For someone unfamiliar with the novels, it creates difficulties. Read Nine Princes in Amber (that's all you need to get started and it's damn short).
If you don't like it, don't play the game. If you do, you'll probably read the rest and want to play/run a game.

I've also never come across a game system where GMs put their own spin on the rules. It's a GM toolkit meant to be largely ignored by players so that they may immerse in the character they have built.


And I don't mean to speak badly of the GM that told you 'no' at character creation, but there are ways to handle concepts that are different from their expectations.
It reminded me of a campaign in which one of the players put 64 points in this wolf companion he had (out of 100!). The wolf became a central theme of the campaign for quite some time, during which the characters merged it with a construct, saw it evolve, and eventually embody wolf symbology throughout Shadow. After it was destroyed, wolves have largely disappeared from Shadow (much like they did on our dear Shadow Earth), and stopped being a threat.

Brilliant. And you've just reminded me of something.

RPGPundit

Quote from: Nihilistic Mind;291041It reminded me of a campaign in which one of the players put 64 points in this wolf companion he had (out of 100!). The wolf became a central theme of the campaign for quite some time, during which the characters merged it with a construct, saw it evolve, and eventually embody wolf symbology throughout Shadow. After it was destroyed, wolves have largely disappeared from Shadow (much like they did on our dear Shadow Earth), and stopped being a threat.

That's fuckin' great!!!

Thanks :D

Quote from: The Worid;290060Here's a quote found early in the book:

"Develop your dream character: the one you have always wanted to play – the one you have always wanted to be."

Okay, sounds good. Yet when we get to some of the character creation examples, that has gone out the window:

"Willy: Yeah. Like I'll have these six cats, and they'll each be
eight point items, and then...
GM: NO!"

...and Willy ends up not actually making the character he set out to

IIRC, that "NO!" is in response to the player, Willy, trying to abuse the item creation system by creating six different cats, each worth 8 points but paying only 16 points through a misreading of the "named and numbered" multiplier. The GM goes on to explain how to create the cats that Willy wants within the system, but Willy ultimately decides to go for the Lynx himself.

QuoteAs for the the sort of trick I was looking for, I just wanted more about Good/Bad Stuff past "They are Good/Bad". Or perhaps an expansion of the bidding concept (which I found clever) into the game at large.

The real trick is hidden within the examples, but it's not spelled out as clearly as it might ahve been. The secret to it all is a combination of no immediately fatal decisions (unless the play sets out to be stupid) and plenty of feedback on which to base future choices.

The combat examples show this best, with players asking the GM what their options are, and how they think different actions might turn out before attempting them so that they can make relatively informed choices. And the GM has a responsibility to provide information to the players when it might influence their actions. This is most obvious in fights where the PCs are outmatched, and the GM fees them the necessary information as they go without immediately ganking them.

To be honest, I've rarely had the kind of problems described in character creation in the book, with players wanting toxic or outrageous character builds.  Usually, if you explain beforehand just how the points system works, just how gimped human ranks are, the relative uses and weaknesses of things like sorcery or magic items, players will make pretty reasonable characters as a result.

RPGPundit

I'd say the best way to "get" Amber is to find an existing game and sit in a while. Pique at the flavor text is not going to reflect in your game unless you really want it to. I never found the examples to be onerous, but even if they were terribly unfair and mean-spirited, that doesn't mean you have to run your game that way. The system really is a bunch of fun, but I will be the first to admit that sitting down to a table full of folks with no experience with either the game or the world would be a hard row to hoe.

Quote from: The Worid;290060"GM: A fist-sized object comes flying into the room, shattering
the window and splashing right into the big soup bowl.
What are you doing?
Willy: Greymer is here with me, didn't I have any warning?
GM: Your lynx, Greymer, looks startled and his fur is standing
straight up on end. What are you doing?
Willy: Greymer is supposed to be psychically sensitive to
danger. Why wasn't I warned?
GM: Greymer takes off for the door, so fast you'd think his tail
was on fire. What are you doing?
Willy: I don't get it. Greymer should tell me about this stuff.
Why didn't I expect this? Is this fair?
GM: Are you asking me?
Willy: Yeah, I'm asking you.
GM: What's the question?
Willy: Why didn't Greymer warn me of this attack?
GM: Are you asking as Willy, or as Garvin?
Willy: What's the difference? Just answer the question.
GM: If you are asking as Willy, I was going to suggest that we
get to it some other time, after the session. As to Garvin,
how is Garvin going to find out the answer?"

QUOTE]

Ok, the whole point fo this exchange is to show a character paying more attention to the rules than to what is going on around him. The player is obviously expecting the GM to tell him "Your lynx senses danger." The GM, on the other hand, has, through Greymer's actions, sent a very clear message that the lynx senses trouble. Instead of reacting to what is going on in front of him, the player arguing about the rules with the GM, instead of following the lynx out the door.

That's what I would say too.  'Willy' definitely wasn't paying attention!

Yup, and note that the quote comes from the "dealing with problems" area under "Rules Lawyers".

RPGPundit

Ok, so I understood the thing correctly above :)

Quote from: The Worid;290060Willy: Greymer is supposed to be psychically sensitive to
danger. Why wasn't I warned?
GM: Greymer takes off for the door, so fast you'd think his tail
was on fire. What are you doing?
Willy: I don't get it. Greymer should tell me about this stuff.
Why didn't I expect this? Is this fair?

I fail to see how wanting to know why abilities the player paid good points for are not working on the GM's whim can be called "rules lawyering"; in fact, given the rules-light nature of the game, I fail to see how significant rules lawyering can even exist.

It's not the GM's whim, exactly; it's that pretty much nothing is absolute.  For a canonical example, Brand is a living trump and should have pretty much unlimited freedom of movement, as he is able to teleport himself to pretty much any place he can think of, but two other elders can imprison him in an exotic shadow.  Merlin can create Trumps, walk in shadow, and use magic to teleport, but Luke's crystal cave shuts him off from all these methods of escape.

In your example above, perhaps there is something that nullified either Greymer's psychic forewarning, or his ability to pass a warning on.  The GM does not want to explain it to the player because the GM WANTS the player to be confused (and thus in-character.)  This isn't the friendliest of decisions, but it's understandable.

I don't see much difference between the distrust for the GM above and a D&D player demanding to know why his permanent arcane sight spell didn't pick up X, when the whole reason he paid good money to have it cast was to avoid situations like this, etc. etc.  A certain level of trust is needed, but not present.

Quote from: The Worid;290379I suppose I shall try to read the Amber novels if I have the time. Thanks for the responses; I can see the matter more clearly now.
However, what I see is that I don't care for this game. It seems oddly restrictive in terms of character creation for such a rules-light game (for context, one of my favorite games is GURPS, despite the complexity) and quite frankly, a bit of argument over whether or not something should have happened on the occasion is part of the fun for me, because it makes the game world seem more real and less like just a narrative device. That said, if you enjoy it, play it and have fun, because that's the point.

I think this is because you haven't read the novels.  The ENTIRE WORLD is a narrative device, to be rearranged at whim.  There is no "solid game world" with detailed rules because the world isn't solid: it's just shadows.  Amber and the Courts are the only real places; everything else is essentially a lucid dream.  Every player has the power to change the rules of the world around them.

Bottom line, AMBER only makes sense if you read and understood the Amber novels.  It's not to be taken out of the context of the novels.

Quote from: moritheil;306291Bottom line, AMBER only makes sense if you read and understood the Amber novels.  It's not to be taken out of the context of the novels.

I beg to differ. While I do consider myself fairly sharp, I played Amber for the first time in a club, without reading the novels first, and with about a 15' explanation of what it was all about, and I got it without major problems. So did the other four or five guys, actually. Not only we got the setting and the system right away, we had a blast. Actually, nothing stops you from playing 300 years before or after Patternfall War, and the handbook is so good you can do that and even portrait all the major NPCs without a problem. In the campaign I'm playing right now, I think I'm the only player who's read the chronicles, and no one seems to be having any difficulties.

EDIT: Oh, and yeah, the GM totally forgot about the cat there, then tried to fix it quickly, the arsehole wasn't buying, so the GM told him to shut up. I found it great.

Yes, I agree that it is a system that plays along with... playing along. The GM is not there to kill the players, though I have played in some game systems where it did seem like that was in fact the goal.  If you as a player have a disagreement with something, (especially your item), it would behoove you to take some time out of game to explain the inner workings and such of your item. That way the GM will understand better how it fits into your story & character.
I played the 1st time without reading the novels, but the 2nd time, I had the 1st 5 read. It truly is essential to understand the "feel" of Amber by reading them.

Quote from: The Worid;289945Moreover, the play examples were irritating (not in that they existed, in their content), and the GM came off as a snide, patronizing jerk to me.

This resonates with me. I have read the entire series + short stories many, many times. So I'm quite familiar with the setting. I have pdf copies of the source books and although I have not had an opportunity to play yet, I'm very excited about the system.

That being said, I don't find the play examples very helpful, mainly because of the way the GM is treating the players.

The auction example blatantly encourages the GM to be disingenuous with the players by presenting each attribute as "The MOST important one". I understand that as a GM you want to establishing a sense of competition between the players. But, this could be done by letting them know that they are competing with one another and telling them that the "most important" attribute depends entirely on what they want their character to be best at. Are all the attributes important? Absolutely, but in their own way. "Most important" is entirely subjective, and the players should know that their judgement on this is the only one that really matters.

"Trust the GM" is good advice, but at the same time trust has to be earned. If I were to run the auction like the book suggests my players may very well sour on the idea of trying out Amber. Which would be a shame. My core gaming group are all close friends that have never played ADRPG, but we've all read the Chronicles and are, to varying degrees, fans of Zelazny. We already love the setting. The system will be an experiment for us. One that I personally think could work very well. We've been a D&D clique for almost 15 years. Most of us were in HS theater together, so there is a huge emphasis placed on the acting aspect of roleplaying. Honestly I think that ADRPG will prove to be a great system for us because it appears to eliminate the thing that always slows our sessions to a crawl. That being combat mechanics. We like rolling dice, it's just that we enjoy the character dynamics of roleplaying so much more.

Quote from: Sydius Mendoza;603855The auction example blatantly encourages the GM to be disingenuous with the players by presenting each attribute as "The MOST important one". I understand that as a GM you want to establishing a sense of competition between the players. But, this could be done by letting them know that they are competing with one another and telling them that the "most important" attribute depends entirely on what they want their character to be best at. Are all the attributes important? Absolutely, but in their own way. "Most important" is entirely subjective, and the players should know that their judgement on this is the only one that really matters.

I've introduced many friends to Amber and run it several times at conventions, and I've always presented the Auction mechanic exactly as it's written in the book - and people love it. It only takes the second attribute auction for players to say, with a smile: "Hey wait a second, you said that for Psyche!", and by the time you say it about a third attribute, people know what to expect, and have a lot of fun with it. Presenting the attributes at auction this way does EXACTLY what you want it to - every one of them is displayed in their best light, and at the time feels like the most important statistic. It helps players focus on what really matters to them and their character.

This is a prime example of how the Amber DRPG rules are written - they often look terrible on paper, ugly even - but when you play them as they're written, they work very, very well. (I've found other game books filled with very pretty looking rules that don't work out at all - more fashionable, but certainly not more useful than the approach Amber takes.)

I haven't met a player who hasn't hesitated when reading the rulebook.
I haven't met a player who hasn't loved playing Amber. (I've heard of people on the internet, but I have no idea how they were playing.)
I haven't met a player who hasn't thought the rulebook was amazing, only after they'd already played a few sessions.

It's like a tome.
Or a cryptonomicon.
A book of secrets.
And on, and on, and on...

The point is - just play the game already.

//Panjumanju

Quote from: darciesdaddy;296038"GM: A fist-sized object comes flying into the room, shattering
the window and splashing right into the big soup bowl.
What are you doing?
Willy: Greymer is here with me, didn't I have any warning?
GM: Your lynx, Greymer, looks startled and his fur is standing
straight up on end. What are you doing?
Willy: Greymer is supposed to be psychically sensitive to
danger. Why wasn't I warned?
GM: Greymer takes off for the door, so fast you'd think his tail
was on fire. What are you doing?
Willy: I don't get it. Greymer should tell me about this stuff.
Why didn't I expect this? Is this fair?
GM: Are you asking me?
Willy: Yeah, I'm asking you.
GM: What's the question?
Willy: Why didn't Greymer warn me of this attack?
GM: Are you asking as Willy, or as Garvin?
Willy: What's the difference? Just answer the question.
GM: If you are asking as Willy, I was going to suggest that we
get to it some other time, after the session. As to Garvin,
how is Garvin going to find out the answer?"

The way I read it, Willy considered the notion that a hard and possibly heavy fist-sized thing crashing through the window and missing your brains by not all that much is dangerous. Which it is, bricks falling on people tend to be nasty. THAT was the danger he was expecting some warning about, not some undisclosed event AFTER the thing has come to a full stop in his soup bowl. And from that point of view, the GM did screw him over. I mean, I reckon the cat's magical warning is supposed to be about things still in the future, not something that has already happened and by now turned inert and safe. "Purr purr, hey master? That brick that just flew through your window and brained you? Guess what, it was dangerous."

Of course, it might be that the thing is actually a hand grenade and it WILL go off rather soon-ish, in which case the GM did it right.


Anyway, slightly off perhaps, but...

You know what I think would be a REALLY great thing to do for Amber DRPG fans who'd like others to check out the game? Get together a good, experienced GM, a few good players, run a good game of 6 hours or so, record it and put it up on Youtube. As it is, both the concept of the DRPG and the possible kinds of adventures you could run are so fucking utterly unintuitive to every gamer or fantasy fan who's not already part of the Cult of Amber/AmberDRPG, that an actual demonstration would do a hundred times more good than any amount of general conversation about it on forums.

Some of my apprehension comes from people I know recounting bad experiences with ADRPG. A former co-worker of mine told me about the one time he and a group tried Amber. They ran the auction with the GM following the play example from the book. Now he must not have done a very good job explaining the system because not a single player had points left to spend on powers after the auction. The players were pissed off and ready to abandon the game before it even got going. The GM re-ran the auction, only this time the players conspired to basically low-ball the bidding (BTW, is there a common term for this here?). So you had players scoring first rank in attributes for less than 5 points spent. The GM had full on pink-panty meltdown and refused to run the game stating that the players had broken the system. The more time I spend on the forum here, the more I see that the failure is on the GM of that group, not on the system.

Quote from: Panjumanju;603870This is a prime example of how the Amber DRPG rules are written - they often look terrible on paper, ugly even - but when you play them as they're written, they work very, very well.
//Panjumanju

Thanks for the input. It really is helpful to have advice from the experienced, especially when it comes to things like this. I think for the first trial run I will do my best to trust the source books and run the auction as written. I honestly value all the advice that i have received so far. This is what keeps me coming back to this forum.

The whole "most important attribute" thing at the auction is not stupid, its actually a stroke of genius.  Like the auction itself, it teaches some important lessons to the players in the very first minutes of the game that set the tone for the entire campaign.

And like with Panjumanju, every time I've used it people have gotten that and loved it; that Amber is a game about not trusting, about manipulation, and one where anything can theoretically be "the most powerful attribute", to boot.

RPGPundit

Quote from: Kevin;293885I'd say the best way to "get" Amber is to find an existing game and sit in a while.

I went through a gradual evolution in order to "get" Amber.

FIRST STAGE: Read about the game in Dragon, ordered the game, read the book, mostly didn't get it but thought the concept sounded cool.

SECOND STAGE: Sat in a game at a local store, sort of got it, ran some games.

THIRD STAGE: Gamed with Erick, talked to Erick about Amber, pieces really clicked into place.

So, I have to agree with Kevin. The best way to get Amber is to experience it.

Quote from: The Worid;289945It seemed like a good two-thirds of the book could have been replaced with a page saying "Wing it" and nothing would have been lost.

This has always been my impression, too, and I likewise wondered if I was missing something.

I am familiar with the Amber novels, so the source material is cool and all.

I also don't know how you'd go about making a character if you have only 1 player. I run alot of solo games for my wife outside of our regular group, so that's pretty important. The rankings and bidding system only make sense in the context of multiple players.

Quote from: Doctor Jest;617902This has always been my impression, too, and I likewise wondered if I was missing something.

I am familiar with the Amber novels, so the source material is cool and all.

I also don't know how you'd go about making a character if you have only 1 player. I run alot of solo games for my wife outside of our regular group, so that's pretty important. The rankings and bidding system only make sense in the context of multiple players.

You cannot run the game if you only have one player. You need many players for the auction - to a certain extent, the more the better. Once you're in the game itself, you can run solo adventures no problem.

//Panjumanju

Quote from: Panjumanju;617909You cannot run the game if you only have one player. You need many players for the auction - to a certain extent, the more the better. Once you're in the game itself, you can run solo adventures no problem.

Actually, you don't really need the auction in order to enjoy Amber, so even if a party is better you can play one-on-one quite well.

Once the player assigns numbers to his stats this helps to define the character's strengths and weaknesses and the GM has material to work with when creating the creatures and NPCs encountered during the campaign. This clearly changes the focus of the game from "player vs. player" to "player vs. environment". Not the same, but can still be fun.

Quote from: finarvyn;618330Actually, you don't really need the auction in order to enjoy Amber, so even if a party is better you can play one-on-one quite well.

Once the player assigns numbers to his stats this helps to define the character's strengths and weaknesses and the GM has material to work with when creating the creatures and NPCs encountered during the campaign. This clearly changes the focus of the game from "player vs. player" to "player vs. environment". Not the same, but can still be fun.

I am corrected.

You can just use the points. I find many players of Amber do this anyway, misalign the importance of the ranking system in favour of number comparison. It's probably an easier way to do character vs. environment.

However, I think a quintessential part of the Amber experience is lost when you don't run an auction.

//Panjumanju

Quote from: Panjumanju;618376I think a quintessential part of the Amber experience is lost when you don't run an auction.

I agree that a part of the Amber experience is lost, but I can't decide just how significant a part this represents.

I GM a group of players who are more cooperative than competitive. When I ran an auction, they hated it. When I had them do a point-buy (and insisted that there be no ties in points spent in attributes) they were okay with it. They seemed to have a good time.

However, your point is well taken. Erick's base ADRP rules system is brilliant in the way it approaches the Amber universe and the way it handles conflict. In general I'm wary of changing anything from the core rulebook, but the auction is one of the few things that didn't work well for my players.

Quote from: finarvyn;618727I GM a group of players who are more cooperative than competitive. When I ran an auction, they hated it.

That's very interesting.

I think the auction requires at least a few shoaboats in order to work. There can be many sneaky-shadow-tactics people in the auction, and it just makes the experience stronger - but you need two or three people on the social front-lines, so to speak, being ambitious, or I can imagine that the auction will not operate. I'm very curious if you don't have some egotistical jokester in your group, or if there's some other social dynamic going on.

Most gaming groups have a high index of socially awkward. (Mine sure does!) Would you rate your group especially so? Fear of conflict, or they don't know each other well, or what? Are they just a timid bunch? How far along the scale of passive versus aggressive would your rate them? What age group are we talking about, here?

I don't mean to be insensitive, I'm just wondering what lead to a breakdown of the auction.


//Panjumanju

Much of their "fear of conflict" is a direct result of the group demographic -- my wife, two teenaged children, sister, and a couple of friends. They love role-playing and have had excellent experiences with ADRP, but mostly in an "us against them" environment instead of "us against each other."

I'm sure it would be very different with a group of friends instead of family.

Quote from: finarvyn;619068Much of their "fear of conflict" is a direct result of the group demographic -- my wife, two teenaged children, sister, and a couple of friends. They love role-playing and have had excellent experiences with ADRP, but mostly in an "us against them" environment instead of "us against each other."

I'm sure it would be very different with a group of friends instead of family.

Sounds like a perfect grup for an amber game you just need to make them all hate each other in real life.... :)

I think you can work round ranks, though I still like an auction to build up pressure. I don't think I coudl play amber without inter PC intrigue though that would kill the buzz for me.

Quote from: finarvyn;619068Much of their "fear of conflict" is a direct result of the group demographic -- my wife, two teenaged children, sister, and a couple of friends. They love role-playing and have had excellent experiences with ADRP, but mostly in an "us against them" environment instead of "us against each other."

I'm sure it would be very different with a group of friends instead of family.

It makes sense.

I engage in roleplaying games as a huge excuse to spend time with friends. You may only have so much time with your two teenagers especially, before they say: "Hanging out with my dad? Ewwww!" So you get in that time while you can. Forget the auction. At the end of the day you do what you have to do to make the game happen and spend time with the people you care about.

//Panjumanju

I think something is definitely lost when you don't run an auction. But at the same time I do think its better to do a small-group game with no auction than to just say "well, we can't run an auction so we won't play Amber at all".

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;619890I think something is definitely lost when you don't run an auction. But at the same time I do think its better to do a small-group game with no auction than to just say "well, we can't run an auction so we won't play Amber at all".

That was my solution.

In an ideal world ADRP would be played exactly by the book, but it doesn't always work out that way for every group. If a 2E ADRP was ever to be published I'd like to see sections that discuss alternate ways to run the game, along with short pros and cons of each. I'll bet there are other groups where the auction doesn't work, as I'll bet there are other groups that prefer points to ranks or other alternate methods of play.

Quote from: finarvyn;619981That was my solution.

In an ideal world ADRP would be played exactly by the book, but it doesn't always work out that way for every group. If a 2E ADRP was ever to be published I'd like to see sections that discuss alternate ways to run the game, along with short pros and cons of each. I'll bet there are other groups where the auction doesn't work, as I'll bet there are other groups that prefer points to ranks or other alternate methods of play.

As to alternate auctions, I'm not sure if this has appeared elsewhere in the forum but...

I've started an Amber game with fewer players and run the auction anyhow. You can run a game with 1 to 3 players and add into the startup the same generation NPCs for the auction.

Because, if you've done the prep work on NPC personalities, then you can have them submit 'bids' to the GM and have them 'play' out the auction process to get the entire feel of conflict before the game starts.

Quote from: Arref;620368As to alternate auctions, I'm not sure if this has appeared elsewhere in the forum but...

I've started an Amber game with fewer players and run the auction anyhow. You can run a game with 1 to 3 players and add into the startup the same generation NPCs for the auction.

Because, if you've done the prep work on NPC personalities, then you can have them submit 'bids' to the GM and have them 'play' out the auction process to get the entire feel of conflict before the game starts.

I always put all my NPCs into the auction pot. I do think the auction needs a few tweaks so stuff like maximum raises is a good idea since he game is based on 5s for the skills I typically use 5s so you can't come in with 1st bid - 100 warfare for example. You actually get an auction.

The most inovative I think was at GenCon where I write all the PCs 8 of them then write some secrets then create some positions with benefits then give everyone 10 points and the character description of each PC picture and brief text. then the 6 players get to bid with their 10 points any remainder are ablative good stuff ie good stuff you can spend or you can go into bad stuff which of course is permanent.
Really works well. And sets up the player tensions almost as well as a real auction though of course the PCs are pregens I do try to make them interesting.

Lords of Olympus provides several alternatives to the standard "bidding war with classes" method of character creation.

RPGPundit

Quote from: Malleus Arianorum;290323I know what you mean. That example of rules lawyering seemed wierd to to me at first too. The GM is clearly in the wrong for forgetting about danger sense but the GM steamrollers through it anyway.
 
As I understand it now the point is not that as a GM you should never make a mistake. The point is that when a mistake occurs you should correct it and move forward without getting dragged into a rules fight.
 
It's counterintuitive but it is one of those 'tricks' you were looking for. By denying the players the opportunity to call a rules lawyering time out, you keep the story moving. Many of the GMing examples show the same senario: the player tries to stall and the GM asks "do you want to stall IN GAME?"

As a DM, my job is to tell you HOW what you do interacts with the rest of the universe, Not to explain WHY.

There are several reason why the cat might not sense the thrown item. Did it represent a real threat to the character or was it just annoying. The cat DID respond with more than a hint of danger sense later. Perhaps the one who threw the item didn't know who was in the room in the first place and only decided to attack after finding out. The possible reason are not quite endless, but close enough.

I have run into rules lawyers before. They don't last long in my games. If they want to run the game themselves then they should, but if they are a player then they are there to play. Not moderate.

In the words of Joss Whedon "Grrr Arrrrgh!"

This sounds like the classic character creation vs. character play conundrum.

Many players enjoy the character creation aspect of the game MORE than the actual play. Traveler is a game where the creation process can be very entertaining. Building a starship or a mech-vehicle can be fun.

Then there are the player-players. Some play their characters as created. Some play the same character regardless of race, class or attributes.

Some will love the auction. Some will go along because you tell them that's the way character creation is done in this game. Some will come to the understanding that the auction IS part of the play.

I have DMed Amber groups ranging in number from one to seven players. A bout a third (2ish) LOVED the character creation process and auction. I received a small book from three players describing their character's background, their artifacts and the shadows they created.

One was a pure role-player that had no use for a character sheet. She had a very firm character idea in mind and relied upon me to tell her how her character's actions affected her and the rest of the universe. It was a little more work initially, but not so much more after we got started. It is easy to extrapolate from actions to attributes and powers. This player had a new power she wanted her character to learn and test. It made play more interesting since she was an AWSOME role-player.

The rest were power players and dating game enthusiasts who spent their time vying for the attention of various elders and NPCs. A wonderfully complex, varied and entertaining group.
The game went on weekly for 5 years.
Le sigh - the nostalgia!

Slightly tangential, perhaps, but what I don't think I get about Amber is how to structure and adventure/game/campaign/whatever, and I just don't think the book gives any sort of real advice on that. I mean, as someone coming from D&D, I understand how to create and run a dungeon crawl, or a sandbox campaign with lots of exploration and domain management. Or a Travelleresque campaign for a freeranging mercenary outfit. Or anything. I also realise that an Amber campaign is very likely NOT supposed to be anything like that. What I don't get is what is it supposed to be like, then?

What I think would be tremendously helpful for people who might be interested in the game are a few session writeups. Or a group recording a few of their sessions - about a "story arc's" worth - and posting it on Youtube. But as far as I can tell, there just doesn't seem to be anything like that out there. Which is a pity, because the basic adventuring premises of the game are nowhere near is simple and intuitive as "go into these dungeons, kill monsters and take their stuff".

Quote from: jibbajibba;290045Ambers multiverse nature would mean there were two approaches. Cover everything to do that you would need a rule book so densely packed it creaked at the seems. Systems for space dogfights, 16th century duels, modern warefare, fantasy creatures, faey, werewolves... It would need to be a combination of D&D, WoD, Twilight 2000, Traveller and Rifts.

Sounds like Hero System. ;) (although opinions will vary on exactly how well Hero pulls all that stuff off, IMO it does a pretty good job)

Personally, I'd like to see a more "rules heavy" approach, but I've also had a lot of fun playing Amber as Wujcik set it up.

Quote from: Premier;732605Slightly tangential, perhaps, but what I don't think I get about Amber is how to structure and adventure/game/campaign/whatever, and I just don't think the book gives any sort of real advice on that. I mean, as someone coming from D&D, I understand how to create and run a dungeon crawl, or a sandbox campaign with lots of exploration and domain management. Or a Travelleresque campaign for a freeranging mercenary outfit. Or anything. I also realise that an Amber campaign is very likely NOT supposed to be anything like that. What I don't get is what is it supposed to be like, then?

What I think would be tremendously helpful for people who might be interested in the game are a few session writeups. Or a group recording a few of their sessions - about a "story arc's" worth - and posting it on Youtube. But as far as I can tell, there just doesn't seem to be anything like that out there. Which is a pity, because the basic adventuring premises of the game are nowhere near is simple and intuitive as "go into these dungeons, kill monsters and take their stuff".

Amber is what you and your players make of it. Period. Ad infinitum. This is what I love about it. The Amber-multiverse is the definition of open-ended. Zelazny gave us that when he defined the narrators of his stories as being lying ---s. Their view of the multiverse is self-serving. They have a point of view and that is the part of the multiverse that they focus upon. It by no means represents the entirety of the multiverse.
You can have a free-ranging mercenary outfit, a single multi-dimensional assassin (or assassin's guild) or a group of adventurers that has fallen through an Einstein-Rosen bridge into a crack between Amber and the closest Golden Circle realm... In addition to being a scion of any given royal family in the Amber-multiverse.

I see your problem, but I am not certain there is an average example of any given Amber arc. You can force a group through a dungeon crawl and if your characters piss-off an elder they can end up like Merlin in an In-between Space subject to various forms of taunting and torture, but most of the story arcs I have watched and provided are an example of an in-process plot.
If you have played D&D (or any of its variations) extensively, then you have a good idea what kind of plots are available.

The challenge of Amber is that even the weakest PC still has the potential to redirect any given plot line.

One of the hardest things a DM has to learn is to give up control of where the story is going. Amber, at least MY Amber, is not a set piece. Once you throw in time travel in any form, the game, the entire game, is up in the air. Oberon could be brought back to life by a clever player just by kidnapping Oberon and substituting a clone for him before he repairs the pattern. And after the Unicorn chooses Random, why would he come back and try to usurp the title of king from his son? And that is just an example of one thing that can happen when you add the world of Dr. Who to the Amber-multiverse. In my experience, the PCs, especially as a group, are far more creative than I, so this probably isn't even a good example - just one that I've seen, though the details make it much more entertaining than how I presented it.

As a DM I create plots with the elders of Amber and the Courts and then add monkey wrenches - the PCs - and watch the machine grind. Your experience with multiple systems and backgrounds for stories will serve you well. One of the most entertaining things for me is to confront a character designed to be from a fantasy world with a world of or from science fiction. J. R. R. Tolkien meets Azimov is always interesting.

But this is only my personal form of entertainment. I offer it as a single example of the multitude of different forms of campaigns available to a moderator of the Amber-verse.

Enjoy!

Quote from: Premier;732605I also realize that an Amber campaign is very likely NOT supposed to be anything like that. What I don't get is what is it supposed to be like, then?

What I think would be tremendously helpful for people who might be interested in the game are a few session writeups.

Let me start by saying there are a few such resources around, you might find them with some serious Google time. I'll provide a link to a very complete PC diary if you have time to wade through character arcs.

But consider the overall approach:  these are stories about powerful family members, not really the adventure, per say.

Corwin's story is less about his quest for the throne than it is about HIM.  In D&D, the focus is your accomplishments (your treasure, your experience points). In Amber, the focus shifts. You have a hundred years of accomplishments... adventure is something that happens to you all the time... but what are your goals? what are your favorite things to get family to help you with? what are your pet peeves or things in the Universe that you will 'correct' through your efforts?

Create those framing devices... and you are off and running.

link to Cassandra diaries (note the first page has included GM notes):
http://home.comcast.net/~arrefmak/aedev/CASS1.htm (http://home.comcast.net/~arrefmak/aedev/CASS1.htm)

Yes. I'd said it many times before: the fundamental theme of Amber is of a big dysfunctional family.   That's the core, and all the adventure goes from there.

Ditto with Lords of Olympus.

RPGPundit