SPECIAL NOTICE
Malicious code was found on the site, which has been removed, but would have been able to access files and the database, revealing email addresses, posts, and encoded passwords (which would need to be decoded). However, there is no direct evidence that any such activity occurred. REGARDLESS, BE SURE TO CHANGE YOUR PASSWORDS. And as is good practice, remember to never use the same password on more than one site. While performing housekeeping, we also decided to upgrade the forums.
This is a site for discussing roleplaying games. Have fun doing so, but there is one major rule: do not discuss political issues that aren't directly and uniquely related to the subject of the thread and about gaming. While this site is dedicated to free speech, the following will not be tolerated: devolving a thread into unrelated political discussion, sockpuppeting (using multiple and/or bogus accounts), disrupting topics without contributing to them, and posting images that could get someone fired in the workplace (an external link is OK, but clearly mark it as Not Safe For Work, or NSFW). If you receive a warning, please take it seriously and either move on to another topic or steer the discussion back to its original RPG-related theme.

Is Amber really that difficult to play?

Started by SunBoy, December 11, 2006, 11:09:17 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

James McMurray

No. It was my need to restate things to make sure I'm on the same page as someone else. Tu inglés es muy bueno. :)

If that's broken spanish I apologize. I'm from Texas. :)

SunBoy

Quote from: James McMurrayNo. It was my need to restate things to make sure I'm on the same page as someone else. Tu inglés es muy bueno. :)

If that's broken spanish I apologize. I'm from Texas. :)

Not at all, that's perfect spanish. And thanks.
"Real randomness, I\'ve discovered, is the result of two or more role-players interacting"

Erick Wujcik, 2007

Otha

Quote from: SunBoyRunning your game only with "cool stuff that can happen" can be nice, but you have to have some kind of idea of what's happening in the world around your players.

Oh, of course.  I put stuff into the notebook with an eye to what the players had done in the last session, and I only pulled stuff out when it was appropriate to the play as it was happening.  That's hardly a 'storyline' though.
 

SunBoy

I think, however, that in a game like Amber, you need a storyline. And that's hardly the same as railroading ;) .
"Real randomness, I\'ve discovered, is the result of two or more role-players interacting"

Erick Wujcik, 2007

RPGPundit

My amber games have the least plotline of any campaign I ever run.  They just have a bunch of NPCs running around doing stuff with different motives, and a bunch of PCs doing the same.

RPGPundit
LION & DRAGON: Medieval-Authentic OSR Roleplaying is available now! You only THINK you\'ve played \'medieval fantasy\' until you play L&D.


My Blog:  http://therpgpundit.blogspot.com/
The most famous uruguayan gaming blog on the planet!

NEW!
Check out my short OSR supplements series; The RPGPundit Presents!


Dark Albion: The Rose War! The OSR fantasy setting of the history that inspired Shakespeare and Martin alike.
Also available in Variant Cover form!
Also, now with the CULTS OF CHAOS cult-generation sourcebook

ARROWS OF INDRA
Arrows of Indra: The Old-School Epic Indian RPG!
NOW AVAILABLE: AoI in print form

LORDS OF OLYMPUS
The new Diceless RPG of multiversal power, adventure and intrigue, now available.

Otha

Quote from: SunBoyI think, however, that in a game like Amber, you need a storyline. And that's hardly the same as railroading ;) .

Okay.  Definition, please?
 

Otha

Quote from: RPGPunditMy amber games have the least plotline of any campaign I ever run.  They just have a bunch of NPCs running around doing stuff with different motives, and a bunch of PCs doing the same.

This is the best way, IMHO.
 

SunBoy

"A bunch of NPCs doing stuff with different motives" is a kind of a storyline. Storyline: Things happening in the world not directely caused by the PCs. They have a start, a development and an end, any of which can vary if some or many PCs get involved. That's about it, simply put.
"Real randomness, I\'ve discovered, is the result of two or more role-players interacting"

Erick Wujcik, 2007

Otha

It's not a storyline.  It's a story structure, into which storylines can be laid.
 

finarvyn

I believe that most players want to have some sort of story unfold during the course of an adventure, and like to believe that there is a single mastermind directing that story. Some sort of behind-the-scenes action (which is probably hidden to the players) allows for players to experience surprise as events unfold, which is harder to achive when everyone decides together.
Marv / Finarvyn
Kingmaker of Amber
I'm pretty much responsible for the S&W WB rules.
Amber Diceless Player since 1993
OD&D Player since 1975

Otha

Well, I'm not most players.

I believe that there is a significant number (perhaps a minority, perhaps not, I can't say) of players who want to feel that they have an impact on events, that what they do matters.  They want to feel that the conflicts they're in really CAN go either way, most of the time.

I agree that there are players out there who insist on "winning" most of the time, who find winning more desirable than losing, and only accept losses when they can expect a bigger win later.  I don't like playing with those players.

I like playing with people who can find losing just as interesting as winning, who want their characters' actions to decide the fate of things rather than a GM's pre-plotted story, and who can bring just as much creative energy to the table as me.

But that's just me.
 

finarvyn

Quote from: OthaWell, I'm not most players.

I believe that there is a significant number (perhaps a minority, perhaps not, I can't say) of players who want to feel that they have an impact on events, that what they do matters.  They want to feel that the conflicts they're in really CAN go either way, most of the time.
I guess I don't see why this can't work with a pre-determined storyline. When I script a plotline, I don't think to myself "Okay, so Otha is going to win a duel with Bleys and then Otha will decide to attack Amber..."

My players always have an impact on events, and what they do does matter. The difference is that as an active GM I have a general plan of what others (NPCs) are doing at the same time. If a bunch of players put together a story without GM guidance, no one is really organizing the actions of NPCs.

A GM-run story to me is not the same as reading a novel -- none of us know the ending yet. (I'm not running a linear module, but giving my players a situation in which they can interact and determine what happens next.) In fact, as much as I plot and plan I can never quite anticipate the actions of my players, so often I'm as surprised as they are as to how the story turns out. My players will come up with some sort of unexpected idea or way to shift the story, and their conflicts can go either way depending upon how they play the scene.
Marv / Finarvyn
Kingmaker of Amber
I'm pretty much responsible for the S&W WB rules.
Amber Diceless Player since 1993
OD&D Player since 1975

James McMurray

Whenever I run a game there's always a "storyline." The players may never even come across it or they may the its primary authors, but I always know what's going on in the world, and what will occur if the PCs don't do anything to change it.

Otha

Quote from: finarvynIf a bunch of players put together a story without GM guidance, no one is really organizing the actions of NPCs.

Well, of course...

But you're assuming that the actions of NPC's have to be important.  If the GM is taking a hands-off attitude towards the flow of play, or if there's no true GM at all, then the actions of the PC's are the only ones that drive things forward.

Oh, yeah, here's your sign for you:

:forge:

Now if you've got players who aren't willing to drive things forward, then you'll have a problem with this mode of play.  Given that thirty years of RPG's have been teaching us that it's the GM's job to drive things forward, this is not uncommon to encounter... but it's not the only way to play.
 

finarvyn

Quote from: OthaOh, yeah, here's your sign for you:
:forge:
Actually, I've never quite understood what they are talking about at the Forge. I get the gist of Narration vs Simulation and a few of their general terms, but then they start spewing terminology to the point where my brain refuses to grasp it. It's like I'm a creature of Law and they are creatures of Chaos (or the other way around). :ponder:

Anyway ... it could be that I am too indoctrinated into the "old school" mentality of RPGs such that the DM sets up a situation and the players follow along. I always thought of myself as being pretty progressive since I rarely run "modules" but instead generate lists of hooks and then let the players decide which ones to follow, but again I'm setting up the situation even if my players have more options than usual.

I guess I need to experience a GM-less game once or twice to get the proper feel for how it works. The fact that I can't imagine it working well probably just shows my lack of imagination rather than a flaw in that style of gaming -- the fact that you can pull it off is proof of that!

Quote from: OthaIf there's no true GM at all, then the actions of the PC's are the only ones that drive things forward.
So ... if the players don't drive the game forward but instead wallow around in confusion, what happens next?
Marv / Finarvyn
Kingmaker of Amber
I'm pretty much responsible for the S&W WB rules.
Amber Diceless Player since 1993
OD&D Player since 1975