TheRPGSite

Hi everyone, I've been interested in GMing a game of Amber for a while. However, reading over the rules, there are a few vague areas that confuse me.

1) How do you decide what attribute a certain action falls under?

For instance, suppose player A decides to use magic to throw a fireball or some sort of projectile at player B? How is this handled? Is it just a question of player A's Warfare, or would player B get a chance to respond?

2) How do you decide when a player can change the attribute being contested?

For instance, suppose player A and player B are in a sword fight, contesting their warfare. But player A wants to engage player B in a psyche battle. Would this require something similar to a grapple, similar to how you would try to change it to a contest of strength? Or would player A simply be allowed to change the playing field without player B having a say in it?

Overall I understand the general idea of the GM making judgment calls, but I'm wondering what kind of guidelines I'm supposed to use. Because things can get competitive between players, I don't want players to feel like they lost a fight for no good reason.

I also see various offensive and defensive maneuvers listed for warfare. Am I supposed to take the player's actions and fit them to those options, or is there anything else I should be using?

This isn't a direct answer, but Mike gms the best Amber combat I've come across.


Running Combat in Amber
Michael Sullivan
sent to the Amber Mailing List,  12/31/2012

I got a couple of requests at ACNW to explain my techniques for
running combat, which I kind of uncomfortably demurred from doing
because I don't really think of myself as having techniques per se.
Nothing I'm terribly good at putting into words, at least. *But it's
4:30 on New Year's Eve, I'm not going to do work, and this seems like
a reasonable way to kill some time. *So here's my best shot at it:

1. *DON'T ARBITRARILY USE "ROUNDS"

Most of us have some D&D or other RPG experience in which there is a
strict approach to battle: the GM goes around the table (or in some
particular order) and asks everyone what their next action will be.
That action is resolved, and the NPCs take one action, and then what's
your next action?

One of the ways that battles in Amber can feel more exciting and,
whatever, visceral and cool is that you can forsake this approach.
Don't ask for player input until the players have meaningful input to
give. *Like, if the player says, "I want to attack Julian," then you
can go ahead and just describe what happens until something materially
changes in the fight. *Don't just say, "Okay, you attack for a while
and he parries and ripostes and it goes on for a few seconds, now
what?" *Keep going until there's some reason to expect that the player
might change his chosen action. *Like:

a. *You've badly wounded Julian and now he's trying to retreat.
b. *Julian has badly wounded you and maybe you want to reconsider this
plan of action.
c. *Morgenstern is getting in on this action.
d. *The player has some kind of choice to make that will affect his
success or failure.

You do NOT have to go around the table. *Even in a large battle, it's
okay to do some short "player A," "NPC B," "player A," "NPC B"
back-and-forths. *You should eventually give people the opportunity to
switch targets and whatnot, but it doesn't have to go around the
table, and you can generally build a better tempo if you don't
restrict yourself to such an arbitrary flow.

2. *DON'T SHY AWAY FROM DESCRIBING THE PC'S ACTION

A big component of my style of running combat is that a player might
say something like, "Okay, I'll try to kill him with my sword," and
I'll transcribe that intent into a more specific action, like, "You
throw yourself into a low thrust for the guy's thigh; he jerks his leg
to the side and hammers the haft of his sword down on your back. *You
twist and take the blow on your shoulder, then flip your sword around
in a backhand cut."

If the player wants to get descriptive himself, that's cool too, but
if he doesn't, I just take over the description for him. *I feel like
this adds immediacy to the combat.

3. *AMBERITES ARE COOL

I try to put everything in the frame of, "You're a bad-ass." *Whether
the PC is being successful or not, what they're doing should
demonstrate their skill, experience, and raw physical ability. *If the
PC is failing to do what they want, it's not because they just
straight up fail, or because they prat-fall or something, it's because
they try something awesome cool, and their opponent does something
even awesomely cooler.

So, putting points #1 and #2 together, you may be taking the narrative
reins for a while, describing how the combat goes (both people's part
in the combat) until such time as the circumstances change enough to
warrant more player input. *That means you have some significant time
to pound home the badassitude of the player.

4. *HAVE AN AESTHETIC

I like the fact that Amberites are superhumanly strong. *My aesthetic
comes probably considerably more from superhero comic books,
Matrix-and-later-era sci-fi movies, and an ad from the Shield (TV
series) in which Michael Chiklis dives through a fence to tackle some
dude, than it does from Zelazny. *But whatever your aesthetic is, have
one.

Like, I think melee fights LOOK COOL. *I spend a not inconsiderable
amount of time imagining fights that would LOOK COOL just for my own
enjoyment, because I am apparently a nine year old boy. *I sometimes
make sound effects. *Seriously. *Feel free to point and laugh.

I think that having these kind of imaginary fights gives me a lot of
ability to describe combats that are in my own dialect of iconography,
and that comes through and makes my fights more vivid.

5. *FIGHTS ARE BETTER WHEN THERE ARE OTHER GOALS

The most boring, least interesting fight you can have is one in which
both parties just want to kill each other. *All of the best fights
I've run have had other goals. *Like, the parties just want thing A.
Party B is trying to escape, not win the fight. *Party A is trying to
keep Party B out of a particular space, or away from a particular
person. *The fight is a delaying action. *The fight is a running
battle. *The fight is part of some kind of mass combat, like a war.
The players are protecting refugees. *A player jumps between two NPCs,
trying keep them from killing each other. *Somebody is trying to raise
the alarm, someone else is preventing it.

Having something like this really opens up the options for both
players and antagonists. *Look at it this way: as soon as there's
another goal besides just party A wants to kill party B, then at the
very, very, very least, you can ask the following question: *"You can
prevent your opponent from doing thing X, but at risk of injury or
death to yourself. *What do you want to do?" *That (and its
subvariants) are inherently more interesting questions than, "Your
opponent is trying to kill you. *Do you want to stop him"?

6. *CONSIDER THE TERRAIN

The most boring, least interesting fights are those in wide open
spaces on flat ground. *Put people in constrained environments
(whether they're constrained because there are walls around them or
constrained because there are spaces to fall into or constrained
because there are trees everywhere or whatever it may be).

And then USE that terrain. *Don't just offer it as a resource and see
if the players take it, force it on them. *Push them up against the
walls, have then smash through doors, fall out windows.

7. *BLOOD IS COMPULSORY

Amberites heal fast. *This is license to wound the shit out of them.
Nothing communicates, "You need to take this shit seriously" better
than a vividly described wound. *Not, like, "He scratches you on the
arm." *Go with, "He plunges his sword between the two bones of your
lower arm, and out the other side. *Arterial bleeding, and -- yeah,
you just heard the crack of your tibia. *Or radial or something, your
anatomy textbooks seem a little vague right now for some reason."

8. *OFFER THE PLAYER IMMEDIATE OPTIONS

So, okay, you've been doing the other stuff so far. *And this is where
I fall down in offering a real "technique," because I don't know quite
how to make this happen -- it just does, for me. *But the point is,
you've got this vividly described scene involving this badass fighting
these other badasses. *In an interesting location. *With, hopefully,
something at stake besides just a general interest in murdering each
other. *The player starts you off with, "I'm gonna attack so-and-so."

You take off and running, leading up to the next time you'll take
player input, and that input ends up looking something like, "So there
you are, *you're both filthy at the bottom of the stream bed, you're
jamming his face into the mud, feeling increasingly rare bubbles of
breath filter through your fingers out of the shallow water, and he's
got the point of his dagger jammed into the bone of your right thigh
-- he's digging like he's gonna find gold in there. *The situation is,
you're pretty sure that you can just keep this up and you'll kill him.
*What you're not sure of is whether he'll have killed you in the same
time. *Do you want to stay the course and give him what time he can to
saw off your right leg, or do you want to let him up, but also get his
dagger out of your flesh?"

Or similar. *The point is, you give the player some options, some
suggested courses of actions (it's also fine if they think up some
options on their own), and those actions are non-abstract. *Real.
Grounded. *It's not, like, "Do you go 60% offensive and 40%
defensive?" *The player understands starkly what is at stake for this
decision.

And something about the previous 7 points helps me personally get to
this point #8, which I guess is the really important part. *And I
think that this is, again, that I'm a nine year old boy and I think
about totally kewl fights and jump around the house and make sound
effects -- like, putting the fight into the reference of this kind of
thing that I can vividly imagine helps me see how to set up a player
choice where the player has a meaningful, immediate, important
decision to make where the consequences are easily understood. *But
I'm not sure that it would help other people set up the same kind of
choices.

Which is, to get back to the starting point, why I kind of mumble and
beg off when people ask me how to run combat. *I'm not trying to be
modest: I'm as arrogant as it comes. *But there's some kind of
internal alchemy where this kind of fight description leads to me
being able to come up with good player choices, and that alchemy feels
personal and non-repeatable.



So, finally, what I'm saying is that if you want your players to
remember their combats, lead them through a vivid scene to a decision
with real consequences. *Make them understand how they came here and
what's at stake. *And then make them choose. *This is how I get to
that point, but however you get to that point, I think your players
will be happy when you arrive.

Happy New Year,

Mike

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;745260Hi everyone, I've been interested in GMing a game of Amber for a while. However, reading over the rules, there are a few vague areas that confuse me.

1) How do you decide what attribute a certain action falls under?

For instance, suppose player A decides to use magic to throw a fireball or some sort of projectile at player B? How is this handled? Is it just a question of player A's Warfare, or would player B get a chance to respond?

2) How do you decide when a player can change the attribute being contested?

For instance, suppose player A and player B are in a sword fight, contesting their warfare. But player A wants to engage player B in a psyche battle. Would this require something similar to a grapple, similar to how you would try to change it to a contest of strength? Or would player A simply be allowed to change the playing field without player B having a say in it?

Overall I understand the general idea of the GM making judgment calls, but I'm wondering what kind of guidelines I'm supposed to use. Because things can get competitive between players, I don't want players to feel like they lost a fight for no good reason.

I also see various offensive and defensive maneuvers listed for warfare. Am I supposed to take the player's actions and fit them to those options, or is there anything else I should be using?

1) Usually the attribute is fairly clear. If you start to mix magic and combat and stuff it gets more confused.

I usually have spells specify exactly how they work when they are designed.

So in my games if a player builds a fireball spell - now they probably won't cos fireball is pretty cheesy and not very Amberish - they woudl write it up like this -

Fireball - This spell generates a ball of fire about the size of a baseball that the PC can throw at a target. As it is thrown it expands to about 2 meters across.
The sucess of the the throw is determined by the Warfare of the caster and the damage it deals scales with the caster's psyche.A PC with Chaos Psyche could easily destroy a heavy wooden door or similar, a character with Amber ranked psyche could blast through a stone wall etc.
The spell has 2 lynchpins - magic of Shadow and target.
Variations - additional lynchpins can be added to enhance the range of the spell, delay the effects or to create multiple smaller fireballs (total damage remains constant) but must of course be included in the spell as it is cast and hung.
 
This means that there is no confusion in play due to the spell or its effects.

If we use it in an example -

Rand has been cornered by his cousin Kista who is looking for revenge on him due to his attack on her twin.
Rand (W - 3rd, S - 4th, E - A, P - A ; Pattern; Shapeshift) Krista (W - A, S - A, E - 2nd, P - 3rd ; Sorcery, Pattern, Power words; ring - rank and Use named and Numbered spells)

GM : Okay Krista you are riding hard and can see Rand's grey stallion up ahead.
Krista: Am I in range for a spell?
GM : not yet.Rand you are continuing to Hellride?
Rand: yeah I don't want to kill her.
Krista: As if! Okay I try to extend my mind into my horse and use the link to push the beast beyond its usual effort.
GM: Okay but you know that could be dangerous right.
Krista: It is but a beast of shadow I can find another.
GM: Okay you extend your mind into the creature's and fill it with a renewed furvour. It seems to be working as the beast acellerates but you can feel its heart and muscles tearing and straining. (GM allows Krista to use Psyche to invade the mind of another creature)
Krista: Just get me close enough.
GM: Rand what are you doing?
Rand: Well she is committed I have to give her that. I am going to add a feature, a Tor to my left covered in a small copse of trees. Then I steer my horse up to the top amongst the trees.
GM: okay the Tor appears through the mist and you cut up its slope riding hard. (GM allows Rand to use Pattern to add a feature to the shadow - effectively moving to a new shadow)
Krista: Okay I push the beast harder and keep on going. Can I also reach out to my ring to grab a spell?
GM: Yeah that seems okay the ring can rack and use (GM allows Krista to separate her psyche into 2 effects at once controlling he beast is fairly easy as Krista has 3rd rank in Psyche and as she has 2nd rank in endurance the additional effort won't stop her grabbing a spell from her ring)
Krista: okay I summon the simplest of my fireball spells and throw it at Rand before he gets to the trees.
GM: You ready the spell and a ball of fire appears in your hand, you pitch your arm back at hurl the thing at Rand's disappearing form
Rand: I am going to be trying to evade as I ride using whatever cover is available.
GM: Krista your fire arcs ars out toward Rand but lands a few meters short there is a burst of flame and a bush catches ablaze. (GM Rand's evasive actions are easily enough to prevent his cousin's fireball from hitting as he is 3rd rank in Warfare)
etc

2 - Changing the attribute.
This really is a test of a good GM. you have to be fair above all because a player who thinks they have been unfairly treated really has no recourse as the rules are deliberately vague.
Generally I allow the players to make their own mistakes. I will encourage them to enage in conversation or in tricks that tigger keywords. My NPCs will do this all the time. A conversation in the middle of a fencing duel will lead to a usful tidbit of information which in turn leads the PC to ask for more details which in turn lets the NPC fix their gaze or some thing.
In addition think about speed. Strength is quicker than warfare which is quicker than psyche whcih is quicker than mist powers, power words are the exception.

So back to the example.
Rand has dismissed his steed and taken up a defensive position in the rocks of the Tor. Krista has dismounted and is moving through the woods towards him.

GM: the forest is pretty thin but the light is getting dark and a slight mist rises slowly amongst the branches.
Krista: I move quietly up the slope. I have my blade out and I am reaying a spell from my ring. Remember I was a ranger in Arden for years so I can move through the woods silently.
GM : Okay you move slowly up the hill. Rand?
Rand: I am a bit cheesed off with her being so unreasonable so I am going to teach her a lesson. I am going to hide , wait til she gets close then well...she'll see. I was a ranger in Arden as well remember
GM: (Rand's warefare is more critical here than anything else so he can take a position from where he can launch a suprise attack) Krista you edge up the slope and think you can make out a shape just up ahead in the shadows.
Krista: ha I prepare another fireball.
GM: Okay
Krista; I thow it at the shadow
GM: Okay the fireball hits with a huge explosion. Rand Krista just blew up that tree stump that you spotted and now she is within a sword blow of your position
Rand: Excellent. I leap forward and exercise a beat on her blade trying to knock the sword away.
GM: From out of the shadows Rand rises and executes a perfect beat attack. Krista your blade is wretched from your hand and it feels like your arm just just got twacked with a baseball bat (GM allowed Rand to use strength in this attack and his 4th rank Strength and superior warfare allow him to reasily disarm Krista).
Rand: Hehehe now let's play. I am going to make a low cut down on her thigh somethign to slow her down a bit.
GM: Okay. Krista Rand's blade cuts through your thigh. A long cut but not so deep. You can feel the blood pumping and welling out of the wound.
Krista: Shit he is going to cut me up isn't he. I drop to my knees and raise my arms. You got me, you got me.
Rand: tsk, giving up so soon, at least your sister made sport of it.
Krista: She always was the stubborn one. What can we do here to call a truce?
Rand: Well you did try to roast me with a fireball, twice, so I am not entirely ready to give it up yet.
Krista: Yeah I should probably apologise for that ...  (note Amberites never actually apologise :) )
Rand: Well....
Krista : I hit him with Power Word - Stun
GM: OOhhh... fiesty. Rand you take a blast of energy. It leaves you momentarily confused and your ears are ringing (The break in combat allows Krista to use a Power Word)
Krista: I am going to leap to my feet, my endurance should cover the pain in my leg I hope, and get my hands to his face and lock eyes with him I want to try for a Psychic attack.
GM: Okay Rand as your head clears you see Krista's green eyes staring at you trying to reach inside your head. (GM Krista has used a power word to get to an oportunity to make the combat a psychic battle. It might work or maybe Rand will be able to switch the combat back to Strength and grapple as he has advantage).

Now in that example Rand gets tagged because he gets cocky and he takes half measures. He could tried to knock Krista out, or go for a lethal blow but he is over confident and doesn't press his advantage. The sword beat is nice but in reality Krista's sword was never a very major threat.

This is all good advice posted above. However, I think the OP needs to get the basics straight first. I suggest you read the rule book. Once you understand the core rulebook you can then deal with fancy fight-running techniques. Then, look up examples of combat to try and flesh out your understanding.

After that, there's nothing really but to just do it.

//Panjumanju

Thanks for the advice so far.

QuoteThis really is a test of a good GM. you have to be fair above all because a player who thinks they have been unfairly treated really has no recourse as the rules are deliberately vague.

This is exactly why I was asking for help. Since I'll be mediating between two players, I don't want to feel like they only lost unfairly. I could just make up my own rules, but I want to see what guidance Amber has.

And I did read the rulebook (although I should read it again) but it's still vague on the particulars. I just want help with the judgment calls that I'm expected to make since I want to be fair to the players.

For instance, if someone is trying to do an ambush: do I give the victim a chance to react to the ambush, or do I just size up the ambusher's Warfare against the ambushee's? Basically I am wondering how to decide who to give priority to during an exchange. It's hard to get out of the "turn based" mentality. If something like this is mentioned in the book then feel free to point it out.

Actually I might as well throw in one more question. This isn't about combat, but about attribute auctions. I was describing it to a friend of mine earlier, and he pointed out that it wasn't that different than just statting up your character by yourself, except now you lose the mystery of what everybody else's strengths are. After all, even if there was no auction and everybody made their characters in private, they would be ranked against each other. The only difference would be that they wouldn't know what everybody else's ranks are, which would be more immersive. Is there something else that makes the auction worth doing?

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;745688Actually I might as well throw in one more question. This isn't about combat, but about attribute auctions. I was describing it to a friend of mine earlier, and he pointed out that it wasn't that different than just statting up your character by yourself, except now you lose the mystery of what everybody else's strengths are. After all, even if there was no auction and everybody made their characters in private, they would be ranked against each other. The only difference would be that they wouldn't know what everybody else's ranks are, which would be more immersive. Is there something else that makes the auction worth doing?

Absolutely! Your friend really missed the point of the auction. In the Auction you can:
* End up spending more than you wanted on something.
* End up getting something amazing for cheaper than you anticipated.

And you always:
* Develop that attitude and personality of your character by the process of the auction, and;
* Generate rivalries and potential alliances through the process of bidding.

The auction isn't just character creation, it;s the first step of playing.

//Panjumanju

Yeah, that's what I like about it. The problem is I want two contradictory things: I want the sense of rivalry the auction fosters, but I also want the players to have the fun and mystery of feeling each other's strengths out. Except that the auction by definition will make it all public.

Have you ever played an Amber game where the player ranks were hidden or there wasn't an auction? A comparison could be useful.

Sure. Auctions make some sense when the characters have a history to explain he rivalry, but strangers? Why would they know jack about each others' strengths?

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;745737Yeah, that's what I like about it. The problem is I want two contradictory things: I want the sense of rivalry the auction fosters, but I also want the players to have the fun and mystery of feeling each other's strengths out. Except that the auction by definition will make it all public.

Have you ever played an Amber game where the player ranks were hidden or there wasn't an auction? A comparison could be useful.

You don't come out of an auction knowing other PCs Attributes - far from it.

You know each of the 1st place Attributes, and that's all you can be sure about. Players often choose not to bid, or not to bid in all the auctions, then buy their way up the Attribute ladder in silence. Even if you remembered everyone's ranking at the end of the auction, that could change before play starts.

So, when you begin a game the best you can say is you *think* you *might* know *roughly* where people are at the end of the auction...at at least you know the four 1st, the PCs who are famous for it, and that's it.

Paranoia blossoms in such mystery.

//Panjumanju

This is how I handle such things. I'll address the last question first as for me it is simpler.

I do a Blind auction. everyone submits bids and then I give them feedback based on that. I also have more youngers than just the characters. So the players are also bidding against these NPC's. So I give them a general ranking after they bid and they can then bid more or not.

Twothings that make this work for me is Because I have a 5th stat. (Split warfare into warfare and dexterity.) I also give more points 150. So bidding up the stats has a little more variety that way.

The second is points continue to matter so 1st compares to second normally as in 1st always wins unless the character creates an exception but by keeping track that 1st went for 40 points and second went for 10, I now know that second place would have to seriously change up the situation to have a chance to compete. And for me as a GM and player I feel those 40 points are worth the same amount post char creation as during. I mean Pattern cost 50 pre or post. (though some people go for rankings in powers which works as well)

Doing it this way also helps in adjudicating combat.

I can more easily see as a GM how one compares to the other. I mean what does 1st place psyche compare to 1st place warfare. If One cost 40 points and the other ten then the 40 point one is going to help me govern if the 10 pointer can change the fight.

For example. A fight starts between 1st place Dexterity at 25 points and 2nd place psyche at 5 points. If one has a knife and the other is trying to make eye contact for a mental take down then It becomes obvious to me the 25pt knife beats the 5 pt mental Staredown. Even if they had 1st place Psyche at 12 pts it is obvious who wins.

I admit the Points are in some way a crutch but I see them as a tool. Also things to note.

Once char creation is over. Players never know their scores again and very, very seldom look at a character sheet.

I review stuff pre-game. Seldom if ever do I need to look at a character sheet or notes to run the combat. 9 out of 10 times I know what the stats are and how they compare without doing this.

These are the tools I use to adjudicate combat. The rest is as people have said learning to be descriptive and controlling the flow of the combat.
(Two things I still need work on :)  )

Hope this helps

I think it's important that when someone is learning Amber Diceless, we stick to the rules. This person is asking a question about the game, not your own hack of the game. Skipping straight to house rules makes things ten times more confusing.

I have my own houserules, too, but I'm not about to proffer them as advice when someone's just asking how the rules work.

//Panjumanju

I don't mind. I thirst for knowledge in all its forms. If someone has experience that let them figure out a better way to do something, I'll just as easily take from their knowledge than re-invent the wheel myself.

My apologies if the concept of retaining the numbers bid to help run combat was confusing.

I find it a useful tool.

As I said. Hope it helps.

It's not confusing, but doesn't that defeat the point of rankings?

Like if 1st place is 50, 2nd place is 49, 3rd place is 48, and 4th is 47, normally there is no way 4th could do anything to the guy in 1st. But here they're only separated by a few points which means they should be very close.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;745830It's not confusing, but doesn't that defeat the point of rankings?

Like if 1st place is 50, 2nd place is 49, 3rd place is 48, and 4th is 47, normally there is no way 4th could do anything to the guy in 1st. But here they're only separated by a few points which means they should be very close.

You are correct. Not everybody likes the ranking systems of 1st, 2nd, 3rd and so on very much, and prefer to treat the numbers as intrinsic values. This is not the rules as written, but it's how some people apply them.

//Panjumanju

Well, to a certain extent, you already have to apply it that way when dealing with non PCs. All the elders are judged that way, right?

Maybe a better way to do it is to keep the rankings but also rank all the elders alongside them. That way everybody fits in one continuum.

Then there's this, from Tony Jones' Amber Page
http://www.clockworksky.net/rp_am_iain_conflict_system.html

and this from Doyce Testerman's site
http://random-average.com/amber/holistic.html
I've both played and gm'd using this one: worked pretty well.

Yeah, I never liked the dual rankings system. Triple with the Shadow Knight demon system thrown in.

I like, in theory (haven't field tested it), the Lords of Olympus npc system of Low Ranked, High Ranked, tied with First Ranked and First Ranked + 1, 2, 3 etc.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;745842Well, to a certain extent, you already have to apply it that way when dealing with non PCs. All the elders are judged that way, right?

Maybe a better way to do it is to keep the rankings but also rank all the elders alongside them. That way everybody fits in one continuum.

Quote from: jibbajibba;7455061)In addition think about speed. Strength is quicker than warfare which is quicker than psyche whcih is quicker than mist powers, power words are the exception.

Check the rules on speed very carefully, the description quoted above is incorrect.

attribute speed (http://home.comcast.net/~arrefmak/faster.htm)

"In general, Strength is the fastest of the Attributes when characters are in a hand-to-hand clinch. Otherwise, reaction time is determined by Warfare, so a better Warfare rank determines a character's reflexes.

Finally, nothing can work faster than thought, so mental combat is fastest of all. However, there must be mind to mind contact already set up."
---pg. 95 ADRPG

Quote from: Arref;745898attribute speed (http://home.comcast.net/~arrefmak/faster.htm)

Thanks for linking to the article, that was great! It's a very good example of how to adjudicate Attributes in action.

//Panjumanju

It's not confusing, but doesn't that defeat the point of rankings?

Like if 1st place is 50, 2nd place is 49, 3rd place is 48, and 4th is 47, normally there is no way 4th could do anything to the guy in 1st. But here they're only separated by a few points which means they should be very close.

mAcular Chaotic


Since you asked,

      Well for me ranks are a general guide. It helps inform the players were they sit in a general way. See I really go off book into the crazy world of house rules.  I may have 3 people at rank 2 in psyche. each only a few points different. Unless they get into do or die contest with each other they never know who actually has more points. So I guess what I am trying to communicate is rankings are general, public, so to speak measurements.

So if everyone is spread only a point apart the contest would be very long and drawn out until whoever has the most points wins. The differences in points effects how long a contest last and how much of an advantage you need to create to beat someone of higher rank. So a one point difference the opponent getting an inopportune Trump that they have to concentrate and refuse may be enough to turn the tide of the fight/contest but someone 30 points better can do both though it would be noticeable.


I try to make all points equivalent but that is not an easy task. Remember that 1 point is enough to by an entire shadow helps :)

Hope this helps.

Getting back to the original questions;

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;7452601) How do you decide what attribute a certain action falls under?

Do you feel like this has been adequately answered? Because more than a few people on here can go on about this until the cows come home....it's more of an art than a science, and thus opens itself up to much subjectivity, but should not be considered arbitrary in its distinctions.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;7452602) How do you decide when a player can change the attribute being contested?

I don't know if anyone said anything about this - but in answer, whenever they want to, potentially instantly. "The ruffian throws a chair at you" (Warfare) "I smash the chair with my forehead." (Strength). A player should be shifting the battleground to their superiour Attributes, or their opponent's inferiour Attributes, whenever they can.

Helpful; yes, no?

//Panjumanju

Quote from: Panjumanju;746012I don't know if anyone said anything about this - but in answer, whenever they want to, potentially instantly. "The ruffian throws a chair at you" (Warfare) "I smash the chair with my forehead." (Strength). A player should be shifting the battleground to their superiour Attributes, or their opponent's inferiour Attributes, whenever they can.

Helpful; yes, no?

//Panjumanju

It's helpful. I was under the impression that when a player tries to change the attribute, the other player would have an ability to stop them or something. But it's not like that?

So to break it down into a "turn" format, it would be like just having a player be able to attack, and then the other player dodging or resisting successfully would just be the attacker missing. As opposed to turning to the defending player and saying something like "he's going to do X, what do you do!"

Quote from: Artifacts of Amber;745959It's not confusing, but doesn't that defeat the point of rankings?

Like if 1st place is 50, 2nd place is 49, 3rd place is 48, and 4th is 47, normally there is no way 4th could do anything to the guy in 1st. But here they're only separated by a few points which means they should be very close.

mAcular Chaotic


Since you asked,

      Well for me ranks are a general guide. It helps inform the players were they sit in a general way. See I really go off book into the crazy world of house rules.  I may have 3 people at rank 2 in psyche. each only a few points different. Unless they get into do or die contest with each other they never know who actually has more points. So I guess what I am trying to communicate is rankings are general, public, so to speak measurements.

So if everyone is spread only a point apart the contest would be very long and drawn out until whoever has the most points wins. The differences in points effects how long a contest last and how much of an advantage you need to create to beat someone of higher rank. So a one point difference the opponent getting an inopportune Trump that they have to concentrate and refuse may be enough to turn the tide of the fight/contest but someone 30 points better can do both though it would be noticeable.


I try to make all points equivalent but that is not an easy task. Remember that 1 point is enough to by an entire shadow helps :)

Hope this helps.

I think it's much more entertaining if contests between closely matched opponents are not necessarily long and drawn out but are instead a bloody mess for both. (Or a psychic mess; the loser is paralyzed but the winner's right arm isn't working right, he has holes in his memory and his speech is slurred . . .)
Less Moreau versus de Maynes (in Scaramouche) and more Cpt. America vs the Winter Soldier.

I think it's much more entertaining if contests between closely matched opponents are not necessarily long and drawn out but are instead a bloody mess for both. (Or a psychic mess; the loser is paralyzed but the winner's right arm isn't working right, he has holes in his memory and his speech is slurred . . .)

RTrimmer

I agree absolutely. Just because the battle/contest in lengthy in game time in real time I still use very short descriptors and means to move the contest along. The length of time and tension can be maintained either way.

I admit this is an area I am still working on, hoping to get better.


It's helpful. I was under the impression that when a player tries to change the attribute, the other player would have an ability to stop them or something. But it's not like that?

So to break it down into a "turn" format, it would be like just having a player be able to attack, and then the other player dodging or resisting successfully would just be the attacker missing. As opposed to turning to the defending player and saying something like "he's going to do X, what do you do!"

mAcular Chaotic

To stay with in the rules in the book or as close as I can get.

It depends on the rankings to me, Someone first place in Warfare and amber Strength gets into a fight with someone 3rd ranked in Strength and much lower ranked in Warfare than his opponent, has little chance to change to avenue or type of contest. The Warfare person would see them trying and have the ability to avoid it. So the Strength guy has no chance to grab or wrestle or throw something heavy or whatever and make it a Strength contest.


If I remember the way Gerard did it was that Corwin woke up in his grip or for that matter a Strength contest. When he confronted him.  Then when he threatened him that if he broke his word said something to the effect he would get to Corwin even if he ran him through so that he would see him dead.

To me this says 1st rank in Strength versus 3-5 rank in Warfare. Warfare may hurt Gerard but not beat his Strength when he tries to make it a Strength contest.

Just my thoughts. Hope it helps.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;746032It's helpful. I was under the impression that when a player tries to change the attribute, the other player would have an ability to stop them or something. But it's not like that?

So to break it down into a "turn" format, it would be like just having a player be able to attack, and then the other player dodging or resisting successfully would just be the attacker missing. As opposed to turning to the defending player and saying something like "he's going to do X, what do you do!"

Get out of the turn and round format. They're artificial limitations you're placing on yourself and your ability to run things. Combat in Amber can take on a more organic process. You *can* turn to someone and say "What do you want to do about this?" when it's justified, but it's not necessarily a my-turn your-turn structure. Try to flow with it.

This is how I do it.

Bandit throws a chair (Warfare) then Strongdude smashes chair with fists (Strength). This could also be: Ruffian throws a chair (Warfare) then Strongdude smashes chair with fists AND charges forward to grab the guy (Strength).

How much you want to do, how far you're extending yourself and how complex you want to make it affects your judgement of what's happening. To just smash the chair is pretty simple, and does not require much in Strength - but to do all those activities as well, before the Bandit has a chance to respond, will require a lot more Strength (or a much higher rank in Strength, depending how you're going about this) to get all that done without being tripped, stabbed, directed into a wall or whatever else.

Swapping Attributes is just a case of what you decide to do as a player, based on what your available options are. You can get trapped in circumstances where you have no choice.

If Strongdude manages to grab the Ruffian and wrap his arms around him, and the Ruffian has no weapon, Strongdude will be matching his Strength against Ruffian's Strength (or Endurance, depending on how Ruffian chooses to respond). If Ruffian has an appropriate power word, or manages to catch Strongdude's eye (say he has a higher Psyche than Strongdude's Strength) then perhaps Ruffian could change the battlefield, so to speak. Otherwise, he's getting crushed.

Don't over-think it. It's a very easy, intuitive system, and it runs better in the moment then sitting around trying to figure it out.

//Panjumanju

Quote from: Arref;745898Check the rules on speed very carefully, the description quoted above is incorrect.

attribute speed (http://home.comcast.net/~arrefmak/faster.htm)

"In general, Strength is the fastest of the Attributes when characters are in a hand-to-hand clinch. Otherwise, reaction time is determined by Warfare, so a better Warfare rank determines a character's reflexes.

Finally, nothing can work faster than thought, so mental combat is fastest of all. However, there must be mind to mind contact already set up."
---pg. 95 ADRPG

thanks for that .
Mind stuff needs the link that takes time.
Still don't like some of the RAW on psyche though as they don't seem to come from the books, though I use them in a Highlanderesque way as per my example of play above.

Quote from: jibbajibba;747309thanks for that .
Mind stuff needs the link that takes time.
Still don't like some of the RAW on psyche though as they don't seem to come from the books, though I use them in a Highlanderesque way as per my example of play above.

Yeah, Eric vs. Corwin via Trump was not all that fast.

Quote from: RTrimmer;747366Yeah, Eric vs. Corwin via Trump was not all that fast.

that one is an oddity as Eric is deliberately dilating time so Corwin can't lead his fleet effectively.
My ruling tends to be once the mind lock is in place the only out for a PC is a strength play (if the opponet gives them an out), a power word, or a spell operated by an external source (an intelligent artifact that can rack and use spells for example and triggers a teleport).

The classic Mental link is when Benedict gets snared by Brand while he is crossint he pattern. (Benedict really is a bit of a dunce in the first series, tricked by just about everyone he meets). In this case it takes Brand a while talking to set Benedict up. Once the lock is there you get eh impression Brand could make Benedict so somethign suicidal such as step of fthe pattern but you don't get the idea that it would be quick.

Dilating time? I don't see that at all. Mind lock and hold it. Eric's in Castle Amber presumably, what else has he got to do that's more important?

I think of psyche moves as analogous to wrestling/boxing moves instead of the Professor X, "I've pushed the paralysis button and now I'm free to do whatever" thing. A mind lock is like a wrestling hold, assault is assault, suggestion doesn't come up in the books IIRC, mindrape is beating information out of them and domination is grabbing them and moving them around. The greater the psychic superiority the more aiki-jijitsu-esque and less thuggy the technique. More astral combat, less computer virus.

Why? I think it models the books better and I think it's more fun.

As for Brand vs Ben, Brand used the Jewel of Judgment to freeze him up.

Quote from: jibbajibba;747593that one is an oddity as Eric is deliberately dilating time so Corwin can't lead his fleet effectively.
My ruling tends to be once the mind lock is in place the only out for a PC is a strength play (if the opponet gives them an out), a power word, or a spell operated by an external source (an intelligent artifact that can rack and use spells for example and triggers a teleport).

The classic Mental link is when Benedict gets snared by Brand while he is crossint he pattern. (Benedict really is a bit of a dunce in the first series, tricked by just about everyone he meets). In this case it takes Brand a while talking to set Benedict up. Once the lock is there you get eh impression Brand could make Benedict so somethign suicidal such as step of fthe pattern but you don't get the idea that it would be quick.

Quote from: RTrimmer;747602Dilating time? I don't see that at all. Mind lock and hold it. Eric's in Castle Amber presumably, what else has he got to do that's more important?

I think of psyche moves as analogous to wrestling/boxing moves instead of the Professor X, "I've pushed the paralysis button and now I'm free to do whatever" thing. A mind lock is like a wrestling hold, assault is assault, suggestion doesn't come up in the books IIRC, mindrape is beating information out of them and domination is grabbing them and moving them around. The greater the psychic superiority the more aiki-jijitsu-esque and less thuggy the technique. More astral combat, less computer virus.

Why? I think it models the books better and I think it's more fun.

As for Brand vs Ben, Brand used the Jewel of Judgment to freeze him up.

If you read the passage of the Trump lock Corwin looses all track of time he thinks a few moments have past but in fact its hours and his fleet is lost.

Brand doesn't have the jewel at that point .

Quote from: jibbajibba;747607If you read the passage of the Trump lock Corwin looses all track of time he thinks a few moments have past but in fact its hours and his fleet is lost.

Brand doesn't have the jewel at that point .

Yes he does. I checked. Brand grabbed it on Earth, Gerard scared him away from Amber's Pattern, Rebma's also guarded, Corwin chased him off the Primal -- partially attuned -- and Ben confronted him in Tir-na Nog'th.

Quote from: RTrimmer;747634Yes he does. I checked. Brand grabbed it on Earth, Gerard scared him away from Amber's Pattern, Rebma's also guarded, Corwin chased him off the Primal -- partially attuned -- and Ben confronted him in Tir-na Nog'th.

alas and alack my amber-fu has failed me :(

I throw myself on the mercy of the Courts. I had assumed that was the inspiration for the whole psyche take control of someone through eye contact part of the rules as I can't recall any other examples of it in teh books at all.

Quote from: jibbajibba;747647alas and alack my amber-fu has failed me :(

I throw myself on the mercy of the Courts. I had assumed that was the inspiration for the whole psyche take control of someone through eye contact part of the rules as I can't recall any other examples of it in teh books at all.

Heh, I had to check to be sure.
For eye contact, I think Strygalldwir snaking Corwin's name was the only example.

Quote from: RTrimmer;747714For eye contact, I think Strygalldwir snaking Corwin's name was the only example.

Also this scene very similar (the two cats of doom attempt to slay Corwin):

But the one I had halved was not yet dead. Its head turned toward me
and those blazing eyes met my own and held them.

"I die the final death," it said, "and so I know you, Opener. Why do
you slay us?" And then the flames consumed its head.

I still don't understand how to handle switching attributes.

For instance if someone is fighting Warfare against another's Warfare... suppose one player says they want to go in for a grapple so they can use Strength.

What do I do at that point? Do I ask the other player how they try to stop that, or do I just check their Warfare and just decide "okay, you made it in."

Or suppose one player wants to establish eye contact: how do I decide that they do that? Do I tell the other player that their enemy is trying to establish eye contact and ask them how they try to resist it? Or do I just rule that eye contact is either made or not made based on their attributes at the time?

Does Lords of Olympus offer more clarity in these kinds of situations?

I would default to ranks in that case.

If first place Warfare was attacked by strength then I would compare Warfare. Second place warfare may take a hit or something similar in order to grab the 1st place Warfare.  If he was lower than that I would say he couldn't get a grip on the 1st place guy. Rank in Strength does not matter until in the clinch.


Eye contact would compare Warfare to Psyche. So first place in both means no contact as it seems easier to avoid than establish contact tie goes to the defender. Other wise if Psyche is high enough, by several ranks, I would say since it is inferred that this sort of thing is difficult they could start contact. So maybe 4th place warfare compared to 1st place psyche ends in mental contact.


You communicate each circumstance so 1st place warfare would notice the psyche person trying to lock eyes or the strength person trying to get close enough for a clinch.



Now Off books and non rules way I do things is compare the actually numbers used to gain that rank for some reason people make those points no longer mean anything once character is done so a 10 point 1st place psyche is same as a 50 pt warfare, but the powers are all equal in cost and abilities given.

So a 50 1st place psyche versus a 15 point 1st place warfare means they could probably mind bend them if they wanted to.

Just my thoughts

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;751990I still don't understand how to handle switching attributes.

I believe you're over thinking it.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;751990For instance if someone is fighting Warfare against another's Warfare... suppose one player says they want to go in for a grapple so they can use Strength.

The rule to remember here is: "The closer the Attributes, the more drawn out the action. The farther away the Attributes, the swifter the resolution."

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;751990Do I ask the other player how they try to stop that,

Yes, if the potential grappler's Strength is fairly on par with or not as good as the other character's Warfare.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;751990or do I just check their Warfare and just decide "okay, you made it in."

Yes, if the potential grappler's Strength is really a whole lot better than the other character's Warfare.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;751990Or suppose one player wants to establish eye contact: how do I decide that they do that?

That's one people usually have trouble with. Remember how difficult it can be to catch someone's eye, and then concentrate, before they stab you in the chest. It's a very tricky thing to do.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;751990Do I tell the other player that their enemy is trying to establish eye contact and ask them how they try to resist it?  

If that other player's Warfare is close to or superiour to the attacker's Psyche, then yes that's exactly what I'd do.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;751990Or do I just rule that eye contact is either made or not made based on their attributes at the time?

If the attacker has a much better Psyche then the contact is probably made. If their Psyche is not adequately better than their target, it just fails, or worse - creates an opening for attack.

I think you've got it all - the "The closer the Attributes..." rule was what you were missing.

//Panjumanju

Thanks. Supposing that it's more drawn out, what kind of actions would the players take to change the situation?

Also, if one character is a few classes above another character, the battle should be fairly quick. How could the weaker character escape when he realizes he's outmatched, or is he just doomed the moment he started the battle?

I've never run an Amber game so I may be talking out of my ass here, but from the above comments I fear the Strength Attribute might have the short end of the stick. It seems Warfare is still considered the most important combat Attribute. That's fine if that's the way you want it. But if you want the Attributes to be closer to equal allow the player(s) to role-play it out more.

The Strength guy can find ways to minimize the superior weapon skills of the Warfare guy. Allow him to pick up a big table and pin his opponent against the wall, or he can use a big shield to move the opposing weapon away to the side so he can land a few punches or kicks. Let the Strength guy go all "Jackie Chan" to get the edge over his weapon holding foes, using anything and everything in the environment to block attacks and land blows. If the Warfare guy has a spear the Strength guy can grab it, move past the point and kick at the legs. Allow him to grab the arms of the Warfare guy and twist/break them, or throw the guy a distance.

The Strength guy doesn't have to be the weaker putz in the contest. Just imagine a bare handed Schwarzenegger fighting Jet Li who's holding a sword or spear. Is Arnold really at a big disadvantage? I don't know. If role played right Arnold should have a decent chance of winning. (Or choose other names, A bare handed Steven Seagal versus a sword wielding... whoever.)

Just my two cents.

mAcular Chaotic

Thanks. Supposing that it's more drawn out, what kind of actions would the players take to change the situation?

Also, if one character is a few classes above another character, the battle should be fairly quick. How could the weaker character escape when he realizes he's outmatched, or is he just doomed the moment he started the battle?

If your dumb enough to get in a fight with someone who sorely outclasses you, you lose. This is why I don't pick fights with black belts. I would freakin' lose. Period!

Now knowing you are absolutely going to lose does open up some interesting role playing, so not end of the world but the beginning of an interesting change of events.



True Doughdee those are all legitimate ways to interpret strength but If I had Warfare I have counter argument that is just as Legitimate. I can see he is strong so I don't let him grab my weapons I am faster so I dance around his blocking with big stuff. etc.


That is where Amber is interesting since it comes to the players as well as GM to figure out what attribute can do what. In my games Strength also offers some injury resistance. I imagine hitting Gerard does not do, as much as, hitting Benedict with the same blow. So Gerard would take a the sword blow and walk into the guy he is fighting to grab him. So the Warfare works since Gerard is now hurt but he takes that hurt as the price of changing the attribute in contest. In fact Gerard says something to that affect in the books to Corwin when he makes him promise to see to Amber's safety.

Just my thoughts as confused as they are :)

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;752428Thanks. Supposing that it's more drawn out, what kind of actions would the players take to change the situation?

The possibilities are potentially endless, and usually based directly on where you are fighting and what else is going on around you. Some ideas are:

* Use the environment - throw a pot at someone or flip a table over.
* Seem to flee but actually lead them into quicksand.
* Start a fire.
* Call for help. (Why are you fighting someone to the death alone, you fool?)
* Endurance: Always remember that the more drawn out it gets the more it becomes a matter of Endurance instead. Your Strength may be similar for this wrestling match, but if one guy has Chaos Endurance, he'll quickly tire.
* Stuff: Good and bad stuff also factors into the conflict. "You try to lead your opponent off the edge, but you slip on a pebble..."

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;752428Also, if one character is a few classes above another character, the battle should be fairly quick. How could the weaker character escape when he realizes he's outmatched, or is he just doomed the moment he started the battle?

The character is rarely ever doomed. Running away is always a really good option. Remember, it's very difficult to catch someone when they're determined to book it. Also, it's rare that someone you're fighting actually wants to full-out kill you, so negotiation is an important skill. Usually one character wants something from the other, and nefarious deals can be made instead.

Quote from: Doughdee222;752430I've never run an Amber game so I may be talking out of my ass here, but from the above comments I fear the Strength Attribute might have the short end of the stick.

The Attributes are all very equal. Part of what tells me they are is because when I'm explaining the rules someone always says: "It seems like X isn't as strong as the other 3", but X is a different Attribute every time.

Strength means more than just muscle mass, it's also use of muscle - like martial arts, and muscle density - acting as a kind of body armour. Typically a Warefare character's interest is in keeping a Strength character at bay, because if a Strength character closes in the match is decided very quickly. There's not much Mr. Warfare can do once Mr. Strength has snapped their sword. Just, as an example.

//Panjumanju

Quote from: Panjumanju;752546The character is rarely ever doomed. Running away is always a really good option. Remember, it's very difficult to catch someone when they're determined to book it. Also, it's rare that someone you're fighting actually wants to full-out kill you, so negotiation is an important skill. Usually one character wants something from the other, and nefarious deals can be made instead.

Well, putting aside killing them, if you can run away whenever you want then how could anyone be forced to cut a nefarious deal? They could just always escape. So there has to be a way to defeat someone even if they want to escape. Right?

Also I was talking about a situation where two players don't know how strong they are in relation to each other when they start fighting. But then once the fight starts, one player quickly realizes he's far outclassed.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;752638Well, putting aside killing them, if you can run away whenever you want then how could anyone be forced to cut a nefarious deal?

Don't be silly, you can't *always* run away. What if you're surrounded, chained, or drugged?

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;752638Also I was talking about a situation where two players don't know how strong they are in relation to each other when they start fighting. But then once the fight starts, one player quickly realizes he's far outclassed.

As a GM you ask the player(s) involved in the combat what their intentions are. If their intention is to kill, or is to hold someone off, or to prevent someone from entering a doorway, or to distract someone, then their fighting ability is going to manifest very differently. It gets further complicated when someone is pretending to be better than they are, or pretending to be worse than they are. Get all the information you can from your players about what they're looking to accomplish before you start telling them the result.

//Panjumanju

Quote from: Panjumanju;752639Don't be silly, you can't *always* run away. What if you're surrounded, chained, or drugged?

Yeah, I just mean what the cut off point would be in terms of pure attributes, with everything else not involved, for someone being able to flee successfully. I guess I just have to just make some rules for myself. Like 3 classes and below, there is no escape.

The kind of game I'm thinking of has players who are friends that relish going after each other so having them try to kill each other is almost guaranteed. I assume at some point the loser would try to escape, so I'm trying to think of how to handle those scenarios.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;752940The kind of game I'm thinking of has players who are friends that relish going after each other so having them try to kill each other is almost guaranteed. I assume at some point the loser would try to escape, so I'm trying to think of how to handle those scenarios.

The best GM tool is your own good judgement. However, given rules-as-written, if someone is more than one class below you - in a flat open field with no wind - there is no getting away if the superiour fighter is intent to pursue. If anything, the inferiour fighter would be injured and further slowed from there.

That being said, how often does a flat open field with no wind come up?

//Panjumanju

Quote from: Panjumanju;752949The best GM tool is your own good judgement. However, given rules-as-written, if someone is more than one class below you - in a flat open field with no wind - there is no getting away if the superiour fighter is intent to pursue. If anything, the inferiour fighter would be injured and further slowed from there.

That being said, how often does a flat open field with no wind come up?

//Panjumanju

Yeah, I don't intend to just put them in a featureless room, but I need to know these core fundamentals as the starting point to accurately judge how circumstances would affect them.

I think someone a few ranks below could still escape -- what if the pursuer has much lower fortitude? A long chase could turn into a contest of Fortitude at that point and the pursuer would tire out first.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;752963I think someone a few ranks below could still escape -- what if the pursuer has much lower fortitude? A long chase could turn into a contest of Fortitude at that point and the pursuer would tire out first.

You're exactly right.

//Panjumanju

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;752963I think someone a few ranks below could still escape -- what if the pursuer has much lower fortitude?

You are well on the way to answering your own question. Keep in mind when talking about escape options, that there is a complex judgment to make with several factors.

I would arrange them like this:

• What attribute governs the escape plan expertise?
• Is the attribute faster than the attacker's attribute?
• How complex is the environ of escape?

So escaping from an empty field duel, might be Strength then Endurance. As a GM, I note that Warfare of the attacker is the slowest attribute, so breaking off a sword duel and running is a good use of speed.  Hopefully, the escapee is higher in Strength and/or Endurance than the attacker.

If the attacker realizes his target is escaping, he may also realize that chasing at a disadvantage is a bad plan (high warfare) whereas, running to a nearby tree and pulling a bow and arrow out from hiding so you can hit the sib a couple times before they vanish away might be satisfying.

If he was going to fire at the retreating foe, what attributes would that compare? Warfare?

IN standard rules. Warfare would cover shooting at a Running opponent. Dodging  same attack would also be Warfare.

I think the important thing in retreating is remembering how hard Amberites are to kill. So even a nasty injury would be survived. you would just have to be willing to take that chance.



Just my thoughts

If martial arts fall under Strength shouldn't dodging fall there too?
Parrying is clearly Warfare.

Quote from: Artifacts of Amber;753105IN standard rules. Warfare would cover shooting at a Running opponent. Dodging  same attack would also be Warfare.

I think the important thing in retreating is remembering how hard Amberites are to kill. So even a nasty injury would be survived. you would just have to be willing to take that chance.



Just my thoughts

Quote from: RTrimmer;753260If martial arts fall under Strength shouldn't dodging fall there too?
Parrying is clearly Warfare.

Dodging a bullet is something beyond the reach of martial arts. (Just ask the Boxer Rebellion.) In the letter of the rules, avoiding projectiles falls under Warfare.

I would let a player use their Strength to do it, though, if they're being clever about it - like grabbing things and throwing them behind, or ducking behind library book shelves or something.

//Panjumanju

Hmm, that raises an interesting point.

Throwing things uses Strength. But Strength is faster than warfare.

Using a gun would presumably be warfare. So you could throw something faster than somebody could shoot you?

Depends gun pointed at you ready then no, Gun faster. Superior weapon trumps inferior weapon.

Rock in hand, gun in holster then maybe.

All depends that is what makes Amber diceless great and a great pain in the ass to run,

Honestly you just have to have it fixed in your head how it works and which is gonna be different from GM to GM in Amber. So basically there are no clear cut rules you have to develop or have the instinct to know what feels far and right for you.

Just my thoughts.

Nobody dodges bullets, they look to where the gunman is pointing and try to be elsewhere or get to cover.

Who is going to be better at that in combat time, a gunman, a swordsman or a martial artist?

Quote from: Panjumanju;753445Dodging a bullet is something beyond the reach of martial arts. (Just ask the Boxer Rebellion.) In the letter of the rules, avoiding projectiles falls under Warfare.

I would let a player use their Strength to do it, though, if they're being clever about it - like grabbing things and throwing them behind, or ducking behind library book shelves or something.

//Panjumanju

Well, to me it seems like the natural outcome would be that you'd get shot without being able to do anything. But that conflicts with the rules of Strength being faster.

I've been told by experienced hunters that it's surprisingly hard to hit a moving animal, even (or especially) at close range.

I remember watching some half-assed martial artists (not even black belts, karate and taekwando IIRC) spar at close range and thinking, "Right. Shotgun, pump shotgun, from as far away as possible, keep firing."

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;753690Well, to me it seems like the natural outcome would be that you'd get shot without being able to do anything. But that conflicts with the rules of Strength being faster.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;753690Well, to me it seems like the natural outcome would be that you'd get shot without being able to do anything. But that conflicts with the rules of Strength being faster.

Here is how I rule in this sort of situation. Your Mileage May Vary.

It's important to remember that you can have 'parallel conflicts' or even 'overlapping conflicts' running in the same scene. It is also important to remember that the PC running away made a choice because they were losing the Warfare contest. Once you've lost a conflict, the choices you make are about how the "you lost" is playing out.

Duel in field, several rounds exchanged, results in mounting damage to weaker Warfare.
Player A is going to win the duel.
Player B decides to escape, switches to Strength, and leaves between A choices (faster attribute) of the Warfare duel.
Therefore Player B begins escape and does not take a back blow, due to faster attribute.
Player A choice is to continue Warfare attacks while Player B escapes, but can only do so by throwing a sword (bad choice) or getting a ranged weapon (which has been hidden nearby), elects to get ranged weapon.
Player B escape proceeds to far range, Strength and Endurance conflict, Player B is 'winning the escape'.

Player A gets the ranged weapon, pops several more hits into Player B at range, but cannot change 'winning the escape'.

Scene ends.

Imagine that the choices are different. Imagine Player B decides to change to Psyche because they are losing the Warfare contest. Psyche is also faster than Warfare.

Player A is going to win the duel.
Player B decides to attack mind, switches to Psyche, and gains mental touch between A choices (faster attribute) of the Warfare duel.
Therefore Player B begins mental assault and DOES take the next blow, due to faster attribute but all Psyche attacks require two stage conflict (connection and then assault).
Player A choice is 'does not panic', continues Warfare attacks while Player B touches mind, realizes the fight must end fast. Consults with GM as to how they will 'win the Warfare contest' since Player B is switching to another attribute.

GM rules that several exchanges of Warfare result are already going against Player B, so Player A can call the final 'now I put you down' for Player B.

Player B loses.
Player A has a bad headache from final all out mental attack try.

In both examples above, there was never a doubt that Warfare contest was going to go to Player A.

In the first example, Player B made a good choice about how they could affect the loss. They escaped.

In the second example, Player B made a 'role playing' choice about how they could affect the loss. They may have hoped Player A would be intimidated, or would make the mistake of thinking they had superior Psyche to respond with. Instead Player A stays the course with Warfare and completes the win.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;753583Hmm, that raises an interesting point.

Throwing things uses Strength. But Strength is faster than warfare.

Using a gun would presumably be warfare. So you could throw something faster than somebody could shoot you?

In my games I always rule you can throw things faster than you can be shot at range.

The Strength strategy has two overall choices against a ranged opponent: defense to win or offense to win?

To me this means, does the Player Character use objects at hand to block shots until they get closer or do they throw something to damage and take damage from unblocked Warfare shots?

Suddenly you have two opponents using their best attributes to wear each other down if both Players use the offense options. Weapon choices versus Endurance are going to mean a lot in attrition.

If the Strength combatant has limited choices of smaller objects, they should be concerned they need to close fast to arm's reach. Defense is not as good a choice.

If the Warfare combatant has a pistol with six shots, they should be concerned if the opponent can block with a heavy table they picked up. Maybe it is time to escape.

There's been some great responses here.

I completely agree with the person who pointed out (I'll paraphrase) that you have to remember how easy to is to pull a trigger. Strength may be quicker than Warfare on an even plane, but a gun has tremendous ease of use.

//Panjumanju

Ah... so you'd consider the gun itself an environmental advantage.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;754759Ah... so you'd consider the gun itself an environmental advantage.

Of a sort, yes. Weapons are not equal, but they are circumstantial. A handgun would be to your hindrance when grappling where a knife would be an advantage. If someone is across the room, however, the gun is more advantageous. (And so on, an so forth...)

//Panjumanju

Speaking of being across the room, here's another question. How do you deal with distances? In tactical games with grids, everything is measured out. But in Amber you deal with everything being abstract and part of your imagination. So if somebody is on the other side of a field with a sword trying to close the distance, and someone else has something like a gun or bow opposite of them, what kind of principles do you use to handle that kind of movement?

I thought of doing something like dividing the range a PC could be in into zones like "melee," "close," and "far" and use that to control where the character would be in relation to another character. Then when they want to close the distance they'd have to cross through these zones.

Or would you just arbitrarily decide after what "feels" right that after dodging so many attacks from the bowman, the swordsman has closed range? Or something like that.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;754869I thought of doing something like dividing the range a PC could be in into zones like "melee," "close," and "far" and use that to control where the character would be in relation to another character. Then when they want to close the distance they'd have to cross through these zones.

I think you're over-complicating it. If you reason in your brain that the melee character has X Strength and therefore can run yae much, and the bowman has, comparably, Y Warfare, then the bowman should be able to get off (for the sake of argument) 6 shots before the melee fighter can close into his preferred range. After no more than 3 shots, if the shots are having any real effect, the melee fighter is probably going to rethink his strategy anyway and try to lay down in the brush to lay a trap (or call trump), or just try and talk it out, or throw his sword, or whatever else.

Trying to run Amber, the situation is changing all the time. If you spend too much time trying to reason out a field of wheat into areas, you'll be quickly bogged down with details that will in no way enhance the combat for the players, but instead just make the situation feel more complicated.

//Panjumanju

Zones may work as an internal dialogue or means for the Gm to keep track but it is not a required to run good combat.

Instead take the idea of distance and like most things in Amber you turn it descriptors. There honestly are no hard and fast rules as to how much ground can warfare rank one cover compared to strength rank one. You make assumptions based on how you see Amberites. Are they super fast compared to a human. You can draw from the books for examples but to be realistic distances are not often given in them.

Each GM has an idea of the physical and mental capabilities of Amberites with that you can have a clearer idea of how fast can A get to B.

As Panjumanju said if the guy charging can't avoid the arrows and gets shot he probably should consider a different approach. if as a player I charged and the first arrow hit I would retreat and not wait and see how good they really are.

So you guys are saying based on the Warfare, I don't worry about the distance the other player travels, I just say "they fire X shots, you get hit/dodge it, now what do you do" and then move on to the next stage that being them being close or doing something else?

If I get time tonight I will write up the actual combat we had the other weekend.
Shows a mix of Strength, Endurance and Warfare in an enclose area with lots of environmentl considerations and a pissed off Snow White with a colt python.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;754869Speaking of being across the room, here's another question. How do you deal with distances? In tactical games with grids, everything is measured out. But in Amber you deal with everything being abstract and part of your imagination. So if somebody is on the other side of a field with a sword trying to close the distance, and someone else has something like a gun or bow opposite of them, what kind of principles do you use to handle that kind of movement?

Read up a Zelazny passage on combat and you'll find that the author jumps from very tactical comments about sword position to a few descriptions about positioning and strikes.

But what the game rules provide is the strategy of conflict, not the tactics (which are described by Players). Tactics become the 'descriptors' and 'environ' that may affect how you delay a loss or accelerate a win.

Because the attributes have told you how the fight should come out before it starts.

In Amber combat, it is perfectly OK for a Player to turn to the GM and say, "well, I'm an expert in Strength and I'm highly ranked. What do I think my best move is for crossing this field and getting to him while he is hitting me with arrows."

As a GM, you do have to offer some choices to that Player. Between the two of you, you define the expertise of the amazing attributes.

The answer may be "you see no way to cross the field without getting seriously hurt and maybe killed". That's a choice based on expert experience. The PCs in an Amber game have got that sort of expertise under their belts already.

Quote from: jibbajibba;755018If I get time tonight I will write up the actual combat we had the other weekend.
Shows a mix of Strength, Endurance and Warfare in an enclose area with lots of environmentl considerations and a pissed off Snow White with a colt python.

Awesome! Seeing it in action would definitely help.

Quote from: Arref;755040But what the game rules provide is the strategy of conflict, not the tactics (which are described by Players).

That's an interesting way of putting it. Could you elaborate on that more?

I also noticed in the Amber that it does offer specific tactics, like parrying a move or trying to go on all defense. Are you supposed to try and fit all the player actions to those options or are those just offered for help?

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;755045I also noticed in the Amber that it does offer specific tactics, like parrying a move or trying to go on all defense. Are you supposed to try and fit all the player actions to those options or are those just offered for help?

They're just there for flavour, if you want them. It's a very important point - you shouldn't have to be a fencing master in order to play a fencing master. In no way is Amber Diceless structured such that the player with more experience in combat can bluff his way through combat better than the player who has none.

I'm very fond of Arref's "strategy of conflict" phrase - I think it hits the nail right on the head.

//Panjumanju

strategy: a plan of action or policy designed to achieve a major or overall aim.

The design of Attributes assumes the skill, pacing, talent, and experience of the ranking in the expertise.

Hence my comment that each Player Character already knows how to win (based on an Attribute they mastered as part of PC creation), and needs to apply tactics to influence the strategy of each conflict.

In rare cases, the tactics applied will not support the Attribute (for a role play reason, for instance), but the GM should give the Player help in reaching Attribute potential.

Gerard loses his temper, goes after Corwin (tunnel vision), gets punched out by a bystander. Debatable? But an example of where Gerard's player has decided that they are not going to win the fight they could have easily won. Bad tactics.

Brand immobilizes Benedict in Psyche battle that does not even appear to be a battle until it is too late. Good tactics that support the expertise of the PC.

Big picture: the hard won experience of your Attributes will always lead you to make the best choices in where to attack, when to make your move, how to get the best out of even overwhelming opposition. Big picture is strategy.

Tactics are the roleplay decisions you make to get the plan implemented. So you need to apply wits and planning to get your Strength aims laid out clearly. And then choose tactics that will make the plan happen. Pick the best location, bring a backup plan, don't let the other person have their favorite option.

One of the GM techniques I use is to assist the Strategy bits with the Player...so the PC looks ultra competent in their plan. Then let the Player run 90% of the choices in the moment without comment.

If things start to go wrong, the GM may toss additional choices into the mix based on that same Attribute ranking, and remind the Player of the Plan for winning.

so this is an actual combat using the Amber engine. Its set in my Fables game and happened at our last session

First I will sumamrise the protagonists

PCs
Tom
S:1st W:Mid E: Mid P:A   - Tom appears a regular human. He is immune to all fear effects and has increased resistance against psyche attacks

Takashi
S:Mid W:1st E:Low P:Low - Takashi is an Oni, an 8 foot tall Japanese Ogre. He can turn invisible at will and carries a deadly damage tetsubo and wears sandals that allow him to fly.

Jim
S:Mid W:Mid E:Mid P:Mid - Jim is a pig. He can shapeshift to any animal form of a similar size and usually appears as a plump little kid. He carries a straw that gives him engine speed, a stick that deals deadly damage and a brick that can make him invlunerable to normal weapons.

Kyuo
S:Low W:Low E:Mid P: 1st - Kyuo is a kitsune (fox spirit) he can change form between a fox and a human and can create scenic illusions which is to say ones that affect the background (you will see how this works)

Morty
A dragon who spent the entire combat over the road at Starbucks with a frothy latte.

NPCs
Snow White
S:A W:Mid E:High P: Low   - Snow is effectively incharge of Fabletown and carries a colt python with mercury tipped silver bullets

Griswold
S:High W: Mid E:1st P:A   - Griswold is a Troll (the one from under the bridge). He can shaprshift to a human form. He can regenerate injuries and has been given enhanced senses so he can see invisible creatures and see through illusions if he concentrates.

Princess Kaguya
S:A W:Low E:High P: Mid   - Kaguya appears as a 13 year old girl. On the spur of the moment in the previous session i gave her powers liek that of Armour in the X-Men, ie. she can create a force shell around herself like a suit of armour which takes on the appearance of a Japanese mythological creature or fable (which was why I thought of it).


Situation
Princess Kaguya is being stored inside a packing crate in a cell in the dungeons of Fabletown in New York. In fact the dungeons exist as extra-planar space under an appartment block. They appear just like medieval dungeon rooms with a low vaulted corridor, thick wooden doors etc.
Takashi and Kyuo have been orderd by Monkey, Great Sage Equal of Heaven (please use full name at all times) to retrieve the princess.
Snow white has ordered the princess kept in the crate in the cell because the crate prevents the People of the Capital of the Moon from sensing her location and sending an army to come and collect her. Tom, Griswold and Jim work for Snow.
Takashi and Kyuo formed a plan for Takashi to enter the complex invisible go down to the cell collect the princess bring her back up and then Kyuo would mask their exit using an illusion. Neither realised that Griswold the sleepy looking security guard who sits in the main lobby of the block is a) a Troll in disguise or b) has enhanced senses that can detect invisible creatures and see through illusions.
Takashi tried to sneak in, Griswold yelled for him to stop, triggered an alarm to snow and chased the Oni downstairs. The Oni was faster because of sandals of flying and so got to the cell door, smashed it and and dragged the girl out of the crate. Then Griswold catches up. Snow raised the other PCs and she and Tom head down to the cells. Jim stays at teh top ofd the stairs to warn of anyone else coming.

Now Amber doesn't use rounds but this will work better and make more sense if I write it up in that way.

1. Griswold tries to slash Takashi as he comes out of the cell. Takashi is 1st ranked in Warfare so blocks the blow easily catching he trolls arm and flinging him behind and into a wall. he follows up by smashing the trolls skull with his club. (in game terms Griswold has an advantage because he is initiating combat but Takashi is 1st rank in warfare so easily sees and counters the attack and lands a blow with a deadly damage club and strength roughtly equal to the troll. Takashi's invisibility has no effect)

2. Takashi pulls Princess Kaguya out of the cell and heads towards the surface. Snow and Tom come into the corridor. Princess Kaguya activates her armour. Griswold regnerates his injuries.

3. Takashi decides to charge Snow and Tom dragging Kaguya by one arm. Griswold however grabs her leg which effectively prevents Griswold from charging. (in game terms Griswold is better at combat and is stronger than the princess everything is in very close quarters and neither the troll or the Oni can actually stand up straight which hinders them. Griswold's Strength is able to stop Takashi)

4. Snow threatens everyone and fires her gun. No effect.

5. Takashi tries to turn and swing his club into Griswold. He hits so but looses his grip on the princess who is slammed into the wall and knocked out (her Psyche that powers her armour is not as high rank as Griswold's Stength). Takashi can't swing his weapon, its a 6 foot long club in a 7 foot high corridor so he jabs it into the trolls chest, crushing a few ribs and driving the troll backwards.
Tom charges down the corridor. He has seen the Oni using invisibility before so knows what is going on.

6. Upstairs Kyuo in fox form tries to sneak past Jim who smacks the fox with his stick, but quite gently.

7. Takashi turns to face Tom. Tom tries to grab the invisible ogre. Takashi smashes Tom in the face with his club.  (Tom is 1st rank in strength. takashi can't swing his club properly so its a smack in the face. Will mash some bones but as Tom is 1st rank in Strength he can take a huge amount of damage especially blunt force trauma) Griswold regenerates.

8. Kyuo begins a conversation with jim and tries to lock eyes and start a psyche battle but the little pig is too strong and gives the fox another warning smack with his stick breaking the possible link.

9. Takashi smacks Tom again trying to stave off any attempt to grab him with the club. Behind him Griswold digs 2 set sof massive claws into his back. (in game terms Takashi has warfare advantage but kinds of wastes it because he repeats the same attack this time with less force. The troll has sufficient warfare to land a solid blow as Takashi is engaged in combat and has his back facing the troll. Really here the player could have been smarter and kept their warfare advantage but they have kind of wasted it and now they find themselves in an enclosed space against 2 opponents. Tom and the troll are both trying to move the combat to hand to hand where strength will trump warfare. The Oni neds to try and resist this.)

10. Takashi pulls himself free of one of Griswolds claws. This however tears his right shoulder badly. He tries to pull Tom onto the invisible spines that grow out of his chest but lacks the strenght to move him at all and now he is in a grapple with Tom. tom's face is now the size of a pumkin becuaser of those blows but he has the endurance and strength to carry on and gets a good grip round Takashi's good arm and bodyand starts to squeeze. Griswold took damage from takashi ripping the claw out which he regenerates. (so due to some less than optimal player choices, the environment and the odds, Takashi has lost his warfare advantage he is now in a grapple with the 1st rank Strength and he has taken a major injury to boot. Tom has taken a major wound but now has the upper hand)

11. Kyou uses his illusion power and turns the lobby into a forest full of foxes staring back at Jim throught eh undergrowth. Using that advantage he slips past down the stairs and into the corridor extending the forest illusion as he goes.

12. Snow White is still shoulding for everyone to stop but is being ignored.

13. Takashi tries to use his sandals to fly forward lifting Tom up. However, the corridor is too low to get enough height so he has no leverage and Tom is not moving anywhere. Tom squeezes popping a couple of the Oni's ribs and flips him down onto the ground on his back. From here there is is nothing he can do so the Oni surrenders and turns visible before Tom squeezes the life out of him. Griswold regenerates and collects the princess.(its a strength battle now Takashi can't use his club and can't see a way to beat Tom)

14. Snow clicks back the hammer on the python and sticks it in the Oni's face demanding he tell her what is going on. (now here even if teh Oni wasn;t held down and injured the gun would go off before  Takashi could act. He might beat a human level wqarfare or even a chasoite here but not a low ranked amberite)

15. As things look to calm down the corridor is replaced with a shadowy forest where hundreds of fox eyes peer out of the shadows as the knot of combatants.        

 
End result.
Tom is badly injured but its blunt force trauma and he is rank 1 Str so he will survive it just looks like a truck drove into his face.
Takashi is injured and will have to heal those claws to his back. It was a bad place for him to fight. No room to move his club, and the fight quickly moved from Warfare to Strength because of the environment.
Princess Kaguya - knocked out because of a direct compare Strength to Psyche. This won't leave any injury and she will soon come round.
Morty - enjoyed the frothy latte but was unable to resist a cookie and now feels guilty about it.