Lords of Gossamer vs. Amber Diceless

[Panjumanju]

I finally got a chance to sit down with my copy of Lords of Gossamer & Shadow from their resent kickstarter. I'm about to start a campaign of Amber Diceless and I was looking for ideas. This started off as a kind of review for LoGs, but it turned into a - perhaps inevitable - comparison between it and Amber Diceless roleplaying by Erick Wujcik.

At first I was disappointed that LoG&S's setting was so similar to Amber - I was looking for something a little new and different with the Diceless engine, otherwise I could just be playing Amber. However, I feel that Jason Durall has done the impossible task of trying to put the old rules back into print in a way that least alters them just enough, and trying to create new powers that capture the feel of Amber without the setting of Zelazny. I would not have thought this possible, but - if that's what you want, know that LoG&S is mission accomplished.

Points in LoG&S's favour:

Warden of the Grand stair is a well thought-out addition, solving the "problem" of Amber's walking through shadow ability being restricted by faction and birthright.

Invocation is just a stand-out better power than High Compelling from the Shadow Knight supplement of Amber Diecless. Its like High Compelling was rushed, and Invocation was what happened when the power had the opportunity to be properly play-tested and edited. I look forward to using Invocation in my Amber Diceless games.

When reading Lords of Gossamer & Shadow I was struck by how reconcilable its content is with that of Amber Diceless. You could well mix and match powers between the games.

Perhaps most importantly, if you found Zelazny's setting too intimidating - and that is what has prevented you from getting into Amber Diceless Roleplaying, the setting of LoGaS is considerably more digestible and straight-forward.

However, it's also not as colourful - in a story sense. The book itself is very colourful. I liked all the purple in the layout. It's nice to see a colour theme. The art is also stupid-gorgeous, and evocative enough in its own right for me to want an icon deck - even if I never run Lords of Gossamer & Shadow itself, just to compliment by Amber games. And I suppose that's part of the problem, but, more on that at the end…

Strikes against LoG&S's, in my books:

There is no family aspect. PCs have in some way found the grand stairs, which makes for interesting individual back-stories but does nothing to tie the characters together. One of the strengths of Amber Diceless is that you are part of a family - sometimes a family you want to weed, but a family.

Also, I was just a little irritated they didn't include shape-shifting.

The sense of place as written in the LoG&S core book is weak. The grand stair itself is well-structured as a location, but really all the 'action' happens in the Gossamer worlds. One of the strengths of Amber Diceless was well-defined locations, evocative of feeling - Castle Amber, Rebma, Tir Na Nog, the Courts of Chaos - and to a lesser extend, Undershadow. In Lords of Gossomer & Shadow there is really only one location - the stairs...oh, and there's some stuff on the stairs. There's a maze somewhere. And a bazaar. A library or something. Other than that there's the doors with an infinite number of worlds behind them. Honestly, the stairs just don't seem that exciting to me - the image on the cover is more evocative of the imaginative potential of the stairs than anything written inside the book. Perhaps supplemental material will flesh this out.

Summation:

It is unfair of me to want the setting of LoG&S to have the complexity and interest in the same chops as a Hugo and Nebula award winning science fiction and fantasy novel series. However, being freed from the tyranny of a license is probably the only thing that will allow LoG&S (and the Diceless engine as a whole) to grow. Lisenced RPG products rarely last long, and we want to keep this thing going, as a fan community, then it must have its own setting.

I think Lords of Gossamer & Shadow is the best it possibly could be, and if I were to set them side by side with Amber Diceless - assuming you know nothing of either product - then I think they're fairly comparable, which is a huge compliment.

However, at the end of the day, the sum of it is - there just isn't enough in LoG&S for me to want to run it instead of running an Amber Diceless game. I'll use LoG&S for is supplemental material for my Amber games, bring in Invocation and maybe even the stairs themselves, and I look forward to getting an Icon Deck so that I can use these characters in Amber. I will probably buy supplemental material for LoG&S…but what I'll be playing will be Amber, which I'm a little sad about. I wanted Lords of Gossamer & Shadow to have its own identity, to feel like its own game, but - in my opinion - it's too close to Amber for me to use it as anything but a toolkit.

//Panjumanju

[mAcular Chaotic]

Are the rules fleshed out in more depth than Amber?

Also on a tangent, I keep seeing Amber refered to as "that diceless game" as if it was taboo or something in the LoO threads. Is there a reason for that?

[Panjumanju]

Are the rules fleshed out in more depth than Amber?

The rules are the same. There are no *more* or *deeper* rules in LoG&S than there are in Amber Diceless. There is no chart explaining relative Strength comparisons, for instance. LoG&S has the exact same rules as Amber, they're explained a little better, and more labouriously. They seem written in a way intended for someone who is not familiar with the system, which is a good thing for new players, and easily skipped over for people who already know the rules.

From what I've heard Lords of Olympus did an even better job explaining the rules, and that's all I'd want, really. I'm of the opinion that Amber does not need more rules because that would detract from it's depth, but novices rightly point out that the system can be mind-boggling to learn.

Then again, so is Go.

Also on a tangent, I keep seeing Amber refered to as "that diceless game" as if it was taboo or something in the LoO threads. Is there a reason for that?

I'm afraid it's as simple as the fact that some people think it's not a real roleplaying game if it doesn't have dice.

//Panjumanju

[RPGPundit]

Yes, you should probably check out Lords of Olympus. Not to disparage LoGaS at all, but the specific issues you bring up (i.e., that the game is just too much like Amber, that there's no family aspect, that the rules could be explained/defined a bit more) are all things that LoO deals with.

RPGPundit

[mAcular Chaotic]

I'm afraid it's as simple as the fact that some people think it's not a real roleplaying game if it doesn't have dice.

//Panjumanju

But it was the RPGPundit himself saying it. Also surely most of the people here are here because they enjoy Amber Diceless. I just figured it was a copyright thing or something.

The real hard part with Amber and other diceless games so far is how heavy they are on GM judgment. They aren't purely GM fiat but that's what it feels like sometimes. It feels like you have to cobble together an entire system of morality from scratch.

Then again I have no problem with using my judgment. It's just that in a game that encourages competition, the natural instinct is to rely more on the system because it is more impartial and less likely to result in hard feelings when something goes wrong for someone. But then the rules themselves don't have enough direction for that.

Games like Paranoia are just as heavy on GM judgment, but since the entire point of the game there is to screw over the players, you don't need to worry about any semblance of balance or fairness. Everybody goes into it already expecting a horror movie.

[noman]

This past year of so has felt like Christmas to me.  LoG&S and LoO, both excellent games, come into being and further the brilliance that was ADRP.  I've bought them both, played them both, and am running them both.  I feel like a kid in a candy store.

It's the same engine, but both authors do a superb job of clarifying and explaining the rules.  IMO, Jason and Pundit did a very good job of rewriting the engine rules in such a way as to become far more clear and balanced.  Sure, it's essentially the same rules as ADRP, but the presentation makes a huge difference.  Wujcik's engine is rule's light, to say the least, and I'm glad LoG&S dosen't go into too much detail into nuts and bolts such as attributes, etc.  I like to tinker and tailor to my taste.

Leaving LoO aside for a moment, I really like LoG&S' setting.  It's outlined in the main rulebook, but Rite Publishing has been putting out supplements like crazy that fill out the setting very well.  No, it can't compete with Amber's setting, because they're competing with ten novels and two, large, well written rulebooks.  But it shouldn't have to.  I just picked up Lucian's Black Files, and about freaked out it gave me so many nasty ideas for my campaigns.

I have a habit of looking at LoO and LoG&S through the filter of ADRP.  I'm trying very hard to stop doing that.  Both games can and should stand on their own merit, beyond the long shadow cast by ADRP.  As excited as I am about these two games, what really excites me is the idea of new players, who never played Amber, running and playing Wujcik's system for the first time in a different form.  I think that's awesome.

I prefer LoG&S's setting to Amber's.  I really like the sandbox nature of LoG&S.  I like the fact that there are no hard coded points of reality in the game such as Amber, the Courts, of Chaos, etc.  I like the fact that in LoG&S, all roads - plots - don't lead to Amber.  No family of functional sociopaths all up in your shit.  I can season my games with whatever amount of Machiavellian politicking I desire without it being hard-coded into the system.

A few other random observations.

Pound per pound a Lord of Gossamer is a lot less powerful than an Amberite.  Partly due to the LoG&S powers, but also due to the setting.  For example, Pattern Imprint and Logrus Mastery are much stronger, IMO than Eidolon or Umbra mastery.  Also, the setting makes troop movements a lot more interesting.  An Amberite can raise an army, or a fleet of ships, or whatever, and lead that Army of Doom to wherever you want.  Not so easy in LoG&S.  You can do the same thing, raise an army, but you better be able to get your troops through a door.  Then, you've got deal with the strategic and logistical nightmare of leading a force of arms through a giant, cosmic staircase.

In Amber, you walk through Shadow.  In Gossamer, you take the stairs.

But this difference in power is a good thing.  The Amber setting wasn't created to be used for a RPG.  The Amber rules were designed around Zelazny's work.  This was sometimes problematic when you try to make it work for a game.  It wasn't that the rules or setting was broken, it's just two separate languages trying to talk to each other, and sometimes they don't translate well.  LoG&S' setting was designed as a gaming setting.  This is a big deal with you actually sit down to play it.

I've found that I have less BS to deal with at my gaming table because of this differnce.  No fast or slow time shadows.  No armies of adamantium-clad dragons invading Avalon (can't get those damn things through the door).  The powers are designed so that characters depend on the Stair to travel worlds, and that's a good thing.  It goes from being a mechanic from getting from point A to B to being it's own setting for adventure and adventure hooks.

You don't need everybody to be family to get everybody together and give them purpose.

Shapeshifting is handled by Umbra Mastery.  Rite Publishing is working on a shapeshifting supplement.

The only real complaint I have is this:  I want advanced versions of the powers, as many, including Eidolon and Umbra, don't have any listed in the main rules.  There are few examples of advanced powers given with some of the NPCs, but those examples are insufficient.  I'd like to see a large supplement that deals with variant rules, further explanations of the powers, and SORCERY VARIANT RULES.  That being said, Rite has added a lot of content in the form of new powers, new factions, and setting fluff.  I've been nothing but pleased with what they've done so far.

However, at the end of the day, the sum of it is - there just isn't enough in LoG&S for me to want to run it instead of running an Amber Diceless game. I'll use LoG&S for is supplemental material for my Amber games, bring in Invocation and maybe even the stairs themselves, and I look forward to getting an Icon Deck so that I can use these characters in Amber. I will probably buy supplemental material for LoG&S…but what I'll be playing will be Amber, which I'm a little sad about. I wanted Lords of Gossamer & Shadow to have its own identity, to feel like its own game, but - in my opinion - it's too close to Amber for me to use it as anything but a toolkit.

I respect your assessment and opinion, but I've come to the opposite decision.  I'm using LoO an LoG&S, and using ADRP as supplemental material in the rare instances I need it.

ADRP will always hold a place of honor in my heart and on my gaming bookshelf, but I've been playing that setting for twenty years.  There's only so many permutations I can come up with, and there comes a time to let a good soldier retire in peace.

[Panjumanju]

Yes, you should probably check out Lords of Olympus.

I really do want to, I'm just waiting for the appropriate funds to fall into my hands.

But it was the RPGPundit himself saying it.

Then I'm really not sure what he was on about. A term of endearment?

The real hard part with Amber and other diceless games so far is how heavy they are on GM judgment.

You're absolutely right, and to me that is the best part and the worst part about Amber. The GM has to be on the ball, and the players have to be mature. When it's all happening it's smoother and more brilliant than any other roleplaying game I've run or played. But, if the GM tries to phone it in, or a player is feeling touchy, there isn't anything in the system to fall back on. I don't see how there could be, and still have it achieve what it achieves when it's running well. I think it's a worthy trade off, but that very thing makes Amber and its variants a hard sell to neophytes. But, I'm sure I'm preaching to the choir.

I have a habit of looking at LoO and LoG&S through the filter of ADRP.  I'm trying very hard to stop doing that. [...] Both games can and should stand on their own merit, beyond the long shadow cast by ADRP.  [...]I respect your assessment and opinion, but I've come to the opposite decision.  I'm using LoO an LoG&S, and using ADRP as supplemental material in the rare instances I need it.

I too am trying to stop looking at these new Diceless marvels through the lens of Amber, because - well, Amber is never coming back as a current publishing entity. If the system is going to survive it's going to be through new games. The only way that's going to happen is these new games have enough merit on their own to win over new players, and convert old ones. I'm gladdened that you feel Lords of Gossamer & Shadow can take centre stage.

My criticisms aside I fully intend to support the product going forward. Hopefully Rite will have a lot in store for the product in the future, enough to overwhelm my resistance.

//Panjumanju

[jibbajibba]

Because the ruels are the same its why I can't see the benefit of old Amber hands buying either product to be honest (No offense to either author) .

You can take the diceless engine and apply it to any setting you can think of and move the settings powers in really easily.

I am doing it now with fables and we have done it before with Star Wars an all sorts of other system.

so process think of a suitable setting define the powers and good to go.

I could see a diceless superhero game working really well - if you went down a ultimates/dark avengers trust no one kind of background. Any mythology, any political setting.

the engine is so simple its a doddle to knock this stuff up.

[mAcular Chaotic]

Well, it's not like every Diceless game has to use the Amber system as a base.

[noman]

Because the ruels are the same its why I can't see the benefit of old Amber hands buying either product to be honest (No offense to either author) .

The rules are far better written and presented in LoO and LoG&S than they are in ADRP.  I'm sorry, but the ADRP rules are a hot mess that send my nerd OCD into overdrive.  The formatting, presentation, and rules modifications made by Amber's successors are much easier to read and understand.  Even if I'm running a game in the Amber setting, I reference all the mechanics from LoG&S and LoO.  Just makes things easier for me

The LoG&S and LoO settings are awesome.  And they're specifically designed for the game engine.  If I want a setting based on Greek Mythology, it's done for me.  If I want an original fantasy, sandbox setting, it's done for me.  No need to port, modify, or reengineer the rules for a setting.  If you're running Amber, you've got some great supplements full of ideas and setting material.

I want to support Pundit and Rite for recreating Wujcik's system.  For me, it's not just a matter of if it's cool, if I'll use it, or whatever.  It's an obligation.  Wujcik is gone.  There is never going to be a continuation of the ADRP line.  No other supplements.  No Rebma rulebook.  Nothing.  All we can do is fill in the blanks ourselves as GMs, trying feebly to patch the holes left in Zelazny's world.  LoG&S and LoO are carrying a torch forward that was first lit and carried by Wujcik himself before he left us.  Now, others have picked that torch up and are trying to carry it further.  Considering the years of enjoyment I've gotten from ADRP, the least I can do is support its successors.

You can take the diceless engine and apply it to any setting you can think of and move the settings powers in really easily.

Yes you can, and I don't have a problem with this; it's a great idea.  I'm not harshing on you Jibba, I respect your POV.  I just have a different one

Well, it's not like every Diceless game has to use the Amber system as a base.

This.

It's never mentioned, but I really like Active Exploits, as well as the whole Genrediversion line.

I use ADRP and related for what it was meant for; high level, godlike, fantasy role-playing.  I use AE for everything else if I want a diceless mechanic.  It works well with almost every setting, but tends to break at very high-power levels.

As far as people being put off by diceless a diceless mechanic, i'll post the following quote from RPG.net

My first thought is to quote some relevant wisdom from Knights Of The Dinner Table.

"No dice?! You're meddling with forces you can't possibly understand!"

My only real advice, as someone who is more or less philosophically opposed to diceless gaming, is to make sure all your players know what they're getting into and how everything works. It can be a bit of a mental leap for some people. It certainly was for me. I had good GMs the few times I've tried diceless, though, and enjoyed it quite a bit. Just like I've enjoyed sushi when I tried it, but am still not crazy about the idea. Fire and dice were invented for good reasons, dammit.

As a rule, I try really hard not to engage in RPG snobbery.  But this kind of thing tests me.

"...make sure all your players know what they're getting into.."  It's a diceless RPG, not a fucking loan shark.

ADRP has been around since the 90's, and there are still folks who shudder at the idea of not having a physical randomizer.  "You can have my dice when you take them from my cold, dead hands!"

Don't get me wrong, I love dice.  Dice are fun.  But I don't define myself philosophically by them.  I'm not even sure how one could do that.

My point is this.  Diceless RPGs are a niche market within a niche market, and I suspect many of the folks who refused to give diceless a try for the last twenty damn years are going to turn their noses up at LoG&S and LoO.  A lot of old ADRP gamers like me will buy the new books, either to run as games or to use as supplements for the Amber setting.  Others will see no value in the new games and continue to run and play ADRP as is.  And that's all fine.  Different strokes for differnt folks, and all that.

I think where LoO and LoG&S will shine is with new players who never tried ADRP.  The younger whippersnappers who came into the hobby in the late 90's and early 2000's and later.  Just a guess anyway.

[mAcular Chaotic]

The benefit of a fresh system is that it does all the work for you. Sure, you could modify ADRP any way you like, but that requires tons of mental effort, testing, and all sorts of judgment calls. It's much easier to have it already all done for you ahead of time so you can focus on playing.

[Vargold]

I think where LoO and LoG&S will shine is with new players who never tried ADRP.  The younger whippersnappers who came into the hobby in the late 90's and early 2000's and later.  Just a guess anyway.

Not to mention some of us who've been gaming since Holmes Basic and chits who didn't happen to be fans of the Amber books . . .

[jibbajibba]

The rules are far better written and presented in LoO and LoG&S than they are in ADRP.  I'm sorry, but the ADRP rules are a hot mess that send my nerd OCD into overdrive.  The formatting, presentation, and rules modifications made by Amber's successors are much easier to read and understand.  Even if I'm running a game in the Amber setting, I reference all the mechanics from LoG&S and LoO.  Just makes things easier for me

The LoG&S and LoO settings are awesome.  And they're specifically designed for the game engine.  If I want a setting based on Greek Mythology, it's done for me.  If I want an original fantasy, sandbox setting, it's done for me.  No need to port, modify, or reengineer the rules for a setting.  If you're running Amber, you've got some great supplements full of ideas and setting material.

I want to support Pundit and Rite for recreating Wujcik's system.  For me, it's not just a matter of if it's cool, if I'll use it, or whatever.  It's an obligation.  Wujcik is gone.  There is never going to be a continuation of the ADRP line.  No other supplements.  No Rebma rulebook.  Nothing.  All we can do is fill in the blanks ourselves as GMs, trying feebly to patch the holes left in Zelazny's world.  LoG&S and LoO are carrying a torch forward that was first lit and carried by Wujcik himself before he left us.  Now, others have picked that torch up and are trying to carry it further.  Considering the years of enjoyment I've gotten from ADRP, the least I can do is support its successors.



Yes you can, and I don't have a problem with this; it's a great idea.  I'm not harshing on you Jibba, I respect your POV.  I just have a different one



This.

It's never mentioned, but I really like Active Exploits, as well as the whole Genrediversion line.

I use ADRP and related for what it was meant for; high level, godlike, fantasy role-playing.  I use AE for everything else if I want a diceless mechanic.  It works well with almost every setting, but tends to break at very high-power levels.

As far as people being put off by diceless a diceless mechanic, i'll post the following quote from RPG.net



As a rule, I try really hard not to engage in RPG snobbery.  But this kind of thing tests me.

"...make sure all your players know what they're getting into.."  It's a diceless RPG, not a fucking loan shark.

ADRP has been around since the 90's, and there are still folks who shudder at the idea of not having a physical randomizer.  "You can have my dice when you take them from my cold, dead hands!"

Don't get me wrong, I love dice.  Dice are fun.  But I don't define myself philosophically by them.  I'm not even sure how one could do that.

My point is this.  Diceless RPGs are a niche market within a niche market, and I suspect many of the folks who refused to give diceless a try for the last twenty damn years are going to turn their noses up at LoG&S and LoO.  A lot of old ADRP gamers like me will buy the new books, either to run as games or to use as supplements for the Amber setting.  Others will see no value in the new games and continue to run and play ADRP as is.  And that's all fine.  Different strokes for differnt folks, and all that.

I think where LoO and LoG&S will shine is with new players who never tried ADRP.  The younger whippersnappers who came into the hobby in the late 90's and early 2000's and later.  Just a guess anyway.

All fair comments. As I noted I was really referring to old Amber fans. The dozen or so of us left have developed our own variants. I totally agree for new players both books are great and props to LoGS for creating a new setting. I guess I could see these as setting books for Amber but that isn't an option with the license.

[mAcular Chaotic]

Not to mention some of us who've been gaming since Holmes Basic and chits who didn't happen to be fans of the Amber books . . .

Oh man. I'd heard such things about Corwin being a bastard that when I read the book I absolutely hated him. Then somehow as the pages turned I found myself rooting for him.

[RPGPundit]

Because the ruels are the same its why I can't see the benefit of old Amber hands buying either product to be honest (No offense to either author) .

Sure, you could; but in LoO, for example, an ENORMOUS amount of legwork has been done to provide a completely original setting. The vast bulk of the book is material to support the LoO setting (which has nothing at all to do with Zelazny's Amber setting).  Its been pointed out that its probably the most complete "greek mythology" sourcebook ever done for an RPG.

RPGPundit