Trump Invulnerability Discussion

[Erick Wujcik]

I ended up responding to a thread over on rpg.net - "Most Audacious Rules Lawyering" - and the post might be worth a discussion over here.

The Amber Diceless RPG suffers from a few oddities where Erick Wujcik made some bizarre statements of fact about the Amber universe, one of these being that Trump cards are indestructable (in spite of the fact that a key plot point in one book involves a card being pierced by a dagger).

Since this seems to have spawned a fair number of responses, I'll start by directly quoting from Amber Diceless Role-Playing, page 50:

   A Trump, once created, is a special artifact. Once filled with the power of the Trump, a card becomes invulnerable to any conventional forces. Likewise, Trump are immune to Logrus Tendrils... and the power of the Pattern. Trump sketches, on the other hand, have no particular innate power, and are ony as durable as their paper medium.

The key phrase here is "filled with the power of the Trump," which one could take as meaning 'once the Trump is created,' but which I always thought meant 'when someone is activating the card and successfully evoking the power fo the Trump.'

As is the case throughout Amber Diceless there is no big, bold "rule" mandating TRUMP INVULNERABILITY. Instead, there is a description, open to interpretation, meant to be flexible enough for Game Masters attempting, each in their own way, to bring life to their own unique version of Amber.

As for the key plot point, where a card is found pierced by a dagger:

First, we are told that the stabbing took place while the Trump was activated, so it's entirely possible that the Trump became a gateway, and that the dagger ended up 'piercing' the Trump as the card was shut down.

Second, Trumps are meant as primal associations with their subjects, so it is possible that the damage done to the character depicted made the Trump uniquely vulnerable.

Third, from the way Corwin and Random react when finding their dagger-pierced Trump, it seems to be an unusual event. Given that these guys have been carrying decks of 'stained pasteboard' for hundreds of years, through very nasty environments, with pretty heavy use (at least some of them seem to cast fortunes the way normal folks play solitaire... and I've burned through ordinary decks in less than two years) without all that much in the way of care or protection, and it's clear that the default assumption is that the Trump are, if not invulnerable, considerably more durable that normal cards.

I'm sure that I have made the occasional "bizarre statements of fact about the Amber universe" but when it comes to Trump, I feel fairly confident that I'm reflecting Zelazny appropriately.

Thanks!

Erick

Erick Wujcik
Phage Press

[finarvyn]

How about this: when the dagger is removed from the Trump, is it possible that the gash would "heal itself" and go away? In other words, it might be possible to inflict short-term changes but have a long-term repair system.

Kind of like Corwin's eyes...

[PhishStyx]

Although I would not be very likely to give the Trumps the equivalent of armor-plate level protection, I agree that they definitely seem tougher than normal playing cards.

I would rather suggest that the card was able to be pierced because the subject of the card (Martin) was being pierced by the same dagger at the same time because it wasn't just a physical pinning of the card to the ground. That event directly connected Martin via Trump energy to the Pattern in a metaphysical scheme that created a devastating feedback loop.

Just a thought.

[Otha]

I think there's a difference between "reflecting Zelazny appropriately" and "being right".

I personally find the quoted passage problematic.  It's subject to differing interpretations, some of which can be the inspiration for strange PC behavior or player/GM misunderstandings.  

Personally, I think Corwin and Random understood the implication of the pierced trump.  It gave them all the information they needed to figure out what had happened.  That means that they understood that in order to get damaged that way, it was in use at the time.  Trumps don't have to be invulnerable for that scene to have its proper meaning, there are other ways to read that scene.

Am I "right" about this?  No.  I don't claim that.  All I'm saying is that the "Trump Invulnerability" meme is occasionally damaging to Amber play, and doesn't need to be retained in order to conform to canon.

[Otha]

Oh, and another question that comes up...

Why is the darn thing still there?  Why didn't Brand clean up after himself?

One possible interpretation is that the dagger was stuck, having been in between when the trump connection closed, and Brand had no quick way to disentangle it, or to hide it on his person.  Not wanting to be seen in Amber carrying it, he left it behind.  He figured that by the time anyone discovered it there, it would be too late for anyone to do anything about his plan.

[Trevelyan]

You'll have to excuse the thread necromancy, but I've only just discovered this forum and I'm trawling through and looking for threads of particular interest to comment on when this one caught my eye.

Before I start, I ought to make a couple of things very clear: I am Mozart from the original RPGnet post quoted above. I'm also a big fan of Erick's work (TMNT was my first RPG and ADRPG is one of my favourite), but that doesn't mean that I always (or even often!) agree with him. With that in mind, any criticism is well intentioned, and Erick's feedback is particularly appreciated.

I honestly see no support for the claim that Trump are in any way more physically robust than any other piece of painted pasteboard. Let's look at the arguments:

it's entirely possible that the Trump became a gateway, and that the dagger ended up 'piercing' the Trump as the card was shut down

I agree that this is entirely possible, but this explanation starts with the assumption that Trump are invulnerable and then makes further assumptions to justify that original claim in light of evidence to the contrary. It amounts to saying that "Trump are invulnerable to any conventional force as can be seen by the  lack of damage to Trump caused except under circumstances arising on the one canon occasion when conventional force was directed at a Trump". It reminds me of the Invisible Boy in the Mystery Men film - he could turn invisible only when no one, including himself, was watching (actually he could, but the initial disbelief of the other characters to his claims highlights my point).

Trumps are meant as primal associations with their subjects, so it is possible that the damage done to the character depicted made the Trump uniquely vulnerable.

Again this is possible, but it starts with the assumption that Trump are invulnerable and then tries to explain how this obvious exception occurred. On what basis is the initial assumption made?

from the way Corwin and Random react when finding their dagger-pierced Trump, it seems to be an unusual event

I'm with Otha on this one. Picture the scene; Corwin, Random and Oberon-as-Ganelon have just been led by the Unicorn through strange twisted shadows while in the supposedly immutable centre of everything to a what they realise to be the damaged original Pattern (that in Amber being only a copy), where the brothers (actually Oberon-as-Ganelon) find a damaged Trump of an unknown relative. A damaged Trump is certainly one potential cause for surprise, but it's hardly the only option. It's a leap of faith to base the "invulnerable Trump" claim on that evidence.

Given that these guys have been carrying decks of 'stained pasteboard' for hundreds of years, through very nasty environments, with pretty heavy use (at least some of them seem to cast fortunes the way normal folks play solitaire...

This is one idea that I hadn't originally considered. After mulling it over I must say that I'm still far from convinced.

For a start, most Amberites seem to keep their Trump very safe. Benedict, for example, stores his in a wooden (padded?) case. Fiona stores hers in a secret compartment, albeit in what we may assume to be a fairly normal box.

We also know for a fact that some packs have been lost and/or destroyed. Corwin speculates on the number of packs that have been distributed over the years - each family member having a pack or two, occasionally loosing them and picking up a new pack form the library. Amberites carry Trump around for hundreds of years, but are these their original packs or do they in fact pick up a replacement when the old packs die?

Perhaps Trump are pretty durable, but it's a pretty big jump from saying that Trump are more durable than normal cards to claiming that "Once filled with the power of the Trump, a card becomes invulnerable to any conventional forces."

I suppose I'm really wondering where the initial basis for the claim comes from. Merlin's Logrus encounter with Jasra's Trump of Luke doesn't suffice - Logrus is hardly a "conventional force", nor does the incident demonstrate any particular invulnerability. Trump are described as being glassy and cool to the touch, but neither of those necessitates or even implies invulnerability, and if they did then surely the invulnerability would apply at all times and not only when in use.

So given that Erick's points make sense if we assume invulnerable Trump and need an work around for the specific case of Martin's damaged Trump, can anyone explain why we should make the initial assumption that a piece of painted card is invulnerable?

[RPGPundit]

Please feel free to necro any thread you find on this forum, and start new ones too, of course.  And tell your friends (esp. amber fans) about this forum; I'd love for it to have more traffic than it does right now.

RPGPundit

[olivier legrand]

And tell your friends (esp. amber fans) about this forum; I'd love for it to have more traffic than it does right now.

RPGPundit

So you actually want people to express their views here ?  I can't believe it.

I thought that all you were really interested in was to bully them around and lash out at them every time they express an opinion other than yours. As far as I'm concerned, I know that's why I've stopped discussing Amber here – because your constant aggression and gratuitous sarcasm made any « discussion » impossible. And I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one who made this choice.

I remember how delighted I was when I first heard that Amber Diceless had an official fanforum here. But I quickly found out that this forum was not really about Amber – it was about your personal views of the game and how people who happened not to agree with you were morons, Swine or whatever you care to call them.

And don't talk to me about « free speech » here. Your attitude is precisely what prevents free speech here.

I'm sure I'll be insulted or flamed down for having written this – feel free to do so, it will only confirm what I'm saying.

I must say I'm quite impatient to see the Diceless by Design forums opened ; perhaps we will really be able to talk about the game we love there.

[RPGPundit]

Its my hope that Erick will convince the guys at Diceless By Design to use these forums as their forums for the design of the new game, especially given that this is already the Official Amber RPG forum.

As for free speech, anyone who is here to talk about Amber in good faith, and not to figure out cheap shots to try to attack the game as it is because what you really want is for the game to be changed beyond recognition, will have no problem whatsoever.

RPGPundit

[olivier legrand]

IAs for free speech, anyone who is here to talk about Amber in good faith, and not to figure out cheap shots to try to attack the game as it is because what you really want is for the game to be changed beyond recognition, will have no problem whatsoever.

RPGPundit

I don't see how this really applies to my previous posts - or to several other persons' posts which provoked your own cheap sarcastic snide remarks - if you want a recent example, just take the thread on "secret notes" where you just couldn't resist jumping at other peoples' throats when you did not agree with their views.

I fail to see how talking about this rule variant or that interpretation of the game (or saying, for instance, that you don't use meta-thinking in your campaign) constitutes a "cheap shot" at "changing the game beyond recognition". If the game is so perfect (and I do think it is one of the most interesting RPGs ever created) that ANY discussion of alternate rules, setting or procedure constitues some kind of "heresy", then WHY bother having a discussion forum at all ?

And as for your "good faith" argument, well... maybe my command of the english language is not perfect but for me "speaking in good faith" means "speaking without any hidden intent". As far as I could tell, my posts (and those of other persons who have had the displeasure to see their "good faith" questions and interventions killed off by your loud-mouthed hooligan attitude) were always written in "good faith".

On the other hand, given the kind of reasonings you seem to be prone to, I guess that, to you, "good faith" is just one of these little pet concepts of yours - you only know what it truly means and so you are the only one who can judge what is "good faith"... as opposed to what ? "bad faith" ?  What is this ??  The Amber Inquisition ? This is just ridiculous.

As long as you will put on this pathetic "overbearing bully" act, well, I guess many people who would have enjoyed discussing the game here will simply not bother to do so. In case you haven't noticed, YOU regularly kill down threads you have started yourself by burying other posters under your cheap sarcasms and your "definitive comments".

You have the right to behave as you like on this forum - this is, after all, your territory.

But then don't be surprised if people walk away from the whole thing, bored and sickened by your attitude.

[RPGPundit]

You know, I know that you wrote words up there, but try as I might all I see is WAH WAH WAH WAHhhhhhh.

RPGPundit

[olivier legrand]

You know, I know that you wrote words up there, but try as I might all I see is WAH WAH WAH WAHhhhhhh.

RPGPundit

Now, that's argumentation.

By the way, this kind of answer illustrates exactly what I was talking about.

You're simply behaving like a pathetic school bully.

So all right, consider me a pathetic crybaby if you wish, I couldn't care less about your opinion.

But again, don't be surprised if this forum doesn't see that many posters - which was the sole point I was trying to make.

I think I'll stop here because trying to argue with you is utterly pointless.

[Khazav]

So to add to this conversation about the trump powers a mere 13 years later.....

The books mention the stabbed card as 'smacking of a ritual' or something like that so maybe the ability to pierce the card had something to do with mixing sorcery and trump powers or sorcery+Trump+Pattern. I imagine it as needing Advanced Trump mixed with sorcery.

A greater problem seems to be the 4 point 'powered by trump' for items. What does that really mean? Especially when trump can, as said before, cancel or break the other powers? Would a trump powered sword destroy all sorcery spells, cut through Logrus tendrils? Would the touch of a trump powered item remove all High Compelling on a character? This does seem to make Trump the real trump card in the game.

[zircher]

Possibly, but the problem with trump powered items is that they are extremely narrow in focus.  A single person or maybe a location but still a fixed position and not the object being viewed itself.  So, if you want to make of Sword of Eric Slaying, I could see that potentially working (but you might also have to defeat their Psyche in order to bind it to/against them.)

[Khazav]

I'm not sure about reading it like that. Usually the 4 point powers contain all the benefits of the 2 and 1 point buys. The lower purchases have cards and decks in them but the 4 point says 'filled with trump power'. Which seems to be beyond any individual image. How about this: What makes spending 4 points on an item worth it compared to 2 points? For most other items the advantage is explained well enough but I can't understand how it is supposed to work with the trumps.