This is a site for discussing roleplaying games. Have fun doing so, but there is one major rule: do not discuss political issues that aren't directly and uniquely related to the subject of the thread and about gaming. While this site is dedicated to free speech, the following will not be tolerated: devolving a thread into unrelated political discussion, sockpuppeting (using multiple and/or bogus accounts), disrupting topics without contributing to them, and posting images that could get someone fired in the workplace (an external link is OK, but clearly mark it as Not Safe For Work, or NSFW). If you receive a warning, please take it seriously and either move on to another topic or steer the discussion back to its original RPG-related theme.

Author Topic: Multiple foes  (Read 4344 times)

finarvyn

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1646
Multiple foes
« Reply #45 on: December 17, 2006, 10:32:55 AM »
Quote from: Otha
So you don't run an auction?

To reinforce what JohnB said, if you look in the rulebook it details a simple process for attribute creation.

1. Players begin the auction by submitting a secret bid so that no one can shout a high bid really fast and screw the rest.

2. The auction begins with the highest of the secret bids and goes as high as the players allow. Each point bid is spent and establishes a "ladder" or price guide for the ranks. This represents the last time that anyone knows for certain anyone else's attributes.

3. Players have the opportunity to improve in secret again, but paying for a particular rank puts them just below that rank. At this point players know their own attributes, but no longer know anyone else's.

4. Players make "wish lists" of what they want to improve with experience. This list may include powers, items, allies, and even attributes. The GM awards experience points in secret so from this point on, if the player includes attributes on the wish list, the player no longer even knows his own attributes.

This makes it hard to calculate. Aside from this, no one but the GM knows the attributes for NPCs so it becomes even harder....
Marv / Finarvyn
Kingmaker of Amber
I'm pretty much responsible for the S&W WB rules.
Amber Diceless Player since 1993
OD&D Player since 1975

Otha

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • O
  • Posts: 365
Multiple foes
« Reply #46 on: December 18, 2006, 06:19:44 AM »
It hasn't been hard to calculate in any game I've seen.

The ladder-points are public knowledge, as are the number of points left for any player to spend after the auction is over.  Whether or not someone has pattern, etc. is usually evident after the first session or so and so you can easily put an upper bound on their score, and a lower bound.  Yes, there's a LITTLE uncertainty, but if the players have made bids the way the game wants them to (that is, high) it's usually not much.
 

JohnB

  • Newbie
  • *
  • J
  • Posts: 43
Multiple foes
« Reply #47 on: December 18, 2006, 12:29:11 PM »
*Some* of the rungs are public knowledge, at least at the beginning. However, in a secret bid there could be multiple rungs between each round of the auction that are *not* visible to everyone.

For example on the third to last round, the high bid was 15. The GM announces the new high bid of 15 and asks for new sealed bids. Player A (with 15) decides to stay pat at 15. Player B decides he wants to up the ante and bids 40, Player C also decides to up the ante and bids 32, and finally player D bids 25. The new high bid is announced at 40 and new bids are collected. Nobody can beat 40, so the final bids stand as they were until the last secret buy up. Now each player knows his own bid, the high bid of 40, and what each previous high bid was (15) for rungs. That is all they know, or can figure out for sure unless they save points to buy up a rung in secret at the end (which nets them knowledge of at most one more rung). Note that between 40 and 15 there are two rungs that are not public knowledge. Multiply this over four attributes, and the uncertainty is enough to make it difficult to pin pown where the points are and who has what. The players gather intel on each other during the game (part of the fun), but each new spend can add even more uncertainty to the scores.
 

Otha

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • O
  • Posts: 365
Multiple foes
« Reply #48 on: December 19, 2006, 10:27:28 AM »
Quote from: JohnB
*Some* of the rungs are public knowledge, at least at the beginning. However, in a secret bid there could be multiple rungs between each round of the auction that are *not* visible to everyone.


Secret bids aren't part of the game as written.  All bids become public, and you can only buy to an existing rung.

Quote from: JohnB
For example on the third to last round, the high bid was 15. The GM announces the new high bid of 15 and asks for new sealed bids....


Sealed bids are not part of the game as written.  Of COURSE if you use secret bidding, the players will have more uncertainty about where the other players stand.
 

JohnB

  • Newbie
  • *
  • J
  • Posts: 43
Multiple foes
« Reply #49 on: December 19, 2006, 12:37:07 PM »
"Secret bids aren't part of the game as written. All bids become public, and you can only buy to an existing rung."

I guess that is probably true. But even using the rules as written,  points can "disappear" into allies, items, powerwords, etc, that can make it more difficult to accurately know who has what for sure, assuming bidders take advantage of the after auction buy-up. Powers and allies are *not* public, at least not until they are revealed in play.

Truthfully after a decade and a half of playing in Amber campaigns, I don't know anyone who uses the rules as written anymore. Most of the people I've been playing with have drifted a great deal, using various "partial power" systems that have cropped up on the net and often revamping sorcery entirely. Or they use an entirely different system like Everway. They still use the book rules at cons, but that is about the only time. I personally don't bother with the auction at all now, just having the players assign their points in secret.
 

RPGPundit

  • Administrator - The Final Boss of Internet Shitlords
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 48855
    • http://therpgpundit.blogspot.com
Multiple foes
« Reply #50 on: December 19, 2006, 11:13:40 PM »
I still pretty well use the rules by the book.  That is, I don't use anything that contradicts the rules as written.  So using partial-powers, which I occasionally do, isn't something that contradicts the rules.

I think most Amber fans still use pretty much the rules as written.

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


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

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


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

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

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

finarvyn

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1646
Multiple foes
« Reply #51 on: December 19, 2006, 11:53:17 PM »
Quote from: RPGPundit
I think most Amber fans still use pretty much the rules as written.

I think that there are two basic styles of RPG rules:
1. Systems which are designed to be flexible and house-ruled.
2. Systems which are designed to be firm and unbending.

Many of the early RPG systems, such as brown book OD&D, Tunnels & Trolls, and the like, seem to fit more into the first category. The designers had the idea that the rules create a structure and the GM can and should change them as they see fit to make the game work for them. They tend to be rules-light and are low on details of bookkeeping.

Other RPG systems such as d20 appear to be more rules-driven and rules-heavy. The letter of the rule often seems to be more important than the spirit of the rule, and bookkeeping and "working the system" becomes more significant. (I don't mean to imply that this is a bad thing, but it is a different style of rules design.) The GM is encouraged to "play by the rules" and standardization of the rules is important.

I believe that ADRP was designed in the spirit of #1 above. As such, I would guess that most campaigns are run along rules consistent with most of the rulebook, but that most campaigns also have house-rule tweaks and modifications to fit the style of play of the game group. Loot at the number of ADRP campaign web pages out there and find a large number of variants of the same basic rules system: sometimes a tweak in which attributes, how many attributes, which powers, partial powers, new powers, canon NPC elders, and so on.

So ... I agree with the spirit of what you have said, that the game they play is still essentially that outlined in the rulebook, but I might disagree somewhat because of the house-rule natue of the game.

Am I just nit-picking? I don't mean to... :cool:
Marv / Finarvyn
Kingmaker of Amber
I'm pretty much responsible for the S&W WB rules.
Amber Diceless Player since 1993
OD&D Player since 1975

Otha

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • O
  • Posts: 365
Multiple foes
« Reply #52 on: December 20, 2006, 06:23:11 AM »
Quote from: RPGPundit

I think most Amber fans still use pretty much the rules as written.
RPGPundit


Never seen it.  Every campaign I've played in, run, or seen posted online has had house rules, extensions, modifications and/or complete rewrites.
 

RPGPundit

  • Administrator - The Final Boss of Internet Shitlords
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 48855
    • http://therpgpundit.blogspot.com
Multiple foes
« Reply #53 on: December 20, 2006, 01:58:06 PM »
My point was that it seems John B was arguing that the fact that a lot of house rules are used (and he did also exaggerate on it a bit) suggests that somehow either Amber's rules are a failure, or that we need to make radical changes to said rules in the next edition.

Amber SHOULD be a toolkit, and sure, everyone probably uses a few house rules here and there, and optional rules that have become popular via internet or other sources in the years since Amber was first published.  Some of those house rules and options should probably be included, AS OPTIONS, in the new edition.

But to suggest that this is all somehow a weakness of Amber and not a strength is ludicrous.

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


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

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


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

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

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

JohnB

  • Newbie
  • *
  • J
  • Posts: 43
Multiple foes
« Reply #54 on: December 20, 2006, 06:55:58 PM »
Quote from: RPGPundit
My point was that it seems John B was arguing that the fact that a lot of house rules are used (and he did also exaggerate on it a bit) suggests that somehow either Amber's rules are a failure, or that we need to make radical changes to said rules in the next edition.

Amber SHOULD be a toolkit, and sure, everyone probably uses a few house rules here and there, and optional rules that have become popular via internet or other sources in the years since Amber was first published.  Some of those house rules and options should probably be included, AS OPTIONS, in the new edition.

But to suggest that this is all somehow a weakness of Amber and not a strength is ludicrous.

RPGPundit



Let me make clear a couple of points.

Firstly, it is in no way my intention to denigrate the original rules. They work just fine as written- else the game would not have a strong following (myself included). The published rules make a great baseline for people from different parts of the country to play a common, familiar game at cons.

Secondly, in my experience I was not exaggerating at all. *Everyone* I personally know playing the game (about 20 individuals over the last few years alone) has modified it with house rules not found in the book. Some have made drastic changes. As you say, the published rules are a marvelous toolkit and people find it easy to tweak to their taste, so they do. The only reason I brought it up at all was to clarify *why* the system I use for multiple opponents is not easy for players to have calculated out (i.e. secret bids). It had nothing to do with an oblique attack on the Amber game itself. The new edition could be pretty much the same as the old edition as far as I am concerned- no drastic changes are required IMO.
 

RPGPundit

  • Administrator - The Final Boss of Internet Shitlords
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 48855
    • http://therpgpundit.blogspot.com
Multiple foes
« Reply #55 on: December 20, 2006, 07:28:54 PM »
Hmm. Ok.

Let me just say that after my experiences in the GoO Amber fora, I'm a vicious paranoid attack dog when it comes to defending the Amber rules for proposed 2nd edition...

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


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

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


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

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

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

finarvyn

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1646
Multiple foes
« Reply #56 on: December 20, 2006, 10:26:51 PM »
That's why I would suggest that a 2E of ADRP be essentially the same as 1E but with extra options included. Instead of having rule X which "everyone must use" but is house-ruled a lot anyway, present rule X as a "standard" model but with a couple of optional ways to do it instead.

We all know that Erick did this with the various versions of the Elders in the rulebook. Extend it to other rules as well.

The example of the auction vs. point-build is obvious and often cited, and is clearly an example of how many people prefer to alter the core system. Thus, include auction, point-build, and maybe random die roll (blasphemy!) as a series of options for the GM to consider when designing the campaign.

So ... nothing radical gets changed, nothing major gets axed out of the rules, but a 2E expands and suggests alternatives to enhance the present system.
Marv / Finarvyn
Kingmaker of Amber
I'm pretty much responsible for the S&W WB rules.
Amber Diceless Player since 1993
OD&D Player since 1975

Otha

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • O
  • Posts: 365
Multiple foes
« Reply #57 on: December 21, 2006, 08:30:41 AM »
Quote from: finarvyn

So ... nothing radical gets changed, nothing major gets axed out of the rules, but a 2E expands and suggests alternatives to enhance the present system.


Hear, hear.

There might even be a simple shorthand that people could use for which of the options they're using in a proposed Amber game.