Amber by the Cards Design Diary, Part One: Power Nineteen

[Vaxalon]

Here's what I am presently thinking:

Number cards (2-10) represent attributes (warfare, strength, psyche, endurance) which are the primary currency for winning conflicts.

Jacks, queens, and kings represent relationships.

Jacks represent relationships with groups of shadowfolk.

Queens represent relationships with NPC peers, such as siblings.

Kings represent relationships with "elders" such as massively older siblings (think Benedict), parents, etc.

Aces represent powers beyond the basic set associated with one's heritage (either basic pattern or basic shapeshift).

WIth jacks, queens, kings, and aces, having the card basically gives the player the right to define the nature of the relationship.  They aren't played in conflicts as much as they permit certain kinds of conflicts to be played in the first place.  For example, in order to get into a battle (say, to invade Amber) one needs to have an army.  That requires either playing a jack, or going out and getting one.

Keep in mind that this design is still in flux.  Don't take this as the only way it can be.

[Clyde L. Rhoer]

Hi Vaxalon,

It seems to me at this point that you are losing a lot of the strength's in Amber's system to break away from GM fiat. Let me state I'm not against the idea, because I would agree that GM-fiat can be a weakness, however it can also be a strength.

One thing about Amber's GM-fiat that is interesting is that much of the conflict is pre-resolved. You won't beat Benedict at war, or if Gerard can lay a hand on you.... I think this is a strength of the game as it so strongly reflects the books, and I don't see it in your present design. Your design seems to be changing resolution from a static nature to a more randomized/skill based nature. Am I understanding correctly?

Also in Amber, as it is now, you can define your relationships, places, etc. So far I'm not understanding what the gain is? If you are using cards to set character strengths, I'm not sure I would enjoy having random characters. Also I'm curious how you plan on dealing with Trump, Logrus, Pattern, etc?

If you are using cards, and we are imagining anything is possible-- a design that used trump cards of the characters would be really cool. Another idea would be the character sheet would be a trump card of the character with numbers in the corners.

Troy: The Amber series is a pretty easy time investment as the books are like 200 pages or so. Nothing like the monster books that are churned out in today's market. You can usually find them in used bookstores for cheap.

[Vaxalon]

Clyde, I don't believe you're understanding, and I don't think I would expect you to, either.

I'm not changing the resolution from static ton randomized/skill based.  Resolution is based on the choices that the players make, about how much of their power to use and when... I'm putting that resolution system in the hands of the players rather than the GM.

You say "You won't beat Benedict at war..." but Corwin did, didn't he?  And so did Lintra.  "You can't beat Benedict" is an artifact of ADRP, not of Amber Canon, as I see it.

Yes, being able to define your relationships, shadows, etc. is a strength of ADRP, and I intend to preserve that.  In fact, it's so cool that I want to make it a central element of the game.

[Clyde L. Rhoer]

Hi Vaxalon,

If you don't expect that I can understand, I would guess that would make it hard for me to give you useful feedback wouldn't it? That really sucks, I love Amber, and am interested in a non-gm-fiat game. So can you clarify the type of feedback you would like, since my attempt at charitable reading seems to indicate I've hit a nerve I wasn't intending to.

[Vaxalon]

About the most useful feedback I've had so far are people asking, "How would this design handle <situation>?  That's something really cool about Amber."

[Darren Hill]

Stack:

Heh, you name it.  I won't bother repeating them... it's not what I'm here for.  You can probably imagine.

A common thread is being opposed to the "System Does Matter" philosophy.

That's a pretty serious misunderstanding of that amberlist discussion. Those who are discussing this with you in (not really that) harsh terms are (a) a tiny, tiny minority of the list, (b) talking about how the _system_ of the ADRPG serves them better than what they see here. That's a pretty staunch defence of System Does Matter, if you ask me.
In any case, I think having a moan over here about a discussion you're not enjoying elsewhere on the net is not very professional - but that's the last you'll hear from me on that subject.

For the record, I'm interested in seeing what comes of this. Cards do seem a good fit to the setting.

[Arturo G.]

For example, in order to get into a battle (say, to invade Amber) one needs to have an army.  That requires either playing a jack, or going out and getting one.

Keep in mind that this design is still in flux.  Don't take this as the only way it can be.

I can imagine you are still considering many options. I'm curious about the result.

You say: "playing a Jack". If playing always means loosing or highly risking the card, you will use them only for hugely important scenes. Then, players will not use for example the "queens", representing subtle relationships with other amberities, in resolution very often, because it would mean to risk the whole relationship.

Relationships should be more endurable, and be able to be carried on from conflict to conflict until you decide to really risk them in high stakes.

It could be interesting to know how the relationships may be created (cards obtained). Are they also coming from conflicts?

Arturo

[Dotan Dimet]

Heya,

That being said, there'll be an option to play towards an ending, where someone ends up as King, or else Amber destroyed.

-Okay cool, this makes morse sense to me.  In reading your Power 19, I never really got a sense for what motivates the characters to act.  I mean I know they have these relationships they want to protect, and as they protect them they get more powerful.  That's cool.  But for the characters, what is the point of accumulating more power?  What do they plan to eventually do with it?  What is that drives them towards an accomplishment?  It just seemed to me that play was just and endless loop without any specific direction.

-The King thing, I think is way cool.  I'd like to hear more about that.  How do they compete against their fellow players?  How do they achieve that status?

Peace,

-Troy

Something that's made clear to me after reading the discussion in the story games forum thread Vaxalon started is that a strong motivation for PCs to accumulate power is to measure themselves against the Elders, i.e, the canon characters. That is, building a relationship with an Elder, gaining their respect, or confronting and being able to match or overcome them are all worthy and emotionaly engaging activities.
The big problem with the whole ability to create worlds out of whole cloth is the old "if everything is possible, does anything matter?" issue. Amber (the series and the DRPG) solve this by making the game about the characters (both the archtypical NPCs and the other PCs).

[Vaxalon]

In any case, I think having a moan over here about a discussion you're not enjoying elsewhere on the net is not very professional - but that's the last you'll hear from me on that subject.

Indeed, and from me.  I cut out 90% of what I had to say on the topic... it should have been 100%.

[Vaxalon]

You say: "playing a Jack". If playing always means loosing or highly risking the card...

As it stands, cards would only be lost when they're explicitly at stake.  Cards you play to win conflicts wouldn't necessarily be at stake.

That's my current thought, anyways.

[Vaxalon]

Something that's made clear to me after reading the discussion in the story games forum thread Vaxalon started is that a strong motivation for PCs to accumulate power is to measure themselves against the Elders, i.e, the canon characters. That is, building a relationship with an Elder, gaining their respect, or confronting and being able to match or overcome them are all worthy and emotionaly engaging activities.

Indeed, the same has been made clear to me as well.  Elders, or their siblings and cousins, or powerful Chaosians, or even the whole Universe, are what the PC's measure themselves against.

I see that as implicit in the "define oneself" imperative.

[Vaxalon]

http://vaxalon.livejournal.com/4146.html

Micro-playtest of the conflict resolution mechanic.  It went quite well, it did what I wanted it to do.