Amber Diceless Attribute Auction without player knowledge?

[Bron]

OK, I have a dilemma. I have a group of players spread out across the state/country, many of whom are fans of Zelazny's Amber setting and the Amber Diceless roleplaying game. I have an idea for an Amber campaign which I think will work well for the sort of email/Skype/PbP interaction which will be required. (Basically, Dworkin or someone sets aside a cache of Amberites in suspended animation to be held in reserve in case Something Bad happens. It does, but something goes awry and the PCs are defrosted with no knowledge of their true identities, abilities, or potentials.)

Now, these players are easygoing enough that if I tell them we're going to play a game where they will initially have no knowledge of the game mechanics, setting, or their own character's stats, they'll jump right in with both feet. HOWEVER, I feel like the Attribute Auction is pretty integral to the mechanics and flavor of the Amber Diceless system, and I want to include it. The moment I do that, though, these crafty gamers will say, "Ah ha! We're playing Amber!" Then, try as they might, they will instantly suspect that the odd Tarot deck they found must be Trumps, they'll feel an irresistible urge to seek the Pattern, they'll have a feeling of understanding, rather than horror, if their character discovers they are a shape-shifter, etc. Meta-gaming will be pretty much unavoidable, "natural" roleplaying will be more difficult for the players, and I think it would make it less fun for all involved.

Soooo.... can anyone think of a way to have an Attribute Auction without giving it away to the players? Maybe the game mechanics could be fiddled with or something. I just need some way to play Amber without the players instantly recognizing it. Unfortunately, I'm at a complete loss as to how to do that.

Thanks in advance, Paizo-ites.
Bron

[Chris Mortika]

Bron,

For what it's worth, I've seen a large number of Amber campaigns. I attended AmberCon several years back. And the attribute auction was one of the first rules to hit the referees' editing floor; only a handful of campaigns campaigns -- and nobody at PaizoCon -- was using it. Amber works just fine if you say that a character has Psyche 15 instead of Psyche [Rank 3rd], and if you just let your players build the characters they want, instead of egging them on to try outspending each other.

This may not be the answer you're looking for, and in that case I apologize.

[hogarth]

Maybe you could do it with a cryptic Ultima IV-style (or KotOR-style, if you prefer) questionnaire where the questions are intended to rank which attributes the PCs would use in solving problems.

[Stefan Hill]

hogarth wrote:

Maybe you could do it with a cryptic Ultima IV-style (or KotOR-style, if you prefer) questionnaire where the questions are intended to rank which attributes the PCs would use in solving problems.

Cunning plan if ever I have heard one. Great thing about Amber RPG is the type of player that enjoy it won't care too much about the 'stats' at any rate.

S.

[Bron]

Thanks, folks!

CM, I agree that the point value works just as well without a comparative ranking. I just want to give them input into their character's stats without giving away that it's Amber. The comparative rankings would be nice, but I think the costs outweigh the benefits.

hogarth, what a great idea! I'm totally using that. I Googled up the questions at http://www.gamefaqs.com/pc/562660-ultima-iv-quest-of-the-avatar/faqs/7807, and I'll modify them to pertain to the Amber attributes.

SH, quite right. They love to optimize as much as the next gamer, but given the setting, they won't lose any sleep over what numbers are on the character sheet they'll never see.

Thanks again. Your comments were quite helpful.

Cheers!
Bron

[Caineach]

Annother idea you might try (and I have seen it work before in homebrew) is to give each player a point allocation. As they try stuff they design their character with what they try. If one of them wants to shapeshift, and has the points to buy the trait, then they can. If one of them wants to invest the points into being better at something than annother player, then they spend those points and you start to rank them.

This way, not even you know what they are capable of :)

[LazarX]

Here's my suggestion after some thought on this topic.

In your mind put in a budget for attributes and a budget for powers.

For your first several sessions just run the characters without stats or sheets and essentially have your characters "bid" by what attributes they push themselves with. (i.e. see who thinks in what terms and rank them by relative effort they put in attributes and how they describe themselves) and spend accordingly. Have them describe thier backgrounds with emphasis on the part that in some way they stand above the average and see how they express that. (The character that's way big on historical simulation for instance might be the top "bidder" on Warfare. The circus strongman or professional wrestler on Strength, etc..

The main difference from the preceding selection is that you do the spending and keep everything hidden from the players until the appropriate time. (or possibly never, maybe the characters never really need to see "sheets", if you're playing Amber in advanced mode. This also delays revealing the true nature of the game even longer.)

[Elrostar]

I've played in a number of Amber RPGs over the past ten years or so and none of them have used attribute auctions. Bluntly put, I think it's a stupid concept and I would probably not want to play in a game that used it. Most (or all) of the games I've played in used various modified rulesets because the four attributes of ADRPG are... frustrating, to put it mildly.
The most recent version of rules I used (when I ran a short-lived game myself a while ago) included a significantly expanded set of attributes in order to better reflect the variety of strengths and weaknesses one might have. I think that it still needs some tweaking, but it's a lot better than the ADRPG rules (he said confidently).
YMMW, however, and obviously a great many people are happy with basic ADRPG rules, and some even use attribute auctions. I think that's a minority of games, however.

[Caineach]

Elrostar wrote:

I've played in a number of Amber RPGs over the past ten years or so and none of them have used attribute auctions. Bluntly put, I think it's a stupid concept and I would probably not want to play in a game that used it. Most (or all) of the games I've played in used various modified rulesets because the four attributes of ADRPG are... frustrating, to put it mildly.

The most recent version of rules I used (when I ran a short-lived game myself a while ago) included a significantly expanded set of attributes in order to better reflect the variety of strengths and weaknesses one might have. I think that it still needs some tweaking, but it's a lot better than the ADRPG rules (he said confidently).
YMMW, however, and obviously a great many people are happy with basic ADRPG rules, and some even use attribute auctions. I think that's a minority of games, however.

Interesting. Everyone I have heard who has played it before has lauded the attribute auction as one of the best parts of the system. I haven't played it myself though.

[LazarX]

Elrostar wrote:

I've played in a number of Amber RPGs over the past ten years or so and none of them have used attribute auctions. Bluntly put, I think it's a stupid concept

Can you say why you disfavor it besides labeling? Remember that Amber is very much tied to the novels that inspired it and evaulate it on that basis rather than as a genre-independent system.

One thing to keep in mind that unlike his Palladium works, Wujick designed Amber as a stepping stone to total systemless bookfree playing rather than trying to build a simulation game.

[Elrostar]

Why do I dislike the attribute auction? Well, first of all because the four attributes are not in any way balanced. Warfare inevitably dominates. Any and all games I've seen the attribute auctions for (online ones of various sorts) include far more bidding on Warfare than other attributes. There is a pervasive sense that Warfare rules everything. This is exacerbated by certain tendencies in games wherein Warfare ends up standing in for all sorts of other attributes/abilities, such as perception, awareness, etc.

Secondly, I dislike Wujick's ideas regarding what different levels of attributes convey. I feel that he misinterprets the books in order to present his view of how Amberites stack up against everyone else. Which is to say that they're way way way more awesome than anyone else. Flora is, according to Wujick, practically infinitely superior to any Shadowling in matters of combat. So is Fiona. They're also significantly better than any PC in combat, because implicit in the attribute auction is the fact that there are several distinct power levels in the game. PCs are, unless they sell down attributes, just way better than Shadowlings. But they're also inferior to all elders. In every respect. Which is both absurd to me (in terms of how people are portrayed in the books) and not very fun.
I can expand at length about how I think the system of Amber Rank attributes is not in any way reflective of how people's competence is portrayed in the books, but I'll leave that for another post.

The idea of an attribute auction also sets up a system in which everyone is aware of everyone else's (more or less) precise rankings in terms of abilities. I don't think this is a particularly useful or (and I don't really want to use the word, but I guess I have to) realistic. Furthermore, the pecking order, once established, cannot be changed. If you are top dog in Warfare, you will always be ranked first in Warfare, and everyone else can more or less go suck it.

As I said, I've played in a number of different Amber games which used a number of different systems. One actually used FUDGE rules, and two had no system at all (including what was probably the best game of any sort I've played in). But I've never thought "wow, I wish we'd had an attribute auction".

I feel that I'm not expressing myself too clearly here, but I will try to expand on things if I'm not making sense.

[Sissyl]

Well, why not simply make characters as usual for another setting, then interpret their choices in the AMBER framework. Let's take Pathfinder. They make characters, they roll stats, they choose classes, they select abilities and so on. Make preliminary AMBER stats from this. As you said, they have been stored somewhere... and so would need to be handicapped to stay put in the shadow they have been imprisoned. This would go for abilities such as the Pattern and for attributes such as Psyche. Give them glimpses of what they are truly able to do when the imprisonment falters. Then eventually, when they finally escape their handicapping, give them their true statistics (if you so choose). You could also, to make this weirder, confront them with utterly terrible menaces that seem to be seeking them - only to be stymied by the handicapping effect.

I could see that working...

Attributes should be easy to assign, abilities would be more difficult, but a guideline I would use is that divine law (paladins, various clerics etc) should correspond to the Pattern, polymorph and shapeshifting effects indicate Shapeshifting, and with a chaotic character could mean Logrus, and so on.

[LazarX]

Elrostar wrote:

Why do I dislike the attribute auction? Well, first of all because the four attributes are not in any way balanced. Warfare inevitably dominates. Any and all games I've seen the attribute auctions for (online ones of various sorts) include far more bidding on Warfare than other attributes. There is a pervasive sense that Warfare rules everything. This is exacerbated by certain tendencies in games wherein Warfare ends up standing in for all sorts of other attributes/abilities, such as perception, awareness, etc.

Secondly, I dislike Wujick's ideas regarding what different levels of attributes convey. I feel that he misinterprets the books in order to present his view of how Amberites stack up against everyone else. Which is to say that they're way way way more awesome than anyone else. Flora is, according to Wujick, practically infinitely superior to any Shadowling in matters of combat. So is Fiona. They're also significantly better than any PC in combat, because implicit in the attribute auction is the fact that there are several distinct power levels in the game. PCs are, unless they sell down attributes, just way better than Shadowlings. But they're also inferior to all elders. In every respect. Which is both absurd to me (in terms of how people are portrayed in the books) and not very fun.

Well that's exactly how they're supposed to be. Amberites are the near-immortal masters and the Elders are setup to outdo any PC who tries to confront them directly. And if you the type that insists on precision crunch, then Amber is definitely not the game for you. The Elders can be thwarted but you have to work subtly the way they do with each other.

Amber is (or should I say wasn't) not for everyone It was an extreme style of game of gaming even among roleplayers and it takes the right combo of players and GM's to pull it off.

[Chris Mortika]

I've attended two AMBERCon conventions and helped play-test scenarios for a couple others. Back in the day, I was involved in perhaps a dozen Amber campaigns.

One one campaign used the attribute auction.

As Bron probably realizes, if the players know what they're doing, and are willing to act like a mature party, the auction doesn't work.

"We discussed ahead of time what kind of party we wanted. I bid 4 points for Psyche. Since everybody else bid 3, 2, or 1 point, that puts me at 1st Rank in Psyche. I also bid 2 points in Endurance, 2 points in Warfare, and 1 point in Strength. Without agreeing to do any service for the referee, I have 91 points to spend on powers."

If that player had reported "I bid 40 points for Psyche. Since everybody else bid 30, 20, or 10 points, that puts me at 1st Rank in Psyche. I also bid 20 points in Endurance, 20 points in Warfare, and 10 points in Strength. Without agreeing to do any service for the referee, I have 10 points to spend on powers." He would have been no more powerful, because all that matters in Amber is your rank, not the number of points bid. 1st Rank is 1st Rank.

[Greg Wasson]

Interesting.

We only bid once, as we were a home group. And since it was new, I guess we didn't know what we were doing, and since we were in our 20's We were probably immature :P.

And I guess we had a good mix, because each of the players felt a different attribute was more important. No two people felt warfare was the best and the same went on down the line. Each of us had a concept, and bid according to our concept. The funny thing was, everyone thought someone else was going to outbid them on thier favorite attribute :) So we were all pleasantly shocked to get what we wanted.

We played the same characters for about three years off and on.

But we were a closed group. No new players and no conventions. Otherwise, the some of the most remembered/best experiences were of that Amber game.

Maybe we were just the perfect intended match. Or maybe just lucky, but the bidding was a fun part for us.

But I can definitely see, if people discuss beforehand what character type they desire, than the system can be abused.

Greg

[thejeff]

Chris Mortika wrote:

As Bron probably realizes, if the players know what they're doing, and are willing to act like a mature party, the auction doesn't work.

"We discussed ahead of time what kind of party we wanted. I bid 4 points for Psyche. Since everybody else bid 3, 2, or 1 point, that puts me at 1st Rank in Psyche. I also bid 2 points in Endurance, 2 points in Warfare, and 1 point in Strength. Without agreeing to do any service for the referee, I have 91 points to spend on powers."

If that player had reported "I bid 40 points for Psyche. Since everybody else bid 30, 20, or 10 points, that puts me at 1st Rank in Psyche. I also bid 20 points in Endurance, 20 points in Warfare, and 10 points in Strength. Without agreeing to do any service for the referee, I have 10 points to spend on powers." He would have been no more powerful, because all that matters in Amber is your rank, not the number of points bid. 1st Rank is 1st Rank.

A mature party is exactly what Amber, as written and as inspired by the books is not about. It's not always a throne war, but the characters are supposed to be competing with each other, working at cross purposes and occasionally trying to kill each other off. It's not a party-based game. The characters are all powerful and flexible enough to work on their own most of the time and only all come together for climactic battles or family dinners. The latter usually being more traumatic.

If I had a group bid like that, I'd have a serious talk with them about what they expected from the game and what they really wanted to play and then redo (or drop) the auction. If I wanted to handle it more mechanically, I'd have NPCs of their generation bid in the auction as well. It's also pretty common to use the actual values, at least for comparison with Elders and others not in the auction. As well as to allow others to buy past 1st rank if the 1st rank holder doesn't keep investing in it. House rules all, but most amber games are house ruled.

The auction is really intended for traditional Amber family games where the characters have known each other for years and have a good feel for where everyone else stands. It's also a mechanical way of generating or reflecting rivalries. The 1st and 2nd in Warfare probably got that way competing with each other, for example. Now, build that into the backstory.

If that's not the setting or game style you want, then by all means don't use an auction. In fact, in the OP's case, I probably wouldn't.

[Caineach]

Chris Mortika wrote:

I've attended two AMBERCon conventions and helped play-test scenarios for a couple others. Back in the day, I was involved in perhaps a dozen Amber campaigns.

One one campaign used the attribute auction.

As Bron probably realizes, if the players know what they're doing, and are willing to act like a mature party, the auction doesn't work.

"We discussed ahead of time what kind of party we wanted. I bid 4 points for Psyche. Since everybody else bid 3, 2, or 1 point, that puts me at 1st Rank in Psyche. I also bid 2 points in Endurance, 2 points in Warfare, and 1 point in Strength. Without agreeing to do any service for the referee, I have 91 points to spend on powers."

If that player had reported "I bid 40 points for Psyche. Since everybody else bid 30, 20, or 10 points, that puts me at 1st Rank in Psyche. I also bid 20 points in Endurance, 20 points in Warfare, and 10 points in Strength. Without agreeing to do any service for the referee, I have 10 points to spend on powers." He would have been no more powerful, because all that matters in Amber is your rank, not the number of points bid. 1st Rank is 1st Rank.

The Amber system is designed to pit the players against eachother and make them fight eachother. If 2 people have the same or similar concepts, then they should be both bidding. If they came to an agreement ahead of time, then they obviously do not fear eachother enough.

[Elrostar]

I think that for a Throne War style game, having an attribute auction is perfectly reasonable. It does indeed represent a situation in which everyone has known each other for a long time and is acutely aware of each other's strengths and weaknesses. And one in which there will probably be quite a few casualties among the players, of course. So as a way of dealing with a throne war among the elders (who have indeed known each other for centuries), it is a perfectly reasonable approach.
That doesn't happen to be the style of Amber game I enjoy, however. I like it to be possible to have PCs be not intimately familiar with each other's strengths and weaknesses, perhaps because they haven't known each other for too long,
I like games in which players are free to explore the world(s) and interact with people, each other, and engage in whatever it is they enjoy. Oh, and also deal with whatever threats may be poised to overthrow them (or even Amber).

In terms of the attribute system as Wujick created it, I just don't feel that it is in any way a proper reflection of Zelazny's books. The vast chasm between Shadowlings and Amberites is simply not something that is found in the novels. An obvious illustration of this is where Corwin is being attacked by Gerard and Ganelon jumps in and knocks Gerard out, allowing Corwin to escape. If Gerard's Strength is such that he is (essentially) infinitely superior to every other Amberite, how the hell do we account for him being knocked out by a mere Shadowling. Of course, as it happens, Ganelon is actually Oberon in disguise, but the fact that none of the parties involved (Corwin, Benedict, Gerard) immediately deduce that Ganelon is an Amberite (and a damn special one at that) is a pretty strong indication that Amberites are not elevated above the level of the most capable of Shadowlings. There are numerous other examples, but that one is pretty solid, I would think.

Arguments that I shouldn't insist on precision crunch are, to my mind, missing the point. I'm not asking for a system that is detailed like GURPS. I'm just asking for one that is self-consistent and makes sense, and is a decent representation of how things work in Zelazny's books. And I honestly don't feel that ADRPG (as created by Wujick) does that, although it's possible to modify it in order to make it work.
I just don't feel that a system in which Flora is stronger, more resilient and a better general than all PCs by construction is a terribly sensible model. Additionally, having a game in which any agency the players may feel can be instantly trumped by the presence of an elder (and indeed, where the suggested resolution of any serious threat or problem is supposed to be resolved by a deus ex machina style intervention on the part of an Elder) is one that is terribly interesting one in which to be a player.
The best Amber game I played in used no rules at all, actually. And the other good games I've been a player in used a number of variants of ADRPG, including FUDGE and an extension to the attribute system (in order to reflect things like Status, knowledge of Shadows, ability to keep and learn other people's secrets). None of these included an auction.

So I guess I'm saying that an attribute auction can work just fine for certain games. But the game the OP is running doesn't off-hand seem to be one of them.