Plot device or by the rules

[Hyper-Man]

I know almost nothing substantive about Amber. Do you find that the system penalizes people who are not articulate? If not, how does it avoid doing so if the system is largely based on "descriptions" and "story-telling"? This isn't even intended as a back-handed criticism, I am truly curious. If it odes not, I wouldn't condemn it, though it would seem to me then that it is clearly for a specific subset of RPGers.

The only thing the system might penalize is lack of imagination since the settng of the Amber books literally covers just about ALL aspects of reality. A full desription would take pages. Anyway, the 'Amber' series and RPG based on it are both just awesome and I strongly recommend them to anyone.

[Tech]

For me, plot devices are things that occur to keep the story going, regardless of what they are. The escape route the villain has constructed to escape for showing up later in the episode, the gun found by the scene of the crime, a taxicab taken by the hero in his secret id, the city streetcleaner used by the hero to clean up the villain's act (sorry, couldn't resist) - these are plot devices.

My players are really good. They know that if a villain's trap overwhelmingly works, it's for the story.

GM: Your group arrives in the empty room. Interestingly enough, the walls, ceiling and floor are all made of metal with no windows apparent. A moment later, a tremendous jolt of electricity flows through the room, knocking all of you unconscious.
Player 1: Uh-oh. Okay, where do we wake up?
The GM smiles and the players groan...

My players know me well enough to realize when a plot device, in this case a trap, has occurred. No stats were needed for the trap. It depends on your GM style and the player's ability to roleplay.

[Hawksmoor]

Two of the best long running games I ever played in were using these 2 systems as well:

• My first Champions game was run by a math-phobic GM who in effect ran it like Amber diceless before the game was invented. Almost none of the characters were book legal, we didn't care since the stories were awesome. Does anyone remember the Keith Giffen era of Justice League where Guy Gardner takes off his power ring and challenges Batman to a fistfight?(Batman one-punches GG, funniest scene I had ever seen in JL) Our game was LIKE that before Giffen started writing that book!
• My first Amber game which eventually turned into a throne war despite the best story telling efforts of the GM. The final outcome was definitely not boring.

I liked the fact that Gardners legs were sticking out from under the table for like what 3 issues. That was GMs discretion.

Hawksmoor
Giffen Legion Fan

[ghost-angel]

I know almost nothing substantive about Amber. Do you find that the system penalizes people who are not articulate? If not, how does it avoid doing so if the system is largely based on "descriptions" and "story-telling"? This isn't even intended as a back-handed criticism, I am truly curious. If it odes not, I wouldn't condemn it, though it would seem to me then that it is clearly for a specific subset of RPGers.

Yes it does, to a degree, penalize people who cannot act out or describe something from vague to specific. Most RPG players are more than capable of handling Amber - it might take a little practice.

As for HERO and Amber being on opposite end .. I always thought of Hero as one step down from Amber. Hero doesn't tell you what something is, only how to make it within a ruleset. Amber doesn't tell you what it is or how to make it. Most other systems just tell you what stuff is (it's a "Fireball" .. well, how do you make one? you don't you play a magic user .. oh, um, nevermind.)

Though I will say Amber is NOT for anyone, or even most everyone. It is for a specific set up RPGers. I'd qualify them but I'd either screw it up or miss them. Most of the people I know who are really into Amber are writers or actors (amateur or professional) who enjoy story telling as much if not more than roleplaying.

It is diceless and nearly mathless (For anyone who wants to check it out I personally recommend ditching the suggested creation rules of bidding like a bad habit.) and gets by on merit of interaction and storytelling. One of the better Amber games I had the pleasure to take part in had no actual GM, it was a pure collective effort. It only lated three sessions before Real Life got in the way.

If you've ever written a co-operative story in a free form format then you can deal with Amber.

And back on the actual topic at hand - someone mentioned that nukes shouldn't be plot deviced .. if I drop a nuke on you it's plot device because I really really don't like you. If I need to destroy a city that bad and want the heroes to survive then they do so somehow.

In general if I want a chance of failure I build the device in question, if I need absolute success for the sake of the story - it works and doesn't need to be built.

[edit: forgoet Hero/Amber comparison]

[austenandrews]

I'm with Dust Raven - the question for me isn't "what's a plot device?" it's "what isn't a plot device?" Even though I enjoy the mental exercise of creating various effects in Hero, the truth is when I run a game I hardly ever stat out anything. If I know a fight is possible with an NPC or creature, I'll jot down the important combat numbers. Otherwise it's all freeform. You'll never see me calculating the point cost of a base or a vehicle or balancing the Disad's of an NPC (well, I might do an NPC if it's pertinent and/or interesting enough to be fun). Partly there's a time constraint, but honestly I wouldn't pore over NPC numbers even if I had all the time in the world. I can accomplish the same thing in my game without it. And I'm liable to change the numbers on the fly anyway, if it helps the flow of the game.

-AA

[cyst13]

One of the interesting strands I've noticed in this discussion is the reference to nukes. I agree that you generally shouldn't have to figure out the d6's of damage a 100 megaton warhead would do; everybody in the area should just die. (I liked the guy who suggested this only applied to wimpy people with less than 350pts. I'd like to see how he stats out a metermaid) The aspect of building a nuke that seems to be overlooked, though, are the limitations. Limitations such as focus, timer device, difficulty of defusing (assuming it's not missile delivered), speed of the missile (if it is), and others make the nuke more of a concrete object and allow the PCs to interect with it in a meaningful way, hopefully avoiding the KA d6 altogether.

This example is one of the reasons why I'm always hesitant to just plot device away a given object/event. What if the PCs come up with some ingenious plan for circumventing said plot device? If you haven't already figured out the limitations of the plot device, it would be that much more difficult for you to intelligently and CONSISTENTLY answer your players' questions and deal with their strategies.

While the GM has access to unlimited points, which makes building things/people seem superfluous, the rigor involved in actually statting out a bad guy or an object or phenomenon requires you to think deeply about it. This is generally a good thing for the campaign as a whole.

[pinecone]

Basicly if it will take me more than a few mins to stat out its going into the plot device box... I just jot down limitations and such and wing the rest...but I'm real comfortable with wingin it.....

[Magmarock]

When ever I need an effect that is only going to happen once, it's a plot device.

If it is something that happens too rarely to gain Disad points, it's a plot device.

If it is an extremely rare (and wildly impractical) power that fits a character or story and it is uncontrollable, it's a plot device.

If it is something that, after being used as a plot device, comes into play more often, then I will build it. Because, face it, you can build anything, any-or-three ways and up, in this game system.

Also, I tend to run a fluid campaign. Things happen in the real world that we don't have control over, so I run with that same premise in the games I GM. I am not above altering any character as I see fit, PC or NPC. You don't have an interesting story without tragedy and pain, and the more the PCs hurt, the more they will value their victories. That being said, sometimes PCs are built too well for average attacks and effects to phase them, therefore you need the plot device.

One of my favorite reasons for for using plots divices is for switching out characters from a campaign and/or to explain an update/rebuild of a character. Also, sometimes things just don't go as the GM had planned for, say, in a long-term plot arc and then there needs to be a revision done on the fly. Rather than do it completely behind the scenes, you can have the PCs see the outcome of their actions. When the players find they have had an effect on your game, they will feel like their PCs can and do make a difference in your campaign world, for better or for worse.


Mags

[zornwil]

Yes it does, to a degree, penalize people who cannot act out or describe something from vague to specific. Most RPG players are more than capable of handling Amber - it might take a little practice.

As for HERO and Amber being on opposite end .. I always thought of Hero as one step down from Amber. Hero doesn't tell you what something is, only how to make it within a ruleset. Amber doesn't tell you what it is or how to make it. Most other systems just tell you what stuff is (it's a "Fireball" .. well, how do you make one? you don't you play a magic user .. oh, um, nevermind.)

Though I will say Amber is NOT for anyone, or even most everyone. It is for a specific set up RPGers. I'd qualify them but I'd either screw it up or miss them. Most of the people I know who are really into Amber are writers or actors (amateur or professional) who enjoy story telling as much if not more than roleplaying.

It is diceless and nearly mathless (For anyone who wants to check it out I personally recommend ditching the suggested creation rules of bidding like a bad habit.) and gets by on merit of interaction and storytelling. One of the better Amber games I had the pleasure to take part in had no actual GM, it was a pure collective effort. It only lated three sessions before Real Life got in the way.

If you've ever written a co-operative story in a free form format then you can deal with Amber.

And back on the actual topic at hand - someone mentioned that nukes shouldn't be plot deviced .. if I drop a nuke on you it's plot device because I really really don't like you. If I need to destroy a city that bad and want the heroes to survive then they do so somehow.

In general if I want a chance of failure I build the device in question, if I need absolute success for the sake of the story - it works and doesn't need to be built.

[edit: forgoet Hero/Amber comparison]

Thanks, appreciate that, makes sense I think.

[Vorsch]

Superheroes in comics survive nukes, direct in your face hit by nukes, at that point they have to be stated. two examples Silver Surfer ,Superman

If Characters can survive ( unscathed effectivly in the above examples ) then they are not Deus Ex Machina.

People also over rate nukes as far as DC are concerned.

[Madstone]

I liked the fact that Gardners legs were sticking out from under the table for like what 3 issues. That was GMs discretion.

Hawksmoor
Giffen Legion Fan

Remember, part of the reason he was out so long was because as he awakened he was scared by a mouse and he hit his head again knocking him unconscious once more. When he awoke he was Sweet Guy. (There's a character that's been utterly decimated. They would have done better just to kill him.)

Madstone
Giffen JL Fan

[Madstone]

My players are really good. They know that if a villain's trap overwhelmingly works, it's for the story.

GM: Your group arrives in the empty room. Interestingly enough, the walls, ceiling and floor are all made of metal with no windows apparent. A moment later, a tremendous jolt of electricity flows through the room, knocking all of you unconscious.
Player 1: Uh-oh. Okay, where do we wake up?
The GM smiles and the players groan...

Wow, you have some really cooperative players there! I simply can't imagine trying this without numerous arguments, whinings, bitchings, etc.

I'm jealous.

[cyst13]

Madstone:

You should try springing one of these traps on your PCs. After they finish whining, bitching, and moaning, show them the post where the others players responded maturely and see if they are shamed into compliance. Of course, you then have to follow said trap with some really cool drama in order to make it worthwhile.

[McCoy]

Personally? When I don't have time to build it. My inner game mechanic builds everything; even if I "cheat" a plot device I find myself inevitably building it later.

What he said. The story is the most important thing, but the back story takes you unexpected places.

Last week I got a last minute inspiration. Godzilla suddenly appeared in the park accross the street from the hero's HQ. At the time I had no idea what had happened. But now I've had a week to think about it, about what power could transport Godzilla from Monster Island to New York City in a blink of an eye, and what powers would go with that one. The result is a character that I hope will present the players with some unique challenges.

[McCoy]

I agree that you generally shouldn't have to figure out the d6's of damage a 100 megaton warhead would do; everybody in the area should just die. (I liked the guy who suggested this only applied to wimpy people with less than 350pts. I'd like to see how he stats out a metermaid)

*checks references* 100 Megaton? I'm geting between DC 50 and 51. I would probably do this as a 17d6 exploding KA, with a level of megascale, effects felt for a 17 km radius, but survivable by normals more than 12 km from ground zero (with f/u medical care). Let's see, standard effect 51 body at ground zero? There are PC's in my game that would survive that.

Point is, I have notes worked out for when I do need to wing it (this is roughly a ST:TNG photon torpedo btw).