Amber Diceless doesn’t make the “Bucket List”?

Related to my previous post, a spin-off discussion about why Amber Diceless doesn’t make some people’s top-12 list.
I contribute to the discussion, but the money-quote is from Tony LB, who just explained to me why I haven’t enjoyed any Amber game I’ve played, but immensely enjoyed the ones I’ve run; relative focus on the character relationships in the game.

Posted By: TonyLB
Here’s a recipe for making yourself really miserable in ADRPG: Go in with a character that you enjoy because of his physical and mental abilities.
Here’s a recipe for making yourself really happy in ADRPG: Go in with a character that you enjoy because of the way they view their family members.

This is also explains why I always thought it was important for folks to have read a couple of the books first.


Be Sociable, Share!

One Reply to “Amber Diceless doesn’t make the “Bucket List”?”

  1. ADRPG used diceless as a mechanism for a collaborative storytelling. The gaming mechanism was nearly useless, really. It was the *setting* that worked, that made the game fun, the let the players go wild while still allowing the GM to really guide whatever the story called to be done.
    Which is why going in with a character for his/her strengths (how they can control the environment and story around them) is a recipe for failure, and why going with a character bound into their family relationships (participating in the story, for better or worse and usually both) is a recipe for success.
    In its own odd way, ADRPG exceeded both the system and the original setting.
    And, bringing the subject back around, ADRPG would not be anywhere near my Top 12 Systems, but absolutely (in multiple instances) is in my Top 12 (hell, Top 5) gaming experiences.

Comments are closed.