Girl Genius RPG

[subplotkudzu]

I just reread all 7 volumes of GG over the last week and something occurred to me: with the overlapping schemes and ever-changing loyalties, a Spark's natural toughness and presence and the overall uber-competence of the characters, there isn't a reason to invent a new GG RPG. Just run it in Amber.

I feel like a dolt for not thinking of this sooner.

Lucrezia, Klaus, Bill, Barry and others are all members of the previous generation, while the PCs are Agatha, Gilgamesh and their peers - active, changing the existing dynamic but not as powerful as their parents, and constantly trying to naviagate between the previous generation's plans and learn their secret history. The existing stat mechanics work fine, as long as you replace Pattern with Spark, perhaps charging it at various levels (15 pts = weak Spark; 30 pts = Spark; 50 pts = Strong Spark) so we can see the differentiation between the pie throwing spark in the circus, Slepneir O'Hara and Gilgamesh Wolfenbach. I'd probably add in the process I had in the primus game for bidding on positions of power to determine the strength of one's starting house, etc.

Hell, it would be easy.

Comments

[cmdr-zoom.livejournal.com]

I'd say that Gil and Agatha both spent themselves into Bad Stuff debt on the house auction (after buying Strong Spark, of course).

[brianrogers.livejournal.com]

Not in my game they didn't. Having run Amber a few times and played in it once, if I do run this it will be a clear expecation that having Bad Stuff does not mean more complications but a greater chance at failure and embarassment. Having Bad Stuff meaning that things were more complacted for you to do had a perverse incentive, because more complications and harder struggles leant themselves to More Spotlight Time. Amongst my players, experience points are all well and good, but more spotlight time in the key victory condition. Meanwhile, people with Good Stuff resolved problems with more speed and therefore got less time in the spotlight.

Harder Challenges + More things going wrong = more opportunites to be brilliant + more time being seen to be brilliant. That's all a plus.

Grater Chance of Perverse Failure (i.e., it's not that there are more complcations, it's that your plan just fails) + People Instinctively Not Liking You = Looking Like a Shmuck. That's a downside. If people want to spend themselves into debt, I intend to be up front on what it will mean.

[whswhs.livejournal.com]

Amongst my players, experience points are all well and good, but more spotlight time in the key victory condition.

This is in fact the case with my players as well, and I am inclined to believe that this attitude is the single best diagnostic of really good players. With the proviso that they have to be prepared to get it not by making themselves into GM attention vampires, but by doing stuff that entertains the other players.

[brianrogers.livejournal.com]

Certainly true. In fact, the best kind of player is the one who willingly invites other players to share the spotlight. I'm a sucker for players who make plans that engage as many part members as possible, or for those who use their spotlight time to make other PCs shine.

That said, I never again want having a high Bad Stuff mean that you get more spotlight time then the player with Good Stuff. The mechanical nature of the Amber 'Stuff' system is a way to balance character power without the need for a lit of 1-2 point fiddly bit powers or disads. So having Bad Stuff should really make your life Bad, or worse, Dull.

[drcpunk.livejournal.com]

Ah, sez mnemex. This means that Tarvek has Bad Stuff.