Our DM might run Numenera at our next meet up. What are the rest

>>46205179
Oh, I would numera her all right.

>>46205179
>What are the rest of us in the group in for?
Fifty pounds of tits and ass.
Also generic dungeon crawling that posits itself as revolutionary but is really just more of the same shit.

>>46205179
>Numenera
I've never played it, but looking just at the site it seems pretty damn pretentious.
>In short, Numenera’s game engine elegantly keeps the focus on story and action, without sacrificing structure or mechanical detail.
Excuse me if I don't believe you, Mister Cook.

>>46205237
I was always wary of games that tried to portray themselves as like radically different or "revolutionary". Like the character creation looks TOO simple and dumb, although I can't really say much because of lack of playing it.

>>46205214
>Oh, I would numera her all right.
...and era, and era and era or nite rong.

>>46205293
>I was always wary of games that tried to portray themselves as like radically different or "revolutionary". Like the character creation looks TOO simple and dumb, although I can't really say much because of lack of playing it.
I feel ya. I actually LIKE Powered by The Apocalypse Games, but if someone talked down to me as much as most *world hacks do I'd chuck them in the "Cunt" bin at lightening speeds.


Same shit applies to Numenara, if from a slightly different angle.

>>46205179
I dunno, if your group is going in blind?

Probably shit. If only the DM is invested in the game.

It's a pretty great system though, one of the best designed games, mostly because it steals shamelessly from other systems and has a consistent construction.

No one who's actually played?

>>46207284
No one is dumb enough for that, anon.

>>46205179
The Strange is better. Try to steer in that direction.

>>46207284
I have not personally played, but from someone who has, it is very important that 1) the GM be on top of their shit, because it's a very GM-heavy game, and 2) play with more than two players.

>>46209428
Yeah, the more rules loose a game, the less able you are to play with fewer players.

>>46205256
You don't know what pretentious means. Treating a setting with seriousness appropriate to it's tone. If your saying Monte acting like he made the best thing ever, he believes that statement, whether or not others agree.

>>46205179
What does your group usually do? Numenera is great when a group is looking for the same thing. There's an amount of freedom within the system that makes it super easy to run off the cuff, but if you get a lolsrandum group (or worse, just one lolsrandum player) if can go completely off the rails.

>>46207361
Better written if nothing else.

>>46209428
>>46209475
Bullshit, I've run Cypher 1-on-1 before and had a really great time. I run a monthly game with two players that we had an hour long philosophical discussion in character about whether killing humans as non-human characters is "wrong."

If the game he ran went poorly, the GM just doesn't know how to run games for small groups.

I agree that a Cypher GM does need to be an actual GM, not just a rules referee though.

>>46207284

I played.

It's bad.

Real bad.

'Spend strength points so you succeed at dodging or else you'll lose strength points' bad.

'intentional trap options encourage regular play by incentivizing veterans' bad. This isn't baseless, two Verbs ( think class path but as a feat, you only get one and it's 1/3 of your character) are identical, except one also has ' you accidentally attack your friends and have to be put down sometimes.'

It's 'we have three books, and one of them is about sex. Not in a particularly kinky way, just to educate yourself' bad.

Oh, did I mention you SPEND 3 FATIGUE TO DECREASE YOUR CHANCE OF LOSING 1?

>>46205179
Play a Nano. The other two classes aren't worth it.

>>46205179
currently my pet system, i know ill get bored eventually running it but hey its fun so far

>>46210206
>Webster Dictionary
>Full Definition of pretentious
>1: characterized by pretension: as
>a : making usually unjustified or excessive claims (as of value or standing) <the pretentious fraud who assumes a love of culture that is alien to him — Richard Watts>
>b : expressive of affected, unwarranted, or exaggerated importance, worth, or stature <pretentious language> <pretentious houses>
Excuse my autism, but I know exactly what it means.
>If your saying Monte acting like he made the best thing ever, he believes that statement, whether or not others agree.
this might come as a surprise to you, but the disparity between
>what he thinks the quality is
and
>what the actual quality is
is EXACTLY what I'm talking about.
If I knew that a guy made a line of cars and deliberately designed half of them to work shittily compared to the other half in order to encourage people buy the half that worked better when they next bought a car, you can bet your ass I'd be rolling my eyes if he told me that this line of cars is 'gonna be perfect guys, we promise'.

>>46207284
It's my favorite system to run. It's a fairly light and flexible system, and it's clearly made for GM's to adapt to suit their tastes.

You're looking at not-DnD where all the magic is forgotten technology and the focus is on exploring the ruins of dead civilizations. Depending on your GM the magic-science will either come across as more science-y, or more magical.

You have three 'classes'. Warrior, Mage, and Rogue, who has some warrior powers, some mage powers, and a few that are exclusive to them. On top of that you have your focus, which is stuff like 'great archer' and 'mind reader'. Any class can take any foci, but some foci are clearly better for some classes.

You also have a descriptor, which is similar to a background/ race, in that it gives you a handful of perks at the start of the game but does not scale up with your level.

Do you have any more focused questions?

>>46212625
>Spend three fatigue points to decrease your chance of losing 1.

Level 1 enemies take a 3 to dodge. If you're spending points to dodge those then you're clearly just trying to avoid rolling a 1, since if you bring the difficulty down to 0, you don't need to roll.

Also, you don't spend Strength points to dodge.

Spending effort to dodge, in most cases, is a bit of a trap option. I wish the book did a bit to address this, but it's not part of your build, it's just an action that you do in combat.

>>46212638
Absolutely false.