Mechanically speaking, what is the big problem with the Cypher

>>51051106
It's by Monte Cook

>>51051106
You spend your hit points in a gamble to avoid losing your hitpoints.
It's a reactive system, the GM can't force an attack. Having the players roll to avoid damage etc makes all enemies feel irrelevant. Natural hazards, traps and opponents become too similar.

>>51051503
>>51051106
The setting itself is also quite boring compared to what it could be. It's a silly sandbox at best.

>>51051503
Don't forget it's XP doubles as a inspiration. You use 'em, you lose em.

That's not an issue personally, it's a trade-off. But some people really hate it for some reason.

File: 71fd086a3ed19095c903372205a288cb.png (1MB, 700x1153px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 700x1153px

From what I understand, Numenera itself was mechanically fine. However, the Cypher System Rulebook came and wreaked havoc on game balance.

1. Intellect is clearly and obviously the best statistic of them all, covering all tasks of "intelligence, wisdom, charisma, education, reasoning, wit, willpower, and charm" (page 15) and even healing (page 210), looking or listening (page 212), social interactions (page 212), disabling devices and locks (page 213), gaining insights (page 217), and using most cyphers (page 241). Intellect covers an absolutely insane span of tasks. This might have been passable in a wilderness/dungeon-focused setting like Numenera, but in other settings, Intellect is king.

2. Ranged beats melee. In this game, if you want to both move and attack, you can move only 10 feet by default. If you want to move further than 10 feet and attack, you must succeed on a difficulty 4 Speed task (difficulty 2 if you purchase a specific special ability), and bad things happen if you roll a natural 1.

Also, ranged attacks made within 10 feet lower the difficulty of the attack by 1. Melee attacks do not have this benefit. Yes, ranged weapons are more accurate than melee weapons within 10 feet.

Similarly, most attacks in combat target your Might, so you will want to conserve your Might as much as possible rather than spend it.
Because of this, ranged weapons are simply better than melee weapons. (Consequently, Speed is better than Might.)

Under the "fantasy" equipment list, longbows are weaker than greatswords, but the movement restrictions and the point blank bonus still make a longbow preferable to a greatsword. Use Speed and Speed Edge to attack with a longbow, take Practiced in Armor to start with elven chainmail for free, and laugh at anyone who bothered with melee.

Under the "modern" and "science fiction" equipment lists, there are better ranged weapons available, so you should wield one of those and ignore melee. Take an unarmored ability.

(Continued.)

>>51051720
Most of those points are relevant to a fair percentage of all modern focused games. Int and Dex (or whatever their equivalents are) will tend to dominate everything, and ranged weapons will usually beat melee weapons. And like you said, the better ranged weapons are available the worse this will be. This isn't unique to the Cypher system (look at Cyberpunk 2020, for example).

File: 60cf4728b3869c8b25a18d640242e591.jpg (347KB, 1200x621px) Image search: [Google]

347KB, 1200x621px

>>51051720

3. In various cases, "magic" accomplishes tasks far more competently and cheaply than mundane methods ever could. Here is a good example: https://boards.fireden.net/tg/thread/46672143/

4. Skills have no balance to them. Various options, such as the Calm descriptor, the Doesn't Do Much focus, and the Would Rather be Reading focus give you a blank check on selecting skills. However, page 20 gives us a sample list of skills like "deceiving," "intimidation," "metalworking," and so on, then tells us:

>You could choose a skill that incorporates more than one of these areas (interacting might include deceiving, intimidation, and persuasion) or that is a more specific version of one (hiding might be sneaking when you’re not moving). You could also make up more general, professional skills, such as baker, sailor, or lumberjack. If you want to choose a skill that’s not on this list, it’s probably best to run it past the GM first, but in general, the most important aspect is to choose skills that are appropriate to your character.

Why would you ever choose "deceiving" or "intimidation" when you could choose "interaction"? Why would you even bother with "hiding" when you could take "sneaking" instead? What is the point of telling a player to select X number of skills when those skills could be as narrow as "hiding while not moving" or as broad as "social interactions"?

Even worse are the abilities like:
>Investigative Skills: You are trained in two skills in which you are not already trained. Choose two of the following: identifying, perception, lockpicking, assessing danger, or tinkering with devices. You can select this ability multiple times. Each time you select it, you must choose two different skills. Enabler.

"Lockpicking" and "tinkering with devices" are good and all, but are we really to believe that either is as broad as "perception"?

(Continued.)

>>51051750
But Cypher isn't modern focused?

>>51051771
Yeah, but it's generic. It has to be judged with the modern options in mind (especially since half its official settings involve hopping through anachronisms, so you WILL get pistols all over your horseriding knights). It's the same with GURPS, for that matter. INT and DEX are objectively better than other stats. It's only in the 4th edition that they've realized that and made them cost more, before that it was just as broken.

And >>51051762 magic being better than not having magic? How's that new?

>>51051762
>Why would you ever choose "deceiving" or "intimidation" when you could choose "interaction"? Why would you even bother with "hiding" when you could take "sneaking" instead? What is the point of telling a player to select X number of skills when those skills could be as narrow as "hiding while not moving" or as broad as "social interactions"?

This is a legitimate complaint, although I suppose you could defend against it by arguing that it's really up to the GM and players not being idiots/assholes. I agree, though, if the book itself provides both "intimidation" and "social interaction" as sample skills than that's a bad influence.

>>51051106
I have to say, I like the fact everything's rated on the same ladder. I don't know if it's been done before but the idea that you can literally create anything mechanically just by assigning it a level is pretty amazing, in my opinion. It reminds me of TWERPS, if you know it. I also don't dislike systems where "the GM never rolls", although that's more of a matter of opinion.

>>51051819
Presumedly the more board the skill the less reliable the GM should make it? but you're right. He either didn't think it through or worst considers hide to be the 'trap' option.

>>51051838
>I have to say, I like the fact everything's rated on the same ladder.

What do you mean by that? Isn't that what levels are for?

>>51051720
>From what I understand, Numenera itself was mechanically fine
You don't understand then.

>>51051874
Yeah, but this like takes the idea to the logical conclusion. Everything has a level, and that's the only mechanical quality it has. Just about everything else is fluff. Like, if there's a trap, its level determines how hard it's to disarm, how much damage it causes, how hard it's to find, avoid, listen to, make educated guesses about, whatever. If a creature has a level than that's its level for detecting stealth, persuading, fighting, shooting, healing, etc. Some have specific abilities besides (so you may get something like "Orc, level 2, level 3 for fighting and sneaking") but for the most part the level determines everything. It's very simplistic, so obviously not everyone will like it, but I find that it really smooths things up.

>>51051862
Fa/tg/uy conspiracies theories about developers specifically out to annoy them with "caster editions", I don't think anyone actively attempts to hide "trap options" within their games. It's all just people being careless or incompetent.

>>51051908
*aside. Conspiracy theories aside. Typing from a phone is suffering.

File: 71e035077b3629d631d436c328ba174d.jpg (1MB, 1800x2350px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1800x2350px

>>51051750
>>51051810

I dare say that fantasy ranged specialists have it as good as modern or science fiction ranged specialists. While fantasy characters have to settle for a medium weapon longbow (until they , they can use Practiced in Armor to start with elven chainmail, which is *very* good for a Speed specialist due to being armor 2 that encumbers as no armor. There is no equivalent to elven chainmail in the modern and science fiction equipment lists.

>magic being better than not having magic? How's that new?
Far Step is a tier 1 ability. It becomes at-will the moment you receive Intellect Edge 2, which can be acquired in very short order. It vastly exceeds the output of even a difficulty 10 jumping task, which is mind-bogglingly difficult even for high-XP characters.

>>51051862

This is not how it works, because having a relevant skill simply reduces the difficulty of a task by 1, or by 2 if you have the skill twice from different sources.

>>51051879

I am mostly referring to Intellect being vaguely balanced with Might and Speed in Numenera's wilderness/dungeon-focused setting, and melee vs. ranged being somewhat more balanced in Numenera due to the slightly different weapon and armor rules.

File: 7671b008c44152471f1f7e42d58d8069.jpg (525KB, 717x1000px) Image search: [Google]

525KB, 717x1000px

>>51051762

5. Descriptors and foci have flimsy balance.

For example, the best descriptor in the entire game is Foolish, because it has this ability:
>Carefree: You succeed more on luck than
anything. Every time you roll for a task, roll
twice and take the higher result.

This is a d20-based game wherein 1s are critical failures and 17-20s are varying degrees of critical success, so rolling twice and taking the higher result is a stupendously strong benefit. The descriptor comes with some downsides that fail to balance out rolling twice on all rolls. For example, Foolish characters have 1 higher difficulty for all Intellect defense tasks and tasks that involve seeing through deception, illusion, or traps... but rolling twice still makes them better at such tasks than a regular character.

Foolish is a supremely strong descriptor, and it gets even better if you can immunize yourself against all mind-influencing effects, such as the Slays Monsters focus's tier 2 ability.

Another example is the Travels Through Time focus (which, sadly, does not synergize well with Foolish). This is the broken part:
>Tier 1: Anticipation (1 Intellect point). You look ahead to see how your actions might unfold. You have an asset for the first task you perform before the end of the next round. Enabler.

This is an enabler. If you have Intellect Edge 1, then congratulations, you have an asset on every single task you could conceivably perform, lowering all difficulties by 1. Monte Cook did not think this through.

On the opposite end of the spectrum, some foci are awful at various tiers.
Masters Weaponry's tier 1 ability is laughably, objectively worse than Slays Monsters' tier 1 ability.
Infiltrates' tier 1 ability is likewise totally worse than Doesn't Do Much's tier 1 ability and Would Rather be Reading's tier 1 ability, especially since the latter two let you choose broad skills like "interaction."

(Continued.)

File: 1405711640720 (1).png (313KB, 1060x1423px) Image search: [Google]

313KB, 1060x1423px

>>51051912
>>51051908
>Fa/tg/uy conspiracies theories about developers specifically out to annoy them with "caster editions", I don't think anyone actively attempts to hide "trap options" within their games. It's all just people being careless or incompetent.

Cook himself would disagree with you thought.

That said I do think 3.5 balance issues are from just people being careless or incompetent. Ivory tower design is just rationalizing after the fect

'rewarding system mastery' is basically just his way of saying 'I was just pretending to be retarded'

File: 211a8756ad5b22734cd9a7fac862d1a3.png (486KB, 730x581px) Image search: [Google]

486KB, 730x581px

>>51052165

6. Spending XP on short-term benefits simply is not worth it unless you are using 1 XP to reroll a roll that will spell death and/or calamity should you fail it.

4 XP is enough to earn you a major, permanent ability for your entire career, and once you purchase four of those (16 total), you advance a tier and reap all of the benefits for doing so. 1 XP rerolls in anything but life-or-death scenarios are thus a trap.

2 XP for short- or medium-term skill trainings are a complete and utter ripoff when all a skill training grants is 1 lower difficulty. 2 XP is half the price of gaining a permanent major ability, and delays you from gaining tiers.

On a tangent, speaking of spending 4 XP for a permanent, major ability, this is perhaps the best of the lot:
>Add 2 to your recovery rolls.
Recovery rolls are the key to resource management. A +2 bonus to such rolls gives you a massive, flexible boost to the resources available to you.

That is all I can think of on the topic of Cypher at the moment.

>>51051810
>And >>51051762 magic being better than not having magic? How's that new?

No it's caster supremacy, yet again.

It's like having 'hide in shadows' as a skill when invisibility is level one cantrip.

What the point of having a skill at all if Magic can do the same thing it does, but better?

If the wizard cast a spell to fill in for a single skill option it's annoying but forgivable, the wizard cast a spell to fill in for the entire point of a player's class ... not so much

File: d5eb4d3a771f424cba9e3c76ac012b8a.png (712KB, 680x879px)

712KB, 680x879px

>>51052353

The magical option is only the vastly superior option only in a select few cases (e.g. Far Step), but those few cases are rather flagrant.

For a versatile noncombat utility specialist, what you want to do is be an Adept or a Speaker, max out your Intellect Edge, take the Calm descriptor and select the broadest skills possible, and then choose the Travels Through Time focus to abuse Anticipation. If your GM bans that focus, take Doesn't Do Much or Would Rather be Reading instead, and then pick as many broad skills as you can.

For a combat monster, you probably want a Warrior with the Foolish descriptor. Max out your Speed Edge, wield the best ranged weapon you can find, and shoot everyone to death while rolling twice for everything. If you are in a fantasy setting, take Practiced in Armor and start with elven chainmail.

>>51051899
Right, hence why everything is in a 1 to 10 scale... that has to be time by three.

I like it in principle but having it on a 1 to 10 scale it has to be multiplied is more trouble than it's worth personally. I would prefer just having the target numbers myself.

>>51052500
The by 3 thing is so it fits on a d20, which the rest of the game uses (like, for random charts or what have you). It also means that you get "impossible target numbers" past level 7, meaning some tasks always require that you do something to lower it. I guess you could very easily change it to a 10 scale and use d10s, it's a pretty minor thing.

>>51052545
You could change it to a 10 scale and use d10s, it's a pretty minor thing.

Well no, because then I'll have to rework the difficulty number to 1 to 5... ×3 to keep it in scale.

It's nothing major it's just annoying that you have to go for the times three step.

>>51051819
Sometimes you want to play a character with more limited skills?

Everything it does well can be done easier by the Powered By Apocalypse system.

I still enjoy numenera though.

File: 1455890134174.png (484KB, 1256x461px) Image search: [Google]

484KB, 1256x461px

>One player asks why we cant use d6s instead of d20s in Numenera
>Try to make change to the crunch
>Suddenly, disaster

Cypher is a delicate snowflake system. It sorta works on its own but altering anything at all destroys it. It's kind of impressive in a horrible sort of way.

>>51054845
>Switching from a D20 to the D6
>this effected the game

Wut?

Dude you can't just change core resolution dice mechanic and expected it work.

What were you doing out of interest?

>>51054053
For what purpose?

>>51054845
I don't think there are many good systems where you can change the core mechanic without things falling into pieces. In fact, if anything, it's the hallmark of a very well-designed system that it has no "mechanical fat": everything influences everything else very intimately (e.g. Apocalypse World). All the pieces fit like clockwork. You change anything without a great deal of deliberation and foreknowledge, you fuck shit up.

>>51054956
Concept?

>>51055105
Why would you try to use an unfitting concept?

>>51054053
Isn't this done better by either deciding to spend less points in a system with sensible granularity, or by just RPing having a more narrow skillset?

>>51055123
Because it fits. Not every character is good at everything and some players aren't munchkins and are willing to make a subotpimal decision to reflect that.

>>51059006
And without committing the Stormwind Fallacy?

Did Monte Cook ever into balance?