Review RPG Codex Review: Monte Cook's Numenera

[Stompa]

Great review. I'm digging the character creation system, mostly the foci part. While, say, Mutants & Masterminds might be better at the whole "play with cool powers" thing, it's probably easier to convince a group play Numenera than M&M due to lighter rules. Kinda not sold on the other mechanics.

 

[Irxy]

I have to agree the corebook is boring and uninspiring, had plans to play it with my friends but wasn't able to finish reading it.
The Torment still has potential though, if the devs choose to ignore the majority of Numenera systems and move the game out of Steadfast.

 

[Blaine]

Setting seems much more of a rip-off of Book of the New Sun than a Planescape rehash.

Both Planescape and Numenera list Book of the New Sun as inspirational material.

 

[clemens]

Very in-depth and interesting review. Thanks to the author and playtesters.

I wished I'd see more quality p&p content like this on Codex.

 

[Grunker]

Very in-depth and interesting review. Thanks to the author and playtesters.

I wished I'd see more quality p&p content like this on Codex.

maybe we should get back on those P&P interviews some time i guess

 

[Onholyservicebound]

Getting all nostalgic seeing the art from my "How to draw fantasy characters" book I had when I was 10.

 

[felipepepe]

Just noticed, why the cover of the book says Numenéra? That "é" is just for show and is never used on the book?

 

[oscar]

Both Planescape and Numenera list Book of the New Sun as inspirational material.

Planescape does? I don't really see the connection.

 

[Alex]

When you compare the system to D&D, are you talking about the basic dice roll mechanic?

No, I'm talking about the whole shebang. Numenera's mechanics are essentially a pared-down, repurposed version of the D&D mechanics, with some unique additions. If someone had only ever read D&D 3.X/4.X, then they might believe Numenera is quite different; but when you compare Numenera not only to D&D but also to GURPS, BRP, WHFRP, Silhouette, RIFTS, FATE, Shadowrun, oWoD, HERO System, and any of the many other core rulebooks I squandered portions my youth poring through, it becomes clear that Numenera shares more in common with D&D than with any of the rest.

Not that I'm accusing you of being unfamiliar with other systems, mind you—I'm just trying to get my point across clearly.

No problem. I just think the similarities with D&D are actually more on the surface level (how abilities are described, how dice are rolled and to a point, even monster descriptions), rather than how the game is played. Although I suppose the kind of episodic gameplay the book's rules suggest is pretty similar to what the various GMing tips in third edition's Game Master's Guide would lead you to.

Completely forgettable, pretentious, stupid garbage, I found it funny how in weeks nobody of the players I know mentioned Numegaya at all. No one has even talked about it once in months. Says it all.

Systems keep getting dumber and dumber, and treating players like Power Rangers who get amazing powers without any effort (with the exception of GURPS).

Use GURPS, and for the rest play older systems, modules, and materials as well. The PnP scene is declining just as much as videogames do, and it shows. Now that gen Xers and earlier are in control their lack of culture and rigor shines through.

I think you are being a bit unkind here. While some new ideas in design did become widespread, there are still many games that don't adopt them. Examples of interesting newer games, besides any retro-clones are: Dungeon Crawl Classics RPG, Twilight 2013, Traveller 5th edition, Stars Without Number (that one is kinda a retro-clone, but it has plenty of new stuff), Pendragon, Aces & Eights, Hackmaster... I am sure there are many more I don't know about too.

The whole feeling the artwork gives off is fucking generic shit.

Looks like a visually badly designed Final Fantasy generic sci-fi-something.

The fact that the creators of rule books get bad artists, and that the visual design statement of the books are bland is something that REALLY puts me off; to me it speaks about not having a clear creative focus.

Well, I hoped for something a lot more unique too. But I think it is still better than, say, D&D 3e for instance.

Just noticed, why the cover of the book says Numenéra? That "é" is just for show and is never used on the book?

I think that is just part of the decoration around the word. Either that or they don't use it for the same reason they don't usually write mêlée.

 

[tuluse]

I just found progression boring, you only really get any choice with your type (class), and most of it is rather uninteresting. In most RPGs you usually look forward leveling up, because it means you get more powerful or versatile and generally have interesting stuff to look forward. But with Numenera i just thought holy shit how many times does a Glaive needs to learn how to swing a sword in a different way (that logically I should already know) for a damage modifier.

I think the only thing that was cool to look forward is that I had the "Howls at the Moon" focus and it has cool tier upgrades where your beast mode gets more powerful and you get better at controlling the shape change, first learning to change with a check and then at will. But again, it's static, not a character development choice.

Do you think this could be ameliorated by letting the player choose new or sub-foci as they level up?

6 levels just doesn't seem like very many. The last time I played PS:T I think I was level 12-13 by the time I finished. It's not very many opportunities to make customization decisions.


Do your or Alex get the impression that Numera characters are meant to be used and discarded? Like you'd make a new one for each adventure rather than keeping a single character going for a long time.

 

[Excidium]

I just found progression boring, you only really get any choice with your type (class), and most of it is rather uninteresting. In most RPGs you usually look forward leveling up, because it means you get more powerful or versatile and generally have interesting stuff to look forward. But with Numenera i just thought holy shit how many times does a Glaive needs to learn how to swing a sword in a different way (that logically I should already know) for a damage modifier.

I think the only thing that was cool to look forward is that I had the "Howls at the Moon" focus and it has cool tier upgrades where your beast mode gets more powerful and you get better at controlling the shape change, first learning to change with a check and then at will. But again, it's static, not a character development choice.

Do you think this could be ameliorated by letting the player choose new or sub-foci as they level up?

I don't know. That would go against the porpose of foci, which is defining your character. Ideally it should offer more choices on each tier but I guess the idea was to keep it simple.

6 levels just doesn't seem like very many. The last time I played PS:T I think I was level 12-13 by the time I finished. It's not very many opportunities to make customization decisions.

Yeah, and there aren't that many customization decisions to make.

Do your or Alex get the impression that Numera characters are meant to be used and discarded? Like you'd make a new one for each adventure rather than keeping a single character going for a long time.

Hm...I'm not sure. It might take a while to level up because ideally you'll be spending your xp as a resource for other things, but the game does assume that you'll reach tier 6 eventually. On the other hand there's the numenera, while the PCs might be level capped, they can still get more developed through that stuff.

 

[Alex]

Although there are only 6 tiers, you don't reap the benefit of a new tier all at once. Every tier, you can make four permanent XP purchases, each costing 4XP. Usually, these are: an increase to one of the three stats, to become trained in a new skill (or specialized in one you already know - skills only have two levels in this game), to increase the edge of one of your attributes or to increase your effort value (which says how much effort you can use in one action). Once you have done all four, your tier goes up and you get whatever tier bonus your type and focus give. There is some opportunity for customization here, such as letting the player exchange these default upgrading options for a type special ability. There are also special groups in the setting that might teach you special abilities, though you need to exchange your skill pick for the tier to get the ability (and to be part of them, obviously).

As the system is, allowing the players to keep getting new special abilities after the 6th tier, like the nano's esotieries, wouldn't really harm anything, I think. However, skills are a bit more dangerous the GM allows players to use skills that are already very wide and cover a lot of ground. It wouldn't be difficult in that case to eventually cover almost every roll with a skill. But, if you plan ahead, it is workable to let players keep picking skills too. What really might mess up game balance, though, is if people keep increasing edge and effort. There is no difficulty 11 in the system, and there isn't supposed to be one. So either the GM start letting players do things that defy the limits of physics, or the players will be regularly doing the almost impossible.

I don't think the problem here is so much that PCs are supposed to be used for one shots as much as that their progress is supposed to rely more on Numenera. You ever saw one of the many D20 games that tried to remove the dependence the system on magic items by giving a lot of special abilities that basically emulated the effect of the said items? Well, Numenera kind of tries the opposite approach.

 

[crawlkill]

For the interested, the tabletop podcasting crew at Fandible have done two sessions (four 90-minute episodes) in Numenara. They're very narrativist-y gamers, not really into the tactical combat and dozens of superpowers thing, and they liked it pretty well. I doubt if it's the kind of thing people who're really into D&D will ever much like. The wargamer faction of the tabletop crowd has been spoiled by the variety and tactileness of D&D4E's combat, I think, and are less likely than ever to be satisfied by a system that isn't about the dicey specifics of dragonmurder.

They're moderately hilarious to listen to, so if you're curious about how it sounds in play by people who aren't gonna be disappointed by the non-numbercrunchness of the system, check it out: http://www.fandible.com/numenera-ep-1-under-the-dome-part-1-of-2/

I could take it or leave it, personally, from the impressions I got from the podcast. I don't think it bodes much for Torment either way, though. Forgotten Realms is the goofiest setti--okay, not that, but it's a pretty tame high fantasy setting, and that didn't stop Baldur's Gate.

 

[tuluse]

Although there are only 6 tiers, you don't reap the benefit of a new tier all at once. Every tier, you can make four permanent XP purchases, each costing 4XP. Usually, these are: an increase to one of the three stats, to become trained in a new skill (or specialized in one you already know - skills only have two levels in this game), to increase the edge of one of your attributes or to increase your effort value (which says how much effort you can use in one action). Once you have done all four, your tier goes up and you get whatever tier bonus your type and focus give. There is some opportunity for customization here, such as letting the player exchange these default upgrading options for a type special ability. There are also special groups in the setting that might teach you special abilities, though you need to exchange your skill pick for the tier to get the ability (and to be part of them, obviously).

As the system is, allowing the players to keep getting new special abilities after the 6th tier, like the nano's esotieries, wouldn't really harm anything, I think. However, skills are a bit more dangerous the GM allows players to use skills that are already very wide and cover a lot of ground. It wouldn't be difficult in that case to eventually cover almost every roll with a skill. But, if you plan ahead, it is workable to let players keep picking skills too. What really might mess up game balance, though, is if people keep increasing edge and effort. There is no difficulty 11 in the system, and there isn't supposed to be one. So either the GM start letting players do things that defy the limits of physics, or the players will be regularly doing the almost impossible.

I don't think the problem here is so much that PCs are supposed to be used for one shots as much as that their progress is supposed to rely more on Numenera. You ever saw one of the many D20 games that tried to remove the dependence the system on magic items by giving a lot of special abilities that basically emulated the effect of the said items? Well, Numenera kind of tries the opposite approach.

Ever since Arcanum I have an intense dislike for systems that treat attribute, skill, and ability advancement the same and use a unified resource to do so.

 

[tuluse]

Still, Numenera doesn't really provide any guidelines for PCs to actually interact with these items, either cyphers or artifacts, other than simple dice to determine success and failure. Interacting with the strange technology should, I think, involve some measure of "puzzle solving". While the GM is free to do this kind of thing in this game, there isn't anything in the book to really support this.

Is there a game that does this? Because this sounds like a lot fun to play.

 

[Dr Schultz]

Ever since Arcanum I have an intense dislike for systems that treat attribute, skill, and ability advancement the same and use a unified resource to do so.

They work on paper; they don't work on screen. If you are playing with a tabletop RPG which is all about role-playing and story-telling (take White Wolf systems, for instance) you want as much freedom as possible in character building. You don't care about balance issues, trash builds and stuff like that. You just come up with an idea for your character and you want a flexible system that allows you to materialize this idea.

 

[Excidium]

Ever since Arcanum I have an intense dislike for systems that treat attribute, skill, and ability advancement the same and use a unified resource to do so.

I don't really see the issue in this. Arcanum sucks.

 

[tuluse]

I don't really see the issue in this. Arcanum sucks.

It leads to confusion about how best to advance your character to achieve what you want and leads to balance problems. IE, Do I want to advance might which affects all melee combat and other physical skills or do I want to increase sword skill which only affects fighting with a sword?

On a subjective note leads to a feeling of over homogenization. It's usually more fun to have separate pools that you pick from for character advancement. Pick 2 spells from this list while assigning 6 skills points is more interesting than here's 8 points spend them how you will.

 

[Excidium]

I disagree. It all depends on how your system is designed. You'd want to increase sword instead of might if you're a swordmaster because you'll get more out of that XP when fighting with swords. Or you might want neither and use the exp to get a perk that lets you wield without penalty an exotic type of sword.

On a subjective note leads to a feeling of over homogenization.

Au contraire. It lets you custom-tailor your character, choosing when and how to improve certain aspects instead of getting a feat every third level or an attribute increase every 5 levels or something like that where every class has the same development model.

Pick 2 spells from this list while assigning 6 skills points is more interesting than here's 8 points spend them how you will.

I just find that boring. It might make sense in character creation, if you want to enforce certain themes or archetypes, but I like to have control over how I develop my character. What if I don't want to learn any new spells? I'd rather have more skills. I might be a wizard who focus on alchemy and only cares for a very specific set of spells.

 

[Stereotypical Villain]

Am I the only one on the Codex who feels that Torment should have been left alone?

 

[Infinitron]

Am I the only one on the Codex who feels that Torment should have been left alone?

It's not like they're making "PS:T 2 - Blood War Combat". Just pretend the new game doesn't have the word "Torment" in its title and left alone it remains.

 

[Excidium]

I would prefer original concepts instead of clones spiritual sequels too, but nostalgia is easier to fund.

 

[tuluse]

I would prefer original concepts instead of clones spiritual sequels too, but nostalgia is easier to fund.

I think there's room for both. Were people complaining when there were hundreds of Wizardy, M&M and Ultima games?

I'd just like a good cRPG to play, so it looks like neither one of us is getting our wish.

 

[crawlkill]

I don't really understand having a universal preference for "open" versus "closed" progression. The implementation in a specific context is what's gonna improve or hurt a game. Non-combative tabletop games are generally way less focused on numerical character progression than they are on what's going on at the table, and in cRPGs where you're battling predefined challenges (that is to say, being "viable" can be more important) it really depends on how well the systems are exposed to players. I like the big, chunky 'level ups' of Baldur's Gate and I like the impulsive hoarding and fits of lavish excess of Bloodlines.

On the other hand, when I re-re-re-re-replay Bloodlines these days, I do often use the console to 'sell back' dots when I get a book or item later on that lets me increase them 'for free' to a level I'd already spent XP to reach, so maybe I DO find freeform character advancement suboptimal in some ways and just cope with it well (although you could resolve that issue by just having the books or dialogue options that could grant 4 Firearms or whatever just give you the xp 4 Firearms had cost you if you already have it, a system I've never seen a game implement). One place I think it really didn't work, sadly, is in Shadowrun Returns. It feels like it works at first, but if you were to import a character from the first campaign into the second campaign, you'd already be as good at murder as you'd probably ever need to be, and would just be bloating up on excess with all your Karma earned. That can be fun, too, but it does feel a little weird. Ultimately I end up asking myself why I'm not just cheating myself in all the points and playing as an all-options god. (Has anyone done this in SR and reported back? Presumably you'd see everywhere there were ever dialogue/story options, be a good way to get a real look at how aware the game really is of your build.)

Thinking more about it, as wonderful as Fallouts 1 and 2 were, their skill system was a fucking mess. Not having any idea how high you really need to go with a skill to 'see everything' that's unlocked with it? To this day I'm never sure whether I should take Speech and Doctor to 100 or 150 or even higher to see all the various dialogue options, and I think that varies by difficulty setting, too. I DID like the way New Vegas did it, though, showing you how much you'd need to succeed at dialogue checks and giving you a goofy failure line you could go ahead and use anyway if you were too low. Even Torment suffered from the same kind of thing--will I be opening more dialogue options if I put my Charisma to 24 or my Wisdom to 19? Some of that kind of thing is inevitable with an open customization system, I guess. It can be a little aesthetically displeasing, especially for obsessives who like to create "as much as I need but no more" characters making sure they put -four- points into Wisdom at the start of the game so they can get the -14- Wisdom check in the Mortuary then ignoring it til they've got -12- Charisma so they can get the -1- Wisdom bonus from O in the tavern and get a further boost to experience so they'll be able to get to -18- Wisdom and Charisma by the Drowned Nations so they can talk their way past Skeletor and then pump Stamina to 14 so they can get the ring from the blind woman and--

You get what I'm saying. I sometimes try to play those games that way, upping stats only to the point that I know or guess they need to go then switching to up other stats so that I can get their unlocks and use that to fuel further progress. I'm not sure how I feel about having that kind of obsessive compulsiveness drawn out of me, but, well. I'm still doing it a decade and a half after first playing Baldur's Gate, so I guess it satisfies me on some level.

 

[Stereotypical Villain]

It's not like they're making "PS:T 2 - Blood War Combat". Just pretend the new game doesn't have the word "Torment" in its title and left alone it remains.

I can't ignore that part because the story (from what I've read) seems like a 1:1 copy of the original Torment, just transplanted into a new setting which one might argue sucks donkey balls.

Whatever, day one purchase none the less. I just hope- Huh... I still possess hope. Fancy that.