Torment Torment: Tides of Numenera Pre-Release Thread [ALPHA RELEASED, GO TO NEW THREAD]

[SarcasticUndertones]

This has to be scaled and added to the Hive collection.. It's the ultimate Brofist, from the ultimate bro.

 

[Snozgobler]

"the muscles of his face twitch and bob" could mean anything (I've never seen "bob" used that way before);

Ive never seen it used like that either. And it could very well be that muscles of his face do indeed twitch and bob.

Personally I don't see the issue here. "Bob" just means move up and down, either in a regular motion similar to an apple rising and falling with ripples in water or in an irregular fashion like a boxer "bobbing and weaving" to avoid giving their opponent an easy target. In this case I think it's intended as a literal description of the way the person looks. After all, with their skin hanging off them and this being the ninth world, who knows what is under their skin or indeed how their musculature works; they could easily have found some numernera artifact that led to their current state, for example a piece of symbiotic/parasitic nanomachinery that feeds off the host's muscle/body fat while simultaneously providing explosive muscle strength when threatened, but that produces uncontrollable spasms and ticks in the hosts muscles.

The whole point of Numenera is that there are a whole host of unexplained and unexplainable things that were created with knowledge that is now lost.

btw, since we are talking writing... ahem, i just took a look at what work you are doing. I have to say it sounds interesting and i like the art and the general idea.
So i took the added story to read. And the first few sentences go:

Herr left arm was crushed beneath some component of the lander, once critical, now useless. The dead weight of five bodies sat on her chest, her legs, her good arm.

"Some" makes the reader automatically ask or wonder: "which one?", but the remainder of the sentence tells its not important at all. Useless.
It would be better if it was merely "a component" or "one of the components" - i think.


"dead weight of five bodies sat on her chest" ?
I literally thought those were dead bodies of some of her fellow travelers or something like it, literally sitting on her chest? Bit crowded that would be. And strange for the dead to be sitting.
But its only the gravity? (if she is human that would make it impossible to move too)

How about something like: "The weight of five bodies pressed on her chest, her legs, her good arm." Or maybe, "She felt like weight of five bodies...- "

The wreckage held other casualties, too, beside her limb.

So... the other casualties were beside her limb... - which was somewhere else as in not attached to her?
very strange pictures you evoke in my mind there... i have to say.

And "But the others were dead too, -"
Why is there a "But" at the beginning when the situation is not any different then what was already rather established? If they were alive i could see the usage of "But" to signify something different.

Now, i dont mean anything by it. No ill intentions here. but i was just reading your analysis of the writing above and opened the free PDF from your page.

I thought I'd just chip in and note that in general you're being very literal in your interpretations of the text; in my opinion overly so as the sentences make perfect sense to me as they are. I'm not sure exactly where you're reading it from so I haven't read anything except what you quoted here, but:

Herr left arm was crushed beneath some component of the lander, once critical, now useless. The dead weight of five bodies sat on her chest, her legs, her good arm.

Other than spelling "her" with two r's, the sentence itself is fine. Saying "some" here adds to the idea that what component it is doesn't matter, it pulls from the off-hand phrase "something or other" which is commonly used to refer to something unimportant/uncared for. It could also convey the idea of a certain grogginess, not being clear what the item is exactly as she is still trying to get her bearings after being in the crash/explosion.

Saying something sat on her is perfectly fine, for example it's common to say something along the lines of "the cup sat on the counter" even though there is no way for a cup to literally "sit" as a human would. Another example would be "the fridge was sitting in a pool of water" as a description of a fridge that had broken down and defrosted; it just means "be or remain in a particular position or state".

The wreckage held other casualties, too, beside her limb.

In this case, beside is being used to mean "in addition to while apart from" i.e. "In addition to the loss of her limb, there were other casualties."

 

[MRY]

I don't understand this reply -- I think you've misread the spirit of my post. I myself don't try to describe things pictorially in my writing, so I didn't mean that as a criticism of TTON's writing, but as a defense of it (as if it needs my defense!). So, for example, I thought the use of "bob" was a pleasant novelty, pleasant not because it's an effective way to describe (pictorially) how something might be moving but precisely because it was evoked a kind of movement we don't associate with the movement of facial muscles. Again, the point (as I took it) wasn't to use a term that conjured a specific visual image but one that conjured unnaturalness.

As for your criticisms (?) of "Fallen," aside from being confused as to where the typo in "herr" is from (it's not in the versions of the story are that are posted online, nor in my copy), they seem totally off topic. I'm happy to chat about it via PM, or simply concede that my writing isn't very good, so that you can have closure in the thread.

[EDIT: Oops, because I have Hiver on ignore, I didn't realize you were responding to him, rather than to me! The perils of the ignore function. :/ Hiver -- sorry to say, but I found debating you too tempting a lure. Like Ulysses's rowers, I need the wax. Sorry.]

 

[Snozgobler]

I understood that you were generally being positive about the writing, I was just responding to both you and hiver saying you'd never seen the term "bob" used in that context by expressing my opinion that it made sense.

As you note, in the rest of the post (and the main reason I was replying really) I was responding to hiver's comments regarding something you wrote somewhere else to state that I believed his criticisms didn't seem to apply (in my opinion).

I found it hard to resist given that a good chunk of my day job is spent either proofreading stuff translated into English or evaluating language tests the company I work for sets job applicants.

 

[Xorazm]

Jesus, if this sucks, the butthurt could potentially kill the codex.

There will never be an RPG anywhere in the incline that will satisfy the Codex - a sizeable minority will hate every game that is released, no matter what, if for no other reason than because the closest reference points are already one full nostalgia away. I'm looking forward Torment and PoE if only to see what the nitpicks turn out to be.

You have to think of the Codex like the guy who lost his wife in a tragic accident a good decade ago. No matter how hot the girl is that you parade in front of him, there will always be that small part of him who won't care because it's just not her.

 

[hiver]

I don't understand this reply -- I think you've misread the spirit of my post. I myself don't try to describe things pictorially in my writing, so I didn't mean that as a criticism of TTON's writing, but as a defense of it (as if it needs my defense!). So, for example, I thought the use of "bob" was a pleasant novelty, pleasant not because it's an effective way to describe (pictorially) how something might be moving but precisely because it was evoked a kind of movement we don't associate with the movement of facial muscles. Again, the point (as I took it) wasn't to use a term that conjured a specific visual image but one that conjured unnaturalness.

As for your criticisms (?) of "Fallen," aside from being confused as to where the typo in "herr" is from (it's not in the versions of the story are that are posted online, nor in my copy), they seem totally off topic. I'm happy to chat about it via PM, or simply concede that my writing isn't very good, so that you can have closure in the thread.
The perils of the ignore function. :/ Hiver -- sorry to say, but I found debating you too tempting a lure. Like Ulysses's rowers, I need the wax. Sorry.

I didnt take your writing as criticism of TTON. Nor was my reply any kind of "vengeance" for it. I said so specifically. Or at least in a way that any normal sane person would interpret as such.

Your idea about the use of "bob" may be valid, was nicely put forward, i was just adding my own.
Which snozgobler copied and is now calling his idea.

aside from being confused as to where the typo in "herr" is from

Its from a typo i made.

they seem totally off topic.

of course. what else?

I'm happy to chat about it via PM,

Im happy to chat about it in broad daylight.

or simply concede that my writing isn't very good, so that you can have closure in the thread.

I see you took over the nasty habit of going around and implying what other people think from that shit at Iron Towers. I would suggest trying to drop it because it makes you look like the ones you hang out with.

Hiver -- sorry to say, but I found debating you too tempting a lure. Like Ulysses's rowers, I need the wax. Sorry.

If this is the way you carry your debates all the better for you. btw, sailors and wax... need i say more, eh, eh?

Debate is not really necessary or wanted.

Sometimes criticism is fun, even if not useful. Sometimes it hones one's own style and critical capacity, even if it doesn't help anyone else. These two reasons justify 90 percent of substantive posts online. But I think it's a kind of pleasure (a hardened kind) that's a lot easier to have in life than the delight of enjoying something you love. Best to be careful not to trade a rare good for a common one. I myself am already too far gone, of course.

:applause:

This has to be scaled and added to the Hive collection.. It's the ultimate Brofist, from the ultimate bro.

That is not for your pathetic hive.

 

[Sykar]

Jesus, if this sucks, the butthurt could potentially kill the codex.

There will never be an RPG anywhere in the incline that will satisfy the Codex - a sizeable minority will hate every game that is released, no matter what, if for no other reason than because the closest reference points are already one full nostalgia away. I'm looking forward Torment and PoE if only to see what the nitpicks turn out to be.

You have to think of the Codex like the guy who lost his wife in a tragic accident a good decade ago. No matter how hot the girl is that you parade in front of him, there will always be that small part of him who won't care because it's just not her.

You can't please everyone. It's as simple as that, regardless how good a game is, even if it's the greatest game ever made you will find people hating it.

 

[hiver]

Personally I don't see the issue here. "Bob" just means move up and down, either in a regular motion similar to an apple rising and falling with ripples in water or in an irregular fashion like a boxer "bobbing and weaving" to avoid giving their opponent an easy target. In this case I think it's intended as a literal description of the way the person looks.

Thats what i said.

After all, with their skin hanging off them and this being the ninth world, who knows what is under their skin or indeed how their musculature works; they could easily have found some numernera artifact that led to their current state, for example a piece of symbiotic/parasitic nanomachinery that feeds off the host's muscle/body fat while simultaneously providing explosive muscle strength when threatened, but that produces uncontrollable spasms and ticks in the hosts muscles.
The whole point of Numenera is that there are a whole host of unexplained and unexplainable things that were created with knowledge that is now lost.

Thats what i said. Although in not so many words.

Now, i dont mean anything by it. No ill intentions here. but i was just reading your analysis of the writing above and opened the free PDF from your page.

mkay, MRY?

I thought I'd just chip in and note that in general you're being very literal in your interpretations of the text;

Yes?

in my opinion overly so as the sentences make perfect sense to me as they are.

i never said they dont make sense or any sense.

Her left arm was crushed beneath some component of the lander, once critical, now useless. The dead weight of five bodies sat on her chest, her legs, her good arm.

Other than spelling "her" with two r's, the sentence itself is fine.

Just a typo i made.
I read it from a free story MRY gives for free at his site. Its a part of his game world, though not directly related to the game story.

Saying "some" here adds to the idea that what component it is doesn't matter, it pulls from the off-hand phrase "something or other" which is commonly used to refer to something unimportant/uncared for.

Could be... could be seen as if she is worrying about what that component might be. Its the whole sentence that tries to imply what the component actually is - is not important, but then specifies it was critical - then makes it irrelevant since its "now useless" - and it is completely irrelevant in the situation or what happens after.

It could also convey the idea of a certain grogginess, not being clear what the item is exactly as she is still trying to get her bearings after being in the crash/explosion.

The last thing anyone does when waking up in such a situation is worrying about what exact components are pinning their arm and how critical or useful it is.
The first thing anyone would think is "Fuck! i cant get my arm out!" and although that can be transferred in number of ways, thinking about how critical and useful that component is - is not one of them.
- it is not a situation where any repair is possible nor any of those components mean anything for the immediate survival - which is in the most critical emergency state -

Saying something sat on her is perfectly fine, for example it's common to say something along the lines of "the cup sat on the counter"

A "cup sitting on a counter" is slightly different then "dead five bodies sitting on someones chest", yes?

even though there is no way for a cup to literally "sit" as a human would. Another example would be "the fridge was sitting in a pool of water" as a description of a fridge that had broken down and defrosted; it just means "be or remain in a particular position or state".

I know what the term "sitting on" means or is used for in this context. I mean that the problem was in the description of increased gravity as "five dead bodies sitting on someones chest". It reads as if there were actual five dead bodies sitting on her.
Which is a very unfortunate way to describe gravity.

It was probably used to foreshadow the deaths of the rest of the crew - which is a bad and quite unnecessary thing to do since we find that out in the next few sentences of the prologue.

The wreckage held other casualties, too, beside her limb.

In this case, beside is being used to mean "in addition to while apart from" i.e. "In addition to the loss of her limb, there were other casualties."

I know what the writer tried to say.

The sentence can be very easily interpreted as meaning that the wreckage held other casualties and her limb. Implying it is somewhere further away from her. Or at least it can be read that way since it is somewhat badly put together, since we have already been told that one of her limbs is pinned under some component.

Of course one understands what the writer really wanted to say. But thats not exactly what someone would call the best possible writing.

 

[SarcasticUndertones]

That is not for your pathetic hive.

That has to be a line in a bad sci-fi movie, surely.

 

[Ninjerk]

Jesus, if this sucks, the butthurt could potentially kill the codex.

There will never be an RPG anywhere in the incline that will satisfy the Codex - a sizeable minority will hate every game that is released, no matter what, if for no other reason than because the closest reference points are already one full nostalgia away. I'm looking forward Torment and PoE if only to see what the nitpicks turn out to be.

You have to think of the Codex like the guy who lost his wife in a tragic accident a good decade ago. No matter how hot the girl is that you parade in front of him, there will always be that small part of him who won't care because it's just not her.

You said it yourself, "A sizable minority." There are segments of the Codex population that like ABC, and segments that like BDE, etc. That someone will not like some new game shouldn't really be a judgement against the Codex generally.

 

[Infinitron]

On lying in dialogue: https://forums.inxile-entertainment.com/viewtopic.php?f=32&t=12059&p=146308#p146196

Interesting discussion here. =)

One clarification: As Caerdon noted, a person's intentions have no bearing on the Tides. One reason we defined the Tides in this way is because we (as game developers) cannot objectively determine what motivations the player intends for the PC to have. If the Tides cared about motivations, then we'd have to guess -- and we'd doubtless get it wrong sometimes. Basing the Tides on actions still has its complications, but at least we aren't pretending we're mind readers.

Another reason we took this approach is because of our central theme of legacy. History judges people by their words and actions, not their motivations.

(Some have noted this, but to be explicit: we aren't planning to use "(Lie)" tags so that we can thwart you. =) We don't "win" by frustrating you or by serving you a Game Over death (unless you deserve it!). We are trying to aid you in telling and experiencing your story as the Last Castoff.)

Zombra and others have already done a good job of explaining some of the reasons we think Truth/Lie tags are a good idea, namely:

• So the dialogue can anticipate what you plan to do (e.g. if you say you're not going to hurt someone, but you mean it as a lie, the dialogue cannot possibly know this and will assume you meant it when you chose that option).
• Sometimes (especially if it's a stupid lie), an NPC might call you on it straight out. This would be rare, though, and it should never lead to disastrous outcomes (like death or combat).
• It reminds the player of what he actually knows or doesn't. (Most players, if they saw a response option that said "The attack is coming at dawn" without a (Lie) attached to it, would assume that was knowledge they learned somewhere and had forgotten.)
• It simplifies the number of cases we need to check for, i.e. if the player chooses a Response that doesn't say (Lie), the dialogue can assume the player meant it.
• It signals to the player whether or not they're going to be beholden to their choice.
• It gives players more options to roleplay (i.e. instead of just "I'm going to help you" and "I'm going to hurt you," there's a third intriguing option of "(Lie) I'm going to help you").

I'm simply very suspicious of the concept. Probably because NPCs, in games I've played so far, react differently, even though you're saying the same thing.

"I destroyed the MacGuffin of evil" [lie]
-Liar! *stabs PC in the kidney*

"I destroyed the MacGuffin of evil" [truth]
-"Oh thank you, great paragon of virtue! Have my wife, my village, and my grandmother's silver exoskeleton!"

And, even worse:

"I'll make sure not to take anything" [lie]
-"You know what? I don't trust you. Go away."

"I'll make sure not to take anything" [truth]
-"I trust you completely. Take this key. The combination to my safe is 1-2-3, and I put my collection of genitalia-shaped diamonds under my bed."

If the player gets clues that maybe the NPC can tell if you're lying, then that might be okay. Otherwise? Yeah, that looks like frustrating game design to me. In TTON, such situations (where failure to lie means really bad things) would be a Difficult Task for which the Deception Skill applies. So you'd know there's a chance the NPC won't buy it and something bad might happen (and you can also control how high that chance is with Effort).

And, worst of them all:

You've two options:
"I give you my word you'll be kept safe" [truth]
You're no longer able to attack the NPC.

"I'm going to poke your eyes out and skip rope with your entrails!" [attack]
You're now in combat with the NPC.

This is exactly what Truth/Lie is good for. Without those tags, you're stuck with a boring good/evil dichotomy as above. But with them, we can do this:

1. (Truth) "I give you my word you'll be kept safe." (You're no longer able to attack the NPC, and the dialogue knows this is okay with you because you expressly chose Truth)
2. (Lie) "I give you my word you'll be kept safe." (In this branch, you can attack the NPC later, and in fact the game expects you to, or at least to consider it).
3. [Attack] "I'm going to poke your eyes out!"

And in TTON (at least for some scenarios), we sometimes use a (Reconsider) tag. So if you chose #1 above, then later you might see these options:

1. "Thank you for your help. As promised, I won't harm you."
2. (Reconsider) "Thank you for your help. Now let me introduce you to your liver." [Attack]

But if you chose #2 above, your options would instead be this:

1. (Reconsider) "Thank you for your help. As promised, I won't harm you."
2. "Thank you for your help. Now let me introduce you to your liver." [Attack]

So really, it's about giving the player more options, and signaling the intent of a Response option to the player.

That said, keep in mind that in TTON the Truth/Lie tags won't show up all the time. It's really up to the writer of the conversation (or designer of the scenario) whether they think it's warranted. Our main goal is to give players a good array of choices. Truths/Lies are one possible way to do that.

3. PsT and TTON will both track your character personality with an "alignment" system. It therefore needs to be able to know your motives in order to do it effectively. The "tides" will play a significant role in TTON, and therefore it's important to give the appropriate data to the game.

Good post, but with this I disagree. The Tide system is not supposed to care about your intentions, only the consequences of your actions. And a lie is only realized when you act against what you say, so whether you really intended to lie or not is quite irrelevant from that perspective. (Well, that's what the devs have said, and that's how I hope it works, because alignments suck.)

Caerdon's got it right on this one. Although PST always used Truth/Lie to determine your Lawful/Chaotic alignment (and sometimes Good/Evil), TTON doesn't use Truth/Lies to determine your Tides. That's because Truth/Lie is about player motivation, and the Tides don't care about that,* nor do any of the five Tides care about honesty in any specific way.

* NOTE: We do bend this a little bit when the player voices their motivation. For example, the following Response might increase the Gold Tide:
[Attack] "I'm going to kill you because you're a bad person who murders people."

But this Response -- which has the same outcome (attacking the NPC) -- might increase the Red Tide:
[Attack] "I'm going to kill you because I feel like it."

These are simplistic examples, of course, but they illustrate how player motivation can influence the Tides if the player expressly voices it.

Hope that clears things up for you guys :D

Systems stuff: https://forums.inxile-entertainment.com/viewtopic.php?f=32&p=146348#p146348

For our Crises, we're looking at a system similar to Temple of Elemental Evil, where you get an attack action and a move action, or you can forego your attack for a double move.

As Caerdon stated, Intellect points are used for esoteries (and Might and Speed are used for other abilities as well). These stat points can be recovered by resting.

In Numenera tabletop, you get four kinds of rests, each requiring an increasing amount of time: 10 seconds (which you can do instead of your action in combat), 10 minutes, 1 hour, and 8 hours (sleeping). After the 8-hour rest, you get all of your other rests back.

In Torment, we're simplifying that a little bit, but we are keeping the basic idea. In particular, PCs will have a quick rest available during combat, and sleep will recover all your rest rolls (as well as allowing you to recover stats with any rest rolls you haven't used yet).

We're also using Sleep as a means of counting time. So when you Sleep, a day is assumed to have passed. This will have reactivity with certain events throughout each Zone. For example, two guys getting pissed off at each other in a bar might (if you don't do anything to push them one way or the other) have gotten into said fight while you were gone. So after you Sleep and return to the bar, there might be only one of the guys there with a black eye, or maybe both are gone and the barkeep tells you they got arrested for disturbing the peace, etc.

This way, we give the player more control over how fast time passes, and we can script much more interesting reactivity to time passing without worrying that the player is going to miss it all. (Some players might still miss some of it, and that's okay, but they won't miss it because they were taking their time exploring or because they left the game on for an hour while they went to eat dinner).

 

[Infinitron]

We're also using Sleep as a means of counting time. So when you Sleep, a day is assumed to have passed. This will have reactivity with certain events throughout each Zone. For example, two guys getting pissed off at each other in a bar might (if you don't do anything to push them one way or the other) have gotten into said fight while you were gone. So after you Sleep and return to the bar, there might be only one of the guys there with a black eye, or maybe both are gone and the barkeep tells you they got arrested for disturbing the peace, etc.

This way, we give the player more control over how fast time passes, and we can script much more interesting reactivity to time passing without worrying that the player is going to miss it all. (Some players might still miss some of it, and that's okay, but they won't miss it because they were taking their time exploring or because they left the game on for an hour while they went to eat dinner).

Hey Crooked Bee! http://www.rpgcodex.net/forums/inde...torment-tides-of-numenera.83223/#post-2666884

 

[FeelTheRads]

This is exactly what Truth/Lie is good for. Without those tags, you're stuck with a boring good/evil dichotomy as above. But with them, we can do this:

(Truth) "I give you my word you'll be kept safe." (You're no longer able to attack the NPC, and the dialogue knows this is okay with you because you expressly chose Truth)
(Lie) "I give you my word you'll be kept safe." (In this branch, you can attack the NPC later, and in fact the game expects you to, or at least to consider it).
[Attack] "I'm going to poke your eyes out!"


And in TTON (at least for some scenarios), we sometimes use a (Reconsider) tag. So if you chose #1 above, then later you might see these options:

"Thank you for your help. As promised, I won't harm you."
(Reconsider) "Thank you for your help. Now let me introduce you to your liver." [Attack]


But if you chose #2 above, your options would instead be this:

(Reconsider) "Thank you for your help. As promised, I won't harm you."
"Thank you for your help. Now let me introduce you to your liver." [Attack]

Not sure what to think about this. In Torment you could tell the "Truth" but still do the opposite which would move you towards the chaotic side.
I haven't actually read too much about the Tides so maybe this doesn't fit, I don't know.

But at least I don't like the idea of not being able to attack someone because I said I won't. So it doesn't look like more options for the player, but rather easier scripting for the developers, unless you will always and at any time have the option to reconsider.

 

[Infinitron]

Well, we've known for some time already that Torment won't let you attack at will. For a long time there were only supposed to be like 12 battles in the entire game.

 

[FeelTheRads]

I see. OK, it makes more sense from that perspective.
It just rubs me the wrong that one point you can do something but doing a metagame choice then stops you.

For example:

- I kill you! [Attack]

Stopping you from accessing a quest or a location -> Good.

- I will protect you! [Truth]

Stopping you from attacking him -> Bad.

 

[hiver]

We're also using Sleep as a means of counting time. So when you Sleep, a day is assumed to have passed. This will have reactivity with certain events throughout each Zone. For example, two guys getting pissed off at each other in a bar might (if you don't do anything to push them one way or the other) have gotten into said fight while you were gone. So after you Sleep and return to the bar, there might be only one of the guys there with a black eye, or maybe both are gone and the barkeep tells you they got arrested for disturbing the peace, etc.

This way, we give the player more control over how fast time passes, and we can script much more interesting reactivity to time passing without worrying that the player is going to miss it all. (Some players might still miss some of it, and that's okay, but they won't miss it because they were taking their time exploring or because they left the game on for an hour while they went to eat dinner).

Hey Crooked Bee! http://www.rpgcodex.net/forums/inde...torment-tides-of-numenera.83223/#post-2666884

So absolutely nothing changes until i go and sleep?
There is no passage of time in the game at all, otherwise?
A hostage situation or a suicide case getting ready to jump will be in stasis no matter what i do and nothing will change UNLESS i go and sleep?


Figures.

Half solutions so everyone can eat the cake and have it to.
InXile design style.

 

[Athelas]

Why don't they make use of the day/night cycle of the PoE engine?

 

[hiver]

Because then the "target audience" will not be able to have its cake and eat it too, duh. Obviously.

But its alright, I actually prefer them not to use my ideas too much. Far better if i can be the first to actually use them one day.

 

[Infinitron]

InXile has solved Zeno's paradox. Achilles caught up with the tortoise after sleeping.

 

[tuluse]

This is perfectly fine. Time in rpgs is abstract anyways. Plus, InXile can do specific "you have to do this thing next" quests on top of it.

 

[Athelas]

Uh, so do we know what the titular Tides actually are (and why they don't care about your motivation)? I'm guessing they'll be a major plot point in the game.

 

[Perkel]

Considering numenera setting and its mythos they can say that time is relative to frame of reference in which case frame of reference is player not actual character or narrator thus concept of time can be moved and shifted as they want with things like one part of city being in night and other in sun.

edit:

in simplier words:

Story is told from narrator point of view not from character point of view. In this case time can move and shift without causing continuity problems.

As : Narrator focused on that part of story more thus days and nights are longer or there is only a day or night where in other case time can move freely.

 

[Athelas]

Obsidian should hire you to explain to the players why both warriors and mages have their damage determined by the same stat.

 

[tuluse]

Uh, so do we know what the titular Tides actually are (and why they don't care about your motivation)? I'm guessing they'll be a major plot point in the game.

Only if you call an explanation on the kickstarter main page knowing.

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/inxile/torment-tides-of-numenera

 

[Athelas]

I was wondering if they revealed anything more specific than 'unseen forces'. I guess not.

Though this answers my question somewhat:

You'll learn more about the Tides as you explore Torment.