New OOTS products from CafePress
New OOTS t-shirts, ornaments, mugs, bags, and more
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 36
  1. - Top - End - #1
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Kaun's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    The DownUnderdark!
    Gender
    Male

    Default Numenera: General Discussion.

    What is Numenera?

    Ok, i really just wanted to ask a rule question about Numenera but it seemed like a waste to start a thread for just one question. So feel free to ask other questions or just talk Numenera in general.

    My question is;

    If you expend effort on an action and the action fails is the expended effort lost? (do you still lower your pool)

    At first i thought the answer was obviously yes but i was reading the book last night and it was talking about how if you cast a touch based Estorie it isn't expended until a successful touch attack is made and the wording kinda made it sound like effort isn't lost in an unsuccessful action either.

    Aside from that i am loving the rules system.

    Character creation had me worried for a bit but in the end i think it rounds out nicely. It defiantly seems like you can build some interesting characters with it.

    The world interests me a lot but i have yet to read much of the fluff section of the book.

    The in game economy seems to be a little odd. For example a drink at a bar costs the same price as a dagger. I am not sure how this will play out in the long run but i would be willing to give it a crack.

    All and all i am defiantly keen to run the game. It looks like it would be fun for the GM.

    I was a bit confused by the price of the hardcover. In Aus i have noticed most of the FLGS have been retailing it for around $80AUD where as it can be bought from Amazon for half that price. I usually like to support my FLGS but that price difference is a bit much to ignore.
    Aside from "have fun", i think the key to GMing is putting your players into situations where they need to make a choice that has no perfect outcome available. They will hate you for it, but they will be back at the table session after session.

  2. - Top - End - #2
    Titan in the Playground
     
    CarpeGuitarrem's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2008

    Default Re: Numenera: General Discussion.

    I'm positive that effort is expended no matter what. (It's the GUMSHOE system, effectively, just multiplied by three.) The reason a touch-based Esotery doesn't expend effort except on a successful touch attack would seem to be because the touch attack is a precursor to whatever roll you make to cast the Esotery? I don't actually own the book, but that's what it sounds like to me.

    (I played in a short-run campaign of this. Tons of interesting weird stuff flying around.)

    The Difficulty scale bugs me a little--it just seems like an obtusely extra layer of math to go through. If it were me, I'd just use DCs ranging from 3 to 30.

    Otherwise, it runs nice and fluidly.
    Ludicrus Gaming: on games and story
    Quote Originally Posted by Saph
    Unless everyone's been lying to me and the next bunch of episodes are The Great Divide II, The Great Divide III, Return to the Great Divide, and Bride of the Great Divide, in which case I hate you all and I'm never touching Avatar again.

  3. - Top - End - #3
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Kaun's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    The DownUnderdark!
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Numenera: General Discussion.

    Quote Originally Posted by CarpeGuitarrem View Post
    I'm positive that effort is expended no matter what. (It's the GUMSHOE system, effectively, just multiplied by three.) The reason a touch-based Esotery doesn't expend effort except on a successful touch attack would seem to be because the touch attack is a precursor to whatever roll you make to cast the Esotery? I don't actually own the book, but that's what it sounds like to me.
    Yeah thats the way i figured it would work but the wording made it a little confusing.

    Quote Originally Posted by CarpeGuitarrem View Post
    (I played in a short-run campaign of this. Tons of interesting weird stuff flying around.)

    The Difficulty scale bugs me a little--it just seems like an obtusely extra layer of math to go through. If it were me, I'd just use DCs ranging from 3 to 30.

    Otherwise, it runs nice and fluidly.
    Yeah i really like the difficulty scaling thing. It seems very fluid to me. The DC/TN is something you only need to worry about if you cant get the Action Difficulty down to 0
    Aside from "have fun", i think the key to GMing is putting your players into situations where they need to make a choice that has no perfect outcome available. They will hate you for it, but they will be back at the table session after session.

  4. - Top - End - #4
    Titan in the Playground
     
    CarpeGuitarrem's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2008

    Default Re: Numenera: General Discussion.

    We also discovered an interesting thing: the game is brutal until you get to tier up, at which point things become way easier (and you face bigger challenges). Being able to spend extra Effort (and get Edge discounts) counts for a lot.
    Ludicrus Gaming: on games and story
    Quote Originally Posted by Saph
    Unless everyone's been lying to me and the next bunch of episodes are The Great Divide II, The Great Divide III, Return to the Great Divide, and Bride of the Great Divide, in which case I hate you all and I'm never touching Avatar again.

  5. - Top - End - #5
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Zejety's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Germany
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Numenera: General Discussion.

    We played a brief session including character creation and explaining the system last week. It was definitely fun and I like how easy it is for the DM to improvise.

    System-wise I share some common concerns I have read in different places:
    • For a system that puts allegedly less focus on combat, the Glaive is incredibly specialized in that role. The huge majority of its class features is combat-centric (and limited to numeric bonuses of all things). This is 3.5 all over again but with combat playing a smaller role...
      This is somewhat mitigated by the extra abilities granted by foci and Numenera but these are available to all character types. Also, the mundane combat foci are super boring again and almost entirely made up of numerical bonuses.
    • There seems to be little reason to invest into Strength Edge over Speed Edge.

    Apart from that, the system and setting seem like a lot of fun!

  6. - Top - End - #6
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Morty's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Poland
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Numenera: General Discussion.

    From my brief foray into the rules, my first and foremost conclusion is that Monte Cook really can't come up with interesting non-magical abilities to save his life. Glaive and Jack abilities are tremendously boring, and there's significant overlap between them.
    My FFRP characters. Avatar by Ashen Lilies. Sigatars by Ashen Lilies, Gullara and Purple Eagle.
    Interested in the Nexus FFRP setting? See our Discord server.

  7. - Top - End - #7
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Kaun's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    The DownUnderdark!
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Numenera: General Discussion.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zejety View Post
    • There seems to be little reason to invest into Strength Edge over Speed Edge.

    Apart from that, the system and setting seem like a lot of fun!
    I have had to put down the book recently and im a little tiered so forgive me if i get this wrong, but can't you exert strength effort to increase damage?
    Aside from "have fun", i think the key to GMing is putting your players into situations where they need to make a choice that has no perfect outcome available. They will hate you for it, but they will be back at the table session after session.

  8. - Top - End - #8
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Zejety's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Germany
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Numenera: General Discussion.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kaun View Post
    I have had to put down the book recently and im a little tiered so forgive me if i get this wrong, but can't you exert strength effort to increase damage?
    You are right, but you can can also use Speed Edge for that. And ranged attacks. And evading attacks. :(

    If you go by RAW then you can use:

    Strength for:
    • Melee hit chance
    • Melee damage
    • Strength defense
    • Strength-based skills

    Speed for:
    • Melee hit chance
    • Melee damage
    • Ranged hit chance
    • Ranged damage
    • Speed defense (very common, defense against generic attacks)
    • Speed-based skills

  9. - Top - End - #9
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Kaun's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    The DownUnderdark!
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Numenera: General Discussion.

    I didn't think speed could be used for melee damage? I would have to pull the book out when i got home to be sure though.

    I know the main advantage of the strength pool is that it is your first line of defense for taking damage. So players with a big strength pool can take more damage before it starts to slow them down. That's not a reason to get strength edge though.
    Aside from "have fun", i think the key to GMing is putting your players into situations where they need to make a choice that has no perfect outcome available. They will hate you for it, but they will be back at the table session after session.

  10. - Top - End - #10
    Pixie in the Playground
     
    ElfPirate

    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Virginia
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Numenera: General Discussion.

    Overall like the system (though I've only managed to actually play 3 times due to issues getting the gaming group together).

    My one complaint would probably be in the occasional +1 or +2 to rolls. The rules feel so simple and easy to run, until suddenly somebody has a +1 from somewhere, thena +2 from somewhere else, then another +1... which results in reducing the difficulty by 1 step and still having a +1.

    OK, sure, it's the same as if they had a total of +4 once you roll the dice, but I'll admit to liking things to be as simple and clean as possible.

    I write books (3 novels so far).
    Why does my party think all alignments boil down to murderhobo?

  11. - Top - End - #11
    Halfling in the Playground
     
    WrathMage's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    The Midlands, UK
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Numenera: General Discussion.

    I really like the system if I'm honest. It allowed me to focus on running the story and describing the world, without having to spend an age planning things out. It certainly makes a nice change from the planning required for 3.5/PF.

    I am planning on getting the other books in print when they come out (I have them coming on pdf as one of the Kickstarter backers) and hopefully I can get it into my gaming groups rotation of games on a regular basis.

  12. - Top - End - #12
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Kaun's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    The DownUnderdark!
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Numenera: General Discussion.

    yeah i think i will try running it soon.

    I like the setting itself so far. The way the book is set up give you a good amount of information to get you thinking but not so much that you feel bogged down.
    Aside from "have fun", i think the key to GMing is putting your players into situations where they need to make a choice that has no perfect outcome available. They will hate you for it, but they will be back at the table session after session.

  13. - Top - End - #13
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Planetar

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Material Plane
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Numenera: General Discussion.

    Eh...

    I do like the setting but the mechanics of the game are horrible. Especially if you are a Glaive (hate the name). I really don't feel like picking glaive "special" moves if I ever advance a tier. In D&D-terms most of them are just Power Attacks with different settings... at total BAB of -3 to +1... cast from your hit points.

    The game could use more classes or, you know... make away with the classes. Warrior-mage-thief is so 80's it's not even funny. However, Descriptor and Focus are really cool.

    I hope the second edition will be better.
    Signatures are so 90's.

  14. - Top - End - #14
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Kaun's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    The DownUnderdark!
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Numenera: General Discussion.

    Quote Originally Posted by Raimun View Post
    Eh...

    I do like the setting but the mechanics of the game are horrible. Especially if you are a Glaive (hate the name). I really don't feel like picking glaive "special" moves if I ever advance a tier. In D&D-terms most of them are just Power Attacks with different settings... at total BAB of -3 to +1... cast from your hit points.
    Yeah i can agree some of the fighting moves are less then impressive. And everything in this game burns your hit points theoretically but with the right edge points the cast cost can be avoided completely though.

    Quote Originally Posted by Raimun View Post
    The game could use more classes or, you know... make away with the classes. Warrior-mage-thief is so 80's it's not even funny.
    See i didn't even think of the game as having classes. The character type, which is what you referring too, is just a way determining your characters preference. Be it Martial combat, skills, or "magic".

    I'm not sure what other ones you could really add?

    Sure they could all do with a few more options per tier, but i'm not sure what other "types" could be made.

    The Focus element of the character really gives it a lot more of its individuality, which is why i think they suggest not having more the one of any focus in a game. The Focus is closer to being a "class" then the character type is. They game has a fair few Focus's to choose from but more options would be welcome i would think.

    I can defiantly see how Numenera wouldn't be to everybody's tastes though.
    Last edited by Kaun; 2014-04-15 at 08:15 PM.
    Aside from "have fun", i think the key to GMing is putting your players into situations where they need to make a choice that has no perfect outcome available. They will hate you for it, but they will be back at the table session after session.

  15. - Top - End - #15
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Morty's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Poland
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Numenera: General Discussion.

    Quote Originally Posted by Raimun View Post
    The game could use more classes or, you know... make away with the classes. Warrior-mage-thief is so 80's it's not even funny.
    Quite, especially since there's so much overlap between glaives and jacks.
    My FFRP characters. Avatar by Ashen Lilies. Sigatars by Ashen Lilies, Gullara and Purple Eagle.
    Interested in the Nexus FFRP setting? See our Discord server.

  16. - Top - End - #16
    Titan in the Playground
     
    CarpeGuitarrem's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2008

    Default Re: Numenera: General Discussion.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kaun View Post

    The Focus element of the character really gives it a lot more of its individuality, which is why i think they suggest not having more the one of any focus in a game. The Focus is closer to being a "class" then the character type is. They game has a fair few Focus's to choose from but more options would be welcome i would think.
    Absolutely. The most defining bit of my character wasn't that they were a nano, it was that they were a nano who was out-of-phase with reality.
    Ludicrus Gaming: on games and story
    Quote Originally Posted by Saph
    Unless everyone's been lying to me and the next bunch of episodes are The Great Divide II, The Great Divide III, Return to the Great Divide, and Bride of the Great Divide, in which case I hate you all and I'm never touching Avatar again.

  17. - Top - End - #17
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Planetar

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Material Plane
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Numenera: General Discussion.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kaun View Post
    Yeah i can agree some of the fighting moves are less then impressive. And everything in this game burns your hit points theoretically but with the right edge points the cast cost can be avoided completely though.



    See i didn't even think of the game as having classes. The character type, which is what you referring too, is just a way determining your characters preference. Be it Martial combat, skills, or "magic".

    I'm not sure what other ones you could really add?

    Sure they could all do with a few more options per tier, but i'm not sure what other "types" could be made.

    The Focus element of the character really gives it a lot more of its individuality, which is why i think they suggest not having more the one of any focus in a game. The Focus is closer to being a "class" then the character type is. They game has a fair few Focus's to choose from but more options would be welcome i would think.

    I can defiantly see how Numenera wouldn't be to everybody's tastes though.
    C'mon, glaive, nano and jack are fighter, mage and thief with different names. They define the character *mechanically* more than any other factor in the game. I'm also pretty sure it would be possible to add more types. I mean, does everyone in the world really identify as one of the three types? Either that or let everyone pick the things the three types offer.
    Signatures are so 90's.

  18. - Top - End - #18
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Morty's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Poland
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Numenera: General Discussion.

    I wonder how hard it would be to excise classes from Numenera and just let the players pick whatever abilities they feel like picking.
    My FFRP characters. Avatar by Ashen Lilies. Sigatars by Ashen Lilies, Gullara and Purple Eagle.
    Interested in the Nexus FFRP setting? See our Discord server.

  19. - Top - End - #19
    Titan in the Playground
     
    CarpeGuitarrem's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2008

    Default Re: Numenera: General Discussion.

    Quote Originally Posted by Raimun View Post
    C'mon, glaive, nano and jack are fighter, mage and thief with different names. They define the character *mechanically* more than any other factor in the game. I'm also pretty sure it would be possible to add more types. I mean, does everyone in the world really identify as one of the three types? Either that or let everyone pick the things the three types offer.
    I don't think it's necessarily the bit with the most mechanical definition. The fact that my character was able to slowly pass through walls? Pretty definitive. Existing halfway in this world and another world was also incredibly definitive when it came to the shape of the story.

    The fighter/rogue/mage triad is just a foundation to build the rest of the character around, and the main difference it makes is: what your optimum stat is, whether you get innate special powers, and how many skills you have. Mix that with cyphers, and I found that in practice, it really isn't all that much of a bugaboo.
    Ludicrus Gaming: on games and story
    Quote Originally Posted by Saph
    Unless everyone's been lying to me and the next bunch of episodes are The Great Divide II, The Great Divide III, Return to the Great Divide, and Bride of the Great Divide, in which case I hate you all and I'm never touching Avatar again.

  20. - Top - End - #20
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Kaun's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    The DownUnderdark!
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Numenera: General Discussion.

    Quote Originally Posted by Raimun View Post
    C'mon, glaive, nano and jack are fighter, mage and thief with different names. They define the character *mechanically* more than any other factor in the game. I'm also pretty sure it would be possible to add more types. I mean, does everyone in the world really identify as one of the three types? Either that or let everyone pick the things the three types offer.
    What ones would you add?
    Aside from "have fun", i think the key to GMing is putting your players into situations where they need to make a choice that has no perfect outcome available. They will hate you for it, but they will be back at the table session after session.

  21. - Top - End - #21
    Firbolg in the Playground
    Join Date
    Dec 2010

    Default Re: Numenera: General Discussion.

    I'd tend to go with the idea of removing Glaive/Nano/Jack entirely rather than adding more. I think the problem is that the way the book reads you expect it to run like D&D - first you pick your class and thats the most important thing, then you pick some quirks/side things that are basically elaboration. But that's basically wrong, and if that's your expectation it's going to be very jarring.

    Really the way it should be seen is 'your focus is your big thing, and the Glaive/Nano/Jack thing is essentially a handful of mechanical tweaks you can make to your character to specialize them in various ways'. The Jack and Glaive abilities are basically all number tweaks, and the Nano abilities are in a class all their own and probably should be doled out across Foci or Cyphers rather than be gathered into a single class.

    That said, I haven't had a chance to play it or run it, just talking with people on the Numenera site about their games and things like that, so in practice may be very different than in theory.

  22. - Top - End - #22
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Kaun's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    The DownUnderdark!
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Numenera: General Discussion.

    Quote Originally Posted by NichG View Post
    I think the problem is that the way the book reads you expect it to run like D&D - first you pick your class and thats the most important thing, then you pick some quirks/side things that are basically elaboration. But that's basically wrong, and if that's your expectation it's going to be very jarring.
    Yeah. After reading this thread and re reading the character creation section I do think this is the core of the issue. The book places far too much importance on the Type over the Descriptor and the Focus. I will go more into this in a second.

    Quote Originally Posted by NichG View Post
    Really the way it should be seen is 'your focus is your big thing, and the Glaive/Nano/Jack thing is essentially a handful of mechanical tweaks you can make to your character to specialize them in various ways'. The Jack and Glaive abilities are basically all number tweaks, and the Nano abilities are in a class all their own and probably should be doled out across Foci or Cyphers rather than be gathered into a single class.
    I’m not sure I agree with you on the Nano point, but in saying that I am yet to play either (planning to start a game at the moment) so my view may change on this. On my first read through, my opinion was the same as yours NichG, that the Focus is the key component of the Character Statement. After contemplating Raimun’s opinion on the game needing more Types I have since changed my mind.

    I am now of the frame mind that the three sections of a Character Statement (Descriptor, Type and Focus) are of equal importance. But… in saying that, one section of the Character Statement may become the key component depending on the character a player wants to build.

    Why and how did I come to that opinion? Thanks to Raumun’s comments I decided to try and build a few of the other core DnD characters and see what happened. For no particular reason I started with Ranger.

    Building a Numenera ranger

    Spoiler: Wall of text warning!!
    Show
    I wanted to stick with a fairly core concept of a dnd ranger, being the wilderness warrior, at home in nature kinda vibe. And because of that the Descriptor became the core part of the Character Statement.

    Quote Originally Posted by Numenera p49
    Descriptor: Rugged

    This descriptor gives my character the following;
    Skill: You’re trained in all tasks involving climbing, jumping, running, and swimming.
    Skill: You’re trained in all tasks involving training, riding, or placating natural animals.
    Skill: You’re trained in all tasks involving identifying or using natural plants.

    Inability: You have no social graces and prefer animals to people. The difficulty of any task involving charm, persuasion, etiquette, or deception is increased by one step.

    Additional Equipment: You carry an explorer’s pack. If you already have one, you can instead take 50 extra feet (15 m) of rope, two more days’ worth of rations, and an extra ranged weapon.
    Ok so from there I have covered a lot of the key elements of the stereotypical Ranger purely from my choice of descriptor. Now I can use my Type and Focus to shape the character into the type of Ranger I want it to be.

    First we will look at Type here:

    Glaive:

    The character would get 1 effort just like all tier one character.

    A speed and Might edge of 1. Glaive’s are they only Type to start with two Edges so that’s nice.

    The character could bare two Cyphers at a time.

    Practiced with armor. which makes wearing heavier armor easier.

    Trained in the use of all weapons.

    Physical Skills: You are trained in your choice of one of the following: balancing, climbing, jumping,
    or swimming. Enabler. So the character would be specialized in one of these due to the Descriptor overlap, unless I chose balance.

    Equipment, which I won’t delve too far into…

    And two fighting moves. Fighting moves will improve the character in certain aspects of combat.

    As the character progresses up tiers it will continue to become a more accomplished combatant. Glaives are the only type that become skilled in attack skills (as far as I can tell, feel free to correct me) plus they have a range of fighting moves to choose from. I will admit the fighting moves are a bit bland at times but there is some useful stuff in there.

    So if I want my character to be a more competent warrior this Type seems like the way to go.



    Jack:

    Effort 1 as with all.

    One edge of my choosing. Which is nice as it gives the option to pick the one I would get the most use out of.

    The character can bear two cyphers which puts me on par with Glaive for the moment.

    Skilled in light and medium weapons. That gives the character a decent amount of choice.

    One additional skill. So I could add something like Survival or Hunting, to booster my skill range more.

    Flex skill. This is a nice little trick which gives the character the ability to pick a skill at the start of each day to be trained in (not attack or defence skills). You can’t use it to become specialized but it does mean my character can adapt to its surroundings better.

    Equipment which I will leave alone.

    And two tricks of the trade. With the tricks of the trade I can augment certain aspects of my character. I can improve the characters ability to wear armour or give it a basic fighting move or add a low level Esoterie.

    As the character progresses up tiers it will gain a lot of extra skills, enabling it to specialize in its existing skills or add some new ones. And more tricks of the trade which include some fighting moves and utility abilities which could be useful in many situations.

    So if I want my character to be a more accomplished outdoorsman with an interesting assortment of abilities to call on this Type seems to be the way to go.



    Nano:

    1 effort

    1 Intellect edge.

    Can bear three cyphers. Which is more than the other types.

    Practiced with light weapons. So the characters choice of weapons is much more limited than the other types.

    Numenera Training: So the character would be trained in the understanding and use of Numenera.

    Equipment, like the other Types I will skip this.

    Esoteries: Magic spells! Pick two. Esoteries can do a bunch of stuff as a character goes up tiers but at tier one I can; Cast prestidigitation (or hedge magic as its referred to in this game). There is an attack spell, a defence spell, a sort of clumsy telekinesis one. And Scan, which is a funky, “would you like to know more?” kinda spell.

    As the character progresses up tiers it would get two things. One the ability to use more cyphers than any other Type and two, more spe….Esotories. Both of these seem really useful as there is a range of Esoteries to choose from which do all different kind of things and cyphers are generally cool.

    So if I want my character to have more of a Druid feel rather than ranger maybe this is the type for me.


    So to sum the type section up; While through the Rugged Descriptor I retain my Ranger outdoors-man feel for the character, my Type selection will guide the progress of the character towards a certain (I don’t want to use the word focus but it’s the word I want!!) style of problem solving… eh i'm not sure of that makes sense either. Lets try again; the Type choice will determine my characters preference for combat skill, general skill and utility or magic.

    Now lets look at Focus:

    Focus adds a lot of flavour to the character which is why it seems to be such a fun section to look through. The book also recommends not have two players with the same Focus in a game, which I can understand, as the Focus element of the Character Statement really gives the character its individuality.


    Ok I’m not going to go through all of them, so sticking to the classic ranger shtick, here are some obvious ones;

    Carries a quiver:

    This Focus will help make the character into the classic ranger bow sniper.

    It gives you a well-made bow and some arrows, plus at tier one the character becomes a trained fletcher, so it can make more arrows. It allows you to tap into your intellect pool in addition to your speed pool for archery attacks plus you get more bang for your buck when using effort on archery damage.
    As the character goes up tiers it gets more archery tricks, training in archery attacks and becomes an accomplished bowyer (making bows).

    Hunts with great skill:

    This Focus will make the character into more specialized huntsmen.

    It improves the characters tracking, movement and stealth abilities plus it gives you a bunch of interesting and useful abilities for bringing down your current prey of choice.

    Lives in the wilderness:

    This Focus will turn your character into a master, survivalist, scout and all round outdoorsman (or women)

    This will increase the characters abilities to survive off the land, navigation and a better understanding of the flora and fauna it encounters. Plus it gives the character a few tricks to utilize when it’s away from civilization.

    Wields two weapons at once:

    If you want the character to do the old duel wielding ranger shtick this Focus would be the option to choose.

    It augments combat abilities with some nice tricks and bonuses.


    Controls Beasts:

    This is the Focus option for a character that wants an animal companion.

    The animal companion will help the character and grows in strength as the character goes up tiers. The character also ends up with a mount by tier three and gets a few nifty animal related abilities over the tiers.

    So my choice of Focus will add more flavor to my “Ranger” build concept for the character, while not being a stereotypical class in itself.

    And my choice in Focus doesn't exclude me from doing other things, if just focuses my chosen specialization. Gives the character a key element which makes it more individual.

    For example; I could use a bow even if I didn't pick the Focus “Carries a quiver”, I would just never be as an accomplished archer. Or I could still have a pet without choosing “Controls beasts”. The character and its pet would never achieve the heightened level of connection though.


    So to sum up my thoughts on Numenera character creation;

    In my opinion, when writing Numenera, it may have been a poor choice to emphasize the character Type the key component of the Character Statement. Each section of the Character Statement is equally important. And it’s only when a player sits down to create a character that they can put a priority on any particular section over another.

    I think the better way to build a Numenera character is to come up with a core concept for your character. Find the elements/s which best represent that concept in any part/s of the Character Statement. Then use the other parts of the Character Statement to add flavor or enhance your character concept.

    In my Ranger example I could have attacked the problem from a completely different way. I could have decided that the "Lives in the wilderness" Focus was the key element of the statement and built my character from that outwards.

    In the end i made a Rugged Jack who carries a quiver.

    He has a decent range of skills and abilities for surviving in the wilderness, plus he can become a competent guide or tracker if need be. He is an above average marksman who carries a well made bow.

    Last edited by Kaun; 2014-04-21 at 11:01 PM.
    Aside from "have fun", i think the key to GMing is putting your players into situations where they need to make a choice that has no perfect outcome available. They will hate you for it, but they will be back at the table session after session.

  23. - Top - End - #23
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Gamgee's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Canada Land
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Numenera: General Discussion.

    Numenera Character Options is a softcover book due out soon, also there has been tons of glimmers released on drivethrurpg. I like the glimmers, but as high quality as they are I really want a nice full book. I wish it would be hardcover, but softcover will have to suffice. Bestiary is out in stores or should be available online as well. Lots of great stuff in it and the book itself is of high quality build.
    They say hope begins in the dark, but most just flail around in the blackness...searching for their destiny. The darkness... for me... is where I shine. - Riddick

    Exile

    Deny a monochrome future!!! -Radio Gosha-

  24. - Top - End - #24
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Kaun's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    The DownUnderdark!
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Numenera: General Discussion.

    I like the core books GM section.

    It's nothing i haven't read on forums before but i like that they have included advice for dealing with troublesome players, tips on how to make the world more out there via your descriptions. Advice on not trying to write the story before the game begins. Dealing with curve balls.

    Its nice to see that they have tried to have a crack at it.

    My game starts in a couple weeks, i will post up some info about how it goes.
    Aside from "have fun", i think the key to GMing is putting your players into situations where they need to make a choice that has no perfect outcome available. They will hate you for it, but they will be back at the table session after session.

  25. - Top - End - #25
    Pixie in the Playground
     
    ElfPirate

    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Virginia
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Numenera: General Discussion.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kaun View Post
    My game starts in a couple weeks, i will post up some info about how it goes.
    Good luck.
    My playgroup seems to like the system well enough, but we're having a lot of trouble getting together to play in person.

    I like reading through all of the world descriptions. Monte said in an interview that they tried to make the book feel like a travel guide, and I think that was quite successful. I can't wait to bring my group to some of the fantastic locations out in the Beyond. Quite curious what we could do with the Banstalk and the Clock.

    I write books (3 novels so far).
    Why does my party think all alignments boil down to murderhobo?

  26. - Top - End - #26
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Gamgee's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Canada Land
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Numenera: General Discussion.

    The game I am running is going good. They have gotten turned into Zhaal four armed cyborg gorilla like creatures by some troublemaker nano. This was way out at some mysterious machine that rests out in the beyond. I can't quite remember what this location was but it was described in the book, and I just made **** up and went for it.

    They are now far from there and uncovering the secrets how to to transform back to human form and defeat the little kid nano. Thankfully they can still speak ordinary human languages. My players don't know this but I'm going to incorporate a majora's mask style element into the game. Where they will slowly uncover the ability to take the forms of others by using a mask that can transform them. However in order to do so the person they are copying must be dying and without able to be healed/cured. So as they go on they can earn new transformations that will make sense form the story point.

    So far my players love it a lot.

    I'm greatly looking forward to hosting more games. Currently alternating between Only War, Deathwatch, Numenera, and the very rare Pathfinder.

    Edit
    Got my character options on preorder.
    Last edited by Gamgee; 2014-05-11 at 05:35 AM.
    They say hope begins in the dark, but most just flail around in the blackness...searching for their destiny. The darkness... for me... is where I shine. - Riddick

    Exile

    Deny a monochrome future!!! -Radio Gosha-

  27. - Top - End - #27
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Kaun's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    The DownUnderdark!
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Numenera: General Discussion.

    Ok here is a question that somebody here may be able to solve for me.

    In the skill section of character creation (p25 core book)...

    You could choose a skill that incorporates more than one of these areas (interacting might include deceiving, intimidating,
    and persuading) or is a more specific version of one (hiding might be sneaking when you’re not moving).
    Why would you ever choose a more specific version? And why would you not try and choose skills which incorporate as much as possible?

    Is it just one of those many situations in Numenera where it is up to the GM to decided what they are ok with and what they aren't?

    Reading that as a player i would try and get skills like.

    Athletics (to cover running, jumping, climbing, balance and even swimming maybe)
    Outdoorsman
    Lore
    ... etc

    Just try and keep my skills as broad as possible.

    Anyway... any opinions or input would be much welcome as i run my first session this weekend.
    Aside from "have fun", i think the key to GMing is putting your players into situations where they need to make a choice that has no perfect outcome available. They will hate you for it, but they will be back at the table session after session.

  28. - Top - End - #28
    Halfling in the Playground
     
    Griffon

    Join Date
    Nov 2008

    Default Re: Numenera: General Discussion.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kaun View Post
    Is it just one of those many situations in Numenera where it is up to the GM to decided what they are ok with and what they aren't?
    I think so, yes, and it does say that if you are choosing a skill other than ones listed above you should run it by the GM. Plus, all characters should take a new skill as part of leveling up, keeping everyone on even footing, unless they select one of the other special options listed on page 24. Between GM encouragement, players all having the same skill choices as one another, and other viable options competing against skill boosts at each tier, I don't believe that this will be an unbalancing factor. Having said that, I would be interested in hearing from anyone who has experience with it in play.

  29. - Top - End - #29
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Gamgee's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Canada Land
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Numenera: General Discussion.

    I'm fine with broad skill specialties, unless I feel the skill being chosen needs to be specific. So athletics is fine and stealth is fine as examples I would allow. Now if you want skill history, I would say pick something specific like a region, or specialty.

    Ultimately it is up to each and every GM and what they feel is correct.
    They say hope begins in the dark, but most just flail around in the blackness...searching for their destiny. The darkness... for me... is where I shine. - Riddick

    Exile

    Deny a monochrome future!!! -Radio Gosha-

  30. - Top - End - #30
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Kaun's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    The DownUnderdark!
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Numenera: General Discussion.

    Ran my first session of Numenera over the weekend and got a really positive response (to the extent where i am already being hassled to arrange the next session).

    From my players perspective:

    They really enjoyed the system as a whole. "it feels very organic" was one quote.

    They character creation system confused them a little at first but i stressed that they should just pick what ever interests them as there is really no wrong choices. And they all seemed happy enough with their characters in the end.

    They liked the GM Intrusions. And they used all of the xp the received from the intrusions on re-rolls.

    They took to the cyphers in varying degrees. On player used three in the session and loved them. One player used one and it really had a dramatic effect on the story. And one player didn't use any. Over all i think they liked the cyphers but it will take some getting use too.

    From my (GM's) perspective.

    Session prep was easy. I didn't really use any NPCs or monsters from the book. I just made up NPC's and assigned them a base level. If i wanted them to be better at something specific i just made a note next to it. I didn't really prep the cyphers they found in the session, i just randomly selected them from the book and fluffed them to suit the encounter.

    Combat was easy and fast. I didn't get two heavy into adv/dis when it came to actions, just gave a +1 or -1 if it seemed appropriate. The players took to effort fairly quickly and made liberal use of it.

    Intrusions were good. I did three (one for each player). I used poker chips to represent the XP and i set them on the table in front of me to remind me that they were there and to use them. I used them to move the plot a long, when the players stalled i would throw a spanner into the works using an intrusion to get the game going again.

    Cyphers are fun. You kinda just need to go with it as a GM. The players will use them to screw up any planing you did but you just need to run with it i guess. The defiantly have a way of making encounters more interesting which is good.

    Character gen was easy. It took maybe an hour and a half to generate three characters for people who didn't know anything about the system prior to the game. I think if you had players that new the system you could knock it out in maybe 10 -15 mins per character.

    ....ehh i could probably say more but i will leave it at that for now.
    Last edited by Kaun; 2014-05-25 at 06:14 PM.
    Aside from "have fun", i think the key to GMing is putting your players into situations where they need to make a choice that has no perfect outcome available. They will hate you for it, but they will be back at the table session after session.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •