Monte Cook Games Announced Numenera 2: Discovery & Destiny!

Ghost2020 · Aug 17, 2017

Lol just played numenera for first time last night. Doesn't surprise me as they're probably adjusting it to fall more in line with Cypher core.

Nuts. I'll pass on this one as we're just starting Numenera.

Dindo Moreno · Aug 17, 2017

We've been playing Numenera for 4yrs now, haven't gone through every canon adventure and this comes out.

. (sigh)

vpuigdoller · Aug 17, 2017

I kinda prefer the numenera version of the rules than the cypher system one. I guess to each their own.

Dahak · Aug 17, 2017

I have mixed feelings about this, but I'm still likely to back it. I don't think Numenera is in need of a new edition, though the vibe I'm getting is that it won't be much different mechanically. I'm guessing the armor rules from Cypher System Rulebook will be integrated, and hopefully all of both Character Options books will be included. MCG has been recycling a lot of content and art in the last year--somewhat expected with three core Cypher lines. On the upside though, I'm playing Mass Effect Andromeda and the settlement building and upkeep rules seem like they'd allow me to capture that feeling in Cypher.

Mistwell · Aug 17, 2017

Anyone have a link to the article where Monte Cook said 3.5 D&D was unnecessary because, while technically supposed to be backwards compatible with 3e, was unnecessary because the changes made were not meaningful enough? I'd like to read that article now and compare it to this decision and see if there is consistency or inconsistency or some good reason for him to change his mind on these sorts of broader RPG design concepts.

dream66_ · Aug 17, 2017

Numenera kickstarter came out and I showed it to my friends, they got all excited made these big promises about the game, and I ordered it.

By the time it came in the gaming group and completely fallen to ruin.

It took another few years for us to gather our game back together, and I offered to run a numenera game. I spend a couple weeks relearning the system, getting ready helping them make characters.... And a huge arguement happened as we set down to play, never even started.

Monte if you're reading this, I dearly love the setting, but I can't bring myself to order the next.

JeffB · Aug 17, 2017

Mistwell said:
Anyone have a link to the article where Monte Cook said 3.5 D&D was unnecessary because, while technically supposed to be backwards compatible with 3e, was unnecessary because the changes made were not meaningful enough? I'd like to read that article now and compare it to this decision and see if there is consistency or inconsistency or some good reason for him to change his mind on these sorts of broader RPG design concepts.

This was my first thought too. He sure made a big stink about 3.5.

Edit, original article seems deleted off his website but here's an ENWorld thread with some quoted passages.

http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?56333-Monte-Cook-reviews-3-5

Dahak · Aug 17, 2017

https://web.archive.org/web/20120430224053/http://www.montecook.com:80/arch_review26.html

https://web.archive.org/web/2004022...=Sections&file=index&req=viewarticle&artid=66

These are the relevant articles.

Note that Monte the publisher has probably seen the reality of the business side in the intervening years. Monte the creative would understandably have railed against that reality when someone else was calling the shots. Human nature.

TrickyUK · Aug 17, 2017

I just got the 3 Into the... books and was looking at getting Character Options 2, Bestiary 2 and Jade Colossus next month. Will be interesting to see how backwards compatible these new books are and how much is reprinted. Not sure that I'm into 'base building' in an RPG.

Will see what details emerge with Kickstarter, but I hope there aren't too many radical changes as I really like the system as it is.