AMA with Monte Cook (Numenera, D&D, Monte Cook Games, Malhavoc Press)

[Monte At Home]

Hi Monte,

A quick question about the Cypher System. Do you think you'll ever do a 'lite' version of the system? Would that even be possible with how the system is currently designed?

I will admit to not following ever part of the system's development, so if such a product is already in the planning stage or exists somewhere where I haven't seen it, then forgive my ignorance.

Cheers!

We are putting the finishing touches on a game for families and in particular very young kids called No Thank You, Evil!. It is a "lite" version of the Cypher System. It might be too (?) light for most experienced gamers in a game without kids, but I don't know. One thing to remember is that the Cypher System itself is already very light--it only takes a handful of pages to cover the whole thing. The Cypher System Rulebook is only so big because there are so many different character choices. By way of analogy, you could think of the 3E D&D feat system. The system is easy (1 feat every three levels), but it takes up a lot of pages because there are lots to choose from.

 

[Tequila Sunrise]

Hi Monte! I'm not familiar with your recent work, but I've been an avid PS fan since getting my grubby little hands on the boxed CS back in the 90s. So thank you for your contribution, and thanks for answering all these questions that I'm sure you've answered a million times already!

1. Which PS themes do you find the most compelling/fun/distinctive?

2. Being a conglomeration of scattered lore written by dozens of D&D authors over the course of twenty years, did you ever feel creatively constrained by that history?

3. Is there anything in particular about PS that you're proud of? That stand out in your mind as great things, even if created by someone else?

4. Is there anything in particular about PS that you'd do differently, if you had your druthers? (Or maybe you already have with Numenara, or some other game I haven't played!)

 

[Monte At Home]

How is the progress on the Torment game? If I remember correctly your going to work on that a bit, is that part done, and if so how do you feel about it?

One of the things I have grown to appreciate in my old age is giant super adventures. I'm currently working through a 3rd Edition adventure with my home group. And on my bucket list is to do "Eternal Lies" for Trail of Cthulhu. Super adventures are probably a pain in the butt to create, but they raise the chances of me running something considerably. Any plans on making one for Numenera or the Strange?

Also I'm madly in love with the Strange, it looks like I'm going to get to play in a game soon. I know your doing the Numenera Kickstarter so that is probably the focus at the moment, but any hints of the future of that line would be awesome.

1. Going well. Just saw a sneak peek at some of the beginning play-throughs. My work is mostly done, other than a general approval of the whole thing, which is obviously ongoing.

2. We did a long adventure for each line--The Devil's Spine and The Dark Spiral. It's possible that people interested in a "super-adventure" missed these because they are each 96 pages. For a much more complex system, like D&D or Pathfinder, a "super-adventure" is probably twice that. But for simple systems such as these, without super long stat blocks or long discussions of tactics or whatever, you just don't need as much space.

3. Cool. We just released Worlds Numberless and Strange, which is a big hardcover detailing a whole bunch of recursions. After that is Strange Revelations, which is a collection of short adventures meant to require little or no prep time for the GM. After that is a still-unnamed book full of various equipment, cyphers, and artifacts for all the different recursions (different genres, time periods, etc). That last book could see a lot of use by anyone running the Cypher System to be honest!

 

[Monte At Home]

Hi Monte!

I'm a Kickstarter backer for Numenera. First I would like to tell that when I saw the announcement for The Strange I was disappointed that you would already be moving on from Numenera, even before the books were all out. I'm glad now to see that I was wrong, as you just announced even more books for Numenera.

About these three new books: why did you choose to put them as expansions to Numenera and not just campaigns for use with the Cypher System? Isn't Numenera already big enough? (Not that I would prefer the other way, just want to understand why). In special the one on other planes go near the theme of The Strange (or doesn't it?).

Also, how weird will the Into the Night be?

I'm also a backer for Torment: Numenera. How involved are you in the development of the game? Do you know the storyline only or also the details of the plot? And do you think you will see an increase in the sales of Numenera (book) when the PC game is out?

I am a long time fan of Planescape: Torment, but have never played tabletop Planescape. I have recently tried to read the old AD&D books and found them hard to digest by modern standards. Will into the Outside make for a similar experience, but with a fresh take on it?

1. I have to admit, I'm confused by your question. At first you seem like you're saying there isn't enough for Numenera, and then that there's too much? In any event, I can say that the books that are part of the new Numenera line are very specific to Numenera and the Ninth World. Into the Deep, for example, isn't a generic book on underwater adventures, but a setting book specifically focused on the oceans of the Ninth World, which get little coverage in any prior supplement. Into the Outside isn't really like The Strange (which focuses on realities spawned by real world fiction) or Planescape (which is very fantasy-based, with myths, religion, alignment, and whatnot being the prime focus). Extra-dimensional realities have always been a Numenera thing (lots of the creatures have extradimensional origins, for example), and has a very specific feel.

2. Very weird.

3. I wrote a small part, and I kind of oversee the whole thing to ensure compatibility with the world. I do know those details but I'm not at liberty to reveal any of them. Hopefully the game exposes Numenera to a whole new audience. We'll see!

4. I tried to lump this in with the first question a bit. Into the Outside won't be very Planescape-like except in that I think overall Numenera and Planescape have a shared sensibility in the sense of wonder and the mysterious.

 

[Monte At Home]

Hi,

Do you think there will be a setting expansion for Numenera that presents a more "organised" corner of the ninth world, something that really draws me to a setting is when you can see the relationships between the different factions and nations on a large scale rather than just presenting them each as their own little concept that ends at the border of the village/city/nation? Golarion and Forgotten realms are usually my examples for diverse settings that still feel like interconnected worlds, but for that matter The Strange does it really well too tying many of the recursions back to the overarching interests of the Estate, Quiet Cabal, OSR, etc. One of my struggles with getting a Numenera game going has been that there are a million great ideas for a one off game or couple session arc, but I have a hard time trying to draw more long term stories and interests out of the fluff for the Steadfast.

Golarion and Forgotten Realms are very different from the Ninth World, in that they are far older and in some ways more established. (Although the Ninth World is a billion years in the future, most of that time the Earth was ruled by other civilizations that rose and fell, or it was the time in between. The Ninth World is only a few thousand years old at most.) The Ninth World is--in a way--almost post-apocalyptic in its core nature, with people just now kind of organizing and developing lines of communication and travel. The PCs then can be at the forefront of building the world and creating relationships between the disparate and isolated locations. This is, of course, a very deliberate move away from the settings you reference, for three reasons.
1. It's a very different world with a different story. I've done the very interconnected kind of setting (Ptolus, for example), and this is a different take.
2. I want to create settings where the GM has a lot of room to expand and create without fear that some later sourcebook is going to come along and tell him his creation is wrong.
3. Lots of GMs don't want a setting so hyper detailed that we know where Elminster goes to lunch on Tuesdays but not Thursdays. (And some do. And there are great products, like FR, for those GMs.) These kinds of settings are fun, but don't always have the aura of mystery and the unknown that I wanted the Ninth World to have. I wanted the Ninth World to be more like the setting of a Clark Ashton Smith or Gene Wolf novel, where you never really know what's going to be around the next bend.

 

[Monte At Home]

Dear Monte,


1. Imagine if you could run a dream game for 5 players. These players can come from any time and be real or fictional. Who would those 5 players be and what game would you run?

2. What kinds of things are you afraid of/if you had a phobia, what would it be?

3. When you are a player in an RPG, do you tend to gravitate towards any kind of class or concept?

4. Is it in the MCG parameters of things to come to have some Metaplot campaign for Numenera or The Strange? I think about stuff like a Ruk Incursion for The Strange or Rise of the Abhumans in Numenera.

5. What other game systems do you think are pushing the RPG industry forward?

Iadace

Desh-Rae-Halra

1. Oh boy. That seems like the kind of question I might ponder for days and still have a different answer from one minute to the next. For now, I'll say I'll run a game for Grant Morrison, Alan Grant (somehow I'll make them get along), Robert Anton Wilson, Jack Parsons, and Jim Morrison, and we'll play Dark Matter. Although I'd probably use a different rules system.

2. I don't like crowds, but I don't think it's an actual phobia.

3. I like any character that has the option to do things out of the box. In D&D, this often means wizard, because I can use a spell in a new and unexpected way. In superhero games, this is often almost any character. I like creative solutions to problems. I also sometimes like the talky kind of character with lots of contacts and ability to influence people, but sometimes I can be content to be the guy who hangs back or researches in the library. Honestly, though, I enjoy all characters and just like playing and being part of the game.

4. It's important to have backstory and mystery, I think, but I don't think of those in terms of metaplots, because those are mysteries for each group to deal with (or not). They aren't things we're going to reveal or solve for you (which is how I usually see the term "metaplot" used).

5. That's an interesting question. I am tempted to say "all of them," but I'm just as tempted to say "none of them." That's mostly because I'm not what "forward" means, and if it is actually a goal. I like, no... I LOVE new ideas and concepts, but I also think that they don't invalidate the old ones. I don't think that 3E D&D, for example, invalidated 1E or 2E. I can sit down tonight and have a great time playing OD&D or original Traveller. Or some brand new game that just showed up on the shelf, like Cypher System Rulebook. I think new systems give new options and opportunities, but I don't think we're being pushed in any one direction or another. I hope that makes sense. It's actually kind of a complex topic for me and a quick answer like this might not really explain my position well.

 

[Monte At Home]

Hi Monte and thanks especially for Numenera and A Hero's Tale (wish there were more of such high quality drag-n-drop scenarios), here a question I am really curious about,if you can answer it: what are the main things you would have done differently in 5e? It seems to be doing fairly well and I'm liking it , still I'd live to know the "what if" scenario, there may be treasure to steal in those dangerous caves...

Thanks.

To answer your question I'd have to know more about 5e. I know it's weird, but I haven't read it. I'm told by those who would know that it's not all that different than the version I'm last familiar with from my time working on it, so I guess... not too much? I'm sure it's a great game. Lots of talent behind it.

 

[Monte At Home]

Is there any chance of a Diamond Throne setting book for Cypher System? I see you are not much for converting AU to 5e, but it is a fabulous setting and it would be great in your current system.

Thanks. No much chance from me, I'm afraid. I've got lots of new ideas I'm excited about, and less interested just reiterating different versions of the same material again and again.

Kind of like I said a question or two earlier, though, I don't see the passage of time adversely affecting rpg material. I don't think there's anything wrong with Ptolus, AU, or anything else I've worked on in their original forms. That said, if you really love Cypher System, the good news is, the system's so easy that converting it using the Cypher System Rulebook would be super easy. I bet most GMs could do it on the fly, actually.

 

[Monte At Home]

Can't think of a question atm but I do want to thank you for everything you have contributed to the gaming community for all these years.
Been trying for several years to convince my friends to let me run a campaign using Monte Cook's World of Darkness -_-* They prefer vanilla.

Thank you for saying so. I sincerely mean it when I say that that means a lot to me.

 

[Monte At Home]

Thank you for responding.

My question was going to be two parts, but of course I wanted to get your general feeling of evil adventures before I asked the second part. It wasn't meant to be a gotcha sorta thing either, so I apologize ahead of time if you feel it is.

After playing as I mentioned the Way of the Wicked series which actually strongly suggests a DM/GM ban all Chaotic Alignments and Good Alignments from character creation and stick with LE/LN/N/NE alignments, is it really that players prefer good modules over evil or is it that players don't fully understand the 3.5 Alignment system and thus play character poorly resulting in failed campaigns? If so, what is a Dungeon Master/Game Master to do when they genuinely have a promising evil AP to bring to the table? Do you have suggestions for a better alignment system in 3.5 or ideas that you had during your 3.5 days that at one time might have been promising?

I honestly don't know the answer.

I remember at one point toying with an alignment system that put a numerical, 1-10 rating on each aspects of your alignment. So if you're just a little bit evil but really chaotic, you'd be C7 E1, for example. Only nonhumans (like demons or angels) would get above a 7. Obviously I chucked this idea because for most people it's needlessly complex. But it does have the virtue of conveying the difference between a merchant who embezzles from the orphanage (evil, but not super evil) and some murderous psychopath (pretty evil) and distinguishes both from Demogorgon.

I don't know if that helps, but it's a starting point to at least think about how there might be characters with the big letter E in their alignment box but that they're still a playable character. Who knows, they might even have some honestly admirable traits. I guess the point is, there is nuance involved here, and many degrees without going immediately to the absolute.