aramis erak
Legend
I've read a lot of good things about it. So I grabbed the humblebundle a couple weeks back.
I had no bleeding clue which book was the initial corebook. There's the "Discovery Corebook" and the "Destiny Corebook," and the "Numenera Players Guide." I started with Discovery, which seems to be the right one.
Actually skimming a bit in the discovery corebook...
1d20 for 3× Difficulty number... a bit coarse. That abilities shift the Difficulty in steps is no big deal for me.
All rolls player facing. I'm good with that.
Layout? functional and pretty.
Fixed damage, bonuses to in on 17+? Not a dealbreaker, but...
3 stats? Hmm...
Effort spending from stat pools? It's a way of giving a bonus
Att Pool, att edge, and max effort... it keeps the numbers in check. Spending pools to use abilities...
Initial classes... Glaive? Jack? Nano? Jack is a good label for what it is... but Glaive and Nano? If you have to have read the rulebook to understand what the class is about, it seems a bit pretentious.
Checking Destiny, the new types, again, are one clear (Wright), and one WTF? (Arkus) The third, Delve, is hinting at its competences.
I see influences from Fate, from Dying Earth, from D&D... I can also see some influences from Baker's Apocalypse World, but they're small and in tone. «GM interruptions» is a term that is clearly is from the narrativist playbook. (pun intended.) And it works very much like Fate «compels.» Those interruptions are the kind of thing that Baker was avoiding in AW; in AW, they are only for when the story stalls. In Fate, they're for enforcing the disad element of aspects.
Here, they're not clear on the why, only on the how.
Advancement seems to be potentially really quick, too.
I could see running it, but I wouldn't have been willing to pay the original price. It feels on first read like "Monte does Dying Earth better than Gary"...
It's definitely neither trad nor totally narrativist. Like Fate, it's a mechanicalized narrativism, with strong nods to Trad.
I've got other things to try first... And other things to return to before hand.
I had no bleeding clue which book was the initial corebook. There's the "Discovery Corebook" and the "Destiny Corebook," and the "Numenera Players Guide." I started with Discovery, which seems to be the right one.
Actually skimming a bit in the discovery corebook...
1d20 for 3× Difficulty number... a bit coarse. That abilities shift the Difficulty in steps is no big deal for me.
All rolls player facing. I'm good with that.
Layout? functional and pretty.
Fixed damage, bonuses to in on 17+? Not a dealbreaker, but...
3 stats? Hmm...
Effort spending from stat pools? It's a way of giving a bonus
Att Pool, att edge, and max effort... it keeps the numbers in check. Spending pools to use abilities...
Initial classes... Glaive? Jack? Nano? Jack is a good label for what it is... but Glaive and Nano? If you have to have read the rulebook to understand what the class is about, it seems a bit pretentious.
Checking Destiny, the new types, again, are one clear (Wright), and one WTF? (Arkus) The third, Delve, is hinting at its competences.
I see influences from Fate, from Dying Earth, from D&D... I can also see some influences from Baker's Apocalypse World, but they're small and in tone. «GM interruptions» is a term that is clearly is from the narrativist playbook. (pun intended.) And it works very much like Fate «compels.» Those interruptions are the kind of thing that Baker was avoiding in AW; in AW, they are only for when the story stalls. In Fate, they're for enforcing the disad element of aspects.
Here, they're not clear on the why, only on the how.
Advancement seems to be potentially really quick, too.
I could see running it, but I wouldn't have been willing to pay the original price. It feels on first read like "Monte does Dying Earth better than Gary"...
It's definitely neither trad nor totally narrativist. Like Fate, it's a mechanicalized narrativism, with strong nods to Trad.
I've got other things to try first... And other things to return to before hand.