Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lord Mhoram" data-source="post: 8533700" data-attributes="member: 4789">I also love Cypher, so I will respond as well, even though I'm not who the question was directed at.I think Cypher fills a niche that is almost impossible to fill and it does a great job of it. It walks the line of trad system/narrative approach. And that is why everone says "I want to like it, but just can't". People who want a robust mechanics to help define progression and flavor find it lacking as it is somewhat mechanics light... but still a traditional system; for example -Task resolution instead of conflict resolution, what is on your character sheet is your skills (although anyone can try just about any skill with just an characteristics role), "hit points" and such. People looking at it as a loose system to have narrative options find it lacking even though it has some elements of narrative mechanics (GM intrustion, Player intrusion, abilities fairly freeform to be defined how the players want - with something being magic or tech, or mutation or just something else).Why I think it fails to find purchase with many people are those that are solidly in one of those camps, and Cypher is sort of sitting in the muddy area between them. Enough theory though - lets talk why I like it. My preferences will be on major display here: For the last 30 or so years my primary system has been HERO. Powers are generic with the player defining the special effects - 10d6 ranged damage could be fire, ice, a telekinetic punch a batarang, a nonlethal bullet - and that was one of the absolute strengths of the system. Your character idea is not constrained by special effects that the designers came up with. However HERO is a very crunch system, and can take lots of time to prep, notably if you build all the npcs yourself. But it does give lots of imaginative freedom.I do prefer a Trad game where the GM controls the world, and the players control the characters and a task resolution (as opposed to conflict resolution) in the way the game is handled.But as I have gotten older, I find I have less time, and especially the wife has less time and enthusiasm for all the mechanics. So we have been looking for a universal game to fit our needs. The wife was really frustrated with D&D 3.X/Pathfinder, as she likes to structure stories out the game, even using literary tools (Rising falling action, foreshadowing ect) and felt constrained by that system; and while she would set up possible hooks, the players would respond, and she would change what was being told (sandbox rather than railroad). HERO worked better as she could just build whatever she wanted.  We tried Fantasy Age/Modern Age, Genesys and a couple others. Then we found Cypher. It has a robust enough ruleset in mechanics to ground the game reality in, but a very open flexible approach to how the world runs, the story and such to make telling stories fun again. And after 30 years of hero, with us defining effects of abilities based a slim mechanical base, we had no issues making Cypher come alive.All in all it is best, in my opinion, for people who like the idea of narrative games, but hate the structure that tends to come along with them (fate aspects for example). So basically a part traditional game, part narrative. Which is exactly what I was needing in a game.</blockquote>

Verification