Is it... too simple? (Related experience inside)

[Evenglare]

So a couple of weekends ago I ran numenera for the first time. I was totally hyped about it. Reading over the book just got me excited, I loved the way the system would work in theory, the setting kind of reminds me of one of my favorite games ever, Phantasy Star Online. And so I ran it. ... ... and it was ... well I don't know what it was. The closest word I can describe it with is that it was boring. Not boring in a story line sense but in a mechanical sense. Since the game is basically ran by a single d20 roll for everything it started to feel eh... damn, it's really hard to put into words. The game felt as if the rules of the character didn't impact the actual mechanic of rolling a d20. Maybe because there are only 3 stats and it provides a vast expanse between each of the stats, unlike D&D which have 6 stats and most things are based off of those 6 statistics. For instance, whenever I called for a roll the players basically just rolled a d20, and nothing actually seemed to matter to that d20 roll, it's felt like stats did absolutely nothing in many circumstances. When I would call for a roll say... a might roll, the player just rolled his d20 and that was it. It's like it could have been an intellect or speed roll and it wouldn't really have made a damn bit of difference.

Now, to be fair I am completely aware of how stats interact within the game. The higher the stat the more pool points you get, each stat's pool is basically your HP, you use moves from the stat pool so the higher it is the more moves you can pull off throughout the day, and that's great. That's what drew me into the game in the first place, but regardless of all of that stuff you CAN do and get to do, it seems like it was a disproportionate rolls simply didn't rely on those things as much as it should have.

Anyway, I'm sure there is more to this rant, I simply can't put the overall feeling into a word I'm comfortable with. Perhaps I am simply playing the game wrong or something, and I completely admit to that. Anyway, has anyone else had this experience with numenera? The feeling that the game is just lacking in some unquantifiable way.

PS: I still do love the game, and hopefully may run a couple more sessions in the future, I absolutely do not hate the game, it's just that it turned out much differently in real life than I read in the book.

 

[Imaro]

So a couple of weekends ago I ran numenera for the first time. I was totally hyped about it. Reading over the book just got me excited, I loved the way the system would work in theory, the setting kind of reminds me of one of my favorite games ever, Phantasy Star Online. And so I ran it. ... ... and it was ... well I don't know what it was. The closest word I can describe it with is that it was boring. Not boring in a story line sense but in a mechanical sense. Since the game is basically ran by a single d20 roll for everything it started to feel eh... damn, it's really hard to put into words. The game felt as if the rules of the character didn't impact the actual mechanic of rolling a d20. Maybe because there are only 3 stats and it provides a vast expanse between each of the stats, unlike D&D which have 6 stats and most things are based off of those 6 statistics. For instance, whenever I called for a roll the players basically just rolled a d20, and nothing actually seemed to matter to that d20 roll, it's felt like stats did absolutely nothing in many circumstances. When I would call for a roll say... a might roll, the player just rolled his d20 and that was it. It's like it could have been an intellect or speed roll and it wouldn't really have made a damn bit of difference.

Now, to be fair I am completely aware of how stats interact within the game. The higher the stat the more pool points you get, each stat's pool is basically your HP, you use moves from the stat pool so the higher it is the more moves you can pull off throughout the day, and that's great. That's what drew me into the game in the first place, but regardless of all of that stuff you CAN do and get to do, it seems like it was a disproportionate rolls simply didn't rely on those things as much as it should have.

Anyway, I'm sure there is more to this rant, I simply can't put the overall feeling into a word I'm comfortable with. Perhaps I am simply playing the game wrong or something, and I completely admit to that. Anyway, has anyone else had this experience with numenera? The feeling that the game is just lacking in some unquantifiable way.

PS: I still do love the game, and hopefully may run a couple more sessions in the future, I absolutely do not hate the game, it's just that it turned out much differently in real life than I read in the book.

I haven't actually played Numenera yet, so take these questions with a grain of salt...

Were you playing or DM'ing? Did players spend effort or use cyphers to aid them in dealing with challenges? Also was the difficulty number being adjusted depending on their level of skill aptitude? was the GM using intrusions and xp? Finally were you all playing with some of the optional rules like trading damage for effect. Just trying to get a better feel for why exactly the game came off feeling boring, especially since I am becoming quite interested in trying the game out the more I read of it.

EDIT: Also I'm a little confused by your statement about "moves" and the stat pool. Could you elaborate what you mean by "moves"?

 

[Shanna Germain]

Effort and Edge

I don't see any mention of your players using Effort and Edge, nor Skills and Assets, which are some of the main mechanics of the game. I would imagine that without those, the game would feel boring indeed! You might also try ninthworldhub.com for additional advice on how the game mechanics work. There's a great community of active players there as well.

 

[Evenglare]

Were you playing or DM'ing?

I was DMing the intro adventure in the back of the book

Did players spend effort or use cyphers to aid them in dealing with challenges?

Players did use their cyphers, and it was fun. But one thing I really found difficult to do was find different ways of giving them cyphers. I mean, there is only so many ways you can say you pick of a strange artifact on the ground. I can imagine later that it would get tedious, since the whole game is fashioned around the cyphers. It's sort of a "if everything is special, nothing is special" type of mentality. Yet they are going for a weird crazy feel with the game, which (again) I love, but in play it just felt like... "okay, here's another really strange thing". Of course I made it sound much more interesting each time they found one, but by the end of a single 6 hour session, the mind struggles to think of interesting ways of finding ancient pieces of tech.

Also was the difficulty number being adjusted depending on their level of skill aptitude?

Yes, difficulty was adjusted. This did not add nor detract from the game play that we felt.

was the GM using intrusions and xp?

I was GMing and I did use intrusions a few times, perhaps 4 or 5. This was nothing new since I have been doing this in games long before Numenera.

Finally were you all playing with some of the optional rules like trading damage for effect.

We did not play with these rules, as we just wanted to learn the basic system before we started adding other stuff.

EDIT: Also I'm a little confused by your statement about "moves" and the stat pool. Could you elaborate what you mean by "moves"?

By moves I mean the abilities characters have. For instance there some fighter abilities that take 1 or 2 (or however many) might points to pull off.

I think it was the fact of using a single d20 roll for literally everything, and there are no bonuses. And I'm completely aware of the fact that our group comes from a D&D (at this point 13th age) mindset of gameplay. People like to roll multiple dice, add numbers up. Psychologically it makes them feel more powerful I think. I don't know...

 

[Evenglare]

I don't see any mention of your players using Effort and Edge, nor Skills and Assets, which are some of the main mechanics of the game. I would imagine that without those, the game would feel boring indeed! You might also try ninthworldhub.com for additional advice on how the game mechanics work. There's a great community of active players there as well.

We did use efforts, and factored in edges, and skills and all of that. However edge simply reduces the amount of points it takes to do something so that really isn't an active sort of thing. Now effort they did use, but most of the time they didn't because they felt they simply didn't need it and most of the time they were correct. Now that being said there were times when they DID use effort to reduce the target number, but in the times they did not use effort there's simply no distinction between abilities. I think that's one of the major problems. Stats don't seem to matter if you don't use effort for them. I can say make a Climb check, but if they don't use might effort for it, it wouldn't matter if it was a might check, a speed check or an intell check.

 

[Imaro]

I was DMing the intro adventure in the back of the book

Cool I'll probably be DM'ing the game with 2 other co-DM's... My impressions of the type of game play Numenera supports (mostly expoloration adventure), the pretty open and able to handle almost anything you can think of world, as well as the (IMO) elegance of it's system seems like for us it's a prime candidate for a shared campaign. Probably won't be starting up till this summer though.

Players did use their cyphers, and it was fun. But one thing I really found difficult to do was find different ways of giving them cyphers. I mean, there is only so many ways you can say you pick of a strange artifact on the ground. I can imagine later that it would get tedious, since the whole game is fashioned around the cyphers. It's sort of a "if everything is special, nothing is special" type of mentality. Yet they are going for a weird crazy feel with the game, which (again) I love, but in play it just felt like... "okay, here's another really strange thing". Of course I made it sound much more interesting each time they found one, but by the end of a single 6 hour session, the mind struggles to think of interesting ways of finding ancient pieces of tech.

Yes, I will say this has popped up in my mind as a possible issue while reading through the books. However, the books also seem to imply that the fiction should support the characters being able to find said cyphers. I was thinking that at the start of a new adventure or appropriate point in the campaign, I would have each player randomly generate their limit in number of cyphers to begin play with (these are items and knicknacks they have picked up during down time)... Once that is done I think the cypher economy is robust enough that there can be times where the PC's are low on cyphers (or even have none) and it'll be fine for a short while... I also don't see the cyphers always being useful in every situation and so I wouldn't worry about a player necessarily finding more if he still has at least one. In fact the rulebook says that a minimum number of cyphers that should be found in an adventure is equal to what the character can carry... so foor 1st tier characters that's 2-3 per player. So at a table of 5 players you could get away with anywhere from 10 to 15 cyphers being found in the span of an entire adventure.

One thing I've been thinking would be cool would be a listing of possible locations that could contain cyphers and be inserted virtually anywhere

I also think the players themselves should be actively helping with the fiction necessary to find cyphers. They should pro-actively be searching, scavenging, jury-rigging, etc. in order to make the appearance of numerous cyphers more plausible. In other words I don't think the GM should bear the sole responsibility of just laying cyphers down in the players paths.

Yes, difficulty was adjusted. This did not add nor detract from the game play that we felt.

I guess I was thinking along the lines that this gives the players another facet to interact with the action through... When you say it didn't detract or add from the gameplay are you saying your felt skills and the levels of proficiency a player has in them had no effect upon the game? Did they provide differentiation between characters? Or are you saying they could have been non-existent and the game would have played the same?

I was GMing and I did use intrusions a few times, perhaps 4 or 5. This was nothing new since I have been doing this in games long before Numenera.

Well I'm asking did the specific intrusion and instant XP reward economy engage the players more than how it is traditionally done? Or were you doing it in a more traditional way? Honestly I'm not familiar with any games that use a system like Numenera's intrusion and XP system. Games like Fate have some similarities but also some pretty big differences... I thought this system would have created tension for the players since it allows the GM to ramp things up but also rewards the characters for things getting harder in the spur of the moment... was that not the case?


We did not play with these rules, as we just wanted to learn the basic system before we started adding other stuff.

By moves I mean the abilities characters have. For instance there some fighter abilities that take 1 or 2 (or however many) might points to pull off.

Ok, that clarifies it you meant more powerful moves... though I guess when you look at it that does expand the number of moves you have available as well...

I think it was the fact of using a single d20 roll for literally everything, and there are no bonuses. And I'm completely aware of the fact that our group comes from a D&D (at this point 13th age) mindset of gameplay. People like to roll multiple dice, add numbers up. Psychologically it makes them feel more powerful I think. I don't know...

There are bonuses... assets, effort, skills, etc. they just reduce difficulty as opposed to increasing what is rolled. I am figuring my group will like less dice rolls but I also see your point. You could always find the die with an average equal to the damage listed for each weapon category and have players roll for damage if you want more dice rolls. You could also offload the reduction of the difficulty to the players to give them more to do... personally the minimalist design of Numenera is what attracted me to it but I could see how some might see that as a drawback.

 

[biotech66]

Honestly, I like this system, but most likely won't run a long term game. I'll keep buying, because I'm an addict.

In the game I ran with my family, my brother who has problems reading really came out of his shell. He came up with new ideas, thought of ways to use his powers that wen't covered by the rules, and had the best RPG game of his life. I think that was because the game was so simple.

Now I know people who like to track all kinds of strange things like gold weight and other fiddly bits, and that's great. But, this game has a nice sweet spot for what it does care about. It might not be perfect for me, but its good.

 

[Jools]

It seems to me that Numenera is designed around a style of game where all dice rolls are important. I think if the players are making lots of non urgent dice rolling where there is no difficult decision of do I expend resources on this or not it's going to get a bit boring.

 

[Fairman Rogers]

I can't find the review I read about this several months back, but it made a point about the math of the game that would pretty much break my enjoyment of it. The review made the observation that - assets and skills aside - there is always a 3-point "sweet spot" on the d20 roll where you have spent the correct amount of effort. Unless you roll right in that sweet spot, you spent either too much effort or not enough. And because a d20 is a very wide and flat distribution, chances are that you are going to get that guess wrong a lot. Considering that effort is supposed to be a risk/reward calculation, this is too much random chance to ever be sure about whether/how much to spend.

If the system used a multi-dice roll (such as 2d6 or 3d6), then the risk/reward would be more of a real calculation. On a 3d6, for example, the difference between 12 and 9 is clearly worth the effort, while the difference between 9 and 6 will sometimes not be.

I really feel like Numenera would be a better game if Monte had not tried to create this new resolution mechanic using 1d20 at its core. But I suppose I'm not as enthralled with the d20 as others are. I'm sure for some people it's a plus.

 

[Imaro]

I can't find the review I read about this several months back, but it made a point about the math of the game that would pretty much break my enjoyment of it. The review made the observation that - assets and skills aside - there is always a 3-point "sweet spot" on the d20 roll where you have spent the correct amount of effort. Unless you roll right in that sweet spot, you spent either too much effort or not enough. And because a d20 is a very wide and flat distribution, chances are that you are going to get that guess wrong a lot. Considering that effort is supposed to be a risk/reward calculation, this is too much random chance to ever be sure about whether/how much to spend.

If the system used a multi-dice roll (such as 2d6 or 3d6), then the risk/reward would be more of a real calculation. On a 3d6, for example, the difference between 12 and 9 is clearly worth the effort, while the difference between 9 and 6 will sometimes not be.

I really feel like Numenera would be a better game if Monte had not tried to create this new resolution mechanic using 1d20 at its core. But I suppose I'm not as enthralled with the d20 as others are. I'm sure for some people it's a plus.

Should you ever be 100% sure about how much effort to spend in order to succeed is the real question...

Personally I don't think it should be. I don't want my players sitting there with a spreadsheet and calculations that tell them when and exactly how much effort they should spend. I want the question to be simply whether what they are doing is or isn't important enough for them to want to devote effort to it. I'm not necessarily enthralled with the d20 as a mechanic, but I'm not convinced Numenera would be a better game if the spending of effort was more predictable (and thus more open to optimization). YMMV, and apparently does.

EDIT: I'm also not convinced that assets, skills, etc. should be discounted since they all work together in the game to expand or contract the window of success when rolling that you are speaking about.