log in or register to remove this ad

 

The d2010 Era

Aldarc

Legend
I understand that everyone has different vies of what are key features of a game. I also would quibble with wikipedia's definitions, but it's a well-defined, well-read definition that seems at least roughly correct. For me I'd add in the things D&D doesn't have -- meta-currency being the big one. But I didn't want to bring inperonsal bias, so I went with an outside authority. If you want to look back in old threads and come up with your own "ten most emblematic features of D&D" that would be great -- I'm pretty sure I recall some such discussions maybe a decade back?
Your personal bias has already been brought into the discussion. Trying to hide it behind a chart with a highly subjective grading system and categories doesn't really change that.

For your specific points, sure you can shift a point around here or there, but it won't make a lot of difference. It's pretty clear that at least based on wikipedia's definition of what is core about D&D mechanics, Numenéra is way less similar to D&D than BRP and SW are. And having played in a fantasy world SW campaign series, my experience strongly mirrors that result.
I don’t think that your framework of discussion is helpful. It misses the forest in favor of the trees. Overall, the Cypher System is most definitely inspired by D&D and the d20 system, and can easily be used to play D&D style games. Is it the d20 system? No. It’s something new. But the fingerprints of the d20 system, D&D, and its place in the Zeitgeist discussed above are kinda hard to ignore. So I think that it’s a little disingenuous to argue that Numenera isn’t a non-OGL Post-Apocayptic D&D with the serial numbers filed off.

As I said before, Numenera plays a lot like an alternate version of D&D in the experience of both @Campbell and myself. (And I suspect the Alexandrian as well since he plays a lot of Cypher System too.) This does not somehow make Numenera bad. To its credit, much as Campbell says, Monte Cook designed a good system for helping the GM get the system out of the way for storytelling.

I think that arguing which game plays more like D&D - Savage Worlds or Numenera - is something of a red herring. If you want to talk about how Savage Worlds stems from its own surrounding d20 era Zeitgeist, then that would be a fun discussion with having. Because I do think that SW belongs to a similar family of games with 3e D&D and Pathfinder. SW definitely feels like it comes out of the '00 d20 era of games. But I would group Numenera as belonging to a later classification of games: i.e., d2010.

I do however completely agree that the early Numenéra published adventures are pretty awful. Devil's Spine is about the only one I ran. The others I looked at and just said no. May I recommend The Bridges We Burn as an excellent 3rd party supplement instead? I've also had much more success using the worlds presented in the "Into the ..." series -- not adventures per se, but easy to create adventures from. Much better hooks and ideas than the original core books.
I am familiar with The Bridges We Burn, having run it myself, but that does little to change my play experience of Numenera as being a part of the d2010 era books. And when you also look at the adventure designs of Bruce Cordell, Sean K. Reynolds, and Shanna Germain, which all seem rooted in a D&D approach to adventuring, then that says a lot about the nature of the game. It's not a knock on Numenera to say that I don't think the Cook, Cordell, and Reynolds could not avoid D&Disms even if they tried. If the Cypher System was so incompatible in terms of play to D&D settings, then we would not be seeing Ptolus and Diamond Throne for the Cypher System or even playing Numenera with 5e. But we are, and that also says a lot to me about the compatibility of the styles of gaming between the two systems. Monte Cook's own sense of Numenera play in its adventures seems fairly rooted in and informed by D&D as well.
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

GrahamWills

Adventurer
Your personal bias has already been brought into the discussion. Trying to hide it behind a chart with a highly subjective grading system and categories doesn't really change that.
Aldarc, I picked an independent, object source and used it to create suggested dimensions of similarities. I defined the criteria I used to select from that outside source. I invited you to do something similar and you have declined to do so. I stated that my ratings were subjective and suggested you have a go. Again you declined.

I don't see much in your repossess other than "my opinion is that's is like D&D because that's my experience and that of some others". I'm really not excited by a thread where we both argue based on personal experience and don't try to find a common ground. To repeat, I'm not claiming that my suggestion for a common framework is perfect or free from bias. That is exactly why I asked you to modify it -- hopefully our biases would cancel out and we'd arrive at something agreeable. But I understand it takes a bit of work, and it looks like there's little interest in this thread, so no worries if you think it's not worthwhile.
 

Aldarc

Legend
Aldarc, I picked an independent, object source and used it to create suggested dimensions of similarities. I defined the criteria I used to select from that outside source. I invited you to do something similar and you have declined to do so. I stated that my ratings were subjective and suggested you have a go. Again you declined.
Having a go at it would imply that I find your framework helpful or meaningful for discussion, but I don't. I had typed up something longer in reply, but then I deleted it because I realized that engaging the framework is the wrong way to go about the discussion. As I said before, I think that you are missing sight of the forest for the trees. It is much as Campbell said earlier:
The differences in the grand scheme of RPG design are minor and largely technical differences rather than play style differences. Numenera is a game where players play re-skinned warriors, mages, and rogues who explore ruins and confront dangerous weird creatures. There are fantastic items that players seek. The adventures feel like D&D adventures to me. Playing the game feels like playing D&D to me. That's not a knock. I like many form of D&D.
I think that your framework mostly doubles down on those technical differences while losing sight of the stylistic similarities.

This is why a lot of Numenera adventures are basically reskinned D&D style adventures. It's why converting Ptolus and Diamond Throne to the Cypher System are more than possible. It's why converting Numenera to 5e is possible. It's why Monte Cook as per the link I posted made a number of the early adventures dungeon crawls. Even the later Numenera 1 adventures, such as the one tied to Jade Colossus, was largely a OSR-style dungeon crawl with resources for the randomization of the "dungeon."

I was actually watching a video today from Monte Cook's GenCon stream where one GM guest talked about how he was running Keep on the Borderlands with the Cypher System. I have even used Numenera to run a Diablo 1 style campaign. Basically a demon-like AI is trapped in the bottom of a crashed spaceship that a mining town recently uncovered, and the demon has taken over the ship's systems and has begun projecting its power outwards into the surrounding area. The players descended down into the depths of the ship, which is what the AI wanted as it wanted its freedom.
 

COMING SOON: 5 Plug-In Settlements for your 5E Game

Advertisement2

Advertisement4

Top