Recent content by Swanosaurus

Since I finished that campaign nearly 10 years ago, haven't really touched the Cypher System since then and have sold off most of my Numenera books (and the rest are on the other side of the atlantic), I'm afraid I have to decline that. So I'll just be happy with my relatively fond memories of...

Hm ... I suspect you're missing a lot about how the system might work at a gaming table, were typically, a lot more is in play than the simple calculus of how to spend least pool points to defeat an enemy. There can be special attacks that you NEED to avoid, there can be special attack effects...

Well, I played a one-year long Numenera campaign to tier 6, and I liked the campaign, but that wasn't so much for the rules, and I still voted "It's pretty bad", mostly because I dislike the constant necessity for the players to think about spends, the character creation that seems to give you...

I think you can hardly compare a fight ran in a computer game to a fight ran at a table with a GM ... I have no idea if Torment uses the exact same system, but even if it does, it says relatively little about how it runs at a gaming table. Anyway, I don't want to convince you to like it, and I...

I wouldn't equate feeling exhausted with feeling bad, and even less with meaninglessness/boredom. More like: If you have achieved something, of course you'll be exhausted. And sometimes, the greater the cost, the more meaningful the victory will feel. (Since I'm a little bit miffed by the...

I wouldn't call them a flaw, since I think they pretty much work as designed and intended - yes, you'll only spend points on defense if you want to avoid a specific effect or if something causes a sh**load of damage, but that's fine, I think. What I like is that all attrition has a visible...

That's actually one part of the system that I really like - spending pool points for tests can be kind of annoying because it sometimes causes analysis paralysis, but the combat death spiral makes it worth it, as far as I am concerned. It's not my favourite combat system, but I like its dynamics...

This is a little absurd, because I'm pretty sure that's exactly what pretty much everyone you've been arguing with the last few pages of this thread has stated; that a) it is possible to add stuff to GH, b) it is possible do it respectfully without overthrowing the setting c) we don't know if...

The difference is mainly that if you want to introduce three or four new ancestries, and each one has to come with an inciting event (a bunch of them just recently came over from another continent or plane and stuff like that), then you end up with a highly disrupted status quo. If you just say...

Nope ... neither "walking around everywhere" nor "suddenly", that's just the point. A whole new ancestry coming from another continent? That's "suddenly", and I can see that disrupting a setting. Learning that in the mountains, there are reclusive giant people called goliaths and maybe seing one...

TBH, that kind of "cool" sounds like the most artificial way to go about it. Just do what's most organic, which would probably be "they were always there" and interweave it a bit with what was known before. Way less intrusive than suddenly having visitors from an unknown contint never heard of...

If we limit the discussion to D&D-adjacent, probably this. If not, "classic" is whatever and however you played back then. If a game is doing "classic Fighting Fantasy but with a modern design", that probably means having only one core stat and pretty much the most unified and simplistic...

If I understand correctly, the world of Oerth hasn't been fully described - so maybe the Dragonborn come from, I don't know, from the country of X on the continent of Y? I'm not saying that they will do it right or respectfully; I can't know that. But I don't really get why introducing new...

Okay, I'm speaking as someone who knows next to nothing about Greyhawk - but from what I've read here, it sounds like it's always been a broad strokes setting. So if it hat magic wielders, why would Warlocks and Sorcerers be a problem beyond "they were always there, we just haven't seen them...

You are not wrong about your need for rules. You are wrong about my need for rules. Because I actually don't care about shotguns beyond the worst unrealistic tropes about how shotguns function, I have no need for a rule that produce believable shotgun results. If you care about these things, I...