Quote from: Spike;788802Shorter Justin Alexander to El Phantasmo: "Who you gonna believe, me or your lying eyes?"

You seem to be implying that nobody in the history of the universe has ever screwed up a game mechanic.

Shorter version: I find your post absurd.

Quote from: Justin Alexander;788973You seem to be implying that nobody in the history of the universe has ever screwed up a game mechanic.

Shorter version: I find your post absurd.

Not at all. I'm implying you just told someone that their experience with the game is wrong.

So is El Phantasmo supposed to believe what he experienced at the table, or you?


Given what I've read elsewhere, and can see in the rules, while I wouldn't have used the phrase 'Top Trumps', as he did, I can definitely see why he said that. You, on the other hand, merely scoffed and offered nothing in rebuttal except your scorn.  Hmm...

Quote from: Spike;789070Not at all. I'm implying you just told someone that their experience with the game is wrong.

You appear to be under the impression that I'm saying, "You appear to be interpreting the rules incorrectly here in this thread, but I bet you actually used the correct rules at your gaming table." You are, however, confused: I fully expect that he also fucked up the rules during actual play.

QuoteYou, on the other hand, merely scoffed and offered nothing in rebuttal except your scorn.

This, of course, is a blatant lie.

I can't help noticing, of course, that this is a completely accurate description of your own comments here. Are you hoping that blatant lying will make people not notice your own lack of credibility? I think you'll find that hypocrisy isn't going to help. Try to do better in the future.

Quote...while I wouldn't have used the phrase 'Top Trumps', as he did, I can definitely see why he said that.

Then, since he doesn't appear to be coming back, perhaps you could explain what "comparing stats" mechanic you're referencing and why you feel none of the other mechanics in the game exist.

As I mentioned before, in the rebuttal you lied about not existing: I anticipate you're going to have some difficulty doing this, since there is literally not a single mechanic in the game which involves comparing stats to anything. But please feel free to prove me wrong.

Quote from: Justin Alexander;789118Then, since he doesn't appear to be coming back, perhaps you could explain what "comparing stats" mechanic you're referencing and why you feel none of the other mechanics in the game exist.

As I mentioned before, in the rebuttal you lied about not existing: I anticipate you're going to have some difficulty doing this, since there is literally not a single mechanic in the game which involves comparing stats to anything. But please feel free to prove me wrong.

Don't worry, I'm back, and I'll provide a little more information;

Said mate is a systems ... guru? Numbers are his thing. He thinks that Eclipse Phase is simple. His "Top Trumps" wasn't about any one specific mechanic or part of the system - his issue was with the massive over simplication of everything to one of four numbers - Either Tier/level and Might, Speed and Intellect.

He's a player that likes variation and lots of ways of lots of things affecting everything else in lots of ways. For example he likes combat moves that make a strike hit harder, or ones that are quicker, or ones that create some kind of opening for more advanced moves and the like. What he doesn't like is, for example, playing a "Fighter" of any description where most things boil down to affecting solely a "Might" pool or, if built to allow it the "Speed" pool.

I dislike the system for other reasons though the above's in there somewhere - everything boiled down probably works well for players who want solely story driven games and the like, but it seems like so would completely free-form improvised theatre. It feels rickety, knocked together and liable to fall over. There's little nuance or variation, everything's so simplified that - and it's a "feels" thing not something mapped to a particular mechanic - it "feels" like Top Trumps or some smartphone CCG app etc.

My other dislikes tend to be around the skill system (Or, more accurately, lack of consistency thereof by saying "Meh, pick what the hell you want!"), advancement/Tiers (My own fault, I dislike Class and Level based systems normally and I've found that Cypher very much falls into the majority that to me feel constricting, limiting and artificially structured) and some other minor things which are largely just little gripes and niggles.

El Phantasmo, may I ask what kind of game system do you favor ? And have you an actual quote of some one saying that Eclipse Phase has a simple system ? It seems preposterous to me (I wish that EP had a simpler system because I like the setting. I had played as a player one time and it was nice but I am not sure that it is simple in the long run) !

Quote from: yabaziou;789223El Phantasmo, may I ask what kind of game system do you favor ? And have you an actual quote of some one saying that Eclipse Phase has a simple system ? It seems preposterous to me (I wish that EP had a simpler system because I like the setting. I had played as a player one time and it was nice but I am not sure that it is simple in the long run) !

Of course! I personally find EP a swine of system - I've only played it a few times and I know I don't have it straight in my mind. Mind you many, many years ago I had Rolemaster memorised to perfection. Over the years I've moved away from the heavy crunchy systems to a more mid-level set of games. Also yes, it was a friend who perceives EP to be "simple", mind you he's somewhat of a genius and scarily well paid in his chosen career thanks to his intelligence.

The cWoD and nWoD are in there purely for the simplicity of the system, Exalted is about as crunchy and heavy as I get. SLA Industries, Fading Suns (Not the current Revised version), L5R. I've played some FATE too which is odd and very light to me but I can see the versatility of the system.

My background is very much not in D&D - I remember when I was starting in roleplay many moons ago that we tried a few, but even then the limits of "Classes" and "levels" just didn't sit right with me. The Cypher system seems to be a very stripped back and basic version of some old D&D with pools instead of stats.

Cypher though ... wants to enable all things, but it's there just enough to stop that in a convincing manner. Everything boils down to the same few things affecting the limited number of stats/measures etc. There's elements I like but the vast majority just seems to have been distilled past the point of use into almost pointlessness. You get up into the high Tiers and things become even more silly in that you may as well get rid of the system entirely - the chances of failure for even broad-focused characters becomes minimal at best unless attempting literally impossible tasks.

I basically need more meat on a system, too little system and we may as well just sit around talking without a system at all.

Quote from: Justin Alexander;789118You appear to be under the impression that I'm saying, "You appear to be interpreting the rules incorrectly here in this thread, but I bet you actually used the correct rules at your gaming table." You are, however, confused: I fully expect that he also fucked up the rules during actual play.

Your reading comprehension, it sucks.

Not merely the fact that you think I said anything like the words you just put in my mouth, but also that you somehow added the Cyphers to El_phantasmo's critique up thread.   You're reading things that just aren't there.

Quote from: Justin Alexander;789118This, of course, is a blatant lie.

This being the internet and all, and thus a written form of communication, it just so happens that I have a rather simple way to prove that what you just said is, in fact, the blatant lie.

Here:

Quote from: Me, being quoted by youYou, on the other hand, merely scoffed and offered nothing in rebuttal except your scorn.

What I was referencing:

Quote from: You, a couple of posts backI can't actually track that comment meaningfully onto any mechanic in the entire game. It seems to be alluding to comparing cypher level to NPC target level, but that doesn't actually involve character stats.

This is like reading a critique of D&D that says, "The problem is that the fighty-guy's spells can't affect skeletons." It's not 100% clear what the guy's actual problem with the system is, but you're pretty sure it's wrong.

Where, in that relatively short statement is an actual case for rebuttal, a refutation of points?   In the first paragraph you admit you don't actually know what he's talking about. Nope, no rebuttal there.

What about the second paragraph?

Nope, its just a vague attempt to reframe a critique you just admitted you didn't understand into a lame D&D metaphor illustration that utterly missed the point. Again: No real rebuttal here, no argument, no case, no logic. Just a crappy nonsense metaphor that does, however, illustrate some scorn for the critique by its utter nonsense.

So what do we have in that quote then? Is it scorn? Why yes, I see scorn quite handily, as I think most reasonable people would.  Intended or not, its there.

What do we NOT have in that quote? A meaningful rebuttal.

So, in what way was this statement:

Quote from: Me, being quoted by youYou, on the other hand, merely scoffed and offered nothing in rebuttal except your scorn.

In any meaningful way an untruth, a misrepresentation of fact... in short, a LIE.  In fact, a lie that is nakedly obvious to even the most casual of observations, lacking any foundation of truth. Blatant, you might say?

Please, do enlighten me.

QuoteI can't help noticing, of course, that this is a completely accurate description of your own comments here.

I'll own to scoffing and scorn. What of it? On the other hand, I am more than ready to make my point with quotes, facts and even, if necessary, page numbers so people can look stuff up for themselves.

QuoteAre you hoping that blatant lying will make people not notice your own lack of credibility?

I think we've covered the blatant lying comment already, but if you'd like I can break it down even more. Let me know if you really want that.

But, by all means: Demonstrate my lack of credibility. I mean, I do go out of my way to explain exactly where I am coming from and any possible biases and weaknesses in my review, up front. Will I need to explain credibility to you as well?

QuoteI think you'll find that hypocrisy isn't going to help. Try to do better in the future.

Challenge accepted.   Do try to keep up.

QuoteThen, since he doesn't appear to be coming back, perhaps you could explain what "comparing stats" mechanic you're referencing and why you feel none of the other mechanics in the game exist.

And where exactly did I claim that no other mechanics existed? By all means, provide the quote. Feel free to read closely. I'll even accept a quote that might just be interpreted that way, rather than forcing you to find something explicit. I'm generous that way.

QuoteAs I mentioned before, in the rebuttal you lied about not existing: I anticipate you're going to have some difficulty doing this, since there is literally not a single mechanic in the game which involves comparing stats to anything. But please feel free to prove me wrong.

You really want that to have been a lie, don't you?  Its quite pathetic, really.

Now, I could stand by my words and point out that comparing stats is in fact verbiage in the description of the Might Pool, but THAT would be a lie*. The truth is I simply used a very crude and inelegant turn of phrase to describe a mechanic I was too lazy to actually double check.  A more accurate way to describe it would be to Compare the creature's level to the difficulty table, not the stat pool.  Since difficulties are fixed and most critters are largely summed up by this single 'level' number, with a few colorful abilities thrown in, it makes for a tediously repetitive system.   that would have been more accurate, and yes, it is a gloss rather than an exhaustive breakdown.

But congratulations for catching me out on an error of description.  Its a minor victory, but I'll give you the point regardless.

The floor is now yours.  Remember, I grade on technique as well as actual arguements leveled.  Check your margins for red ink, as I often leave helpful tips on how to improve your technique.




*Not the fact that the Might pool comparison phrase exists, check Page 13, bottom right corner of The Strange player's guide, but rather attempting to claim that was what I meant.  Still, I find it amusing that even accidentally I can refute your point that you never compare stats to anything.

Quote from: Spike;789370Snipped lots of a quite elegant post.

I honestly didn't mean my lack of love for the Cypher system to incite a debate...

I've tried playing and running it RAW and I've seen games of Numenera fail quite quickly - however they were PbP games and as such a good number do fail and implode very quickly anyway so likely not a reflection on the system.

I've yet to really see any Strange games crop up online and my FLGS don't appear to be shifting many copies. My own personal experience of using Cypher is quite negative but I do recognise there is a very vocal and very passionate MCG/Numenera/Strange/Cypher/Monte Cook fan base who'll seek to correct criticism and negativity about the system and settings (Seems they're a bit like Marmite - which it's own advertising makes a joke about "You either love it or hate it!").

For the system is too light-weight, doesn't encourage versatility (Largely due to the niche protection rubbish you get with Class systems which is doubly irritating in Numenera which explicitly states in the Main book - and also in the Strange IIRC - that no two PCs should ever have the same Foci.

I imagine that after a few campaigns all the Foci will have been used and their novelty will soon wear thin - especially as the same combinations seem to occur constantly in games or in discussions on various forums. I don't like niche protection and artificially forcing it through a system isn't something I like at all - hence I'm converting Numenera away from the Cyphe system and instead using the nWoD GMC rules which the majority of the players I'm currently running it with are loving. It's not perfect, it's somewhat of a playtest in fact, but I'm already seeing PC's branch out and move away from tropes and traps in Foci and Type choices and having immense fun with the combinations they're finding.

(Frex) - One of the two Jacks has the "Explores Dark Places" Foci. Very much an Indiana Jones/Lara Croft explorer of ruins to find artifacts and cyphers to sell. He recently got infected whilst leading a group by something and has now found the parasite allows him to change form - he's basically opened up the opportunity to start taking levels of powers from the "Howls at the Moon" powerset (Which is changed a lot in my system).

Why do I bring it up? There's already a player with "Howls at the Moon" - the aforementioned genius/number savvy guy who made the Top Trumps comment and thinks EP is simple. Is he annoyed another player now potentially has HatM powers? No - He's looking forward to it even though he's a "natural" changer. He's looking forward to a mentoring role to the Jack, he's a far more experienced changer and it'll make for some nice RP between them. It goes against everything in the Numenera game and Cypher system but it's working so well. The Nano is wanting to learn combat moves to supplement his Esoteries, Glaives are wanting to be able to do things other than "Hit hard" or "Hit fast" which are the two options in Cypher.

Moving away from Cypher opens up so many options without having to lose anything. I can only imagine what FATE and a SW version would be like.

tl:dr It's working for us and working really well. It's already as memorable as several of our other very long-standing campaigns in other systems and settings but it wouldn't have been using straight vanilla Cypher. Not for everyone we know, but it works for us where Cypher was a no-go from the players first look at it.

Don't sweat it, Phantasmo. I love me a good arguement, or even a bad one.  I generally prefer them in real life, among friends, but I'm just as happy to pull the rhetorical knives and see who quits bleeding first online with strangers if they jump up and volunteer for it.

Thanks for your answer, El Phantasmo ! I can see how come you don't like the cypher because it is a class and level system that you seem to not enjoy. Your remarks about EP do not appeased because mt inelligence is not genius-level. Will I a day manage to crasp this system ^_^ (I think the more difficult parts are the character creation and the whole body shift thing).