Interview inXile's Torment successor officially announced on RPS, will use Monte Cook's Numenera setting

[Harg Harfardarssen]

Its not really about sub-optimal in the sense of being less than min-maxed or sub-optimal in the sense of having a weakness, its about sub-optimal in the sense that there is an objectively best answer to questions of character design. If a longsword is better than other martial weapons, why specialize in the flail?

The toughness feat is kind of an odd example in that it doesn't quite embody this flaw (3 HP is useful, just not useful enough to justify using up a feat), but it illustrates the problems with the thinking very well. Because its a purely number rather than something that affects the mechanics, it could just be increased to make it worth a feat. If Cook thought it wasn't worth a feat and didn't increase the HP given it so it was, then its indicative of a desire to create a "bad" feat for the purpose of rewarding mastery by punishing being a novice.

On one hand, I agree that the idea of 'system mastery' being desirable is not a great one. It leads to a lot of infuriating people who want nothing more than to munchkin-ize everything and play the perfect character within the system. But at the same time, if those sub-optimal choices are not there at all (and this is just my own opinion, not some sort of great truth of game design) then a system loses some of its depth and luster. To use Monte Cook's own example, just because toughness is never the best feat to take, should I be precluded from taking it at all if I *want* to make a character that is sub-optimal in some ways?

Maybe this is just my P&P background, but I don't derive as much fun from creating the perfect character as I do from creating a (potentially flawed) character concept and running with it. A system in which there is no potential for sub-optimal choices -- intentional or not -- feels like a boring one to me.

I'm playing devils advocate a bit here as well - flawed characters can be interesting, so I'm not against creating options that enable this. But my problem is that when the longsword is objectively better than the flail, you have to choose to weaken yourself in order to go outside of a fairly generic vision of a sword-wielding warrior. So it tends to work against the creation of idiosyncratic characters.

 

[Jasede]

I like variety.
I wouldn't like a game where every weapon does 1d8 damage in the interest of "balance".

 

[Grunker]

evdk: Yeah, you should have seen the sig. It pretty much tells you everything about Josh's megalomania and delusions. But fuck that, none of those things exclude the ability to make a decent cRPG system. Doesn't mean I won't call Roguey out on those delusions though.

It's hilarious how you can not see how shitty an argument it is to say "EVERYTHING WE HAVE IS SHIT", then claim you know just how to make the perfect system, yet have nothing at all to show for it. Roguey's dedication is the incarnation of fanboyism; blind obedience without any critical sense or ability to listen to even a degree of the opposition's arguments.

However, seeing this kind of bullshit:

I wouldn't like a game where every weapon does 1d8 damage in the interest of "balance".

After Roguey has repeatedly and in a million different threads have explained in detail that the above notion of balance is not what Roguey is promoting makes me understand why Roguey stands so hard on those delusions. No matter how retarded they are there's no ground for this constant Argumentum ad Reductio which seems to be leveled Roguey's way pretty much everytime the notion of balance is discussed.

In short, Josh has megalomania and delusions, Roguey trusts in those because of fanboyism, but the blindness and unwillingness to listen to reason is understandable considering the amount of bullshit arguments utilized by the opposition.

Now excuse me, I have a Pathfinder-game in 10 minutes which is about 1000 times more fun than anything Josh has ever had his hand in creating.

 

[FeelTheRads]

Check the quotez in my sig.

Please check random quotes from other people because I can't think for myself! And then change your opinions to those quotes! Because they're the truth!

"Pretty much all games get it wrong."

No, sorry. Sawyer pretty much always gets it wrong.

 

[Jasede]

Oh.

 

[evdk]

Jesus Christ, Roguey, I actually have a degree of trust in Josh, although I keep bitching about some of his irritatingly gamist design decisions, but to put him forth as a person that will show Gygax and his descendants how to do it right for a change is presumptuous to the extreme.

Check the quotez in my sig.

I am ready to be proven wrong. So far Josh has tall tales, big ideas and little to show for them. If P:E is the second coming I'll be the first to hunt for crows to eat, you can quote me on that.

Also: sorry, I do not read people's sigs much.

 

[Grunker]

Jesus Christ, Roguey, I actually have a degree of trust in Josh, although I keep bitching about some of his irritatingly gamist design decisions, but to put him forth as a person that will show Gygax and his descendants how to do it right for a change is presumptuous to the extreme.

Check the quotez in my sig.

I am ready to be proven wrong. So far Josh has tall tales, big ideas and little to show for them. If P:E is the second coming I'll be the first to hunt for crows to eat, you can quote me on that.

Even if Josh produces the second coming of RPG systems he'll still be wrong in Roguey's quotes. Him proving his ability to create a good system does not invalidate other systems.

But that's a minor detail to your point, overall I agree. Josh sure talks a lot and has done very little.

 

[evdk]

Even if Josh produces the second coming of RPG systems he'll still be wrong in Roguey's quotes. Him proving his ability to create a good system does not invalidate other systems.

But that's a minor detail to your point, overall I agree. Josh sure talks a lot and has done very little.

Sure, even if he Josh proves Roguey right it will not retroactively make all my 3E experiences boring and subpar. I just didn't think that even needed to me mentioned, you'd have to be an utter fanatic not to grasp that.

 

[Kirtai]

Jesus Christ, Roguey, I actually have a degree of trust in Josh, although I keep bitching about some of his irritatingly gamist design decisions, but to put him forth as a person that will show Gygax and his descendants how to do it right for a change is presumptuous to the extreme.

Well, Gygax and company are not making the same sort of thing after all. Their designs were for human gamemasters - flexible and imaginative but not so hot at calculations. Designs meant for computers have exactly opposite constraints - rigid and inflexible but very quick at crunching numbers and statistics. Suggesting that Josh could do better than Gygax at something Gygax didn't even attempt isn't that far fetched.

 

[Grunker]

utter fanatic

like roguey amirite

Kirtai: Especially since Gygax' systems are pretty shitty systems. He designed the way to play, the frame of reference for P&P. That's what we should thank Gygax for. Not for the prototypes of games rules systems he made, which were pretty awful at doing what he intended to make them do. Every game I've played in a Gygax system would work as well without a system or in another system. Gygax deserves credit for the first step, but he didn't exactly invent aeronautics.

 

[evdk]

Well, Gygax and company are not making the same sort of thing after all. Their designs were for human gamemasters - flexible and imaginative but not so hot at calculations. Designs meant for computers have exactly opposite constraints - rigid and inflexible but very quick at crunching numbers and statistics. Suggesting that Josh could do better than Gygax at something Gygax didn't even attempt isn't that far fetched.

A lot of the system design decisions have nothing to do with the amount of math involved - I do not think it is a whole different ballpark at all.

utter fanatic

like roguey amirite

Hopefully not.

 

[Kirtai]

A lot of the system design decisions have nothing to do with the amount of math involved - I do not think it is a whole different ballpark at all.

It's not the maths so much as the flexibility of p&p vs the rigidity of computers that's the problem. P&P tends to have the implicit (or even explicit) assumption that the GM can change or ignore the rules as they see fit if it makes for a better game. Computer rules don't have that luxury. Not that one is better than the other, but they do have different requirements.

 

[bussinrounds]

A lot of the system design decisions have nothing to do with the amount of math involved - I do not think it is a whole different ballpark at all.

It's not the maths so much as the flexibility of p&p vs the rigidity of computers that's the problem. P&P tends to have the implicit (or even explicit) assumption that the GM can change or ignore the rules as they see fit if it makes for a better game. Computer rules don't have that luxury. Not that one is better than the other, but they do have different requirements.

What's the purpose of even having all these rules if the GM is just gonna ignore them or make up shit as he goes along ?

I could see it being ok if the GM is really experienced and good. But on the other hand, it probably gets really retarded with shitty DMs or ones that are nothing to write home about also.

 

[Zakhad]

It's like a new Godwin's law: any thread on the Codex, given sufficient time, will inevitably degenerate into the same interminable argument over Josh Sawyer's design philosophies.

It seems like some people here must have pledged thousands of dollar-equivalents to P:E expecting the second coming of Bhaalspawn Jesus. I'm not sure, if that's the case, that Sawyer can really shoulder the blame for your (pre-emptive) disappointment. No mere game was ever going to measure up.




Anyway, to return to the game this thread is actually about: I'm excited about Numenera: Torment. I'll pledge at least the base amount. Because seriously, it'll be like 30 dollars. And so, even if it's average, it'll still be a better investment than half the shitty games that sit forever uninstalled at the bottom of my steam library.

 

[St. Toxic]

No. You were talking about what the creators of Fallout intended without giving any evidence

Why would I do that? For what purpose? C'mon man.

What's the purpose of even having all these rules if the GM is just gonna ignore them or make up shit as he goes along ?

They're a general and imperfect guideline, like the legal system.

 

[mondblut]

As everyone keeps reiterating, it's a game primarily about branching storylines and world-exploration and combat seems to exist mainly because adventure games went down the shitter in late 90s so they had to somehow sell the game to RPG fanbase instead.

 

[Brother None]

I, too, am curious about Eternity. Josh just hasn't impressed me with anything he's done *so far*, but he puts more thought and effort into systems than any other cRPG designer I can think of, and it's interesting to see where it leads.

And there is certainly a lot to be said for freely abandoned p&p notions for cRPGs. p&p help determine the roots, but making a straitjacket out of that helps no one.

Especially when some of the original developers/writers are tyaking place, even if divineMCA(c) doesn't seem to want be part of it.

Want? Nah, that's not really the problem. The problem is the bananas workload that guy keeps taking on himself. But if it can't happen with this Torment, then oh well, once inXile is done they can let Obsidian use it to make Eternity Torment. MCA will get to work on it eventually, even if he can't now.

I wouldn't mind some references to him and other PST characters, like Ravel.

I wouldn't expect any direct story ties, at least not explicitly. Maybe something like it, as you say, is possible. Mostly it's about themes though, and that narrows down more than just Fargo talking about a personal story in general. I've read the story outline and a lot of the details and structures are reminiscent of PS:T in very clear ways...man that sounds vague, but I don't dare be specific

 

[grotsnik]

I've read the story outline and a lot of the details and structures are reminiscent of PS:T in very clear ways...man that sounds vague, but I don't dare be specific

Absurdly early days, I know, but when I was reading that RPS interview I did think this might be a project where the makers could benefit from releasing the details of the starting conceit of the plot (if obviously nothing even slightly in-depth concerning the story-outline itself) much earlier than they usually would - almost as one of the first bits of proper information. Because the setting's almost entirely an unknown quantity to Joe Public, and the gameplay's apparently still up in the air, and because there's supposed to be this unquantifiable 'thematic' relationship with PS:T, a lot of the discussion I've read has been restricted to the likes of 'Oh, I...wonder what this is going to be like.' and 'Yeah, what's the deal with this, then?', and then someone posts some of the Numenara art and says, 'That looks quite nice'. And then that's it.

It's very hard for anyone to get even a very basic sense of the tone of the project as is, which makes it harder for proper interest to develop around it. So maybe giving out the basic hook/pitch of the PC's story (you wake up in a Crematorium with hideous burns all over, or whatever) would be the most appropriate place to start for a plot-centric Torment successor - even more so than tidbits of lore or artwork? Or maybe that's a terrible idea, I don't fucking know.

 

[Brother None]

Maybe. Part of the process is definitely doing more to explain what Numenera is and how specifically it'll be utilized here, it's not Wasteland 2 where the setting and even prequel story is in place so you do have to explain it.

But plot spoilers... Fargo has a huge aversion to plot spoilers in the game's coverage. I know Wasteland 2's plot too, obviously, but how much has been released of that except some allusions and hints? Might require a slightly different approach here, yes, maybe a bit on the start since the game's opening is definitely a point where you can feel that thematic hook with PS:T, but again, it's not how inXile prefers to roll.

It'll have its own art to show off aside from Numenera's, of course, with Dana working on it.

 

[FeelTheRads]

Who's Dana?

 

[Infinitron]

Who's Dana?

Concept artist. Read the OP

 

[FeelTheRads]

Ah, jeez. That's pretty awesome.

 

[Brother None]

Here's his site for those interested: http://www.danaknutson.com/

He's got an interesting aesthetic that'll certainly influence this game's look in a big way. Other artists will be brought in as well, of course.

 

[Grunker]

The Numenera artist is doing the work on the game's art too? That's pretty awesome, the Numenera art is great.

 

[Orma]

Real time with pause is not really a problem i think. I hope it turns out like a storyfag's dream-come-true.