Tell Me About the Cypher System

[Swanosaurus]

Agree here. Linking abilities directly to health resource means that in the end, after any resource intensive encounter you end up exhausted regardless of whether you were successful or not.

This is hardly a great design if you feel bad regardless of your performance. It's like doing a boring corpo work that feels utterly meaningless because regardless of the outcome you get nothing out of it. This is pretty difficult to enjoy - unless you don't mind bringing corporate drone mentality to a gaming table.

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 "corporate drone mentality" thing, I'll say that you could say the same thing about largely consequence-free rinse-repeat combats in other systems where you may feel triumphant, but really, you just keep doing the same thing over and over again, three times a day.)
But that also depends on campaign structure. I usually prefer one or two fights per adventure, which often means that there's game nights with no fight challenge at all. If there's a fight, you know it will tax you. You know it's meaningful and worth your ressources. A lot of systems handle it differently, but as I said, that's pretty much the one thing I actually like about the Cypher system - fights against harder hitters can quickly start to feel really dangerous.

 

[ruemere]

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 "corporate drone mentality" thing, I'll say that you could say the same thing about largely consequence-free rinse-repeat combats in other systems where you may feel triumphant, but really, you just keep doing the same thing over and over again, three times a day.)
But that also depends on campaign structure. I usually prefer one or two fights per adventure, which often means that there's game nights with no fight challenge at all. If there's a fight, you know it will tax you. You know it's meaningful and worth your ressources. A lot of systems handle it differently, but as I said, that's pretty much the one thing I actually like about the Cypher system - fights against harder hitters can quickly start to feel really dangerous.

Well, I've run multiple fights using Torment:Tides of Numenera (no player volunteered for the experience) and sadly, they were monotonous and unsatisfying. In order to win, I had to use the same amount of effort regardless of whether my strategy sucked or not. The same was true about non-combat encounters.

The premise of the system, hurt yourself to hurt enemy, hurt yourself more to hurt your enemy more and finally, just do the minimum effort because regardless of whatever you do, you'll end up in the same place (with the exception of being a total failure) provided an ironic commentary on the core question of the computer game - what does one's life matter? - almost nothing would be the answer.

So I have taken long and hard look at the game and gave it a pass. Nowadays however, I would not mind running with the fourth pool.

 

[Swanosaurus]

Well, I've run multiple fights using Torment:Tides of Numenera (no player volunteered for the experience) and sadly, they were monotonous and unsatisfying. In order to win, I had to use the same amount of effort regardless of whether my strategy sucked or not. The same was true about non-combat encounters.

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 see the problems with it - they just don't happen to be problems that bother me that much. I just take issue with the notion that me kind of liking it means that I'm taking some "corporate drone mentality" to RPGs.

 

[Thomas Shey]

I'm not going to tell people they're playing a game just because its popular or such (though I'll make a partial exception to that with D&D for reasons that shouldn't require a lot of unpacking as to why I think there's some influence there). Its abundantly clear that some people just love the heck out of Cypher. I just think parts of it are malformed on a personal level, and some others in general.

 

[Swanosaurus]

Its abundantly clear that some people just love the heck out of Cypher. I just think parts of it are malformed on a personal level, and some others in general.

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 control but actually locks you into stuff you never intended, the XP system (though that one is easily fixed) and how the Cyphers actually don't work so well in most contexts.
It's just that the death-spiral of combat, to me, is one of the few elements of the game that actually feels well-designed. Combats usually were pretty cool in our campaign because of it.

 

[ruemere]

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 see the problems with it - they just don't happen to be problems that bother me that much. I just take issue with the notion that me kind of liking it means that I'm taking some "corporate drone mentality" to RPGs.

That would depend on whether you want to feel rewarded for your effort. I do.

Corporate drone is a person who does their job. They do what they are asked to, no enthusiasm or willingness to add something special. I work for a large corpo, I do it with enthusiasm and I do put a lot of extras in because I happen to like what I do.

Being a drone is not bad, it's just not a very rewarding or satisfying position to be in.

And to me Cypher system core is like being a corporate drone - do what you need to do with minimum effort, because, by doing more you gain little.

 

[Swanosaurus]

And to me Cypher system core is like being a corporate drone - do what you need to do with minimum effort, because, by doing more you gain little.

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 that you want to achieve, you may be on a ticking clock and spend more to end the fight faster, it may be relevant which pool gets tapped ... as I said, defense spends were used infrequently at our table, but if you're low on Might or an opponent has a nasty effect like poison, they're definitely worth the effort. Most special abilities are definitely worth their cost in pool points, and if you have enough Edge, you can easily spam them.

You mentioned that you only tried the system alone, playing Torment, so I'd wager a lot of that just didn't come into play. Or maybe you're just more mathematically-minded than anyone in my group was and do the cost-benefit calculus a lot faster in your head and decide that spending effort usually isn't worth it, if you treat the fight as nothing more than a mathematical exercise. Either way, at least in the Cypher System you have the option to spend effort to for effect, which is more than in many other systems, where you just use whatever ability available and hope to roll well.

As I said, I don't want to convince you that it's a great combat system; it certainly has its downsides, and I can easily see why others might dislike it for exactly the elements that I consider its best features (not everyone likes a death spiral). I just find it strange that you stick to remote-judging the mentality of people who like the system, in a way that, even if you didn't mean it to, might easily come across as insulting (in my experience, few people like to be called a "corporate drone"); especially if you only ever tried it solo on a computer and have no actual experience with it at a gaming table.

 

[ruemere]

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 that you want to achieve, you may be on a ticking clock and spend more to end the fight faster, it may be relevant which pool gets tapped ... as I said, defense spends were used infrequently at our table, but if you're low on Might or an opponent has a nasty effect like poison, they're definitely worth the effort. Most special abilities are definitely worth their cost in pool points, and if you have enough Edge, you can easily spam them.

You mentioned that you only tried the system alone, playing Torment, so I'd wager a lot of that just didn't come into play. Or maybe you're just more mathematically-minded than anyone in my group was and do the cost-benefit calculus a lot faster in your head and decide that spending effort usually isn't worth it, if you treat the fight as nothing more than a mathematical exercise. Either way, at least in the Cypher System you have the option to spend effort to for effect, which is more than in many other systems, where you just use whatever ability available and hope to roll well.

As I said, I don't want to convince you that it's a great combat system; it certainly has its downsides, and I can easily see why others might dislike it for exactly the elements that I consider its best features (not everyone likes a death spiral). I just find it strange that you stick to remote-judging the mentality of people who like the system, in a way that, even if you didn't mean it to, might easily come across as insulting (in my experience, few people like to be called a "corporate drone"); especially if you only ever tried it solo on a computer and have no actual experience with it at a gaming table.

Could you provide an encounter example that would exhibit the traits you've mentioned? A simple setup, with an NPC whose attacks make it worthwhile to avoid/use effort to counter. Then please demonstrate how using effort actively would beneficial over just taking damage and dishing attacks.

That should be pretty simple, right?

 

[Swanosaurus]

Could you provide an encounter example that would exhibit the traits you've mentioned? A simple setup, with an NPC whose attacks make it worthwhile to avoid/use effort to counter. Then please demonstrate how using effort actively would beneficial over just taking damage and dishing attacks.

That should be pretty simple, right?

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 that aspect of the system. As I said, it's less about getting anyone to see my point about the system (really, I don't care if you like it and totally convinced that there's a lot of good reasons to dislike it), and more about demanding some basic courtesy (namely apologizing for a perceived slight and accepting that other people's experiences are just as valid as yours). But I see now that I won't get it, so I might just as well move on.

 

[ruemere]

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 that aspect of the system. As I said, it's less about getting anyone to see my point about the system (really, I don't care if you like it and totally convinced that there's a lot of good reasons to dislike it), and more about demanding some basic courtesy (namely apologizing for a perceived slight and accepting that other people's experiences are just as valid as yours). But I see now that I won't get it, so I might just as well move on.

Glad you have fond memories, at least. Pity, you've taken my request to provide data negatively - or at least that's how I perceived your reaction. Still, thank you for taking your time to share.

To anyone else reading this, could you provide a Cypher system encounter example where using more effort to succeed is more beneficial than using minimum effort?