The Gaming Den

I have a friend who likes to DM, and especially likes running and modifying the pathfinder APs. However, she doesn't really have any desire to learn or deal with the intricacies 3.x monsters. Honestly, a simplified version of d20 combat would suit her very well.

I know that this forum doesn't mutch care for Monte Cook's passion projects but does Cypher work as a "D&D light?" I am the regular DM for this group, and (at her request) having been basically been providing the rules structure for the game. The rest of the group would be frustrated if we switched to something that got to far from d20, but cypher seems like it might be more her speed.

Also, has anybody seen, played in, or bothered to convert a pathfinder AP to cypher? It seems like it would be pretty straight forward.

Cypher certainly feels a lot like D&D in play, and works well for the same types of adventures. I've run adventures set in D&D land and in the MtG multiverse with it and in all instances it worked quite well. It will however not be good fit for players who enjoy d20-based systems such as 3.5 or PF for being 'fair' because Team Monster (mostly) plays by the same rules as the PCs, because Cypher doesn't give two shits about that.

Why don't you offer to run the monsters? If you're experienced, you can probably run them 'blind' - you get the monster when the combat music starts and handle that part of it. That'd let her focus more on the non-combat parts of the game.

Another option might be that 13th Age game. It's a bit more complicated Numa-numa from what I can tell, but it's also more D&D-like. Its metagame powers seem like they might mesh well with an AP.

Cypher is like Fate Core's aspects yeah?

If you can get/give details as to what counts as 'the intricacies,' I'll write up a D20 Lite that doesn't involve Cypher's superfluous math steps and 'Carries a Quiver'-level bullshit or 13th Age's... being someone's house rules for 4e.

OgreBattle wrote:Cypher is like Fate Core's aspects yeah?

Cyphers are random single-use items with disproportionately powerful effects, but you mainly get them as loot and can only carry a small number of them.

The idea is that you'd find random items on an adventure and use them in the same adventure, or the next.

In theory, you can, considering how Numa-Numa was the 5E we could have had if Mearls hadn't alienated him.

In the practice, your game will BSOD as soon as your wizard player asks how force fields (or even hirelings) work, because there are no rules for "NPC vs NPC" conflict. Nada. Zero. Zeulch. Same thing for PvP. No rules.

HOWEVER... considering how Paizo APs are Second Order Idiot Plots, at least Numa-Numa has "DM fuckery" codified, so at least you can demand for compensation whenever the AP forces a Paizo on you.

P.S: No, Numa-Numa has nothing in common with FATE.

Dogbert wrote:In theory, you can, considering how Numa-Numa was the 5E we could have had if Mearls hadn't alienated him.

In the practice, your game will BSOD as soon as your wizard player asks how force fields (or even hirelings) work, because there are no rules for "NPC vs NPC" conflict. Nada. Zero. Zeulch. Same thing for PvP. No rules.

HOWEVER... considering how Paizo APs are Second Order Idiot Plots, at least Numa-Numa has "DM fuckery" codified, so at least you can demand for compensation whenever the AP forces a Paizo on you.

P.S: No, Numa-Numa has nothing in common with FATE.

See, posts like this contain so much vitriol and a lot of things that are demonstrably not true, but basically nothing useful.

Meals design work on Numenenera begins after leaving the design team for 5e, but 5e was already pretty far in its design cycle. There is actually very little common design structures (we could get into what they are but its actually not important.). The 5E would have looked/worked like cypher system if Cook had more input only makes sense if you believe that he would have been allowed to work in vacuum and would not been required to make a game that had clear lineage to previous editions. Cypher isn't Monte's version of 5e. Cypher is his passion project once he remembered that he didn't particularly like working on D&D anymore.

That said, the demonstrably false part is NPC vs. NPC conflict and PVP conflict. See pages 198 and 206 of the cypher system core rulebook. Both are discussed. NPCs that are basically on team PC can be rolled as players or treated as assets or take the aid a person action. Again, the games presumption is that they will not be focus of the action so they are abstracted. Otherwise, the outcome a two NPCs in conflict is decided by the GM with level being used as a general arbitrator if you don't care from a story perspective. You can like that or hate it, but it is there. PVP is handled as opposed rolls. With things that normally reduce level treated as +3.

That said, after looking at what pathfinder to cypher would entail (not a lot) the end result is work that feels like running in place.

souran wrote:but 5e was already pretty far in its design cycle.

This is false. Mearls called Cook from the beginning, to be 5E's lead designer, no less. (also, I didn't know there was a cycle for navel-gazing considering 5E was barely two months from going to print and Mearls had just "called some guys to do the underlying math").

souran wrote:That said, the demonstrably false part is NPC vs. NPC conflict and PVP conflict. See pages 198 and 206 of the cypher system core rulebook.

"Of the cypher system rulebook"... which came about one year after The Strange and Two Years after Numenera.

souran wrote:NPCs that are basically on team PC can be rolled as players or treated as assets or take the aid a person action.

And pray tell, exactly HOW do they roll? What's the score on their three non existent pools? Or they just roll plain, unmodified rolls that are pretty much useless after level three? This paragraph tells me absolutely nothing (and "using them as assets" means Force Fields are worth exactly two things).

"Player-facing systems" sound pretty in the theory, but truth of the matter is that they're more trouble than they're worth with the amount of exceptions you need for maneuvers and special powers.

Look, it's okay if you like Cypher, we're all entitled to like what we like, just don't try to defend the indefensible in it.

Does Cypher have unique class mechanics?

What are the recovery mechanics?

The whole Numa Numa thing where you divide bonuses to get a skill level, compare the skill levels and then multiply the difference by the same number in order to get the net die modifier was indeed the big innovation that Monte Cook unveiled for 5th edition before he walked off the project. It's... completely pointless. Mathematically it does nothing, it's just extra work.

It's not even extra work in the way of THAC0, where it was dumb but happened because things grew up organically and no one had quite simplified them as far as they could go. Rolling a die and adding your bonuses is the base state. Dividing your bonuses by a number and then multiplying the result by the same number is obviously pointless wheel spinning. There's no reason to do that.

-Username17

OgreBattle wrote:Does Cypher have unique class mechanics?

What are the recovery mechanics?

You recover a set amount of points to your pools each day, I think it was based on your level if I remember right, but I could be wrong.

And no unique class mechanics. Each class has a different selection of Class Powers available per level, like dnd4 or Saga. It's a Linear Fighters/ Quadratic Wizards with a single escape clause: Choose a good Verb (what would be a "path" in dnd) and you can still have some agency regardless of class.