# Now that both books are out... 13th Age vs Numenera



## dm4hire (Aug 9, 2013)

Ok, both books are out now and people have had a chance to read through enough to get a good feel for the systems.  Which do you see yourself running now?

I really like both games and am torn between which to run though leaning more toward Numenera, mainly because it is definitely a new twist on d20.  I get the vibe that Monte truly took the best of everything on this one and made it into its own thing.  It definitely doesn't feel like D&D but really captures that new game essence when reading it.  I want to learn and play it.

13th Age on the other hand definitely feels like D&D, but done in a way that feels new and better than 4e.  4e to me seemed very cookie cutter, slap new paint on it, and change the name and it's a new class, leaving me bored after the first two levels because everything is the same.  13th definitely doesn't do that.  It also is a lot lighter.  I want to play it because it feels like D&D the way I wanted 4e to feel.  And it still has that 3e tone in the background.  This will most likely be the game I stay with over the long haul only because everyone I play with will feel more comfortable with it.

All that being said what are your opinions as to which you will most likely stay with?


----------



## Dice4Hire (Aug 9, 2013)

I did not buy either, but I am interested in how the poll comes out.


----------



## dm4hire (Aug 9, 2013)

Here's an interesting observation I just made.  They posted on the Numenera Facebook page that they sent out nearly 17,000 pdfs for the core book (they did the players guide the next day).  The Kickstarter only had 4,658 backers.  I'm pretty sure the retailers only got one copy of the PDF, but even if they did get more that would be only 83 more copies.  There may have been some who also bought extra copies, but I doubt there were that many.  That still leaves probably close to 12,000 preorders of the book and PDF.  I think it will be interesting to see how popular Numenera ends up being.


----------



## Lord_Blacksteel (Aug 12, 2013)

The question I am really interested in will be how they're both doing a year to two years down the road, mainly after D&D (insert edition name here) officially releases. Based on Monte's track record (AU/AE mainly) I think it's safe to say Numenera will have support for a few years at least. 

Among those who do go with either one I can't help but think there will be a fair amount of "OK that was fun but back to D&D" once that new edition comes out.


----------



## Ahnehnois (Aug 12, 2013)

Both are moderately interesting to me (13th Age moreso simply because it's closer to D&D and likely to be more useful). Both may be sources for ideas. I am not likely to play or spend money on either.


----------



## dm4hire (Aug 12, 2013)

Lord_Blacksteel said:


> The question I am really interested in will be how they're both doing a year to two years down the road, mainly after D&D (insert edition name here) officially releases. Based on Monte's track record (AU/AE mainly) I think it's safe to say Numenera will have support for a few years at least.
> 
> Among those who do go with either one I can't help but think there will be a fair amount of "OK that was fun but back to D&D" once that new edition comes out.




I will agree for the most part, however I know quite a few that feel burned by how WotC(Hasbro) has handled D&D recently that they don't plan on going back.  Monte's books tend to fill a niche that is for certain and while AU/AE are not popular as D&D I think that is because they fall into the same flaw that 13th Age will fall into, which is they are still D&D clones.  Pathfinder has been the exception to this I think only because they have been able to take advantage of WotC(Hasbro)'s inept handling of D&D recently.  By that I mean Paizo took the ball and ran with it after 4e fumbled in terms of 3PP support and then by not meeting everyone's satisfaction.  That could change once 5e returns, but there are a lot of bridges that will need to be rebuilt in order for the game to reach its former glory, if it even can.  Pathfinder on the other hand is starting to face a similar fate I believe in that the game is getting so bloated that it is on the verge of imploding as they continue to expand the rules and eventually will face the need for a second edition.

Numenera may break away from the D&D clone fate because while it has a very fantasy feel to it you can't help but remember it is a sci-fi game as well.  Definitely it sits in its own niche at the moment and I would love to see it remain there.  Sci-fi or even sci-fantasy has never had a game that equals to D&D as far as staying power or dominance.* Given the figures which can be found at the Kickstarter website and from Monte's admission to the PDF preorder the game is definitely popular, but as you say time will be the biggest factor in whether it remains that way.  I would love to see sci-fantasy become its own market niche with Numenera filling the roll of flagship, but can’t help that like sci-fi it will be an area that sees fits and starts a lot.

*I am making this claim because while there are popular sci-fi games, such as Alternity, Star Frontiers, Star Wars, and Traveler to name a few, none have taken a dominant role as D&D has within that genre/niche market.  One could possibly argue Star Wars, though I wouldn’t classify its popularity as being strictly gaming related since it falls into its own dimension of fandom as does all things Star Wars when taken as a whole.
D&D may be the granddaddy of them all, but you have to admit that something about it definitely set it apart as the preferred game by the majority of the fantasy fans in terms of game play over the years, at least until 4e and even then it still commands a large portion of the gaming community in terms of fantasy gaming.


----------



## TrippyHippy (Aug 13, 2013)

> Sci-fi or even sci-fantasy has never had a game that equals to D&D as far as staying power or dominance.*




Warhammer 40K (as in the tabletop wargame) outsells any RPG, including any version of D&D, by a considerable degree. And the RPGs don't do that badly either.


----------



## dm4hire (Aug 13, 2013)

I would agree that in terms of wargames, but it hasn't been a mainstay RPG which is my point.  If you ask which game is the pick of the crowd you'll either come out with Star Wars on top by a somewhat decent margin or it will be pretty close for a few games that are popular.


----------



## TrippyHippy (Aug 14, 2013)

I think the 40KRP games have been a pretty consistent mainstay for the last few years since they've been released at least - the games have been top 5 sellers (top 3 sellers mainly) consistently since it came out. It's obviously difficult to make comparisons before then.


----------



## Evenglare (Aug 15, 2013)

Numenera is my game of choice for the foreseeable future. I'm tired of the edition treadmill, im happy with the new system, it's easy enough to run and create new things for etc etc.


----------



## Kaodi (Aug 15, 2013)

Pathfinder has a lot of stuff but honestly it does not feel that bloated to me. Maybe because while there is a lot of material there are relatively few actual game manuals (13)? If Paizo makes a new edition I do not think it is going to be because people are saying, "This is too bloated."


----------



## Lord_Blacksteel (Aug 15, 2013)

dm4hire said:


> I will agree for the most part, however I know quite a few that feel burned by how WotC(Hasbro) has handled D&D recently that they don't plan on going back. ...That could change once 5E returns, but there are a lot of bridges that will need to be rebuilt in order for the game to reach its former glory, if it even can.




I see this online sometimes but I think the number of people who will refuse to buy the next version of D&D because they're still mad about the last version is pretty small. I mean logically, if you dropped D&D because you didn't like the direction the company took it, well, you won! they're changing the game back towards what it used to be. I can't think of a better apology than 1)dropping the game they didn't like far earlier than expected and 2) using a lengthy open playtest to design the replacement. People may not like the new version for whatever reason, but that's different than still being mad about 4E. 

Plus, these aren't mutually exclusive choices - people can own and play 3E/4E/5E/Pathfinder, 13th Age, and Numenera concurrently if they're interested



dm4hire said:


> Pathfinder on the other hand is starting to face a similar fate I believe in that the game is getting so bloated that it is on the verge of imploding as they continue to expand the rules and eventually will face the need for a second edition.




I agree that it will happen some day but I don't think it will be all that soon. I don't think it makes great sense to release a new edition at the same time the new edition of D&D is coming out. Give it a year or more after Next is officially released and then you might see something. We're only 4 years into this edition of Pathfinder, it can run for a few more.



dm4hire said:


> Numenera may break away from the D&D clone fate because while it has a very fantasy feel to it you can't help but remember it is a sci-fi game as well.  Definitely it sits in its own niche at the moment and I would love to see it remain there.  Sci-fi or even sci-fantasy has never had a game that equals to D&D as far as staying power or dominance.* Given the figures which can be found at the Kickstarter website and from Monte's admission to the PDF preorder the game is definitely popular, but as you say time will be the biggest factor in whether it remains that way.  I would love to see sci-fantasy become its own market niche with Numenera filling the roll of flagship, but can’t help that like sci-fi it will be an area that sees fits and starts a lot.




Numenera is interesting but I think it's too "weird" to have any long term dominance. The kickstarter was big but I think a lot of that was Monte's name on it and once DM's start trying to talk people into playing it I think the road gets a lot tougher. I'd like to see it stick around, and it will at some level, but let's meet back here in 3 years and see what we have : )



dm4hire said:


> *I am making this claim because while there are popular sci-fi games, such as Alternity, Star Frontiers, Star Wars, and Traveler to name a few, none have taken a dominant role as D&D has within that genre/niche market.  One could possibly argue Star Wars, though I wouldn’t classify its popularity as being strictly gaming related since it falls into its own dimension of fandom as does all things Star Wars when taken as a whole.
> D&D may be the granddaddy of them all, but you have to admit that something about it definitely set it apart as the preferred game by the majority of the fantasy fans in terms of game play over the years, at least until 4e and even then it still commands a large portion of the gaming community in terms of fantasy gaming.




Early on Traveller was pretty dominant, then the company decided to dramatically change up the rules and the setting and it lost a lot of ground - sound familiar? The Rebellion and "The New Era" is pretty much the "4e/Spellplague" of Traveller history. Star Frontiers was pretty popular -it was TSR- but it only lasted about 3 years as a game line. I agree that Star Wars is kind of it's own thing and hard to gauge.

Champions was the big supers game for quite a bit of the 80s and 90s even as Marvel and DC came and went but the company lost steam and Mutants and Masterminds jumped in and took Hero's lunch money and has yet to relinquish it, so change is possible even after a long run.

When you get into science fantasy type weirdness some of it depends on where you draw the lines. Shadowrun might bleed into it and it's pretty popular. Gamma World has had some peaks (and valleys) over the years. Rifts was regularly in those top 10 sales lists in the back of magazines in the 90's though you never hear much about it online thanks to the owner. The 40K RPG's are up there now and if it wasn't split into 5 different lines it might be perceived as more dominant than it seems to be.

13th Age has both a bigger chance and a bigger risk, I think: over the long haul some games ride alongside D&D and do well enough, like C&C. Others get squeezed out by "we could just play D&D" like Palladium Fantasy. Time will tell.

Numenera, despite having "Monte Cook" on the cover, has less of a link to D&D in my mind, partly because of the setting, partly because of the rules, and partly because of the kickstarter. the setting is different enough from standard fantasy that it's necessarily competing with D&D, the rules are not standard d20, and kickstarter backers tend to be invested in a game beyond just financial considerations. That means there will be a vocal, active core of people pushing the game and that should help quite a bit.


----------



## dm4hire (Aug 15, 2013)

Kaodi said:


> Pathfinder has a lot of stuff but honestly it does not feel that bloated to me. Maybe because while there is a lot of material there are relatively few actual game manuals (13)? If Paizo makes a new edition I do not think it is going to be because people are saying, "This is too bloated."




See that's kind of a fallacy as 1st ed had about as many books, including Deities & Demigods, DragonLance Adventures, Dungeon Masters Guide, Dungeoneer's Survival Guide, Fiend Folio, Greyhawk Adventures, Legends & Lore, Manual of the Planes, Monster Manual, Monster Manual II, Oriental Adventures, Players Handbook, Unearthed Arcana, and Wilderness Survival Guide all as hardback books.  There was no question that 2nd Ed was needed, but it wasn't because there were too many books, but because the rules were conflicting already as well as other gaming aspects needed to be addressed and fixed.

I think where the problem with editions, beyond the first, is that the designers (as well as the players) start thinking of cool things to add to the game and don't think of what the overall impact is going to be.  They kick out books adding new details but they don't account for every aspect.  Playtesting has definitely helped curb that and while I think Pathfinder is better than 3e in a lot of respects because of that (and 5e will definitely be better than previous editions for the same reason) they are going to fall into the same hole eventually.

Where we can fix this when going to the next edition is looking from the top down.  Once the decision to make the next edition is made I think you need to stop and look at the game from the top down.  Then decide where you want to end both for characters and monsters and scale everything from there.  What monster will be the top of the food chain and start filling in the pyramid going down from there.  By not doing this you end up seeing monsters that were meant to be the top suddenly becoming second rate.  They no longer have the same association they once had as penultimate monsters.  Then to fix the problem you see things like "elder" or whatever template the company comes up with that gets added to the monster to push it up to meet the challenge that the players will be facing.

That creates a breakdown because the fix either becomes too powerful or still too weak.  The result eventually leads to the next edition.  4e met that challenge somewhat by setting a maximum level for the game, but even then WotC failed because they kept throwing more stuff into the mix without thought.  By thinking top down you set you limits as to what is the penultimate mob then stick everything else in where they fit below it.
I will admit that 13th Age addresses this by having the level cap at 10th for players and then having the monsters cap at 14th.  If they keep the influx of materials down as far as abilities and keep classes to the same restriction then it will work in the long run because they will eliminate the game breaking down.  The key is limiting what gets released as far as rules.
If every class is kept to a similar, although hopefully different, pattern then it will work as far as diversity.  So if you want the maximum damage a character can ever do to be 10d# then set it, but let how they reach that 10d# be the difference as long as it stays the limit.
This is why I believe 13th Age will work over the long haul since it addresses that power creep and the break down at high levels.  Numenera meets this by using a set range of difficulty and then limiting how it is adjusted as well as giving the GM a little more range to play with, thus through arbitration they can pull the reins back on the game and keep it in check.  Both have strong points and excellent merits that lend themselves to my main question.  Which game do other gamers think will have the staying power.


----------



## dm4hire (Aug 15, 2013)

Lord_Blacksteel said:


> I see this online sometimes but I think the number of people who will refuse to buy the next version of D&D because they're still mad about the last version is pretty small. I mean logically, if you dropped D&D because you didn't like the direction the company took it, well, you won! they're changing the game back towards what it used to be. I can't think of a better apology than 1)dropping the game they didn't like far earlier than expected and 2) using a lengthy open playtest to design the replacement. People may not like the new version for whatever reason, but that's different than still being mad about 4E.
> Plus, these aren't mutually exclusive choices - people can own and play 3E/4E/5E/Pathfinder, 13th Age, and Numenera concurrently if they're interested



 I agree and most players in that position probably will stay with the previous game they are on if they don’t want to move on or will completely move to a different game.


Lord_Blacksteel said:


> I agree that it will happen some day but I don't think it will be all that soon. I don't think it makes great sense to release a new edition at the same time the new edition of D&D is coming out. Give it a year or more after Next is officially released and then you might see something. We're only 4 years into this edition of Pathfinder, it can run for a few more.



No, I concur with you in that it will be a few years, but there is definitely starting to be rules conflict in the game which is my whole meaning by bloat.  Once they start having to arbitrate rules interpretations between books it becomes a problem that most likely can only be corrected by a new edition, thus eliminating the conflict.


Lord_Blacksteel said:


> Numenera is interesting but I think it's too "weird" to have any long term dominance. The kickstarter was big but I think a lot of that was Monte's name on it and once DM's start trying to talk people into playing it I think the road gets a lot tougher. I'd like to see it stick around, and it will at some level, but let's meet back here in 3 years and see what we have : )



Perhaps, the rules light nature and ease of play once you get past the differences are nice though.  It definitely will be a game that requires some adjustment for long time gamers, especially followers of d20.


Lord_Blacksteel said:


> Early on Traveller was pretty dominant, then the company decided to dramatically change up the rules and the setting and it lost a lot of ground - sound familiar? The Rebellion and "The New Era" is pretty much the "4e/Spellplague" of Traveller history. Star Frontiers was pretty popular -it was TSR- but it only lasted about 3 years as a game line. I agree that Star Wars is kind of it's own thing and hard to gauge.
> Champions was the big supers game for quite a bit of the 80s and 90s even as Marvel and DC came and went but the company lost steam and Mutants and Masterminds jumped in and took Hero's lunch money and has yet to relinquish it, so change is possible even after a long run.
> When you get into science fantasy type weirdness some of it depends on where you draw the lines. Shadowrun might bleed into it and it's pretty popular. Gamma World has had some peaks (and valleys) over the years. Rifts was regularly in those top 10 sales lists in the back of magazines in the 90's though you never hear much about it online thanks to the owner. The 40K RPG's are up there now and if it wasn't split into 5 different lines it might be perceived as more dominant than it seems to be.
> 13th Age has both a bigger chance and a bigger risk, I think: over the long haul some games ride alongside D&D and do well enough, like C&C. Others get squeezed out by "we could just play D&D" like Palladium Fantasy. Time will tell.
> Numenera, despite having "Monte Cook" on the cover, has less of a link to D&D in my mind, partly because of the setting, partly because of the rules, and partly because of the kickstarter. the setting is different enough from standard fantasy that it's necessarily competing with D&D, the rules are not standard d20, and kickstarter backers tend to be invested in a game beyond just financial considerations. That means there will be a vocal, active core of people pushing the game and that should help quite a bit.



I agree with you again on all those points.  Star Frontiers I think never got the treatment it fully deserved and had a lot of potential.  It would have been interesting to see what would have happened had they continued it and perhaps done a second edition.  The same could be said for Alternity, which was a system a head of its time IMO, it’s a shame that for the most part it got thrown under the bus so it wouldn’t compete with Star Wars.
I hope Numenera and 13th Age both hang on for the long haul.  They both definitely struck a chord judging by their current popularity and show that the market is open to what they offer.


----------



## Aldarc (Aug 15, 2013)

Lord_Blacksteel said:


> Numenera is interesting but I think it's too "weird" to have any long term dominance. The kickstarter was big but I think a lot of that was Monte's name on it and once DM's start trying to talk people into playing it I think the road gets a lot tougher. I'd like to see it stick around, and it will at some level, but let's meet back here in 3 years and see what we have : )



I'll be curious as to whether Monte Cook expands his "Cypher System" for adapting other genres. For example, one could easily replace "cyphers" with things like scrolls and potions or other magical items for a more "traditional fantasy."


----------



## dm4hire (Aug 15, 2013)

Aldarc said:


> I'll be curious as to whether Monte Cook expands his "Cypher System" for adapting other genres. For example, one could easily replace "cyphers" with things like scrolls and potions or other magical items for a more "traditional fantasy."




And we have this to support that thought:


			
				Monte Cook's Bruce Cordell Announcement today at Gencon said:
			
		

> “It was absolutely a no-brainer to bring Bruce on board. His incredible talent for creating and developing novel ideas that capture the imagination of readers and players is a perfect fit for us,” said Monte Cook. “We are *building a hothouse for innovative game worlds and designs*, and Bruce’s powerful imagination and strong fan following are just what we need to continue fueling our work on Numenera and, eventually, future projects.”


----------



## Stacie GmrGrl (Aug 18, 2013)

I will definitely go with Numenera because it does NOT look like a d20 system game at all and the world is fantastic and very fresh whereas 13th Age appears like a true clone to D&D (and is probably what D&D Next wishes it could be). Numenera looks amazing and from what I have read of the world I can see so many different kinds of stories that eclipse 13th Age by a infinite sized landslide.


----------



## SchlieffenPlan (Aug 18, 2013)

I will play Numenera as soon as I get my hands on it. We will probably keep playing Pathfinder for the time being, too. I would be interested in 13th Age, as well, if I had the time.


----------



## dm4hire (Aug 18, 2013)

Has anyone heard anything out of Gencon concerning 13th Age?  Only thing I saw was the guy giving the acceptance speech for the Ennie had a 13th Age t-shirt on.  I haven't seen any posts by anyone about it though news in general seems quiet this year from the convention, looking forward to Morrus' recap once it's over.


----------



## tangleknot (Aug 18, 2013)

I only need 1 dungeon dwelling rpg and Pathfinder seems to be doing a fine job.  If D&D next heads back into the realms of 3.5 and 2nd ed as well as significantly simplifying the rules I'll be drawn away from pathfinder.

As for action adventure RPG's:  I've played 7th Sea to death, Found epic endings in shadowrun, and twisted the rules of World of darkness to the point that it has become heroic...  I look forward to Numenera and my players are excited for it.  I know that Numenera will never be as popular D&D, but even if Monte only makes source material for a couple years that will be plenty enough for me.


----------



## fjw70 (Aug 19, 2013)

I just got the Numenera PDF and so far it looks pretty good.  I am getting my 4e group back together soon and will try to run short scenarios for both Edge of he Empire and Numenera if I have time (EotE will be first) to see if they want to try something else for a while. If not I might bring out 13th Age, but we will probably stik with 4e (which is fine with me).

so I will play what the groups want to play.


----------



## Rel (Aug 21, 2013)

I participated in the playtest for 13th Age and came away saying, "I like this."

I picked up the finished product at GenCon and came away saying, "I LOVE this!"

Hands down the most excited I've been about a game since Savage Worlds.


----------



## dm4hire (Aug 27, 2013)

Anyone get some quality game time in that's helped make your mind up further?


----------



## Hand of Evil (Aug 28, 2013)

I am leaning more to 13th Age, just like the touch and feel to the system and my players seem to like it.  Now I love Shadows of Esteren but my players as a bit more standoffish to the Cthulhu vibe.  Numenera will be played but don't see it becoming a primary game. 

My order of play (at this time): 

13th Age (if I have my way) - a game every 2 weeks 
Pathfinder - a game every 3 weeks
Shadows of Esteren - once a month
Numenera - maybe a game every quarter


----------



## Shadowsmith (Aug 31, 2013)

I have both 13th Age and Numenera. Both are very cool and I'll be running them.

13th Age is my current D&D replacement game. While I can enjoy Pathfinder, I find that I don't enjoy tracking skill points and it feels too busy for me. 13th Age is streamlined while keeping characters very individualized.

Numenera is a very cool sci fi/fantasy game. I'm a long time fan of Skyrealms of Jorune but can't get my current group to play it. Numenera has already gotten some acceptance as a game we'll try.

I like different systems for different games. The mechanics should support the setting and story rather than controlling it. Both 13th Age and Numenera do this well.


----------



## TarionzCousin (Sep 1, 2013)

I got my Numenera book yesterday. It is gorgeous. It's done in the same style as Ptolus, only with more color. Very impressive.


----------



## dm4hire (Sep 7, 2013)

I am bumping this as it is the last day to vote in the poll and want to make sure everyone gets a chance at voting.


----------



## Stalker0 (Sep 10, 2013)

I've bought 13th age and got to read a friend Numenera book within a week of each other, so I got to see each one side by side.

My overall thoughts:

13th age has a lot of good ideas, but ultimately is a dnd clone. I think that as Dnd moves to next the game may be forgotten, but many of its innovative mechanics will live on.

Numenera is a brand new beast. The flavor of the world is very distinctive, and if it gathers enough design support may be around a long time. But if it doesn't catch on I think it will just fade away.


So basically 13th age I think will definitely be around in spirit, but never be a big name. Numenera will either make it big or die into obscurity.


----------



## NotZenon (Oct 19, 2013)

I'm a little late to the conversation here, but i just wanted to post that i absolutely LOVE the "cypher" system of rules for numenera.  Its very easy to teach to new (or young) players, and easy to DM too. (although i'm still not sure if i prefer cypher or savage worlds, i'll have to run more games to find out)

The setting of the game, I like, but i'm not as excited about as i thought i would be.  I'm excited to see the cypher system in some new games (the strange looks interesting but not enough so for me to back it (at least not yet).  

The 13th age seems really cool to me but ultimately i don't think i will buy it because its another d20 product.  I love d20 but I already own so many d20 products and quite frankly am a bit 'done' with d20.


----------



## Le Noir Faineant (Oct 20, 2013)

I think Numenera hits a spot with me. I dislike Monte's tendency to churn out legions of splatbooks, though, and so I doubt I will ever give the game a prominent spot on my table. A one-shot, probably, but longer games, that require more material? I doubt it.


----------



## Aldeon (Oct 20, 2013)

When I first heard about these two games, I was extremely excited for Numenera. 13th Age just looked like another rehash of D&D and I wanted something with a new flavor. After reading the two systems, I pretty much dropped Numenera completely and took up 13th Age as my next game. I'm about to start running a game of 13th Age in a few weeks. I felt like Numenera dropped the ball with my expectations mechanically-wise, although I still love the fluff of the game. I always liked both 3.5 and 4e, and now I feel like 13th Age took my favorite things about both of the games and meshed them together. I've fallen out a bit with 4e after playing for a few years due to its ridiculous combats and I'm hoping it gets cut down a lot with 13th Age (and I know I'm going to enjoy it more, since I prefer description and basing much more compared to having a battlemat).


----------



## artikid (Oct 22, 2013)

I only have Numenera, I was not interested in 13th Age


----------



## delericho (Oct 22, 2013)

13th Age just never grabbed me at all. There are a couple of neat ideas (such as the Escalation Die), but my willingness to read hundreds of pages of rules for a game is now sorely limited, and anything in the kinda-D&D line will have a huge fight just to get me to take a look. So, if one of my friends runs it, I'll play, but otherwise I'm not even going to check it out.

Conversely, I've played Numenera (once). Sadly, I wasn't impressed - I really liked the setting, but the pre-gen adventure was, frankly, awful, and a couple of the mechanical aspects of the game were very problematic (though it's possible part of that was due to our misreading some of them). I'm going to be playing another one-shot soon, which may change my mind, but I can't see Numenera becoming our "game of choice", or anything close to it - at best, it will just be one more game for our roster.



dm4hire said:


> Numenera may break away from the D&D clone fate because while it has a very fantasy feel to it you can't help but remember it is a sci-fi game as well.  Definitely it sits in its own niche at the moment and I would love to see it remain there.  Sci-fi or even sci-fantasy has never had a game that equals to D&D as far as staying power or dominance.




In fairness, there hasn't been _any_ RPG that has equalled D&D for staying power or dominance! Vampire matched it for a few years, and Pathfinder has now matched it for a few years, but that's about it.

Indeed, there are precious few RPGs at all that have lasted more than a few years - most seem to get in, produce a fairly limited line, and then fade away. Even D&D itself hasn't had more than 5 years without a printing of new core rulebooks since WotC took over, and has been completely redesigned twice.

So, if Numenera lasts five years, it will be doing very, very well.


----------



## dm4hire (Oct 22, 2013)

delericho said:


> In fairness, there hasn't been _any_ RPG that has equalled D&D for staying power or dominance! Vampire matched it for a few years, and Pathfinder has now matched it for a few years, but that's about it.
> 
> Indeed, there are precious few RPGs at all that have lasted more than a few years - most seem to get in, produce a fairly limited line, and then fade away. Even D&D itself hasn't had more than 5 years without a printing of new core rulebooks since WotC took over, and has been completely redesigned twice.
> 
> So, if Numenera lasts five years, it will be doing very, very well.




We have the advantage of hindsight to make that claim though.  The problem now is that unlike the past where most of us grew up with predominantly D&D, or some variant of it, that can't be said for players going forward.  Pathfinder is definitely becoming the more dominant and that could change easily given the current state of the industry.  Many gamers wetting their toes these days have the luxury of several D&D type fantasy games in addition to all the non fantasy games out there.  Numenera is in a good place since it won't be wrestling directly with the big kids on the block and it breaks away from the standard D&D mold.  13th Age has the problem of competing directly with D&D and Pathfinder as well as all the clones.  It's a virtual "clone war" for the title right now.

I have to disagree also with your comparisons of Vampire and others not having staying power.  D&D may have had the dominance over the last 39 years, but there are still other games that have the staying power; Tunnels & Trolls just saw a new version release and it's the second oldest game and don't forget Traveler and others from back in the late 70's and 80's.  The fact that Vampire and as well as others printed twenty plus years ago are still in print means they do have staying power and a strong enough following to support them.  Vampire's appeal seems to have drifted more toward the LARP side of gaming, which is a pretty vibrant niche in its own right.  If the online version lives up to expectations then it will definitely surpass D&D in that the horror genre has a much broader appeal than D&D fantasy ever had and will pull in fans and non fans alike.  Most of the other games are niche or enjoy regional success, which means we can't exclude them because they don't seem to be doing well in our neck of the world.


----------



## delericho (Oct 22, 2013)

dm4hire said:


> We have the advantage of hindsight to make that claim though.




Sure. It's really easy to seem wise in hindsight! 

Predicting the future is, of course, much harder - you might very well be right on all counts.



> I have to disagree also with your comparisons of Vampire and others not having staying power.  D&D may have had the dominance over the last 39 years, but there are still other games that have the staying power; Tunnels & Trolls just saw a new version release and it's the second oldest game and don't forget Traveler and others from back in the late 70's and 80's.




There are a few... but only a few. Vampire: the Masquerade has a new printing, but was out of print for a fairly long time there (and Vampire as a whole looked dead and buried until recently). You can add Shadowrun and Call of Cthulhu to your list. And Star Wars is still around, though I'm not sure it counts, since it's on its third distinct game from its third distinct company.

Even so, that's 8 games (including D&D). That's not a huge number, nor a huge proportion. As I said, "precious few".


----------



## Campbell (Oct 22, 2013)

It's really hard to gauge the impact that White Wolf/Onyx Path Publishing have on the overall tabletop RPG market without any indication of Drivethrurpg's over all sales, but no other publisher has more consistent top sellers. They have been playing the margin game for the last several years following the restructuring of CCP and no longer expend much on marketing or anything on inventory.

We know they have brought in over $2,000,000 in revenue from Kickstarters over the last 2 years, including over $700,000 for the deluxe edition of Exalted 3e. They are producing a vast amount of content, including some fairly major releases this next year:

Demon : The Descent - a New World of Darkness reboot of Demon.
Exalted 3e
Blood and Smoke: Strix Chronicles - a stand alone revision of Vampire: The Requiem using the foundations established in the God Machine Chronicles. Also introduces a new antagonist for inclusion in Vampire games.
Mage 20th Anniversary. Will definitely have a kickstarter.
Dragonblooded: What Fire Has Wrought - the first major splat for Exalted 3e. I expect this to be a Kickstarter.
Scion: Origin - Reboot of Scion. I hope we get a deluxe Kickstarter.
 Werewolf: The Idiagram Chronicles - much like Blood and Smoke, this is a revision to Werewolf that introduces a new thematic adversary and updates Werewolf to the God Machine rules. WoD 3.0 really.

That list doesn't include a host of supplements for Exalted, oWoD and nWoD.


----------



## evilbob (Oct 28, 2013)

This is a pretty interesting thread and I'm glad it got necro'd.

A few months ago I thought 13th Age was the newest, best thing and I'd never heard of Numenera.  Now I'm wondering if _it's_ the newest, best thing.  For me and my friends, we played D&D forever and followed along without much thought about it until 4.0 completely changed our habits.  It was so... not what we wanted that we took a step back and went out in all directions, finding all sorts of new ideas and cool stuff.  Now that I've seen all the amazing ideas that are out there, I have a hard time imaging playing something even remotely like 3.5 ever again.

Recently, I've been interested more in 5.0 and my frustrations with their "nah let's just make 3.5 again" approach in some of the playtests led me to 13th Age.  It was great because it had a lot of wonderful ideas about playing D&D-like games that definitely make them better and I wished 5.0 would have.  But when we played 13th Age, we still got that same old D&D flavor in our mouths.  It's such a great cross between 3.5 and 4.0 that I would have LOVED it three years ago.  Now I don't think it's enough.

The reason I'm posting is because the talk of Vampire above.  We got back into that during our D&D hiatus and our Vampire game was probably one of the top three games I've ever run - maybe the best.  We got into a discussion about this recently and the short version is that I realized that when D&D, 13th Age, and let's face it - a zillion other games create characters, they all start with one simple question:  *what do you do*.  It's the very core basic building block of your character:  your class.  It's how you define yourself in the world and at the table.  And it's an incredibly limited, ever-so-_American_ way to look at the world!  

Vampire, by contrast, starts with:  *what kind of personality do you have*.  It's right there, in the character creation.  Sure, they call it "clans" and some people might mistake clans for classes, but it's so very different.  It makes you think about the game in an entirely different way.  You might have a role, but that's not what defines you.  You are defined by your outlook on life.  And somehow that makes all the difference with us.

13th Age didn't last long at our table, although it brought some great ideas and I'll still be using them for many games to come.  But the thing that makes Numenera more interesting to me at the moment is that the core of the character is defined differently.  It's not just a collection of powers tied up in a class - although it mostly is, and frankly it may also not last long for the same reason.  But it's also a descriptor and a special thing you have that makes you different from everyone else.  13th Age called it "one unique thing," and that was awesome.  But Numenera seems to push this idea a little further.  And the idea that something like "charming" is at the very heart of who you are is the closest non-White Wolf game I've seen at getting the idea that _personality _- not _occupation _- is what truly defines the most interesting characters.  There are a billion rangers out there in fiction.  Why can I only name two or three off the top of my head?

So my ridiculously long answer to the OP's question is:  I have hope that someday soon, our quest to find a game that defines characters in ways other than by their job - but is flexible enough to expand to other genres in generous ways - will succeed.  13th Age wasn't it.  Maybe Numenera will be.  Or maybe it will be something else.


----------



## dm4hire (Oct 28, 2013)

I can understand where you're coming from evilbob and I think you are correct.  One thing I'm noticing with the Cypher system, Numenera's core engine, is that Monte and company definitely are starting to think more about how the engine works.  The Strange is adding in some new aspects that I wish would have been thought of and included in Numenera, such as the changing of descriptors between realms (granted that can be house ruled in Numenera) and with the new Glimmer for Numenera we are seeing a taste of new descriptors such as Mad and Doomed as well as insanity rules.

The game is in its infancy and because of its separation from D&D it has better potential to develop in the future versus 13th Age which has tied itself to many of the sacred cows of D&D.  Numenera compared to 13th Age more rules light and therefore able to have more added in via house rules to customize the game the way you want it.  I think that as they develop the Cypher system we will see Numenera evolve more with each game they added on.

This is another aspect of the development in Monte’s approach as set out in The Strange:



> The Strange: An alien data-network comprised of what Earth scientists have dubbed “dark energy” that lies just outside what we know. Also known as the “chaosphere.”




Since Numenera is supposed to be our world a billion years in the future it can automatically become either the future of The Strange from an Earth standpoint or another realm within it.  Then any other game Monte puts out using the Cypher system should then automatically have a chance to fall into one of those realms not listed.  Regardless if one doesn't sync the games together you can at least use the bestiaries and house rule what changes you want from the future material.

My actual concern isn’t that the game won’t last on its own as much as Monte seems to have a “make it and leave it” approach to gaming I’ve noticed once he focuses on something new.  There’s nothing wrong with that and that may have changed with Numenera and the Cypher system; time will tell.  I just hope the game continues past the current product schedule if only for a couple more books.


----------



## evilbob (Oct 29, 2013)

One of the best things about Numenera is the bit toward the back about making your own descriptors and foci and whatnot.  I absolutely have assumed that we'd do that for every character, and if there's an existing one in the book that can work instead:  that's a bonus.  That said:  it's good to hear that "The Strange" is following in similar footsteps.  It may be worth picking up the player's guide at the very least just to have some more interesting ideas for options (or the core book to also get some setting ideas and creatures).

However, one of the things that's started to work with our group - and seems pretty platform-independent - is starting character creation by intentionally not talking about someone's class/role/job.  I'll have to make a separate post about this at some point, but basically we're trying to define the character first, and then shoehorn it into whatever "class" works best, modifying as necessary.  This is sort of the opposite of nearly every game we've ever played, where character creation starts with your role, and then you sort of shoehorn your character concept into whatever class you picked, modifying as necessary.  Numenera just seems a little bit more receptive to this, since there are only 3 classes, and the differences between them are relatively slight (and extremely easy to modify).  Heck, they could have made only one class without much issue.  They nearly did.


----------



## herrozerro (Nov 2, 2013)

evilbob said:


> One of the best things about Numenera is the bit toward the back about making your own descriptors and foci and whatnot.  I absolutely have assumed that we'd do that for every character, and if there's an existing one in the book that can work instead:  that's a bonus.  That said:  it's good to hear that "The Strange" is following in similar footsteps.  It may be worth picking up the player's guide at the very least just to have some more interesting ideas for options (or the core book to also get some setting ideas and creatures).
> 
> However, one of the things that's started to work with our group - and seems pretty platform-independent - is starting character creation by intentionally not talking about someone's class/role/job.  I'll have to make a separate post about this at some point, but basically we're trying to define the character first, and then shoehorn it into whatever "class" works best, modifying as necessary.  This is sort of the opposite of nearly every game we've ever played, where character creation starts with your role, and then you sort of shoehorn your character concept into whatever class you picked, modifying as necessary.  Numenera just seems a little bit more receptive to this, since there are only 3 classes, and the differences between them are relatively slight (and extremely easy to modify).  Heck, they could have made only one class without much issue.  They nearly did.




Where might someone find that information?


----------



## dm4hire (Nov 3, 2013)

herrozerro said:


> Where might someone find that information?




Page 117-118 talks about customizing, including descriptors and foci.


----------



## herrozerro (Nov 3, 2013)

dm4hire said:


> Page 117-118 talks about customizing, including descriptors and foci.




Thanks!  When you were talking about the back of the book i was looking in the glossary and other actual back of the book areas.


----------



## dm4hire (Nov 3, 2013)

herrozerro said:


> Thanks!  When you were talking about the back of the book i was looking in the glossary and other actual back of the book areas.




Actually it was evilbob who mentioned it.  I just happened to look for it myself, trying to remember where I had seen it and thought the same thing.  Luckily I have the PDF so did a search for it.


----------



## herrozerro (Nov 3, 2013)

dm4hire said:


> Actually it was evilbob who mentioned it.  I just happened to look for it myself, trying to remember where I had seen it and thought the same thing.  Luckily I have the PDF so did a search for it.




Well thanks anyways.  I didn't even notice that the poster had changed.


----------



## evilbob (Nov 4, 2013)

herrozerro said:


> Where might someone find that information?



Did you mean "the bit toward the back about making your own descriptors and foci and whatnot"?  Well my words were a bit off; it's actually in Chapter 9, p.117-118.

Edit:  oops, I didn't realize the thread had continued onto the next page!  Thanks, dm4hire!


----------

