I guess that jhkim was right, some terms put people off before they have the experience of how it plays out at the table.

I mean, GM Intrusion couldn't be more badly worded for those kinds of people.

Actually, I would think a lot of people on the forums here would really like how XP is awarded in Numenera.

1. GM Intrusion (Which has been described above, and Justin did a great job describing it)

2. Discovery (Finding magic items, leftover remnants of the past worlds, etc.)

3. Accomplishing goals that required overcoming challenges. These goals can be set by the GM OR the Player, as long as it requires overcoming some form of challenge. (You can't set a goal of "EATING THIS SANDWICH" and expect to get XP).

It does a lot to encourage exploring over confrontation, kind of like the gold for XP rules from old school D&D.

Just as a note: I really like Numenera. I didn't think much of it at first, but then I wanted to see what all this fuss was about... and after reading through most of it I have a copy arriving in the mail tomorrow.

Quote from: Justin Alexander;696437If your normal mode of GMing is to, for example, interpret a successful attack roll as meaning that the PC has lost their weapon and your players never have any sort of problem with that... Then, yeah, GM intrusions aren't going to make a lot of sense to you.
QUOTE]

I don't get that at all.  

Why would a gm assume a successful attack means you lost a weapon?

Quote from: Simlasa;696448OK, now see... those examples sound fairly reasonable to me... they're things that haven't been specified. The GM hasn't asked for a list of what equipment you're taking to the party (ours usually does) or hasn't asked for specific marching order/positioning.
So the Players can't outright refuse the attack at the party? They can't change the sex of the Mayor? They can't alter things outside of themselves or things that have already been clearly stated?
It's only to answer questions left open about the PCs eg. Did he or did he not have himself tied to the rope? Which saddlebag had the gold in it?

The way I play it, it's either:

• A "Schrödinger's cat" scenario where something previously unspecified and ambiguous is taken and defined in one way or another, or
• A new situation starts to develop and it could go one way or another

Players do not have explicit rights to edit the scene in Numenera.

QuoteAnd it's XP for just the affected PC? The whole group can't refuse a wandering monster that attacks?

There are mechanisms for both, you could have a GMI which effected the whole party (like the ambush scenario) or it could just effect one PC (like the 'you spilled my pint' scenario). You could choose to mash the two together if you liked, and only have part of the PCs surprised when ambushed if you have one person who objects but all the rest go with it.

Like I mentioned earlier, I have never had one of these things rejected as my group are cool with the idea that trouble=fun and we trust each other not to hose too strongly.

Quote from: Bill;696486

Quote from: Justin Alexander;696437If your normal mode of GMing is to, for example, interpret a successful attack roll as meaning that the PC has lost their weapon and your players never have any sort of problem with that... Then, yeah, GM intrusions aren't going to make a lot of sense to you.

I don't get that at all.  

Why would a gm assume a successful attack means you lost a weapon?

I can't speak for Justin, but maybe he means that if your GM style is to manoeuvre the PCs with circumstance and the players never object then you wouldn't need a mechanism for negotiating or marking these kind of things?

If this kind if thing were to be handled in Numenera as a GMI then I suspect the GM would describe it something like "the ginormous abhuman back-hands you solidly and you are flung across the room - your weapon starts to slip from your hand?" At this point you would visually offer the XP (via poker chips or the like) and if the player rejects you add "... But in the nick of time you regain hold". Otherwise the PC has been disarmed by the blow.

Quote from: dbm;696544The way I play it, it's either:

• A "Schrödinger's cat" scenario where something previously unspecified and ambiguous is taken and defined in one way or another, or
• A new situation starts to develop and it could go one way or another

Players do not have explicit rights to edit the scene in Numenera.



There are mechanisms for both, you could have a GMI which effected the whole party (like the ambush scenario) or it could just effect one PC (like the 'you spilled my pint' scenario). You could choose to mash the two together if you liked, and only have part of the PCs surprised when ambushed if you have one person who objects but all the rest go with it.

Like I mentioned earlier, I have never had one of these things rejected as my group are cool with the idea that trouble=fun and we trust each other not to hose too strongly.



I can't speak for Justin, but maybe he means that if your GM style is to manoeuvre the PCs with circumstance and the players never object then you wouldn't need a mechanism for negotiating or marking these kind of things?

If this kind if thing were to be handled in Numenera as a GMI then I suspect the GM would describe it something like "the ginormous abhuman back-hands you solidly and you are flung across the room - your weapon starts to slip from your hand?" At this point you would visually offer the XP (via poker chips or the like) and if the player rejects you add "... But in the nick of time you regain hold". Otherwise the PC has been disarmed by the blow.

I never intentionally maneuver pc's; if that can even be defined. I tend to let them get into trouble themselves. I am kinda the 'anti railroad' type. So I don't really experience maneuvering pc's, or player objections.

When I do something like a disarm, I tend to let critical hits guide that.

I can see the use for a mechanical effect for 'situatonal bad things' but I am also very wary of too many metagame distractions.

I suspect familarity is key here; hopefully when one is used to the Intrusion mechanics they don't seem as....Intrusive

Quote from: Bill;696557When I do something like a disarm, I tend to let critical hits guide that.

That would be pretty much 'by the book' in Numenera terms. A crit-fail on your defence roll triggers a GMI which doesn't have the XP-treat attached.

You could use an XP to reject the GMI, but you'd be much more likely to use it for a re-roll instead.

Quote from: Bill;696486I don't get that at all.  

Why would a gm assume a successful attack means you lost a weapon?

He wouldn't.  Justin's example was, "You hit the monster, but your axe is lodged in his shell.  You'll have to get it unstuck."  The GMI mechanic allows the GM to do that without feeling like he's "cheated" the players.  If the GM ruled such with more traditional mechanics (i.e., you hit his Armor Class, but now your axe is stuck for no reason), it would seem unfair.  The GMI solves this.

Quote from: Simlasa;696448So the Players can't outright refuse the attack at the party?

Anything you choose to introduce as a GM intrusion can be refused. It's a pretty flexible mechanic, so the GM is free to declare pretty much anything to be a GM intrusion. And, conversely, the GM is also free to do pretty much anything they want without it being a GM intrusion.

So if the PCs are negotiating with some bandits on the road and you say, "GM intrusion: The bandits are attacking you!" Then the players would have the ability to outright refuse that attack.

But the "if" is pretty important. If that's not the sort of thing you think the players should have any control over, it shouldn't be a GM intrusion. (A better intrusion along the same lines might be something like: "The bandit archer hidden fires a shot! You never saw it coming!" And if the players buy that off, they spot her before she shoots or notice the bandit leader giving her a sign. In other words, the intrusion is "you're surprised!" not "she shoots you". She's going to be shooting regardless.)

The key point here is that the GM is in complete control: The players can only buy-off things which the GM declares to be intrusions. Neither the players nor the rules can force the GM to declare anything to be an intrusion that they don't want to be an intrusion.

QuoteAnd it's XP for just the affected PC? The whole group can't refuse a wandering monster that attacks?

I believe it's only the affected PC, but I'd have to double-check the rulebook to say that with absolute certainty.

Quote from: Bill;696486I don't get that at all.  

Why would a gm assume a successful attack means you lost a weapon?

You've never seen a movie where a character's melee weapon gets stuck in a body?

That's not meant to be a rhetorical question: I'm trying to figure out if you're literally unaware that this is a thing which can actually happen. (In addition to be a common media trope, it's also a thing well-testified to in real life.)

Quote from: Justin Alexander;696769The key point here is that the GM is in complete control: The players can only buy-off things which the GM declares to be intrusions. Neither the players nor the rules can force the GM to declare anything to be an intrusion that they don't want to be an intrusion.

OK, this smooths down my hackles. Sounds... not so bad.

QuoteYou've never seen a movie where a character's melee weapon gets stuck in a body?

I think that was part of the RQII rules regarding impales. You did a lot of damage but also risked getting your weapon stuck.
Somehow that wasn't how I read you though... it sounded like you were saying the GM declared the successful attacker had just dropped his weapon for no reason.

All in all the GMI thing doesn't sound like the deal-breaker I was taking it to be. It's not constant Fate-like negotiations, the GM can still put tigers in your bathtub.
The setting of Numenera interests me and Monty Cook has had my good will since Dark Space... so I guess it's back on my 'buy' list.

Quote from: Justin Alexander;696769Anything you choose to introduce as a GM intrusion can be refused. It's a pretty flexible mechanic, so the GM is free to declare pretty much anything to be a GM intrusion. And, conversely, the GM is also free to do pretty much anything they want without it being a GM intrusion.

So if the PCs are negotiating with some bandits on the road and you say, "GM intrusion: The bandits are attacking you!" Then the players would have the ability to outright refuse that attack.

But the "if" is pretty important. If that's not the sort of thing you think the players should have any control over, it shouldn't be a GM intrusion. (A better intrusion along the same lines might be something like: "The bandit archer hidden fires a shot! You never saw it coming!" And if the players buy that off, they spot her before she shoots or notice the bandit leader giving her a sign. In other words, the intrusion is "you're surprised!" not "she shoots you". She's going to be shooting regardless.)

The key point here is that the GM is in complete control: The players can only buy-off things which the GM declares to be intrusions. Neither the players nor the rules can force the GM to declare anything to be an intrusion that they don't want to be an intrusion.



I believe it's only the affected PC, but I'd have to double-check the rulebook to say that with absolute certainty.



You've never seen a movie where a character's melee weapon gets stuck in a body?

That's not meant to be a rhetorical question: I'm trying to figure out if you're literally unaware that this is a thing which can actually happen. (In addition to be a common media trope, it's also a thing well-testified to in real life.)

I was responding to this:

Quote from: Justin Alexander;696437If your normal mode of GMing is to, for example, interpret a successful attack roll as meaning that the PC has lost their weapon and your players never have any sort of problem with that... Then, yeah, GM intrusions aren't going to make a lot of sense to you.

Yeah, that's the bit I read as the attacker somehow dropping/throwing his weapon... no mention of it being lodged inside his target.

Heck, I'm really only interested in this game for the setting... how portable would it seem... say to something like BRP or GURPS... or Mutant Future maybe?

Quote from: Simlasa;697007Yeah, that's the bit I read as the attacker somehow dropping/throwing his weapon... no mention of it being lodged inside his target.

Heck, I'm really only interested in this game for the setting... how portable would it seem... say to something like BRP or GURPS... or Mutant Future maybe?

Give how light the mechanics are it would be very easy to port; just whip up stats in your system of choice. A generic system would be best as there are a diverse range of powers which you will need to convert.