I was reading the Numenera Corebook, the new game by Monte Cook, and liked some of the ideas for simplifying the GM's job, especially for combat.
One thing is that I don't like to use miniatures, but that makes it hard to track what's going on in Pathfinder since combat is based on a grid. Numenera handles this by classifying all distances as either immediate (within 10 feet), near (10 - 100 feet), and far (further than 100 feet). So it doesn't matter if your 20 feet or 60 feet from your opponent, you're just "near" him, and therefore you can move and attack him in 1 turn.
Another thing they do is have weapons always deal the same amount of damage. Its something like light weapons deal 1 damage, medium deals 3, and heavy deals 6. Thus you eliminate the time needed to make the extra dice roll and calculate everything.
Lastly, there are no complicated combat maneuvers to memorize rules for. You just make regular attacks, and if you roll really well (19 or 20) you have the option of doing things like knocking opponents back, or distracting them.
I really like Pathfinder though and wonder if I could make combat quicker and more exciting by applying some of the Numenera concepts to it.
What do you think? Would combat be more fun with house rules inspired by Numenera, or would it be a bad fit for Pathfinder?
I think most of it is very difficult. Pathfinder is basically DnD, which is basically a tabletop wargame with some rpg elements. Distances, templates, manouevering are essential elements of that.
If you dont like miniatures, dont use them! Ive played DnD in various forms for 12 years now and only recently started using miniatures. Graph paper and pencils worked fine for more than a decennium,
If you dont like BUYING miniatures, dig out your old Lego's. You can use those to make custom minis for almost everything if you've got enough supplies. You can expand your collection with dirt-cheap 3d party bricks and figures (the patent expired recently) or buy second hand stuff.
I've been playing D&D or Pathfinder since 3rd edition came out, and I never used minis or graphs or anything like that. Always just stuck with keeping the scenarios narrative. It's just challenging to do with a grid based combat system.
To be honest, Numenera doesn't seem as interesting to me, which is why I'd rather house rule Pathfinder. I don't like the setting, and the character options seem uninspired. Pathfinder has lots of classes, feats, and spells. I haven't read the entire Numenera book yet, but it seems like it has 3 classes, and only a handful of options for each. I just didn't feel any motivation to play it.
|
As someone that supported the KS for Numenera, I've enjoyed what I've been reading. But I think you can separate the mechanics of Numenera from the setting and details. Part of the design is to simplify the d20 game. It's trying to get back to the essence without making it about numbers. The idea that you're advancing your character by completing goals (exploration) vs fighting monsters makes it more about the story than the combat.
Read more of the book. Then apply that to the PF game you want to run. You'll find that you don't have to make it about numenera and cyphers.
And I'm not sure you can really separate out just the combat and not how skills and feats work in PF.