Aren’t the game mechanics the same? not familiar with the PnP rules, but I thought it was derived.
The same as what?
As the PnP rules.
What does “PnP” stand for?
“Pen and Paper”. The tabletop game rules.
Then is the question whether the computer game will be using the Numenera RPG rules? If so, I have no idea. I doubt it, though, unless they’re going to be heavily modified. I found the PnP (right?) far too vague and GM-dependent to work in a CRPG.
Besides, haven’t we all learned that you can’t just plug tabletop rules into a computer? RPGs and CRPGs are completely different beasts. The failure of 4th Edition D&D is the ultimate proof of this.
Sorry I misread your post when I replied. I thought you said that you LIKED the PnP mechanics, but didn’t like the game mechanics. I thought they were one and the same, hence my question.
Eh, disagree. Both Temple of Elemental Evil and* Neverwinter Nights 2* were pretty good and (relatively) faithful adaptations of 3.5 rules. But then D&D 3.5 has always been a crunchy, door-monster-treasure game at heart ; so that works just as well as a cRPG. Something like Shadowrun, or god forbid Feng Shui, would be another matter altogether 
The Shadowrun cRPGs by Harebrained Schemes are really good. Granted, they definitely streamlined the mechanics from the PnP RPG.
But that was, what, 14 years ago? Computer RPGs have evolved immensely since then. I haven’t played NWN in a while, but I have a feeling it would feel antiquated today, and as you noted, D&D 3.5 was the crunchiest of systems.
PnP RPGs have tons to offer computer games - but in terms of content, not in terms of game mechanics.
Oh yeah, absolutely - the *Shadowrun *setting works great for a cRPG (or, yanno, in general. Noir cyber-zombie trolls in the Matrix ? I mean, c’mon. I’m honestly amazed Hollywood hasn’t done anything with it yet) but the ruleset is both opaque, annoying, and much too freeform to lend itself to a computer adaptation - even a turn-by-turn one. Managing one’s half dozen dice pools wouldn’t make for a fun video experience IMO. They were right to simplify it all to hell for Shadowrun Returns et al.
Anyone try Tyranny yet, by the way? I started a campaign, and enjoyed the startup sequence where you choose how you came to be who you are, but I still hadn’t finished the huge dungeon that is the White March part 2 (Pillars of Eternity) so I went back to that first.
Does it get better form the beginning part?
Did you ever play the old version for the Sega Genesis? It was pretty faithful without being 100% slavish to the tabletop, and it worked very well.
Edit: Also, it was actually real-time, and in some ways technologically superior to the new and “improved” games.
I see a few people have mentioned Shadowrun and thge D7D 3.5 games, but I think the best adaptation of tabletop rules and mechanics to a CRPG was Vampire the Masquerade: Bloodlines. It simplified a bit, but it really captured the heart of the World of Darkness tabletop RPGs.
That said, I loved Planescape: Torment enough that this was the first game I backed on kickstarter. Time will tell if that was a good call or not.
Nobody else is bothered by having only a month to finish this game before Andromeda hits?
Nope, not even a little bit. I’m still salty over the shit ending of ME3, and have no plans to play Andromeda.
I feel certain they won’t do the BioWare Fuck-you-we-got-yo-money dance to us a third time. I mean, come on. Three times?
Am I the only person who really liked the end of ME3? Sure, it wasn’t perfect, but it worked, and ending a science fiction series well is damn hard - most SF games, books, movies and TV shows can’t nail the landing. The ones that do are the exception.
Most people disliked the ending because it made you feel like everything else you’d done up to that point was meaningless. I guess for a fan of science fiction nihilism it was pretty good. 
You save the galaxy, don’t you?