I am a(n) Adjective Noun who Verbs

The Cypher system likes to summarize (or initialize?) character creation with a sentence in the structure of: "I am a(n) Adjective Noun who Verbs" and there's something sublimely cleaver about that. Cypher The choices then goes on to assign stats, powers and situational bonuses (also tied to the experience level of the character) to the character based on the choices you make when you choose your Descriptor (Adjective), Type (Noun) and Focus (Verb). The words themselves don't really indicate anything after that; they're just identifiers for the choices made. On the one hand, you know that every character with the ‘Adroit’ Adjective is capable of; On the other hand, you’re limited to the choices that have been defined with stats, skills and modifiers.

I like the idea of decoupling those defined modifiers for the most part, and return to just relying on the context of your Adjective, Noun and Verb choice. I feel this could work very well in a FATE kind of way where Aspects have mechanical benefits but are totally open to creation and interpreting in context.

We could even take this concept one layer deeper (what FATE refers to as the ‘fractal’) and consider how the same descriptive phrasing could be applied to not only player characters, but NPCs, objects and even places.

Consider:

• A Person who is: a(n) (Adjective) (Noun) who (Verbs)
• An Object that is: a(n) (Adjective) (Noun) with/that (Verbs)
• A Place that is: a(n) (Adjective) (Noun) that (Verbs)

Nouns define the quintessential function of the person, place or thing. For people, it’s their root career, story purpose, ‘class’, etc. For things it should encapsulate the general use, purpose and effectiveness of that type of thing. All Rifles fundamentally are the same; a firearm that requires two hands to hold and brace properly for use, etc. In a game with generic versions of a class of weapon or tool, all types of the same Noun start with the same base stats/values.

E.g. all pistols in 1st edition 7thSea were 4k2 weapons. All heavy melee weapons were 3k3, adding Brawn to the number of dice thrown. All longswords in D&D do d8 damage, and so on.

Adjectives are Enhancers which are boons when they are relevant to the situation, and added complications when the are inappropriate to the context of use.  (In RISK games, I’d adjudicate this as a free Raise when appropriate, and at least one Raise of Complication if inappropriate.) Against an opponent with the same or opposing Adjective, the bonuses cancel out.

A sniper who is forced into close-combat with a melee attacker tries to shoot their opponent with their longarm. The GM adjudicates the ‘sniper’ Adjective of their weapon means they have to overcome a 2-Raise Complication to not damage or loose grip on their weapon during the melee.

Verbs are Enablers and augment base abilities with additional or unusual functionality. For ‘magic’ items, this is where the special and magical ability is defined (e.g a longsword that drains life force). For modular and modified technology items, this is the added features/functions of the modifications (e.g. an Assault Rifle with an underslung grenade launcher; the grenade launcher is the added functionality.)

A soldier armed with an Assault Rifle with Grenade Launcher, is attacking a Brute Squad. The GM adjudicates that the Verb on the weapon lets them take out their Weapons skill rank in Brutes for a single Raise. BOOM.

Not everything needs Adjectives and Verbs in their descriptions, but everything must have a Noun. +Adjectives should be common, while +Verbs represent rare, unique and especially important or powerful people/places/things.

Another thought: could this system work with skills or other character traits? Let the (Adjective) be the relative level of experience/ability, the (Noun) be the broad skill, and let any (Verb) represent specializations or extra effects the character has associated with that Skill.

I’m an Expert Hacker.
I’m a Novice Archaeologist who Finds Lost Things.
They’re an Experienced Marksman who Dual Wields.

Thoughts?