Hello guys.
I'm going to be concise here.
The point is :
If you had to design some "classes" for a roleplaying game, will you make them as different as possible and giving them particular power that are proper to their class. Right ?
But, for example, we have a warrior and a thief/rogue.
Are you going to lock all strength-related skills only for the fighter/warrior and all dex-related skills only for the rogue/thief or will you prefer let the choice to your player ?
I have read the thread about balance rencetly on the forum and I was wondering... is freedom choice is more important than "balance" or mechanism ?
Why let the choice to the player if it's obviously less viable ? The warrior is going to have a lot of strenght by default. So why do he even consider to take acrobatics since there's other classes in his group that can do it better ?
We can see a lot of videogames not letting the choice to players. If you're a warrior you're not going to be sneaky. But in roleplaying games you can. And for me that's the point to play a rpg. Do what you want.
But what about rules and game design ? I saw a lot of people complaining about balanced things, talking about numbers, op things... I'm not talking about self-nerfing where people fear so much about being broken that they could fight with a spoon instead of a sword but people who don't care about all that stuff ans just play what they want.
What you guys think ? Do you prefer when the rules defines clearly what your character has to be, or being free to make whay you want even if it's that make your character potentially less powerful ?
I'm going to be concise here.
The point is :
If you had to design some "classes" for a roleplaying game, will you make them as different as possible and giving them particular power that are proper to their class. Right ?
But, for example, we have a warrior and a thief/rogue.
Are you going to lock all strength-related skills only for the fighter/warrior and all dex-related skills only for the rogue/thief or will you prefer let the choice to your player ?
I have read the thread about balance rencetly on the forum and I was wondering... is freedom choice is more important than "balance" or mechanism ?
Why let the choice to the player if it's obviously less viable ? The warrior is going to have a lot of strenght by default. So why do he even consider to take acrobatics since there's other classes in his group that can do it better ?
We can see a lot of videogames not letting the choice to players. If you're a warrior you're not going to be sneaky. But in roleplaying games you can. And for me that's the point to play a rpg. Do what you want.
But what about rules and game design ? I saw a lot of people complaining about balanced things, talking about numbers, op things... I'm not talking about self-nerfing where people fear so much about being broken that they could fight with a spoon instead of a sword but people who don't care about all that stuff ans just play what they want.
What you guys think ? Do you prefer when the rules defines clearly what your character has to be, or being free to make whay you want even if it's that make your character potentially less powerful ?