2014: The End of Character Classes?

[TrippyHippy]

Let's not get classes and occupations confused. A character class is a set of character-rules constraints and options, sometimes with a theme. An occupation is something that your character does in-game to get by in the world. I'm no expert on RuneQuests's cultures, professions, and cults, but just keep in mind that this thread is only about the character-rules end of the class-occupation spectrum.

Classes are a powerful tool for imbuing a sense of character in a player. They shouldn't have anything to do with a character's in-game experience (of society), because classes are a metagame feature. Now, that's not to say that a character's class and occupation can't coincide. Just that they're two different things.

They don't have to be - indeed, they don't have to be metagame, either.

Being a Cleric, or example, does indeed inform us of the characters place in society - they are a member of a clergy (be that of a church or cult or whatever). The classic four D&D classes loosely correspond to medieval societal classes too (Those who fight, those who work, those who pray and wizards being something of a fantasy archetype on top). I certainly don't see why they shouldn't have anything to do with a character's in game experience of society at all. Classes, careers, clans, houses, cults and cultures all provide information for character identity - and that identity is integral to the society it is part of.

 

[Hyper-Man]

What some folks might not like about Character Classes is the limited choices of character advancement via experience implied when choosing a Class.

Modern Class based systems have widened the choices over systems from the 80's but finite limits still exist.

 

[GMMichael]

Modern Class based systems have widened the choices over systems from the 80's but finite limits still exist.

An interesting point. 3.5 bloated out the class list, but the prestige classes just spilled out all over the floor. Classes seem worthwhile if there's a small number of them, since maybe it's hard to balance attack bonuses, magic spells, skills, and hit points. And saving throws. But if there are too many classes - maybe class design isn't that hard. Maybe it's easy to swap out one or two characteristics and have a new "class," which means maybe players should be doing this on their own.

Exhibit A:
http://paizo.com/products/btpy92zi?Pathfinder-Roleplaying-Game-Advanced-Class-Guide-Playtest

I'd say the theme is the real value in a class. But you don't need rules for a theme. Look at the class kits from AD&D 2nd: entire handbooks filled with cool things you could do with your classes, but the kits didn't have any rules. Sure, they'd give you a bonus here and recommend a skill there, but they were essentially just character themes.

 

[steenan]

What some folks might not like about Character Classes is the limited choices of character advancement via experience implied when choosing a Class.

Modern Class based systems have widened the choices over systems from the 80's but finite limits still exist.

It may sound strange, but it's the other way around for me.

I'll gladly play a game with classes that are restricted, because they represent solid archetypes, specific, separate groups in setting or separate tactical roles. That are the cases when classes are useful, they mean something. Classes in Dungeon World work like this; D&D4 also did at the beginning, but later, with additional classes and builds within classes, it worsened somewhat.


What I definitely don't want is classes that are numerous, generic and flavorless. If I see a character and can't clearly determine their class from what they do (because there are many similar classes, or because there is unrestricted multiclassing, or because a class is just a bag of talents/feats and has no flavor by itself), the game is not for me. D&D3 and Pathfinder have this problem, while d20 Modern reached the peak of flavorless genericness.


Class systems that are too flexible (because of multiclassing or a lot of customization) bring no improvement in flavor or balance over a classless system, while adding unnecessary complications.

 

[Dethklok]

Are you willing to wave goodbye to classes?

I'm with you; I waved goodbye to them long ago. Character classes are nothing but a hindrance to imaginative games. Any character can be built from a good skill system, and skill packages can give the exact same speed and thematic feel as a character class, while allowing players to freely step outside of the box whenever they desire.

But you may not realize that some people see boxes and restrictions as a positive good and an aid to their gaming experience. Indeed, this is all a matter of degree - the character class, just like the initiative system, is one more piece of ritual and constraint, and many gamers genuinely enjoy that.

I'm afraid you're right here. D&D is just stuck with classes. But are we stuck with D&D?

For as long as we'll be alive, yes. D&D will exist so long as the psychological outlook that craves D&D exists.

I would be interested to find out whether you were still pushing MODOS five years from now, DMMike. I predict that you will eventually stop when you learn this lesson, but still, I wish you good luck all the same.

 

[Derren]

I also wish D&D would abandon classes or at least severely limit their effects.
And the sad thing is, D&D was on its way to do exactly that by introducing alternate, class independent advancement in 3E with Feats. And while the classes still provided rather big bonuses with its class and cross class skills the skill system was, except for 1-2 skills, class independent. Also, multiclassing was pretty open. It just needed a few more editions into that direction.
But then 4E came along and threw all those advancement away in favor of role locked classes with fixed power lists, etc.

 

[Meatboy]

I personally like classes especially in a team based game like DnD. Classes can be a good way to ensure that players aren't stepping on each others toes and, as long as the challenges are varied, gives everyone sometime in the spot light. Classless on the other hand can lead to characters with a lot of overlap or sameness, unless everyone picks a specialization of some kind, but then classes make this process faster and less painful.

 

[Hyper-Man]

But you may not realize that some people see boxes and restrictions as a positive good and an aid to their gaming experience. Indeed, this is all a matter of degree - the character class, just like the initiative system, is one more piece of ritual and constraint, and many gamers genuinely enjoy that.

Yes.

I see this a lot when long time level based system players try using the HERO System character creation rules for the first time. They get decision-lock because there basically are NO restrictions other than what the GM enforces for their particular campaign. Class based systems are much better at teaching new players the concept of party roles, shctick or archtype (or whatever term suites you).

 

[Dethklok]

Yes.

I see this a lot when long time level based system players try using the HERO System character creation rules for the first time. They get decision-lock because there basically are NO restrictions other than what the GM enforces for their particular campaign.

Mm. I noticed this decision-lock you mention with a skill-based system I made several years ago, and after that point switched to skill packages in character creation - the Rogue got Attack, Stealth, and so on, while the Huntsman or Huntress got Missile, Alertness, and so on. Starting equipment also came with the package you chose. The ability to choose your own skills and equipment from the ground up remained in the rules, but was relegated to the end of the book.

Class based systems are much better at teaching new players the concept of party roles, shctick or archtype (or whatever term suites you).

No - although I will grant that most skill-based systems don't use this method, they can quite easily function as outlined above, and give gamers everything that class-systems offer.

 

[Hyper-Man]

Mm. I noticed this decision-lock you mention with a skill-based system I made several years ago, and after that point switched to skill packages in character creation - the Rogue got Attack, Stealth, and so on, while the Huntsman or Huntress got Missile, Alertness, and so on. Starting equipment also came with the package you chose. The ability to choose your own skills and equipment from the ground up remained in the rules, but was relegated to the end of the book.


No - although I will grant that most skill-based systems don't use this method, they can quite easily function as outlined above, and give gamers everything that class-systems offer.

I agree there are ways to work around the issue. I meant out-of-the-box with minimal effort.