Do we really need Classes anymore?

[garrowolf]

When I was first working on my Nexus D20 system I was thinking in terms of Classes such as in T20 Traveller and Spycraft 2.0. I was mixing it with my idea of having Feats under Skills. I had more and more Classes and they were less and less different from each other. After a while I realized that I could make Classes all day long but there wasn't much point to it because it was just proving that the game system didn't need them in the first place. I was just trying to make use of an old idea that isn't really necessary anymore.

Basically I think that level based games are starting to shed their need for classes. They have been together for so long that most people don't see how that could be but we have Mutants and Masterminds and D20 Call of Cthulhu already that don't have classes and they work fine without them. If certain traits (feats, class features, talents, etc) are available in a certain way so you can't get them in stupid ways (ie they require prerequisites of level or each other) then which way you place them in order to create a class is largely not only unnecessarily restrictive on the player but on the whole game system. You are railroading the player down your view of a Fighter or Rogue, etc. Then you give them options to Multiclass and you negate your own railroading and the point of having Classes again.

I know that certain settings need Archetypes that are laid out. However if we define them as Archetypes and just say that a particular player is close to or is deviating from a traditional Archetype is all we really need to do. If there is a social consequence to creating a weird character type then let that occur. Maybe require a background explaining how that character learned those strange combination of skills.

If you have some Archetypes laid out then the players will have an idea of your setting but most of the time the players are going to either want to create something traditional or not.

Why restrict the players or yourself as a GM and more importantly why go through the work of creating the classes in the first place?

 

[Heathen72]

I definitely do, especially when people use a small font. I can barely read thread titles let alone anything smaller

 

[Umbran]

Why restrict the players or yourself as a GM and more importantly why go
through the work of creating the classes in the first place?

There are a few technical answers to this, mostly centered around game balance, and accessibility to new players.

My heartfelt answer is simpler: just because. It isn't like all games must be the same, and every one must use what are seen to be the best of the best current to the day structure. Variety is the spice of life, you see.

 

[Deset Gled]

Game design for a classed and unclassed systems are drastically different. Party makeup, balance, rate of power growth, and flavor are all heavily changed if you take away classes. Classed systems have less freedom to customize characters, but they also create more well-rounded characters (building in an unclassed system promotes building only primary skills, neglecting minor flavor skills). Unclassed systems are harder to design and harder to learn. The list goes on and on.

It's kind of like comparing a directional pad to an analog stick on a video game controller. Both options have situations where they excel, and many people strongly prefer one over the other. But neither can ever completely replace the other. There cannot be only one.

 

[Smoss]

I largely agree with killing classes. It was the very first thing I did when I created my own fantasy RPG system. No more pigeon-holed PCs. Some may deel overwhelmed by the sheer amount of available options when there are no classes. To combat this a bit, I made some sample "archetype" characters. Similar to Shadowrun (Another classless system). I drew inspiration from SW Saga, Mutants and Masterminds, and Shadowrun to help point me in the right direction. Certainly it isn't for everyone, but it was for me.

Eventually I did away with levels too, but that is another story.
--------------------
Smoss
RPG System - Doulairen

 

[Numlock]

IMO Classes are outdated and most (if not all) systems I use don't have Classes. If you want to keep the Class-flavor (as mentioned above, pro's are better defined party roles, etc.) you could create 'Class'-template, i.e. a combination of skills and feats which represent a certain Class. Players could take these as inspiration and customize them to their own need and ideas.

 

[1Mac]

Siloing! Siloing is when a game designer restricts access to powers so that you can only acquire certain powers alongside other powers. It's like sorting powers into bins (or silos) and restricting players to selecting only a smaller number of bins, if not just one. Classes are a classic way of doing this, as are power trees and the like.

Take 4e. As 4e classes are largely just an amalgamation of powers built on a common structure, it would be superficially easy to allow anyone to take any power. The problem is that you can't easily predict how any one power will interact with another. Maybe some warlock power combined with some barbarian power will foster some unholy, imbalanced combo that breaks the game. By siloing powers into classes (and making occasional access to other class powers come with a price), 4e better manages (in theory) to keep powers balanced.

For me, most of the restrictiveness in class design comes from flavor that is too thematically narrow. But that's a challenge to develop broader class themes, not an obligation to do without classes entirely. Besides, some people like specific class themes and would find broader classes thematically bland!

 

[Dausuul]

Speaking as someone who used to be on the "get rid of classes" bandwagon and later jumped off...

Classes are useful for several reasons. In a combat-heavy game such as D&D, they dramatically simplify the task of achieving and maintaining game balance. In addition, they allow the creation of custom-designed, integrated character mechanics to an extent that feats, powers, and the like do not. Finally, they help new players learn the game, and they streamline chargen for everyone.

Not every game needs classes, certainly, but many benefit from them. D&D is one.

 

[balam_br]

In my experience, Classless systems tend to make characters with very close mechanics... and somewhat boring. I used to play shadowrun for a time, but aside from flavor, Every shaman had the same (optimal) spells, every Decker the same (optimal) software and so on. And this can get really worse when you have a system With no restrictions, like storyteller, where you can create a 16 year old garou with ocult 5 and Computer 5, One of the most capable in the world in two completely different areas...

I heard that new classless systems have more variety in character building. But at this moment, Class systems just brings the variety i want in crunch to my game.

 

[Umbran]

In my experience, Classless systems tend to make characters with very close mechanics...

Agreed.

Any finite rules system will have optimal choices to reach whatever the player thinks of as success - for D&D, it is usually killing things and taking their stuff. It doesn't take long for players to learn these optimal choices, and most players will tend to go down these optimal paths. At which point, it looks rather like a classed system anyway.