Do we really need Classes anymore?

[Zhaleskra]

Con's:

-Complex:
Freedom is hard. Everything in Class-less systems is more complex, because it has to be more compatible. Combat rules have thousands of exceptions noted, every skill has complex effects if used in collaboration with other, certain things don't work together, this has to be noted and explained. (Somewhat exaggerated )

-Harder to understand
Whereas DnD you only need a basic understanding of the rules, and a bit better understanding of your Class, Classless systems require you to know something about everything you chose and things relate to those chosen things. Combine this with a very complex system (see above) and it's no wonder new players just give up when I force them to read GURPS.


All above was meant to be unbiased, I'm not sure I succeeded. If I missed things (which I surely did) please tell me.

I think you missed. Probably because the only classless systems you appear to have dealt with have been super complex. While World Tree doesn't really have "combat exceptions", it technically has three combat systems. All the various uses of magic use the same rules, after their own peculiarities. Then again, that is only one example.

 

[Numlock]

It was all meant to be with a big neon glowing disclaimer saying "In general, exceptions are not only possible but also common."
Class-less systems are more complex than class systems in general, because Class-less systems offer more options, and have more possibilities they have to address than class systems in general.




But, you might be right it's more of a DnD vs. GURPS comparison than a Class vs. Class-less comparison

 

[Zhaleskra]

But, you might be right it's more of a DnD vs. GURPS comparison than a Class vs. Class-less comparison

It's personal experience too. One of the Amazon.com reviews of World Tree had the reviewer declaring any character to take an hour or more to make. My opinion is that either English is farther up the ladder on his multiple languages list than 2, or he has a lot of trouble understanding what he reads.

To be fair, it did take me around 3 hours to make my first WT character. Factors for that: 2003 Michigan/Canada Blackout (3 days in my case), working by lantern light, and making sure said character could cast the spells I was selecting (which isn't strictly necessary). Gaining the XP to cast a spell you have grafted is a good plot hook!

 

[pawsplay]

Con's:

-Complex:
Freedom is hard. Everything in Class-less systems is more complex, because it has to be more compatible. Combat rules have thousands of exceptions noted, every skill has complex effects if used in collaboration with other, certain things don't work together, this has to be noted and explained. (Somewhat exaggerated )

-Harder to understand
Whereas DnD you only need a basic understanding of the rules, and a bit better understanding of your Class, Classless systems require you to know something about everything you chose and things relate to those chosen things. Combine this with a very complex system (see above) and it's no wonder new players just give up when I force them to read GURPS.

I don't think any of that has to do with classful versus classes. Specific example: GURPS Lite, which contains everything you would need to play GURPS for the first time, is like 32 pages. Compare to D&D 4e, which is virtually impossible to boil down to its core mechanics; either you can read a power card or you can't. D&D 3e is about halfway in the middle.

 

[giant.robot]

Great points being made.

I'll expand on this a bit and to explain in a little more detail GURPS resolution mechanics for those unfamiliar. In GURPS skill checks are rolled against your intrinsic skill level rather than some sort of external difficulty. In D&D you roll against a DC provided by the DM, adding your skill ranks and other modifiers to a D20 roll. Rolling higher than the DC means your skill check is successful. In GURPS skill checks are different, your skill ranks are your DC for rolls. If you've got say Lockpicking-14 you roll 3D6 and a roll of 14 or less succeeds. There's times when the GM will add a modifier to the check but typically you roll against that number.

With Lockpicking-14 you've got roughly a 90% chance of success every time you make that skill check. This would likely make you a master locksmith. A 3.5E Rogue with Open Lock doesn't get into 90% territory for average locks until they're about level 14 (level 12 with masterwork thieves tools). Using D&D skill logic every talented locksmith in the city would have to be at least level 14 rogue (with an 7D6 sneak attack) just to stay in business. In GURPS a 25-50 point NPC can be a master locksmith but not terribly good at combat with broadswords or small machine guns.

I see the word "effective" thrown around a bit in this thread without an explanation of what sort of effectiveness is meant. It's like comparing two unit-less numbers. Since D&D is a dungeon fantasy RPG and is often dealing with things that happen in and around dungeons. A character can be "effective" at crawling through dungeons and swinging a sword but less "effective" at disabling magical traps or deciphering ancient runes. You can optimize a character for combat but you need to hope they don't trip any magical land mines while they hack merrily away with their sword. Is that character more "effective" than the one optimized for finding and disabling traps or casting protective spells?

Back to GURPS, while you can of course run a dungeon fantasy game where points dropped into a skill like Public Speaking would be wasted. However because the system isn't tailored specifically for dungeon fantasy settings (like D&D) you can run a game where a broadsword skill will never be used but Public Speaking or Research will be used all the time. This related to classes in that classes in general tend to be tailored pretty specifically for the setting they're going to be used in. A D&D fighter is a class whose features work really well for traipsing around dungeons and killing orcs but would be totally out of place in a d20 Modern game where the prime focus of the campaign was computer hacking, just as a d20 Modern hacker class wouldn't do too well against those bloodthirsty orcs.

You need to be careful about eliminating classes in a system whose feats and skills are tailored around classes existing. A classless system is definitely more flexible but with that flexibility comes the ability to make characters that are useless in nearly all situations. The 3E Rogue and Bard are good examples of this problem. It's easy (and tempting) for people playing these classes to attempt to generalize and put a single skill point at a time into skills trying to get the maximum number of trained skills. Doing so means they spend most of their time only marginally better at any of their skills than a completely untrained character. Towards level 20 they are skill powerhouses but they probably won't have made it that far being that they likely got killed by a magical trap around level 3.

 

[garrowolf]

What I did for my Nexus D20 system was I started with two sets of skills that everyone had. One was the everyman skills for people of that tech level. They get three-four skills that everyone should have at least a basic understanding of such as computers, drive, and academics in a modern setting and Beastcraft, and survival in a low tech setting (this is just off the top of my head and not exact).
Then you get four skills that are the foundations of the defenses/savings throws. Athletics, Perception, Resistance, and Willpower. You get two of these at trained level and the other two at basic. Which ones is up to you and you can upgrade these during character creation if you want to. Each one is a normal bonus such a +6 but they also provide passive defense values by adding 10 to each one. So our Reflex save is Athletics +10, Fortitude is Resistance +10, Will Save is Willpower +10. No charts needed.

You get some more skills and upgrades during character creation but it ensures that at least basic level skills are there for every character. You can't start with a character that is missing so many basic skills that they can't function.

 

[pawsplay]

What I did for my Nexus D20 system was I started with two sets of skills that everyone had. One was the everyman skills for people of that tech level. They get three-four skills that everyone should have at least a basic understanding of such as computers, drive, and academics in a modern setting and Beastcraft, and survival in a low tech setting (this is just off the top of my head and not exact).
Then you get four skills that are the foundations of the defenses/savings throws. Athletics, Perception, Resistance, and Willpower. You get two of these at trained level and the other two at basic. Which ones is up to you and you can upgrade these during character creation if you want to. Each one is a normal bonus such a +6 but they also provide passive defense values by adding 10 to each one. So our Reflex save is Athletics +10, Fortitude is Resistance +10, Will Save is Willpower +10. No charts needed.

You get some more skills and upgrades during character creation but it ensures that at least basic level skills are there for every character. You can't start with a character that is missing so many basic skills that they can't function.

That sounds very similar to True20 which basically builds a numerical "floor" for the character on top of which you stack all your powers and development choices.

 

[1Mac]

-Originality:
DnD 3.5 has 11 (standard) Classes. If I don't like some of those, it'll only take a few campaigns before I am playing almost exactly the same Char (rulewise) as a few games before. Class-less systems don't have this.

I like a lot of your general points, but this particular point is one I was trying to dismiss in my first post upthread. What you describe is not a problem with classes, but a problem with DnD classes. A game like Spycraft or Traveller feature classes that offer the broad range of character choices that you seem to prefer, by making the concepts behind the classes less narrowly focused. I know that you were trying to generalize, but I can think of as many exceptions to this rule as examples.

 

[Numlock]

I like a lot of your general points, but this particular point is one I was trying to dismiss in my first post upthread. What you describe is not a problem with classes, but a problem with DnD classes. A game like Spycraft or Traveller feature classes that offer the broad range of character choices that you seem to prefer, by making the concepts behind the classes less narrowly focused. I know that you were trying to generalize, but I can think of as many exceptions to this rule as examples.

I was generalizing to get the point across, and the point is you have more options in a Class-less system than in a Class system. Still, you have a very valid point.