Do we really need Classes anymore?

[Locien]

It seems to me that people are talking past each other-the differences in d20 and GURPS systems are enough that being able to balance a GURPS game does not mean that you can balance a DnD game. If i were to sum things up, point buy systems are harder(but not insurmountably so) to balance than class based systems because it's more possible to make bad character design decisions than in a class based system. However, as game systems work in sufficiently different ways the techniques and understanding for a pointbuy system and a class based system that it is fully possible to be good at one and not the other.

 

[1Mac]

I hope you, and everyone else reading this, will agree with me that if this is an authors way of keeping his system balanced, the fault is with the author and the system, and not the Class-less-ness of this system. GURPS for instance is a Classless system (although with templates), but still very balanced. This is because GURPS has a basic rule 'engine' and all power, skills and feats give modifiers to that system, where as DnD has a lot of 'custom' rules for certain classes, e.g. a different spell list for each class.

Replying a little late. Sorry!

I don't quite see it the same way. Where we might agree is in saying that classless systems have to work harder that systems with classes to ensure balance. But it sounds as though you think relying on classes is a crutch or a fallback for balanced system design, whereas I think classless systems create a lot more work for themselves than may* be necessary.

*Focus on "may." Risus is classless, and that's good, because its structure is very freeform. Adding classes to such a system would be pointless extra work. But a system with the number of powers as, say, 4e, without a class-like structure, has its work cut out for it if it is concerned with balance. It could still have great balance, but without siloing of some kind it is less likely.

 

[1Mac]

An axiom I just thought of on free point-buy vs siloing: The fewer powers a system has, the more likely a classless point-buy system can be well balanced. That is, if there are only a few dozen tricks, they can only interact with each other in so many ways, and if you can account for them all, you can balance it fairly easily. But the more options you add, exponentially more interactions between them crop up. The DnD Compendium lists over 7500 powers, which means 7500! ways for each power to interact, if they were siloed by class. If it weren't for classes, I'd hate to be the guy who has to make sure all those interactions are balanced.

 

[pawsplay]

If i were to sum things up, point buy systems are harder(but not insurmountably so) to balance than class based systems because it's more possible to make bad character design decisions than in a class based system.

I just don't agree with that. It's very easy to make a weak character, and not difficult to make a truly flawed one, in a classed system, which is essentially the same as in a classless one. I don't think it's any "easier" to make a weak fighter unskilled in his sword in GURPS than it is in D&D. Sure, you could spend all your points on playing the accordion, but hey, you pretty much get what it says on the tin. Similarly, in a hypothetical classless d20 game, you could take feats that relate to what you want to do, or feats unrelated to what you want to do.

The reason to go with classes, or do without them, has very little to do with balance. It has to do with fluency in character creation: do you want to make it easier to customize the character you want, or easier to play a particular archetype? If you try to make a D&D character against type, you aren't in a particularly "easier" situation. Note that you can add more archetypes; these can be a resource in classless games or a rules expansion in classed one. A classed game with lots of classes and a classless game with lots of archetypes result in a very similar ease of realizing a given character.

 

[prosfilaes]

The DnD Compendium lists over 7500 powers, which means 7500! ways for each power to interact, if they were siloed by class. If it weren't for classes, I'd hate to be the guy who has to make sure all those interactions are balanced.

I don't think it's coincidental that GURPS doesn't have remotely that many character options, and the options it has tend to be simpler than those powers, and less likely to interact in negative ways. Most point-based systems are designed from a smaller number of simpler building blocks (and simple means you have to worry about interactions less) then D&D 3 or 4, which have thousands of complex sets of powers.

 

[Heathen72]

The way I see it, all systems are point buy, on some level. With Class based games it's just behind the curtain, that's all. With D&D the players are provided with templates (classes) of differing types (magic, stealth, etc) that are optimised to work well together in combat and balanced against each other.

A small amount of freedom is given for personalization of characters, but not so much as to break that optimization and balance.

 

[1Mac]

Sure, but that's my point. If you want lotsa powers, you'd better silo them.

 

[garrowolf]

On the subject of powers I think that classless systems deal with it better because you have to make the powers make sense overall and not just per class basis. For example if you have 5 different classes with rules about creating fire magic, for instance, and don't have them working with each other then it will not make any sense across the board. If you wanted to add fire powers to a 6th character then you end up just copying one of them or making up a 6th version of the same rules. Why not have one set of fire rules and have everything reference them?

Of course I am just using Fire as an example. It could be Martial arts, melee, leadership. etc. The point is that if you have 7200 powers in a game, that is not a good thing. I can't imagine any GM being able to keep up with all that without keeping his nose in the books the whole time.

 

[kitsune9]

I'm a fan of classes, but I also like systems where you can pick and choose to build your character too. I'd say I'm a 60/40 kind of guy in my attitude toward classes. Granted, one can make the argument that classes are truly not necessary if you strip all the abilities and make them available to player to choose as a smorgasboard. The only caveat is that new players may feel overwhelmed by the array of choices in designing their character. Having a system that comes "prepakaged" (aka classes) helps to mitigate that.

 

[Numlock]

I don't quite see it the same way. Where we might agree is in saying that classless systems have to work harder that systems with classes to ensure balance. But it sounds as though you think relying on classes is a crutch or a fallback for balanced system design, whereas I think classless systems create a lot more work for themselves than may* be necessary.

Of course when making two systems (One Class-less and one with Classes) of the same completeness, the Class-less system is the hardest to get totally balanced. This doesn't mean I think Developers who use Classes are just too stupid to make Class-less systems.

I'm going to make a list of pro's and con's.

Classes:
Pro's:

-Flavour
Using only the standard fantasy classes with all their own 'Cool thing', DnD instantly creates this fantasy feel.

-Simple(r) CharGen
Just having to choose a Class, and not seperate skills, powers, feats, etc. speeds up CharGen considerably. (This is on average, some Class systems might have slow and complex CharGen, and some Classless systems might not)


Con's:

-Less freedom for players
If I want to play a healing, unarmored, lockpicking 1st level Char in DnD, I'm screwed.

-Less controlable for GM's
Harder to make NPC's stats fit with their personality. Everytime a player wants to be a Class from some exotic book, the GM has to learn new rules. If a players says he wants to play something that isn't their, the GM has the complex task of creating a Class.


Class-less:

Pro's:

-Freedom:
I can be everything I want. Priest-Barbarian-Thief, albeit some what unrealistic, is no problem.

-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.


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.


Now, for my personal opinion.

I like these complex Class-less systems because they are complete. I found out that the best way to introduce GURPS to new players and viceversa, I discovered lately, is to not show them the rules. Just tell them the setting, the goal their character should have and some pointers, and tell them to start writing a character. When done, I allow them to see the inside of the book, so they can find the adv/disadv/skills that fit their written character. Never had the situation were they came up with something, and GURPS didn't deliver.