Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Skywalker" data-source="post: 60756" data-attributes="member: 1538">Just a few points.&nbsp; I like both systems though would probably fall on the classless side of the argument.First, don't base classless systems on GURPS which is IMO a bad rule set.&nbsp; Better classless systems&nbsp; would be Cthulhu and Unknown Armies.Classes are an arbitrary rule element designed to enhance playability.&nbsp; For this reason sometimes classes can be extremely useful.&nbsp; For beginning RPGers it is very important and why I think D&amp;D makes the perfect entry game.&nbsp; Classes do a number of things for new RPGers.&nbsp; They encourage cooperation.&nbsp; They help develop character concepts.&nbsp; They also foster a &quot;game&quot; mentality which is important for new RPGers who find the idea of playing highly realistic games intimidating.&nbsp; I once ran some RPGing with 10 year olds and class systems were far superior.However after yopu have roleplayed for some time I think you get to see good and bad class systems.&nbsp; Some are flexible and make certain sense.&nbsp; Examples include Cthulhu professions, Warhammer Careers and Outlooks and Tribes in Tribe 8.&nbsp; Even the Clans in Vampire make a certain amount of sense and there are strong in game reasons for the divisions.&nbsp; However these games' classes only provide starting points to start the creative juices flowing.&nbsp; My issue with some class systems (and D&amp;D is a good example) is that there is often not enough flexibility within the classes.&nbsp; At have got to a stage with roleplaying that I don't want to be restricted by arbitrary rules like Rangers have spells if such doesn't fit my concept.&nbsp; Also advancement is lumpy.&nbsp; The game aspects of classes get in the way of roleplaying.&nbsp; Some say that DMs and players can modify the classes as they see fit but this ignores that many people do not like going outside the rule set inf ear of unbalancing things.D&amp;D has recently refocused on balance which in my mind is a two edged sword.&nbsp; It discourages change and encourages a &quot;game&quot;mentality much as GURPS does.&nbsp; Its a throw back from its wargaming roots, where it was a contest between 2 people who needed even sides.The strange thing I see is that D&amp;D does not need to be so artificial.&nbsp; I do hope that D&amp;D classes never go away.&nbsp; However as we have seen in a number of places - Fading Suns d20, Monte Cook's variants - and will see more of in the future - d20 Modern, D20 Cthulhu and d20 Godlike - D&amp;D classes will become more flexible.&nbsp; Toolkits to create the concept that PC desires more accurately.&nbsp; So I think classes if done right are the best as they provide in game assistance and guidance.&nbsp; However I prefer something completely classless over D&amp;Ds current class artificiality.&nbsp; But there is hope on the horizon.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Skywalker, post: 60756, member: 1538"] Just a few points. I like both systems though would probably fall on the classless side of the argument. First, don't base classless systems on GURPS which is IMO a bad rule set. Better classless systems would be Cthulhu and Unknown Armies. Classes are an arbitrary rule element designed to enhance playability. For this reason sometimes classes can be extremely useful. For beginning RPGers it is very important and why I think D&D makes the perfect entry game. Classes do a number of things for new RPGers. They encourage cooperation. They help develop character concepts. They also foster a "game" mentality which is important for new RPGers who find the idea of playing highly realistic games intimidating. I once ran some RPGing with 10 year olds and class systems were far superior. However after yopu have roleplayed for some time I think you get to see good and bad class systems. Some are flexible and make certain sense. Examples include Cthulhu professions, Warhammer Careers and Outlooks and Tribes in Tribe 8. Even the Clans in Vampire make a certain amount of sense and there are strong in game reasons for the divisions. However these games' classes only provide starting points to start the creative juices flowing. My issue with some class systems (and D&D is a good example) is that there is often not enough flexibility within the classes. At have got to a stage with roleplaying that I don't want to be restricted by arbitrary rules like Rangers have spells if such doesn't fit my concept. Also advancement is lumpy. The game aspects of classes get in the way of roleplaying. Some say that DMs and players can modify the classes as they see fit but this ignores that many people do not like going outside the rule set inf ear of unbalancing things. D&D has recently refocused on balance which in my mind is a two edged sword. It discourages change and encourages a "game"mentality much as GURPS does. Its a throw back from its wargaming roots, where it was a contest between 2 people who needed even sides. The strange thing I see is that D&D does not need to be so artificial. I do hope that D&D classes never go away. However as we have seen in a number of places - Fading Suns d20, Monte Cook's variants - and will see more of in the future - d20 Modern, D20 Cthulhu and d20 Godlike - D&D classes will become more flexible. Toolkits to create the concept that PC desires more accurately. So I think classes if done right are the best as they provide in game assistance and guidance. However I prefer something completely classless over D&Ds current class artificiality. But there is hope on the horizon. [/QUOTE]

Verification