Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="jfiz" data-source="post: 62956" data-attributes="member: 2856">my thoughts...in question form...Ok, if we look at this as purely a comparison of systems, and we for the sake of that don't limit ourselves to a DnD/Fantasy like setting;Consider the following character "concepts" - basically the RolePlay background/descriptions of characters that we wish to use the system to  model for game play:A former fringe scientist who is now a government agent working to protect a secret alien race.A salvage ship captain who wields a modicum of psionic powers.A gallavanting swashbuckler who is equally charming, good with a blade, and religously empowered....think about how you would model these characters first in an existing class-based system, using core-published classes in that system....then think about how you would model these same characters using an established class-less system, such as GURPS, BESM2, or something similar....finally consider how you would model them using a more "rules-light" or abstract system such as WaRP (OTE), Risus, Amber, and their ilk.In considering these questions, my hunch is that you may arrive at some of these same conclusions:1) In a class-based system such as DnD, characters that are in the vein of the fantasy setting the system was designed for (i.e. the swashbuckler perhaps) are easier to model then the characters further removed from that setting. My theory is that this stems from how we have been "shown" various settings...fantasy (DnD) literature tends to put less emphasis on skill and diversity, and more on core archetypes.  Whereas science fiction literature tends to explore more deeply the quirkiness, faults, shortcommings, diversity, and contradictions of character.2) In order to suffeciently model the less archetypal characters in a class based system, some details must be compromised, and the resulting character model (as opposed to the original concept) will be arbitarily abstract.  More abstract in fact, than the same character model in a class-less systems such as GURPS et. al.  Often times, this abstraction may lead to the idea that the same character could be represented (modeled) equally well by the "rules-light" systems.  The in-between nature of the class-based system may have the effects of abstracting the character some, losing detail, and not necessarily gaining any benefit of the lost complexity. 3) If you are willing to accept abstraction in character modeling (leading to greater subjectiveness of action resolution), the more diversified, less archetypal characters will be much easier to model in a rules-light system while still staying true to the original concept.4) The strongly archetypal characters will be "streched" or made needlessly complex in modeling in order to be created in the class-less sytems such as GURPS.  While the original concept may be maintained, it could be buried or inadvertently alterered by the extra complexity inherent in the class-less systems.My current theory (*theory* - something to test/think about further etc.) is that the important distinction in class vs. classless systems is a matter of abstraction.  Furthermore, this degree of abstraction is a measurable quality of any given RPG setting.  Class-based systems may prove the more elegant choice for classical Fantasy-based settings, where the resulting models serve the strongly archetyped, balanced characters associated with such settings.  Powerful Wizards, skulking rogues, and reverant priests are the shoulders that carry Fantasy plots.Non-class systems seem to work best when mated to science fiction or modern-military style settings (cyberpunk, forex).  In these settings, detailed skill levels and specific areas of expertise, along with precise modeling of a characters faults and shortcomings are more important in driving the detailed oriented story lines - more important than the descriptive character concept at times.Rules-Light systems, such as WaRP (OTE), Risus, et. al should work best when mated to a very RP oriented game, where the emphasis in character modeling should be drawn strictly from the descriptive character concept.  Games where a greater degree of abstraction is acceptable, and where an "Axe wielding manaic" serves a better purpose in the setting than a "12th lvl barbarian" are likely candidates.  OTE is one such setting; other games tilted towards the descriptive side, such as Amber, Birthright (IMHO), and even cinematic games like HKAT can be a hoot when coupled with such an abstract system.  Afterall, doesn't just feel cooler to have the trait "praying mantis lashes out" on your character sheet, instead of "Martial Arts: 18" or "improved unarmed combat BAB: +10" on your character sheet? (sorry this is a tough distinction to make heh)....Anyway, think about these questions and see if you make your way to any of the same conclusions.  For me lately, it seems like the nature of the system (class vs. non-class vs. rules-light) runs a gamut from one-end to the other, and that it's more important for the system to simply support and empower the play style appropriate to the setting.  From that respect, I find DnD 3E quite well suited to fantasy gaming.  GURPS, BESM, etc. are good choices for Cyberpunk, X-files, Modern Military, etc. type games, and the rules light crowd are great for games like OTE etc.  Sometimes this can be a close call...i.e. GURPS vs. BESM for example...I would chose BESM for more cinematic action, and GURPS for more granular "reality" feel, and probably if I wanted to model complex ideas in greater detail...What do you guys think?Thanks,</blockquote>

Verification