Should the whole idea of class skills be done away with?

[Nifelhein]

Well I have a point of view tht was born not long after 3rd edition was released and I played it for some months...

The designers have completely underestimated the power of the cross class system, they have allied a very differing skill points allowance with a high cost buying method.

As I see it not even the rogue can be what it should, my experience says that people think they have too much skill points because many players don't pick the old thieving skills and abilities replacing them with other skills. That is fine and I think it was/should be the true intent behind the skill system adopted on 3rd edition.

Afetr some time I saw that this whole skill system seemed to have been ripped from Earthdawn... with adapatations, it was how the crossclas was born, in my opinion.

I think that simply ignoring all the cross mechanic would not be all that unbalancing ut I have not played with it.

So far I considered this idea:

1. everyone should have more skills to cover their own basic aspects, except for the rogue who has a very high adaptability already. everyone who receives 2 goes to 4 and 4s stay where they are (anyway this would have to be well considered, so far I didn't).

2. races should be considered when counting for what would be more expensive, after all elves have to hunt or forage for their food in many cases, thus survival...

3. cross class could be considered just for a differing top to not-so-related skills, no higher cost, but lower limit.

4. extremely restricted skills should be made into others (they even made ome considerations I did on the revision) I even think disale device could have open locks with it (a thread on it is here: <http://www.enworld.org/forums/showthread.php?t=58370>).

5. Changing about all of the skill lists since fighter having 6 class skills is just ridiculous, they can't even be effective sentries and many skills in his list (many!!!! hah!) have the armor check penalty for a armored mostly class!!!

EDIT: there are many mistakes around, just try to make it meaningful.

 

[johnsemlak]

"Most people, once exposed to a skill-based system (whether RuneQuest in '77, or GURPS or Hero today) find it very difficult to go back to the restrictions of the D&D class system."

I guess I'm not like most people

 

[Dark Jezter]

No, I just find your attitude hard to take.

As I said above, my original response had to do with the assertion that taking away the class system would just result in the reappearance of said system. Which I disagree with. Somehow, you interpreted this as an attack upon your very gaming fiber, which is just silly. Somehow this all became about you and your need to feel right. You were the one who decided for me that I should be playing something else, which isn't your decision to make.

Wow.

I honestly don't know how to respond to that little bit of pychoanalysis, save to say that you have a very active imagination.

As for telling you to go play another game, I don't feel that was inappropriate at all. I said it in response to you saying that the class system is an antiquated relic, which is of course a ridiculous claim, because how can a gaming concept be antiquated? It's like saying that billiards is an antiquated game and ping-pong is the future of tabletop sports.

Of course, maybe I'm just jaded. Between this forum and RPG.net, I've seen far too many White Wolf/GURPS/Hero fanboys show up and start making claims that classes, levels, HP, etc. are outdated concepts and that anyone who likes them is a "3tard" or a "newb" who hasn't yet reached gaming enlightment and adopted their favorite system.

This discussion is about Carnifex's ideas on changing the skill system to better fit his gaming needs. To which I say, "More power to him." You can agree or disagree, but don't put words into people's mouths. If you aren't able to keep up with discussion, if it bothers you so much that someone might change something in the "canon", then I don't know what to say.

Huh? I've just gone back and read every reply I've posted in this thread, and I can't find any place where I was "putting words into people's mouths". In your previous post, you were acting as though you knew how the gaming community on a whole felt, and didn't provide any information to back up your claims. When I asked you to provide sources and asked you if it was so hard to believe that I prefer D&D over skill-based systems, you just said "No, I find your attitude hard to take" and then you later edited the post to include numerous assumptions and accusations regarding me.

 

[jmucchiello]

Sorry for the hijacking....

Most defenses of class based RPGs state that class systems provide newbies with a simple mechanic to hook their character on. If you want to be a knight in armor, you look at the fighter and the paladin and pick one, the other or a combination of both. If you want to be a mage, you look at sorcerer or wizard and choose one. And if you don't know what you want to be, you still only have 11 choices to choose among.

Skill based systems aren't as simple. You have to know exactly what kind of knight you want to be down to whatever detail level is provided by the game system. If you don't know what you want to be, you have infinite choices to choose among.

Creating an "experienced" class-based character from scratch can be very simple. In the first few moments, you have a pretty good idea what the final character looks like. Creating "experienced" skill-based characters from scratch requires more time, generally.

If you want to describe your character to another player quickly in a class-based RPG, you spit out your race, class and level and perhaps a signature weapon or magic item. Done. The other player has about 90% of what your character is at his finger tips. Getting another player about 90% of what your skill-based character is like requires that you list your skills, a longer process.

In any case, it's the newbie factor that makes class-based games "better". Limiting a newbie's choices makes it easier for them to grasp what is going on quickly without overwhelming them with system details. That is the most likely reason class-based systems have lasted so long.

 

[tetsujin28]

Of course, maybe I'm just jaded. Between this forum and RPG.net, I've seen far too many White Wolf/GURPS/Hero fanboys show up and start making claims that classes, levels, HP, etc. are outdated concepts and that anyone who likes them is a "3tard" or a "newb" who hasn't yet reached gaming enlightment and adopted their favorite system.

Well, RPG.net seems to be full of people who seem to place their entire sense of self-worth into defending their favourite game system. I think we're in agreement about the attitudes there, which would be why I stopped going there a long time ago.

At no point did I say that people who like D&D are dumb as stumps, retards, or newbies. That would be not only rude to people in the forum, but disingenous on my part, since D&D is the game I started with, and a game I still enjoy. (Hence my 300+ posts on this forum, and the several hundred that got wiped when Morrus took over from Eric Noah. I don't have such a lack of a life to spend that much time on a board that discusses a game I don't like.)

I don't post very often at the Hero boards for precisely the reason that if you mention anything being better than Hero at something (such as, oh, taking an hour and a half to create a first character, or combat being interminably long), and canonical Hero at that, you get jumped on. Which is something I find especially annoying, having played Hero in its various guises since '81, not to mention having done some work which found its way into some of the older Champions books.

I still feel that classes are outdated, and that players can create far more versatile and unique characters in a system with "classless classes" such as d20 Modern or d20 CoC. And I'll stand by that. But no-one is dumb for liking D&D as is. I think we should just agree to strongly disagree.

Having said that, what's your solution to Carnifex's problem?

 

[Carnifex]

If you say so. What you describes sounds very much like M&M though and very little like D&D. Add the damage save, and you're essentially 95% there. For fantasy gaming, I personally would rather not play D&D these days, at least not for campaigns I'm running. D&D is a kinda beer & pretzels game to me these days that we can run for each other in our sleep without any thought. For "real" fantasy campaigns, I'd still be d20 but not D&D. The D&D classes and their ties to the implicit D&D setting is a big part of the reason for that.

Um... so by removing the concept of class skills I'm suddenly almost at M&M I think that M&M is *quite* a lot different than that...

I'm not sure how making skills more general results in a game that is "much like M&M though and very little like D&D".

 

[Carnifex]

I did the same thing and have also had no balance issues or feelings of discontent from those playing rogues. I also gave classes with only 2 skill pts/level 4 pts instead, so they could take advantage of the versatility. Still no problems or complaints. I got rid of Use Magic Device as a skill and made it a Feat however (I gave it a Cha check with a bonus equal to half your level to replace the skill roll.) There was some very minor whining about it, but since none of the whiners had taken ANY skill levels with it that didn't concern me much. In general everybody liked the change. So far only the fighter has taken it though, so he can carry a Wand of Cure Light Wounds.

That sounds like quite a good solution th the problem of Use Magic Device when there are no cross-class skills! I think I'll nab that idea for when I do runa campaign with the skill system altered.

 

[Carnifex]

And there we go. You can't stand skill-based systems, for whatever arcane reasons you have. I would question your ability to carry on meaningful discussion on the topic, since you've already stated that you are opposed to anything of the kind. Most people, once exposed to a skill-based system (whether RuneQuest in '77, or GURPS or Hero today) find it very difficult to go back to the restrictions of the D&D class system. d20 Modern has gone a good way towards correcting this, and shows that the d20 system can withstand a fair amount of tweaking without breaking.

I will say this: I originally played lots lots of skill-based clasless systems before I even really played that much D&D.

God, I won't touch GURPS with a ten foot pole now, but I *like* classes, prestige classes etc. I do still enjoy playing Champions on the rare occasions I get to, but I don't consider it as a 'technically superipor' rpg to D&D. I consider them to be just too different to say one is better than the other.

However, within a class-based system, I do enjoy a fair bit of customiseability... hence my problem with the cross-class skill thingy, because it seems unnecessarily restrictive...

 

[Carnifex]

On the subject of adding 'Professions' which give extra packages of class skills - I like the idea. It works rather well in a Planescape campaign if alignecd with the factions (eg Harmonium get Intimidate, etc). However, it's a lot of work to create a whole load of different 'professions', and it seems to be simply easier to just do away with class skills instead, especially since the reports of those in this thread who have *done* so say it has caused no problems, and certainly hasn't made their games 'not D&D'.

 

[Desdichado]

Sorry, maybe I misunderstood. Didn't you also say you were gradually moving towards no classes as well?