Classes create limitations that make it easier to develop certain play styles. With no class system it's more difficult to prevent ultimate builds. It's also harder in a no class system to make hybrid builds good. You end up creating a couple distinct concentrated builds, or a single hybrid build that is good at everything.
If the skills are balanced and the weapons diversified then "Ultimate Builds" aren't a problem. They keeping making "Good" weapons and "Bad" weapons or "good" skills and "Bad" skills.
If you are top notch fighter who uses a rapier and light armor, you will lose to anyone half your level in heavy armor or who uses an area effect spell that you can't melee dodge. If you're taking on breath weapons or volleys of arrows you need to be carrying a shield.
If you're a top notch Plate armor tank you will get your but kicked from the giant throwing 500lb boulders which you can't dodge fast enough. Don't wear heavy armor against targets that will one shot you dead if they connect.
I don't care how high your martial arts skill is, you might be able to take on multiple human sized target better than other fighters but you cannot foot sweep a dragon AT ALL.
That would be a good system., Instead it's "This weapon is +3 and this one is +1, the +3 is better" and "More armor is more defense always"
It's a good system for turn based strategy game.
For MMO with real style combat it won't work, because that extreme balance differences would make the combat unnecessary.
Also I fail to see what your suggestion has to do with having skills instead of classes: rapier user, plate armor user, etc. would be classes. If a single choice is so powerful it dictates your other choices, then that's your class, no matter what fancy name the devs decide to call it by.
the main problem with MMOs is not the balance debates over combat but rather that combat is for the most part the only thing to do. If there were more things in MMOs other than just combat I dont think people would be so hyper focused on questions regarding classes vs skill system because of combat balance (which by the way balance concerns exist equally in BOTH systems but that is aside from my core point in this reply)
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Classes create limitations that make it easier to develop certain play styles. With no class system it's more difficult to prevent ultimate builds. It's also harder in a no class system to make hybrid builds good. You end up creating a couple distinct concentrated builds, or a single hybrid build that is good at everything.
I don't agree with this. In a classless system you have to create a balance of choices.
Also a classless system doesn't need to be/get rid of group roles. I think it's cherry picking to say wearing a plate armor is a class. Even if you wear a plate armor you could still be casting spells, specializing in ranged combat or melee combat or using different weapons and different skills with same weapons or different weapons.
But the game has to have something that ties everything together for example an energy resource. When you cast a spell you use energy when you use a ranged weapon skill you use energy, you always use that same resource.
You also have to have other systems in play that force players to make decions about their character. For example: you can't do this in this armor or wearing a certain armor hinders you from doing something severely to less severely creating hues or scopes for players to explore .
The whole character development system has to a be like a giant tree with numerous branches, twigs, leafs, roots that all tie together in one trunk with multiple choices.
In modern mmos I find the class systems to be highly boring and unimaginative in terms of charcter development.
Also when people talk about ultimate builds, they usually talk about 1vs1 combat, which is irrelevant imo in an mmo environment.
Talking about games where thousands of players exist simultaneously in a single instance and mechanics related to such games.
Classes create limitations that make it easier to develop certain play styles. With no class system it's more difficult to prevent ultimate builds. It's also harder in a no class system to make hybrid builds good. You end up creating a couple distinct concentrated builds, or a single hybrid build that is good at everything.
I don't agree with this. In a classless system you have to create a balance of choices.
Also a classless system doesn't need to be/get rid of group roles. I think it's cherry picking to say wearing a plate armor is a class. Even if you wear a plate armor you could still be casting spells, specializing in ranged combat or melee combat or using different weapons and different skills with same weapons or different weapons.
But the game has to have something that ties everything together for example an energy resource. When you cast a spell you use energy when you use a ranged weapon skill you use energy, you always use that same resource.
You also have to have other systems in play that force players to make decions about their character. For example: you can't do this in this armor or wearing a certain armor hinders you from doing something severely to less severely creating hues or scopes for players to explore .
The whole character development system has to a be like a giant tree with numerous branches, twigs, leafs, roots that all tie together in one trunk with multiple choices.
In modern mmos I find the class systems to be highly boring and unimaginative in terms of charcter development.
Also when people talk about ultimate builds, they usually talk about 1vs1 combat, which is irrelevant imo in an mmo environment.
It really depends on the MMO world, which seems to be going out of style these days. In D&D, Wizards could not wear armor becuase it interfered with their connection to magic. Druids could only wear leather and use wooden shields (no metal) because they were "natural", not man-made.
The trouble with "balancing" plate wearing spell casters is that the long range spell damage now has the best armor for defense. They get the best of both worlds, massive damage and massive protection. Players don't seem to understand this, or maybe they do and desire "ultra-warriors?" Would a sneaky character get to use heavy armor, too?
You think classes are boring, and I can see why if you've played RPGs for any length of time. For me, they're comfortable and "known." If I come across a plate wearing character and think, "Tank." and they instead are in the back slinging spells, they're not doing what I asked of them: Protect the party by getting between the opponents and us. Or a "healer" type that uses their magic resources to deal massive damage instead of healing.
I agree about the 1v1 PvP balance. This is where nerfs take place and balancing makes each character "the same." This shouldn't happen, but it has since 1v1 PvP has been in MMOs. I think this is actually the basis of all the "class dislike" today. Players want a single character that can do everything and rely on no one else. Classes make this harder to accomplish than picking skills. I totally understand this, as MMOs go further away from social gaming, aka: Playing with others.
Classes create limitations that make it easier to develop certain play styles. With no class system it's more difficult to prevent ultimate builds. It's also harder in a no class system to make hybrid builds good. You end up creating a couple distinct concentrated builds, or a single hybrid build that is good at everything.
I don't agree with this. In a classless system you have to create a balance of choices.
Also a classless system doesn't need to be/get rid of group roles. I think it's cherry picking to say wearing a plate armor is a class. Even if you wear a plate armor you could still be casting spells, specializing in ranged combat or melee combat or using different weapons and different skills with same weapons or different weapons.
But the game has to have something that ties everything together for example an energy resource. When you cast a spell you use energy when you use a ranged weapon skill you use energy, you always use that same resource.
You also have to have other systems in play that force players to make decions about their character. For example: you can't do this in this armor or wearing a certain armor hinders you from doing something severely to less severely creating hues or scopes for players to explore .
The whole character development system has to a be like a giant tree with numerous branches, twigs, leafs, roots that all tie together in one trunk with multiple choices.
In modern mmos I find the class systems to be highly boring and unimaginative in terms of charcter development.
Also when people talk about ultimate builds, they usually talk about 1vs1 combat, which is irrelevant imo in an mmo environment.
It really depends on the MMO world, which seems to be going out of style these days. In D&D, Wizards could not wear armor becuase it interfered with their connection to magic. Druids could only wear leather and use wooden shields (no metal) because they were "natural", not man-made.
The trouble with "balancing" plate wearing spell casters is that the long range spell damage now has the best armor for defense. They get the best of both worlds, massive damage and massive protection. Players don't seem to understand this, or maybe they do and desire "ultra-warriors?" Would a sneaky character get to use heavy armor, too?
You think classes are boring, and I can see why if you've played RPGs for any length of time. For me, they're comfortable and "known." If I come across a plate wearing character and think, "Tank." and they instead are in the back slinging spells, they're not doing what I asked of them: Protect the party by getting between the opponents and us. Or a "healer" type that uses their magic resources to deal massive damage instead of healing.
I agree about the 1v1 PvP balance. This is where nerfs take place and balancing makes each character "the same." This shouldn't happen, but it has since 1v1 PvP has been in MMOs. I think this is actually the basis of all the "class dislike" today. Players want a single character that can do everything and rely on no one else. Classes make this harder to accomplish than picking skills. I totally understand this, as MMOs go further away from social gaming, aka: Playing with others.
yeah like we were talking earlier a lot of good ideas can take queues from real life.
Its only natural that a real life scout is going to want to keep things light which means he cant take armour. it doesn't mean if he had different gear with a different assignment he could not do that other assignment but it also doesnt mean he could by default. it depends on if he has the skill sets.
which is why I personally like the idea of 'class gear' if you will to control questions of 'balance' in skill based games.
I personally think the preception of balance problems are way over blown but regardless of that gear can add a level of control in that area that is much more natural.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
I feel like its easier to balance the game if there's a class system even though it might not be perfect and there are flavor of the month classes etc. Having more control over the classes makes the dev feel more comfortable about fixing issues than going through a million different combinations of skills to try to figure out which to nerf or buff. And if you have no classes but a combination of skills thats more realistic. Not everyone is going to want to stick with being in construction for the rest of their lives they might want to also be a engineer.
So I feel like its a matter of Realism vs Balance.....I guess.
The acronym MMORPG use to mean Massive Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Game.
But the acronym MMMORPG now currently means Microscopic Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Game. Kappa.
So I feel like its a matter of Realism vs Balance.....I guess.
This is the key for me. Real life takes time to learn new skills. Games don't. When one levels up, they can now get new skills with a simple click of the button. If there was something more than a mouse click involved, I would not be so against all skills all the time types of character growth.
Older versions of D&D suggested that the players seek out trainers for their classes and actually spend time learning between new levels. Video games are not built for this. This is "ugly, yucky, stupid downtime" where players are not clicking buttons as fast as possible, making the best use of their "precious time", and killing things, so it would go over like a lead balloon.
[edit] I should add that I would play such a game, but that means not many others would.
So I feel like its a matter of Realism vs Balance.....I guess.
This is the key for me. Real life takes time to learn new skills. Games don't. When one levels up, they can now get new skills with a simple click of the button. If there was something more than a mouse click involved, I would not be so against all skills all the time types of character growth.
Older versions of D&D suggested that the players seek out trainers for their classes and actually spend time learning between new levels. Video games are not built for this. This is "ugly, yucky, stupid downtime" where players are not clicking buttons as fast as possible, making the best use of their "precious time", and killing things, so it would go over like a lead balloon.
[edit] I should add that I would play such a game, but that means not many others would.
So instead of clicking a mouse what is it you want to do? Look in the yellow pages for "necromancer", go have a couple of beers with him and get him to teach you more advanced necromancy?
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
Well the argument used to go: it's a reflection of the intensive training your character did between eight and sixteen. The sort of training that actually produced physical changes in the skeletons of English longbow men. In the case of magic users eight years of scholarly study and practice that, among other things, provided literacy in an illiterate society. In the case of a cleric eight years of instruction, prayer and devotion that lead to a profound link with one of the gods etc.
It wasn't a collection of skills that could be learnt with a few weeks of intensive practice, but a vocation developed over a lifetime.
Of course the further you move from a medieval setting the less relevant this is.
So I feel like its a matter of Realism vs Balance.....I guess.
This is the key for me. Real life takes time to learn new skills. Games don't. When one levels up, they can now get new skills with a simple click of the button. If there was something more than a mouse click involved, I would not be so against all skills all the time types of character growth.
Older versions of D&D suggested that the players seek out trainers for their classes and actually spend time learning between new levels. Video games are not built for this. This is "ugly, yucky, stupid downtime" where players are not clicking buttons as fast as possible, making the best use of their "precious time", and killing things, so it would go over like a lead balloon.
[edit] I should add that I would play such a game, but that means not many others would.
So instead of clicking a mouse what is it you want to do? Look in the yellow pages for "necromancer", go have a couple of beers with him and get him to teach you more advanced necromancy?
Finding the local Fighters Guild, Temple of a Deity, or Mage's Tower should suffice.
The point of classes has been lost over the years.
In a traditional setting, classes defined a set of skills you had that could benefit the party. This is the D+D roots, but no MMO better displayed this than EQ.
EQ had larger group sizes, because you were going to have your tank, healer, and dps. Then you had to flesh out group with utility. Crowd control? buffing? debuffing? pulling? Your group make up determined where you would optimally go (or vice versa). For instance, a group that was War-Druid-Rog-Wiz-Mag-Ranger would most likely go someplace outdoors, as they had no mez and weak healer but the ranger (and druid) had good pulling techniques to use outdoors. In modern games simply gathering a group is sufficient for going pretty much anywhere.
The same thing *could* be achieved in a skill based system, its just tougher, especially on the players end, to make it work.
But classes today are boring, as dps = dps = dps, or there are systems like Rift where anyone can switch to anything at will so there are no limitations or consequences.
So you have a role and can feel like teamwork is taking place. Then feel important and vital and get a sense of reward when you succeed. It is a neverending carrot chase! But it is fun.
Op has never played FFXI i see because it IS the ultimate way to design a game ,or i should was until post 75.
A skill system will ALWAYS be limited by the developer no different than any class system. A game will be as easy or difficult as the developer so chooses,it has NOTHING to do with you the gamer.
A class system +sub class system allows your character to have every single ability/skill/spell in the game,so how can a skill system top that,answer is it can NOT.On top of that,a game like FFXI utilized a skill system as well,so it combined the best of both worlds.My only knock is like any game,it could have been improved and done even better.
I think this is where confusion sets in,people see several crappy games and think ,ok that design does not work,when in reality it is the developer that does not work. There are always going to be really smart people in the world with the ability to think outside the bubble or now how to implement ideas just right without making something too hard or too easy.So a game is only as good as the developer,not so much the design or systems,it is a combined effort of all employees minds.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
For me...and I feel alone at times, classes help to identify roles when in groups or even role-playing. The push towards open-ended everything leads to messy games without identities. Let's face it, there is some theme that appeals to us and we decide if we are going to jump in or not. Unlimited everything from zones to classes that creates a blank boring slate. What's to get anybody to take interest or keep it. Yes I might try it, but if not carefully designed to work with others (IMO A MAJOR FAULT OF MANY CURRENT GAMES) then what is my motivation to do anything with anybody? I'm encountering that a lot right now. I'm playing a game and I have a 'class' that can do just about anything I need. So, I end up playing alone (don't care for PvP EVAH!), losing interest, and dropping the game. Classes give purpose for those seeking roles imo. Not for everybody, but hopefully the push for just open everything will stop and people can move towards games that actually appeal to them and hold their interests. Just my opinion.
because its a role playing game where you play a role with a group of others. If you wanted everyone to be the same the game would suck.
If youre talking about a custom skill system there would need to be locks on mixes of builds which would be the same as classes.
That is just silly, my favorite pen and paper system, Shadowrun, have zero classes and yet have my players specialized as a thief (the Mission impossible type), a hermetic mage, a Shaman, a rigger, a physical adapt and a decker.
Just because you can pick and choose skills does not mean everyone will take exactly the same, you should need different builds to have an effective group no matter if you classes in your game or not. Games that allow you to have all skills at the same time indeed make everyone the same eventually and that isn't good but you don't have to pick the worst case scenario.
The big difference is that you can't re-spec in P&P but that doesn't have to destroy the game.
* Balanced combat skills * Off combat skills in numbers you can't choose all but all should be useful in a group *Certain skills that can't be used in heavy and/or medium armor * Attacks locked to a weapon (could be single skills you pick or larger packets * 1 special ability you can equip at a time (instead of the class special ability) * A limited number of skills of each type you can specc at any time * Skills/attacks that get boosted for being used with other skills from other players
That would work just fine and you can build your own custom class or build your entire team around it.
In old MMOs they were there to give you a different feel of the game, you might pick a class that was not so good at PvE but better than the others at PvP. Their key importance was to build groups, the class roles supplementing each other.
Today with MMOs designed for solo play and groups as an add on, the key reason for having them has gone. Also with the easymode "you can never make a mistake" design, few MMOs have classes which do not all perform nearly equally well in any given situation.
So now classes are just a gimmick that makes you think your character is different. There is some change in gameplay, say longer range to close ranged attacks, that's about it.
Classes are a shorthand for easier communication and identification in group based play. Skill based systems are great for solo focused play, but ideally no one wants to type an essay to advertise for a range of skills required at what level when they can just say "LFM Cleric L90", or whatever, and know that they are getting a player with a stated skill set.
The truth is though that even in point/ skill based systems certain builds become favoured and folks follow a handful of optimised templates/ builds anyhow. These optimised builds are really just 'classes'.
So, classes tend to appear if the devs use them officially or not. You might as well remove the confusion and just use them. The illusion of choice helps no one.
I believe it's original idea was to give players a definitive role in the games fantasy world. Basically each class has a set concept of how it acts and the actions it performs. For instance a Ranger had a general template as a loner who traveled the wilds, was friends to animals, and helped people who were lost. People were given a few general ideas to choose from to make things a bit easier on the player. It made it easy to pick what you wanted to portray in the world and easy for other people to tell what character was based on their class. I suppose this would be stereotyping to an extent and that makes a lot of people angry these days, but it was and maybe still is to an extent helpful for players to find a place for themselves in the world.
Comments
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Also a classless system doesn't need to be/get rid of group roles. I think it's cherry picking to say wearing a plate armor is a class. Even if you wear a plate armor you could still be casting spells, specializing in ranged combat or melee combat or using different weapons and different skills with same weapons or different weapons.
But the game has to have something that ties everything together for example an energy resource. When you cast a spell you use energy when you use a ranged weapon skill you use energy, you always use that same resource.
You also have to have other systems in play that force players to make decions about their character. For example: you can't do this in this armor or wearing a certain armor hinders you from doing something severely to less severely creating hues or scopes for players to explore .
The whole character development system has to a be like a giant tree with numerous branches, twigs, leafs, roots that all tie together in one trunk with multiple choices.
In modern mmos I find the class systems to be highly boring and unimaginative in terms of charcter development.
Also when people talk about ultimate builds, they usually talk about 1vs1 combat, which is irrelevant imo in an mmo environment.
Already been done - GW! - a two profession game. Not very balanced at all.
The trouble with "balancing" plate wearing spell casters is that the long range spell damage now has the best armor for defense. They get the best of both worlds, massive damage and massive protection. Players don't seem to understand this, or maybe they do and desire "ultra-warriors?" Would a sneaky character get to use heavy armor, too?
You think classes are boring, and I can see why if you've played RPGs for any length of time. For me, they're comfortable and "known." If I come across a plate wearing character and think, "Tank." and they instead are in the back slinging spells, they're not doing what I asked of them: Protect the party by getting between the opponents and us. Or a "healer" type that uses their magic resources to deal massive damage instead of healing.
I agree about the 1v1 PvP balance. This is where nerfs take place and balancing makes each character "the same." This shouldn't happen, but it has since 1v1 PvP has been in MMOs. I think this is actually the basis of all the "class dislike" today. Players want a single character that can do everything and rely on no one else.
Classes make this harder to accomplish than picking skills. I totally understand this, as MMOs go further away from social gaming, aka: Playing with others.
VG
Its only natural that a real life scout is going to want to keep things light which means he cant take armour. it doesn't mean if he had different gear with a different assignment he could not do that other assignment but it also doesnt mean he could by default. it depends on if he has the skill sets.
which is why I personally like the idea of 'class gear' if you will to control questions of 'balance' in skill based games.
I personally think the preception of balance problems are way over blown but regardless of that gear can add a level of control in that area that is much more natural.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
So I feel like its a matter of Realism vs Balance.....I guess.
But the acronym MMMORPG now currently means Microscopic Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Game. Kappa.
Older versions of D&D suggested that the players seek out trainers for their classes and actually spend time learning between new levels. Video games are not built for this. This is "ugly, yucky, stupid downtime" where players are not clicking buttons as fast as possible, making the best use of their "precious time", and killing things, so it would go over like a lead balloon.
[edit]
I should add that I would play such a game, but that means not many others would.
VG
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
Well the argument used to go: it's a reflection of the intensive training your character did between eight and sixteen. The sort of training that actually produced physical changes in the skeletons of English longbow men. In the case of magic users eight years of scholarly study and practice that, among other things, provided literacy in an illiterate society. In the case of a cleric eight years of instruction, prayer and devotion that lead to a profound link with one of the gods etc.
It wasn't a collection of skills that could be learnt with a few weeks of intensive practice, but a vocation developed over a lifetime.
Of course the further you move from a medieval setting the less relevant this is.
VG
But the acronym MMMORPG now currently means Microscopic Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Game. Kappa.
In a traditional setting, classes defined a set of skills you had that could benefit the party. This is the D+D roots, but no MMO better displayed this than EQ.
EQ had larger group sizes, because you were going to have your tank, healer, and dps. Then you had to flesh out group with utility. Crowd control? buffing? debuffing? pulling? Your group make up determined where you would optimally go (or vice versa). For instance, a group that was War-Druid-Rog-Wiz-Mag-Ranger would most likely go someplace outdoors, as they had no mez and weak healer but the ranger (and druid) had good pulling techniques to use outdoors. In modern games simply gathering a group is sufficient for going pretty much anywhere.
The same thing *could* be achieved in a skill based system, its just tougher, especially on the players end, to make it work.
But classes today are boring, as dps = dps = dps, or there are systems like Rift where anyone can switch to anything at will so there are no limitations or consequences.
A skill system will ALWAYS be limited by the developer no different than any class system.
A game will be as easy or difficult as the developer so chooses,it has NOTHING to do with you the gamer.
A class system +sub class system allows your character to have every single ability/skill/spell in the game,so how can a skill system top that,answer is it can NOT.On top of that,a game like FFXI utilized a skill system as well,so it combined the best of both worlds.My only knock is like any game,it could have been improved and done even better.
I think this is where confusion sets in,people see several crappy games and think ,ok that design does not work,when in reality it is the developer that does not work.
There are always going to be really smart people in the world with the ability to think outside the bubble or now how to implement ideas just right without making something too hard or too easy.So a game is only as good as the developer,not so much the design or systems,it is a combined effort of all employees minds.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
appearance should not stick to the class. a knight can wear a medium armor or light armor
a mage can wear full plate armor if he wanted.
Just because you can pick and choose skills does not mean everyone will take exactly the same, you should need different builds to have an effective group no matter if you classes in your game or not. Games that allow you to have all skills at the same time indeed make everyone the same eventually and that isn't good but you don't have to pick the worst case scenario.
The big difference is that you can't re-spec in P&P but that doesn't have to destroy the game.
* Balanced combat skills
* Off combat skills in numbers you can't choose all but all should be useful in a group
*Certain skills that can't be used in heavy and/or medium armor
* Attacks locked to a weapon (could be single skills you pick or larger packets
* 1 special ability you can equip at a time (instead of the class special ability)
* A limited number of skills of each type you can specc at any time
* Skills/attacks that get boosted for being used with other skills from other players
That would work just fine and you can build your own custom class or build your entire team around it.
We aren't allowed different types of games with different design mechanics?
Tons of skill based games. Tons of class based games. Many different reasons to have a variety in ... everything.
You stay sassy!
Today with MMOs designed for solo play and groups as an add on, the key reason for having them has gone. Also with the easymode "you can never make a mistake" design, few MMOs have classes which do not all perform nearly equally well in any given situation.
So now classes are just a gimmick that makes you think your character is different. There is some change in gameplay, say longer range to close ranged attacks, that's about it.
Classes are a shorthand for easier communication and identification in group based play. Skill based systems are great for solo focused play, but ideally no one wants to type an essay to advertise for a range of skills required at what level when they can just say "LFM Cleric L90", or whatever, and know that they are getting a player with a stated skill set.
The truth is though that even in point/ skill based systems certain builds become favoured and folks follow a handful of optimised templates/ builds anyhow. These optimised builds are really just 'classes'.
So, classes tend to appear if the devs use them officially or not. You might as well remove the confusion and just use them. The illusion of choice helps no one.
So why ask?