Class or Skill based system? Hybrids? (Which do you prefer and why?)

[Stiler]

Hello, thoughout the years there have been many rpgs, some that have leaned to skill based systems and some that follow a more traditional class based focus (IE most D&D based crpgs).

 

 

Personally, I prefer skill based over class based. Mainly for it's openess and ability to really "create" your own character style. The best skill based systems let you basicalyl make your own class an dplay exactly how you want. Do you want to be a greatsword weilding/plate armored melee fighter who has magic abilities? Go ahead, You want to play a magic user who can stealth and do a little backstabbing? Be my guest.

 

With class based systems many times you get "pigeon" holed into a specific focused area, mages are range dps or healers, warriors use armor/weapons and no magic. Some of them offer a few "hybrid" classes but many don't.

 

I always want to play a kind of magic based warrior in rpgs, not a "paladin" (Ie focus on healing/group buffs, etc) but a dps focus warrior who uses awesome magic abilities, rather to enhance my combat or damaging spells that "fit" with that type of person. However in almost any class based game you are never given such a type of character. You either choose a mage and wear only light "cloth" and use a staff from range or choose a warrior and wear heavy armor/use weapons with 0 magic.

 

I hope whichever route Eternity goes they offer players a more open/hybrid style of choice and let us make our own style of character and the abilitie sthey have.

 

The recent Kingdoms of Amalur was good at this, allowing you to basically mix/match anything you wanted, magic and melee, range and magic, anything, and it also rewarded you for doing just about any combination, from jack of all trades to spellswords and other routes.

[Ieo]

I definitely favor categorized but open-choice skills (enjoyed Divinity2DKS for that reason), but I've always favored hybrid play like dual/multiclassing. Party NPCs of course could be completely specialized or even partially hybridized. Far more customization options.

 

In relation, it'd be nice to be able to 'undo' skill/trait options as well in case you make a mistake or something. Hmm.

[The Sharmat]

Count me in for wanting a skill/talent based system rather than a class based one. Though I realize it's much harder to balance.

[Hoverdog]

Skill-based system is better for single-character game, such as Fallout, Arcanum or even Divinity. Eternity is party-based, plus it's a successor to the DnD infinity engine games, so I vote for class system.

[Tale]

Here's a similar topic, for those who'd like to read it.

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/59957-what-type-of-game-system/

 

I still favor class systems for the gimmick potential and for the ability to have different stats mean different things. However, I understand that's a bunch of extra work creating the new classes and may not be the best use of resources.

[Humanoid]

As an absolute A or B answer, I'd take the skill based system. Looking beyond the label though, the systems are not as diametrically opposed as they might seem. D&D3-esque multiclassing is, when if comes down to it, essentially a less granular version of the skill based system, where instead of allocating single points, you get what is essentially a preset bundle of "points" - less flexible but perhaps adding more flavour in terms of making distinct characters. Both cater for what I want out of a system though, flexibility to not be permanently stuck to the one predefined development path because of the option you chose way back at the start of the game, and the ability to adapt your party members to roles so that you're not essentially forced to pick based on class over personality.

[Seagloom]

I agree with Hoverdog. While I prefer classless systems on the whole for their fludity, party dynamics tend to be more interesting with rigid limitations on what everyone can do. I also like the idea of NPCs having a unique ability a la KotOR2 instead of choosing from an identical pool. Classless systems in a party based game run the risk of homogenizing the whole group unless mechanics are superbly balanced. It becomes very tempting to pick the best of everything instead of trying to work with what your classes have available. I can live with either approach, though.

Edited September 15, 2012 by Seagloom

[PsychoBlonde]

Personally, I prefer skill based over class based. Mainly for it's openess and ability to really "create" your own character style. The best skill based systems let you basicalyl make your own class an dplay exactly how you want. Do you want to be a greatsword weilding/plate armored melee fighter who has magic abilities? Go ahead, You want to play a magic user who can stealth and do a little backstabbing? Be my guest.

 

I would definitely prefer something like Arcanum or Fallout to yet another Fighter/Mage/Rogue Tank/Healer/DPS split.

[PsychoBlonde]

I agree with Hoverdog. While I prefer classless systems on the whole for their fludity, party dynamics tend to be more interesting with rigid limitations on what everyone can do. I also like the idea of NPCs having a unique ability a la KotOR2 instead of choosing from an identical pool. Classless systems in a party based game run the risk of homogenizing the whole group unless mechanics are superbly balanced. It becomes very tempting to pick the best of everything instead of trying to work with what your classes have available. I can live with either approach, though.

 

Or, they could just do what they did in Arcanum, and you have no control over what abilities your companions take as they level. They're their own person, and if they want to be a dedicated healer, that's dang well what they're going to be. Your personal main character can be whatever you want but the NPC companions will have definite strengths and weaknesses.

 

I also think it would be cool for NPC companions to have unique background traits/abilities.

[Seagloom]

I thought about that. The Fallout games do it too. The reason I'm not too thrilled about it is NPCs in classless games tend to be superfluous even under those circumstances. What usually happens is they bring little of definite worth to the table and end up glorified pack mules. However few points the player has to upgrade their character, classless systems to make it extremely easy to play a self-sufficient protagonist unless you go out of your way to specialize into an unorthodox niche. The only exceptions I have seen to this is Virgil in Arcanum for any build that doesn't pick up healing skills, and ED-E in New Vegas for his portable workbench and reloading bench ability. (I'm not counting Veronica since she was bugged to hell and back. )

 

Now, on the whole I prefer a classless system. I enjoy the freedom in brings to role-playing and dig the extra content taking certain skills over others might unlock. I've just never seen it done to my satisfaction in a party based game.

 

Edit: I should also mention none of those games allowed direct control of followers. I don't know if that was an intentional design choice or an actual inherent limitation of the style, but I prefer full control of my party in combat.

Edited September 15, 2012 by Seagloom

[Darji]

Personally I loved the class system in NWN2 with all these starting classes which then depending on your actions could evolve into advanced classes which some of them were harder to obtain than other.

[Sammael]

Both systems have their advantages and disadvantages, and which one should be used depends a lot on the exact nature of the game. I lean more towards skill-based systems, but a well-executed class system (that supports robust multiclassing) can be just as fun.

[Metabot]

I think a skill based system can be used in a party based game, but the player would have to make classes that worked well enough together in order to complete quests, etc. So, for example, you'd need one character that is highly proficient in one skill and another character that is highly proficient in another skill that the first character cannot be proficient in due to their attributes.

[Piekokas]

I would prefer skill-based over class-based any time.

More freedom for my character building and more re-playability for the game.

[Labadal]

I would prefer skill-based over class-based any time.

More freedom for my character building and more re-playability for the game.

 

If there are enough classes, and if you're allowed to multiclass, then replayability won't be such a big problem.

[Volourn]

Doesn't bother me either way.

[catmorbid]

While I generally prefer skill-based systems, classes can have their uses. For instance, when balancing character roles. The bad thing is, that if the classes are too rigid, character creation and character progression becomes a chore with very little choice involved.

 

If a class-based solution would be used, I'd rather go for a hybrid solution where the class only offers a certain special ability or other relatively significant bonuses, but character development is still mostly skill based. The worst thing you can do, in my opinion, is go for a very little number of very rigid classes.

[Delterius]

I kinda expect a character system similar to those games they cite a inspiration. But I also personally prefer a class based system.

[Longknife]

Skill-based....I think. Not sure I'm understanding where the difference lies.

 

More importantly, I prefer a system like New Vegas. Traits combined with perks combined with attributes for various outcomes. Why? Because this system is unpredictable. I like how I can use a certain gun with one character, then use that same gun with another character and have them feel completely different, simply because their perks, traits and attributes make the weapon perform differently. This resulted in me making dozens and dozens and dozens of characters to see just how strong I could make certain weapons and what character build did best with what, etc etc.

 

I think a class-based system can become a little predictable, at least by comparison. If you have 24 classes, for example, then ok that's probably 24 playthroughs perhaps, but it definitely stops there. Once you've explored those 24, you've basically seen it all.

With skill-based, I may make some bad characters here and there, but at least it keeps me guessing and experimenting, and when I DO find a strong character build, well, that's just the most accomplished feeling ever.

 

 

Having said that though, I think something that's more important than skill-based and class-based is that your character has multiple layers. Offer attributes that are set in stone and affect everything you do. Offer perks or abilities that your character unlocks with experience, but can't pick literally every single one. Offer traits or abilities/weaknesses your character has that have a massive effect on everything. Fallout got this absolutely right and this example should be followed, to some extent. Make a new system, sure, but aim for something functionally similar to what Fallout has.

Edited September 16, 2012 by Longknife

[oldmanpaco]

Unless they have been blowing smoke up our a$#es it should be a class based system. That's what all the IE games they were talking about had. Of course since they have revealed incredibly little about the game mechanics it's hard to say. For a party based game I hope they have something like D&D 3.5.

[Metabot]

"With class based systems many times you get "pigeon" holed into a specific focused area, mages are range dps or healers, warriors use armor/weapons and no magic. Some of them offer a few "hybrid" classes but many don't."

 

That's really the point of them though....

[WDeranged]

Skill based for me but I can appreciate that classes may be an inescapable part of the nostalgia, I honestly don't mind that much.

[Tauron]

Hmmm. This can be tough one, skill system is cool,and you have lot of freedom but people end up being jack of all trades. Having multiclasses and good class progression, prestigeclasses etc is also interesting and very rewarding especially if you are working toward specific class. There are lot of good arguments here for both...i just realize my english is very limited. Hmm, but mission here is to revive feeling of BG series, ice wind dale etc. So I will have to trust devs on this one, unless they make their own sistem, something betwean class and skill system, depends on what skills you hone you get your class???

[nikolokolus]

I could go either way with skill-trees or class systems, but a lot of it boils down to the way the world is portrayed. If the game world is more egalitarian and there's a lot of bleed over across roles in society, then having fuzzier distinctions that skill based systems provide (like Fallout and Arcanum for instance) could work but if we're talking about rigid caste systems where fighters fight, thieves thieve, Sorcerers ensorcel, then it seems like a class based system is the way to go.

 

My guess is that they'll probably go with a class system of some sort with class specific skill trees nested within those classes for differentiation.

[Wombat]

As for system/setting integrity, if the setting of this game allows character to acquire supernatural abilities/exceptional abilities as human being, does it have explanations for it? Are such abilities given by deities, spirits, accessing different planes directly/indirectly and/or dealing mystical creatures such as killing dragons (Black Dragon in IWD2 has "Siegfried effect", for example)? For example, leveling-up is too granted a notion that it tends to be a mechanical process but is there more convincing/dramatic/thematic way of achieving new abilities tied to the setting?