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

[oldmanpaco]

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.

 

And that's the problem with DA and too many MMORPGs. I like having a fighter class, a barbarian class, a berserker class, an archer class and a sword master class and any others. I hate it when a Fighter A is just a few skill selections different from Fighter B. Variety people.

[nikolokolus]

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.

 

And that's the problem with DA and too many MMORPGs. I like having a fighter class, a barbarian class, a berserker class, an archer class and a sword master class and any others. I hate it when a Fighter A is just a few skill selections different from Fighter B. Variety people.

 

Well it's just a guess. Truth is, we have no idea what the Devs plan to do.

[HangedMan]

I would like to see a system like Arcanum's, personally. I think it's one of the best systems devised, and that the only way to really imrpove it would be to add some sort of Fallout-styled Perk system.

[slopesandsam]

I definitely prefer a classless system. The best one I've encountered is the system from Fallout 1 & 2. The Skyrim one, for instance, disappointed me, because it eventually became apparent that you didn't have to actually make any hard choices - you could become a master of everything if you were willing to do a bit of grinding.

 

I wouldn't mind if the classless system included lockouts. For example: you can choose to wield a two-handed weapon in each hand, barbarian style, and thus gain access to a "Double-Fisting" branch of the skill tree, but the "Stealth Attacks" branch is now closed to you forever. That sort of thing.

 

I can see where a classless system might become unwieldy in a party-oriented game, but it seems to me that you could give the potential companions classes of a sort by having them already partway along the road to a particular set of skills when they join you. Thus, you might meat a wizard who has already lost access to the more advanced combat oriented skill options, but still has the entire set of magic skills for you to choose from as they level up. Does this make sense?

 

Footnote: Another thing I really liked about Fallout 1 & 2 were that the base stats didn't change throughout the game. Those states really defined your character, and dictated what skills you could channel points into and be effective. It was a much more versatile system than a class-based one.

 

One of the many disappointments in Fallout 3 was that they changed this, and gave you stat points to spend as you leveled up. This made for an entirely different type of game.

[Umberlin]

Both can have their place, if done right, and hybrid models have worked before too. It's hard for me to say what I'd want to see specifically because I know they can all work quite well - it's a matter of the Developer and their dedication to making it work right. I'm curious, certainly, to see what they'll do.

 

A level based, class based with some skill/ability/feat type management intermingled . . . would not surprise me though.

[DarthAdamRG]

The more customization and individualization i could give my character the better, I am sick to death of the choose warrior > choose heavy or medium armour spec > choose 1h and shield or 2h style, I would love to pick my race, model my character and let the adventure start, and have him grow as he levels up into whatever I want him to be.

[kenup]

Attribute/Skill based might be good, and it really worked in Fallout, but they might also make the beginning really.... stupid, case of point: Skyrim. The whole blank state, where your character knows nothing about anything prior to the beginning of the game was bad.

 

Personally, I think choosing a class could work, by giving a background to your character and some starting skill bonuses/feats.

[Gurkog]

err.... Doesn't it say on the Kickstarter page that there are classes? I thought that was pretty obvious. The classes probably have a base set of utilty stuff that can be expanded upon with general skills, abilities, etc...

[Grimlorn]

Skill based would be a terrible idea. You have a party of 6 characters. A skill based system would make it so they can all do the same things if they just train them. There wouldn't be any diversity. No replay value. No strengths and weaknesses based on choosing different classes.

[Longknife]

err.... Doesn't it say on the Kickstarter page that there are classes? I thought that was pretty obvious. The classes probably have a base set of utilty stuff that can be expanded upon with general skills, abilities, etc...

 

I hope they clarify on this.

 

Personally I have to admit class based rather than skill based sounds a bit disappointing, but if the classes each have a good ~6 or so subclasses, then that's fine.