What defines a class?

[Hormalakh]

^Why don't players feel the same way about some of the other classes? Has obsidian already shown how they handle barbarians , monks, etc in other games? I believe this is their first tiem doing this without having to resort to D&D classes (NWN2). They could do whatever they want with any of the classes. Making them all very interesting to play would be to the benefit of everyone.

[Somna]

^Why don't players feel the same way about some of the other classes? Has obsidian already shown how they handle barbarians , monks, etc in other games? I believe this is their first tiem doing this without having to resort to D&D classes (NWN2). They could do whatever they want with any of the classes. Making them all very interesting to play would be to the benefit of everyone.

 

Despite the fact that this is the first time they're doing it outside of D&D classes, they haven't stated anything functionally different yet other than that Barbarians will probably have some kind of damage reduction for Stamina. Cipher, on the other hand, is brand new to their IE game package even when you consider what it's likely to resemble, hence the interest.

[wanderon]

I'm not getting how anyone can call any of these classes boring old rehashes without having a clue from the devs as to how they are being implemented.

 

Just becuase of their titles?

 

Would you rather the classes were merchants, fishermen, farmers, blacksmiths, witches, assemblymen, militia, squires, knights, dukes, commoners, nobles, ruffians, thugs,?

 

Seems to me we should see what they actually have in store for us before pronouncing them boring rehashes.

 

That said - this game is supposed to be an old style isometric CRPG - it was never supposed to break new ground with an entirely new cast of characters never before seen. Looks to me like a great mix of new and old and from whats already been said by the devs I'm thinking we are not likely to see boring or rehash when all is said and done.

 

Of course this is the internet so negativity rules I suppose...

[Lephys]

^ It'll have what we love about the classics, but you don't have to invent a new genre of music to make a good song.

[Hormalakh]

It's about evocation. Barbarians and monks evoke a certain idea and thought in many people's minds. Even the paladin does. Look at the threads, people are calling the paladins "warlords really." Once we knew that paladins were not the old D&D cliche, we accepted it. We understood them to be different and some people jut found it easier to think of them as warlords. The fear -illogical, I admit - that I and many others like me have is that these classes have been named thus because they will reuse those ideas from past games. A lot of us hated those ideas of monks and barbarians as tired old cliches. Then we see class names like "chanters" instead of bards and refreshing new ideas on "paladins" and wonder why haven't the monks and barbarians had either new names or explanations? Why call them monks and make a companion fit the old stereotype? At this point, people start to freak out. Yeah, it's illogical, but we don't have much else to go on.

 

We worry that these names of classes are not only meant to evoke the idea of older D&D classes, but are actually the same as those old thoughtless classes. The only thing we have is a class name and a companion that evokes that old cliche. Why should we think that they will do anything different with monks or barbarians?

 

At which point I started thinking to myself, why do we use the word class? What does this word actually mean? Why am I tired of seeing monks/barbarians described as classes but not fighters. Fighters also have tropes, but I'm more likely to accept them than monks or barbarians. Hence why I started this thread. I didn't know why. I've got some answers from some of the posters (mokona to name one) and even some insight to why I hated these "trope classes."

Edited November 27, 2012 by Hormalakh

[Lephys]

^ Your fears are understandable, and I'm not trying to be a **** here, but the reason for your fears doesn't change the fact that poll choices based on completely assorted psychological impressions of class names don't really tell us a whole lot right now.

 

Also, you've got a point about the term "class." But, since a game is an artificial construct, intended to simulate aspects of reality, we've developed many new terms and usages for existing terms, without which it would be quite difficult to refer to games' blueprints, so-to-speak, from an external, critical standpoint.

 

Inside the immersion barrier of the fantasy world, you probably wouldn't see anyone using the term "class" like we do when referring to the way character types are programmed. But, in an RPG, whatever your character's make up and ability/stat set, if at any point we ask ourselves to compare that character to another character, or to other possibilities for character development, we're going to run into the classification. It's an identification phenomena. If it didn't serve to organize the possibilities of character mechanics, it wouldn't serve much other use.

 

As others have touched on, within the reality of the virtual game world, characters would not be identified by other characters by their class mechanics, but instead by more title-like labels. If you can work magic when most people cannot, then that would be an identifiyng factor. You'd be a wizard. If you make shoes, you're a cobbler. If you steal things from people, you're a Thief. Whereas, if you were just super stealthy all the time, you wouldn't necessarily be called anything. How do people KNOW just how stealthy you are? They only know what you do that identifies you to them. If you were stealthy and make precision kills on specific targets, you'd probably be called an assassin, if anyone knew you did so.

 

So, yes, I get why you're kind of irked by "class" always being so attributed to everything. It's a lot like damage. No one would ask you, if you got stabbed in real life, how much "damage" you took. They'd ask how badly you're hurt. But, with game mechanics, we're forced to represent wounds mathematically, relative to a completely unwounded state. Therefore, we have damage. And you may not care to use damage as a basis for class differences, but that doesn't change the fact that different characters are going to have varying damage outputs.

 

"Class" and "damage" are examples of notions that get misused a lot, but they exist for a good reason.

[Osvir]

I lost track of this thread. Going to read up on it, meanwhile just want to post this link to the Classes and Party Builds thread that I unloaded loads of thoughts on classes. I think that what I wrote there might've been more fitting here. Some quick notations:

 

Summary of what I wrote in the other thread.

Fighter: Often the Hero archetype. I would like to see it as "Champion" or "Soldier". I'd like to have a more definate title for this Class, something that you can tie to the world, like the Wizard or the Paladin are part of the world, could the Fighter be a Gladiator-type of character/background? "Fighter" being... broad and not really something would call someone else as a "Profession". Imagine someone saying, "That guy is a great fighter". Are they talking about my Fighter, my Barbarian, my Rogue, Cipher, Ranger, Paladin, Priest, Druid, Chanter, Monk or Wizard (seeing as all of them can be close-combat fighters)??

Rogue: Associated with the Adventurer archetype (the risky, good guy bad boy or just a bad boy, a devious charmer or a naive charmer)

Wizard: Scholar-type, Deckard Cain, the Librarian

Barbarian: VIking, Pirate, Bandit, a vulgar person, a hearty and lovely person with a strong open soul. Laughs out loud and chews with an open mouth. But can also be a silent, Frankenstein type, character.

Paladin: Dark Knight, White Knight, Royal Knight, Crusader Knight etc. etc. a Knight in Shining or Corroding Armor.

Chanter: A Churchly choir boy/girl. Not necessarily a Bard. Messenger of God (be it inner or outer).

Priest: Agent of God, Sword of God, Intention of God, Action of God. Jeane D'Arc.

Monk: Servitude to God, Prayer to God, inner or outer.

Ranger: A Cowboy, farmboy. Look it up on Wikipedia or read more in the thread I linked first.

Cipher: Psionic, Infiltrator, Assassin, Spy, Ninja.

Druid: Tree-Hugger, hates Authority, dislikes the "Matrix" or whatnot. Hermit, isolated, solo. Doesn't work too well in a group, arrogant, prefer to Lead rather than be Led (which is ironic as they dislike authority).

[Hormalakh]

@Osvir

 

some of what you wrote i like. it describes professions. those are good. the personalities, i don't like so much. they limit the character design too much.

[Osvir]

^For some classes a certain attitude and personality is required. A Paladin who isn't a fanatic in the "Holy Order" can still be a Paladin in the "Holy Order" that's not what I am saying, but the guy/gal would still be devoted to the God or else they can't be in the Order.

 

Metaphor:

I'm an NPC on the forums, and Adam and Josh are VIP's, quest givers or even PC's. Being Developers, from my perspective where I'm sitting, is part of their personality, even though I value their skills and persons differently they both share that same trait, it is part of who they are to me and why they are developers. You are the only one limiting the character design really. If it says that Paladins in the Holy Order are fanatical, does your Paladin have to be fanatical just because of that? What if NPC's were afraid of Paladins, and at first glance seeing your character they are afraid but as dialogues develop they find trust in your character.

 

Likewise, if it says that the Barbarian is dumb and not very intelligent, does your Barbarian have to dumb? Will Forton be monastic and peaceful just because the churchly NPC Monks at their temples/churches are peaceful? Does Edair have to be a bully and an **** just because he is a Fighter? Does Cadegund have to burn down heretics just because there are groups of Priests in P:E that could do it?

 

How does the NPC's look at and generalize the Classes of P:E? I am not discussing Character Creation, but the worldly aspects of classes. What kind of Prejudice will Classes have in P:E in the eyes of others?

[JOG]

If there are prejudices towards classes, then the main question is: how do you know what class someone is?

 

The 7ft guy clad in raw hide armor, carrying a huge axe, and smelling like he never saw a bathtub in his whole life is obviously a barbarian, it might be more complicated to identify a dwarven barbarian, as his only distinctive feature would be the hide armor. That pompous fool in in shiny plate armor is obviously a paladin, and maybe there even is a law that all wizards have to wear a pointy hat, but what about the other classes? If there is a law that thieves have to wear black leather, nobody will ever wear black leather. A clever thief would wear a pointy hat, a trickster would wear the pointy hat, hide armor and behave all pompous.

Edited November 28, 2012 by JOG

[JFSOCC]

If there are prejudices towards classes, then the main question is: how do you know what class someone is?

 

The 7ft guy clad in raw hide armor, carrying a huge axe, and smelling like he never saw a bathtub in his whole life is obviously a barbarian, it might be more complicated to identify a dwarven barbarian, as his only distinctive feature would be the hide armor. That pompous fool in in shiny plate armor is obviously a paladin, and maybe there even is a law that all wizards have to wear a pointy hat, but what about the other classes? If there is a law that thieves have to wear black leather, nobody will ever wear black leather. A clever thief would wear a pointy hat, a trickster would wear the pointy hat, hide armor and behave all pompous.

I want pointy hats. I just want to make that clear. pointy hats that say "Wizzard"

[Osvir]

If there are prejudices towards classes, then the main question is: how do you know what class someone is?

 

Good question. It all depends on where in the nick of the wood you're at. One place might hold prejudice towards Dwarf's, but none against Barbarians so by just strolling into a room as a dwarf gets you a pounding (regardless if you follow any barbaric way). Another one might be favoring humans and hate Barbarians, which is where you pretend not to be a Barbarian and can later prove the people wrong with a shocking (intelligent & sophisticated) revelation.

 

I don't think it is necessary for anyone to automatically know what class/profession you are, but as they find out or you share some traits with someone perhaps they react to it. A Paladin would be an easy one to spot, if he wears his Order's banner/colors. Likewise as I stated earlier is that a Paladin doesn't necessarily have to be a part of a Holy Order (not talking about the player character by the way, but Paladin's you encounter in the world) but could be a White Knight in Shining Armor. I see Sarevok as a Paladin, just as I can see him as a Fighter/Mage-esque type, a Fallen one (i.e. Dark/Death Knight).

 

In Fallout: New Vegas you could wear the colors of a faction as well, which marked you as "One of those" getting different reactions from different people.

 

I also think that the "anvil" heavy Grimoire would be distinct feature to notice the Wizard by as well, pretty much a given that the wielder is dealing with the "Dark Arts" for anyone who views Magic as such. Another NPC might get excited as they see a fellow scientist.

[Hormalakh]

See. These are the reasons I brought up the question in the first place. Does class mean "personality" or does it mean "occupation"? To me, it means an occupation and life-style. While certain personalities are more likely to be drawn to a classes, there can be other personalities that choose those classes.

 

Let's take barbarian for example. You could have a lot of dumb (i.e. unintelligent) characters who become barbarians, but there will undoubtedly be the few smart barbarians or charismatic ones who aren't vulgar.

 

A better example would be the druid. What exactly stops a druid from following authority? What if my druid is of the belief that nature is the highest authority and that, as there is a hierarchy in the animal kingdom (alphas, food chain, etc) there should be a hierarchy in intelligent life and leadership. There is no reason for druids to be proud or arrogant. They could just as well be polite people who have learned much from the way of nature and how everyone is interconnected (swamp-guy from Avatar who controls the vines, for you to understand what I'm talking about).

 

Also, another issue I have is with your definition of paladins and others relating to gods. paladins are considered more like "warlords" in this game than fighter-priests. Priests are the more "godly" of the classes. Other classes don't really have any relationships to god per se. They could, but they don't necessarily have to. Buddhist monks (to name a trope) don't really focus on God or gods.

[Umberlin]

Looking at my past posts in this thread, I do think it's the occupation, of sorts, or at least definitive of the skillset and background/achievements of the character in question. That's especially true in a game like Gothic II, and I think games like that have definitely influenced my opinion on such things. It can reflect their personality too, obviously, but does it have to be definitive of their personality, as in, 'all Wizards think like this' . . . my answer is, 'No', but that's me.

[Lephys]

I think it's safe to say that "class" applies to those traits of a character that were voluntarily developed/chosen. Example: shyness... not associated with a class. Skill with a sword? Possibly associated with a class. You could be born with shyness, but you cannot be born with knowledge of swordplay. This would include societal titles and creeds, though.

 

Of course, certain inherent traits might cause certain class choices to not make much sense. You couldn't have magic-o-phobia and be a wizard, just as I can't ever own a spider ranch. 8P

 

And finally, while attire isn't necessarily associated with class choice, I would like to join the Advocates for the Existence of Pointy Hats to be Implemented Definitively group, or A.E.P.H.I.D. u_u

[Osvir]

You couldn't have magic-o-phobia and be a wizard

 

I'd like to see that is the Grimoire the only tool to cast Magic? What if there is a savant, or a "gifted" one. Wild Magic, someone who is born with innate ability but can't control it and is afraid of it xD

 

A better example would be the druid. What exactly stops a druid from following authority? What if my druid is of the belief that nature is the highest authority and that, as there is a hierarchy in the animal kingdom (alphas, food chain, etc) there should be a hierarchy in intelligent life and leadership. There is no reason for druids to be proud or arrogant. They could just as well be polite people who have learned much from the way of nature and how everyone is interconnected (swamp-guy from Avatar who controls the vines, for you to understand what I'm talking about).

 

True, yes I understand what you're getting at. And I like the wording of "nature is the highest authority" for a Druid.