StarDestroyer.Net BBS

After going through the X-Com thread, here's something I would like to hear from everybody.

Exactly what sort of RPG system do you like?

Pure class based? Pure skill based? A mix of the two, with one predominant?

Others(pls state)?

Also, you can try to dicuss which system might be more appropriate for which settings. Current trends are that fantasy genres are mostly class dominated, while futuristic ones tend to be skill based.

The Nice Guy

What do you vote if you want character classes and skills to be equally important?

Sorry, I'm being evil here. You gotta choose one or the other. No fence sitting!

The Evil Wobbly Guy

To be honest, I can't really decide. Character class-based would maybe make it easier to play for me, but basing it primarly on skills (a la GURPS) would be more realistic.

Skill based.

Fallout's SPECIAL system 0wnZ j00.

Skills.

Class alone leaves a lot to be desired...besides I'm on a Fallout 2 kick...come back here KIDDIES!!!(this'll teach them laughing at my giant tin can suit of death)

Skill based.

Strict class oriented systems tend to be a bit restrictive and can make creating the type of character you wan't quite difficult. So I'd go with skill based.

Skill based. Abolish levels. Make it a crime against the roleplay community. Instate capital punishment.

Pendragon wrote:Skill based. Abolish levels. Make it a crime against the roleplay community. Instate capital punishment.

I kinda agree with that. But I would also like to retain 'levels' as a sort of gauge of a character's progression in his chosen field, if he wants to, providing certain synergistic bonuses when several skills can back each other up. Of course, XP is still used only to improve skills, and not gain levels.

The Nice Guy

I would say that class should have a part in it. There are some skills that one just can't pick up in a short amount of time. Those need extensive background training before anything useful is learned.

Ghost Rider wrote:Skills.

Class alone leaves a lot to be desired...besides I'm on a Fallout 2 kick...come back here KIDDIES!!!(this'll teach them laughing at my giant tin can suit of death)

"You drink pee pee! You drink pee pee!"

class with skill emphasis. Im too lazy to make a template on my own.

This thread belongs in the gaming forum.

Activates commie powers

Moved.

Skill based all the way!

Classes = a small group of specific skills in a set progression....you cant create a "real" character with them.

Keevan_Colton wrote:Skill based all the way!

Classes = a small group of specific skills in a set progression....you cant create a "real" character with them.

Let me guess, you're a White Wolf angst puppy, aren't you?

Skills! Classes are illogical and nonsensical abstractions and should be done away with. Create character archetypes for players to base their characters on, noting which skills would be useful, and then leave it at that. If you want a skill to be difficult to get, make some skills have pre-requisites and/or complexity values.

Also, abolish arbitrary random damage nonsense! If I roll perfectly on my attack roll, I should do more damage than if I just barely succeeded!

Silhouette forever!

Iceberg wrote:

Keevan_Colton wrote:Skill based all the way!

Classes = a small group of specific skills in a set progression....you cant create a "real" character with them.

Let me guess, you're a White Wolf angst puppy, aren't you?

*badum-tisch*

White Wolf don't do roleplaying games, they do storytelling. *crowd goes "ooooh" in fake awe*

Damn pretentious little angst-loving poser wannabe something-greater-than-their-miserable-nerdy-selves-preferrably-clad-in-black-leather-coats.

Hey... did i mention that Vampire the Masquerade is not my favourite game?

Iceberg wrote: Let me guess, you're a White Wolf angst puppy, aren't you?

I do prefer the White Wolf system to the likes of the WotC D20 class BS....
Though, cram the angst puppy crap, I'm as much a fan of a number of other systems, even CRPG ones such as Fallout's SPECIAL system.

They are roleplay games, Storytelling/Storyteller are a name used for the system used in thier products...much the same way as pretty much everything from WotC is uses the "D20" system.....the WoD games generally offer much more potential for a character than the likes of the WotC stuff.....GURP's isnt bad either, the Fallout SPECIAL system was a good version of such things for the computer.....

Classes limit a character in ways that shouldnt really exist....the 3rd Ed D&D isnt as bad for this kind of thing as previous versions, using wait for it....skills and traits.....gee.....

Keevan_Colton wrote:

Iceberg wrote: Let me guess, you're a White Wolf angst puppy, aren't you?

I do prefer the White Wolf system to the likes of the WotC D20 class BS....
Though, cram the angst puppy crap, I'm as much a fan of a number of other systems, even CRPG ones such as Fallout's SPECIAL system.

Of course, the White Wolf system has its own class structure, which is actually far more restrictive in terms of character conceptualization and development than the job-based class system of D&D3E/Star Wars d20, and light-years more restrictive than the attribute-based class system of d20 Modern (wherin "classes" are more like loose descriptors of a character - like Strong Hero, Fast Hero, Smart Hero).

Meanwhile, White Wolf games have class descriptors like "Brujah are rebels," "Malkavians are insane," "Ventrue are politicians," "Tremere are duplicitous," "Cultists of Ecstasy are pleasure freaks" (you get the idea).

Of course, the Cult of Ecstasy got a bit more depth in Mage Revised. Now they can be pleasure freaks or pain freaks.

All that a D&D class really tells you is a character's job. A "4th level fighter" tells you that the character is an experienced adventurer who is an expert with weapons. But which weapons? What does that say about his (or her) personality? Why did he (or she) become a fighter, as opposed to a rogue or a wizard? These are questions that you can't answer from just knowing the character's class. But in White Wolf, you DO know a great deal about a character's personality by asking which splat he/she belongs to.

Telling you that I'm a computer engineer tells you absolutely nothing about my personality. All it tells you is what I do for a living. That's what a class should be - it's what you do, not who you are.

Iceberg wrote:Telling you that I'm a computer engineer tells you absolutely nothing about my personality. All it tells you is what I do for a living. That's what a class should be - it's what you do, not who you are.

Even more evidence for why Silhouette is king.

Hail to the king, baby.

Hotfoot wrote:

Iceberg wrote:Telling you that I'm a computer engineer tells you absolutely nothing about my personality. All it tells you is what I do for a living. That's what a class should be - it's what you do, not who you are.

Even more evidence for why Silhouette is king.

Hail to the king, baby.

Mekton Z, BESM and Silhouette are three different ways of getting the same basic result - a very nearly class-free method of character generation. I'm quite attached to Mekton Z myself (I've had it for the last 9 years).

There's no such thing as a truly class-free roleplaying game - every RPG has a set of archetypes (usually with game-mechanics benefits for choosing an archetype) which can be loosely thought of as classes, in order to facilitate play by getting characters into in-party roles. Job-based classing is very good, because it tells you what people do. Personality-based classing is very bad, because it provides a ready-made crutch to make role-playing easier.

Iceberg wrote:Of course, the White Wolf system has its own class structure, which is actually far more restrictive in terms of character conceptualization and development than the job-based class system of D&D3E/Star Wars d20, and light-years more restrictive than the attribute-based class system of d20 Modern (wherin "classes" are more like loose descriptors of a character - like Strong Hero, Fast Hero, Smart Hero).

Meanwhile, White Wolf games have class descriptors like "Brujah are rebels," "Malkavians are insane," "Ventrue are politicians," "Tremere are duplicitous," "Cultists of Ecstasy are pleasure freaks" (you get the idea).

Of course, the Cult of Ecstasy got a bit more depth in Mage Revised. Now they can be pleasure freaks or pain freaks.

Though these are general archetypes, they are not rules....want me to start quoting some of the books? You've a lot more freedom than in the WotC systems to create the particular character you want, you could be completely different from the sterotypical member of a particular clan, or if you wish have no clan at all.....the clan sterotypes are just suggestions aimed as much at the person running the game for figuring out the world as for the players to use.

All that a D&D class really tells you is a character's job. A "4th level fighter" tells you that the character is an experienced adventurer who is an expert with weapons. But which weapons? What does that say about his (or her) personality? Why did he (or she) become a fighter, as opposed to a rogue or a wizard? These are questions that you can't answer from just knowing the character's class. But in White Wolf, you DO know a great deal about a character's personality by asking which splat he/she belongs to.

Telling you that I'm a computer engineer tells you absolutely nothing about my personality. All it tells you is what I do for a living. That's what a class should be - it's what you do, not who you are.

*mutters a bit* Its only since 3rd Ed, where they've moved to a hybrid skills/class system that this has begun to be addressed. Your comparision of clans to classes is flawed...a better comparison would be to races......lets see....
Elves are nimble
Dwarves are tough
Halflings are happy
Favoured classes anyone?

It's far closer to what you're saying for clans than the class analogy.

As for the job thing....that's just it.....a person isnt thier job....your character should be a reflection of thier intrests, personality etc....otherwise it isnt roleplaying its a war game of some sort.......

Skill based systems such as WW's Storyteller, or Black Isle's SPECIAL or GURPS etc all offer far more versatility for a character.

Iceberg wrote: Mekton Z, BESM and Silhouette are three different ways of getting the same basic result - a very nearly class-free method of character generation. I'm quite attached to Mekton Z myself (I've had it for the last 9 years).

Mekton Zeta was the alpha version of Jovian Chronicles, as I understand it. Core Silhouette is coming out in a few weeks, so I'll give you a play-by-play as to how they've updated the rules. From the scuttlebutt on the DP9 mailing lists, it's looking damn good.

There's no such thing as a truly class-free roleplaying game - every RPG has a set of archetypes (usually with game-mechanics benefits for choosing an archetype) which can be loosely thought of as classes, in order to facilitate play by getting characters into in-party roles. Job-based classing is very good, because it tells you what people do. Personality-based classing is very bad, because it provides a ready-made crutch to make role-playing easier.

There's the difference between Sil and D20. Sil uses archetypes to show what skills a character working in a specific profession should or commonly has. D20 tells you what skills they will have, then imposes penalties on you for attempting to add anything else. You have to jump through some ungodly hoops to get a bard who can read lips, FFS. Then there's the rampant stereotyping, but that's another rant.

I'll be glad when all of my D&D characters are converted to Core Silhouette.

Hotfoot wrote:

Iceberg wrote:Telling you that I'm a computer engineer tells you absolutely nothing about my personality. All it tells you is what I do for a living. That's what a class should be - it's what you do, not who you are.

Even more evidence for why Silhouette is king.

Hail to the king, baby.

Just you wait until Eon gets translated to english... *mutters and whinges*