So i just relaized something tonight

[ngilop]

I love classes in my fantasy.. not so much for my sci-fi

I guess for me having an archetypical role is something that is just inghrained within me from all the fantasy ive read in my lifetime, and so I don't have igh opinions of classless fantasy RPGs and own none.

while it is quite the opposite of that for any SCi-FI i am interested in, i live the idea that any one character can do anything albeit with the caveat that the ones in say a scietific background are better at that than a more military background would be (usually in the form of higher skills costs or lower skill cap) and vice-versa.

does anybody else feel this way? Or am I just an odd man out.

[Surfnerd]

I have a similar hang up on sci fi versus fantasy but not in the class vs. classless. I love fantasy and sci fi both tons, but for me Sci fi is so visual for me, I just can't get into it on the tabletop; love sci-fi video games and movies more than fantasy. Can't play them in my head at all.

Weirdest thing to me. I love RPing fantasy, I can visualize it all and really get into it, especially when I'm writing recaps or notes. Its similar but not the same and I can't rationalize it.

[KillianHawkeye]

I guess I can kinda see your point. There are some sci-fi shows and movies where the characters aren't necessarily put into separate classes, but there are also plenty that are. It's definitely less prevalent than in the fantasy genre, though.

[ArcturusV]

It depends on the nature of the Sci-Fi. I mean with something like Robotech, I wasn't all that opposed to the Class system. Most skills could be taken by most characters anyway, with either a bonus or a penalty. I think any individual class could access something around 80% of the skills. But when you start talking about highly specialized skills, they really shouldn't be open to everyone. You don't have a kid just mess around in a garage and learn how to build transformable mecha with VTOL capabilities and Nuclear/Protoculture reactors. Nor do you take "Driver's Ed" in giant combat mecha in high school or something.

But if it's a setting like... Star Wars. Outside of "Force Use" there isn't really anything set up in game as so complex that it can't be part of a general education or easily learned in setting. Similarly with the Federation in Star Trek, where it's culture seems very based on, "Are you interested in... then we will help you learn it because it's a mostly post scarcity utopia around here."

[Rhynn]

Nope. It's all about the system. Stars Without Number works great with classes. Fading Suns and Traveller work great without, so does GURPS (whether for fantasy or sci-fi). D&D works great with classes, RuneQuest works great without...

A class-based system where your class sets hard limits for what you can do - rather than just makes you better at something - isn't much good, though. (But I even interpret AD&D as the former rather than the latter, so...)

[Tovec]

Actually, I'm right there with you. I dislike classed-based systems for my Scifi. I'm not sure why that is exactly. I think it probably has to do with a sense of scifi being more of a story and DnD being more of a game. I would love a system with a lot of customization of a single (or very similar) base class; GURPS or what have you might work well for me.

[MukkTB]

There is still room for classes in a Sci-Fi game, but I don't think they need to be too specific. The scientist should be a bit different from the pilot who should be different from the space marine. That means variability in combat capability and variability in how many skills/feats they get. I'd guess you could do that without classes. I'm not familiar with GURPS but I would think that if you had a classless system where you bought abilities with a limited number of resources you'd have to choose between spending them on things like punching really good or knowing advanced math.

Future settings may not call for such in depth classes because there is a lot more variability between science fiction stories than there is between fantasy stories. A science fiction character could be in a giant mecha or shooting bugs with his rifle or piloting between the stars or being a diplomat to rubber forehead aliens. There is such a thing as the Generic Fantasy Setting. You know what I mean. Its pseudo medieval European with Knights running around, kings, princesses, wizards and dragons. There isn't a generic science fiction setting. Exactly what elements do you think belong in such a setting? Are mecha in or out? How about killer robots? Do psychic powers belong or are they not hard science enough? Can we break the light barrier with handwavium or do we stick with a more realistic approach? Are there mutants? Should I watch for space marines? Do we get space fighters? Is the galaxy filled with aliens or are humans alone? Where should we fall on Mohs Scale of Science Fiction Hardness? I'm sure we wouldn't have near the level of consensus as we would about what belongs in the generic fantasy setting. So a game that catered to this would have to be open ended if it wanted to cover science fiction in general. If the game came with a limited number of specific classes then it wouldn't be representative of all science fiction, only a smaller chunk.

[MukkTB]

I just went over to TVTropes and found these:
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.ph...FantasySetting
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.ph...rdSciFiSetting

The Fantasy entry is a bit larger than the SciFi entry.

[mjlush]

I love classes in my fantasy.. not so much for my sci-fi

I agree, I think its because skills matter more in SciFi.

In fantasy you don't need first aid or medical skills you have magical healing, Why bother boosting you lock pick to a reasonable level when there are magical locks you can't pick and the mage can always fish out that Knock scroll and.... and...

I'm going to say it... your equipment makes you unique.... another player could copy your classes and feats but they would have a really hard job in getting the same magic items.

In a SciFi setting you may be able to buy a automatic lockpick which is probably inferior to the skill, you need someone to operate the medkit and the computer and several to operate the spaceship... you also need someone who can repair all of the above.

Furthermore it's not unreasonable to expect to be able to upgrade you own equipment (so you want to upgrade your magic bow from +1 to +2? OK you'll need a Blood moon and High Magic circle. You want to upgrade your gun from +1 to +2? OK just clip on this red dot sight <rolls easy Armory check>... You want the extra damage like the bow gets? Use these hollow point bullets that will give you +3 damage)

If you like someones equipment you could go out and buy an identical set though they may need to have a run of good luck on Streetwise to get to the right part of the black market.

IMHO level bases systems work well in rationing abilities but don't do skills so well
under d20 you have a hard job starting out as a genius computer hacker because the best you can do is 18 Int +4 skill points and perhaps +2 from a feat. In a skill based system you can dump all your points into 'hacking' and as soon as you get a few more skill points you can boost it again .. under d20 you probably need to wait 3-4 sessions and get to increase it by +1.

[ArcturusV]

That was one thing I didn't like about d20 Prime Directive. The classes are narrowly defined. You can't really multiclass well. Class features were all goobered up to the point where I actually had to to write in to the creators to get a clarification on how things actually worked. Rich setting, loved the SFB universe, wanted to run it. But the system is just such a train wreck due to trying to pigeon hole the characters into artificial classes and having these narrow, limited abilities that are generally eclipsed by Skill Choice anyway... but Skill Choice is relatively limited. And the Education packages guaranteed that by level 6 or so you'd only have at most 3 or 2 ranks in a wide array of skills (Because futuristic well rounded education). So ineffective at everything. And with your points spread out badly enough that it'll take another 6 levels just to be mildly decent at a few things. Another 6 levels after that before you can really claim "expertise".

It was kinda bad, and the reason why I said Class based doesn't really work for that setting.

[Dewani90]

i remember a fantasy + sci-fi feat on a videogame, square enix, responsible of the final fantasy saga working on an action game... Parasite Eve, they couldn't get rid of the battle per turns system, and your stuff had fantasy stats on it, you equip a SMG instead of your gun, that's a +15 hit ratio +2 firepower, equip a body armor instead of your police jacket, that's a +20 reduce damage and +10 fire defense, and i was okay with it because it was fantasy stuff working on a sci-fi environment, your weapons could be + too, just take them to the police department with a weapon upgrade license and the person in charge of the police station armory will upgrade your firepower, hit ratio or shooting speed...also bullet capacity because your weapons used ammo, weird huh?

[Pandoras Folly]

Dragon Star is a pretty decent fantasy/sci fi setting. Its literally dnd in space, complete with all the classes modified slightly to work in a ultra tech environmnt and best part of it actually works in a more balanced fashion than regular dnd. At least for non casters, but even then its good for casters who can specialize in being the Swiss army knife, buffer, controller, while the fighter is.shooting his.4d8 blaster rifle on full automatic while wearing startrooper style magically augmented power armor and the monk is playing psionic equilibrium gun monk.

[dps]

In theory, even in a fantasy setting, classes are a fairly artificial game mechanic, and like any game mechanic how well it works, and maybe more important, how "right" it feels depends on how well it's implemented. I think that they seem more artificial (and therefore harder to make feel "right") in a SF setting because we probably tend to think (if only subconsciously) as SF as being closer to a RW setting than fantasy, and we know that in the RW, we don't really have classes (in the RPG sense).

[ngilop]

Wow.. I was not expecting anything even close to this amount of replies.

Its weirder to me that there are people out there that actually agree with me LOL

Not calling you guys/girls weird but I think that its weird that I do it so.. LOL

[Xuc Xac]

the ones in say a scietific background are better at that than a more military background would be (usually in the form of higher skills costs or lower skill cap) and vice-versa.

Psst. Those are classes.

[Rhynn]

Psst. Those are classes.

That's a matter of semantics, I guess. Are Navy, Marine, Army, Scout, and Merchant classes in Traveller? They kinda are... but none of them give you anything unique automatically. A Marine and an Army dude can have the exact same attributes and skills, and those are the only things they have to distinguish themselves mechanically from each other.

Similarly, are Noble, Guilder, Priest, and Vorox classes in Fading Suns? What about Decados and Hawkwood, or Muster and Scraver? Again, they just give you a framework to acquire your skills, rather than determine anything immutable about your character. (Except, I guess, your ability to perform miracles.)

Cyberpunk 2020's archetypes - Solo, Nomad, Cop, etc. - are classes to me, because each gets a unique special ability that, in two cases, is actually powerful and irreplaceable (Combat Sense and Interface).

Rolemaster's classes are separated entirely by the costs to increase skills... and yeah, those are classes, because the only way to affect those costs is by your choice of class, and in practice it sets pretty firm limits on development - you're not gonna see a Rogue with maxed-out spell lists, and spellcasting classes (mostly) can't max out a weapon skill.

Loose enough, classes can work for pretty much any type of game.

[king.com]

I find classless systems are just such a huge barrier preventing trying a new system, nobody ever wants to just use the pre-gens so you make your own. Except when it becomes work. When you enter a system you typically dont have any idea what is and isnt useful. A class atleast does something to cap and control where your focusing your attention. It can be implemented poorly like the D&D systems (Feat choice is impossible without prior knowledge) but atleast many of the class system faults dont cripple what you want out of a character. Sci-Fi highlights this problem given the tendency to build a sci-fi game based upon its setting.

Take the Eclipse Phase example, that setting may have a very interesting approach to the character being a mind rather than a body but until you actually play the game and learn the system you dont know how or why this is something to actually be taking advantage of.

I still hold the 40K RPGs as some of the best examples of class character creation systems. The classes heavily work to talk about what the setting contains and encapsulates what their choices are in small pre-defined tables for each level. While knowing the setting helps, identifying that a 'Tech-Priest' is probably going to be someone good with technology with a religious streak is easy to identify. They also work to build a person at the end of the character creation processes. Ultimately it does cap the maximum amount of variation but with the way the system is structured, its not unreasonable to be giving a vast array of background specific skills to the player.

[ArcturusV]

Then again the Dark Heresy book is also considered my top choice for easing in players. It does something simple that so many other RPG books I've read have failed to actually do.

... a player who knows nothing about RPGing in general, or Warhammer 40k in particular, can just start reading the book front to back, working up a character along the way, and end up with a finished character, no confusion, no worry, no muss, no fuss.

You really get to appreciate that compared to some other games out there where every 2 minutes of character creation you're flipping randomly through pages trying to find the next thing you need.

[Gnomish Wanderer]

I dislike classes in all my game systems.

I'd greatly prefer to be able to build my character's abilities to do what I want them to do. I wouldn't mind if the game system provided something akin to synergies or light bonuses for 'keeping it in the family' of class-related abilities, as long as it managed to stay balanced somehow by keeping the specialist on roughly even footing with the jack of all trades in general power level.

Basically I don't see the need for classes even in fantasy.

[king.com]

Then again the Dark Heresy book is also considered my top choice for easing in players. It does something simple that so many other RPG books I've read have failed to actually do.

... a player who knows nothing about RPGing in general, or Warhammer 40k in particular, can just start reading the book front to back, working up a character along the way, and end up with a finished character, no confusion, no worry, no muss, no fuss.

You really get to appreciate that compared to some other games out there where every 2 minutes of character creation you're flipping randomly through pages trying to find the next thing you need.

Exactly, I feel many people don't like class systems in general because somes dont actually bother to take advantage of what class systems do. That is to provide an easy entry and logical process to getting to actually play the game.

I dislike classes in all my game systems.

I'd greatly prefer to be able to build my character's abilities to do what I want them to do. I wouldn't mind if the game system provided something akin to synergies or light bonuses for 'keeping it in the family' of class-related abilities, as long as it managed to stay balanced somehow by keeping the specialist on roughly even footing with the jack of all trades in general power level.

Basically I don't see the need for classes even in fantasy.

I get this logic but my problem I always have with people thinking like that is whether they ask themselve HOW they know what they want their character to do before ever playing the game. A lot of game subsystems and playstyle really dont become clear until your running the game and as a result knowing what your character should and shouldnt be doing and how high/low your numbers should be to reasonably to achieve your character goals is difficult.

[RPGuru1331]

I get this logic but my problem I always have with people thinking like that is whether they ask themselve HOW they know what they want their character to do before ever playing the game.

Imagine, before even cracking open the Dark Heresy book, a player told you they wanted to be a marine - that is, a marine from Alien. Would you have such a hard time finding the class to do it? When you enter it with that question, rather than 'what mechanical toy does this system offer that I want to play with", it's not generally difficult. Without a lot of familiarity with the system , it's entirely probable that the character won't be optimal, of course. And perhaps within the system there's a somewhat better way to handle it, but you can usually do a good enough job without that familiarity.

It doesn't work for everyone all the time, believe me, but it's pretty easy if you approach it a different way.

[king.com]

Imagine, before even cracking open the Dark Heresy book, a player told you they wanted to be a marine - that is, a marine from Alien. Would you have such a hard time finding the class to do it? When you enter it with that question, rather than 'what mechanical toy does this system offer that I want to play with", it's not generally difficult. Without a lot of familiarity with the system , it's entirely probable that the character won't be optimal, of course. And perhaps within the system there's a somewhat better way to handle it, but you can usually do a good enough job without that familiarity.

It doesn't work for everyone all the time, believe me, but it's pretty easy if you approach it a different way.

I understand that but what the process (not saying its wrong or anything) is but too often I find things happening which cripple the character. Like in a first time shadowrun (a fairly controlled kind of classless) game where a player didnt know where to start with a talky character and ended up with something like 25 dice to roll (the average success needing 5 or more?). An easy way to prevent this is to have some system to limit how far people can advance based on an arbitrary limit of gameplay. A class essentially. Additionally I played in a game (cant remember the name, runequest I think) where the combat character was unable to hit the trash monsters because he didnt dump enough points into his hitting skill.

I feel classes are in place to prevent this kind of stuff happening and measuring improvement across a games lifespan. If a game has a specific, unique mechanic you want to take advantage of, theres usually a class built around that.

[Rhynn]

Additionally I played in a game (cant remember the name, runequest I think) where the combat character was unable to hit the trash monsters because he didnt dump enough points into his hitting skill.

RuneQuest is classless and skill-based, but how can you not know your chance to hit a monster in it? It's literally your skill value. RQ has always used % skills, and you roll d100 against it. Your chance to hit every monster is the same...

The point makes sense, but I personally don't understand why anyone would let a player new to a system create a character without help. That's just sadistic, to me. They don't know the rules! Of course they can't make a good character. Classes don't automatically eliminate that. Sure, in old D&D editions, it's basically impossible to make a really bad character... but in 3rd edition, it's laughably easy. For crying out loud, a lot of new players want to make monks right at the start.

[JellyPooga]

I don't think Class-based systems are inherently easier than non-Class systems...I've always found them to be both limiting and enabling, depending on the game in question and my mindset at the time.

They are limiting when you have a very specific idea of what character you want to play; want to play an ex-mine slave that wields a pick-axe with wild abandon but doesn't wear armour in D&D 3.5? It's possible (Monk with Martial Weapon Proficiency: Heavy Pick, possibly multiclassing to Barbarian after an alignment shift), but the system tends to punish you for it unless your character ideas fit in line with those of the game designers.

They are enabling when they present an idea that you can bounce from. "Ooh, the Ranger class lets you pick Favoured Enemies...maybe I'll play a guy who's village was slaughtered by Foo's". This can, I guess, be seen as "easier", but I don't think it neccesarily is.

This applies equally to both Sci-fi and Fantasy games in my opinion.

[RPGuru1331]

I understand that but what the process (not saying its wrong or anything) is but too often I find things happening which cripple the character. Like in a first time shadowrun (a fairly controlled kind of classless) game where a player didnt know where to start with a talky character and ended up with something like 25 dice to roll (the average success needing 5 or more?). An easy way to prevent this is to have some system to limit how far people can advance based on an arbitrary limit of gameplay. A class essentially. Additionally I played in a game (cant remember the name, runequest I think) where the combat character was unable to hit the trash monsters because he didnt dump enough points into his hitting skill.

I feel classes are in place to prevent this kind of stuff happening and measuring improvement across a games lifespan. If a game has a specific, unique mechanic you want to take advantage of, theres usually a class built around that.

Actually, there's a second easy way to prevent it, and it's the GM being more active in the design phase. Leaving the option open, and having the GM say "That's unnecessary, but you can choose to do it" is a thing. Also, the most ineffective characters I've seen were in DnD. Even when it was everyone's first go in classless systems that were the first try by everyone in the group, I've never seen performance that bad.

And no, you're not even talking about a class when you mention an arbitrary cap on advancement - you're talking about a level. Mutants and Masterminds has levels, but no class.

I feel classes are in place to prevent this kind of stuff happening and measuring improvement across a games lifespan. If a game has a specific, unique mechanic you want to take advantage of, theres usually a class built around that.

Not in default GURPs or MnM, at least.

[king.com]

RuneQuest is classless and skill-based, but how can you not know your chance to hit a monster in it? It's literally your skill value. RQ has always used % skills, and you roll d100 against it. Your chance to hit every monster is the same...

The point makes sense, but I personally don't understand why anyone would let a player new to a system create a character without help. That's just sadistic, to me. They don't know the rules! Of course they can't make a good character. Classes don't automatically eliminate that. Sure, in old D&D editions, it's basically impossible to make a really bad character... but in 3rd edition, it's laughably easy. For crying out loud, a lot of new players want to make monks right at the start.

Okay few points here, 1) I didnt know the name of the system, maybe it was runequest but it didnt use a percentile system. It was a system that you hit 20 with a stat and then got a special symbol that gave you an automatic success or something like that. So its pretty hard to call me on a system I DONT KNOW THE NAME OF.

2) How can you help a new player create a character when NOBODY KNOWS THE SYSTEM IN THE FIRST PLACE. Thats seems like a big handicap.

3) As I said Im referring to a not-broken system. Its a massive flaw in your system regardless of it being class or not-class based if you have a skillset that is FUNDAMENTALLY WORSE. Thats a trap is a different topic entirely.

I don't think Class-based systems are inherently easier than non-Class systems...I've always found them to be both limiting and enabling, depending on the game in question and my mindset at the time.

I'll be honest an say I've never played a classless system where there wasn't fundamental problems with a character, a difficult character creation process and systems in place to prevent certain concepts based on the setting (if it was a setting-specific game). This is the viewpoint im coming from.

I think the only system I've seen that I can make a character in without losing interest is the nWoD stuff and even that had class-like setups and very limited points spending control (i've only played it once so not an expert).

They are limiting when you have a very specific idea of what character you want to play; want to play an ex-mine slave that wields a pick-axe with wild abandon but doesn't wear armour in D&D 3.5? It's possible (Monk with Martial Weapon Proficiency: Heavy Pick, possibly multiclassing to Barbarian after an alignment shift), but the system tends to punish you for it unless your character ideas fit in line with those of the game designers.

I thought common conscensus is that D&D3.5 has a generally bad character creation system in the first place?

Actually, there's a second easy way to prevent it, and it's the GM being more active in the design phase. Leaving the option open, and having the GM say "That's unnecessary, but you can choose to do it" is a thing. Also, the most ineffective characters I've seen were in DnD. Even when it was everyone's first go in classless systems that were the first try by everyone in the group, I've never seen performance that bad.

The GM saying, do that instead of the rules seems very much indenpendent of class or classbased. Again, isnt D&D3.5 established as being a bad character creation system?

And no, you're not even talking about a class when you mention an arbitrary cap on advancement - you're talking about a level. Mutants and Masterminds has levels, but no class.

Not in default GURPs or MnM, at least.

Ok Im confused here, not having played Mutants and Masterminds, are you saying they do or dont have classes? I get that it can have levels but I've yet to see a game that has classes and no levels linked together somehow.
On the one hand you say that MnM has levels and no classes and then you say that MnM is a classbased system that does not have classes for unique features (in response to my comment about class based games).


Seems this is all reinforcing my point of people disliking class-based systems because of BAD class based systems.

[Rhynn]

Okay few points here, 1) I didnt know the name of the system, maybe it was runequest but it didnt use a percentile system. It was a system that you hit 20 with a stat and then got a special symbol that gave you an automatic success or something like that. So its pretty hard to call me on a system I DONT KNOW THE NAME OF.

That'd probably be Hero Wars / HeroQuest (understandable confusion with RuneQuest given the similar name and usually the same setting), where you do have a limit on how high you can set your skills at he start (25 or 5w in Hero Wars, 27 or 7w in HeroQuest)... so presumably if you wanted to focus on fighting, you'd set your combat ability to the maximum.

2) How can you help a new player create a character when NOBODY KNOWS THE SYSTEM IN THE FIRST PLACE. Thats seems like a big handicap.

At least the GM should probably read and understand the basic rules (like how tests/contests are resolved) before a game is played.

Ok Im confused here, not having played Mutants and Masterminds, are you saying they do or dont have classes? I get that it can have levels but I've yet to see a game that has classes and no levels linked together somehow.

Cyberpunk 2020 - classes, no levels. Maybe Traveller and Fading Suns if you think of them that way. Others, too...

[king.com]

That'd probably be Hero Wars / HeroQuest (understandable confusion with RuneQuest given the similar name and usually the same setting), where you do have a limit on how high you can set your skills at he start (25 or 5w in Hero Wars, 27 or 7w in HeroQuest)... so presumably if you wanted to focus on fighting, you'd set your combat ability to the maximum.

At least the GM should probably read and understand the basic rules (like how tests/contests are resolved) before a game is played.

Which is what happened. We made the mistake of thinking 20 or so was a good number to hit at for starting characters, not that your completely screwed if you dont have max stat. The logic being that if your stat is so high they change the way things are represented to fit your numbers probably means your good at it. Premade adventure had some random chaos bull things that TPK'd the party in the first fight.

Cyberpunk 2020 - classes, no levels. Maybe Traveller and Fading Suns if you think of them that way. Others, too...

I've played traveller and I would NOT call those classes. Not to mention I dont really consider something like a pre-made package to be a class, like something that cyberpunk does (I think thats what it does, though its been ages since ive seen cyberpunk stuff).

[Rhynn]

I've played traveller and I would NOT call those classes. Not to mention I dont really consider something like a pre-made package to be a class, like something that cyberpunk does (I think thats what it does, though its been ages since ive seen cyberpunk stuff).

Cyberpunk 2020 absolutely has classes. Each archetype has its own special ability (skill) that no other archetype can get - they all do something no one else can. You can never have two. In the case of Netrunners, that ability (Interface) gives them unique capabilities - basically, nobody else can really do anything on the Net.

Anyway, if it's a matter of number of examples...

The One Ring: Adventures Over the Edge of the Wild has classes, no levels.
The Lord of the Rings Roleplaying Game has classes, no levels.
Warhammer Fantasy RPG (1e-2e) has classes (careers), no levels. You move through careers, but you get the advances and skills the career you're in offers.

That's just what I can think of off-hand, if you don't consider White Wolf games to have classes (even though they have categories you pick at the beginning to determine both what you are like and what abilities you have access to).

[king.com]

Anyway, if it's a matter of number of examples...

Alright, Im sure there are ones out there im just saying I've yet to see one. Anyway rather than getting off into a completely different topic...