Classes or classless, which system is better in RPGs?

[V_K]

. OTOH, if the content overlaps and the system is classless each character should have a set of options (plus some suboptimal fallback ones). It is also possible to provide synergistic options (both in quests and mechanics) vastly increasing variety of builds in terms of gameplay without increasing variety of underlying mechanics.

While I don't disagree on principle, does any game in existence actually have all that?

Realms of Arkania HD

But it has classes

 

[UsernamesAreOverrated]

Classes are basically restrictions on which skills / abilities you can or can't take and which skills are easier/harder to improve, so in principle classless is better because it has no such restrictions. In practice though, I've often seen classless systems lead to all characters feeling the same because the skills you can take are not that different from each other or because people end up taking the same small number of skills that seem the most powerful. Restrictions can be good.
Also it depends on the lore. In Dragon Age universe, for example, only a very small number of people have any spellcasting ability and having it is a very big deal and such person is treated very differently because of it. In Fallout OTOH there is no Lockpicking Guild you join at a young age to dedicate your life to unravelling the mysteries of lockpicking, it's just something you're good at (or not).
I think the best is some king of hybrid system where the basics of any discipline are accessible to all characters but casting a super powerful spell or especially impressive feats of swordsmanship or ninja-like stealth require a lifetime of learning and practice and are only accessible to the correct class.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

Also it depends on the lore. In Dragon Age universe, for example, only a very small number of people have any spellcasting ability and having it is a very big deal and such person is treated very differently because of it. In Fallout OTOH there is no Lockpicking Guild you join at a young age to dedicate your life to unravelling the mysteries of lockpicking, it's just something you're good at (or not).

This can be represented in a classless system e.g., Underrail
IIRC, lorewise only a small amount of people show affinity for psionics, and gameplay-wise it's not something you want to just do a small dip into because of the negatives associated with it

 

[Raghar]

This discussion happened decade ago, DnD vs GURPS. For computer games, RPG system is underlying of the whole game, and classes are being build on top of WORKING RPG system. PoE system was bad, thus the whole game was quite meh.

Proper RPG system would have enough skills that even with class system the character would be able to learn stuff from other classes.

 

[UsernamesAreOverrated]

This can be represented in a classless system e.g., Underrail
IIRC, lorewise only a small amount of people show affinity for psionics, and gameplay-wise it's not something you want to just do a small dip into because of the negatives associated with it

Having negative effects from taking a skill is one way of encouraging specialization, certainly, it won't work in all settings though.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

This discussion happened decade ago, DnD vs GURPS. For computer games, RPG system is underlying of the whole game, and classes are being build on top of WORKING RPG system. PoE system was bad, thus the whole game was quite meh.

Proper RPG system would have enough skills that even with class system the character would be able to learn stuff from other classes.

GURPS-style via proxy(Fallout) won in the digital medium though.
Classes are good for pnp because it's a very good thing to keep pnp games as simple as possible.

 

[mondblut]

Classes are basically restrictions on which skills / abilities you can or can't take and which skills are easier/harder to improve, so in principle classless is better because it has no such restrictions.

Who said restrictions are necessarily bad? Needing a skill (of sufficient value) is also a restriction anyway.

 

[mondblut]

GURPS-style via proxy(Fallout) won in the digital medium though.

WUT?

 

[the mole]

Classes are basically restrictions on which skills / abilities you can or can't take and which skills are easier/harder to improve, so in principle classless is better because it has no such restrictions.

Who said restrictions are necessarily bad? Needing a skill (of sufficient value) is also a restriction anyway.

you arent taking into account player intelligence and the satisfaction of taking on a challenge underleveled and beating it

 

[mondblut]

you arent taking into account player intelligence and the satisfaction of taking on a challenge underleveled and beating it

You aren't taking into account hard gating that won't let you say this line or open that door unless a particular skill is equal or greater than an arbitrary value.

 

[the mole]

which is an idiotic system that restricts the player from roleplaying, for example taking on a challenge he shouldnt be ready for and succeeding

 

[J1M]

I am disappointed nobody took up my challenge to list the skills needed to convert Pathfinder Kingmaker to a classless system.

Or maybe they just tried and failed.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

I am disappointed nobody took up my challenge to list the skills needed to convert Pathfinder Kingmaker to a classless system.

Or maybe they just tried and failed.

There's plenty of guides for converting between D&D & GURPS.

 

[Siobhan]

challenge to list the skills needed to convert Pathfinder Kingmaker to a classless system.

Without defining restrictions on what counts as a skill, there's nothing to it. Make every class a skill that can be raised independently, done. But the challenge is a strawman anyways since those that have defended classless systems as superior have also argued at length that this should go hand in hand with gameplay changes to yield superior results --- whether a straight port is possible or not thus has no bearing on their argument. I, on the other hand, have been arguing that straight ports are possible because loose notions like class, multiclass, feat, trait, and skill must be accurately pinned down for the distinction between classes and classless to have any substance. Basically an autistic version of "you guys just keep talking past one another, this thread is going nowhere".

 

[J1M]

challenge to list the skills needed to convert Pathfinder Kingmaker to a classless system.

Without defining restrictions on what counts as a skill, there's nothing to it. Make every class a skill that can be raised independently, done. But the challenge is a strawman anyways since those that have defended classless systems as superior have also argued at length that this should go hand in hand with gameplay changes to yield superior results --- whether a straight port is possible or not thus has no bearing on their argument. I, on the other hand, have been arguing that straight ports are possible because loose notions like class, multiclass, feat, trait, and skill must be accurately pinned down for the distinction between classes and classless to have any substance. Basically an autistic version of "you guys just keep talking past one another, this thread is going nowhere".

I think everyone can see that this is a remarkably disingenuous response. Nobody has been advocating for 'skills' that give you a dozen different benefits like a class does.

 

[Siobhan]

There's nothing disingenuous about pointing out the whole problem with this whole debate.

Edit for clarity: This whole thread is basically the equivalent of arguing about whether addition or subtraction is the better basis for arithmetic. Some say addition, others like subtraction because the symbol is easier to write, some say addition for large numbers but with small numbers both addition and subtraction are cool. Somebody then points out that addition allows you to define an infinite set, which allows for more gradation than a finite set. Then somebody points out it really doesn't matter if you also allow for negative numbers, and then somebody says negative numbers are worse than positive numbers, and another person adds that they aren't really numbers because you can have 5 fingers but not -5 fingers. And it just keeps going like this. The topic is very interesting and would make for an intriguing mental exercise, but the discussion is headed in a very different direction from what piqued my interest. So I'll remove myself from this thread and let you guys have your fun without my nagging from the sidelines.

 

[mondblut]

which is an idiotic system that restricts the player from roleplaying, for example taking on a challenge he shouldnt be ready for and succeeding

Hey, you gotta implement those terribly important speech and hacking skills somehow!

 

[Valky]

Class based system is better. If you want variety and change, the mechanism to do so already exists and is called multiclassing. Classless systems more often than classed ends up meaning that every character becomes a single colored paste in their effectiveness and range.

 

[Stormcrowfleet]

Something nice about classes is the flavor of it. If you start up as a Knight, it includes some kind of background, position within the world, etc. A good classless system with backgrounds can emulate this, but I feel sometimes it looses that "archetype flavor". Anybody have an example of a right one ?