Just something I'd like to see responses to - whether a collection of D&D players would like to see a future D&D edition that lacked the trademark "class system" that D&D has used since it's creation, or continue with the tried & true method of building characters through classes. Nothing snarky please, everyone is allowed an opinion (or many opinions), and so no answer is inherently "wrong" or "right". Try to keep things civil, polite and courteous please.
Personally? I'd like to see them give it a try. I've always enjoyed systems that lack "classes" and instead give a player a wide range of options that anyone can take, provided they meet all the prerequisites and so forth. So, you could build a Rogue by taking attributes, feats and skills that you find suit what you define as "roguish", not what the developers say "is roguish". You could also mix and match, creating your own classes and abilities, not to mention open rules for feats, skill focuses and martial/magic/etc styles.
On the other hand, I've always liked D&D for those classes, a statement in hypocrisy, I know. Being able to leef through a manual and read up on the different abilities, skills, feats and the like of each individual class has always been a treat, especially whenever new material is published and new classes revealed. The sure excitement and adrenaline, I remember it well. Not to mention, with pre-defined classes and abilities, you don't have to worry about building the foundations of that characters, just fill in the middle pieces.
Overall though, I wouldn't mind D&D giving it a shot, it would be interesting too see WotC take on such a design decision. What do the general forum goers think? Yay or Nay? And tell us why, if you feel inclined.
Au revoir,
Zahkaryii
Case in point, not like Mutants and Masterminds. You can easily put a few points into many, many different things to the point where at 15th level, you're capable of anything and reliably, competently capable of nothing. Or you could take all of your points and divide them amongst a very small number of different things to where you're capable of nothing but one or two tricks, but you are unassailable when it comes to those tricks.
Furthermore, it's a spectrum, so you can have a group of players build their characters for a campaign (with different levels of optimization and different expectations), and when game night comes around, everyone is making everyone else obsolete.
So any classless D&D that were to come around (given the results of 3.5, I'm leaning towards "unlikely") would have to avoid being completely free-form, just to achieve basic functionality.
Classes are part of D&D character creation and options. Getting rid of classes and just having customizable abilities wouldn't appeal to me.
Also there are ways to get pretty close to classless in 4e. Start with any hybrid class pair of your choice and then add multiclass feats from a third class, if it's a Realms game take the Windrise Ports background and you can through in a forth class. It's not full free form, but it's probably close enough for most any wacky concept most people could imagine.
Seriously, I think any well-balanced system will have collectives of options that will favour certain character concepts, either or both for flavour reasons as well as power concerns. If we ditch classes and make another kind of limitation (psionic powers cost less if you take another psionic power, training in weapons prevents you from using wands, etc.), we have classes unofficially, but without all the good things classes provide: flavour, easy access to themed options, etc.
IMO, 4ed is a classless system in many ways. The baseline damage outputs and effect criteria for different roles are consistent whether you are Martial, Divine, Arcane, Primal, Shadow, or Psionic. If you want to defend, kill one guy, kill many guys, or lead, your options will be very similar and differ mostly on base class abilities. I would even say that most powers could be multi-classed without an effect on a PC's efficacy.
Au revoir,
Zahkaryii
Every time you leveled up, you gain a "level point" which you can use to select an ability package. This ability package also gives you skill points, possibly a feat point, and a few other bonuses.
I wouldn't mind trying a classless 4E. Sounds like it would be a fun system to play.
Just something I'd like to see responses to - whether a collection of D&D players would like to see a future D&D edition that lacked the trademark "class system" that D&D has used since it's creation, or continue with the tried & true method of building characters through classes. ...
I've always enjoyed systems that lack "classes" and instead give a player a wide range of options that anyone can take, provided they meet all the prerequisites and so forth.
I've seen it recommended before, but mechanically speaking it always slips back into class-like divisions anyway.
Some build options will encourage damage, some will encourage tanking, some will encourage control, etc. Sure, you could build a bit of everything but then you won't excel at anything. Feat-trees or research trees are basically classes in disguise anyway.
Additionally, allowing everyone to take anything kind of makes power issues. Once some powerful combo or option is found, everyone tries to choose it. Class systems help manage the clutter.
I think the current system actually has a nice balance. The options are diverse, and by early Paragon you can have two characters that started identical but now look and feel completly different.
The number of choices at each level are impressive but not quite overwhelming. This could become a problem in the future, but for now I think most of the PHB1 classes are approaching a nice position where nearly any concept can be achieved.
So, you could build a Rogue by taking attributes, feats and skills that you find suit what you define as "roguish", not what the developers say "is roguish". You could also mix and match, creating your own classes and abilities, not to mention open rules for feats, skill focuses and martial/magic/etc styles.
As far as I'm concerned, re-fluffing and multiclassing takes care of this. As more classes and other material support comes out, more unique builds and such will be available.
For example, if someone wanted to play an elemental-type character, the best options now are basically Sorcerer and in some cases a Wizard. Refluff and there you go. Elemental class. When actual elemental classes come out, you will have even more choices, possibly even hybrid or multiclass between the two.
Overall though, I wouldn't mind D&D giving it a shot, it would be interesting too see WotC take on such a design decision. What do the general forum goers think? Yay or Nay?
I vote no, for the reasons stated above.
Class distinctions will evolve out of a classless system anyway. Embracing this system helps with balance and flavor.
Anyways, back on topic. I think something akin to Morrowind would be cool.
that doesnt sound Classy...
Anyways, back on topic. I think something akin to Morrowind would be cool.
Problem is, by the end of Morrowind, you're pretty much good at EVERYTHING...
However, I think a system where you 'level in what you actually do' is hard to do in a pen and paper game. Even then, i still mostly found myself building characters that can easily be represented in D&D's classes.
Well, if you leveled all your skills yes. However, morrowind and oblivion are really only designed to go level 20-ish (maybe 30 or 40 ish in the MW expansions). After that point, morrowind becomes extremely easy, and oblivion's level scaling starts going out of wack.
However, I think a system where you 'level in what you actually do' is hard to do in a pen and paper game. Even then, i still mostly found myself building characters that can easily be represented in D&D's classes.
But it takes a lot longer to complete the main quests and House quests and faction quests....
In any case, I find that the reason I like 4e D&D is because the classes and the builds within them evoke archetypes, and their features do this as well. Remove the classes, and you're stuck building characters from scratch, with no inspirational power behind them. The classes provide unity to the powers, rather than the concepts that they might include (roguish, for example). The flavour of D&D classes tend to be really good, enough that I can pretty much create whatever character I want with them.
The only time I ever feel restrained by D&D classes is when I want a character to be able to do stuff across builds – for example, Gandalf had aspects of all three builds of the Invoker. Originally, my Bard character was somewhat of a trickster that also used swords – something would require him to be both a Cunning Bard and a Valorous Bard, which is obviously not possible. Really, I wanted him to be the ultimate Bardic character, and unfortunately, in order to fit into 4e, he had to specialise. But that made his character more concise, and actually turned him from the Bard archetype to a more specific character, and developed him.
I feel that the classes allow evocation of archetypes, and the builds force/allow specialisation within that archetype, creating a blueprint for a character. Without this system in place, I feel the D&D wouldn't be nearly as evocative to me.
There's a reason I got really fed up with 3.5e, and it wasn't simply because the combats took so long...
Lets say that in a classless system, the typical plate wearing, shield fighter with healing spells and dabbling in one specific control spell region is simply amazing. The classless system simply wont allow you to build a character that feels balanced anymore.
Classes give narrower options and vary the gameplay without making things stale at least in my opinon. Having said all that, I'm all for playing a classless table top game if someone could design in a way that would remove the above fears that tend to accompany it.
Just something I'd like to see responses to - whether a collection of D&D players would like to see a future D&D edition that lacked the trademark "class system" that D&D has used since it's creation, or continue with the tried & true method of building characters through classes.
If they went classless I wouldn't play it. It just wouldn't be D&D. There's plenty of classless systems out there, but to me D&D shouldn't be one of them. It's too iconic.
I have played the Hero System back in the 90's. Hero is a classless system where you can mix and match anything you want and reflavour it any way you like. In the rule book, it gives examples on packages where players can pick. These packages are a set of abilities tied together to make a character feel a certain way. For some settings, it may be beneficial to have packages and then the player may tack on anything else with left over character points that are not spent on the package. These packages represent classes or races to give the characters a certain flavour. D&D has a certain flavour and without classes and races, this flavour may be lost potentially making the game not feel like D&D at all.
I actually like the Hero System. If I wanted to play a game like D&D, I would play D&D and not Hero.
For example, the powers for a fighter aren't so unique that choosing one style vs the other make the fighter seem very unique.
Not sure what a good solution is for this though...
Sanjay
On the other hand, classes like the Ranger really are like more than one class (Beastmaster, Archer, and Two Blade), having a huge difference in play styles, and general feel than the other builds.
All in all, I think the current class system could use some touching up, but it is a wonderful system that I enjoy more than the alternatives despite it's flaws.
The ideas I've been kicking around for 4.5e or 5e in my own mind are picking a role, then picking a power source and going from there. All of the roles would be streamlined with the same HP and surges, and the various class features would be feats, or level 1 utilities. I would add more feats at level one to give more customizability and you could be able to take a feat to gain a secondary power source (and possibly a secondary role). Of course that means you'd have huge chapters full of abilities that would probably overwhelm a new player but the books would include plenty of builds to show how to easily create a fighter, rogue, mage, ect.
In the end it would probably not be that different than what we already have but it's the illusion of freedom that I really enjoy.
I actaully thought that 4e was going to be a classless system before I learned more about it and was a little disappointed that it wasn't. Now that I've played it awhile I can say that I don't have too much trouble making the characters I'd like, so I don't dislike the system at all. But I still think about it a lot. There are many good reasons for classes, they help a person fit into their role, they're easy to explain to new players, they make sure things stay balanced (mostly).
The ideas I've been kicking around for 4.5e or 5e in my own mind are picking a role, then picking a power source and going from there. All of the roles would be streamlined with the same HP and surges, and the various class features would be feats, or level 1 utilities. I would add more feats at level one to give more customizability and you could be able to take a feat to gain a secondary power source (and possibly a secondary role). Of course that means you'd have huge chapters full of abilities that would probably overwhelm a new player but the books would include plenty of builds to show how to easily create a fighter, rogue, mage, ect.
In the end it would probably not be that different than what we already have but it's the illusion of freedom that I really enjoy.
I dunno. The main reason I'm attacted to classes, other than party balance, is archetype. And there's just something about being able to see "oh, my class and it's build options reflect the character I want to play" rather than having to define this all by hand. That isn't to say that I don't use my powers to reflect the way that my character is. It's that the character concept comes first, and it resonates with classes and their builds, but the emotion falls flat when all I see is numbers and powers that anyone could pick. Classes and the builds within them give differentiation but also connection – the character has a bond with other characters of the same class or build, and while standing on his/her own, the character has a wealth of archetypes to draw on.
The ideas I've been kicking around for 4.5e or 5e in my own mind are picking a role, then picking a power source and going from there. All of the roles would be streamlined with the same HP and surges, and the various class features would be feats, or level 1 utilities. I would add more feats at level one to give more customizability and you could be able to take a feat to gain a secondary power source (and possibly a secondary role). Of course that means you'd have huge chapters full of abilities that would probably overwhelm a new player but the books would include plenty of builds to show how to easily create a fighter, rogue, mage, ect.
In the end it would probably not be that different than what we already have but it's the illusion of freedom that I really enjoy.
This sounds like the HERO system to me. The HERO system also has templates called packages that contain a set of abilities that make your character feel like a particular race or class. With remaining character points, you can purchase any ability.
The problem with these packages is that they are likely not optimal. Anyone not selecting any of the packages will likely have a much stronger character and will lead to balance issues. With a class-based system, it can be easier to ensure balance between different characters. The reason is that with a class-based system, you are preventing certain combos by ensuring these pieces of a potential combo are not used in the same character to any great effect when you build the classes.
Just use the Character Advancement table in the PH1. Choose any powers and feats you want, ignoring class prereqs.
Its probably best to start of with a hybrid at level 1 to get the ball rolling.
The DM needs to look out for breakable combos.
Done.
like the elderscrolls ruleset?
