I would prefer restrictions linked to skills rather than class, and skills to get ride or diminish those restrictions, that way you could do a character that doesn''t do many things, but does it very well.

For example, I made a Wizard/Fighter character wearing an armor (the DM gave me an armor that wouldn''t restrict magic), I played the character as a fighter (was fighting huge beasts, including dragons with the party), using spells from time to time, and only a few : fireball to get ride of many ennemies at once, fly at the beginning of each combat (loved to fight big ennemies flying around them), magic missiles sometimes, a few Traits enhancing spells and a few protection spells (mostly against magic).

But I needed to be dual classed in order to get those very few spells, of course I could have asked the DM for a magical item replicating the powers I wanted, but I prefer to rely on my character abilities.
With a skill based system, I MAY have been able to learn only the few spells I needed (fly, fireball, magic missile, non detection), not have the armor penalty without requiring a DM help, and be almost only a fighter.

What a good system must give, is the ability for a player to make his DREAM character come true, it shouldn''t require the player to play by rules and find workaround in order to get a fun character, of course the system shouldn''t be abused to get power characters.

I''m still working on a rule system to put everything together in the right way IMO.
To me rules are there so that everyone agrees on what''s happening in the gaming world, nothing more, nothing less.


-* So many things to do, so little time to spend. *-

I think it depends on the type of gameplay you are looking for. For a multiplayer game, with team gameplay, a class system will be very helpful. With a single player game with little or no team gameplay, a classless system, or at least a very customizable class system, is important.

In pretty much all team sports, every player has a position - some of those positions are somewhat interchangeable, but the vast majority of players have one position which they play best at. It is better to have a team of players each with their own complementary strengths and weaknesses than to have a team of players who are competent at everything, but masters of nothing. No player can play in two positions simultaneously, so there is relatively little point in him being trained to. The only exception to this rule is when a player is sent off and another player has to step in and fill his role - but this is only a temporary situation so it is excusable if he is slightly less than 100% effective in his team mate's role.

I also think that over customizability can also lead to less variety - you end up with a party full of somewhat homogenous characters, none of which has a clearly defined role in the team. The result is a much less interesting gameplay experience, since the players often end up working individually rather than as a team.

Of course, in a single player game, unless your game storyline is very well written or dynamicly generated to suit the character, the player may well end up needing to play some or all of the roles himself. In which case he needs a system flexible enough for him to do so.


[edited by - Sandman on August 12, 2002 8:29:37 AM]