Here I'm going to try to incite a little debate. As many of you who have played MMORPGs, you probably have found that characters are often limited into how much they can be customized akin to the player's taste, both in appearance and stats. So here I'm going to pose some points that I believe are worth discussing. From my point of view, I feel having custom builds so that that players can add any kind of stats without messing up is a powerful feature, since it allows for endless amounts of different characters, and also gives you the feeling of being unique. Still, if we are to add in Classes into the equation, how do you think it would be best to customize them? As I think specialization is also important so that cooperation is encouraged in an MMORPG, is tends to limit the amount of options for players to choose (i.e. a warrior will most certainly not add INT or Magic points). Looking for a solution, a game like Guild Wars comes to mind. In it, players have two different professions, with the secondary one being able to be changed after a certain point in the game. Still, that's only due to the nature of the interchangeable player skills, and how stats can be instantly converted from one build to another when in town. I myself dislike this, since even though it is a nice feature itself, it kind of takes away the sense of having a 'unique' set of stats, and the challenge of thinking out your character's growth. Furthermore, there's also the skill system. Should a player have a predefined skill tree? or should he be able to master some, forgo some? while there's disavantages in both systems when it comes to uniqueness and completing a character's growth, both are also crucial approaches to realism in an MMORPG (i.e. a priest that doesn't know how to resurrect but instead does more powerful healing?). So, I would like to know people's comments and oppinions on this matter. Let us discuss.

Personally I would rather not see pre-created classes; races maybe, that could be an aesthetic thing and also determine the character's starting story, but I'd love to see all spells/abilities be purchasable, and classes would be determined by how the player built and titles awarded for what activities they chose to do most in the game. Stats though are just stupid, they make the game seem more mathematical/mechanical and contribute to making pvp impossible between high and low level characters.

I agree and I'll iterate again what I've said a few weeks ago.
Classes are probably an historical artifact.
They were introduced for easiness of management and since rule sets using them were successful, they went to the PC-RPG world.
The PC-RPG world is a different beast. For first, it could roll 1000d6 for each simple action, for second, it can manage complex relationships with ease.
Are classes justified in this context? I believe they are not.

If the GURPS generic rule set would have won over DnD and such, everybody right now would find classes extremely ugly.

Classes as I find it, are just plain out broken even for paper games, it's just even worse when running on silicon.
Have a read to some dnd rule books as a not-so-quick proof. There are hundreds (?) of feats and a whole load of "prestige classes" just to workaround the problem of not having enough flexibility, a thing that they could work out much better by throwing classes in the trashcan!

I believe the class each player presents to others should just be a string he/she can write. I don't see much point in forcing a player to act as a warrior because he/she choosen so 100 hours ago! If he/she wants to be a warrior he/she'll train the appropriate skills and put "the warrior" after its name.

Quote:

Original post by Krohm I agree and I'll iterate again what I've said a few weeks ago. Classes are probably an historical artifact. They were introduced for easiness of management and since rule sets using them were successful, they went to the PC-RPG world. The PC-RPG world is a different beast. For first, it could roll 1000d6 for each simple action, for second, it can manage complex relationships with ease.

I disagree. Classes enforce a certain level of specialization which is important as it encourages cooperative team play. And team play is a fundamental aspect of a social PnP RPG, and is something you're probably going to want to encourage in MMOGs as well.

Quote:

Are classes justified in this context? I believe they are not. If the GURPS generic rule set would have won over DnD and such, everybody right now would find classes extremely ugly.

While I'm not 100% familiar with the GURPs ruleset, I have played some generic skill based PnP RPGs, and the team aspect is definitely an issue. Players are certainly free to tailor their characters to fit their imagination, but they all too frequently lose sight of where they fit into the party as a whole. Often you will have several similar characters competing poorly for the same role, while other vital party roles are largely unfilled.

While it is certainly possible to do this in a class based RPG, it's a hell of a lot more obvious that you're doing it, and that it's a bad idea.

Another issue is that it's entirely possible to create a character for a role for which there is absolutely no need whatsoever. Classes restrict the domain of choices to those which are actually useful, and thus go some way to preventing the self-gimped character.

Quote:

Classes as I find it, are just plain out broken even for paper games, it's just even worse when running on silicon. Have a read to some dnd rule books as a not-so-quick proof. There are hundreds (?) of feats and a whole load of "prestige classes" just to workaround the problem of not having enough flexibility, a thing that they could work out much better by throwing classes in the trashcan!

Some PrCs might fairly be described as a 'fix' for flaws specificallyin the 3rd edition DnD class system but the vast majority are just worthless filler that WotC uses to sell more books to munchkins.

Back in the heady days of 2nd Edition there were no PrCs necessary; the base classes are generic enough that you still have a fair amount of freedom to interpret in a wide variety of ways. (Although they did later add 'kits' which were much the same as PrCs)

I'm not suggesting that classes are necessarily 'better' than generic systems; I am suggesting that it is worth understanding what advantages classes have before you discard them so you know the tradeoffs you're making.

Quote:

Original post by sunandshadow Stats though are just stupid, they make the game seem more mathematical/mechanical and contribute to making pvp impossible between high and low level characters.

True. You rarely, if ever, see a "David vs. Goliath" scenario in online gaming.

Quote:

Original post by Krohm Classes are probably an historical artifact. They were introduced for easiness of management and since rule sets using them were successful, they went to the PC-RPG world. The PC-RPG world is a different beast. For first, it could roll 1000d6 for each simple action, for second, it can manage complex relationships with ease.

Quote:

Original post by Sandman I disagree. Classes enforce a certain level of specialization which is important as it encourages cooperative team play. And team play is a fundamental aspect of a social PnP RPG, and is something you're probably going to want to encourage in MMOGs as well.

I agree, on both points: classes are a remnant of tabletop gaming, and they are also necessary to enforce specialization, which in turn promotes teamwork, which is the staple of cooperative gaming. Competitive gaming, of course, has no such requirements or limitations, but I have yet to see any RPG that is purely competitive. Thus, classes are generally a good idea. (They're also easier to balance, as you need only compare a few static classes, as opposed to a hundred skills in a trillion dynamic combinations.)

Regarding your question as to whether classes or skills should be used, it's a matter of using the right tool for the right job. Do you want teamwork, or do you want competition? How much balancing are you willing to do? How many tactical variations do you want to permit? Does it fit your story, if indeed story is important to you?

Quote:

Original post by Krohm I agree and I'll iterate again what I've said a few weeks ago. Classes are probably an historical artifact. They were introduced for easiness of management and since rule sets using them were successful, they went to the PC-RPG world. The PC-RPG world is a different beast. For first, it could roll 1000d6 for each simple action, for second, it can manage complex relationships with ease. Are classes justified in this context? I believe they are not. Classes as I find it, are just plain out broken even for paper games, it's just even worse when running on silicon. Have a read to some dnd rule books as a not-so-quick proof. There are hundreds (?) of feats and a whole load of "prestige classes" just to workaround the problem of not having enough flexibility, a thing that they could work out much better by throwing classes in the trashcan! I believe the class each player presents to others should just be a string he/she can write. I don't see much point in forcing a player to act as a warrior because he/she choosen so 100 hours ago! If he/she wants to be a warrior he/she'll train the appropriate skills and put "the warrior" after its name.

But then again, we're talking in the context of a MMORPG. While it may work to have players be able to customize their skills and stats to an almost limitless extent, wouldn't that be detrimental to actual gameplay and cooperation? if my memory serves right, most, if not all of the players usually want to create jack-of-all-trades characters, and end up losing sight of any particular goal.

Not only that, but isn't classes pretty much a pre-established idea that focuses on realism? A warrior will have to spend his whole life training to be able to take monsters head on, while mages need to study in order to master their magic. Having a stealing-warrior-mage with healing spells probably won't get you anywhere, since you won't be able to master any of those fields. I do, however, think that your idea of throwing very-predefined classes out the window is good; while they are pretty much essential, I believe there can be a way to make them into pointers, which the player can use to get an idea of what a warrior, or a mage, should be like.

I'm certain that characters will get lost if given too many choices, so to keep guiding them is also part of the number of things we must take into account.

I like themes, with trees

The more you focus on a area the more you become a specialist in that area

Basically a Eve type system, sure you can master everything on eve, but it simply isn't feasible, so you have to plan out and focus on skills you want in the future

In wow, within 20 lvls, you have a pretty much fixed build, unless you spend gold and respec

Quote:

Original post by Sandman I disagree. Classes enforce a certain level of specialization which is important as it encourages cooperative team play. And team play is a fundamental aspect of a social PnP RPG, and is something you're probably going to want to encourage in MMOGs as well.

Excellent point - helping players in choosing what to do. I suppose there could be some other helpers but yes, you point is taken here.

Quote:

Original post by Sandman I'm not suggesting that classes are necessarily 'better' than generic systems; I am suggesting that it is worth understanding what advantages classes have before you discard them so you know the tradeoffs you're making.

Effectively, I can now recall a few cases in which evolution led to a dead end a thing that is by sure undesiderable.

I actually think its easier for any random number of players to play together if they aren't dependent on each other. I've many times seen a group of people standing around unable to do the dungeon they wanted to do because none of them was a healer, or none of them was a tank, or none of them could see through invisibility, or none of them could cure poison, or in one odd case no one had maxed fishing which was required to call out the boss. o.O And how about the fact that some classes are shunned as useless, and others everyone will be nice to because they have a great buff everyone wants? Or the class you want to be isn't available for the race you want to look like?

Besides, if mmos really want to encourage social play, the first priority should be making players able to easily and instantly get to the same place in the game world, and the next priority should be figuring out how to make characters of different levels able to play together without disadvantaging either, and the third should be creating a central location for pugs to form. Classes are far down the list of factors affecting group play.

Class-based systems vary greatly in the amount of freedom they allow their players - it's a sliding scale. Even in open systems, players generally end up bunched in a comparatively small number of optimal configurations. Whether one chooses a class to begin with or ends up in a configuration which could be categorised doesn't really make a heck of a lot of difference.

For instance, Guild Wars has a class-based system, but is far more "open" than many classless systems in terms of the number of viable choices one could make in character design. WoW is the antithesis - once chosen, a character is locked into a small fixed set of roles - optimal configurations are few and obvious. Yet WoW still works well, but I submit that this is due to great UI design, and the well-defined cooperative gameplay, which Sandman notes as an advantage.