Thanks for the replies everyone. Some very good information was added to a semi-old post.. I appreciate it! :D

I'm still trying to finalize the class system. I probably should of had it figured out by now, but I just don't yet :( When playing RPGs I dislike skill-based systems, personally. I don't think that someone can use a huge axe, wear heavy armor, AND cast magic. To me it doesn't make sense, and that's why I decided to do with a class based system.

I also dislike how, in a class system, you're kind of forced into one or two defined roles. I like defined roles, but I also like having the flexibility to fit another role if needed. What I'm trying to come up with is a middle ground - and I think I'm close to that ground now with my third iteration of the class system.

Basically each class would have a set of skills available to them. A tank would have tanking skills, a mage would have magic, etc. Players would then have to chose 6-8 skills that he wants to use during combat. He would only be able to use those 6-8 skills until he changed the skills he had slotted. Each class can have a lot of skills to chose from, which can add to the strategy involved.

Make sense?

Why is it that it doesn't make sense? To wear heavy armor it takes a strong build and muscle, to wield a great axe it takes muscle and skill, to cast magic it takes mental and spiritual focuses, or for it to be pre-cast.

Even the heaviest armor we have one can move around and swing a sword in. It's because the weight is spread across the full body and it simply slows you down or prevents are particular movement which is why stronger, lighter armors were made and why some people had special armor made. Further "strong" armor doesn't necessarily mean "heavy" armor. Samurai Armor is incredibly strong compared to it's western equivalent, because they knew how to build strong armor with fibers and didn't rely on metal as much. Likewise that is why in western armor there is chainmail and plate armor, because there are different things they are better at defending against equally, but weight vs mobility is almost never an issue.

Great Axes are impractical to begin with so I don't know why you would say it doesn't make sense to allow someone to use one with great armor or magic >.> it doesn't make sense to ever use them.

And as for magic, if they have enchanted things or get their magic power from an alternate source that doesn't need focus then there is no problem and if it does require focus you should read up on what it means to be "in the zone" something that people go into that focuses them so that if they know it it wouldn't be that hard to use to the max potential while they are in that state of mind...and if they are not, well it's not like they can't use it, just not to their full power. I'd suggest looking into the different ways of how magic is cast or used as there are at least 3 ways in most traditions and i can think of between 5 and 6 ways for it to be cast.

Quote:

Original post by Durakken Samurai Armor is incredibly strong compared to it's western equivalent, because they knew how to build strong armor with fibers and didn't rely on metal as much. Likewise that is why in western armor there is chainmail and plate armor, because there are different things they are better at defending against equally, but weight vs mobility is almost never an issue.

Wrong, there is no historical evidence that Samurai EVER utilized wood or bamboo armor. They utilized METAL armor historically; and furthermore it is a fact that Japan's iron is of lower quality than much of the iron used in European weapons and armor.

The closest you might come is pre-historic use of bamboo or of hardened leather; both of which were either long gone by the days of the Samurai, or wouldn't be in use by that class. While wikipedia isn't a reliable source, it does have several good pictures from museums which show samurai armor, all of which is made from iron.

Furthermore, a knight in full plate can do a standing back flip. Western armor being inflexible is as much a myth as the 10lb sword. Chainmail was an earlier development, and cheaper to make compared to plate; thus it remained in use. Hardened leather was cheaper still, and was the primary method of arming conscripts, on the occasion that they were armored at all.

If anything, the Samurai had inferior armor compared to western plate available to a knight in similar standing, due to poorer iron to make it with. There are other considerations, particularly tactical; as Samurai were often used as mounted archers and medium cavalry.

The armor that samurai used was better due to many things. It's construction was a weave which in general was better vs the weapons of the day. They did use metal, but not as much and what little they did use was used more effectively.

The inflexibility of armor is not a myth. It is exaggerated. There is a difference. It limits the range of motion below what is natural, but it does not limit to the point of what many people like to portray.

It should also be pointed out that the weapons and how they are used are different... Swords, which are the most notable in the fantasy area, western blades are generally shorter, straighter, and designed to thrust. A rapier's blade length is more of an oddity of design... while in eastern they are more about slashing (in fact katanas do not cut if you touch the edge unless someone pulls it down) with an option to pierce, but generally not used in that way.

I'm not saying one is better than the other but there is a lot to consider.

Hi,

I really like your class-based system and your selection of classes, reminds me of the early computer rpgs where you have a party of different classes. Choosing a (strict) class based system in a single character game is arguable, but in a multi-character system absolutly legitimate. One of the best features about such a game is the character creation process and how to composite your group :)

Some comments on your classes(just my opinion):
- sorcerer is more like an evil class, whereas a druid is a good class. Maybe you should make a magic and a nature branch:
magic: Mage->Wizard->Necromancer/Socrerer
nature: Mage->???->Duid/Shaman
- Silencer sound more like a pistol silencer :) A "ranger" would be a class fitting in this branch.
- "soldier" as base class sound like a military career, how about apprentice.
- The knight is a heavily armored class, I would drop the "Stone" class and replace it with the "knight" class. A warrior is a more neutral class, using wide range of armor and weapons. This would be my hybrid class. The missing slot I would fill up with a babarian (almost no armor, brute force), resulting in the following branch:
Fighter->Defender->Knight
Fighter->Defender->Guardian
Fighter->Brawler->Barbarian
Fighter->Brawler->Destroyer(Berserker?)
Fighter->Brawler/Defender->Warrior


--
Ashaman

Quote:

Original post by Durakken It should also be pointed out that the weapons and how they are used are different... Swords, which are the most notable in the fantasy area, western blades are generally shorter, straighter, and designed to thrust. A rapier's blade length is more of an oddity of design... while in eastern they are more about slashing (in fact katanas do not cut if you touch the edge unless someone pulls it down) with an option to pierce, but generally not used in that way. I'm not saying one is better than the other but there is a lot to consider.

There is a multitude of weapons both in East and West. Weapons that have developed for a similar purpose in either region tend to be similar, and the way they are used tends to be similar as well. If the external trappings were removed and the swords exchanged, the majority of people who are not specifically interested in swordsmanship (watching samurai movies or exercising with a bokken at a karate dojo does not count) would be unable to tell a bunch of German longsword trainees apart from students of some kenjutsu school.

Games generally make little attempt to model even the difference between totally different weapons like a thrusting sword and a warhammer. In comparison, the difference of two 2h swords of a roughly similar length is minuscule.

Kendo vs Fencing you'd notice the difference immediately...Kendo vs midevil broadswords you'd not notice a difference right off. Kendo vs Roman style swordsman ship you'd notice a difference.

And i mean someone who's knows nothing and looked at it trying to see if they are the same or different. Broadswords use the same principle of arcs that Kendo users do so it would look very similar if kept to that, BUT is instantly recognizable once you notice that the broad sword user is using all parts of the sword mixed with what appears to be a kind of judo while the kendo user would not be.

I don't know how we got onto the topic of sword fighting, but anyway, skill-based systems with that problem, Jaylach, should be prevented by additional weight to wear heavy armor, better magic modifiers on magic items, physical modifiers on physical items, etc. In Morrowind I choose to wear magic robes over heavy armor.

So you're going with the skill system used in Guild Wars. I like the idea. It solves the skill issue, and makes logical sense, but from an role-playing perspective it doesn't quite make much sense. Meaning you are forcing the player to imagine their character doesn't know how to cast a certain spell just because the GUI won't allow them. If it were reality, your wizard character should be able to cast any spell the wizard has learned. It's like saying "choose running or walking", choosing running, and then later forcing yourself to act like you don't know how to walk because you didn't pick walking.

Quote:

Original post by Durakken Kendo vs Fencing you'd notice the difference immediately...Kendo vs midevil broadswords you'd not notice a difference right off. Kendo vs Roman style swordsman ship you'd notice a difference. And i mean someone who's knows nothing and looked at it trying to see if they are the same or different. Broadswords use the same principle of arcs that Kendo users do so it would look very similar if kept to that, BUT is instantly recognizable once you notice that the broad sword user is using all parts of the sword mixed with what appears to be a kind of judo while the kendo user would not be.

You are confusing kendo and kenjutsu. Kendo is a sport, and a restrictive one at that. Kenjutsu schools are concerned about how to fight, and you best believe kenjutsuka practice wrestling the opponent and hitting him with anything that can be (productively) used for that purpose, such as the tsuka/pommel.

Also, I said "German longsword", meaning the style of Lichtenauer, Ringeck, Talhoffer and so forth, not "broadsword" which is generally understood to be a one-handed weapon.

The laws of physics are the same, the body is the same, so people will eventually figure out the same principles apart from each other when given sufficient motivation.