what RPG made you realize that classes are an unnecessary and restrictive game mechanic? for me it was picrel.
 UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68 |
 |
UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68 |
what RPG made you realize that classes are an unnecessary and restrictive game mechanic? for me it was picrel.
¿Why a game about having a party doesn't let one character do everything?
it's not the fact that the game doesn't let one character everything, it's that modern CRPGs are very clearly superhero simulators and the type of superhero it lets you create is always limited to what class the developer thought of and implemented into the game and putting more classes and subclasses has the illusion of more options but in reality in only makes it harder to make the character you want to make. say for example that you're a weeb who wants to make an anime katana wielder build; what starting class do you pick? do you pick fighter because you need a build who is masterful with a katana, or do you go for the sword saint subclass because you need to use a little bit of what is essentially magic, how about you start with a martial class and then take some levels in a spellcasting class so you can enchant your katana with electricity or whatever the frick? so many routes and options to achieve something that wasn't even close to what you originally envisioned. whereas if you had a classless setting you would just train the skills you want to train and learn the spells you want to learn to make the build you want. the developers should take care to not allow the player to make a character that can everything all the time like skyrim for example, but it's not like this thing hasn't been done before. in CDDA you can only efficiently educate yourself on a limited number of subjects, and the more fields you specialize in the lower you proficiency ceiling is in fields you haven't studied. or DF adventure mode where skills progress so slowly that grinding archery when you chose a melee fighting skillset at character creation is infeasible.
>"just don't have a specific build in mind when creating your character dude, just choose the uhhh...*looks closer* arcane enforcer slayer class and go with the flow dude"
don't pretend like this isn't how people play the game, otherwise there wouldn't be such an abundance of redundant classes and subclasses.
That's the fricked part of using an engine based on D&D 3.5.
A million of options, like twenty work.
>modern CRPGs are very clearly superhero simulators
The frick? Your level 1 fighter can't hit shit with that glorious +1 to hit unless you start powergaming already and they sell it like that?
nta but that's true
The reason is a much higher level cap
>A million of options, like twenty work.
All of them work lmao especially if you play on normal like the rest of the brainlets. Some of them don't work as in they literally don't work due to bugs but that's not what you meant.
What a shit take. What's funniest is that you are using 3.5e bloat to shit on all class systems.
Classes/ jobs serve several purposes. They give the character a clear role in battle and a place in the world. In short it´s a mechanic meant to put roleplaying at the core of the experience and limitations are just part of that.
And FYI there are lots of ways to make a workable spell sword. Tons of weeb chuunibyou options too if that´s your thing. If you are unable to do so you should blame it on your lack of skill, not on the system.
>And FYI there are lots of ways to make a
He knows, he specifically identified that as the problem, and you completely missed the point. His complaint is the path to it is unclear because instead of just grabbing the handful of skills he wants he has to first rummaged through the lego bin of archetypes to find which combination gets him closest to the very specific thing he wants to be, (IE okay I need to take 7 level of class A, 3 level of class B, and 10 levels of class C and that sorta makes what I want). It front loads character creation and requires the player to plan out ahead of time what sort of character they want to be rather than letting them decide as they go.
No, i got it. I just disagree and think the system has merit and serves a function. The spread sheet is at the core of the roleplaying experience. Classes help manage the skill point distribution, the role in battle, the background of previously acquired talents, the available feats and off course the acquisition of skills and techniques as lots of those things depend on specific stats (Sorcerers and paladins cast with CHA, while druids and clerics use WIS, how many points one allocates on STR determine if a character can wear an armor or use certain skills too). Without the classes you would have to do away with all of that and every skill or spell should use something else to calculate dmg. You could certainly keep the mechanic but without the classes people would end up picking skills they can´t use because they built using CHA but picked a skill that uses WIS. Or what, you also want to have all your stats at base 15?
My point is the character sheet is pretty much everything on an RPG, RPGs are defined by what the character can do, not what the player can do and choice implies sacrifices. One picks one thing while giving up on other possibilities. Not wanting that is like saying you don´t actually want to play an RPG.
>My point is the character sheet is pretty much everything on an RPG
Your spreadsheet doesn't matter when all it changes is the color of particle effects around your party as you mass select them and move them like a blob to autoattack for every encounter over the course of 40 hours.
so basically systems don't matter in the abstract, only their execution.
>No, i got it.
This rambling and nonsensical post proved otherwise.
>They give the character a clear role in battle and a place in the world.
This is ONLY true in terms of gameplay, there is no narrative consequence to having or not having classes. You can still represent thieves by having high stealth abilities with limited combat prowess. You can still be the archetypical heavy armor fighting man.
You can't make fun character concepts in Pathfinder because D&D is a shit system that strictly enforces frontloading features.
Classes prevent the player from cherry picking all the best abilities and forces them into playing a role.
Sounds like you just don't like the Pathfinder system because you are bad at making characters.
>You can't make fun character concepts in Pathfinder
>rolls a paladin
>kills demons
>mfw I'm having fun
>roll paladin in pathfinder
>enemies are mostly CN
>paladin doesn't work because of it
>anon's face goes missing from embarrassment
I played Kingmaker twice (once solo, once with a custom party of 4) and played a paladin both times. Was fun. Total fey death except I married Nyrissa the second time. Still made custom holy axiomatic weapons for everyone. If it bleeds, I can kill it.
>>"just don't have a specific build in mind when creating your character dude, just choose the uhhh...*looks closer* arcane enforcer slayer class and go with the flow dude"
what's the issue with this?
Imagine you have severe autism and you want to play as your favourite anime character Kirito, but you're not intelligent enough to figure out the dual wielding rules. How mad would you get about this? Is it enough to go on a Malaysian Music Forum to whine about it?
>but you're not intelligent enough to figure out the dual wielding rules.
The issue is right there. Why are there rules for dual wielding other than requirement for having a spare weapon (ideally same or similar as primary weapon) and enough physical stats to wield both at the same time, the more advanced wielding techniques and special moves are obviously learned from other characters (some weapon master) or from some manual, player could also develop his own (which would require like a million years of grind, so just find a teacher)
Isn't this how it is?
Why did kirito get to dual wield but others did not?
wait, is this why you see all those moronic posts saying "how would you build x in x?". they don't understand how to create an original character using a setting's concepts?
Its really just they want to make something more creative and the system was designed by boomers who could only imagine players wanting to be Gandalf, Robinhood, Aragorn, Conan, ect.
not really, they just want to apply their outside fantasies to every game they play and don't know how to get there. like, a weeb wanting to make a samurai isn't being creative.
Nah, that's entirely it. The systems were designed by people who have no sense of what's cool anymore.
no, that's bullshit and here's why. "cool" is amorphous, so this is meaningless generational nonsense you are trying to divert to, as if there's any consensus about what is "cool" among "boomers". if a game allows you to play anything at all, to create any concept and make it work, it really just has no identity as a world to roleplay in. i mean, it's okay to like or dislike certain things, not everything has to appeal to everyone.
Mad because you know I'm right. Back in my day we had Conan and Elric, they were cool to us. Nowadays the kids have anime characters and when the systems weren't built to allow for those types of heroes. Really what it comes down to. You'll understand when you're a little older.
p. lazy stuff, anon.
Glad you see things my way now. I accept your apology.
He isn't wrong that things have changed a lot.
Take the classic D&D Monk class.
People 40 years ago really liked the idea of playing a Bruce Lee or Wire Kung-Fu type character. So monk reflected that style. A class that is built around doing small amounts of damage with lots of individual hits and is more about being floaty and getting utility abilities than actually dealing damage. Often being just clerics that had some unarmed attack gimmick.
Now, Monk was never a 'strong' class. But people were mostly getting what they wanted out of it.
Today, the modern DnD fan that is picking Monk is not thinking about Kung-Fu movies from the 70s. They're thinking about playing Goku or Naruto or Itadori.
They want to play a front line brawler character that dishes out big damage on par with any Fighter or Barbarian.
The issue is that, fundamentally, Monk isn't about that. The damage scaling isn't there. The class bonuses don't mesh with the idea of being a frontline brawler. Etc.
It is a class that has fallen behind what the audience wants from it because what is cool about the idea of being an Eastern unarmored hand-to-hand or light weapon equipped fighter is different.
Many TTRPGs are stuck with the legacies of power fantasies that were popular in the 80s and 90s, with only some finally being updated to account for the fantasies of the early 2000s.
>They're thinking about playing Goku or Naruto or Itadori
talk about outdated...
Itadori's anime just finished airing.
anime itself isn't a universal draw amongst kids, anon. it's like a 30+ year old hobby.
WSJ action shonen like Jujutsu Kaisen are.
It is probably the most popular anime series with young people in the West right now.
>most popular anime series with young people in the West right now
Are you just at the point of claiming that anime isn't popular?
i'm saying any particular aspect of any hobby being popular or not amongst its fans isn't indicative of anything at all. everything is piecemeal and has been for decades. stop trying to make theories to understand people, you aren't good at it.
What do you mean it isn't indicative at all?
You stupid fricker, the fantasy of being a badass anime fighting character is one of the biggest trends within anime fans.
People start hitting the gym over loving Dragon Ball or Baki. Play their video games to live that fantasy. And then take those fantasies to TTRPGs.
If you've ever played DnD, you've played at least one session with someone trying to be Guts. Trying to be Musashi. Trying to be Edward Elric.
Or trying to be Gon/Joseph Joestar/Baki and failing because the Monk class just doesn't facilitate it.
This attempt to claim that large fanbases and fans that seek to live out their fantasies derived from media don't exist via some appeal to social atomization is incredible.
You're using a site where at any point half of a given board is owned by one or two trendy fanbases, and the entire site is hobby boards.
i think you are trapped in a bubble and tend to encounter similar people. lots of people like lots of things. the world is very interconnected and there's no consensus of taste or cool factor. hell, if you think you've got your finger on the pulse of what's hot, you should get involved in creating something to service that.
If you can't tell by observation what is popular, that is on you.
And even if it was just a bubble, the bubble that contains 'TTRPG players' and 'Anime fans' crosses over immensely. So my point would stand regardless.
>the bubble that contains 'TTRPG players' and 'Anime fans' crosses over immensely
yes, 20 years ago
Bro I have been looking for this gif for like 10 years. I always see the still image of the end of it but never the full gif. Thank you.
What the frick is this autism? Shut the frick up moron.
that voice you hear? it's yours.
>Now, Monk was never a 'strong' class. But people were mostly getting what they wanted out of it.
anon, bruce lee kicked people across the room or fought 40 dudes and cracked their heads with one nunchuk blow each. the class just sucked.
The tree of feat dependencies is not clearly communicated to the player, that's a problem with how the game is designed.
Because they don't care, they throw in some generic system and call it a day.
who?
>what RPG made you realize that classes are an unnecessary and restrictive game mechanic?
>whereas if you had a classless setting you would just train the skills you want to train and learn the spells you want to learn to make the build you want
>you should really just chuck the class based pretense out the window completely
Bottom: Before the Zionists broke his brain with benzos
Above: After
>it's not the fact that the game doesn't let one character everything, it's that modern CRPGs are very clearly superhero simulators and the type of superhero it lets you create is always limited to what class the developer thought of and implemented into the game and putting more classes and subclasses has the illusion of more options but in reality in only makes it harder to make the character you want to make. say for example that you're a weeb who wants to make an anime katana wielder build; what starting class do you pick? do you pick fighter because you need a build who is masterful with a katana, or do you go for the sword saint subclass because you need to use a little bit of what is essentially magic, how about you start with a martial class and then take some levels in a spellcasting class so you can enchant your katana with electricity or whatever the frick? so many routes and options to achieve something that wasn't even close to what you originally envisioned. whereas if you had a classless setting you would just train the skills you want to train and learn the spells you want to learn to make the build you want. the developers should take care to not allow the player to make a character that can everything all the time like skyrim for example, but it's not like this thing hasn't been done before. in CDDA you can only efficiently educate yourself on a limited number of subjects, and the more fields you specialize in the lower you proficiency ceiling is in fields you haven't studied. or DF adventure mode where skills progress so slowly that grinding archery when you chose a melee fighting skillset at character creation is infeasible.
congratulations, you will 100% always get self-buffing warriors as the optimal build if you even tried to balance melee against magic.
Nope.
You mean like Kensai/Wizard or fighter classes with some spellcasting?
That's a problem of balance, not whether or not your game has classes.
You can plan out a build without classes.
This is mainly an education problem. In that like 5% of players are adequately educated to know how the system works well enough to get what they want out of it on the first try.
Something like Pathfinder tries to give you all that granularity, but unless you have a few hours to read all the class books and figure out how they all work and then read some community posts that explain things in more detail, you're just shooting from the hip and hoping it works out.
I don't disagree with what you or OP is saying but it can also be an enjoyable art of RP + mechanics to eke out the best combo for your style against the odds, which is why a lot of us keep coming back to the genre.
Something like DD2 does handle this kind of modularity much better though than "Flavor one off class we didn't really put much balance thought into".
D here will take 2 levels of scholar of war, then be double dipping INT to AC which is fun since they nerfed double dip CHA (which I hardly did because I didn't like the RP of nature domains usually, nor mass published meta guide bullshit that ignores all RP) The massive Shadowcaster INT bonus will be triple dipped essentially through 2 ac stack + sword saint offensive stuff. This is currently for hard difficulty and I might rerun it for unfair later. So far just Wenduag as pure Mad Dog with a wolf, throwing axes, and Ember as pure Oracle is the rest of the plan and just those three as much as possible. (Fits my Gothweeb sensibilities of who shows up in a D anime)
Really happy with this one since I hate nenio, don't care to run woljif that much so always lacking arcane in my parties and it all really fits D thematically.
2 SoW, 20 Sword Saint, 18 Shadowcaster being the end goal which I believe hits all the AB and CL power points. Will tell the lich to frick off into legend thus giving me a lot of dark necro and shadow magic themed fighter mage D with all the cosmetics I need since he keeps lich spells after merge and legend.
I was doing this with cavalier + spellmaster before without any ac dipping but it is a pain in the ass to mod in the black horse (DL-4 Cyborg natch) if you didn't preorder and I think the levelling script detaches from the character sometimes even when i thought i toyboxed it in proper.
>fix for visual adjustments 2 when that mod is a piece of crap and performs worse than the first one
Just so you know D has an official stat block.
why is D aligned as NG though? LN or even LG make more sense.
>Vampire nobility set the laws in his world
No
>Ignores helpless villagers
Never
NG is correct. He's too low key judo mentality to be chaotic.
"Lawful" alignment doesn't mean you have the follows the arbitrary laws that someone else sets, anon. It's a matter of ethos. A Lawful Good paladin who enters a lawful evil domain does not suddenly have any compunction to obey a law demanding that escaped slaves be returned to their masters, for example.
>allow the player to make a character that can everything all the time like skyrim for example
You can't do "everything all the time" in Skyrim.
I mean, you can. Just grind those stats anon!
You can, but mostly because the game is designed so that all builds can take on any challenge.
>casualized level scaling
Yes you can
Perhaps the devs, having a solid understanding of the system and its mechanics, didn't want every option to be available? Perhaps a fantasy setting doesn't need a robot ninja class? Perhaps a western setting doesn't need a weeb katana class as that would not fit in lore wise? Classes are pretty useful as a tool for balance, lore, and story.
If I made a hard scifi setting I wouldn't include ninjas or wizards; that might be an issue for you if you wanted to be a space ninja wizard, but perhaps the issue is that you want a different game altogether?
Generally I find classes to be a shit way of giving characters limitations. With classes you end up spending hours just reading through all 300 archetypes only to decide on a basic b***h fighter, mage, cleric, and thief.
If people want to be snowflakes or spice it up you don't need classes what you want is just à la carte selection of class features and the player gets a limited number of points to buy type of class they want to be. Want 1/4th level arcane spell casting that's 2 class points, want full arcane spell casting, well that's 6 class points. You have 10 class points to spend and you'll get 10 more over the course of the game, have fun. This is what a lot of the classless roguelikes do and its so much more satisfying.
>With classes you end up spending hours just reading through all 300 archetypes only to decide on a basic b***h fighter, mage, cleric, and thief.
This means there’s too much bloat (looking at you Pathfinder). There should be a couple options for each archetypical role, with different roleplaying flavor and mechanics, but you don’t need a dozen. I think the base classes for 3.5 are about perfect.
That's what Ad&d 2e did... I'll post the rules once I'm back home. Funny how "modern" iterations of D&D don't even have that.
Hell, even 3e at least suggested rules to exchange your powers in order to customize your character.
Skills & Powers was banned at nearly every table in existence. It was a DM aid more than a player aid.
No I'm speaking about the rules to create new PC classes. It's strange that newer editions didn't use a similar method to replace the good old Classes.
how many points do you get to spend?
As many as you'd like to : you just add up the + and - , the final result is a multiplier to the XP you need to go to level 2.
As a result, making a guy who fights like a Fighter but casts Wizards and Cleric spells will require more XP than simply being multiclassed. The idea was to make an exceptional character (like a Ninja who has some Thief abilities but can cast Wizard spells). The idea was great, the execution less so, that Table would need some work.
That seems really shit, if I take wizard class I get 1x EXP but if I build the same exact thing here I need 13.5x as much EXP. Clearly this wasn't balanced at all.
The normal Wizard is about 5x, actually, but the point still stands.
moron, classless doesn't mean your characters can do everything.
Even Underrail which is just another moronic serbian power fantasy limits what your character can do.
these systems are obnoxious because theres a million classes and they're all just derivative of an archetype, and given to the worst narcissistic tendencies of players.
> oh my char is a swashbuckling rolero duellist from the order of wabbaflabba AND he's a ..
so you're just a high DEX warrior who uses rapiers and prances around in light armor, we got it
> oh my char is a warlock sorcerer dragonblood with...
you mean a wizard
> nnoo you dont understand its different its like
you mean a wizard, shut the frick up, gandalf used a sword too homosexual
Almost every special "class" is just some form of warrior/rogue/wizard and the idiosyncrasies of your character should really come from the RP and not from having 5000 disparate "classes" that all end up filling the same actual roles.
Systems like pathfinder as it is translated to CRPGs just makes it even more obnoxious because any regard for roleplaying has gone out the window and people are "dipping" for buildhomosexualry at which point you should really just chuck the class based pretense out the window completely.
>people are "dipping" for buildhomosexualry
>requires the player to plan out ahead of time
Believe it or not some people actually enjoy building characters in 3e/pathfinder.
oh I believe it
no shortage of profoundly moronic people on this planet
Whoever invented that multiclassing system deserves to get publically executed in the most gruesome and memorable way possible. The entire ordeal will then be recorded and then used as a grim reminder to any autist who wants to go into that decline system.
If you really can't contain autism then just expand the opitions within the respective classes:
You don't need Fighter + Aldori defender + Two handed fighter + Tower Shield specialist as different distict classes. What you need is a normal fighter with ability to pick and choose if he want to spend on FIGHTER-RESPECTIVE-Feats/talents whether he wants to be a two-hand or a tower shield etc. That way you remove 5 classes and replace them with just 1, who has much bigger complexity.
Multiclassing should also come with powerful drawbacks. Yes, leave some loopholes for gigautists to have fun with, but don't make them 50% stronger than the rest. 5-10% is acceptable.
That's how 3.5's Fighter worked and it absolutely fricking blew.
nobody gives a shit about your tabletroony garbage
least of all diapers and dragqueens
>responds to a pathfinder topic
>doesn't realize it is a vidya adaptation of a tabletop system
nta, but you get my gold star for stupidest fricking post i've seen in all day anon
That's how Pathfinder 2e work dummy. Most of those different "variants" are inside the core classes. "Multiclassing" exist but it's hella limited and more like "I wanna specialize in X thingy" and has hard brakes to avoid dipping.
Sadly people would rather adapt DND 5E, 3E or PF 1E Instead of 2E or *gasp* Gurps.
They are free to do so
Raising obvious flaws (from the point of view of someone who dislikes the system) doesn't mean that nobody should like it
No.
>any regard for roleplaying has gone out the window and people are "dipping" for buildhomosexualry
This is the core problem with freely allowing multiclassing. Originally, the roleplaying came first and then the mechanics were there to implement the roleplaying. Now, it’s entirely about mechanics without even a cursory attempt to roleplay. The relationship has been inverted and that’s why it’s hollow.
>t. pure class builds only
>This is the core problem with freely allowing multiclassing.
Only 3e based multiclassing
Do you have examples of other systems that do multiclassing better? Imo the concept is flawed, your class defines what you can do (and implicitly, what you cannot do), and that choice is meaningless if you can combine as many classes as you want.
>systems that do multiclassing better
2e
deadfire
>that choice is meaningless if you can combine as many classes as you want
I know, I literally said
> 3e based multiclassing
I see your point now. Yes, 3e style multiclassing was primarily what I was criticizing, where you can arbitrarily decide to take whatever dips at whatever point. I don't consider 2nd ed or Deadfire style to be the same thing, since you're effectively picking a class at character creation and then sticking with that for the rest of the game, with your "class" just being a 50/50 split of two classes, with no dips.
That depends on the player though. You can still choose to multyclass for roleplaying purposes and doing so it´s still the most satisfying option as, if done correctly, it really feels as if the character is being changed by the events of the adventure.
>That depends on the player though. You can still choose to multyclass for roleplaying purposes and doing so it´s still the most satisfying option as, if done correctly, it really feels as if the character is being changed by the events of the adventure.
True. This was the original intent of the system, to mechanically reflect the roleplaying and the story. That’s why Elminster had the goofy class split he does, it shows his time spent as different professions. I just think the majority of players don’t do this, and instead go for munchkin dips and broken combinations.
That's not a problem.
>>oh my char is a holy man with a mace and
>So he's just a fighter/wizard.
>>nnoo you don't understand his spells are different
>You mean a fighter/wizard, shut the frick up, Aragorn healed people too, homosexual.
But wait, there's more!
>>oh my char is warrior with a huge sword
>So he's just a lame wizard who doesn't know any spells. At least he roided up some and practised swinging a chunk of metal.
>>nnoo you don't understand he comes from this cool tribe and
>You mean a lame wizard who doesn't know any spells, shut the frick up, Gandalf used a sword too, homosexual.
Riveting.
I don't think this post is the rebuttal you hoped
It actually was, you just lack the requisite INT to understand what he was getting at.
No I got it its just kind of nothing.
>No I got it
Did you though? Did you really? Be honest here.
Yeah hes just being kind of absurd and unfair. The other guy is right in that a lot of "classes" can and should be compressed. This guy just kind of says oh well you can compress everything down to one class, which doesn't really mean anything in this context.
The core problem hes getting at is Pathfinder presenting the player with like 50 "classes" when they hit new game which is kind of a pain in the ass especially when its pretty shallow at the end of the day. The point is not that we should compress like for like as much as possible but that there is such a thing as having too much. The guy saying everything can be compressed down to wizard just seems like hes being confrontational with no particular goal in mind.
basically he wrote a lot of lines when he really just wanted to say "frick you"
>I in fact didn't get it at all
Thanks for clearing that up.
oh ok
>If I can't crouch to simulate getting turned into a snail it's not RPG.
>Normies will never understand me.
This legendary btfo of (You) types will haunt you all for the rest of your time here I promise you.
This guy got everything, or at least salvaged two shitty posts from between the usual reductionism vs. hyperbole autism shitflinging that passes for discussion here. Good job that guy. I be he is a normie with a job, car, and wife.
>I didn't get it either and I have a very small penis
Very sad, but understandable.
>The other guy is right in that a lot of "classes" can and should be compressed.
"It's true/applicable when it aligns with my beliefs."
>This guy just kind of says oh well you can compress everything down to one class, which doesn't really mean anything in this context.
"It's not true/not applicable when it doesn't align with my beliefs."
>Yeah hes just being kind of absurd and unfair.
Sorry about hurting your feelings with truth, anon. Get well soon.
there should be only two classes: martial and magic user
The things is, where there's martials, there is magic.
Otherwise martials would NEVER compete with people casting spells.
and why should they?
so normal and normal+
naw, there should be classes but your game should restrict them to the fighter-wizard-thief-cleric set up with limited subtypes, 3 at most each
i don't think anyone who thinks in terms of metarules for system design should ever be listened to, because they will never make a good game.
having no limitations isn't necessarily good
also, classes are evocative and soulful
they shouldn't be too restrictive, though, and you should be allowed to make sub-optimal but still viable fun builds
>having no limitations isn't necessarily good
classless doesn't mean no limitations. most of these class-based games still have stats and prerequisites that shape builds along certain desired paths. the class/archetype part is a crutch for designers that want to have their cake and eat it too (control and freedom)
Basically none, because I've played more than 4 RPGs and know that my dislike for a particular game doesn't mean a particular style of character development is shit.
Class should just be a starting point, after that you get to build however you like.
dark souls isn't an RPG fromBlack person
Are these "dark souls" in the room with you now?
I don’t think any one game made me think it I just realized it on my own
PoE
Any game that has the bard class. That shit is the dumbest idea i've ever heard.
the best approach to classes is a battle-dynamic job switch system. that's why FFX-2 and Stranger of Paradise are my favorite games.
Never.
They're only restrictive if they're imbalanced to the point some classes aren't usable.
Underrail for me
Sure there are stat requirements but otherwise its real flexible for most things (exceptions are 8+ requirements for feats, but usually these are so high up you only bother when already being fit to a role)
Its also really silly, as if a person was THAT limited to a specific task, instead of being limited by training and "potential"
Like, a human with the same stats if he didn't go rogue he can't pick locks, ever.
>I'm angry people optimize character builds in a single player cRPG
>I'm also angry people don't optimize character builds in a single player cRPG
Why do you care how other people play the game?
who is the addressee of your questions?
[Scully]Not who, but whom?[/Scully]
>whom is the addressee of your questions?
ESL?
jack of all trades. master of none. the best kind of character to play
nwn1 multiplayer persistent worlds
I realized d&d was an extremely bad rpg and it forced players to be dungeon crawling dragon killing adventurers per the name suggests. GL trying to roleplay a merchant, a lord, a thief in the city, a beggar etc. You need to homebrew so hard that the game stops being deeandeee
>wtf i have to be a vampire in Vampire!!? lame.
Which is why I said multiplayer persistent worlds. Basically not d&d campaings but persistent areas where many players roleplayed together, City of Arabel, Turmish Lands, Narfell servers come to my mind.
In each and single one of them if you were not some adventurer you were fricked. People did their best to mitigate this, try to implement trade/caravan/crafting/nobility mechanics it was being modded to hell. Which caused my 12 year old brain to jump ship from deeanddee. I don't hate the system per se I just find it not for my taste. I don't like dungeon crawling
But I see many people try to push every style of gameplay into d&d which is kinda moronic.
I think the word 'adventurer' has always been metanarrative cancer.
There have only been like the most extreme of explorers called 'adventurers' in the real world occasionally for some conde nast article or some bullshit like history channel.
No one uses that term in real life as much as they do in rpgs but d&D hackbrains can't get it out of their mouths.
You wouldn't call any real position in the world 'adventurer', no one describes other people like that irl. They'd be Burton the annoying caravan guard and such.
Instant sign of bad writing: "adventurer", "casts fireball", etc.
Leftists go on and on about some esg bullshit 'trope' but are totally fine with Cliche World otherwise.
>metanarrative cancer
>No one uses that term in real life
>real position
lol, is this thread moron bait or what
You've added a lot to the discussion with your insight and depth, and I hope you'll return soon as it's always a pleasure to hear from you.
what's there to say to someone who says "adventurers aren't real". like, no shit, we don't have magic ruins of ancient civilizations inhabited by monstrous creatures and full of loot here on Earth.
>What is verisimilitude
You're not qualified to handle your end of this conversation, maybe when you're older.
>What is verisimilitude
indeed, you don't know what it means. it means the appearance of reality within that world. it makes perfect sense that a world with countless guarded ruins and extremely dangerous monsters would inspire a profession dedicated to dungeon crawling. you are too autistic for this concept, methinks.
>I think the word 'adventurer' has always been metanarrative cancer.
agree on this bit. and if there's an "adventurer's guild" there's no saving a setting.
Mages would have a guild however, and a world with magic would primarily use magic for industry rather than adventure. A freelancer mage would almost certainly be illegal.
depends how widespread they are. most fantasy settings wouldn't be capable of legislating between licensed and freelance anything, in practice. no one's checking id against a centralised database. if 5% of people can do a bit of magic what are you realistically going to do about "illegals"?
you either burn all witches or let them do what they're going to do and punish crimes like you would any normies.
>legislating
Guilds would chase down and 'politely recruit' or do mob shit to tradesmen that try to work outside of their guild (and they make learning the skill without being an apprentice to a guild tradesman very hard): People find out through word of mouth that Jacque or William aren't registered with the local guild, then they will receive 'offers' to join.
Trust me, if I ran a Mage's Guild, any hedge wizard or unregistered caster would receive at least a sternly worded letter.
Even if you were just a street performer practicing sleight-of-hand "magic" the mages guild would probably send their goon squad over and make you register with them and pay their fees since the average folk can't tell a difference.
Even if they make it difficult to learn magic, those who have natural magic talent would be a thorn in the side of the Guild. Even if checking a database for an ID wouldn't be possible, perhaps something similar could be done via a secret handshake whether literal or a tattoo only members have.
You'd really only need a license with the appropriate seals of authenticity, perhaps magical seals rather than wax, they'd have a ledger at the guild if they think your license is suspicious.
Magic could make that sort of thing easy to replicate, a tattoo that gives you a free low level spell everyday on the other hand could be seen as a nice membership perk as well as an ID.
Your magical signature is impossible to replicate by another mage, its like a fingerprint, any mage can tell any other mage's magic just by the flow and character of their unique od. The guild seal is created by the head mage of that chapter, it might fool a non-mage or someone from out of town but a mage, or even anyone with slight magical-sensitivity from that community can immediately tell if the document was falsified.
>Your magical signature is impossible to replicate by another mage
That would have been true 50 years ago, but with the advent of new presdigitation techniques a magical signature is easy to forge, same for the magical seal since the Thieves guild managed to figure out how to forge one of those a long time ago. The end result is that there are more hedge mages than ever ruining the good name of our Illustrious guild and we need better security methods to combat this growing problem.
No, Magic's economic value would outweigh anything else, if you burned all witches you'd quickly be conquered by your neighbors who didn't because you can't compete with them economically. Guilds would form and guilds harshly punish any one practicing their trade without their authorization the same would be true for magic.
I think there should still be a thief guild, but instead of calling it a guild because that's stupid. It should be called a gang instead. You know, like in real life.
Maybe you'd have the Goldenbarge family, a gnomish Crime family who specialises in extortion rather than an actual "Thieves guild".
I don't know what you expected.
Even though DnD hasn't been a wargame for a long time it is still fundamentally an action game.
You're not playing DnD to simulate being a shopkeeper.
There's a middling contingent of autists that somehow think they're better roleplayers for wanting to balance medieval excel spreadsheets instead of doing anything exciting. That's where you get these le pacifist pushes in garbage like DE. You end up with a not very immersive flat world, using not much of what computers are capable of.
I suppose it's cool for them to come on once in a while in NWN and run the pickpocket through the regs campaign to troll them but if it were that cool and enduring there'd be a lot more thief simulators instead of a couple in the early 00's and that's the more exciting end of what 'le roleplayers' speak of.
It's always going to be a niche part of an already niche genre but I am beyond tired of such pseud blather.
What should be pushed for instead is more detailed campaigns and better writing in settings that have been left to languish and not counting moldy socks in some stick up the ass autist's underwear drawer with 'le pacifist rp'.
What should be pushed for instead is removing not just tired, but diseased to the point of metastasized cliches like 'adventuring' and standard descriptions of magic so much that it becomes mundane across all forms of writing and shows in order to replace it with actual original fantasy writing again, and compelling crpg settings to match, which should be derived from the writing, not the other way around as happens now.
Unfortunately we're dealing with a generation trained by bad dnd, lcd derivates of that like pf, isekai, and 'adventurer's guilds' in every anime and manga at this point so if you suggest it could be done better they start foaming at the mouth a little, sort of like the dbz monk culture clash mentioned already.
fallout 1/2/nv
I think classes are fine, it's just the linear class progression of d&d in general that's an issue. See Expeditions: Rome, Tower of Time/Dark Envoy and Pillars of Eternity for good class design where every class is distinct and purposeful, yet can be played in a number of ways depending on how you stat them or what perks are picked.
>Classes are unnecessary
Yes. Many games work without them.
>restrictive
Depends on the game. Knowing what a character will be good at just by glancing at their class is very liberating both from a design perspective and a player perspective.
Reminds me of Lands of Lore, you begin as someone who is strongly suited for one of the three available classes but you can become something else as you level up - the character is effectively a fighter, thief, magic user, as long as you do what is necessary to progress.
Pathfinder is just terrible and the crpgs based on it are for morons. In a proper game classes give you more variety and synergies, whereas a removal of classes compresses diversity into role functions (tank, dps, heals), so all these options become far less impactful.
Indeed, morons will use a lot of buzzwords to say nothing of substance.
I will always prefer defined classes to build a bear classes. Restrictions make things more fun.
The pathfinder class selection stuff was the worst shit I've ever seen. Talk about mile wide inch deep
Nah.
I understand what you are getting at. But I had a different realization.
More doesn't mean better.
There is such a thing as "too many classes".
Fighter
Thief
Wizard
Dwarf(class)
Elf(class)
All you need
God i wish I could make my own RPG
>Classes prevent the player from cherry picking all the best abilities and forces them into playing a role.
Non-sequitur response.
>Sounds like you just don't like the Pathfinder system because you are bad at making characters.
Why would system mastery even matter when Pathfinder's class fantasy is just inherently trash and stifling?
meant to reply to
okay fair enough but why does the player get to build their character if they're not allowed to "do it wrong", if the roles are so rigid why build a character at all, why not just have prebuild characters that either never change their stats or have set progressions
Let me guess, you 'need' more.
Still the best looking D&D game, perfect blend of east and western styles.
Yes, it is unbalanced on purpose, which is my biggest pet peeve with ADD 2e : the authors are preachy and go as far as botching some rules to ensure that the players won't abuse it.
Still, the idea was clearly there 30 years ago, there would be little need for a "Disciple of the Pike" if I could just make a Fighter with Weapon Specialization, the Ranger's favored ennemy and the good old dwarf's bonus against Giants.
Bundling skills together makes it easy to control and manipulate metas.
>what RPG made you realize that classes are an unnecessary and restrictive game mechanic?
None, and they never will. Both approaches have merit. But my first RPG without classes that I really like is Arx Fatalis.
Here is a quote you will see in nearly every thread that mentions playing something classless that explains the mindset of modern D&D players "Everyone will just play the same character because it is the most powerful build!"
Are they wrong? Have you ever seen how much of a meme "Stealth Archer" is in the Skyrim community? Players will naturally gravitate towards effective gameplay even if it ruins their fun, and Skyrim got really lucky that Archery was more fun than melee or magic.
stealth archery in skyrim is neither strong nor powerful
its a meme spouted by morons because it was a thing in level 1 oblivion runs
the same morons even talk about stealth archery in morrowind
Wrong.
Amazing, every sentence is completely wrong.
>t. didn't play the game
>Skyrim
>ruins their fun
lol, stealth archery is a symptom of the game not really being fun in the first place. melee is garbage, magic is garbage, combat is garbage, so why not bypass it as quickly as possible?
Does the Pathfinder games use 1E or 2E class system?
i don't think 2e had any vidya made of it so far