Party Based Classless RPG Suggestions

[Slow James]

I get that people enjoy doing their own thing and hence the clamour for a classless system, but I was raised on D&D 2nd ed and am fairly familiar with both ways of doing it and tbh I prefer strict classes. A lot of the fun I got was from hinder, hobbling the classes to see what would happen. PnP example, I had a brain damaged mage, couldn't remember his own name most of the time DM used to regularly fuck me up and it was a hoot, so I just guess those memories have rolled over and made me enjoy classes in my RPG's.. although admittedly cRPG's certainly don't have the same freedom or options, but that's were my predilections have continued to lie.

The problem I want to explore is the pigeon holing of class into combat roles (and little else). I didn't feel that in PnP tabletops that had classes, but seem to find inescapable in CRPGs.

 

[CryptRat]

In Dungeon Master you use magic as you wish.

 

[SarcasticUndertones]

I guess it just comes down to the fact that games are mostly combat fests now, it's pretty much their raison d'etre. If we get worthwhile story and atmosphere it's almost always done to justify the combat, so that become pretty much the only reason PC's exist in the first place, so yeah all skills are going to be skewed that way.

Now if you want to raise an arguement against that I'm all in, I'd love to see a game with little combat but a wide variance of skills/knowldge to take advantage of, but TBH I'm not sure how in the hell a game would go about that, or even if in the end it would be fun in the end.

 

[Slow James]

I guess it just comes down to the fact that games are mostly combat fests now, it's pretty much their raison d'etre. If we get worthwhile story and atmosphere it's almost always done to justify the combat, so that become pretty much the only reason PC's exist in the first place, so yeah all skills are going to be skewed that way.

Now if you want to raise an arguement against that I'm all in, I'd love to see a game with little combat but a wide variance of skills/knowldge to take advantage of, but TBH I'm not sure how in the hell a game would go about that, or even if in the end it would be fun in the end.

I can't say I Disagree, although I would really like to. It's almost like describing a party based Adventure game.

A party based quest for glory... now that's either a brilliant or a atrocious idea.

 

[V_K]

A party based quest for glory... now that's either a brilliant or a atrocious idea.

Well there was Arcatera, which was atrocious. Although that was mostly due to overambitiousness and bugs. If it settled on being just a party-based QfG, it'd be a much better game. They had a bunch of really good ideas there.

 

[Damned Registrations]

There's Shadowrun. The recent crogs have sort of loose builds already put together, but the old action rpg for the Genesis let you do pretty much whatever the fuck you wanted, although you have to start as one of 3 archetypes, you end up becoming so much stronger by the end that the starting skillset was basically trivial. And you can swap control to one of your other 2 party members, and there's a fair amount of non combat skills to go around (though certain ones are basically useless on party members since you are the leader, negotiation for hiring new runners for example.)

 

[oscar]

Prelude to Darkness.

 

[laclongquan]

Good choice! I remember that shit... though it's a bit short~

 

[Jason Liang]

FF VIII is classless. Basically you assign 4 commands to each character, including Attack, Item, Magic, Draw or GF, and GFs also provide special actions as well, but you can build each character any way you like...

 

[Akratus]

There's Shadowrun. The recent crogs have sort of loose builds already put together,¨

Hey yeah, I had realized how classless Shadowrun Returns is.

I did wonder how a character that puts at least 1 point in everything (sans weapon skills) would fare. .

 

[laclongquan]

While that is true, the growth of stats make it inefficient to deviate from the optimum path. Squall is a melee fighter, and let him combat by casting is not a great method.

 

[IncendiaryDevice]

The discussion in some of the other threads about magic and it sizes in gaming had me thinking about more systems that could have magic being utilized freely by other class types, essentially. Classes in today's gaming seem to be driven by MMO archetypes that pigeonhole game design into an increasingly stale direction, IMO. I was just looking for some suggested examples of games that let you control a party, but also not be slaves to designated roles within that party. If that makes sense.

I think I agree with Octavius, in that by starting with a blank slate for characters but have a system where you then assign talents/points won't you end up creating the separate classes as the game unfolds anyway? This is specifically relating to the Party aspect of your thread as opposed to a single-PC game.

Also, by removing classes just because you're personally bored of them aren't you more suggesting that you're bored of the genre rather than the genre requires change? Most people here spend their time complaining if a game has too limited a class choice, do they not, and bemoan games which reduce class options.

I think whoever said "a bit like adventure games" is kind of proving this point. Like saying "wouldn't it be interesting to play an FPS that didn't have weapons + weapon variety/upgrades", it would be interesting, but it also wouldn't be an FPS.

I'm trying to visualise what a classless party based RPG would play like. I'm seeing 4/6/8 swordsmen walking along a beaten path. One loots a dead body and finds a wand of 10 charges of Open Lock. You give that to one of your party members, but it doesn't matter which. You loot another dead body and find a crossbow and bolts. You give that to another party member, but it doesn't matter which. Until all party members each have a wand of open lock and a crossbow. What I'm visualising is a diablo-clone bot:

 

[V_K]

I think I agree with Octavius, in that by starting with a blank slate for characters but have a system where you then assign talents/points won't you end up creating the separate classes as the game unfolds anyway?

You do, but they'll be your classes, that support your playing style, not the tried-and-tired archetypes spoon-fed to you by the designers.
Of course, this is also possible to an extent with the flexible enough class system - like, for example, Grimrock 2, where an alchemist who doesn't know any alchemy is an absolutely viable build. But such systems are even more rare than fully-classless.

 

[Tigranes]

The discussion in some of the other threads about magic and it sizes in gaming had me thinking about more systems that could have magic being utilized freely by other class types, essentially. Classes in today's gaming seem to be driven by MMO archetypes that pigeonhole game design into an increasingly stale direction, IMO. I was just looking for some suggested examples of games that let you control a party, but also not be slaves to designated roles within that party. If that makes sense.

I think I agree with Octavius, in that by starting with a blank slate for characters but have a system where you then assign talents/points won't you end up creating the separate classes as the game unfolds anyway? This is specifically relating to the Party aspect of your thread as opposed to a single-PC game.

Also, by removing classes just because you're personally bored of them aren't you more suggesting that you're bored of the genre rather than the genre requires change? Most people here spend their time complaining if a game has too limited a class choice, do they not, and bemoan games which reduce class options.

I think whoever said "a bit like adventure games" is kind of proving this point. Like saying "wouldn't it be interesting to play an FPS that didn't have weapons + weapon variety/upgrades", it would be interesting, but it also wouldn't be an FPS.

I'm trying to visualise what a classless party based RPG would play like. I'm seeing 4/6/8 swordsmen walking along a beaten path. One loots a dead body and finds a wand of 10 charges of Open Lock. You give that to one of your party members, but it doesn't matter which. You loot another dead body and find a crossbow and bolts. You give that to another party member, but it doesn't matter which. Until all party members each have a wand of open lock and a crossbow. What I'm visualising is a diablo-clone bot:

Classless does not mean no skills or character development. Have you ever played a classless system?

 

[IncendiaryDevice]

You do, but they'll be your classes, that support your playing style, not the tried-and-tired archetypes spoon-fed to you by the designers.
Of course, this is also possible to an extent with the flexible enough class system - like, for example, Grimrock 2, where an alchemist who doesn't know any alchemy is an absolutely viable build. But such systems are even more rare than fully-classless.

I refute this perspective to a degree, not totally, but to a great enough degree to question it.

If you are allowed to choose your classes from the start, you are choosing classes which suit your own personal preferences anyway, this is only hampered by "spoon-fed archetypes" if the game lacks a good variety of choice - see my sentences on bemoaning games with too few choices.

In games where I am allowed to start off relatively blank and then shape a more defined class over time, what I find is that I assign skill-points and talents in a reactionary way depending on what I meet in the environment. Find a locked chest? Add points to pick lock. Find I'm not hitting my target enough? Add points to Strength or Accuracy. I don't end up with my own personal playing style, I end up with a character that's even more "spoon-fed by the designers".

 

[IncendiaryDevice]

Classless does not mean no skills or character development. Have you ever played a classless system?

To be honest I'm a tad confused about the term 'classless' in the context of the thread. If you can build a class from a classes start, it's still not a classless system, it's just delayed class. Rather than wait for me to complete a game you consider to be classless, perhaps you could describe in meaningful way what 'classless' means in relation to an RPG so I know exactly where you're coming from.

 

[laclongquan]

If you dont understand "classless" concept... what do you think opening your mouth here anyway? Isnt it better to try the games mentioned to experience first hand what it means?

 

[IncendiaryDevice]

If you dont understand "classless" concept... what do you think opening your mouth here anyway? Isnt it better to try the games mentioned to experience first hand what it means?

Where else would I ask what people mean by a classless system than in a thread entitled "classless suggestions". I'm sorry, but to me that's just utterly duuuuuuuurrrrrrr...

Sorry if it pains you to have to describe the concept...

 

[V_K]

In games where I am allowed to start off relatively blank and then shape a more defined class over time, what I find is that I assign skill-points and talents in a reactionary way depending on what I meet in the environment. Find a locked chest? Add points to pick lock. Find I'm not hitting my target enough? Add points to Strength or Accuracy. I don't end up with my own personal playing style, I end up with a character that's even more "spoon-fed by the designers".

Well, if you lack creativity, that's your problem, not the concept's.

 

[Tigranes]

Have you played Fallout? Arcanum? Divinity OS? Wasteland 2? Elder Scrolls? How have you never played a classless game?

Classes enforce hard limits on what skills and abilities your character may or may not have, and then you choose your specialiation within that limit.
Classless systems allow your character to choose from all skills and abilities, but limited points, synergy effects, attribute requriements, etc. will still force you to specialise.

 

[IncendiaryDevice]

Have you played Fallout? Arcanum? Divinity OS? Wasteland 2? Elder Scrolls? How have you never played a classless game?

Classes enforce hard limits on what skills and abilities your character may or may not have, and then you choose your specialiation within that limit.
Classless systems allow your character to choose from all skills and abilities, but limited points, synergy effects, attribute requriements, etc. will still force you to specialise.

I've played some of the games you've listed and I don't know why the descriptor would be "classless". Wouldn't the phrase "delayed class" be more fitting. I've also played other games some people have mentioned in the thread, but as threads are often full of ignored posts I have no idea if everyone is in agreement that those games are what you term classless games, because I wouldn't have ever thought of them as classless games, just more open classes really. A dilution rather than a removal.

If you are forced to specialise at some point, then you've got yourself a class. On your next playthrough, if want to min/max, you're approaching the game from a set group of hard classes in mind anyway.

Well, if you lack creativity, that's your problem, not the concept's.

Sure, I could use a character that invests in skills that have no in-game use, just for the role play, but it's not something I'd call a lack of creativity...

 

[Tigranes]

Have you played Fallout? Arcanum? Divinity OS? Wasteland 2? Elder Scrolls? How have you never played a classless game?

Classes enforce hard limits on what skills and abilities your character may or may not have, and then you choose your specialiation within that limit.
Classless systems allow your character to choose from all skills and abilities, but limited points, synergy effects, attribute requriements, etc. will still force you to specialise.

I've played some of the games you've listed and I don't know why the descriptor would be "classless". Wouldn't the phrase "delayed class" be more fitting. I've also played other games some people have mentioned in the thread, but as threads are often full of ignored posts I have no idea if everyone is in agreement that those games are what you term classless games, because I wouldn't have ever thought of them as classless games, just more open classes really. A dilution rather than a removal.

If you are forced to specialise at some point, then you've got yourself a class. On your next playthrough, if want to min/max, you're approaching the game from a set group of hard classes in mind anyway.

Well, if you lack creativity, that's your problem, not the concept's.

Sure, I could use a character that invests in skills that have no in-game use, just for the role play, but it's not something I'd call a lack of creativity...

Yes, everybody calls them classless. Nobody calls them delayed classes. Because they are not delayed. Putting 1 in magic after making your classless character into a sword-wielding pickpocket might be stupid, but you can still do it. In some cool systems, it isn't stupid, and gives you a new dimension that would not be possible in many class games (e.g. having one point in one magic school for a melee oriented guy in D:OS). You're basically starting off with incorrect impressions, and then twisting new information this way and that to try and keep them afloat, reaching untenable strawmen like "if you specialise, it's a class".

Part of it is that you seem incapable of imagining building characters that are not cookie cutter classes or min/max munchkins. First of all, depending on the system, min/max munchkins may end up being a weird mix of skills that would not be possible with many class systems. Second of all, many many people have played classless games in interesting ways. Arcanum isn't a well balanced game but even then you can experiment with going magic/tech hybrid, e.g. a character relying on technology to augment its melee combat capacity while summoning creatures or using magic as melee buffs and protection then going to guns for ranged fire, a Fallout character who is good at Science and Melee and does not deal in guns...

 

[IncendiaryDevice]

Yes, everybody calls them classless. Nobody calls them delayed classes. Because they are not delayed. Putting 1 in magic after making your classless character into a sword-wielding pickpocket might be stupid, but you can still do it. In some cool systems, it isn't stupid, and gives you a new dimension that would not be possible in many class games (e.g. having one point in one magic school for a melee oriented guy in D:OS). You're basically starting off with incorrect impressions, and then twisting new information this way and that to try and keep them afloat, reaching untenable strawmen like "if you specialise, it's a class".

Part of it is that you seem incapable of imagining building characters that are not cookie cutter classes or min/max munchkins. First of all, depending on the system, min/max munchkins may end up being a weird mix of skills that would not be possible with many class systems. Second of all, many many people have played classless games in interesting ways. Arcanum isn't a well balanced game but even then you can experiment with going magic/tech hybrid, e.g. a character relying on technology to augment its melee combat capacity while summoning creatures or using magic as melee buffs and protection then going to guns for ranged fire, a Fallout character who is good at Science and Melee and does not deal in guns...

The weird thing is, I'm not arguing against any of that. It was just the whole concept of "classless" that caught me out. You say everyone uses that term. I've never once heard it before. Hence all I did was ask what it meant so I could possibly join in. Ok, so now I know, classless doesn't mean classless it just means freedom to create your own hybrid class. That's cool. I still pretty much agree with Octavius though, sorry if that offends you.

 

[Shadowfang]

Classless game is a game that lacks classes. Classes are basicaly restriction to what your character can learn, use, cast and what he can not.
In D&D a Paladin won't be able to get diamond body at level 11 because its a specific to the Monk class.

Classless does mean classess, you just want to bring your own definition to the table.

 

[IncendiaryDevice]

Classless game is a game that lacks classes. Classes are basicaly restriction to what your character can learn, use, cast and what he can not.
In D&D a Paladin won't be able to get diamond body at level 11 because its a specific to the Monk class.

Classless does mean classess, you just want to bring your own definition to the table.

No. You're saying that by removing class restrictions you're removing classes. But if you have a party of characters, each specialising in different abilities to complement each other, you're still making classes, just in an unrestricted way. we're now just debating the use of the word "classless". I'm quite happy for some elites to have termed an RPG format under a banner of their choosing with whatever word they like - heck, open world very rarely means open world, I've rarely seen a game with infinite borders, but in RPGs it means something different. So, ok, I get you, the term classless in RPGs just means no class restrictions, fine, gotcha.