|
4 years ago ::
Mar 27, 2009 - 1:45PM
#51
|
Date Joined:
Sep 13, 2001
|
I realize that might not apply to all groups, but in my experience the more effective character builders tend to help the less-knowledgeable ones. No one wants to have to pick up the slack for another player. Also, like you said, they can still be effective even if they arent optimized.
All groups are different. In the game that I run, I am one of the more effective character builders. I have made suggestions to the less-knowledgeable ones. Sometimes the response I get is that their less optimial build is what they want to play and my suggestion makes their character less cool. In 4E, it isn't that big of an issue because he would still be effective. In 3.5, there would be a big issue because he does something that he feels is cool, but is even more useless than the simplest basic attack. If some players play significant inferior characters, those players will be unhappy as the feel they cannot be effective and others feel they have to always pick up the slack.
I would feel that a classless system would have a disparity in power more like 3.5 than 4E. I may be wrong as I am not an expert in game design. Perhaps someone can build a classless system that can keep the power level disparity close. If so, I would support such a system. I am not optimistic about it because all of the game system that I have seen, the more customisation, mixing and matching allowed the greater disparity in power level there can be. This is not just RPG's, but other games with any type of tactical combat.
<\
\>tuntman
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Mar 27, 2009 - 9:18PM
#52
|
|
|
All groups are different. In the game that I run, I am one of the more effective character builders. I have made suggestions to the less-knowledgeable ones. Sometimes the response I get is that their less optimial build is what they want to play and my suggestion makes their character less cool. In 4E, it isn't that big of an issue because he would still be effective. In 3.5, there would be a big issue because he does something that he feels is cool, but is even more useless than the simplest basic attack. If some players play significant inferior characters, those players will be unhappy as the feel they cannot be effective and others feel they have to always pick up the slack.
I would feel that a classless system would have a disparity in power more like 3.5 than 4E. I may be wrong as I am not an expert in game design. Perhaps someone can build a classless system that can keep the power level disparity close. If so, I would support such a system. I am not optimistic about it because all of the game system that I have seen, the more customisation, mixing and matching allowed the greater disparity in power level there can be. This is not just RPG's, but other games with any type of tactical combat.
I hate to say it, but the best solution here might be to play gurps fantasy.
It's the most balanced classless system I've ever seen simply because they did a great job of the math for the points for things, and everyone in a campaign starts with the same number of points.
More sex and gender equality and racial equality shouldn't even be an argument--it should simply be an assumption for any RPG that wants to stay relevant in the 21st century.
I could say anything in D&D is silly though, because it's a silly game and we are silly people.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Mar 28, 2009 - 1:58AM
#53
|
Date Joined:
Sep 13, 2001
|
I hate to say it, but the best solution here might be to play gurps fantasy.
It's the most balanced classless system I've ever seen simply because they did a great job of the math for the points for things, and everyone in a campaign starts with the same number of points.
I've heard of GURPS, but have not seen the system. I would be interested in seeing it as I have heard that it is a classless gaming system. The only classless RPG that I have experience with is the Hero system which also uses points to purchase abilities, skills and powers. That particular system allows some real brokenness and some of the abilities you can take do have warnings for the DM if players take those powers. There are even examples of such characters so the GM knows what to watch out for.
<\
\>tuntman
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Mar 28, 2009 - 2:53AM
#54
|
Date Joined:
Dec 21, 2004
|
I've heard of GURPS, but have not seen the system. I would be interested in seeing it as I have heard that it is a classless gaming system. The only classless RPG that I have experience with is the Hero system which also uses points to purchase abilities, skills and powers. That particular system allows some real brokenness and some of the abilities you can take do have warnings for the DM if players take those powers. There are even examples of such characters so the GM knows what to watch out for.
GURPS is a general gaming system using a 3d6-roll-under mechanic. The most interesting facts about GURPS are
- the basic system is completely void of flavor (crunch in its purest form)
- there are LOTS of splatbooks (GURPS Space, GURPS Traveller, GURPS Horror, GURPS WW2, GURPS Zombie Apocalypse, ...)
- it uses the very same mechanics for character creation and character advancement (same points, same costs, ...)
- the whole system is very flexible and offers lots of customization options for pretty much everything you can imagine (race powers, superhero powers, alien powers, equipment, magic, psionics, ...)
Theoretically you could have a party consisting of
- a vampire lord
- a cowboy
- a swamp alien from a 1970's horror movie
- an elven samurai
- a transient human time-traveller from 10k years in the future
and all characters would be balanced against each other. At least the game system would support such a cast.  If you want to take a look at it, you can find more information about GURPS here, and grab a free lite version of the game rules here. One thing, however: GURPS is quite math-heavy and imho definitively no comparison to DnD regarding "ease of play". Character creation alone can take several hours with players new to the system because there are so many options (in 4e you basically just select race, class, trained skills, your starting feat, and then you're ready to go; in GURPS you have several pages of advantages and skills that may be suitable for your character to wade through). Also, I personally find it less suitable for the "heroic fantasy" style of play because the default combat system is rather realistic and quite lethal if the DM doesn't apply some heavy tweaking to it and the PCs. While for this particular style of play imho DnD is the better and more suitable system, YMMV. :P
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Mar 28, 2009 - 1:23PM
#55
|
|
|
One of the suggestions I've heard is to simply allow players to choose from any Power, but even this (beyond a superficial nod) is problematic. Take, for example, the Fighter Class. If fighters could choose Wizard Powers willy-nilly then why make a Wizard? You'll have more HP, more Surges, better Armor (without a Str requirement), and be better off in general. There's no need for class features for a Wizard if you have good gear. You'd be better off as Bloodmage since you'll have more HP and more Surges. You'd be better off as a Spiral Tower Wizzy because you'll have the Long Sword feat and you'll benefit from Sword and Board. This could go on and on.
Class based games are the simplest way to built a cooperative foundation for obvious team dynamics.
Gah. no...If I'm playing a spellslinger I am absolutely going to take a class that gives me magic oriented options and bonuses, always. Why would I ever be in a position to make signifigent use of the fighter class features? My magic is ranged, so I'm going to try to avoid being in front, and thus am going to get less use out of higher hp and better armor than I will out of features made to enhance my magical ability.
More sex and gender equality and racial equality shouldn't even be an argument--it should simply be an assumption for any RPG that wants to stay relevant in the 21st century.
I could say anything in D&D is silly though, because it's a silly game and we are silly people.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Mar 28, 2009 - 1:30PM
#56
|
|
|
Best description I think you could give Gurps.
One things though, if the OP becomes interested in using Gurps. There are cinematic combat rules, which are less realistic and more in favor of the PCs, thus a little closer to DnD, and in a high magic fantasy game meant to be similar in thematic style to DnD, I'd raise the point buy quite a bit.(which is standard for doing things like superheroes, high powered cinematic campaigns, etc.)
there's also a Gurps character builder, to keep the record keeping easier, I'll see if i can locate it.
More sex and gender equality and racial equality shouldn't even be an argument--it should simply be an assumption for any RPG that wants to stay relevant in the 21st century.
I could say anything in D&D is silly though, because it's a silly game and we are silly people.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Mar 28, 2009 - 4:50PM
#57
|
Date Joined:
Jun 16, 2007
|
I think the biggest thing is to assign values to the Class features. Because to make a stiker work well, you need more than just rogue/ranger/warlock powers, you also need the bonus damage feature.
To play a good defender, you need a marking power.
So, you should go through, try to assign 'Point' values to all the class features, with the better powers having a higher value, and comparable powers having the same value (i.e. all Defender marking features share a value, all Striker bonus damage features share a value, etc.).
Each character starts with a number of points, which they can use to but class features. Then they can choose powers from any class, but the balancing feature is that powers should RETAIN their original stats. So, Fighter powers should still key off strength, warlock powers off Con or Cha as appropriate, etc.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Mar 28, 2009 - 11:00PM
#58
|
Date Joined:
Sep 13, 2001
|
GURPS is a general gaming system...
Thank you for the overview of GURPS. From what you described, it sounds a lot like the Hero system. In fact, I could pretty much use what you wrote to describe Hero.
How does GURPS prevent brokenness? If you were to say build a D&D character in Hero, you can probably do it by allocating points to all of the various abilities. If you notice, a D&D character has many abilities. Some coming from their class, some from race, some from feats, etc. What's to prevent me from say only taking half of those powers thus doubling the number of points I allocate to them? With D&D, you cannot for instance trade your shield proficiency, combat superiority your encounter and daily power and then spend all of those points to pump up Reaping Strike. With Hero, you can build a character with 10 powers or a character with 5 more powerful powers or a character with one super powerful power. You end up with degenerate characters who are one trick ponies, but can cause armageddon with that one trick.
<\
\>tuntman
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Mar 29, 2009 - 12:00AM
#59
|
|
|
Thank you for the overview of GURPS. From what you described, it sounds a lot like the Hero system. In fact, I could pretty much use what you wrote to describe Hero.
How does GURPS prevent brokenness? If you were to say build a D&D character in Hero, you can probably do it by allocating points to all of the various abilities. If you notice, a D&D character has many abilities. Some coming from their class, some from race, some from feats, etc. What's to prevent me from say only taking half of those powers thus doubling the number of points I allocate to them? With D&D, you cannot for instance trade your shield proficiency, combat superiority your encounter and daily power and then spend all of those points to pump up Reaping Strike. With Hero, you can build a character with 10 powers or a character with 5 more powerful powers or a character with one super powerful power. You end up with degenerate characters who are one trick ponies, but can cause armageddon with that one trick.
Well, if you want to play an elf, they come as a package deal, and they cost a certain number of points, period. You can gain more points with mitigators, but not many. you also end up pretty much having to take disadvantages to gain any advantages that could be considered truly powerful. The math is done so that it's more expensive to level something up than to grab another ability, enough so that if you try to do that you won't have an epic ability so much as an above average ability, and the other people in the party will probably have better survivability than you.
More sex and gender equality and racial equality shouldn't even be an argument--it should simply be an assumption for any RPG that wants to stay relevant in the 21st century.
I could say anything in D&D is silly though, because it's a silly game and we are silly people.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Mar 29, 2009 - 3:51AM
#60
|
Date Joined:
Dec 21, 2004
|
[...] How does GURPS prevent brokenness? [...]
That's twofold.
On the one hand, like DoctorBadwolf said, there are the point costs. I haven't played GURPS for quite a while now, but I think a very baseline character (almost your "Joe Average") is around 50-100 points, a character like John McClane would be in the 200s, while Ozymandias would probably have 500 points or so and Dr. Manhatten would break into the thousands. Also, the costs don't scale linearily so it's [much] more expensive to push one ability to the top than learning one or two new abilities at moderate level.
On the other hand, the system itself doesn't put any restrictions on what a PC can learn or improve. If the character has enough points to spend, he could learn whatever ability/skill/power he wanted to learn. The limits are up to the DM to impose on the players. Iirc, there are some recommendations, and there are always the various "setting books" that describe what would be appropriate and what not (e.g. no time-traveling or laser eye beams in a Cthulhu horror setting :P). The skills and powers are classified with icons into "normal"/"supernatural"/"super heroic"/etc. categories but by itself that doesn't impose any restrictions.
|
|
|
