What separates a 'Class' from a 'Class option'?

[OgreBattle]

What do you see as the defining line between something being an entirely different class, or just being a variant of an existing class?

It seems to me in D&D it's been...

AD&D: If it's not something that casts spells, it's a new class
3.5: if you change the BAB/Saves/Skills, it's a new class
4e: if you change the role, it's a new class

So basically there's just some mechanics they don't want to change ('Ranger and Fighter have different HD, so different classes!').
That's looking at it mechanically


philosophically, do you think things like necromancer and illusionist are right as 'class option', but 'rage' and 'sneak attack' must be granted by separate classes?

At some point though you just wind up creating a Point buy system.
On that... do you think the tone/feel/execution of Shadowrun would be entirely different if it was using a D&Desque Class system?

[Ancient History]

The desire for a greater range of classes grafted-on to the original classes is pretty old, actually. Sub-classes, if you're going for Hackmaster-style versions of OD&D, and in AD&D you had various kits and specialized cleric/wizard/etc. classes. D&D3.+ had prestige classes right off the bat, and then introduce alternate class features and substitution levels - but all of that is really an organic response.

Necromancer and Illusionist are, for example, were originally specializations - it was only later that they gained more distinctions in the form of alternate class features, specialized feats, prestige classes, etc. In part this is because of their popularity - there was a Complete Necromancer's Handbook for example. You could hypothetically do the same sort of specialization with Barbarians and Rogues, and if fact there were kits that focused on one aspect of things or another in that regard; but the lower number of effects/abilities probably makes the distinction less impressive.

I do think it would work well for a character class to have a pool of abilities to choose from at each level - or even to choose to buy. I think Earthdawn is a fairly good model in that regard, though there remains room for improvement.

And yes, I think Shadowrun would be completely unrecognizable if there was a "decker" class and a "street samurai" class and so on. It would feel much more...stilted, shoehorned and arbitrary.

[CatharzGodfoot]

It only matters in that making a new class for each concept or ability set takes a lot more work and space to write, while a point buy system is way harder to balance. The sweet spot for any specific RPG probably lies somewhere in the middle, but the exact point you choose is pretty arbitrary.

[kzt]

For example of the point issues, by any rational standard it's far too cheap to become a magician in SR. You gain so many abilities for a very few points.

[Koumei]

And yes, I think Shadowrun would be completely unrecognizable if there was a "decker" class and a "street samurai" class and so on. It would feel much more...stilted, shoehorned and arbitrary.

That said, I've made Shadowrun characters... maybe two or three times? The games never took off, but each time, I had to get someone else to help because it's just an open sprawl of points*.

Shadowrun (and all "Here's a pile of points, go spend them" systems) is not very friendly to new players in that regard. Though at least it doesn't screw you the way WW does (1-for-1 at creation, then XP costs actually scaling). So actually being able to select "Race: Elf, Class: Street Samurai, now I am given X upgrades, and each one is a choice between 2 or 3 options" would be really handy.


*Actually the first time it used that A-E system where, as a Street Samurai, you select Money: A, because you have to spend half a million on wired reflexes or whatever it was, then you realise you'll have trouble spending the other half so you end up owning a house, a truck, a motorcycle, the biggest gun you're allowed to buy (to put in the truck) and a gold-plated yacht.

[Korgan0]

To be honest, I can't see why the two systems can't be totally integrated. You can have a point-buy system like X: the Y or Shadowrun and just do what Shadowrun did and have what they called PACKS, which were essentially groups of options put together and given a points cost. So you would pick a 200 BP Street Samurai pack and then drop on a 50 BP Ork pack, a 100 BP Weapons Expert pack and a 50 BP Martial Artist pack, or something like that. I never used them, but I think that's how they work. That kind of system allows for veteran players to customize their characters to a stupendous level, and allows new players to easily create a recognizable, distinct character.

[kzt]

I think there might be someone around here who can explain PACKS...

[Koumei]

I wasn't aware of PACKS. In that case, ignore what I said, that works totally fine. Sure, you need to make sure the PACKS you offer are decent, but that's the same as making sure you don't offer shitty classes.

[Ancient History]

PACKS (at least my original version) is designed to speed up and facilitate character creation, particularly NPCs, but it's not a class system by any means, just a grouping together of elements around a character concept. Players still have total control to fiddle, customize, and swap out elements as they choose.

And really, PACKS is very similar in some regards to what GURPS has been doing with templates and lenses for ages.

[OgreBattle]

To be honest, I can't see why the two systems can't be totally integrated. You can have a point-buy system like X: the Y or Shadowrun and just do what Shadowrun did and have what they called PACKS, which were essentially groups of options put together and given a points cost. So you would pick a 200 BP Street Samurai pack and then drop on a 50 BP Ork pack, a 100 BP Weapons Expert pack and a 50 BP Martial Artist pack, or something like that. I never used them, but I think that's how they work. That kind of system allows for veteran players to customize their characters to a stupendous level, and allows new players to easily create a recognizable, distinct character.

so... sell the legos in kits to assemble what's on the box
But you are still free to take the individual pieces to build a giant robot




Ideally that's how things should work. Not everyone has the mastery to make the giant mecha by themselves, but the kits they start with should be good.

[MGuy]

The things people can do with legos never ceases to amaze me.

[Ancient History]

The main difference between a class system and a total point-buy system is that classes imply at least a degree of exclusivity - only class XX can do thing YY, and any other class that starts to do some limited version of YY is impinging on XX's concept to some greater or lesser degree.

[MfA]

Don't GURPS lenses give discounts to abilities within the lens? That is the right way to encourage archetypes ... just bundling abilities as a crutch for newbies is not.

[OgreBattle]

Don't GURPS lenses give discounts to abilities within the lens? That is the right way to encourage archetypes ... just bundling abilities as a crutch for newbies is not.

So is this like how 3.X did class and cross-class skills to encourage you only use class skills?

The main difference between a class system and a total point-buy system is that classes imply at least a degree of exclusivity - only class XX can do thing YY, and any other class that starts to do some limited version of YY is impinging on XX's concept to some greater or lesser degree.

But what should that 'thing' be? Rangers and Druids can do the nature thing. Fighter and Ranger can use bows and twin scimitars. Ranger and Rogue can sneak and hide.

[Ancient History]

This has been argued out before, and it depends. Generally speaking a character class combines (or should combine) a distinct umbrella concept with certain specific abilities that support that concept. Prestige classes, alternate class features, kits, feats, etc. are used to further distinguish the character from the general concept (Fighter named Mike) to the specific concept (Mikael Blackblade, Sabermaster of Gryphon's Peak).

But, it depends. Some options suck more than others. Exclusive abilities tend to diminish and become less distinct, particularly with multiclassing. Some character concepts just aren't very clear, or the abilities not particularly worthwhile.

[Red_Rob]

One of the major differences between systems that use classes and levels to assign stats and regulate advancement and systems that allow open point buy is that generally classed systems force players to increment everything together rather than hyper specialise in one thing. This means that in systems where a large amount of player advancement is expected then with a point system it is much harder to predict PC's abilities. It's like if you could choose to up your hp or your BaB in D&D - assigning level 10 monster ACs and damage would be even more nightmarish than it is at the moment.

That's why Shadowrun (generally human level characters, never advance past James Bond level) works with point buy and D&D (dirt farmer wit a long sword up to dimension hopping godslayer) works with classes and levels.

[CatharzGodfoot]

This has been argued out before, and it depends. Generally speaking a character class combines (or should combine) a distinct umbrella concept with certain specific abilities that support that concept. Prestige classes, alternate class features, kits, feats, etc. are used to further distinguish the character from the general concept (Fighter named Mike) to the specific concept (Mikael Blackblade, Sabermaster of Gryphon's Peak).

But, it depends. Some options suck more than others. Exclusive abilities tend to diminish and become less distinct, particularly with multiclassing. Some character concepts just aren't very clear, or the abilities not particularly worthwhile.

All I get from this is 'I have no fucking clue'.

[OgreBattle]

Yeah, multiclassing

If you have a class system, what does multiclassing do to it 'cause god damn.

[MGuy]

I would like to state for the record I hate prestige classes. Most of them are only worth two or three of the abilities you get and might as well be higher level class options like higher level spells are. Also trying design multiclass options was a nightmare so I just dropped it.

[erik]

I hate prestige classes as they were used, but as they were intended you were really supposed to make up your own. They were examples of expansion options and the DMG outright said "The best prestige classes for your campaign are the ones you tailor make yourself."

Unfortunately it's easier to just rip em straight out of the book for portability between games (despite that most games are with the same people). So most people ate that crap up with a spoon. Heck, even among otherwise enlightened players in my group, we had nay-sayers to such customization, and I felt guilty making something custom for myself if other people weren't doing it.

[Aryxbez]

Yeah, I just figured it's generally one of those cop-out statements "don't like our rules? Make up your own!" kind of thing. I'd imagine those naysayers would also think only a DM be allowed to make said prestige class, probably working with the player to them both happy.

I can dig Prestige classes, gives unique or specialized abilities that if put into a class, would make the class entry look bigger than it actually is. I'm in the belief nowadays, that far as classes go, base should be 10 levels, with prestige classes being 3-5 levels. This way with the latter, people can get down to the essential abilities, even at its lowest level and ability per level, you would get the "two or three worth" abilities that MGuy mentioned they're worth. Also that as we know, people rarely tend to play into the double digits, so most won't see past 10th level anyways. So this way someone can perhaps go through their favorite prestige class before the game ends. Plus, I think it has place in our medias, of how heroes tend to attain specific titles, with abilities that likely start to specify in some certain field(s). So you have PC's when they're becoming Demigods, with a past of specific and unique abilities, former organizations they now rule, divine pacts or fighting styles they've superseded its norms adapting to their style and so on.

In my RPG experience, I've mostly been playing D&D, so when in recent years gotten into ones with point based creation systems, I find it rather refreshing. It's nice getting to specifically make the character I want to play, have essential skills so you're not sitting out on other parts of the game that simply aren't combat. Though I agree they need to be more new player friendly, if don't know the system as well, you will very well make a poor character. I've noticed the idea that since its hard to gauge power of PC's, these point based RPG's tend to lack a system for making ENCOUNTERS. Something I always find rather frustrating, and I think something like a PACKS system would go a long way to help create a more concrete system so GM's can build consistent challenges.

As for Class System in Multiclassing, I guess to further your options, but said options that aren't as specialized in the long run as a character going full time in that class? Also perhaps they're supposed to ideally combo together, such as a man-at-arms completely covered in armor taking pyromancer, would get some fire attacks, like heat metal, allowing himself to immolate himself in flames, armor that hurts unarmed monsters, grapplers, and his attacks doing fire damage, with resistance to the element, so he's not harmed by this at all of course.

On that... do you think the tone/feel/execution of Shadowrun would be entirely different if it was using a D&Desque Class system?

I'd imagine so, wasn't part of the advertising for Shadowrun, is that ye can customize your archtype to your desire? Any case, I'd imagine a class system would mean combat becomes less lethal as it's known for, and no doubt that has some implications. Speaking of feel, I recall reading this briefly long ago, where people did the very thing of adapting a game to a different system for a no doubt different feel.

http://www.enworld.org/forum/d-d-4th-ed ... ition.html

[MfA]

That's why Shadowrun (generally human level characters, never advance past James Bond level) works with point buy and D&D (dirt farmer wit a long sword up to dimension hopping godslayer) works with classes and levels.

There are solutions for point buy of course, just use multiple pools of points for several categories of abilities and level caps on how many points can be invested in a single ability ... unfortunately a lot of the point buy crowd hates all restrictions on point allocation (ignoring the gm fiat, sigh).

[mlangsdorf]

Don't GURPS lenses give discounts to abilities within the lens? That is the right way to encourage archetypes ... just bundling abilities as a crutch for newbies is not.

Nope. GURPS archetypes and lenses are just ways of saying "if you want to play an acrobat-thief type like Parker from Leverage, an Infiltrator will probably want these skills, advantages, and attributes." There's no point break involved.

[OgreBattle]

Well I haven't played Shadowrun... (other than on the Genesis) and most playthroughs I read it sure sounds like people have characer classes

'Troll samurai with cyberware and minigun'
'elf shaman'
'a rigger'

I haven't played the game though, so I'm missing out on something here.

[Zaranthan]

They're just community jargon, actually, indicating the character's primary focus, what they've spent most of their build points on. It's a one or two word shorthand telling you what someone is competent in and often how they go about being competent. A samurai is a sort of weapons specialist who gains his superhuman powers from cybernetic implants, as opposed to a physical adept who uses magic to punch/shoot people or the rigger who remote controls drones to do the shooting for him. The point buy system lets you dabble in these areas as much or little as you wish. Anybody can get a prosthetic arm with superhuman strength. Anybody can buy a drone with a machine gun. Anybody (OOC, at chargen) can purchase the adept quality.