Class vs Skill
Psychochild’s latest weekend design challenge (hey, I caught up) asks us to:
Point out an advantage of either a class-based or skill-based system that hasn’t been discussed to death yet. Or, if you’re feeling bold, describe a system that goes beyond either of these systems.
Now, I’m new enough to the debate to not know whether something has been discussed to death so badly that it isn’t even mentioned anymore. I had alot of reading to do… Luckily, Ryan Shwayder over in Nerfbat provided a good starting point earlier last week.
For those friends and family newer to the debate than me, but checking out the blog wondering what I’m up to (yes, mom, I never call, but I DO check server logs….) the “class” vs “skill” debate has raged for centuries…. or at least since the first pen-n-paper roleplaying game was printed.
Do players choose a “class” like “fighter, thief, mage, or priest” that narrowly defines what they can and cannot do, or do you offer a range of “skills” and let players pick-and-choose what their character’s abilities.
Class-based systems are simpler to understand and to balance. Your options are limited as a player, but it helps keep you focused. Developers are able to better predict the different characters and plan accordingly. Finally, when you’re teamed with a “fighter” of a particular level, you know what you should be able to expect from that teammate.
Skills are more flexible, but the vast array of options can be daunting to a new player- particularly when a “wrong choice” will make gameplay more difficult. The possible combinations can be mind boggling for a dev to prepare against, and you’ll inevitably have some combination (called a “template”) that will be identified as the MOST efficient and MOST powerful. In teams, you never know whether the person you’re with is really built to handle the role of frontline fighter until you see him fall in battle.
Background’s Over, Where To From Here?
After grossly generalizing the debate like that, I’ll go on to focus on some small inconsistency to appear more informed than the experts. I’ll probably dismiss all the problems inherent in my side with a line like “skill based systems only have these problems because they’ve never been done right” followed by a manifesto on “how I would have done game X differently, and it would have WORKED.” It’ll finish off with an ill-informed rant identifying one developer as either divinely inspired or demonically possessed.
or both.
At least, that’s the format this debate takes on the player’s forums…. the polite ones. (I left out the obligatory questioning of a previous posters’ parentage, patriotism, or intelligence).
I’m A Skills Person
I DO prefer skill-based systems. They allow a wider range of possibilities. That’s appealing because, after all, I play like a GM. Classes confine you- often in frustrating ways. Hamilcar one of my EQ2 characters, was imagined as a laughing, jovial barroom brawler. Last I checked, deadly force isn’t usually used in a friendly fray, so I wanted a bare-knuckle brawler. In Everquest 2, that left me with choices of a “good” monk or the “evil” bruiser. I tried- and deleted- both.
People say classes are simpler for new players to learn. I have to admit, if I were to start teaching a player about pen-n-paper gaming today, I’d be tempted to start with AD&D’s class based system over the options-laden GURPS. GURPS has made great headway, however, in making decisions easier to new people- and some of the techniques can be taken farther in MMO’s.
I’m talking about templates.
What’s a template?
In a skill-template system, a vast and complicated “skill tree” is made simpler by providing the equivalent of a transparent overlay, hiding parts of the tree from view and drawing attention to others.
A new player can select a template of “Paladin†and see what skills the generic paladin would focus on. As the player gets more experienced and understands the game, he can shed the template and experiment with the whole tree, or even add another template to the mix, revealing different avenues of development.
If this system seems familiar, I first started advocating it in comments on Evan Sampson’s blog (madscientist.com)
A “good” template system could give the new user an experience identical to a class system. It could even color-code the skills to stress where development should be stressed.
It can also serve as a “frame of reference” to people in evaluating others.
How good of a mage is X? Well, the mage template shows he’s superior in elemental magic, but lacking in the crowd control. Interestingly, he’s not too bad of cook too…
Now, templates aren’t the answer to all of a skill system’s woes. We still need to address the issue of min/maxing and the inevitable “flavor of the month” builds, but that’s an issue for future discussion. Hopefully in tinier, more managable bites.
September 14th, 2006 at 8:44 am
The problem with templates, as you describe them, is that they require the developer to see the future. Asheron’s Call was primarily a skill-based system, and the developers offered some “templates” for people to use. The problem is that the templates turned out to be the least appealing choices. The developers chose things that looked good at the time, but they didn’t account for player preferences, or changes to the game.
One other disadvantage is that they don’t really replace classes as you might want them to. A “Paladin” is more than just some fighting and healing skills put together. There’s usually a strict bit of philosophy and loyalty required to a higher power (usually a temple). It’s easier to put these specific restrictions on a class, but trying to figure out of someone is playing a “paladin-type” character in a skill-based system is harder.
I look forward to the rest of your discussions.
September 14th, 2006 at 3:06 pm
Paladin was probably a poor choice. I was debating whether template should define story-role or gameplay-role, and Paladin is probably the worst-defined in either respect.
It IS easier to put restrictions on a package (class). Let’s face it: the whole powerset we ascribe to paladins came from class definitions in AD&D. The word had very different values before the (class-based) game systems adopted it.
(Not only that, but many of the truly “paladin” characteristics are very behavior-based and not skill-based. Players are just as likely to break the convention of paladinhood in a class-system as a skill system. In pen-n-paper games, the GM could penalize such concepts. On MMO’s, class or skill, there’s little that can be regulated)
The term paladin originally referred to Charlemagne’s paladins- the latin “palatinus” (palace official). In the tales, these were not only knights, but characters that would normally be described in quite different “classes” including Maugris, the sorcerer.
Over time, the term became somewhat synonymous with the knight-errant, who, by many game standards, was more of a cavalier (or eq2 guardian), lacking many of the “holy” powers associated to our paladin class. Magic was usually ascribed to divine providence or the bad guy, not something controlled by the hero.
So, maybe it’s high time to break some of our conventions… to allow a blending of the borders and accept a broader range of possibilities.
But… that DOES damage the comparative value of templates. Some rethinking is necessary.
Thank for the feedback!
September 18th, 2006 at 4:15 am
I’d like to see the Diablo 2 frame applied to an MMO. I thought WoW would have this when I tried it, but it had only a skeletal reflection of D2’s great system. Certainly, Diablo 2 was a different sort of game; but not so different, I believe, that the class/skill system couldn’t be applied in MMOs.
It provides a good balance between player equality and player uniqueness (particularly in a PvE-focused game). It also leans enough toward a class system to benefit the lore aspects of the game, while leaning enough towards a skill system that players are not confined to someone else’s vision of that character.
I’ll cheer aloud the day an MMO shows me five people playing the same class in significantly different ways, while retaining the identity of that class.