There's a few reasons why this just doesn't work. First, with your gear selection idea, everyone is gonna choose the same thing anyway. Because No one in game wants to be less effective than anyone else. If wearing Heavy Armor as a mage hurts your spell casting, then you won't want to wear any of it.
A developer could add an additional layer of customization (I'll call it a "Perk system," since Anarchy Online comes to mind right now) above the pool of skills and abilities. You could, for instance, make a Mage character in heavy armor, but you'd trade off some of your Mage-oriented perks to choose perks that mitigate the casting disadvantage of heavy armor. You'd likely have a lower raw damage output, but you'd have greater survivability in some situations and that might justify the choice. Bonus points if the developer can encourage this sort of hybrid character to play more tactically with spell selection, rather than trying to be an ordinary mage but in plate armor.
Secondly, and you said it yourself. Some people will choose to recreate the "Holy Trinity" roles, some people won't. Sounds great. But if I'm a Holy Trinity Healer, then I'm gonna want to party with a "Holy Trinity" Tank. Because a hybrid fighter would have less hp, less strength, and less ability to draw aggro and protect my ass. And that ultimately , means he will need more healing in less time. All the Hybrid players will be forced to group on their own, and well, thats just a mess. Parties need structure, and combat roles create that.
I won't argue that trinity roles do create structure, but it sounds to me like you could fit that Hybrid fighter into your group anyway - not as the main "Tank", but as a DPS character who off-tanks when needed? It sounds as if he'd have more HP and greater ability to pull aggro than pure fighters would. It depends mainly on what sort of system the game has for hybrid characters, and how much hybridization an individual player will create with an individual character.
Thirdly, The "ultimate build syndrome" cannot be avoided. Its the main thing that drives me crazy in games. I mean seriously, how many times in a game session do you hear or read, "Whats the best build for ____ (whatever class)?" I used to hate when people would ask me that in DDO. When I would tell them they could build their character however they wanted they would just act as though I were an idiot, (as if to say DOES NOT COMPUTE). Then turn and ask people until someone gave them an answer.
Granted, you can't really escape that mentality because of the first point you made: Not many people want to play an underpowered or less-effective character. However, I think this line of thinking can be mitigated somewhat: in a game like Guild Wars, where you have a huge deck of skills but can only use eight at any given time, there ARE meta builds and there is certainly a FoTM attitude in PvP venues. In PvE, there isn't necessarily a "best" build for any given class, though, even if there are popular builds. ArenaNet did a good job of balancing each character against itself, in that each "attribute" a character has access to fills a particular role (sometimes recurrent roles as with Elementalists - the nukers - and sometimes varied roles as with the Mesmer - who arguably falls outside the Holy Trinity but is still an amazingly-designed class.) Time constraints aside, I think developers who try to make a game that's skill-based should try to balance its skills against themselves (so that each skill within a subset can do that job reasonably well, and only vary in method) and against each other (so that some combinations of skills don't create gimped characters and others don't create overpowered ones.)
Going back to Midare's earlier example of the Mage-Fighter and pure Mage, the pure Mage should be able to fill it's role of "damage dealer" more effectively than the Mage-Fighter. BUT! The hybrid character should be able to make this choice because it's valid for gameplay and not be too badly penalized for it. Lower damage output, but situationally greater survivability. That doesn't sound terribly imbalanced to me, but we are talking in general strokes here.
Speaking of DDO, that's a great example. You can mix and match up to 3 classes in that game. But if I have my choice between a fighter/barbarian/rogue and a fighter to tank for my party, I'm gonna go for the pure fighter, if I need a Damage dealer, I'd rather have the pure barbarian, and I want a pure rogue to backstab and disarm traps instead of a gimpy one.
I'd actually say that Dungeons and Dragons, both PnP and Online, is a poor example because the game allows for degrees of hybridization that not all games do. Your example of a multiclassed Fighter/Barb/Rogue omits one very important, contextual detail: How many levels of each does that character have? Is he Fighter 18/Barb 1/Rogue 1? Is he Fighter 7/Barb 7/Rogue 6?
In the case of a Fighter 18/Barbarian 1/Rogue 1 (or even a Fighter 16/Barb 2/Rogue 2), I would probably choose the multi-classed character over the pure Fighter because he's acquired Feats through his multiclassing that give him more flexibility without sacrificing too much of what makes him a "tank" character. At level 1, Barbarians can Rage. At level 2, they add Uncanny Dodge and, in DDO, even a bit of Damage Reduction. At level 1, Rogues can detect traps (which is a mild advantage, granted, and negated if you have an actual rogue in your party.) At level 2, Rogues gain Evasion. A Fighter wouldn't ordinarily have access to any of these Feats, and losing a small amount of Fighter levels might be considered a legitimate choice in a situation like this.
In the case of something like a Fighter 7/Barb 7/Rogue 6, I would agree with you - that character is a mish-mash of classes that doesn't bring anything focused to a group (except perhaps bag space.)
Quick EDIT: These D&D examples are drawn mainly from my experience with the table-top RPG and not DDO. I did look through DDO's Compendium before posting to understand how the three example classes and their feat selections function, but if my examples operate on a mechanic that exists in D&D but not DDO, please let me know.
I notice in pretty much any post where someone posts an idea for their game, they always have to list classes. But why? It's an inferior outdated system that locks the player into a certain playstyle. I know a few people are going to rush in here and say "Balance!", but imo that's bullshit, what matters most is the player's ability to have fun and play the way they want to play, and I think classes get in the way of that. I wouldn't say entirely skill-based like Darkfall though is an optimal system either, because everyone can do everything and that's no good either. Really I think the best system is a design your own class where you get a certain amount of points to pick various skills from a list, and a limited amount of points to choose your starting dexterity and stuff. So I'm wondering, is there any reason that most of you advocate classes over a "build your own class" system? Have you guys ever tried an alternate system?
How is it an outdated and inferior system? Diversity drives MMO games in PvE and PvP. If everyone can do everything than you need less people overall in the game. You seem to directly link having fun and classless systems, but that's a huge leap in logic imo. I'd rather play a game with classes than one that is completely sandbox. I can't think of a single game out there that runs a classless system that is surviving well enough. If you say Darkfall, than clearly you don't play or follow it, without a doubt it does not survive this upcoming year.
It sounds to me like you want a game like Champion's Online where everyone can design their own hero with certain limitations, take a quick look at that game to see how well it is doing.
A skill based system is much more elegant than classes. A character feels much more unique if its not a exact copy of every other one of his class and level. The good thing about classes is that they make the players to accept weaknesses that their characters have. A Fighter can’t heal, a mage can’t wear plate armour, and so on. If the skill system allows it everyone will end up being a battlemage-healer. A system where everyone can learn everything like darkfall has does not work.
So a skill system needs a quite complicated set of caps and restrictions in that a player must accept a weakness if he chooses a power.
"So a skill system needs a quite complicated set of caps and restrictions in that a player must accept a weakness if he chooses a power."
That really beats up everything everyone has to say in this thread,and I never thought I would encounter someone smart enough to type this in a forum. It all comes down to the players,and 95% of the players in the MMO world all want to be solopwnmobiles. The next question is why even play a MMO with a selfish mindset? The point of a MMO is playing co-op,in other words why the hell would I waste my time taking turns at killing a boss which I need for a quest when I can party with 40 people and get it all done at once? The reason why fantasy MMO's degraded,from my point of view,is because everyone wants to solo everything with ease. Almost every game out there have balanced skills,just that people whine because that perticular class can own everyone in PvP. Seriously I never cared for PvP in a fantasy game tbh. I always considered story line and depth to be top priority in a Fantasy game.I PvP like crazy in low sec on EVE-Online,I win some and I lose some,it all comes down to tactics and luck but in the end,the fun is all that matters,because lets face it,from a PvP stand point you'll always end up getting your ass kicked by a certain type of class. This debate can go on forever but deep down it's all about the PvP and at this rate I wouldn't be surprised on seeing a tank out damageing a mage in a near future. Sci-Fi ftw,the hell with fantasy,got enough of them already. Happy Holidays and drive safe!
There's a few reasons why this just doesn't work. First, with your gear selection idea, everyone is gonna choose the same thing anyway. Because No one in game wants to be less effective than anyone else. If wearing Heavy Armor as a mage hurts your spell casting, then you won't want to wear any of it.
A developer could add an additional layer of customization (I'll call it a "Perk system," since Anarchy Online comes to mind right now) above the pool of skills and abilities. You could, for instance, make a Mage character in heavy armor, but you'd trade off some of your Mage-oriented perks to choose perks that mitigate the casting disadvantage of heavy armor. You'd likely have a lower raw damage output, but you'd have greater survivability in some situations and that might justify the choice. Bonus points if the developer can encourage this sort of hybrid character to play more tactically with spell selection, rather than trying to be an ordinary mage but in plate armor.
But you don't have to get rid of classes to do that. Plenty of games with classes still allow for customization
Secondly, and you said it yourself. Some people will choose to recreate the "Holy Trinity" roles, some people won't. Sounds great. But if I'm a Holy Trinity Healer, then I'm gonna want to party with a "Holy Trinity" Tank. Because a hybrid fighter would have less hp, less strength, and less ability to draw aggro and protect my ass. And that ultimately , means he will need more healing in less time. All the Hybrid players will be forced to group on their own, and well, thats just a mess. Parties need structure, and combat roles create that.
I won't argue that trinity roles do create structure, but it sounds to me like you could fit that Hybrid fighter into your group anyway - not as the main "Tank", but as a DPS character who off-tanks when needed? It sounds as if he'd have more HP and greater ability to pull aggro than pure fighters would. It depends mainly on what sort of system the game has for hybrid characters, and how much hybridization an individual player will create with an individual character.
They have hybrid classes for that. and while they can be ok, the hybrids are never needed nor missed from the party. Besides, you just proved my point. You said maybe he can fit in the party, but not as the main tank. Well, if such a game were made, the majority of the players won't really fit those combat roles. And thus the question we've all been asking. If these classless, do everything, characters don't fit into parties, what's the point of having them in games where parties are key???
Thirdly, The "ultimate build syndrome" cannot be avoided. Its the main thing that drives me crazy in games. I mean seriously, how many times in a game session do you hear or read, "Whats the best build for ____ (whatever class)?" I used to hate when people would ask me that in DDO. When I would tell them they could build their character however they wanted they would just act as though I were an idiot, (as if to say DOES NOT COMPUTE). Then turn and ask people until someone gave them an answer.
Granted, you can't really escape that mentality because of the first point you made: Not many people want to play an underpowered or less-effective character. However, I think this line of thinking can be mitigated somewhat: in a game like Guild Wars, where you have a huge deck of skills but can only use eight at any given time, there ARE meta builds and there is certainly a FoTM attitude in PvP venues. In PvE, there isn't necessarily a "best" build for any given class, though, even if there are popular builds. ArenaNet did a good job of balancing each character against itself, in that each "attribute" a character has access to fills a particular role (sometimes recurrent roles as with Elementalists - the nukers - and sometimes varied roles as with the Mesmer - who arguably falls outside the Holy Trinity but is still an amazingly-designed class.) Time constraints aside, I think developers who try to make a game that's skill-based should try to balance its skills against themselves (so that each skill within a subset can do that job reasonably well, and only vary in method) and against each other (so that some combinations of skills don't create gimped characters and others don't create overpowered ones.)
Going back to Midare's earlier example of the Mage-Fighter and pure Mage, the pure Mage should be able to fill it's role of "damage dealer" more effectively than the Mage-Fighter. BUT! The hybrid character should be able to make this choice because it's valid for gameplay and not be too badly penalized for it. Lower damage output, but situationally greater survivability. That doesn't sound terribly imbalanced to me, but we are talking in general strokes here.
(so that each skill within a subset can do that job reasonably well, and only vary in method) I'm not sure why a class-based game, with build options can't do that same thing. Hell, there's no "best build" in a lot of games, people just think there is.
In the case of a Fighter 18/Barbarian 1/Rogue 1 (or even a Fighter 16/Barb 2/Rogue 2), I would probably choose the multi-classed character over the pure Fighter because he's acquired Feats through his multiclassing that give him more flexibility without sacrificing too much of what makes him a "tank" character. At level 1, Barbarians can Rage. At level 2, they add Uncanny Dodge and, in DDO, even a bit of Damage Reduction. At level 1, Rogues can detect traps (which is a mild advantage, granted, and negated if you have an actual rogue in your party.) At level 2, Rogues gain Evasion. A Fighter wouldn't ordinarily have access to any of these Feats, and losing a small amount of Fighter levels might be considered a legitimate choice in a situation like this.
In the case of something like a Fighter 7/Barb 7/Rogue 6, I would agree with you - that character is a mish-mash of classes that doesn't bring anything focused to a group (except perhaps bag space.)
Quick EDIT: These D&D examples are drawn mainly from my experience with the table-top RPG and not DDO. I did look through DDO's Compendium before posting to understand how the three example classes and their feat selections function, but if my examples operate on a mechanic that exists in D&D but not DDO, please let me know.
I could go into reasons to flaw that logic, (like how armor effects those skills, and being flat footed) but DDO is the perfect example of a class based game, that allows for character customization. And I won't argue against one of the few games that has a system that could make everyone happy. Because I guarantee you that no to characters are alike in looks or skills, and thats without even considering multi-classing.
I wouldn't say that the class system is out-dated or obsolete, it's just different from a skill-based system. Aside from what the above poster mentioned, a class system also makes it much easier to confidently form parties with other players. If you're looking for someone to heal, you can look for clerics or druids, instead of having to ask someone to list their skills, or trust them when they say they're a "healer" that they haven't packed up on nukes and then brought one heal skill that just doesn't quite do the job. And class systems can offer a great deal of customization. Look at DAoC or Guild Wars. Both have their merits. I enjoyed EVE and Oblivion's skill-based systems for a time too (although something I noticed in EVE is that when you're going to PvP you end up being forced into cookie cutter builds that are so well known they get.. well... class names. And the game becomes class-based anyway.)
There is no such thing as a 'build' in EVE Online unless you refer to the ship configuration. There is no limit to the amount of skills a player can learn. There is no 'talent tree'.
I like classless games because I firmly believe MMOs should be about infinite progression. Meaning, the journey should never end. There should be no end game. So, I should always be able to keep learning new things just like I do in real life. That is how an MMORPG should be too me.
Now, how this is handled I am not too picky these days. You can be like EVE Online and offer best of both worlds whereas even though its infinite progression and such, you are locked into a role during an encounter (due to ship constraints). So I have nothing against performing a role.
But you don't have to get rid of classes to do that. Plenty of games with classes still allow for customization That's very true, and I'm not strictly "against" class-based games or "for" classless or skill-based games. The point I was trying to make is that oversimplification doesn't work well with a classless system - you can't just let a mage wear plate armor as if he were a full Mage and full Warrior at the same time. You have to give something up (in this example, efficiency in a damage-dealing role) to gain something (survivability) if you want any sort of balanced game. A non-MMO game with this system, like Oblivion, would be difficult to convert into an MMO precisely because every character can do everything given sufficient time and training.
They have hybrid classes for that. and while they can be ok, the hybrids are never needed nor missed from the party. Besides, you just proved my point. You said maybe he can fit in the party, but not as the main tank. Well, if such a game were made, the majority of the players won't really fit those combat roles. And thus the question we've all been asking. If these classless, do everything, characters don't fit into parties, what's the point of having them in games where parties are key???
The problem is that classless or skill-based games shouldn't let characters do everything at once as if they are multiple characters at the same time. Neither should a hybrid character be so penalized for its choices as to be made useless or undesirable. From my admittedly limited understanding, that seems to be a major premise for people who are against classless games: either a hybrid character can do everything all at once as well as if it were multiple characters folded into one, OR that a hybrid character could be constructed in such a way as to be a useless jack-of-all-trades who do not or cannot justify taking a position in a group. All I can really say is that it's a thorny problem facing developers, and, being a mere gamer, I really don't have any solutions worth considering.
(so that each skill within a subset can do that job reasonably well, and only vary in method) I'm not sure why a class-based game, with build options can't do that same thing. Hell, there's no "best build" in a lot of games, people just think there is.
It's not that class-based games can't do this. It's that they don't always do this, depending on the development team. I'd be perfectly happy playing a class-based game that allowed for that sort of customization; in fact, I was happy playing Guild Wars and the game I'm most excited for in the coming year is Guild Wars 2 (I wouldn't mind waiting if the game won't launch until 2011, though).
I could go into reasons to flaw that logic, (like how armor effects those skills, and being flat footed) but DDO is the perfect example of a class based game, that allows for character customization. And I won't argue against one of the few games that has a system that could make everyone happy. Because I guarantee you that no to characters are alike in looks or skills, and thats without even considering multi-classing.
I think there was a misunderstanding here. I didn't mean to say that DDO wasn't a class-based game, but I agree that it permits more customization of a character than most class-based games allow. I was trying to argue against your specific example of a hybrid character (Fighter/Barb/Rogue) and that you're overlooking the value of intelligent hybrid choices. Admittedly, while a Fighter/Barb/Rogue is not the best example of such a choice, there are important things in the context of DDO to consider that can be applied to other games, class-based or classless.
Firstly, DDO permits degrees of hybridization: A Wizard 10/Cleric 10 (just off the top of my head) is not the same as a Wizard 17/Cleric 3. That's important to consider given your flat dismissal of your Fighter/Barb/Rogue example - "How many levels of each?" can make a difference between a poorly-designed character and a feasible one. Other MMOs, such as Guild Wars and even Runes of Magic have a more black-and-white take on multiclassing. In Guild Wars, you either are a primary Warrior or you are not, and that affects armor choice and primary attribute (Strength). In Runes of Magic, you either have Class A as your primary or Class B, and this affects 90% of the skills available to you at any given time. In DDO, these distinctions are blurred somewhat. A Wizard/Cleric *could* wear heavy armor, but it would interfere with his arcane-based spells (unless he had the Still Spell feat). The same character also has access to all of his Cleric and Wizard spells at any one time, he merely has to choose which ones he plans to use in a given period of time and prepare them.
Secondly, DDO limits how well a character can fill a given role in three primary ways: Attribute selection (a Wizard/Cleric can min/max for either Intelligence or Wisdom or try to balance both), Feat selection (you only have so many to choose, and they are important to your character's development) and Skill selection (while they may have some skills in common, such as Spellcraft, there are others that they do not and this can affect what situations this hybrid character is useful in.)
I'm trying to minimize the quote pyramid as much as possible and keep this from becoming a huge wall of text.
I notice in pretty much any post where someone posts an idea for their game, they always have to list classes. But why? It's an inferior outdated system that locks the player into a certain playstyle. I know a few people are going to rush in here and say "Balance!", but imo that's bullshit, what matters most is the player's ability to have fun and play the way they want to play, and I think classes get in the way of that. I wouldn't say entirely skill-based like Darkfall though is an optimal system either, because everyone can do everything and that's no good either. Really I think the best system is a design your own class where you get a certain amount of points to pick various skills from a list, and a limited amount of points to choose your starting dexterity and stuff. So I'm wondering, is there any reason that most of you advocate classes over a "build your own class" system? Have you guys ever tried an alternate system?
You want to see what a classless game looks like go play Champions. A game that does exactly what you suggest.
It's a gave where everyone takes a defensive ability, a heal (just to keep themselves alive), and lots of dps. It is also a game where people have little incentive for cooperative play.
Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do. Benjamin Franklin
I notice in pretty much any post where someone posts an idea for their game, they always have to list classes. But why? It's an inferior outdated system that locks the player into a certain playstyle. I know a few people are going to rush in here and say "Balance!", but imo that's bullshit, what matters most is the player's ability to have fun and play the way they want to play, and I think classes get in the way of that. I wouldn't say entirely skill-based like Darkfall though is an optimal system either, because everyone can do everything and that's no good either. Really I think the best system is a design your own class where you get a certain amount of points to pick various skills from a list, and a limited amount of points to choose your starting dexterity and stuff. So I'm wondering, is there any reason that most of you advocate classes over a "build your own class" system? Have you guys ever tried an alternate system?
You want to see what a classless game looks like go play Champions. A game that does exactly what you suggest.
It's a gave where everyone takes a defensive ability, a heal (just to keep themselves alive), and lots of dps. It is also a game where people have little incentive for cooperative play.
This is true. But I think EVE Online is the best example of a Classless game. You still have strong roles just like a Class game (due to ship constraints). But yet- you still have the strength of a skill-based game
Champions- well go to Champions online forum here to read my rants. They still could've had strong teamplay if they would've made content for teams and given FULL XP for teams.
But alas Cryptic dropped the ball.
Really,EVE is a much better example of a Classless game and you'll see 100 man fleets all the time for PVE / PVP (I consider POS shooting in pre-Domination sort of pve'ish mixed with pvp). You'll also see big groups do mining and exploration and wormholes.
[quote]Originally posted by SuprGamerX [b] "[color=#ff0000]So a skill system needs a quite complicated set of caps and restrictions in that [color=#ffff00]a player [color=#ffff00]must accept a weakness if he chooses a power."[/b][/quote]
Why is this so? There's so much to learn from other genres here. Take FPS games for example... In most such games, every character is equally trained, they all know how to shoot and use any equipment they find on the battlefield. Typically they start with a particular set of equipment, which can be defined as their "class". Certain equipment may have drawbacks like reduced damage and accuracy if a suppressor is used, but this is related to the equipment, and can easily be changed by picking up a gun from another fallen combatant.
If you want something that stops everyone from being a battle-mage-cleric then keep equipment in mind. Mages cast at reduced effectiveness while in armor. They cast at reduced effectiveness when not using a focus (staff). Warriors don't beat stuff up very well with a staff. A mage might be able to sneak around like a thief, but if he has any enchantments on him it might make him stand out like a shining beacon. And once he starts casting he becomes very visible.
Comments
How is it an outdated and inferior system? Diversity drives MMO games in PvE and PvP. If everyone can do everything than you need less people overall in the game. You seem to directly link having fun and classless systems, but that's a huge leap in logic imo. I'd rather play a game with classes than one that is completely sandbox. I can't think of a single game out there that runs a classless system that is surviving well enough. If you say Darkfall, than clearly you don't play or follow it, without a doubt it does not survive this upcoming year.
It sounds to me like you want a game like Champion's Online where everyone can design their own hero with certain limitations, take a quick look at that game to see how well it is doing.
Sennheiser
Assist
Thage
"So a skill system needs a quite complicated set of caps and restrictions in that a player must accept a weakness if he chooses a power."
That really beats up everything everyone has to say in this thread,and I never thought I would encounter someone smart enough to type this in a forum. It all comes down to the players,and 95% of the players in the MMO world all want to be solopwnmobiles. The next question is why even play a MMO with a selfish mindset? The point of a MMO is playing co-op,in other words why the hell would I waste my time taking turns at killing a boss which I need for a quest when I can party with 40 people and get it all done at once? The reason why fantasy MMO's degraded,from my point of view,is because everyone wants to solo everything with ease. Almost every game out there have balanced skills,just that people whine because that perticular class can own everyone in PvP. Seriously I never cared for PvP in a fantasy game tbh. I always considered story line and depth to be top priority in a Fantasy game.I PvP like crazy in low sec on EVE-Online,I win some and I lose some,it all comes down to tactics and luck but in the end,the fun is all that matters,because lets face it,from a PvP stand point you'll always end up getting your ass kicked by a certain type of class. This debate can go on forever but deep down it's all about the PvP and at this rate I wouldn't be surprised on seeing a tank out damageing a mage in a near future. Sci-Fi ftw,the hell with fantasy,got enough of them already. Happy Holidays and drive safe!
There is no such thing as a 'build' in EVE Online unless you refer to the ship configuration. There is no limit to the amount of skills a player can learn. There is no 'talent tree'.
Going to try to be brief:
I like classless games because I firmly believe MMOs should be about infinite progression. Meaning, the journey should never end. There should be no end game. So, I should always be able to keep learning new things just like I do in real life. That is how an MMORPG should be too me.
Now, how this is handled I am not too picky these days. You can be like EVE Online and offer best of both worlds whereas even though its infinite progression and such, you are locked into a role during an encounter (due to ship constraints). So I have nothing against performing a role.
I'm trying to minimize the quote pyramid as much as possible and keep this from becoming a huge wall of text.
You want to see what a classless game looks like go play Champions. A game that does exactly what you suggest.
It's a gave where everyone takes a defensive ability, a heal (just to keep themselves alive), and lots of dps. It is also a game where people have little incentive for cooperative play.
Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do.
Benjamin Franklin
You want to see what a classless game looks like go play Champions. A game that does exactly what you suggest.
It's a gave where everyone takes a defensive ability, a heal (just to keep themselves alive), and lots of dps. It is also a game where people have little incentive for cooperative play.
This is true. But I think EVE Online is the best example of a Classless game. You still have strong roles just like a Class game (due to ship constraints). But yet- you still have the strength of a skill-based game
Champions- well go to Champions online forum here to read my rants. They still could've had strong teamplay if they would've made content for teams and given FULL XP for teams.
But alas Cryptic dropped the ball.
Really,EVE is a much better example of a Classless game and you'll see 100 man fleets all the time for PVE / PVP (I consider POS shooting in pre-Domination sort of pve'ish mixed with pvp). You'll also see big groups do mining and exploration and wormholes.
[quote]Originally posted by SuprGamerX
[b]
"[color=#ff0000]So a skill system needs a quite complicated set of caps and restrictions in that [color=#ffff00]a player [color=#ffff00]must accept a weakness if he chooses a power."[/b][/quote]
Why is this so? There's so much to learn from other genres here. Take FPS games for example... In most such games, every character is equally trained, they all know how to shoot and use any equipment they find on the battlefield. Typically they start with a particular set of equipment, which can be defined as their "class". Certain equipment may have drawbacks like reduced damage and accuracy if a suppressor is used, but this is related to the equipment, and can easily be changed by picking up a gun from another fallen combatant.
If you want something that stops everyone from being a battle-mage-cleric then keep equipment in mind. Mages cast at reduced effectiveness while in armor. They cast at reduced effectiveness when not using a focus (staff). Warriors don't beat stuff up very well with a staff. A mage might be able to sneak around like a thief, but if he has any enchantments on him it might make him stand out like a shining beacon. And once he starts casting he becomes very visible.