Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Class Based System or Capped Skill System?
Emergence
Member Posts: 888
This is an age old argument, but I wanted to put a heavy emphasis on the benefits of both.
Let's say that it is Class based systems vs Capped Skill Systems (Ultima Online). That players have only [x] amount of skill points to spend, so they can only specialize in ONE or TWO (maybe THREE if they stretch it) areas or types of character.
Let's discuss the pro's of a class based system and the pro's of a skill based system.
I would mainly like to hear the pro's of a class based system and the con's of a skill based system. Usually the community prefers skill based systems, but I rarely see anything about their possible con's compared to Class based systems.
Does this change from PvE to PvP?
If being a developer means being quiet, mature, well-spoken, and disconnected from the community, then by all means do me a favor and believe I'm not one.
Comments
For PVP i believe a capped skill based system with no classes is best. That way you don't have all of the constant balancing issues that tends to ruin the PVP in class based MMOs.
For PVE i enjoy a diverse class system like Vanguard has where each of the classes could fill alternate rolls in small groups when necessary.
The benefit to class-based systems is the developer commits to trying to make each playstyle interesting and balanced.
The disadvantage to skill-based systems is many pitfall builds (which you can offset by having a readily available respec system to try different combinations). It also tends to result in fewer defined roles/playstyles, but that's primarily because it's harder to implement the right skills which provide varied playstyles.
Also important is use-based vs. XP-based progression.
Use-based combined with Skills is a terrible combination that forces users to participate in all sorts of really bland activities. Oblivion is a good example of forcing users to do all sorts of inane things (jumping off cliffs repetitively to improve Acrobatics) in order to advance their characters. Darkfall's auto-swim grind (or "cast water spells 10,000 times") is another example of huge failure.
A skill-based game with XP progression is considerably better -- providing you reward players XP for all sorts of enjoyable (and non-AFKable) activities. One way a lot of XP-based games fail is to not provide XP for crafting. Crafting is enjoyable to many, so having it be a viable method of advancing your character is only logical. The challenge, of course, is to ensure these activities are generally balanced with one another (because if crafting is the best way to gain XP then players who don't even like crafting will craft -- and dislike the game as a result.)
Really there are few Skill+XP systems out there nowadays, which is a shame. Asheron's Call 1 was the closest I think (it was a skill-based game with a hybrid of use-based and XP-based progression.)
If we want to get away from theoretical into actual examples, I feel WOW has the best playstyle selection system. Basically it's a game where there are effectively about 25 different classes, but they're accessed via talent trees within the 10 core classes. In a game with fewer core classes, you could offer even greater talent tree variety per class.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Thank you! This is the first time you gave real, practical explanations which were very specific and well thought out!
I really appreciate this, thank you! Everything you said was clear and specific, not vague or cryptic.
Very interesting theory!
If being a developer means being quiet, mature, well-spoken, and disconnected from the community, then by all means do me a favor and believe I'm not one.
But that's the player's fault. You aren't supposed to be jumping off of cliffs or facing a wall and putting a weight on the run key.
You are supposed to just be playing the game normally and eventually your skills raise. I swear, it seems the players are constantly making their own hells.
It puts advancement being first priority over just playing and exploring the world. Especially in a single player game. If a player is finding that they are spending most of their time running and jumping and doing "bland things" then they need to find a different type of game as it is very clear they have missed the point entirely.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
Well, I prefer either a system where you can design your own class, like in Daggerfall or a system where you choose a basic class (Soldier, rogue or Magic user) and then design that basic class into your own class.
In a system where everyone can have all skills there is no needs for alts, and balance is straight out of the window.
On the other hand is system with fixed classes rather boring and predictable. Everybody is more or less the same even if some specialization exist.
So a system where you either buy skills or when you design a lot yourself is most fun. There must however exist templates for the people who don't want to create their own class. That way most players are happy.
This has been done in many single player games and works fine. As a pen and paper player I want to have a character that I put together myself.
I will tell you what I think after darkfall starts implementing their prestige system. If done well I think it will be the best system. A system that allows you to do anything would be awesome if people can specialize their talents and still compete.
I'm a fan of a non-capped skill system ala Eve-Online. Players can train whatever skills they want, but when they undock they take on a role that is dependent on the ship they are flying in. There are also so many different skills, and the skills can take quite some time to train, that people don't always end up like a clone of each other like what happens in Darkfall.
Game developers seem to think that player progression must be done in a way that the player becomes more powerful. To some extent I agree. With games like Darkfall, however, I think the developers have made the growth too linear. Too much emphasis is placed on getting stronger that new players cannot really keep with older players.
I would rather a game where character skill progression branched out horizontally and somewhat vertically. Where characters do get more powerful as their skills increase in a particular skill, but also that it unlocks more skills to be improved, that allow for a character to do different things. I don't think that skills and stats should make a character so powerful that unequipped they can tank and kill two or three newbie characters. I think that that should be more along the lines of what equipment is for. Especially in a player-driven economy game. Equipment should have high turnover rates so that equipment is constantly leaving the game, not just switching hands. And the equipment that a player can access and use at any one time should be varied so that players can assume different roles based on what they can afford and what their skills dictate they should be able to use profeciently.
--------
"Chemistry: 'We do stuff in lab that would be a felony in your garage.'"
The most awesomest after school special T-shirt:
Front: UNO Chemistry Club
Back: /\OH --> Bad Decisions
Well of course that's how the game is supposed to play out.
But use-based progression is an unnecessary pitfall. Not every player falls in, but some do.
As soon as any substantial challenge comes along which requires a skill to be high (PVP in Darkfall; a big jumpable chasm in Oblivion; or many combat checks in either game,) that's when even more players will jump into the pit in order to pursue their goals -- and have a lousy time as a result.
There's little downside -- apart from being slightly more abstract -- to an XP-based system that lets players choose which activities they enjoy and advance via those activities.
I mean there's always going to be a subset of players who really like the logical sense that a use-based system makes (and are willing to suffer the downsides), so it's not like that sort of system doesn't get made or won't get made again...but it's a weaker design, generally speaking.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
I think the answer to use-progression problems is to take basic skills and make them time-based. Just allow combat and crafting skills to be leveled up by ingame decisions. As long as there is some kind of incentive for players to progress through more difficult content there shouldn't be any reason to do unenjoyable activities.
Well that's really only appropriate for very sandbox games. And even then it's a little dubious.
I mean the core reason people like RPGs is that their actions accumulate permanent progression. If you disconnect that and have it be their subscription fee that accumulates progression, you miss out on a lot of interest in the genre.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
I think a use-based system that puts a lot less emphasis on skill points, and a lot more emphasis on items would be a better way to go. There'd be less of a reason to macro since you'll need money/resources to get items. Make harvesting and crafting require player input (possibly using abilities or timing) and that wouldn't be so bad either.
--------
"Chemistry: 'We do stuff in lab that would be a felony in your garage.'"
The most awesomest after school special T-shirt:
Front: UNO Chemistry Club
Back: /\OH --> Bad Decisions
I always liked sparing with my friends to gain skills up. This wasn't a grind for me, it was a fun, entertaining, relaxing social aspect of Ultima Online.
I would spend hours talking with my guild in Ultima Online while I would "spare" with butcher cleavers or kitchen knives (low dps weapons). This was fun!
I think that if I made a game where players can spare with one another in a friendly duel to raise skill- it would be fun!
To accomplish this, I would do the following:
1) Players can only gain skill from sparing in a TRAINING GROUNDS area. These areas are specific social hot-spots where players hang out to find sparing partners.
2) Players can only gain skill from like-minded characters. A 60 swordsmanship player will NOT gain anything from a character less than 50 swordsmanship. There must be a similar range of skill for a player to gain skill. Otherwise, only the lower skill player gains skill. (So a 100 swordsmanship player can give gains to ANY player. He can give the best gains too!) Up to a limit per day. Spar training is like a Daily Quest.
3) Sparing is in the form of a duel. If a player wins-- they gain skill. If a player loses, he may not spar again until the next day...or perhaps a few hours. This says to players "If you spare, you HAVE to win!" which makes dueling fun and competitive. No one will want to lose, even 100 skill players. Grand Masters cannot make money giving players high gains if they let the student win the duel. Winning also gives gains. Players can also gamble in duels. These are never to the death though.
4) #2 and #3 will only be there, given the grounds this isn't abused by players. We want to add in a design to counter abuse, but if impossible and abuse is too likely and too profitable, we may scrap the system to a simple "You can gain [x] skill per day sparing."
If being a developer means being quiet, mature, well-spoken, and disconnected from the community, then by all means do me a favor and believe I'm not one.
That sounds like a pretty cool feature.
I like the concept of #3 as far as the winning clause to gaining skill points. Even in a use-skill system I think points should only be earned if you kill something in combat, and only as a function of the skill(s) level(s) used during combat, the size of the party, and the difficulty of the mob/player based on some way of determining their skill levels.
I don't like the idea of players losing being locked out of partcipating for x amount of time. I think #4 would be the better choice, with x skill points/day being based on a function of the player's skill levels.
--------
"Chemistry: 'We do stuff in lab that would be a felony in your garage.'"
The most awesomest after school special T-shirt:
Front: UNO Chemistry Club
Back: /\OH --> Bad Decisions
class system >>> skill system.
Once the elitistjerk people get their hands on a skill system, you will be sure to get a solution of the most combat efficient build and everyone will be using it.
There will be NO diversity .. kind of like the tank mage thingie back in UO.
That's an extremely common talking point from people who dislike skill-based systems, which is always accompanied by that same example. However, when one actually looks at skill-based MMOs like UO and EVE Online - rather than repeats something he heard or saw once in 1998 - the myth is easily busted.
That old example from one time period of one game well before the turn of the century just doesn't hold up when there are games - including that very one - in present day that clearly and immediately disprove that myth.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
This, lol....If the game fails at the balance of skill system then it's the game's fault, not the system's.
I think the reason there was no diversity in UO was because... there were very few actual combat skills.
No diversity? No choices.
You could be...
1) Melee
2) Magic
3) Archer
4) Animal Tamer
That's about it. Hiding was possible...but eh. Archery was awesome, but no one used it for some reason O.o heavy X-bows were awesome.
But really, archery was a bit gimped bc of the chasing involved (you could either hit and let them get away, or chase and NOT hit, lol) or idk what the reason was that no one played as an archer. Anyways... animal tamer was overly difficult bc of the need for very high skill and taming a wyvern/dragon.
That is why everyone was either Melee or Magic.
If being a developer means being quiet, mature, well-spoken, and disconnected from the community, then by all means do me a favor and believe I'm not one.
One of the core reasons is that players accumulate PROGRESSION.
That progression does NOT need to be permanent.
Item decay and Full Loot do not take away this progress, even though it does. Why? Because Banks are always safe.
Even if the only form of permanent progression was Gold in a Bank account, it would still be plenty enough for people.
I would rephrase it as "I mean the core reason people like RPGs is that their actions accumulate some form of progression."
If being a developer means being quiet, mature, well-spoken, and disconnected from the community, then by all means do me a favor and believe I'm not one.
I voted: A skill based system with a cap (Ultima Online)
But I would have much rathered a A skill based system with a cap (Asheron's Call)
SKill based:
-Pros: Can be whatever you want, don't have to switch characters.
-Cons: Well pvp wise, I know others will have the total opposite opinion, but I think it is easier overall, I choose whatever I'm best at, and I don't think as much about how to counter the other players. All characters pretty much seem the same to me. I feel I can be more easily forgotten in a completely skill based game.
Class Based:
-Pros: Feels funner, and I feel more involved with the story. Having alts seems more rewarding to me. Pvp is funner.
-Cons: Restricted to certain abilities.
The best system on the poll for me is Class based, but with a lot of choices, however sometimes that means a class may be less defined, which sort of sucks to me.
The best system for me that isn't on the poll: A Mixed system. One that gives you many well-defined classes, but you have a ton of options. In the real world you have warriors, but not every warrior is alike.
-I want a Platformer MMO
Didn't vote.
Personally I like skill-based systems as many people here. However, it seems skill-based systems are prone to macroing, cheating, powergaming, afk-skilling etc, especially when xp doesn't get earned by defeating a mob but by merely using a skill.
I'd rather prefer a system where the player characters earns xp by defeating mobs (not by defeating players in PvP, too easy to exploit) and then the player can "buy" skills with his xp from NPC trainers.
Alternatively I'd have a system like D&D has: classes, but with the ability to multi-class if I want to play a hybrid of some sorts.
I maintain this List of Sandbox MMORPGs. Please post or send PM for corrections and suggestions.
I dont think there is a single "One True System" for character advancement. The developer needs to match the advancement system (if any) to the stype of game he's aiming for. EVE's skill system works well for a high complexity, slow-paced game. That doesn't mean it would be right for a high-accessibility, action-based game.
There's also the case of games based on a specific IP. It would be difficult to imagine an MMO based on Dungeons & Dragons that didn't have class based advancement.
In general, I'm against class-based systems on principle - I dont like arbitrary limitations on what I can and can't do. But if a game has a coherent and well balanced class system that makes sense then that's fine.
Give me liberty or give me lasers
Combo of both with archetypes, perks and detriments, and a little point allotment for good measure.
The scattergun approach has died since you can't make everyone happy, but something with some depth could go a long way in today's market I think.
I agree with this. Use for skill increase results in inane activities.
I COULD shoot that creature with my bow, one shot, and kill it. But, I need to raise my sword skills, so I will run over there and whack it 5 times with my sword.
Makes no sense at all.
I like this sort of system as well. It allows me to create my character by making decisions on what skills to buy, which is fun.