>>98579608
In theory, classless but I think it's harder to design for.

>>98579608
I like them as broad concepts but characters should be unique even if they follow a particular class "trajectory".

>>98579608
Vietnam is cool. Wearing a dragon is cool.

>>98579608
I like both for different reasons and uses.

>>98579608
I design all of my games around multiclassing, to the point of offering options for each combination that are greater than the sum of their parts.

>>98579608
Thailand looks like a whore

>>98579608
I was all in on classes until I started playing Cosmere RPG. Now I like skill trees and endless mixing and matching, though my big gripe is that my players never seem to branch outside their one or two paths (the equivalent of class trees) despite the wide variety of options.

>>98579753
Far easier.

>>98580522
As he should.

>>98579608
Middle of the road where the game is mostly classless, but there are abilities exclusive to some choices.
Like Cyberpunk or Genesys.

>>98579608
Neither's a dealbreaker, but I prefer classless.

>>98579608
I like classes, because they enable designers to create abilities without having to worry about how they synergize with literally everything else in the entire game. This makes it easier to make more evocative and complex abilities. I do think, however, that games should also include advancement options outside of classes.

>>98579608
Class based.
Especially with hard roles, but not with rotating spotlight. This is difficult to pull off but some systems manage

>>98579608
Depends. I dislike how WotC D&D and its derivatives do classes which boils down to classes being tied to weirdly specific features (e.g. barbarians raging). That one can work, if it's tied to the setting, but even then I know fewer examples of this that got it right than fuck ups.
Other than that both approaches are viable. My favorite is having premade templates as classes with the option of creating your own or the Genesys Approach.

>>98579608
Classless, but I still think fringe exclusivity is a good idea.

>>98579608
Career-based, like WFRP2 or FFGSWRPG.

>>98581033
>This makes it easier to make more evocative and complex abilities.
No it doesn't.
>enable designers to create abilities without having to worry about how they synergize with literally everything else in the entire game
This is not a function of anything. You can do that with or without anything else.

>>98581188
This is the dumbest post I have ever seen, and I have been a regular on /b/ since 2004.

>>98579608
What class is Laos and Myanmar supposed to be

>>98579753
yeah, so many problems come with going classless.

That is, if you have any mind for optimization. If you don't care that you might be the weakest party member when playing an archetype that's even in the title of the game then the problems don't matter.

I like both, slightly leaning towards class-based because classless tend to leave the onus of making a mechanically distinctive character on the player.
In theory classless but you get to buy into classes too like Cyberpunk RED should be the most rad shit ever, and I do kind of like it but the way it's done isn't ideal.

>>98580653
Your players are going hard on one or two paths because that is what the game incentivizes.

In Cosmere, most of the magic trees have so much internal synergy that you are encouraged to take most or all of the tree if you want to use that magic seriously. This dynamic is similar in a lot of heroic paths where the path gimmick is kinda shit unless you pick up a bunch of supplementary talents, with some exceptions that have the opposite problem where you are best off taking a 1-2 talent dip in the path with your free human heroic talents. Between that and the in game character resources (focus and investiture) and action economy encouraging efficient use of a few high impact abilities offset by cost reducing talents, there is little incentive to diversify your character when the system actively rewards deep investment and punishes having lots of lackluster abilities that burn character resources quickly.

>>98579608
Depends on the game. I find that the existence of magic in a game automatically incentivizes classes as a way to sort the different types of magic or magical abilities. Without the existence of magic it is nearly impossible to justify the existence of classes.
Therefor low-magic games, or games where players are not expected to use magic really are better off classless.

Funny enough i also believe that games where everyone uses magic should also be classless.

Look at cyberpunk, it is completely classless except for one skill that is unique to that role. However that skill is a big deal, or at call of cthulhu which i cant imagine classes existing for.

Does the Philippino guy get a defense bonus against low calibre firearms? I remember reading somewhere that in the Philippine theater of the Spanish-American War, the US had to issue its soldiers bigger guns because the native warriors had this weird tendency to not only not die but keep right on fighting if they were shot by anything smaller than a .45.

>>98581265
Ironic, LOL

>>98581033
wow, it's like you've never played a game in your life

>>98581330
Exactly backwards.

>>98581450
No? Magic is just one of the sources, it dooesn't imply or require classes.

>>98581330
That's pretty much it, for me. I've had fun in classless but only because I stopped caring about builds.

Treat them like Lego.

>>98581450
Sure, but at the very least classless lets your mostly caster character dip into other things more easily.

Class based. Half the people I GM for are like herding cats so them knowing their role specifically is needed to keep the game flowing smoothly.

>>98579608
I like the structure classes give, but they shouldn't be too rigid

>>98579608
Both, and inbetween, because I play games, not merely talk about them online.

classeless is better for RP but classless combat is almost always awful

>>98581330
Grab a (You), never-game

>>98581936
>t. complete retard who never played a single classless game in his life
And that already is a big doubt if you played anything at all, ever

>>98579608
Depends on the goal of the game and its internal design and what's the pipeline for making characters.
Pirate Borg is fun, because it is entirely build around randomising your class and its features
Righteous Blood, Ruthless Blades is fun, because it is entirely build on convention, rather than whatever some autismo might be building, while having exciting and fun combat
Barbarians of Lemuria and its endless clones technically are a hybrid system and that's what's making them so fucking fun - because you have both a soft cap and soft bonus of what you are doing and can pull off.

So many weird opinions here about combat and subsystems that are not related to classes at all. Classes are just a set of classless abilities arranged in a way to fulfill certain archetypes. The only difference is between variety and convenience. Classes are convenient but restrictive, while classless allows for greater variety but due to the variety not as convenient. I prefer classless because the abilities can better fit the character even if it takes more work to make the character

>>98582081
>classless allows for greater variety but due to the variety not as convenient.
Yes anon, we get it - you never played, but keep dreaming.
Maybe one day local rec center will run open table for disabled

>>98581936
What the fuck are you possibly talking about.
>>98579608
Classless all the way, but archetypes and examples are a nice bonus.

>>98581661
Huh? You build characters in classless games too. Have you played any?

>>98581330
what problems?

>>98582081
No, classless is more variety and more convenient. There are no downsides.

>>98582088
Classless games allow for archetypes, and are better at representing them, since you can make any archetype you can imagine instead of being restricted by the designer's tiny, boring imagination.

No games like classless. It sounds better but is always worse in execution. Fact is, D&D mostly got it right with 3.X, but Shadow of the Demon Lord/Weird Wizard is my favorite character gen of any game.

File: ok.jpg (27 KB, 370x370)

27 KB JPG

>>98582142
>Here is my set of random claims

FFG star wars is classless right
All I know about the game is that you can break it by stacking duplicate abilities from different trees

>>98581079
>rotating spotlight
wut

>>98582163
>I don't play games
Thanks for sharing your valuable opinion

>>98582088
>>98581936
classless faggots like you wouldn't get so sensitive if I wasn't right. The only classless game I've played with good combat is X-com

>>98582351
>I too don't play actual TTRPGs

>>98582351
What makes combat good, in your eyes?

>>98582351
>people disagree with me
>therefore I must be right
Solid logic right there.

>>98582118
Classless games are the ultimate midwit games.
Dumb and Smart people thrive with classes. Dumb people have to make fewer decisions, and smart people understand that restrictions breed creativity.
Smart people in classless games get bored because everything just evolves into the Single Best Build™ plus a handful of RP skills.

>>98582383
NTAYRT but many meaningful decisions for many player participants, emphasis on the meaningful. This is achieved much more by class based games who can give you harsh binary enabler skills. In classless, everyone just picks up the good stuff.

>Most /tg/ posters are now more into magic and supernatural theming
>Classless is mogging class in popularity

The fuck happened in like 2 years? I swore it was like constant human fighters are good and class is good posting.

>>98582405
Harsh binary enabler skills? So you mean picking X gates off Y? This all just sounds like buildfaggotry which isn't gameplay. A classless game can present a bunch of options every turn, especially if your character has choices over equipment (rifle Vs SMG, grenades, etc.) and while stats may begin to converge it's not as though D&D is immune to that either.

>>98582405
This whole "Le Dumb and Smart people are actually the same" shit has no basis in reality and is just a cope from conservative psuedo intellectuals and hipsters that the majority of people who share their politics are all dudebro retards and gacha gamers.

>>98582142
this is false btw

>>98582351
you wouldn't get so sensitive if I wasn't right :)
reply if you're sensitive :)

>>98582405
classless is better for creativity, and class games have dominant strategies. classless do not. so you're wrong.

>>98582405
achieved much more by classless games, you mean.

>>98582383
fun action economy, fun 'buttons' to hit and enemies that actually matter, in that I have to fear what they are capable of or they make me play my kit differently

classless games tend to be pretty shallow. You get one or two tricks and spam them hard. Class based games can give you a much wider array of options.

Games with good Combat:
4e
Lancer
13th Age
Tactics Ogre One Vision
X-com

Games with bad combat:
anything pbta
ventangle
Icon ( fantasy lancer - the earlier playtests with harder classes were much better than the later playtests with SotDL like miniclass progression. The monster manual reads well but the actual play was way too narrow.)

Games with good encounters but I wouldn't call the combat good: Adnd, mutants and masterminds, DH/RT/Deathwatch
3.PF ( if everyone on your team is good and the DM does a zillion hours of prep in theory this game should be goated but all my DMs + usually the other players make combat mid)

>>98579883
Vietnam might be the most powerful country on Earth. They historically punch well above their weight class; from China, to France, to the United States. Foreigners can't hold them.

>>98579608
Class based with a lot parallel means of customization and ways to combine classes to express different concepts.

File: 1770756025544138 the-wiza(...).png (3.28 MB, 2204x1240)

3.28 MB PNG

true to their preference, pro-classless opinions voiced here are mostly shapeless blobs of words with no real design or coherence to them
"no, retard" isn't an argument

>>98582573
Sure, and pro-class opinions voiced here are full of strong claims about benefits class-based systems supposedly have with absolutely nothing to back those claims up.

>>98582585
at least they're specific and purposeful, thus allowing actual discussion where you debate concrete points

>>98582601
Classless systems being less restrictive and making mixing and matching abilities are specific and concrete benefits of classless systems that have been mentioned ITT.

>>98581188
You didn't really make a cogent argument beyond "nuh-uh". Do you want to try again?

>>98582623
hence "mostly"
there have been some good points raised
but it doesn't contradict what I said

>>98582623
That's not a benefit, because it inevitable leads to monobuilds.

>>98582484
You never actually played a TTRPG

>>98582455
Someone is mad he's a midwit.

>>98582448
No, I mean "You can't do X if you didn't pick the X skill". You know, the thing everybody bitches about in DnD Threads. Because that means you can have five players on the board who all are forced to have radically different options.

>This all just sounds like buildfaggotry which isn't gameplay
The entire meat of every single RPG ever can be boiled down to "what can your character do". Every RPG is inevitable buildfaggotry.

>A classless game can present a bunch of options every turn, especially if your character has choices over equipment (rifle Vs SMG, grenades, etc.)
I guarantuee you it cannot, because in complete freedom there's always an optimal option. You'd know this if you weren't a retard. Class based systems quite often block you from that optimal option because it's not part of your class, and then you have to choose between different bad options, and that's where things get interesting.

>>98582866
>That's not a benefit, because it inevitable leads to monobuilds.
That has not been my experience with classless systems. What are you basing that claim on?

>>98582900
>That has not been my experience with classless systems
Then your players are incompetent or you never actually played any games

>What are you basing that claim on?
Playing GURPS, Runequest, and various D6 Hacks with people with a triple digit IQ

>>98582925
>Then your players are incompetent
Not minmaxing to the utmost is not incompetence. Inability to build functional characters that don't adhere to a specific, easy, straightfoerward optimal build you probably found on some forum, on the other hand, definitely is a sign of incompetence.

>or you never actually played any games
There it is, the classic "any difference from my opinions or experiences means you're nogames" argument, favored by idiots with no capacity to form actual arguments.

>Playing GURPS, Runequest, and various D6 Hacks with people with a triple digit IQ
I guess it's nice of people with triple digit IQ to hang out with you.

>>98582900
NTA, what classless game has good combat?

>>98582953
>He thinks forums have good builds for any game that isn't DnD 3.5, 4E or 5
See, that's why I KNOW that you're both retarded and nogames.
For every other game, online builds were either actually bad or straight up based on misread rules.

fucking hell. nu/tg/ sucks.

first of all there are no builds in classless systems.
builds are a term for combining classes, feats and items to get a desired power effect and the very reason it is a build is because you meticulously plan that shit.
Dumping all your extra skill point in combat and being good at fighting in gurps or in runequest or in savage worlds isnt a build.
It is the equivalent of a class at best. You just built a fighter that's good at fighting.

>>98582998
Every classless game i ve played had better combat than dnd. I know that's not a high bar but still. Honor and Intrigue, Openquest, Gurps, Savage Worlds, Talislanta 4e are some i ve played.
I liked openquest best imo.
I ve heard great things about mythras both here on this board and elsewhere but havent played

>>98583049
I actually almost laughed out aloud when reading this post. Missing a simple point like that while bragging about your own intelligence and mechanical savvy is pretty delicious.

>>98583058
>Dumping all your extra skill point in combat and being good at fighting in gurps or in runequest or in savage worlds isnt a build.
It's so fucking funny how many claims people like you make about games they never played. The skill does't make the build, the various traits that you combine in ridiculously broken ways do, do.

>>98583049
Source?

>>98583100
Common knowledge for anyone who actually hasgames

>>98583089
what traits. only gurps has traits and how much leeway you have with them greatly depends on the game and the gm.
the d100 games mentioned dont have traits besides mythras having just a couple to your combat style to differentiate how each fighter fights. In Honour and intrigue they are most definitely not a build since you only have a couple of them.Talislanta has none as well. Savage world i really cant remember any in the version we plyaed, i know there are a few.
What the fuck are you talking about nogames retard

>>98583114
No, I'm pretty sure if I looked at a random build posted on dumpshock it'd work.

>>98583058
sav worlds is the only one of those i have read. there are some neat subsystems in the game but i found it to read like shit.

Tell me about openquest, why is the combat good?

>>98583177
hp doesnt scale and damage scales very moderately with better equipment or magic so the game never drags on first of all.
it's your typical brp style game with both ative offense and defense with armor as damage reduction. You get one combat action and one free reaction with each additional reaction having a penalty so no one man army stuff because you have a high AC like dnd.
It has a small suite of useful combat options like great attack giving you a good bonus to your attack and taking your free reaction away, the usual disarms, trips, fighting retreat. i believe my dm might have homebrewed a couple of his own as well which is trivially easy.
Has a good amount of situational modifiers baked in so the dm doesnt have to make numbers on the fly most of the time and even if he has there are numbers to extrapolate from, so you can have strategic stuff during combat.
Also major and minor wounds making hp not be a flat number but meaning that a good hit can take someone out in one go.
It went fast, hits mattered, combat never felt too easy, the opposite honestly. Coming from dnd and using it as classless dnd lite it was a breath of fresh air

>>98583360
also casters have both a limited spell pool and a limited spell points pool so that they cant cast a million bonkers spells per fight and they keep a certain niche that pertains to their character concept. Not all casters have to be combat wizards or combat clerics. You can also be a wizard and still know how to fight. We had a wizard and he never felt useless even without the spells because even one more body out there makes a difference

the one caveat is that if you like very high power stuff it probably falters a little but for the 1-12 range of levels in dnd power tier it fits perfectly

>>98582526
as does classless.

>>98582573
exactly like the class posts, then. there isn't a single word of reasoning anywhere. "X does this better because I say so" is not actually convincing. Since you have provided no examples, I won't either. As soon as you post something specific that you believe a classless system can't represent, I will provide a counterexample.

>>98582601
There is no specific post in the thread, at all.

>>98582866
Yep, you've never played a game.

>>98582866
No optimal options and anything can be represented. Try again.

>>98582866
By this reasoning there's also always the optimal class that everyone plays.

>>98583728
this is literally half the discourse around dnd 3.5/pf 1e. how to get around the fact that the game is solved, the best classes are here to stay and they are much better than anything else
i am sure 4e and 5e have a similar thing as well

>>98583728
the reasoning is half correct, since good classless games have no dominant strategies.

>>98582573
that's right bitch, run away.

>>98583802
In my experience with classless systems, even with min-maxxing players, the PCs will cover different niches.
So one guy will be a melee combat specialist, one will be a sniper, one will be a charmer, one will be a healer, one will be a walking encyclopaedia etc.
And players will go for suboptimal options that are on theme (as long as suboptimal is like 80% as effective as optimal instead of 20%) for their main character concept.
And even assuming that the players will inevitably break the game by optimising, breaking through crunch can take different amount of time, so the honeymoon phase of a new system can last for quite a while.

>>98583764
5e does have classes better than others, but the baseline is already powerful enough that the lion's share of players doesn't care. Especially with how many of them are normies/casuals. Doubly so for the 5.5 2024 "balance patch".

>>98579608
I spent lots of time creating my perfect classless adaptation to D&D only to discover that the class was the only "pseudovisual" aid that players have to conceptualize their character

>>98584056
Players who need help to conceptualise "fighting man" should probably have their life support unplugged.

>>98582295
I mean to be fair I've only played class based rpgs so I don't have a good frame of reference. Every time I ask what people are playing though it's some weird rules light freeform d6 generic system that seems about as exciting as forum rp. I tried Risus with the group and we had fun and all but it was super chickenshit

>>98583972
stop playing bad games that can be broken.

>>98584261
Ironic, considering how dreadfully dull class slop is.

>>98584549
Oh, I know you, you're the prowlersparagonsnigger.

>>98584553
Idk what's a cool classless system? I mean GURPS is classless right? Not sure I'm trying to learn it though

i like class-based rpgs more in theory, but classless in practice. in theory a class implies an awesome archetype that should make a GM say "yeah, your character naturally knows how to do that, no roll needed". in practice though, class-based systems turn into min-maxing, plan-your-build-seven-levels-ahead spreadsheet homework. classless systems have their own issues often boiling down to "if it's not on your sheet, you can't do it, even if a normal person could", but i prefer classless as the lesser evil.

The ideal system would be a mix. Like, you don't need Arcane Trickster when it's literally just Thief and Wizard. Just have a system where you can pick [Thievery] and [Spellcasting] to make your own class. You don't need Paladin when it's literally [Fighter] and [Spellcasting]. Make a bunch of archetype packages and let players take 2-3 of them. You now have the structure of class abilities but the customization for players to come up with their own ideas for a class.

>>98579608
I have a rather strict criteria for what I think classes should be and do.

1. They have to have their own unique gimmick.
2. They represent different ways of using/approaching the game mechanics.
3. They have thematic connection to the over-arching story.

If the mechanics of the system are in line with the setting it is built for, I would expect there to be some tie in because you can provide ideas and context via the mechanics in ways that just fluff doesn't do.

>>98584892
struck a nerve huh? LOL

>>98585132
"if it's not on your sheet, you can't do it, even if a normal person could" is true of class games. most classless games explicitly mention that heroes are expected to be competent and can automatically do anything an average person can (flaws, cons, etc notwithstanding, of course).

>>98585149
Arcane Trickster

health 5
edge 11
resolve 8

might 3
agility 6
toughness 4
willpower 6
intellect 5
perception 5

academics 4
charm 4
command 2
covert 5
investigation 4
medicine 3
professional 3
science 2
streetwise 5
survival 3
technology 4
vehicles 3

dazzle 5
illusions 6
blending
blind fighting
cloud minds 5
master of disguise
martial arts 6

>>98579608
It depends. I think Class-based RPGs, especially ones that give the class a strict, narrow function and flavor, are generally the best because they make cooperation important in a cooperative storytelling game. You HAVE to rely on your party because you have so many weaknesses, you have one, maybe two things you can be good at and suck ass at the rest. That's where the party comes in.

Classless is, as has been noted, harder to design for. You have more combinations to account for, which makes game balance harder to achieve. It does however leave more flexibility in character creation - but you still need limitations so that characters can't become good at everything. Again, TTRPGs are cooperative, and if you don't pidgeonhole characters into niches then why does the guy who's good at everything need a party? He doesn't, and the premise of the game falls apart.

>>98585859
what gave you the impression that weaknesses are unique to classes?

if balance is so easy for classes, why are they never balanced?

>>98585859
what "guy who's good at everything" are you referring to? there is no such character.

>>98579608
Classes, but make them actual in-universe professions instead. That innkeeper isn't a commoner or some retired adventurer, his class is Innkeeper.

>>98586257
That sounds very isekai anime.

>good classless
>classes
>bad classless

I always find it a bit pathetic when third world countries try to make their spear chucker savage past look cool
No, SEA person, you're not Europe or Japan stop trying

>>98586731
South East Asia does, objectively, have a long history of civilization, though.

>>98586780
But its not cool, not even with elephants

>>98586844
wtf are you on about? southeast asia is the coolest place in asia and the most critically under represented in rpgs because of the general ignorance about the place

>>98585859
well?

>>98587132
>>98582491

>>98587267
Wanna try that again, with something that's relevant to the discussion?

>>98579608
classless is most interesting when it has the appearance of classes. most storyteller games are effectively classless, but still have splats where some are better at some things than others, so you either start off with or are incentivized to choose certain options over others

>>98587492
No.

>>98587267
well?

>>98585856
/thread.

>>98579608
Class-based, but I almost always prefer classless systems, because not a single class-based system I've found actually works for anything I want to do.

>>98587267
well?

>>98587336
Pass. Elaborate and I might consider it.

>>98590244
Nope, you lose.

>>98579608
Yes.

>>98590615
You got nothing.

Make a short post of no substance to confirm.

In reply to that post: lol

>>98591096
Why do you keep losing? KEK