>Fighter>Mage>ThiefThis is all you need for an rpg; anything more is just bloat.
>>3971165Ackshually, it was "Fighting Man", "Magic User" and "Cleric".
>>3971165>Sword>BoardThis is all you need; anything else is bloat.
>>3971166How is a cleric not just a mage that can use a shield?
>>3971165FighterClericMageIs the truth in encapsuled the very essence of being a man:>FighterThe essence of strength itself to improve oneself >MageThe power of mind to think and preserve>ClericThe power of faith and to endure any trail you may face>ThiefPussy shit>>3971166Blessed is the mind too small for doubt
>>3971192How is a thief not just a fighter who can shut his fucking mouth? How is an archer not just a smarter fighter?
>>3971165>white male two handed fighterrest if bloatwizards are evil btw
>>3971165Actually, you just need "Hero"
>>3971165Thief is unnecessary, and only exists because common sense skills were arbitrarily ripped from everyone else. Lemme guess, you want magic, reality bending butter knives that ignore armor, and spindly, scrawny fucks using bows, too?
A fighter that doesn't carry a bow, a two hander, a blunt weapon, and a sword and board is a fake fighter.
>>3971165>tfw no Kineticist or BloodragerBut I'm SPECIAL! I need a special class!
>>3971300Primalist may not be needed but it sure the fuck is enjoyable, unlike being a >>3971165 styled contrarian in hopes it will make you an intersting person.
>>3971275disarming traps from chests and locks is common sense?
>>3971165>>Fighter>>Mage>>Thiefneed a heal slut priestess to suck my RPG(really perky gonads)
>>3972613Yes
>>3971165>Fighter/Mage >Gish>Spellblade>Spellsword>Magus >Bladesinger>Mysic Knight>Mystic Fencer >Battlemage>Bladecaster>Witchblade >HexbladeThis is the only class that has ever, or will ever matter in any RPG. Everything else is boring bloat.IMHO
>>3972811Absolutely not. You're the kind of idiot who thinks you can totally wrestle into submission a dragon the size of a house.
>>3972811And by this logic I assume you believe wielding a sword and shield is common sense too? A wizard is smart! Why is there not just one class that does everything?
>>3972845NoThe time a wizard spends researching magic precludes physical training, the time a fighter spends physically training precludes researching magic. The wizard is assumed capable of most kinds of magic, the fighter is assumed capable of most kinds of physical combat. They may have their own specialties within the things they can do, but they are fundamentally capable of their spheres. Niether are idiots, but they have chosen to invest their time differently. If you really want to squint, the existence of Clerics and Druids or similar forms of alternative mage can be accepted, since while they are fundamentally wizards, their studies are different and non-interchangable enough that it could be argued they are different. I think that's a stretch, but I can see it argued. A fighter that prefers wearing light armor and using bows is still a fighter. A fighter that prefers great weapons and no armor, is still a fighter. A fighter that prefers heavy armor, shields, and a sling is still a fighter. And a Fighter, as written and intended, is capable of all these things provided proper equipment and a reason to do it, as the situation requires. And a fighter that prefers using magic augmentation when possible isn't a spellblade, he's just not an idiot.
>>3972833>he can't overpower building sized lizardslmao get a load of this weak little faggot
>>3972833NoThe leverage is all wrong, no amount of physical strength can allow someone to do this. At best, they could pin the wings up, and even that requires a tremendously strong person.Picking locks is completely common sense, because I figured out how to do it in like a week. I could absolutely get better at it, but it has not taken years of focused effort to become competent at it. I cannot spend like a week becoming an Olympic athlete. That takes years of effort that would have otherwise defined my lifestyle before this. Moving quietly is common sense. Developing a sense and instinct for traps in a dungeon comes from experience being in dungeons, like an adventurer, not from robbing and prison shanking people, like a thief.It's concerning that you think these two cases are equivalent, however.
>>3972869Do you even Archimedes, bro?
>>3972864>The time a wizard spends researching magic precludes physical training, the time a fighter spends physically training precludes researching magic. Except you can have a physically strong wizard in every edition in D&D, yet he still can't use simple weapons like spears or equip a set of chainmail at all. Stop rationalizing this shit.>>3972869>Moving quietly is common sense. Developing a sense and instinct for traps in a dungeon comes from experience being in dungeons, like an adventurer, not from robbing and prison shanking people, like a thief."Thieves" are just "adventurers" in a practical sense. They're half-way between a fighter and wizard in terms of martial capability, but where the fighter over-specializes, a thief is far more comfortable in the role of a generalist who can do many other things at once.
>>3972927>physically strong wizard in every edition in D&DDoesn't qualify for exceptional strength>equip a set of chainmailInterferes with somatic spell componentsYou're mistaking "talent" for "practiced skill and training"
>>3972933>Doesn't qualify for exceptional strengthYou don't need "exceptional strength" to use a spear and chainmail.>Interferes with somatic spell componentsAnd when you're not casting, what then?>You're mistaking "talent" for "practiced skill and training"Doesn't matter, the line is arbitrary.
>>3971192They are holy man, mages are standard wizards.>>3971197Thieves are functionnaly mages, but with skills instead of spells.
>>3972829>Gish
>>3972829damnwish I could play as a Bard(Blade kit).I really like when I can fight with swords and melee and supplement my fighting style with magic.
>>3971165>class slopyawn
>>3971166>"Fighting Man"The term was "Fighter."
>>3971300she's not allowed at the boys-only table.
>>3976331NTA. “Fighting man” predates “fighter” by years, just like “magic user” predates “mage”
>>3976346"Fighter" is younger, but it's still the correct term.
>>3971165Who's healing this party? The mage?
>>3977533Resting heals you.
>>3977533>Who's healing this party?Wickwheat and marshmerrow shakes
>>3971165The difference between bloat and variety is implementation.
>>3977603>Goblins stabs you in the knee.>Group A: No healer just rest>6~8 weeks of immobilization>4 weeks of progressive physical therapy>rest of your life: permanent mobility loss, scarring, pain, adventurer's insurance won't cover it>Groub B: Dedicated healer >healer prays for like 20 seconds>knee completely healed>remember to thank my healerI know which party I'm joining.
>>3977623I used to be a shitposter like you, until I took a career-ending injury to the knee.
>>3977533Nobody, you rest like in classic tabletop games.
>>3977623Just drink a healing potion
>>3977533They don't need to heal because a warrior should be mitigating any damage coming the party's way, the thief should be scouting ahead for danger, and the mage should have a solution tucked somewhere in their spellbook.
>>3977693>Do one combat>Spend 8+ months healing up>Another 4+ months of rehab>Accumulate lifelong debilitating injuries each timeNice party comp retard.>>3977703>Spend gold each time you tank a hitNah, I'll just bring a healer.
>>3977705And who heals the warrior, numb nuts?
>>3977623>3 negorian mages>1 darky knight>allan snackbars. blood for the blood god!!! kek kek kek!it's all optics man.
>>3977706>Surgery doesn't exist>Medicine doesn't exist>Magic healing elixirs in fantasy land don't exist>Doctors in big cities don't exist>Wild shamans/medicine men don't exist>He thinks medieval troops spent 1 year recovering from injuries instead of mounting up for the next battle next week/monthDie faggot
To me, the most sensible is:Fighter (Focuses on combat)Rogue (Focuses on tricks, slight of hand, stealth, charisma)Magic-User (Focuses on powerful spells, but only has a few available for any given situation so you better be ready)Cleric (Focuses on a bit of everything, plus faith)
>>3977737He's right, prior to the industrial revolution basically none of that shit existed and the form it did exist was mostly ineffective. You're far more likely to get an infection and die than you were to recover from an injury.
>>3977774GURPS does a good job of gamifying medicine / recovery according to historically-accurate technology progression (the term you'll find in the books is "tech level").
>>3977774Fantasy adventures only work if you have some kind of magical healing, be that a guy who casts healing spells, a guy who brews healing potions, or if everyone in the group just has wolverine's healing factor for some reason. Real healing is slow, and even seemingly minor injuries can lead to major complications.
Paladins are the only class anyone needs.>Beat the shit out of monsters>Heal yourself>Bash open treasure chests with warhammer>Just walk through traps and heal yourself>Bring some friends along if you get bored, resurrect them when they do retarded shit>All the women lust after your purity, so you can choose the most virtuous one to impregnateEasy life, blessed be God.
>>3977917Exactly right.I see (D&D) Clerics as basically a variation on the Paladin concept but shifted more towards the God side of the equation.
>>3971185Third posts the charm or something. PRAISE THE SUN!
>>3973078This. Thief class has the body, the physical realm, maxed. The mage has the mental, psychological, while having a paltry body.It's give 'n' take baby, compromise - the way of life. For now.
>>3971165It's still funny that being a criminal became a fundamental role in rpgs.
>>3978031Blame Bilbo the Burgler
>>3971165What's the SF equivalent of these?
>>3978332RyuDhalsim'Gief
no matter what you pick you only get a fraction of the experience. the hero should be a fighter who can use magic and sneak around
>>3978386Fuck off, Todd
>>3978374
>>3977917>Paladins>Easy life"Though the knight commanded respect, he was rarely envied. His life was dangerous and brutal, marked by incessant confrontations and the constant threat of humiliation. Rather than adventuring for honor or pleasure, most engaged in a constant struggle for income, desperately seeking any and all opportunities to earn an honest living. The rigid chivalric code, which made abstract principles of loyalty more important than life itself, resulted in a death sentence for most knights. Few lived beyond age 30. Those who survived often spent their remaining years penniless and broken, depending on the charity of a society that had all but forgotten them.">-AD&D 2nd edition, the complete paladin's handbook
>>3972955>While [Magic-users] have mighty spells of offensive, defensive, and informational nature, magic-users are very weak in combat. They have but four-sided dice (d4) to determine how many hit points of damage they can withstand, and magic-users have the least favorable table and progression as regards missile and melee combat. Furthermore, they can wear no armor and have few weapons they can use, for martial training is so foreign to magic-use as to make the two almost mutually exclusive.-AD&D 1st ed PHB>Spending their lives in pursuit of arcane wisdom, wizards have little time for physical endeavors. They tend to be poor fighters with little knowledge of weapons.>Spells are the tools, weapons, and armor of the wizard. He is weak in a toe-to-toe fight>Wizards cannot wear any armor, for several reasons. Firstly, most spells require complicated gestures and odd posturings by the caster and armor restricts the wearer's ability to do these properly. Secondly, the wizard spent his youth (and will spend most of his life) learning arcane languages, poring through old books, and practicing his spells. This leaves no time for learning other things (like how to wear armor properly and use it effectively). If the wizard had spent his time learning about armor, he would not have even the meager skills and powers he begins with.>For similar reasons, wizards are severely restricted in weapons they can use. They are limited to those that are easy to learn or are sometimes useful in their own research. Hence, a wizard can use a dagger or a staff, items that are traditionally useful in magical studies. Other weapons allowed are darts, knives, and slings (weapons that require little skill, little strength, or both)-AD&D 2nd ed PHBIt's an attempt to balance the classes. If you wanted a mage who could fight, roll a fighter/mage multiclass, and sacrifice some of your spellcasting for fighting ability.
>>3971275based thief hater>stealth is invisibilityfuck off with that shit
>>3971185>>Sword>>Board>This is all you need; anything else is bloat.
>>3978665>t.>later that day
>>3971165>ThiefNah. Trash archetype .>stealingEither a side activity that can be performed without a dedicated thief or immersion-breaking savescumming/metagaming bait. >disarming trapsDogshit mechanic. Skill monkey dispelling invisible environmental hazard is antithetical to Indiana Jones style set pieces that dungeon traps are trying to replicate.>stealthConsistently shitty and underdeveloped in every game where it's not the main focus, especially in RPGs.>lockpickingHeld back by level designers' skill issues.>bows and daggersAh, yes, the arbitrary "dex" weapons that are somehow too sophisticated for a fighter, an expert in all things martial.
You need a THF in the party because without Treasure Hunter your chance to get that rare drop off that enemy that only spawns once every 72~86 hours is going to be at a 2.1% rate instead of the optimal 6.275% rate
>>3978683>rare dropsNot even once.
>>3978685I'm sorry for your loss, but that's what you get for not bringing a THF.
>>3978680>Ah, yes, the arbitrary "dex" weapons that are somehow too sophisticated for a fighter, an expert in all things martial.What kind of retarded rpg system are you talking about where fighters can't use bows or daggers?
>>3978680Problem with stealth classes is they basically need the entire game built around them to truly shine. That's how Thief came to be, for example.
>>3977917As far as D&D originally went Paladins were supposed to be anything but easy to play.>strict stat spread just to play as one>oaths you had to keep>alignment limitations
>>3977693This is the solution in tabletop RPGs without magical healing. But then again, you have downtime to account for some seasons like winter were not relegated to war, for example. In practice it makes mass combat a suicide and fighting in general a last resort thing where you want to stack the odds in your favor. Add honor to the mix for nightmare difficulty.
>>3972811enjoy getting raped to death by literally any mimic, retard
>>3978748>strict stat spread just to play as oneDoesn't make it harder to play, just less likely.>oaths you had to keep>alignment limitationsUnless the DM is set on having you fall for storyfaggot reasons, it's impossible to fail on those points and they instead become easy to follow guidelines on how to roleplay your character.
>>3977917>>3977925pretty sure paladins can't rez the dead. unless there's some new rules in DnD i don't care about.and yes clerics are good for everything, except lockpicking.
>>3978914oath of poverty sounds neat until you have to live by it
>>3972613For an adventuring person?Yes, very common sense. Same with repairing and maintenance of your gear, basic medical skills, recognizing common plants, starting fire, cooking and whatever can be logically concluded from your background - you papa was a horse keeper and mother a tailor and you did not had tragic backstory with them dying when you were little babu, so you have some basic knowledge about what they were doing.
>>3978679Crassus had severe skill issues. Caesar would have won.
>>3978758>like winterJust equip all your soldiers with snowshoes and skis.
>>3979287Caesar would have run better reconnaissance and never gotten himself in such a situation, but if he was in command of the battle the result would have been the same. No amount of tactical brilliance would have saved Carrhae for the Romans. That battle was won and lost with logistics.
>>3976332That's a male.
I am a strict purist when it comes to adventuring party size in RPGs. It should be either solo, or 6-8. I don't like the mediocrity of 3-4 niggas (in a row or otherwise), which a lot of games have settled into. Very few of them do something different with that limited party size. It's usually the same strict class distinction as in bigger party titles, but you have fewer people.
>>3971165>less options = goodMissing the point entirely. There should be as many options & variations as possible so you can tailor your build & character concept any way you want. This approach only becomes a problem if it’s half-assed and filled with trap options that are just mechanically the same as others but worse. If you simplify it to the basics of just three pure classes then your title will be flooded with casuals because you’ve made it too accessible & bland.
>>3981196>If you simplify it to the basics of just three pure classes then your title will be flooded with casuals because you’ve made it too accessible & bland.What's the rationale here?
>>3971197Thief is lateral thinking, circumvention, he has a place.
>>3981196>There should be as many options & variations as possible so you can tailor your build & character concept any way you want.This is the kind of midwit thinking that led to disgusting superfluous bloat like Pathfinder. The point of RPG mechanics is to facilitate and implement roleplaying, they’re not the end in and of themselves. If you can’t satisfactorily roleplay “fighter” as the special snowflake you’re imagining, that’s on you, not the ruleset. You don’t need nineteen different types of “arcane caster, stat X, stat Y, half caster, 3/4ths caster, spontaneous caster” etc. you want a fighter/mage multiclass? There you go, fighter/mage multiclass with a split to taste.Play your sheet.
>>3981220>You make it too easy >Activist tourists easily pass the barrier of entry >They become the loud minority and start astroturfing politics using your game >Paying normies and faggots leave to something more entertaining and less obnoxious >You're forced to pander to unpaying audience that eats their own >You escalate the pandering in hopes of translating political autism to money. You fail.>You're forever marked as the developer of "THAT GAME" and have much lower chance of attracting people for your next game.Make things harder. Force people to engage with complex systems. Filter out those who don't care about games.
>>3981264>Force people to engage with complex systemsTalking about “engaging with a games systems” is on par with using the term “macromastia” to mean “I like really big tits”. It does not make you sound smarter.
>>3981267What? Why do you think that common phrase is "smart speech" in the first place?
>>3981196>>3981264..Is this the same anon?
>>3981270No.
>>3981269>Why do you think that common phrase is "smart speech" in the first place?It’s not, but /vrpg/ anons repeat it all the time to prove they’re part of the big boy very serious RPG enthusiast club. “Engaging with a games mechanics” and “engaging with a games systems”. No you don’t understand I’m not like those other people who play video games to have fun like peasants, I’m ““engaging”” with the “”mechanical systems””. It’s a pretentious shibboleth.
>>3981281>It’s a pretentious shibboleth.It's a phrase coined by normie game journos and is a shorter way to say "paying close attention to X". You're sperging over something that's never been an issue.
>>3972829Based
>>3978646>slings>little skill>darts>little skillImpale Gary gygax. Crush Gary gygax's balls with a hammer. Inoculate Gary gygax with zyklon b.
>>3981289>You're sperging over something that's never been an issue.I’m deeply immersed in the boards mechanics, and engaging with its systems.
>Warrior>Paladin/cleric (faggy warrior)>Mage>Priest (faggy mage)>Thief>ArcherThese are the 6 true classes.
>>3971166truth nuke
>>3972927>wizard can't equip chainmailblud never heard of elven mail
>>3971165I only play games with monk class.I love use my bare hands
>>3981658Why would someone make armor out of elves?
>>3981732well, they've got to fit SOME sort of role in the party
>>3971165>A monk with self buffs; using the totality of yourself to get through the enemies in a solipsistic manner.>An illusionist with rogueish inclinations; the proclivity for using others as your playthings to self-destruct and avoiding sullying your hands. >A pilgrim with silver tongue and charisma; the pacifism that seeks to quell the needles strife with a kind word, but not fearing to use force when necessary. >A human fighter in heavy armor; the quintessence of humanity that, while not burning for long, showcases the will and limit of man's tenacity in face of void arcane gifts.
>>3981764I swear Monks are always ass except for THAT one specific scenario where the party gets captured and their powers negated in some way so now the Monk has to save the day.
>>3981786Monks are super good in BG2:SoA.
>>3981786monks get better the more you level them because their fists turn into +X weapons and they gain resistances/immunities along the way.
>>3981236>I break rules and steal shitCriminal, uncivilized, and sub-human third worlder mentality, They have no place in an honest man's world, or adventuring party.
>>3981391Pretty much my default character in every RPG I play.Love me that archetype.
>>3971165If an rpg magic system wasn't lying gamified horseshit you only need a mage for anything.>he can change of the rules of reality, but we had to cripple him with asspull caveats just to make the game fit the only mould our peabrains could conveice of!
>>3981963The most generic default bland trope possible? You cook by just dumping whatever into a pot and boiling it for an hour, and you think you're a fucking genius because the beige slop produced can be sucked down your dick hole in between queue times for League matches.Fucking gross. Gross and stupid.
>>3981996It's always the "mages are masters of magic! but squirting fire, electricity or cold is the only thing they can do" bullshit, isn't it.
>>3981963LLMs and their consequences have been a disaster for fantasy portrait art.
>>3982012Why are you giving us your dinner recipes?
>>3981963>i love being a faggot in games>it's my favorite
>>3982013>"mages are masters of magic!yes play MOM. but that is a /vst/ with optional Heroes to level up.
>>3981788>>3981786https://www.mobygames.com/game/5840/legend-of-legaia/https://shining.fandom.com/wiki/Master_Monk_(class)https://vandalhearts.fandom.com/wiki/Character_Classes#Monk
>>3982016Alright, lets see your fursona.
>>3984911considering xe/xister does not know the difference between an LLM and a stable diffusion machine, supposed to say xe/xir is not a computer nerd, and can't be a furry
>>3971165But i like the bloat anon. I like advanced classes that require specialization proficiency and to master certain skills first and i like to be able to build my classes as i think they should be. While i´m no fan of overpowered characters that can do just about anything to the point classes become meaningless i find dipping or even multiclassing acceptable for the sake of achieving a concept. For example in pathfinder WoTR i had to mix like 4 classes to get my thief to actually be cool. I wanted a thief that could use smokescreens to teleport to crit from the shadows and throw it´s knives while remained obscured but the default rogue was incapable of doing that by itself. Or say you want a spellsword? More often than not the build in spellwords are trash>INB4 that´s because the concept of spellswords is trash Calm your tits. I just want to roleplay Elric. That´s as classic as high fantasy archetypes get. It´s not as if i want 6+ tier level spells and 8 attacks for turn or something. In short, it´s not about min maxing, it´s about to having the tools to build the character you want to roleplay and creating synergies. Finding the best ways skills and feats complement each other to build that.
>>3971197>>3981236My main issue of thief is that their role is usually just solving problems accessory to combat. E.g.>pick chest>disarmTheir role is specialized and typically outside of combat. Or if they do, it's usually some roundabout stuff.MMO's shift towards tank, heal and DPS forced the thief/rogue to have a meaningful combat role. The cleric meanwhile, actually has a role within combat that isn't just roundabout combat, but is a crucial part of healing within it.I will say one thing: thief/rogue is the class of most heroes in literature. Most stories aren't about a fighter and his years of martial arts leading the day, or a mage using his decades of study. It's usually a swashbuckler, a free-thinker. A rogue, who uses his wits to defeat foes bigger and stronger. It's just RPGs can't really translate this dynamic effectively, hence me giving them crap here despite narratively being my favorite class.
>>3985570because going by D&D tradition rogue was a skill monkey
>>3985574Also, the ability of using stuff like wands.
>>3981220The quality of the game will become worse with consecutive entries if casuals are the primary marketing base, as dumbing down mechanics to appease incompetents becomes the primary design philosophy while meaningful challenge, depth, and leaving space for the player to make novel discoveries gets shafted; you are asking for the series to be slowly killed overtime by seeking to remove “bloat” and be overly minimalistic. The options for character building have to be vast, with stats that go into specific minutia with consequences for what you prioritize & what you don’t. Better to have multiple types of fighters, hybrids, and pre-requisites for their equipments if it means combat is going to be engaging & require as much strategy as was put into character creation instead of having one generic fighter that just spams attack and calls it a day.
>mage who casts spells on his fists so he can punch a hole through a castle wall and a dragon's chestget on my level
>>3980074a military fireteam never consists of more than 5 people, so neither should an adventuring party.
>>3991212>a military fireteam never consists of more than 5 people
>>3991215>anon can't readthat's a breakdown of a squad's equipment, it even shows how it's two fire teams of 4 men each.
>>3971165>sword and board warrior, boring, dependable, farm boy>fighter with magic scrolls, a nerd and autistic>fighter with bandages and potions, big brother/sister attitude, tired of his job, smokes a lot>fighter with knifes and a robe, likes to steal, likes to gamble, spends all in whores, Robin Hood complexThere you go, sars, your adveture party.
>>3991218I realized that about two seconds after I posted itSuch is life
>>3971165why are you pretending like this is an earthshattering revelation when it's how every wrpg has been designed for the last 25 years
>>3971165>>Fighter>>Mage>>ThiefThat's already one too many.>I want to be the master of the sword, beating hordes of enemies with nothing but steel and grit.>I want to control the forces of the arcane, bending reality itself to my iron will.>I just want to run away and hide from my enemies! uwuYou'd have to incredibly cucked to want to play a thief.
>>3981475>weapons that require little skill, little strength, or bothIlliterate retard or ESL?
>>3991334And they're all girls except for the magic nerd, who they bully relentlessly.
>>3971165>no healer>no jesterShameful display
>>3991374If you have fun playing a thief, that's all that matters. Don't be so insecure, man.
>>3971165IRL everybody just want to be the warrior.Mages are NEETs.Thieves are poorfags.
>>3991599Not me. In games I like the simplicity of bonking people with big sticks but if I had the choice in real life to be able to do magic, I'd take that.Anyone can be strong if they exercise enough but no matter how many weights you lift, you can't get magic that way.Very short sighted of you.
>>3991764Lift books.
>>3991764>Anyone can be strong if they exercise enough but no matter how many weights you lift, you can't get magic that way.It worked for Cameron
>>3977611rolling
I like the idea of unexpected specialization for classesLike a mage tank and a healing rogue
>>3991591NTA, but I do have a problem with Rogues. Like, I can't pinpoint what they represent aside from crooks that are incompetents outside of lockpicking.You have Robin the Hood, the THIEF by pop culture standard, who is also a good wrestler, archer, swordfighter and has his own bands of acolytes. By D&D standards, he is a Fighting Man who just happened to be a thief and a local hero.Another example: Conan. That big, agile, panther like warrior (according to the stories) had a period where he was a thief too.My point is that Fighting Man, Magic Users and Clerics defines archetypes while Rogue/Thief defines a job, which confuse me.
>>3993674A mage tank just uses buffs & defensive spells, but how would a healing rogue work? A physician/surgeon who can stitch people up? An pseudo-alchemist who force feeds the party with healing potions?
>>3993911They say laughter is the best medicine
>>3993696The rogue is usually a multi-skilled operative. In another kind of media, he would a spy, a secret agent, an infiltrator.Not much good on a field of battle or in a duel where he can't use devious tricks.
>>3993915>he would a spy, a secret agent, an infiltrator.>Not much good on a field of battle or in a duel where he can't use devious tricks.Your spies suck https://youtube.com/watch?v=R3zdYUG2_RA
>>3982012>food analogy
>>3971165You're missing cleric.
>>3993696Fighter-rogue is the hero's class, not just rogue. They can't defeat hordes of evil or a dragon man-to-man, but they use a combination of wits, brawn and luck to win anyways.
>>3993912Ah so a bard
>MageThis is all you need for an rpg
>>3977917Uhm, BASED?
>>3994521>This is all you need for an rpgOne role for a roleplaying game?
>>3994674We're literally a single species and we invented roleplaying. Limitation is what creates roleplaying opportunities.
>>3994860Indeed. When you can do everything, you have no role.
>>3994860>Limitation is what creates roleplaying opportunities.What do you mean?
>>3994873Theatrics, early Greek theatre to be exact.
>>3991764>Anyone can be strong if they exercise enoughVery short sighted (and ableist) of you to ignore disabled people.
>>3994877They didn't have different roles..?
>>3994884They realised roles through limits imposed by temple traditions and the original purpose of story recitation (aka chorus performance and religious ceremony).
>>3994899..so multiple roles but with limited means of expressing them?This isn't really relevant to my post in the first place, is it.
>>3971192Cleric was just a hybrid fighter+mageThe rogue archetype was identified afterward.The general category involves using a combination of cunning, indirection, social savvy, miscellaneous technical skills and willingness to violate laws and norms to get ahead. This is distinct enough from both fighters and magic-users, but also a viable adventuring cagetory, that it deserves its own archetype.Because many of the miscellaneous adventuring skills are dex-based (lockpicking, for example), the rogue category became unfortunately synonymous with the "dex/agi" category even though many of those are really just fighter variants. A fencer isn't a fighter/rogue hybrid it's just a fighter that specializes in rapiers and minimal armor. A better example of a fighter with some rogue-archetype traits would be a Swashbuckler.
>>3993696Speaking as broadly as possible, the defining elements of the Rogue archetype are indirection and breaking the rules. While any good fighter will be clever and possess skills to trick opponents, the rogue makes tricks and cunning primary.>Robin HoodThe defining feature of Robin Hood is his defiance of the current order and violating laws. He may not literally be a rogue by "D&D standards" but his story inspires the archetype of a rule-breaking rogue. Robin Hood acquired warrior skills fighting in the crusades, then after returning home had to become an outlaw to fight the corrupt government.>ConanConan is basically the inverse of Robin Hood. Instead of a crusader turned outlaw, Conan was a thief and scoundrel with a code of honor and immense strength and will who rose to prominence through successful adventuring. Conan being a thief is more about his backstory, not his primary means of advancing in the world. The better argument for why Conan might be considered a rogue is how often he relies on cunning over brute force to win. But I'd counter-argue in most cases that's an example of the "Warrior cunning" of tactics and strategy rather than the more subversive cunning of a rogue.>>3993915Correct.In videogames where the combat system is basically all that matters, rogues will often have something like backstab because it's a "dishonorable" way to fight.
>>3977611These gradients always become a thesaurus dump once you get past like 10 archetypes.
>>3995057Combat system heavy games cause the rift since it means the Thief/Rogue must prove itself, but it can't when it for the longest time was a major provider of support skills and quality of life, things which would make people who love combat heavy games go "But how does that make number go up?" And I can't blame them too muchI say fuck archetypes, I certainly don't look at those when seeing if a game is good. It can have 3 classes, it can have 42, what matters is the implementation.
>>3971165All you really need are fighters. Everything else is bloat.
>>3997324It's less about "number go up" than it is needing a distinct role in the dynamic part of the game that involves risk and tactical decision-making.
I wonder what a game would be like if the mage and rogue were expected to sit out the fight. They would only be support. When the violence starts, the rogue hides and the wizard wraps himself in a shield bubble.
>>3997324If you abstract combat as a problem to solve, the main problem is that most of the time rogue/thief archetype solve those problems using indirect methods, in comparison to the fighter, who uses directs methods of problem solving. Now because of balance most people and designers will want both of those archetype to be ''equal'' but the problem there is that in such a case the ''direct'' method of problem solving will have an edge because it will require less input/time by the player. If its just as good, the player wont want to just slowly sneak around and take on separate ennemies while he could just go in. The end result is that most games will either homegenize the experience as ''number must go up'' or give the rogue some sideway utilities, a solution which comes with its own problems since the rogue will now inadequately compete with two archetype.
>>3997744>Now because of balance most people and designers will want both of those archetype to be ''equal''It's much more than that. The "balance" needs to be fun. It needs to amount to viable game, and the classic d20 skill check isn't remotely enough for a videogame. The reason RPGs are combat-heavy is because that's where the dynamic and compelling part of the game normally is. That's where you have the right balance of predictable and unpredictable to be both fair and challenging.Consider that videogame RPGs have being implementing simulated turn-based combat systems successfully since 1975, while stealth mechanics were a minor feature at best until the late 90s (basically 1998). It took over 20 years of hardware and game design evolution to figure out how to make compelling gameplay based primarily around stealth.>the problem there is that in such a case the ''direct'' method of problem solving will have an edge because it will require less input/time by the player.Whether the direct or indirect method has an edge depends entirely on the game. That's the balance challenge. It's not simply equality/parity for its own sake, but for the sake of good gameplay. It is very easy to make the "indirect" method simultaneously boring and effective. You just use your indirect skill to bypass the encounter and get the rewards without having to actually do anything interesting. A good battle requires a whole sequence of tactical decisions and reactions to AI choices. Meanwhile, charisma-charming an NPC to tell you about the secret passageway you can access with lockpicking involves just two completely mindless skill checks and no dynamic decisions at all. And often you have either no risk of consequences, or some unfairly unknown risks where the GM (gamedev) includes a hidden fuck-you outcome to one of the skill checks that you couldn't have reasonably predicted or accounted for even if prediction was possible.
>>3976197Saneposter in a world of retards.
>>3977917>Paladins and Clerics are ok>Spellblades are NOT okProbably just a case of boomerism
>>3998616Archetypes exist whether you use a class system or not.
>>3977917The absolute temerity to presume to bless your god. I can't relate, though. The delusional bullshit only fools retarded children. The rest of us grow out of the whole Santa Claus thing pretty quickly.
>>3981788They're.... ok... in the vanilla game. But they're never able to replace actual fighters or paladins. That's why I modded the shit out of the game with Near Infinity to let them wear the mage robes (which I edited so there's a variety of effects on them, and moved them to be found around in dungeons) and use priest scrolls. That fixed a LOT of their problems and it was pretty trivial to do.
>>3998670I'm confident those anons are not being rigorous in their definitions, so you're correct enough for them. But technically, archetypes / tropes existing in media generally is not the same as classes as a game design system.The enforcement of tropes via a class system is definitely not without its negative consequences and side effects.
>>3998714>But technically, archetypes / tropes existing in mediaI'm not talking about existence in media, I'm talking about existence in RPGs.RPGs are about adventuring, usually in dangerous environments with hostile adversaries. This is by effective definition, at least in the realm of videogames.There's a wide array of skills and abilities useful to adventurers.These skillsets can be categorized by nature.These categories can categorized.Until eventually you wind up with a very small number of distinct super-categories that cannot be reasonably merged. You can derive a rapier specialist and a club-wielding brute from the concept of a "fighter." They develop their physical abilities and master the use of weapons in combat. One emphasizes finesse the other raw strength, but "fighter" is a valid category for both. But a "spellsword" is a combination of both "fighter" and "magic-user." Their supernatural abilities cannot be derived from the mere concept of a fighter.You can see super-archetypes emerge in class-based and non-class-based games. A class-based MMO may have a dozen individual classes, but still reduce into the two archetypes of melee and caster. Those may subdivide, melee may be split between tanks and dps, casters may be split between arcane and divine. There may be hybrids that combine melee and caster skills.Meanwhile a game with no classes (eg Dark Souls) still yields builds that fall into the two major categories of melee and caster. Either you primarily use weapons or you primarily use catalysts and magic. You can freely upgrade attributes and switch your equipment to the point where you can change to any build at any time, but each build will be identifiable in one of the two categories.The "fighter" and "magic-user" super-categories are fairly well established, hence the discussion ITT has focused on what makes a rogue and whether they should be counted as distinct from fighters or not.
>>3998728Why isn't there a "merchant" or "scavenger" or "prospector" class? Why isn't there a "spoiled rich kid cosplaying as a vagabond during their rebellious teenage phase" class?
>>3998745>Why isn't there a "merchant"Merchants aren't an adventuring archetype. Same with politicians, housewives, tradesman-- all part of civilized society but not adventuring. Tradeskills and political instincts might be useful to an adventurer from time to time, but those skills aren't primary adventuring essentials.>"scavenger" or "prospector" classInsufficiently broad. There isn't a suite of traits and abilities you can find downstream of "scavenger" that would make for an archetype. What is a scavenger good at? What skills would define their adventuring abilities? A scavenger is just a type of rogue, at best. A prospector is just a type of labor, a job. It's something anyone can do and doesn't convey any particular skills or abilities.>Why isn't there a "spoiled rich kid cosplaying as a vagabond during their rebellious teenage phase" class?Too specific AND lacking in any abilities specifically useful for adventuring. This is just a backstory. What skills does the spoiled rich kid possess that makes him believe he'd be a successful itinerant adventurer? Was he trained by a renowned fencing champion? Did he study magic at a prestigious university? Was he raised under oppressive rules where he had to learn all the best ways to cheat without getting caught?The main 'missing' RPG archetype is some kind of technical/engineering role. I think this is largely because some combination of magic-users and rogues fill most of the roles that an engineer would otherwise fill in a fantasy adventure. A beastmaster is another one that doesn't quite fit into any of the 3 categories, but might be just barely useful enough to be a valid adventuring class. (Still would be rather cumbersome and limited compared to others, in practice beastmasters are almost always derived from a fighter or mage base class).
>>3971165>Physical combat>Spells>FaggotryThere's an obvious lack of an item-centric character. An alchemist crafting potions using materials found in the dungeon or a merchant being able to sell junk and buy useful tools for favorable money.
>>3998766>>3998978(me)Huh, I just noticed that ppl had the same idea as me.Merchants can work as a class - they have unique skills and get their "strength" from an unique resource that is item knowledge and being able to sell and buy items at favorable prices. Also merchant is an adventurer - a profit-driven one, but even irl merchants were known for constant traveling and interacting with various people.Warrior will bash enemy's head, Mage will cast fireball, Thief will sneak around and suck off enemy like a faggot he is and merchant will have stash of grenades they bought at promotion and a +2 stick of beating your ass they found and immediately appraised.
>>3998978Item-crafter is basically a component of the "engineer" category, where the full role really needs to involve some kind of active adventuring task. Smithing weapons is just making weapons for a fighter class. But knowing how to build (or destroy) a bridge or deploy an explosive are field activities. Merchant is not a viable adventuring class, selling the junk you find is not adventuring. You can do it in Skyrim because Skyrim is basically halfway to being a Life Sim and you can just fuck around in the sandbox without ever going on a real adventure. A "merchant" that actually goes into a dungeon is either going to fill one of the 3 classic archetypes, or has followers do it for him.
>>3998979>merchant will have stash of grenades they bought at promotion and a +2 stick of beating your ass they found and immediately appraised.Having expensive items isn't a class. Being good at trade is a skill with value, but it doesn't rise to the level of an archetype. It's a specific skill anyone may possess.>Also merchant is an adventurer - a profit-driven one, but even irl merchants were known for constant traveling and interacting with various people.This is mostly not true "adventure" in the sense of being dangerous and risky. Either way, the main way a merchant archetype deals with this kind of danger is to hire guards and mercenaries. And although RPGs may have hireling mechanics, playing "a guy who hires mercenaries to adventure for him" is not really the spirit of the genre.
>>3998986>playing "a guy who hires mercenaries to adventure for him" is not really the spirit of the genre.Wasn't the first Atelier game on ps1 literally just this?
>>3998986>>3998990That was basically the entire premise of Recettear, including playing as a merchant.MC during dungeon crawls was protected by fairy magic and was there only to collect loot and use support moves. Player's hireling was doing all the dirty job.
>>3998766That's just not true, though. Not just because adventurers are primary components of the economy in settings where "adventurers" exist, but also because the definition of "adventurer" is already arbitrary. For example, why are there bards? Do you actually seriously believe you need a musician in a dungeon, but not an archaeologist or antiquarian? You need to do quests for the king, but you can't have an aristocrat or diplomat along for the ride? You're adventuring to earn money... but you can't bring a merchant or banker along to manage and multiply the party's wealth or secure the best deals on that loot?It's just fucking nonsense. You've taken a stance based on ignorance and bullshit, not on actual reason. You're woefully unfamiliar with the actual history of RPGs, and it shows.
>>3998986Being good at hitting stuff with a sword is a skill with value, but it doesn't rise to the level of archetype. It's just a specific skill anyone can possess.
>>3999090>>3999090>Being good at hitting stuff with a sword is a skill with value, but it doesn't rise to the level of archetype.Yes, it does generalize into the fighter archetype. Fighting ability, skill at prevailing in direct combat, is a primary adventuring demand. Specialization in swordplay is one example of combat skill.>the definition of "adventurer" is already arbitrary.It most certainly is not. That is THE most important thing to understand here. Almost all the confusion and misunderstanding is downstream of being trapped in the relativistic hell of pretending there are no concrete definitions and no first principles.You know what an adventure is (m-w: "an undertaking usually involving danger and unknown risks"). You know that RPGs evolved around adventuring. The concept of adventure can be adapted, tortured and parodied but it's not arbitrary. Doing a parody of real adventure by having Kawaii puffballs overwhelm their "adversaries" with cuteness auras doesn't negate the meaning of a real adventure. This is the most important thing to understand about why the adventuring archetypes are what they are. The "class archetypes" are human(-oid) roles evolved from adventuring needs. >>3998990>Wasn't the first Atelier game on ps1 literally just this?That's just standard protagonist behavior in a party-based videogame. It's not an adventuring archetype, the characters you recruit and use are where the class archetypes apply.Atelier Marie herself is an item/magic-user. Again, an item-using specialist (engineer) is a potentially "missing" archetype but it's common for games to cover these skills using the other archetypes (Fighters use haste potions, Mages throw grenades, Rogues set traps). But item-using specialist is NOT a merchant archetype.>>3999018>MC during dungeon crawls was protected by fairy magicSo in other words, not at any personal risk and not a real adventurer. This is just like "troop commander" isn't an RPG archetype.
>>3999089>For example, why are there bards?(a) Bards are a hybrid design. They are a jack of all trades, and in many games their signature singing ability is treated as a form of magic.(b) A "morale guy" is a theoretically valid archetype, but is more common in literature than videogames. I think that's because it's a lot more interesting to explore the subtleties of shifting morale and emotional state in a story than to try and implement mechanics.
Maybe it's time to admit thieves don't belong in dungeons. You're a thief, you steal from old widows. You can't fight a 10ft troll.
>>3999162Baffling post, how is "leader" or "commander" not an archetype? That is the single most important role in any real life expedition.
>>3999162>It most certainly is not.It absolutely is. Your opinion on the matter is irrelevant.
>>3999164If your thief is doing any fighting, you're doing it wrong and your party is doing it wrong. The thief is there to deal with locks, traps and scouting.
>>3999167Right, but I mean, if people are looking for balance in fun, it's just not going to happen, because one is a warrior and the other is a locksmith. Like, what do you want from game design people. Trying to polish a turd into a diamond.
>>3999165>how is "leader" or "commander" not an archetypeIt is an archetype. It's just not an RPG class archetype.There are lots of archetypes that aren't core adventuring roles.>>3999166It's an argument, not an opinion. You have no argument, so you lose. In fact, you cannot even make an argument because you have no sound principles or functional epistemology on which to base one.
>>3999167>If your thief is doing any fighting, you're doing it wrong and your party is doing it wrong.Yeah well that challenge is easier described than solved with entertaining gameplay.
>>3999179What is an "RPG Archetype"? The three stereotypes chosen specifically by you?Truth is that both Item-focused classes (Merchant, Alchemist, Engineer etc.) and Commanding classes already appear infrequently in RPGs.On top of that, people already pointed out that theoretical class focusing on interaction with items and currency resources would expand on game play elements that very often are just an afterthought.And yes, merchandise is an unique skill that easily can be transferred to concept of a class - ability to appraise items and sell/purchase them for favorable price is more of a skill than swinging a sword or sneaking around :V.I'd rather have that than Cleric that is just magic but white or Paladin that is just Cleric and Warrior 2-in-1.
>>3999278>What is an "RPG Archetype"?I already explained in excruciatingly simple terms that shouldn't even be necessary. You probably imagine this is a rhetorical question, but I will explain yet again.An RPG is a game where you take the basic mechanical foundations of a tactical wargame and then shift the focus from being the guy in charge of the troops to being the individual combatants themselves, and instead of military operations, they go on adventures: exploring dungeons and fighting monsters to find the Holy Grail or defeat the evil wizard and rescue the damsel in distress.Player characters going on an adventure is the core of an RPG, it's the primary essence of the genre, along with the gameplay mechanics derived from tactical wargames. Any game requires conflict, obstacles, challenges. In an RPG, those conflicts are derived primarily from adventuring.PCs overcome obstacles using traits, skills, equipment, and so on. An RPG involves players making decisions on behalf of the characters, based on the traits (etc.) those characters possess. Players decide on actions based on the character traits, and outcomes are determined through via simulation rules and random chance.Therefore: the traits relevant to a character are traits that are useful WHILE adventuring (not just before). It's primarily about the decisions you make in the field. Strategy and preparation play a role, but the root conflict driving the gameplay is what happens in the field.This is critical to understand, because it defines (soft) boundaries for relevant PC traits. Any decent PC class (or build) is going to possess a number of these useful adventuring traits. The specific details will depend on the game world and its rules (a world with no magic won't have a magic-user class).Archetypes are derived by identifying clusters of PC traits that belong together. What are the largest possible trait clusters you can describe without excessive overlap? That's an archetype.
>>3999278Merchants, are just not an adventuring class. Whether it takes more or less skill to be good at trade than wielding a sword is completely irrelevant. What is relevant is that adventuring requires combat* and combat requires a weapon so if you are going into a goblin cave you better know how to use one or you're going to die pretty quickly.* btw of course some midwit redditor is going to cry that you can have adventure without combat to avoid addressing the point, as if I didn't fucking know that already.When talking about archetypes, you have to consider the whole scope of RPGs, in aggregate, and what the usual patterns look like and what it looks like when you deliberately distort or fixate on some particular element. That "Merchant" isn't a reasonable RPG Archetype doesn't mean that you can't have some outlier special case game that was designed entirely around using merchant abilities and that this game still somehow manages to be an RPG and not a management sim or a life sim some other totally different genre that is not RPG. But the existence of some minute example, should you find one, does not refute the general point about how RPGs are about Adventuring and that Merchants are not adventurers. Unless of course, the merchant happens to possess some additional traits that are useful for adventuring... and in those cases you'll find those traits will almost always fall somehow under the already-mentioned archetypes (Fighter, Magic-User, Rogue, or Engineer/Special-Item-User)
>>3972829Why is that hybrids attracts so many homosexuals?
>>3998728>>3999278I find it incredibly depressing that Storytelling has devolved to such a degree that people are confused about some of the oldest archetypes in storytelling.The Fighting Man, Magic-User and Thief are the Foundation upon which the heroes journey was build on.The Archetypes of the Martial Hero, the Trickster and the Wise man you can find in any mythos in any culture. If modern audiences are not familiar with something this basic its no wonder why modern RPGs suck.
