Hi there. Thought I'd continue the system design conversations, and follow up with some thoughts about class-based character definition vs. skill-based. Here's what I mean (and some examples - your terminology might differ):
Class-based is what we see in most classic RPG games. I'm thinking the old Bard's Tale, Wizardry, and more recently in games like EverQuest and Diablo II. This is by far the most common approach to character definition, though many variations have come about recently. It generally works like this: When you create a character you get to choose a class, or role that the character will play. Sometimes called a profession or a job, the character's class dictates what skills and abilities he/she/it has, and also often, how the character is played. For example, if a player likes to be up front, swinging a huge axe, he/she/it would probably choose a warrior, brawler, monk, or other "melee class" that leads to skills like "kick", "punch", and "grapple". The melee class path would also help dictate what "stat" points should be raised - strength instead of intelligence, for example.
Skill-based systems are less often seen, but have started to attract the attention of developers and players alike. This is a system which allows the player to dictate the character's abilities by choosing from a complete list of skills or abilities, rather than a "class-limited" list. Games that have used such a system include Star Wars Galaxies (to some extent), Asheron's Call, and Dungeon Siege. There aren't many pure examples of this, but the general idea is to allow the player to play the game the way they want, with no limitations on what they can or cannot do. If you want to have a fireball-casting Monk, go for it. If you want a rocket-firing repair droid, why not? This is the land of open-ended gameplay.
Class-based systems use roles to define the player's gameplay experience, while skill-based systems let the player define the role and the gameplay. The latter is far more open-ended, but can lead to some complex balancing issues, while the former has it's own balancing issues involved with the limitations of one class over another. The skill-based system often leads players down the path of hybrid characters. They try to have a little of everything. Who wouldn't want a warrior that can teleport, cast healing spells on him/her/itself, AND pick pockets and open locks? This often leads to shallow but wide skill trees, and characters that can't hang because they only have the basics from several "catagories" of skills. This can pose a problem with pace and (again) balance. So it's important to set some guidelines. A totally open-ended list of skills, with every skill available out of the gate probably isn't the way to handle it. A catagorized skill-tree system might be better. Breaking down the skills into catagories ("Magic", "Crafting", "Psionics", etc) and then producing trees where one skill leads to another, helps guide the player towards more powerful skills of each type. If they want to spend the time becoming a master magic user AND a master house builder, they can do that... it just takes them longer to master both than someone who always chooses from the "Melee" skill list.
There are many ways to organize and "charge" for skills, and some of that was covered in
our last discussion... so I'll leave that as an exercise for you to think about. But in my opinion, some of the most interesting ideas stem from the Skill-based system described here. We all know (and use) the Class-based system. I think it's time that we, as designers, try to find ways to allow the player to help define the character, the character's role, and provide guidance throughout the process. I believe that players want choice, and if given the opportunity, would like to guide the character development beyond walls of pre-defined roles and gameplay styles. Again, I vote for choice. ;)
How about you folks?
Thanks for reading.
-locke
