Attributes tend to work poorly in class-based systems since a given class typically has only a few decent attribute spreads. A Fighter is going to want Strength and a Wizard is going to want Intelligence. Attributes only offer a false choice. Is there a way to make them play nice with a class-based system, offering meaningful choice?
There are very few ways to do that well. It either requires the attributes to be class agnostic, doing such things that EVERY class needs to an extent. Or, make every class able to use every attribute in a meaningful fashion.
>has only a few decent attribute spreads
Is that more than one? Congrats. That means there's choices involved.
>Attributes tend to work poorly in class-based systems
Except they've worked fine since... oh... the foundation of this entire genre of gaming.
>>43652012
You forgot your :^) friend
>2015
>Still playing class-based systems
I'm not really sure what to tell you. Structrure your games in such a way that having only one thing you're good at doesn't cut it? No... that would work in a one or two person game... probably not so much in a larger party.
Yeah... just play something that isn't class-based.
>>43652073
Aggressive niche protection has some nice benefits in the tactical combat portion of the game.
>>43652090
Niche's have their place... but enforcing them as ridgidly as games like DnD and Pathfinder do... not so great.
I'm all for someone who wants to specialize in killing stuff with a bow, for example... but if they want to dabble around and pick up a few wizard spells or whatever and can make it work with the story, go ahead and let them. It's better than outdated systems that are like "LOL, YOU'RE NOT BUILT FOR THIS SPECIFIC THING AND WILL SUCK AT EVERYTHING ELSE FOREVER LOL!"
>B-but muh game balance! My munchkin players!
Get better players who can trust to take advantage of options without abusing them.
>>43652131
Holding yourself back is boring if you're in it for the tactical wargaming as much as you are in it for the roleplaying.
>>43651995
You are awfully short sighted in you interpretation of this topic, I suspect you play D&D 3E too much.
That is only true if your class based system is designed in a way that every class only needs one stat and the rest are unnecessary, which is basically piss poor design (read: D&D)
If a wizard needs strength to wear armor and wield weapons and carry items then things get different. If there are muscle wizards that need strength to cast spell things are different.
In contrast if a Fighter needs intelligence to increase critical strike chance he will take that too, if a fighter needs intelligence to craft better weapons he will take that.
>"But Anon why would they invest in a secondary stat when their primary is more valuable" - you say
You just have to have diminishing returns in play so that a well rounded statblock is overall better than a heavily skewed one.
>>"But Anon then every class will be the same" - you say
No because some classes play fundamentally different, fighters hit things with their sword and wizards hit things with fireballs. Just cause they use the same stats doesn't mean they are exactly the same.
>>"But Anon I want to play a "spesshul snowflake" character that can swing sword and fling fireball and shoot a bow at the same time.
If you clearly want to do the exact opposite that the system is designed for then just don't play class based systems. Don't try to eat your soup with a fork and knife only to complain that they are unsuited for it.
>>43652205
>>Holding yourself back is boring
What you need to realize is that in a good game being able kill things at 200% efficiency will not get you far. For that I suggest you go and play vidya.
>>43652227
what systems are there that are like that though? where every stat means something to every class?
>>43651995
>>Attributes tend to work poorly in class-based systems since a given class typically has only a few decent attribute spreads.
>>43652227
That's what Tome of Battle and Psionics in 3.5 tried to do, unfortunately retards hated both of those for the most part. Every stat should have a reason to at least THINK about caring about more all the stats.
Shit, Pathfinder actually made an Witch arcetype that let Orcs and Half-Orcs cast from there con(but they needed Int for bonus spells) and people bithed and whined and it got hit with a "nerf" bat that actually makes the fucking archetype more broken by letting Half-Orc players start with Witches with an effective 22 intelligence and Aasimer players with like a 24 because people minged about "muh squishy caster".
It's like people hate fun mechanics in these games.
>>43652251
Systems without classes. The whole "class" system is flawed from the start. With the exception of magical classes (in settings where you have to be born with magic, as opposed to learning it), there is absolutely no justification for why a spellcaster can't learn to hit things well with a sword, or why a thief can't wear armor. Maybe my character is a reformed thief who joined the local militia to get his act together... too bad Fighters don't have enough skill points for thief skills and thieves don't have enough weapon/armor proficiencies to be good melee fighters (when they're not spamming back-stab).
Class-based systems are garbage.
>>43652291
>That's what Tome of Battle and Psionics in 3.5 tried to do, unfortunately retards hated both of those for the most part. Every stat should have a reason to at least THINK about caring about more all the stats.
I'm sorry, I just fucking woke up. I meant to say
>Every player should have a reason to at least THINK about caring about more than one stat.
>>43652292
nigger.
i was asking for a specific system, not the same complaint reworded.
>>43652308
>I want a CLASS-BASED system where all the stats matter to every class.
Your answer is that you're literally never going to find that in a CLASS-BASED system because class-based systems are, by their very design, the opposite of what you're looking for.
>>43652292
Except class based systems don't prevent any of that.
>why a spellcaster can't learn to hit things well with a sword
Because that takes training so in the time they were learning magic shit they could have been training martial shit. If they spend enough time learning martial shit, they can get good at swording a the expense of not being as good at casting shit.
> a thief can't wear armor
Rogues can wear armor in D&D, they start with light armor and can invest resources into getting heavy armor if they want to.
>Fighters don't have enough skill points for thief skills and thieves don't have enough weapon/armor proficiencies to be good melee fighters
Then you play a ranger and fucking refluff it, numbskull. If you're playing Pathfinder the Slayer class is practically MADE for that sort of character.
Or you could *GASP* multiclass! THE HORROR! THE HORROR!
People who bitch about class systems probably aren't creative and think classes are a straight jacket.
>>43651995
First, have (mostly) randomly-distributed attributes, so you don't get to put things exactly where you want them. That way you'll at least have some variance.
Second, design a system with attributes that are more generally useful. I don't know, I'm (perpetually) working on a retroclone with 4 attributes: strength, dexterity, constitution and intelligence (with greatly reduced mental stats because that's going to be more an issue of background and role-play). A fighter really wants them all to be high. Why?
Well, first off, there are no variable-size hit dice or strong and weak saves. It all comes down to attribute scores. It's just that a fighter has a +2 bonus to strength and constitution. And as a wizard has a -4 penalty to constitution, that leads to a rather large gap (hp = (4 + con mod) x level + 10). So the only thing giving fighters a better fortitude save than thieves is the fact that they get a +2 bonus to constitution, while thieves get a -2 penalty.
So naturally, fighters really need a high constitution, because they don't have a larger hit dice padding things out so that a +1 means much less to them than a wizard. Dexterity adds to AC, initiative, and ranged attacks, so that's pretty useful too. And intelligence? That modifies the number of talent points you get, and you can spend one of those to enhance an attack, increasing it's effectiveness by maybe 50% (giving you the better of two to-hit rolls, for instance). Having more talent points is never not going to be useful, so while intelligence is not the first attribute fighters are going to be shooting for, it certainly doesn't hurt. And that just leaves strength, which is obviously all kinds of useful for fighters.
>>43652320
Class-based system prevent it by virtue of your character being completely useless if you don't read a guide on how to build them for maximum efficiency, especially if the other players in the game do. It's really an "all-or-nothing" sort of deal unless you're multiclassing with two classes that build off the same main attribute.
>>43652227
So what class system doesn't face these problems?
>>43652292
>>43652227
It can be easily designed for quick games: Pick class, roll stats, pick abilities from the class, there is something per class where x stat will be helpful.
Roll, play a Dragon's Crown level, see you next week.
>>43651995
Allocate the actual mechanical benefits of attributes to multiple attributes and take the higher of them. Let Strength give Reflex saves and let Charisma give Will saves.
Did any games do that? Hmm, naw, I can't remember any, oh well.
>>43652343
Why not cut out constitution and put it together with strength? That's what Numenera does.
>>43652316
dont pretend to be retarded, you know what i meant a system where every stat means something to every player
>>43652378
I did always find it sorta funny how strength and constitution are seperate. The idea of being a muscle tank who's as fragile as a skinny little wizard girl is pretty weird to think about.
>>43652371
No games have allowed strength for reflex saves, that I know of.
[Spoiler] strength and con make fort. Dexterity and int make reflex.[/spoiler]
>>43652292
>there is absolutely no justification for why a spellcaster can't learn to hit things well with a sword, or why a thief can't wear armor.
Of course if these things are as easy to do as clicking a button. Remember that all these things are supposed to be hard and demaniding almost a lifetime of practice, becoming a powerhouse fighter SHOULD take a lot of work and effort, same goes to learning magic. If anyone can just learn both with no problems then they are meaningless.
Remember real life? People do not become Scientists and Olympic level athletes everywhere, some select few may do yes, but that is not how things work.
>>43652378
I've done that in other games, but mechanically it doesn't work so well here, because the resulting strength/constitution score is too powerful/desirable, and this would take away my ability to customize classes' durability independently of their offensive melee power (without adding something extra to compensate, which kind of defeats the purpose).
>>43652391
Path of War for Pathfinder has a archetype for one of its classes that gets an ability called "Muscle Memory" that lets it use it's strength score instead of dex for reflex saves.
>>43652388
Not in my anime's.
Really, Hitpoints by class do a lot to alleviate this. A fighter with a 10 in con is still pretty sturdy. While a wizard with 10 con is a pushover. Still, kind of makes a mockery of stat values.
>>43651995
>thinly veiled reference to the static stats of DungeonWorld and it's related shit
Fuck off.
>>43652412
Once you get out of the core design of the game, everything else is essentially homebrew.
>>43652427
Pathfinder is basically homebrew of 3.5 anyway.
>>43652251
I can think of Dark Heresy. It's not ALL stats, but you want toughness, perception and willpower and agility regardless on what class you are, plus at least a slight investment in one of the combat stats (weapon and ballistic skill) in order to not be completely useless in combat.
Toughness is easy. You want to stay alive, and seeing how lethal DH combat can be, it's very important regardless of who you are.
Perception is a general purpose skill. Everyone needs awareness because most of the time the whole party rolls and the more you have the more chance you have for the party to notice important clues or spot that ambush or hidden trap.
Willpower because... Daemons, Fear, Psychic shit, traumatic stuff. Need I say more? Everyone in the party gets that stuff or you'll soon retire them from insanity.
Finally, agility, which is a bit less obvious but holy shit Dodge does so much for staying alive. If you don't have decent agility and/or late access to the Dodge skill, you better have sky-high Toughness (like with Techpriests) or you'll be dead soon.
The only skills that one can completely dump if they're not your class thing are Strength, Intelligence and Fellowship, and even still, a Guardsman that goes into demolition still needs a lot of intelligence. There's enough variety within the classes themselves that you can still need what are otherwise dump stats for other types of the same class.
Despite all its faults, I still think 40kRP is one of the more versatile and easy to use systems.
Except most classes actually get to choose their main stat. For martials there is an actual choice between maining Str or Dex (the fact that Dex is the superior choice is a fault of system balance rather than any sort of designer intention that Dex be the only stat for martials). Casters obviously must always focus in the main stat because that is the design intention, by forcing them to choose a stat with no physical benefits it forces them to specialize and not be a jack of all trades (again, it is a failure of system balance that the wide array of spells makes up for this rather than designer intent that Int/Cha are the best stats by allowing you to do everything)
Even if we were to abandon stats, you are essentially just obscuring the fact that all members or a class use the same attributes. Logically it makes sense that most professions value one attribute above others and expect that to be your strongest attribute. You would never expect a scientist who values physical strength over intelligence to be more successful than one who valued intelligence over strength.
I went "fuck it" at one point and played a barbarian with Constitution as his main stat.
They laughed at me, but after hitting 100 hit points at level 5, Grigory became a lot harder to make fun of.
>>43652251
iirc 5e shadowrun kind of have it with it limits system, where you would want to invest in secondary attributes to burst your maximum number of successes.
>>43652247
>>43652292
>TFW there are non-gamist on this board RIGHT NOW
That Balor looks like an anime.
One sentence solution to all of your problems:
Occasionally cause the party to be split up, or give them reason to do so semi frequently.
Lets see you solve the problem without the caster when you have 3 int
Lets see you move the rock without the barbarian when you have 1 str faggot
>>43652609
>Lets see you move the rock without the barbarian when you have 1 str faggot
>what is telekinesis
>what is Summon Monster
>what is million spells that buff your strength
>>43652655
>what is shit system
If you want "do anything everyday because I can, there is no point in other classes" tier magic You should not be in this thread
when did I imply the person with 1 str is even a magic user you illiterate fuck
also
>wizard player has a solution for most physical problems
>look at his spell list
>create problem he cant "LOL IM A WIZARD ITS SOLVED" because I know literally everything he can do
>>43652700
So what the fuck is the point if the player has no means to solve the problem nor allies to help them. That's just senselessly antagonistic.
And after a certain point, there really isn't a way to reighn in a prepared caster like that with out creating an almost ridiculous, out of place, and incredibly contrived scenario.
>>43652887
It isn't really possible for a caster to be completely prepared for anything. That's a nice theory, but in reality - especially in an organically run game where things aren't tied to the railroad tracks the way most people on /tg/ think everything is - there are dozens of ways the so called "perfect caster" can be fucked over by seemingly inconsequential details, such as an unexpected encounter, an encounter with a monster type that he isn't prepared for, or even a simple diplomatic encounter where his attempts to take control using magic not only backfire but land the party in such deep shit that they have to deal with it in a completely mundane manner or face situations far worse than they were capable of dealing with.
Not even contrived situations, just the way the adventure unfolded.
>>43651995
The only reason they offer a false choice is because you're playing in a system that decided that was how it was going to work.
In old-school D&D, all attributes were fairly important- even if you weren't planning on fighting much, strength determined how much you could carry, intelligence determined how many languages you could speak, charisma determined how many hirelings you could have (which was extremely important, actually), and so on.
A fighter with 15 intelligence and 14 charisma was useful as a translator and had a decent sized retinue. A wizard with 15 strength could carry a good bit, especially since he wasn't wearing armor.
>>43652941
>What are Wands and Scrolls
Almost none of those things happen to a semi-competent Wizard being played half-seriously.
>>43652346
what
In a cooperative style game, having classes allow for quick and easy ways to create balanced party composition (except when game is broken for spellcasters being allowed to do anything).
The best system I saw with that was D&D4E. PC works as cogs in an mechanism and having one of each type makes the machine works greatly.
In classless system you must have a good control to avoid players making a priest good at hitting things, a policeman good at hitting things, a fat hacker good at hitting things and a wheelchair academic professor good at hitting things. Or worse: no combat-centric characters in a combat-centric scenario.
/v/idya game Pillars of Eternity had a pretty good variation on the classic DnD 6 attributes
Might (MIG) a character's physical and spiritual strength, brute force as well as their ability to channel powerful magic ±3% Damage and Healing
±2 Fortitude intimidating displays and acts of brute force
Constitution (CON) a combination of the character's overall health and endurance ±5% Endurance and Health
±2 Fortitude to withstand pain or endure a physically taxing ordeal
Dexterity (DEX) a character's hand-eye coordination, balance, and overall grace ±3% Action Speed
±2 Reflex sleight-of-hand and fast reactions
Perception (PER) a character's senses as well as their instinctive ability to pick up on details ±3 Interrupt
±1 Accuracy
±2 Reflex to catch someone in a lie, to make an observant comment about their appearance, or to notice something happening in the background
Intellect (INT) a character's logic and reasoning capabilities ±6% Area of Effect
±5% Duration
±2 Will deduction, sudden realizations, and problem-solving
Resolve (RES) a character's internal drive, determination, fearlessness ±3 Concentration
±1 Deflection
±2 Will mental intimidation, leadership, and convincing performances
With all classes having access to the aoe/duration effects there are no real dump stats, even charisma^WResolve leads to fragility if dumped.
>>43653463
And none interferes with Hit Chance, which is defined by class.
