>rigid class-based games that pigeonhole characters into narrow archetypes
Why are these still being made?
>>44073264
Because people will buy them
>>44073264
Because most people aren't as creative as we think they are, and need their hands held.
But who doesn't want to be obligatory healbitch or crafterslave?
>>44073264
Because figuring out how to work within those restrictions can be fun. Restrictions breed creativity.
Except most of those have dies out. In any D&D game past 3.5 (PF, 4e, 5e) the systems introduce versatility to all of the classes so that you aren't limited by the archetype if you chose not to be.
But then, complaining about games you don't actually know or understand how to play is a common /tg/ passtime.
In an ideal world, humans are able to easily accept that there's a great wealth of different types of people and personalities, all unique - and we have the interest level to look into every character and find them.
In reality, we don't have the mental space to keep so many people inside our head. And many of us don't have enough interest to parse every single trait of an original character, judge what's important, and understand how they interact with the world. So we use these archetypes as a base for personalities; it lets others quickly understand who you are and what you do, and allows you to have a base from which you can make alterations.
Besides, it's fun to be subversive and make characters that don't fit the class' stereotypes sometimes.
For example: if I told you about how my setting has a race called the Eldenspenths, the Brumblebraurs, and the Knopfinths, all engaged in combat over Blandaarite, you'd need me to explain all of those terms. And I'm pretty sure most people would either end up confused, or find nothing they can grab onto and understand in the setting. If I said that my setting has Elves, Dwarves, and Orcs fighting over Magic Crystals, you'd be able to understand immediately - and if I didn't want to follow the stereotypes, I could add footnotes about how my elves, dwarves, and orcs deviate from their base versions. This also has the bonus of letting people who love to play orcs put an orc in the setting.
>>44073315
If we're talking class based in the sense of Team Fortress 2 or Overwatch, not really.
>>44073264
Because it's easy on lazy incompetent creators and lazy unimaginative consumers, both of which dominate the market. Also autists can't roleplay a knight or a thief if it doesn't say 'knight' or 'thief' on their character sheet.
Because rigid class styles and roles creates more compelling gameplay.
>>44073414
I find this to be true. Sue me.
>>44073264
Because people like archetypes.
It's why archetypes exist.
People like to categorize things- put them into niches.
The only reason to abandon comfortable archetypes is if they grow stale. For a lot of people, especially those who haven't oversaturated themselves with it, these archetypes remain fun and/or compelling, though for you it may be the opposite.
>pic unrelated, but festive.
>>44073349
Because in a team game it is nice to have each one playing a role.
>>44073264
Name one that does that.
>>44073531
>the only reason
Or they get fed up of the artificial limitations on what characters can do or be.
If a game is about adventurers for example everyone should be able to be competent at all basic adventuring tasks without having to multi-class or other such nonsense. Everyone should be able to run, jump, climb, sneak decently, do emergency first aid and fight at least reasonably regardless of their main role.
Otherwise its like a spec ops squad game where the medic is only really good at combat medicine and the demo guy is only really good at blowing stuff up.
Because most people playing RPGs don't know anything beyond D&D or Pathfinder exists. I shit you not, most players are people that played 3.X during middle or high school and now suddenly get the itch to play D&D again.
And since any industry is mostly comprised of uncreative shitters that just copy the most successful product instead of innovating and trying to get ahead, many games are shitty clones of these mechanics.
Because people can make and play whatever they feel like playing you fucking commie pinko shit.
>>44073264
The limitations of a class system have more to do with the limitations of a level system, really.
Consider this: the major games that don't have a hard class system are, what, Shadowrun and WoD? And they have that point system. Gaining a significant amount of power in that system takes forever. Whereas in a level-based system, every level is (or at least is supposed to be) a big jump in power. However, making that big jump in power work well with a more freeform character growth model doesn't work as neatly. Not saying it couldn't be done, it'd just require some actual effort to work through.
Additionally, characters are typically going to fall into archetypes anyway. Take the previous examples: there are archetypes that simply perform head and shoulders above all others. Classes, ideally, should simply be formalizing something that tends to happen anyway. (Nevermind the disparity in class power that actually occurs.)
>>44073273
/thread
Sacred cows sell well anon.
>>44073874
It kinda sounds like you just want to play exalted
>>44074191
>Wanting people to be competent at things they're going to do
>Hurrr you want to be a god
>>44074191
>>44074229
Exalted's the opposite here anyway. An Exalt that tries to invest in everything is going to end up crippled, and an Exalt that specializes is going to have weaknesses that even a mortal can beat them at, let alone a magical foe.
The whole idea being that between bouts of wild success, the ST hammers on your weaknesses where you're below-average even for a human, let alone a demigod.
>>44073264
There are thousands of games out there.
Why not make a game about playing a specific cast of characters? If you want something else, play something else.
I like games that go "I wanna do that kinda stuff, and I'm gonna do it good" instead of "ok here's rules, here's things, do whatever with it".
Well, I also like DIY old-school D&D, but yeah, I totally see the point in having narrow archetypes like say, Cyberpunk 2020's roles : Solo (Terminator), Media (Spider Jerusalem), Rockerboy (Any fucking punk rockstar), Corporate (Largo Winch) et caetera. They're great, they fit in the setting, they're the type of characters people Ought to play in a cool Cyberpunk 2020 campaign. If you want super-duper custom characters, you can play any other game that has point buy or class-less things, and it's ok too.
>>44073961
>the major games that don't have a hard class system are, what, Shadowrun and WoD?
Shadowrun doesn't have classes?
>>44073264
Because the most popular RPGs are class based
>>44074191
Excuse me? I just want it so adventurers can actually all do adventuring things.
Do you think everyone in a military squad game should be crap at shooting other than the dedicated riflemen? That all fantasy adventurers should be unable to sneak past orcs if they are not a rogue?
>>44073874
Sound like you should play OD&D before the thief, because the assumption is that they are all competent at basic adventuring things.
>>44074430
Not as a mechanical construct. It has roles, because a team of specialists gets more shit done than a team of generalists, and what's worthwhile to specialize in is somewhat fixed over the course of the game's life, but it doesn't have hard-chosen "okay I'll take a level in Street Samurai..."
>>44073264
>Why are these still being made?
Because people like them and there are merits to both classed systems and classless systems.
>>44074430
Shadowrun has class archetypes, but not classes. Most builds can be summed up with a certain archetype, but the archetype is not what defines the build.
>>44073349
> The Eldenspenths, the Brumblebraurs, and the Knopfinths, all engaged in combat over Blandaarite.
Sounds like an episode of He-Man, or Thundercats.
Because some people don't give a fuck about chargen and just want to play the damn game
>>44073339
>In any D&D game past 3.5 (PF, 4e, 5e) the systems introduce versatility to all of the classes so that you aren't limited by the archetype if you chose not to be.
Then what the hell happened to skills in 5e? "Pick two off this list of 5-7 skills that are directly relevant to your class and fuck you if you want anything else"? Because before my 3.5 group dropped the idea of moving to 5e, that's exactly what it looked like.
>>44073264
Because a lot of people view pnp rpgs more like WoW without graphics than as an improv acting and cooperative storytelling activity with some rules to arbitrate conflicts.
If most of your goals are accomplished through killing stuff, or killing stuff is the goal, artificial specializations like "only this class can have this skill or item" becomes a way to force variety.
>>44075189
Sounds a lot more like Blackstar.
>>44073264
who is this immaculate ejaculate?
>>44073264
Because they are fun and serve a market
And your pretensions are not shared universally
>>44075638
And that's a totally valid interpretation.
>>44075414
>Pick two off this list of 5-7 skills that are directly relevant to your class and fuck you if you want anything else"?
Well, you can get new skill proficiency through character advancement. Class, background and races/race variants give you pretty varied skill options and potential combinations.
Also, being proficient in a skill doesn't mean you can't do something that would use that skill, it just means you don't get to add your proficiency bonus to attribute rolls that use it.
For example, your level 5 dude with a +4 STR mod. is attempting to scale a cliff using a Strength check. Your dude has the Athletics skill which would apply in this situation, meaning he can add his +3 proficiency bonus to the roll giving a total bonus of +7. If he did not have the Athletics skill he would not add a proficiency bonus, but he could still attempt to climb the cliff.
Weapon proficiency works the same as skill proficiency.
I'm pretty sure tool proficiency works slightly different, if you have no idea how to use a set of lockpicks you can't pick a lock, if you have no idea what a beaker is you can't use a herbalism kit.
I'm going to go out on a limb and assume that it has been a while since you read the 5e PH, as opposed to you misreading it or shitposting.
>>44073264
DUDE
D&D
LMAO
Role protection, it's for games that are designed to function primarily as games in the standard sense.
>>44073264
Honestly thats why I play GURPS. I grew up playing DnD so I didn't know anything different, when a friend introduced me to GURPS i was like "Whoa, my character can be anything I want instead of having to choose between fighter, wizard etc." Never looked back from there and now I use GURPS more than the friend who introduced me.
>>44073373
Sure, but we're not talking about videogames, we're talking about Traditional Games such as Tabletop RPGs
Even without classes, people still specialize their characters.
Why? Because a team of specialists is almost always more functional (In any sense of the word) than a team of generalists.
Also, making characters that can do everything just means you end up boring and samey from a mechanical standpoint, which is generally avoided with classes due to forced differences.
>>44076510
That is right here. That's why playing shadowrun has everyone call an archtype, such as rigger, adept, street sammy, what have you and fill those specific rolls instead of having a character who's a little bit of everything even though it's possible.
>>44076510
There is a difference between pure generalists and people who are broadly capable with a focus.
In an action game everyone should be able to shoot, throw punches and do the basic sneaky/active stuff even if they cannot all fly a plane, read Hieroglyphics or fast talk guards.
>>44077225
I'm not seeing anything in this post that differentiates class-based and non-class-based games.
>>44073264
Most people who learn a craft learn the same things their teachers know.
It's actually fine, it's fine. A game that only has narrow archetypes available is completely justifiable and can be super fun to play. That can be the case in something super simple where it's Warrior/Wizard/Thief or much more niche stuff like 'Astronaut who survived the apocalypse and then crash-landed on earth' or 'Literally Horseman of the Apocalypse'.
It's all okay. You do not need to have massive character customisation options in a game - the issue is people who exclusively want that playing games which do not offer it.
>>44077225
The point is, lots of class based games are far too rigid and force the characters to be too specialised.
Or limit what skills/abilities people can have for no good reason.
>>44077379
Name a character concept that you haven't been able to play in a class based system. Ill try and show if it can be done in one.
I feel the need to point out that the existence of character classes does not necessarily mean they're rigid and pigeonholing, and there are in fact games that allow you quite a fair amount of leeway, between build options apart from class and easily-refluffable abilities, to take a given class in a wide variety of different directions. It's not strictly black-and-white.
>>44077379
>force the characters to be too specialised.
That's kind of the whole point, you're meant to be playing a balanced party, having any one guy who's good at too many things ruins this. (See: D&D casters in 3rd edition)
>>44078271
4e-style warlord in 5e.
NOTE: 4e-style warlords are NOT big damage beatsticks who half-heartedly and ineffectually grant an ally a token attack/temporary HP every so often.
NOTE: 4e-style warlords do not get their martial tactics suddenly dispelled, counterspelled, or antimagic field-ed either.
>>44078561
That's not a problem with it being class-based, since you are pining for a specific class.
>>44078561
Thats one rigid class system to another. Im talking about an actual character concept that someone couldn't pull off in a class system but could in a classless, not emulating a specific class.
And that's actually one of the reasons why I don't play the shitty edition that is 5e. Fuck WortC for killing one of the best classes.
>>44073349
>In reality, we don't have the mental space to keep so many people inside our head
Armchair psychologist detected.
>>44078561
>This again
Screaming at people to heal them and/or make them swing faster should never have been a class. All characters being able to fight better than they normally do, but only when being yelled at by a very specific type of person, is also really, really dumb.
>>44078540
And a balanced party should not be too specialised. Hell depending on genre the skill overlap between different party roles should logically be significant.
Even in fantasy with a wizard, a cleric, a fighter and a thief I would expect all of them to be able to do general adventurer stuff even if the cleric, thief and fighter will be the best at their specific niche.
>>44078771
OD&D and 5e actually do that. Before Thief was a class, everyone was assumed to be able to sneak and pick locks and climb ropes and whatever. In 5e, a character without proficiency in a skill can still do it, they just don't have the relatively small proficiency bonus. There aren't negative modifiers for unskilled attempts.
>>44073264
Because some people still enjoy finding their own narrative within a niche. Some people are frustrated with free mix and matching, either afraid to miss out on "the proper way to build a character" or because forced creativity can be just as bad as forced niche characters.
>>44073264
Because in games like that it's very easy to know what your role is and what you're supposed to be doing, and, ideally, all those roles are supposed to work together and support each other without any of them invalidating the others.
It makes things easier, at least in theory.
>>44078656
Handegg quarterbacks make this happen, and that's handegg.
>>44073961
>Gaining a significant amount of power in that system takes forever. Whereas in a level-based system, every level is (or at least is supposed to be) a big jump in power.
That's actually something I miss about D&D after playing WoD for years. Sure, you only improve when you level up, but when you level up you get better at *everything*. More skills, more hit points, a better attack bonus, more spells if you're a caster, sometimes new class features...
Meanwhile, in WoD, you're saving up XP for like four sessions just to be able to buy one new thing.
>>44078824
This.
To take Shadowrun as an example, it is possible to make generalist characters that can do everything (In a mediocre kind of way), but the entire group, GM included, has to be making characters that way or you'll get outshone in every category by the specialists with 4 to 5 times as much skill as you.
And if you make a specialist when everyone else is making generalists, your entire team will be really good at one aspect of their missions (Where you specialized) and mediocre to poor everywhere else, which makes it hard to balance and justify as a GM. Either it becomes too difficult for the other characters to contribute at all, or the specialist breezes through while everyone else struggles.
There's an entire extra step in completely open chargen, where the group needs to decide the general gist of the characters and the power level involved. On top of the specialization aspect, there's also just plain minmaxing. One guy making an ubercharacter and the rest making average shitters isn't fun. One player making an unoptomized character while the rest munchkin it up with 15 splatbooks each isn't fun.
>>44078656
Right? That's why when someone kicks down your door, shoves a shotgun in your face, and bellows in a deep, booming voice, "FREEZE!" your first inclination is to do anything but exactly that.
And HP is not wounds, blood loss, or injury. It never was, and never will be. It is an abstraction of ability to keep fighting. And if you don't think I'm right: why is it that you can have 200 HP, be knocked to 0 HP, then be healed back to 200 HP, and never once suffer any kind of drawback?
>>44078965
>And HP is not wounds, blood loss, or injury. It never was, and never will be. It is an abstraction of ability to keep fighting.
This is literally never said in any D&D edition, take your fanfic somewhere else.The answer to your question is because it's a fucking game you amateur dramatist
>>44079064
Right, but it's hard to imagine someone being capable of "healing by shouting at them". Gotcha.
>convoluted build-based games with a million customization options that end up requiring to take the feat for it if you want to do anything related to it at all
Why are these still being made?
>>44078965
>And HP is not wounds, blood loss, or injury. It never was, and never will be. It is an abstraction of ability to keep fighting.
Explain falling damage. Or acid damage. Or damage from lava.
>>44079146
Explain taking damage from those sources and not having lasting wounds that fuck you up for a long time after?
Or, you know, lava not killing you.
D&D may not ever explicitly state "this is an abstraction" but it really is.
>>44079126
>witch
>>44073264
Because GURPS already exists, so why make anything point buy when the pinnacle of classless systems has already been reached?
>>44079109
Not that guy buddy.
>>44079219
>Explain taking damage from those sources and not having lasting wounds that fuck you up for a long time after?
>Or, you know, lava not killing you.
D&D adventurers, once they hit a point where they're not killed by lava, are literally superhuman.
Didn't someone calculate that real-world humans cap out at like, level three? With the most notably capable specific humans in all of history being maybe level five?
>>44078965
Why is the healing spell called cure light wounds then.
>>44076364
>Woah my character can be anything I want
>Implying Wizard, Druid, Sorcerer, FIghter, Barbarian, Ranger, Cleric, Paladin, Monnk doesn't cover every archetype you'd want to play in DnD
You are truly pathetic. I'm not even gonna blame GURPS.
>>44077379
yeah man, I totally loved all those times I put points in spellcraft as a cleric and then never used it because the Wizard's spellcraft check was twice as high as mine.
>>44075414
2-4 skills from your class, off of a list of several
>2 skills of your choice from background
>many races also get a skill
>some archetypes also gain more skills
>profession skills replaced by tool proficiency, so they don't eat skill slots
A human fighter has 5 skills, only 2 of which are restricted to a list. Plus tool proficiency.
Compared to 3.5's "lmao 2 points per level", 5e fighters know a shitload.
A human rogue (assassin archetype) can get 7 skills, 5 tools, and speak an extra language (not counting Thieves' Cant).
Because that's how DnD does it and change is scary.
>>44079064
This is said. In multiple editions. Quick quote from PHB D&D 4e p.293
Hit points (hp) measure your ability to stand up to punishment, turn deadly strikes into glancing blows, and stay on your feet throughout a battle. Hit points represent more than physical endurance. They represent your character’s skill, luck, and resolve—all the factors that combine to help you stay alive in a combat situation.
>>44073874
I already say this is true.
Even if you look at stat blocks like DnD; the Wizard is shit at fighting, but he's better then a commoner. You know why? Because when the commoner sees a Minotaur he shits himself and runs, the Wizard can still fight.
Nobody appreciates how bad ass player-controlled characters are because they can actually stand up to horrors and not fall in the face of them, THAT is what makes them all good adventurers at heart, regardless of class or level.
>>44078654
Not that guy, but bro, if this ain't bait, then I gotta point out that it's a pretty obvious observation.
>>44073264
Tell you what, OP, you find me a ttrpg that doesn't and isn't broken, then I'll play it. Until then, fuck you, I'm having fun.
>>44073874
That's fucking OD&D dude. The lack of lots and lots of numbers leads to the assumption that unless there is a something to significantly hinder a basic action, an adventurer can accomplish it without trouble. Rolls are for when shit goes down.
Classes basically covered things that needed to be done when shit does go down. A fighter is good at fighting, better than anyone else, he can do other stuff too but fighting is his thing. He could be knight or bandit or a butcher turned adventurer or a thief with a knack for violence. The mage is a normal guy, with all the basic adventuring know-how and whatever background the player can think up. He can also cast spells.
>>44077379
That problem isn't just in class based systems. Every game with resource based character advancement winds up being specialize or die. I agree that punishing players for broad competence is retarded and unrealistic but there are more fundamental roots than classes.
The deal is that in most games characters get a limited resource to spend on abilities. These are EXP, karma, levels, whatever and most times they are a generic stand in for any ability growth and roughly even across the party. Players get to spend the resource on whatever they want. Characters don't learn by doing they learn at particular checkpoints. On top of that their actions have no impact on what they learn.
A wizard can spend months travelling through the wilderness with his party and learn absolutely nothing about how to pitch a tent, make a fire or keep warm at night.
And due to the resource thing, there is a very rigid, very finite limit on what a character can potentially due. There are no hobbies in RPG world, that would eat up valuable points best spent on dagger throwing.
Also the whole bullshit expression "never split the party" often leads to the very comfortable scenario of ever Autistic Death Sevant being close together so they can cover each other's weaknesses. Really the abstract and mechanical nature of the average rpg world lends itself well to obsessive specialization. General competence is useful in the real world because anything can happen and a working knowledge of many things gives you and your team a better survival chance. In RPG world everyone has plenty of time to coordinate perfectly and fit every person to their use.
>>44078656
>All characters being able to fight better than they normally do, but only when being yelled at by a very specific type of person, is also really, really dumb.
>coaches, music conductors, generals, slave drivers, etc are really, really dumb
You've hit a new low, /tg/. I'm impressed.
>>44073264
Because creativity though limitations is one os the better forms of creativity
>>44073264
Most people suffer from choice shock, obsessive indecision or whatever psych buzzword the phenomena has.
People want choices because no one wants to be told what to do they want to be individuals just like everyone else. Offer them more than a hand full of clearly defined choices though and the freeze up, panic, and are unable to make a choice at all.
Class based systems are for these people.
>>44084947
>Coaches, music conductors, generals, and slave drivers can tell specialists how to do their jobs better than they can do it on their own
>Those same specialists can't remember how to do the more efficient methods without being constantly yelled at.
>>44073452
I'll see you in court!
>>44075947
>>44080503
Yeah, it's been a while since I read it. Our group dropped the idea entirely partway through character creation, so I'm likely misremembering.
Still not great.
>>44085264
Is a musician not a specialist? How about an Olympic athlete?
>>44085423
Does a musician need a conductor to play at their best? Does an athlete need a coach constantly telling them how to do the routine that they presumably practiced for? Does a fighter need someone constantly reminding him how to use his sword so that he doesn't forget to swing every once in a while?
>>44085609
>all of those things
Pretty much? An orchestra without a conductor would probably be a cluster fuck, and I'm pretty sure no athlete would ever reach Olympic level without a coach. And I really hope you're not going to argue that a military squad doesn't perform better with someone in command.
The Warlord brings out the potential of his allies through instruction, motivation, and inspiration.
Do you also have a problem with bard songs?
>faggot plucks at the lute he bought from walmart
>expertly trained paladin from a renown knight order is suddenly able to hit harder
Uh
D&Dbabs????
Because I can't afford all the gurps books.
Also I like basic dungeons and dragons, blame the golden dragon reptoid aliens,
>>44079064
>literally never been said
So I should ignore Gygax's own words in the 1E DMG, page 82?
"Why
then the increase in hit points? Because these reflect both the actual
physical ability of the character to withstand damage - as indicated by
constitution bonuses- and a commensurate increase in such areas as skill
in combat and similar life-or-death situations, the "sixth sense" whith
warns the individual of some otherwise unforeseen events, sheer luck,
and the fantastic provisions of magical protections and/or divine
protection. "
To answer OP's question - Apocalypse World does it to enforce creation of certain character types and generate appropriate conflicts and mood through the mechanics, and PbtA games do similar. For example, you wanna play the king of a settlement? Bam, done, Hardholder playbook, there's all your moves and level ups all in one place.
Basically, if you have a hundred choices, but those choices only add up to five builds that are actually viable... might as well just make those builds into classes.
>>44073264
Most people like them. I personally don't. I homebrewed a system that works kind of like elder scrolls' leveling with many individual skills defining a character's ability instead of class. Any class abilities are taken like DnD feats.
