The only draw back that you see....

No one would play your game. Although you have some valid ideas , of which i have already am using in my game, for example, forgetting abilities if they are not used over a period of time.

Seriously, why would someone want to physically sit there and chop at wood to get better?

Have you not heard of trainers? The concept is used in todays society. There are trainers, professors for everything that you would like to do. Why is that any different in computer games? Or, why should it be any different?

The line between reality and fiction has to be one of the most difficult decisions to make. To real, and the game is boring. To fictional, and the game gets old quickly.

That magic idea reminds me of Spellfire from Forgotten Realms. But i think that if every player is given a special ability then they should never know that they have it. There should just be behind the scene modifiers being calculated that the player has to work out if and where these are happening. If at all.

I love Game Design and it loves me back.

Our Goal is "Fun"!

Edited by - Paul Cunningham on July 25, 2000 2:43:36 AM

Why not just make magicans a farce. Yeah, there''s these wonderful people who can make magic and all that but when they are put to the test they''re really never that good at it. Its kind of like reality bites

So if your character (ordinary individual) wants to learn magic then they never really get amazing spells and the spells that are fantastic take some time to cast. I think this would help bring back the wonder of magic to RPG''s. "Wow, He actually casted a fireball!!!"

I love Game Design and it loves me back.

Our Goal is "Fun"!

quote: Original post by Paul Cunningham

Why is it that all characters and classes in RPG have to be so super human to be fun? I think that this is leading most RPG into the Genre of being a sub FPS or something similar.

Shouldn''t rare abilities like detect evil/good and other almost magical abilities be preserved for characters that have made accomplishments rather than just starting the game as a wizard or paladin etc.

Just to be called a wizard should be a status in itself little lone being able to cast wall of fire after killing 100 enemies. Why not just start the game with an ordinary human and work you way up from there.

I love Game Design and it loves me back.

Our Goal is "Fun"!

Ok Paul, here''s the deal. Without classes, things are like a Dahli painting, they tend to run and not hold shape. The point of defining a "class" is because we humans tend to generalize anything and everything. There is a class for all things. What i dislike is the fact that you can''t be two classes at once without some major penalty or some such. I mean, i may not be the best of all things, but i know a little about everything. However, i don''t know about some things.. like how to play an instrument. I can play the drums, that''s about it everything else is beyond me.

By allowing classification, you allow the player to say "this is the general way i''d like my character to turn out". There''s no reason that that should mean "this is ALL i want my character to be". And that''s an important thing i think no one has yet understood.

True, skill-based systems allow you to do what you want and fall into a category. However, they lack any real bonus for certain things. You can go with the "what you use in the first 5 minutes" rule, or you can try to guess based on what they use most. This leaves a LOT to chance, and means that bonuses are hell to figure out. In class-based, you have bonuses in areas you will be working with. I believe classes, sub-classes, and multi-classes are the best way to go. D&D had some form of optimizing the character, but lacked the skill-based side of things, using proficiencies to determine things. This kept you from being able to power-max a particular skill. But, it also kept you from defining a more individual character. You should be able to work and build skills, but classes make a difference. If i''m a wizard, i want to be able to get bonuses in wizard things. Let''s say i''m a fighter, and i perfer to use longswords and swords similar to those. I''m not gonna be terrible with a broadsword, but it''ll be different.

I think there''s also other points lost to skill-based games. What you use most is gonna be what you remember most. Now, if you use a longsword all the time, and suddenly are forced to use a broadsword, you''re gonna suck for the first 5 minutes while you adjust to the sword. Now, once adjusted, you begin to learn about the sword and how it works. This, however, is only a temporary thing. Why? you don''t use the sword enough to remember it. This goes back to attrition. If you use an item less, you forget more. This is a pretty basic concept. The percentage of time spent using a weapon on a weekly basis should determine the ammount of skill you remember, and this translates to how fast the skill does or doesn''t fall.

What you say about the status of wizard isn''t true always. I''m actually conjuring up a game where wizards rule the lands, and warriors are few and far between. To be a mighty warrior and successful takes a LOT. And it''s like what you say about wizards. You only consider them to be cool as heck because they''re rare (like, none). However, if they were common, you wouldn''t think "to be called a wizard should be awesome" but more like "a wizard is common, why not be a warrior, they''re cool!"

Just to make ya think..

J

Well i think we''re talking about two completely different games niphty. Your''s would be good maybe brilliant i don''t know but i was mainly talking about how i could be done without classes or a least game-imediate-classes. Letting the player wonder around for a while in civilan clothes whilst they are emersing themselves in the game environment. If they want to be a fighter then they could go to the training yards and get some basic training if they so wish, but that''s up to the player.

I''m mainly talking about having a game where you don''t have to be a class just to get in to the game.

I love Game Design and it loves me back.

Our Goal is "Fun"!

Well on the subject of classes for characters I am in the process of writing a RPG with a few freinds which we hope to turn into a game after the intial bases are set but how we are creating the classes are as follows:

there are no set classes just a skill index like in fallout but the skill index will be able to be added to, like if you want to use a big gun some one has to teach you how to use it or you simply cant as you dont know.

and the more you do something like fire that gun, or chop a tree like in the lumber jack example the higher it is,

so if you are a wizard and cast spells you will get better the more you cast, and if you like to hack people up the more skill you get doing that, so you can be a wizard and a warrior but its harder to acheive than being only a wizard, as you need to practice to skill bases.

the only draw back is having to start out as an idiot and teach your dude things, but then sometimes thats fun if the game is built right, and thats the hard bit, bringing in the game play.

cheers

Roy

oh and we are thinking of setting up a few class templates so that you may have abit more of a start in one dircetion but that still wont stop your character from learning new skills.

What about ditching skills altogether? and attributes. How about a system that relies entirely on the magical powers of items to boost your characters ability and give your character new and differing abilities to other players. This way you can pass your character on to a new character by merely exchanging items.

So you make and boost items abilities to make your character more powerful.

I love Game Design and it loves me back.

Our Goal is "Fun"!