Hi guys, what exactly are the major perks to Class-based systems over "skill-based systems", or said otherwise, systems that utilize more custom construction options for a given character? Is it really just a matter of simplicity, familiarity, and ease-of-use?

You may find this recent topic of interest:  Purpose of classes

You'll find a lot of people's answers in this thread:

https://www.therpgsite.com/pen-paper-roleplaying-games-rpgs-discussion/what-is-the-purpose-of-character-classes/

Looking at it as a player, the chief advantage of classes is that it makes it very easy to pick what you'd like to play. You can look at a class/profession/archetype list as a menu, and just go "Oh, I can be Sphere Knight? That sounds cool. I'll give that a try". In classless games you often have to go in with a very clear idea of what kind of character you want to play and the system knowledge to successfully build that, or else you end up with a sort of grey goo character that just feels like you're playing "some guy". That can be a big hassle if you're coming into a game new, especially if it's a setting/genre you aren't familiar with.


EDIT: yeah, Steven linked the thread while I was typing.

Role protection. Well designed class systems require character to specialize in a particular area. They also provide a clear path of advancement compared to the much more open system of skill advancement. That said a lot of my favorite games presently are classless.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell on January 15, 2025, 01:47:38 PMYou may find this recent topic of interest:  Purpose of classes

Quote from: ForgottenF on January 15, 2025, 01:51:38 PMYou'll find a lot of people's answers in this thread:

https://www.therpgsite.com/pen-paper-roleplaying-games-rpgs-discussion/what-is-the-purpose-of-character-classes/

Looking at it as a player, the chief advantage of classes is that it makes it very easy to pick what you'd like to play. You can look at a class/profession/archetype list as a menu, and just go "Oh, I can be Sphere Knight? That sounds cool. I'll give that a try". In classless games you often have to go in with a very clear idea of what kind of character you want to play and the system knowledge to successfully build that, or else you end up with a sort of grey goo character that just feels like you're playing "some guy". That can be a big hassle if you're coming into a game new, especially if it's a setting/genre you aren't familiar with.


EDIT: yeah, Steven linked the thread while I was typing.

Thank you both!

1. Niche Protection: each class is distinct from one another in a way that makes them mutually useful without needing to be relatively as powerful as one another. though I'd argue this only works in systems with a low number of distinct classes, 3.5 edition and to a lesser extent 5th edition had very little to no niche protection do to the raw number of classes/subclasses.

2. archetypical: tied to point 1, each class, when few and distinct, reinforces their own play styles and themes, fighters feel like tough and capable, clerics feel defensive and noble, thiefs feel clever and slippery, wizards feel like a A-10 warthog blending up a small village of iraqis.

3. Very quick character generation: Characters in Class systems tend to be quicker (given the classes are few and distinct) this has a knock on effect, my general belief is a system has to have a quick method of character generation for it to also be deadly, otherwise it's at best annoying or downright game ender to have a character die.

I think archetypes is really the key. Especially if there is multiclassing, niche protection isn't that strong a force

Quote from: Socratic-DM on January 16, 2025, 06:39:53 PMVery quick character generation: Characters in Class systems tend to be quicker (given the classes are few and distinct) this has a knock on effect, my general belief is a system has to have a quick method of character generation for it to also be deadly, otherwise it's at best annoying or downright game ender to have a character die.

As a long-time Call of Cthulhu player, I strongly disagree. Call of Cthulhu is one of the most successful RPGs for over four decades, and it is both deadly and skill-based.

Quote from: jhkim on January 16, 2025, 08:31:08 PMI think archetypes is really the key. Especially if there is multiclassing, niche protection isn't that strong a force

Quote from: Socratic-DM on January 16, 2025, 06:39:53 PMVery quick character generation: Characters in Class systems tend to be quicker (given the classes are few and distinct) this has a knock on effect, my general belief is a system has to have a quick method of character generation for it to also be deadly, otherwise it's at best annoying or downright game ender to have a character die.

As a long-time Call of Cthulhu player, I strongly disagree. Call of Cthulhu is one of the most successful RPGs for over four decades, and it is both deadly and skill-based.

I never said class based systems were always faster or always fast in comparison to skill-based. I imagine it doesn't take very long to make a CoC character?

If it does, then regardless of the strengths I'd still dock points away from it on the grounds it should have a quicker means of character if it's going to be so deadly.

Quote from: Socratic-DM on January 16, 2025, 08:55:29 PM

Quote from: jhkim on January 16, 2025, 08:31:08 PM

Quote from: Socratic-DM on January 16, 2025, 06:39:53 PMVery quick character generation: Characters in Class systems tend to be quicker (given the classes are few and distinct) this has a knock on effect, my general belief is a system has to have a quick method of character generation for it to also be deadly, otherwise it's at best annoying or downright game ender to have a character die.

As a long-time Call of Cthulhu player, I strongly disagree. Call of Cthulhu is one of the most successful RPGs for over four decades, and it is both deadly and skill-based.

I never said class based systems were always faster or always fast in comparison to skill-based. I imagine it doesn't take very long to make a CoC character?

If it does, then regardless of the strengths I'd still dock points away from it on the grounds it should have a quicker means of character if it's going to be so deadly.

Chargen in Call of Cthulhu (CoC) is mostly about allocating points to skills. You have a few hundred points to divide among fifty or so skills. It's straightforward but can be time-consuming.

But from experience with Call of Cthulhu, I don't find that it is more of a downer or game-breaker for a character to die.

I think that's because time investment isn't the biggest factor in emotional investment. I think the archetypal-ness of classes and the "zero-to-hero" of D&D XP are bigger factors.

In Call of Cthulhu, you make a relatively ordinary person - not an archetypal hero. That makes it easier when your PC dies. Also, experience in CoC is much more incremental. In D&D, after a few levels it becomes very painful to give up the investment, whereas in CoC it's easier to fold in a beginning character.

Quote from: jhkim on January 17, 2025, 05:27:48 PM

Quote from: Socratic-DM on January 16, 2025, 08:55:29 PM

Quote from: jhkim on January 16, 2025, 08:31:08 PM

Quote from: Socratic-DM on January 16, 2025, 06:39:53 PMVery quick character generation: Characters in Class systems tend to be quicker (given the classes are few and distinct) this has a knock on effect, my general belief is a system has to have a quick method of character generation for it to also be deadly, otherwise it's at best annoying or downright game ender to have a character die.

As a long-time Call of Cthulhu player, I strongly disagree. Call of Cthulhu is one of the most successful RPGs for over four decades, and it is both deadly and skill-based.

I never said class based systems were always faster or always fast in comparison to skill-based. I imagine it doesn't take very long to make a CoC character?

If it does, then regardless of the strengths I'd still dock points away from it on the grounds it should have a quicker means of character if it's going to be so deadly.

Chargen in Call of Cthulhu (CoC) is mostly about allocating points to skills. You have a few hundred points to divide among fifty or so skills. It's straightforward but can be time-consuming.

But from experience with Call of Cthulhu, I don't find that it is more of a downer or game-breaker for a character to die.

I think that's because time investment isn't the biggest factor in emotional investment. I think the archetypal-ness of classes and the "zero-to-hero" of D&D XP are bigger factors.

In Call of Cthulhu, you make a relatively ordinary person - not an archetypal hero. That makes it easier when your PC dies. Also, experience in CoC is much more incremental. In D&D, after a few levels it becomes very painful to give up the investment, whereas in CoC it's easier to fold in a beginning character.

I spoke strictly in terms of mechanics, whether a character is "easier" to accept dying is utterly subjective as far as I'm concerned.

I strictly meant in the mechanical sense, and it is clear to me CoC and many BRP systems don't exactly have breezy character generation. which makes their lethality simply annoying as opposed to having any sense of bathos.

the advantage of quick and random character generation is that the ones that survive long you feel (rightfully so) more entitled to care and think they are epic and as to what happens to them. than say some pre-planned min/maxed character build, because all of their greatness was set ahead of them even having been played.

another reason I make a distinction between old-school classes in games and new-school classes. because D&D 3.5 sucked ass through a straw and making characters was a tedious chore.

Others have said this sort of stuff better, of course, but honestly it's a game. Classes enable more immediate play. Not to mention, "I'm putting a team together," is like the ultimate action movie trope. You gotta have the heavy weapons dude, the safe cracker, the mechanic, the face man, etc. Even the hyper-competent jack-of-all-trades is an archetype in the genre. So, yeah, class directly emulate fiction and make it easier to play the game more quickly.

If you look at a game as portraying heroes/adventurers/those who go 'out there', I believe jhkim has hit the nail on the head by mentioning archetypes. Looking at Joseph Campbell's body of work such as the documentary about his decades of study on myths and legends, his Hero's Journey chart, along with books such as The Hero With A Thousand Faces (a great read, yet I teach World Mythologies, so I am a bit biased in this example) we see that there are archetypes that resonate with us across cultures and differences that we can all understand and that some of us still yearn for, and can via activities like rpgs.

Quote from: Brad on January 17, 2025, 06:22:52 PMOthers have said this sort of stuff better, of course, but honestly it's a game. Classes enable more immediate play. Not to mention, "I'm putting a team together," is like the ultimate action movie trope. You gotta have the heavy weapons dude, the safe cracker, the mechanic, the face man, etc. Even the hyper-competent jack-of-all-trades is an archetype in the genre. So, yeah, class directly emulate fiction and make it easier to play the game more quickly.

That depends what fiction you're emulating. While all fiction has archetypes, I think some fiction doesn't easily lend itself to systematizing those archetypes as classes.

You mention safe cracker like in heist movies or the Mission: Impossible series. Those would do well with classes, but on the other hand, I think the James Bond 007 RPG fits well by not having classes, because there aren't those simple roles.

I do like some class-based systems, like Cyberpunk and Monster of the Week, for example - which match up well with their associated fiction.

On the other hand, I think Call of Cthulhu emulates Lovecraft's fiction well by not having classes. Also, Marvel Superheroes I think does well by not having classes to emulate it's fiction. There are some subsets of superheroic action that can work well with classes, but not a broad superheroic system.

I've preferred classless systems for my Tolkien games as well - I've been using Savage Worlds most recently. I don't think Tolkien's stories actually lend themselves to simple classes, despite some D&D classes being based on his characters. Nothing wrong with D&D, but D&D does not emulate Tolkien's fiction.

Someone offers to run a quick D&D adventure.  You volunteer to play the Rogue / Thief.  Everyone with any experience, understands exactly what role you are going to fill.  Someone else volunteers to play a Priest / Cleric, etc. 

You don't need 640 pages of rules.  You can run a class based game, right off the top of your head,

I like them as shortcuts/summaries/memes; I can just say he villain is a "level 8 Fighter" and it's basically all I need to know.

It really help defines the PCs role in the party too.

Skill systems OTOH are good when the PCs are all from a similar profession, e.g., a group of knights. Then you can differentiate by skill. If that's not the case, classes are a good shortcut to differentiate PCs.

BTW: I like to say a Fighter 8 has +8 to-hit and a Thief 8 has +8 dmg when backstabbing etc. Really simplifies things.