Quote from: RPGPundit;931905It means it's poor design.

No. It means that Call of Fucking Chthulhu is indeed a classless game:).
You want to shoot people in the face? Become a Soldier and learn how to do it best.

You want to be a soldier who relies on knowledge and administrative skills for his "contribution to the war effort", but never overcame his (possibly religiously-motivated) unwillingness to hurt another human, or even learned how to do that? You can play that, too. And you're still in the Soldier profession.
Can I play it and make it fun? Of course I can, just like my Kung-fu Master in WHoOG is focusing on knowledge skills. It's lots of fun!

So, there goes your theory that "only classes work"...unless you want to call CoC "bad design".

Quote from: James Gillen;931938I thought that was Quartermaster Corps.

JG

Or they've just got good scores in other skills.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;931939What if "soldier" or "warrior" includes weapons skills as part of the class description?

Yes, the class description does include it;).
But we're talking about the Profession of Soldier, as found in BRP and the like, CoC included. Pundit believes the profession equals "a hidden class in a supposedly classless game". I'm telling him that it's nothing like he imagines it;).

Quote from: Black Vulmea;932028When I ran a modern military campaign many years ago using d20 Modern, I instructed the players as follows: "Each character must take at least one rank of Jump, one rank of Knowledge (military science) [a homebrew skill replacing Knowledge (tactics)] and the Personal Firearms Proficiency feat to reflect their training as Foreign Legion paratroopers; a character who does not have French as their primary language must invest one skill point in Speak Language (French) as required of all legionnaires."

That's your way of setting it up. It's not the only way.

Moreover, d20 Modern isn't a classless game, so your solution simply has no bearing on what is possible in classless games:D.

Quote from: AsenRG;932059That's your way of setting it up. It's not the only way.

Never claimed otherwise.

Quote from: AsenRG;932059Moreover, d20 Modern isn't a classless game, so your solution simply has no bearing on what is possible in classless games:D.

It's also not a game which has a 'Soldier' basic class, so to account for a soldier's training in the campaign it was necessary for me to say that each character's abilities reflect their training by investing in those skills, which is one way a class-less system could handle it.

d20 Modern remains my favorite d20 game precisely because there are so many ways to skin a vocational cat within the rules. A Strong Hero could be the basis for a Jersey wiseguy, an Atlanta police officer, a Burgundian crossbowman or a Dutch pirate - and so could a Tough Hero, a Fast Hero, and so on. My favorite toolkit system to date.

The inherent failure of class based systems is demonstrated by there really being only one. All class based systems are functionally D&D in costume dress. The imagination-stunted retreading of an archaic system in an attempt to capture some of its market.

The inherent superiority of classless systems is demonstrated by there being so many of them, each examples of the hobby pushing beyond the narrow boundaries of a single outdate approach cribbed from wargames and allowing RPGs to grow into a hobby on its own, focusing on the strengths of roleplaying as unique to miniature skirmish games and not perpetually bound by the arbitrary limitations perpetrated by a pedantic nerd capitalizing on cribbed notes from Dave Anderson's innovations.







Yeah, its all nonsense, but so is the argument that its parodying.

Quote from: CRKrueger;932030The problem with conflating detailed lifepath chargen with "class" is that in most cases, it's historical.  Chargen is how to got to where you are when you enter the campaign.  Where you go from there is either bound to certain degrees by classes in a class system, or completely unbound in a classless one.

Exactly.

Lifepath can also include stuff unrelated to the 'class/profession'.

Most 'class based' systems are best for niche protection and when you have specific roles that are really needed for a game to run properly.  Classless games thrive when the collection of experiences, before and especially after, create the character.  In these, optimization becomes much harder, but storyline becomes a bit more tied to the character's abilities.

There is more to class systems then 1970s D&D.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;932063Never claimed otherwise.

No, you didn't, and I didn't point it out for you;).

QuoteIt's also not a game which has a 'Soldier' basic class, so to account for a soldier's training in the campaign it was necessary for me to say that each character's abilities reflect their training by investing in those skills, which is one way a class-less system could handle it.

Yes, but "games without a Soldier-specific basic class or vocation" aren't really covered by my example. It was aimed at debunking the Pundit's idea that BRP is actually "a class game in drag".

Quoted20 Modern remains my favorite d20 game precisely because there are so many ways to skin a vocational cat within the rules. A Strong Hero could be the basis for a Jersey wiseguy, an Atlanta police officer, a Burgundian crossbowman or a Dutch pirate - and so could a Tough Hero, a Fast Hero, and so on. My favorite toolkit system to date.

No dispute about that, it is one of the better iterations of the d20 system. Still, I find that using classes to represent anything at least close to real people is like using 50-centimeters squares to cover a human figure in a random position. You either have an excessive amount of coverage, not enough, or both:D.

Quote from: TristramEvans;932072The inherent failure of class based systems is demonstrated by there really being only one. All class based systems are functionally D&D in costume dress. The imagination-stunted retreading of an archaic system in an attempt to capture some of its market.

The inherent superiority of classless systems is demonstrated by there being so many of them, each examples of the hobby pushing beyond the narrow boundaries of a single outdate approach cribbed from wargames and allowing RPGs to grow into a hobby on its own, focusing on the strengths of roleplaying as unique to miniature skirmish games and not perpetually bound by the arbitrary limitations perpetrated by a pedantic nerd capitalizing on cribbed notes from Dave Anderson's innovations.







Yeah, its all nonsense, but so is the argument that its parodying.

OK, until I read that last line, I was going in my head "what's wrong with TriEv"?
Then it all became clear, and I agreed:D.

Quote from: LordVreeg;932202Exactly.

Lifepath can also include stuff unrelated to the 'class/profession'.

Most 'class based' systems are best for niche protection and when you have specific roles that are really needed for a game to run properly.  Classless games thrive when the collection of experiences, before and especially after, create the character.  In these, optimization becomes much harder, but storyline becomes a bit more tied to the character's abilities.

That conforms to my experience as well;).

I just figured Tristram was taking the piss at me for my "One True Way" post, which he so well satirized. My own having been meant as satire as well.  I missed his tiny print final line until you quoted it.

Quote from: DavetheLost;932427I just figured Tristram was taking the piss at me for my "One True Way" post, which he so well satirized. My own having been meant as satire as well.  I missed his tiny print final line until you quoted it.

Glad I was able to help;)!

Quote from: DavetheLost;932427I just figured Tristram was taking the piss at me for my "One True Way" post, which he so well satirized. My own having been meant as satire as well.

And like the best satire, they're trenchant because they're built around a kernel of truth. You can argue both points with a straight face.