General Discussion

When Managing Editor Jon Wood attended the recent Indie MMO Developers Conference, he attended a roundtable discussion on the question of Class Systems vs. Skill Systems. Today, in this blog article, Wood looks at the discussion and discussion from other conferences, asking for your opinions to continue the debate.

While I was at the Indie MMO Game Developers Conference, I attended a round table discussion about the age-old debate: Skill System vs. Class System. Ok, so this might not be an age-old debate, but recently, it seems as though every time developers get together, whether they be what Josh Williams called "mainline" devs or indie devs, the question of Class vs. Skill is one that is continually examined and re-examined. Below, you will find my thoughts on the matter, informed by what I heard in this roundtable and in others.

Each time that I hear this debate, it is being debated by developers, and I think that it's time that it was had by the players. I am hoping that this will spark a debate in our own community so please feel free to comment on this article and expand on it. Do I think that we will decide which is better? Probably not, but everyone has an opinion. Share yours.

Read the whole article here.

Skill > Class.

I believe you summed up the basic pros/cons and main attributes of skill and class based advancement systems very well.

We've all seen throughout the history of the games we've played that both can be good/bad for a game. In SWG, the extreme end of a skill based system, we saw how flexible and involving a skill based system could be, and that rocked. But, we saw how imbalanced it became, as players switched nearly weekly/monthly to the next new "uber" template, the most overpowered balance of skills/professions of the current patch. And in reference to the quest vs. open-world debate, SWG was idealy set up for the open-world environment it had, however, the grind became very, very prevalent.

Then we see WoW, the extreme end of a class based system. You choose your class in the beginning, and that's it. They very wisely put in three talent trees for advancement, to give players some option, and with many classes, turn a single archetype into a completely different "feeling" for that class. Like protection warrior vs. fury warrior, or holy priest vs. shadow priest. Almost as if two very different classes. They created the quest system as we know it today, leading players from adventure to adventure, however once reaching the end of the line, the grind became prevalent yet again.

I think one of the best systems I have yet seen in a game is that of Final Fantasy XI. Well, at least parts of it.

It was class based, with the option to pick a sub-class, you created a vast number of possibilities. Also, the most amazing thing about it was that you could switch classes at any time. Job switching. Awsome idea. It was kind of like a skill system, in that your character stayed the same level, and you had a seperate level for your jobs. Switch to a new job, your character is still level 20 or whatever, but your job level goes back down to one. This way, a really dedicated player could in theory level up every single job, and switch between them as needed. That's be awsome.

So I really think that the best solution is a hybrid system. Something that doesn't lock you into one role forever, gives you the opportunity to change, expand, adapt, yet, based on a more rigid structure for better balance/tuning content.

At first I thought that it depends on the game. For example I see a medieval-fantastic game more suited for classes, like "WoW". But is see "Fallen Earth" a game more suited for skills.

But for me the best solution is a skill system with classes/sub-classes/races that give bonus/malus to skills. Counting sub-claasses something similar to D20 prestige class, gained by special quests and/or faction.

PD. Please excuse my english.

 

Originally posted by Mrbloodworth
Skill > Class.

What skill based game have you played... ?

Eve is a 100% skill based game, SWG was not. Nor was FFXI.

There are very few pure skill based games out there, and for good reason too.

Personally i think every game out there should have ..... BOTH . OMGZ what ?

SWG had a combination of class and skill, so did FFXI , and many others. DAOC did , you had your base class then you trained your ability points into various different skills.

I prefer this type of system more becuase while it does lock a character into certain range of abilities, it also differs game plan and add diversity.   In EvE flyign my drake i fly somethign that looks 95% what others usign drake do. Sure i can pick a myrmi but i am 85% like others, etc. You could say thats not bad .. well that could be true but when i look at my play time in SWG, i see that my TKM was nothing like my comabt medic. See limitatiosn can also make a game better. Lets look at doac , if i could just skill anything then well i sould be able to wear high abs armor whield a 2 handed sword and cast super power pure caster magic and everyoen would do thsi .... why not. Now instead look at a real use of what i am talkign about DDO, in ddo everythign is skill base minus hp and mana. as a caster you can wear heavy armor , etc. However, limitations come into play , your going to outright fail/fizzle many of your spells.  The game is class base but your abilities are skill base. Certain class get skills automaticly becuase of their class, but everythign you do is based on skills. This is how characters should be a combination of both, and i rather prefer more open or effect skill system then DDO has ... it has been crafted to make classes stronger at doign what they already do good.

It remains that in all daoc, swg, FFXI, and DDO palyers have more diversity than in pure skill games. So skill is not greater than class , and class is not greater than skill , becuase you should have both. And the combinations should create diversity and abilities, play style, and experince.

Yeah, I agree with the hybrid thing. Matrix Online has something like that as well.

This article is overly simplistic, misleading, and clearly biased.

First, it sets up a false dichotomy.  There is no law of game design that states you must choose class- or skill-based, and that no other system is possible.  I personally feel it would be a lot healthier for developers to think outside this particular box.

Also, the description of class-based systems is far from complete.  There was absolutely no mention of character customization within a class-based system.  The article makes it sound as if every member of a class is exactly the same.  In a lot of games, this couldn't be further from the truth.  In WoW (which I use as an example because most players are familiar with it), a Shadow Priest differs significantly from a Holy Priest.  While both can fulfill the basic duties of a priest, the gameplay for each is a very different experience.

The article is misleading -- actually, it's outright false -- in saying that members of a certain class can never learn skills inherent in another class.  Take City of Heroes for example.  Healing is normally the purview of Defenders and Controllers, yet any character from any archetype can take a decent healing power (and even learn to rez) by selecting it as a Pool power.  Likewise a Controller, typically weak on offense, can take fighting Pool powers to round himself out.  (I know because I've done it, and it's a lot of fun.)  You cannot completely disregard your class's intended function, but you can definitely make your character differ from the norm.

Ultimately, pure skill-based systems and pure class-based systems are both far too limiting.  As with so many things in life, moderation is key.  A well-designed hybrid is probably the best way to go -- something where a character's overall strengths and weaknesses are directed by a class-like framework, but where the player is free to sacrifice some of that focus in order to make up for some of the class's deficiencies that annoy him.

Right now, CoH and D&D are my favorite systems.  Both are ultimately class-based, yet both allow the player a lot of customization without some of the horrible drawbacks of the skill-based model.

The points you raise about the skill based system, where you could simply continue to learn different things, didn't bring up the possibility of having a maximum amount of abilities that you could learn.  If you choose to learn Writing 3, would you be forced to 'forget' Speaking 3?  If so eventually you still max out your character.

If you do actually max out your character and want to fill out a different role, you will have to either re-create your first character or make a new one.

In a class based system if you want to fill a different role, you make a new character as well.

With this simplified example, they are similar.

I think to capture the idea of a skill based system you would probably need to not put a cap on player advancement.  Allow characters to learn everything without the cost of forgetting anything.

To help with the development of a linear style of play, you could base 'level' advancement on how far up a fighting line of skills you advanced.  If you want to learn how to hunt and some survival skills, you wouldn't advance through the style of leveling in the game.  If you chose to learn a ranged style along side a melee style at an even pace, you would 'level up' two times slower.  If you were focusing on a single line of skills such as healing, you would be effective at healing as far as you had advanced it, leveling up faster, but you would not be as well rounded or able to fill in other roles.  If you went back to learn other things however, you would now be a max level healer and the earlier content where you advance low level skills wouldn't necessarily be well balanced.

It sounds to me like sill based is extremely hard to implement.  Someone one (not me) is going to have to figure out how to deal with these types of issues.  If there's a game out there that still uses a skill based system that works very well, i'd love to try it.  Let me know!