General Discussion

Just a couple of quick points here.

FIrst, not all skill based systems eschew experience points or even levels.  In many cases, you still earn xp, but now instead of gaining a whole level in a class, you can choose to spend it on a particular skill (or set of skills).  Some games (a few text muds) lumped skills into rough groups and tracked those to determine your level... that is, if you gained enough skill points in skills that were considered "magic user" skills, you'd be shown as a "level X Mage", which made coding item restrictions or NPC interaction much simpler.

Secondly, while you can make skills open-ended, in practice this isn't done.  It would create a system where the oldest players will ALWAYS win, as without any form of cap, they'd always be ahead in everything.  If you use repeated use instead of xp gain, then the macro/bot players will always win.  To overcome this problem, EVE-Online took the unique solution of making skills train in real-time, and ONLY in real-time.  That overcomes the macro/bot problem automatically, and also overcomes the oldest player problem.  How, see the next paragraph.

Another problem skill based systems often have is that players end up with cookie-cutter master-of-all-trades characters at end-game.  Instead of seeing a hundred level 70 paladins walking around, you see 200 maxed-out players who can all do everything.  Some games try to add mutual-exclusion to skills... saying if you learn "Advanced Finger Waggling", it prevents you from learning "Advanced Tin Can Opening"... but that's a sneaky form of class.  The solution that works for EVE-Online (and only because of its real-time training) is to provide far more skills than anyone can master in a given lifetime.  Someone calculated that it would take 24 years to max out every single skill in that game, and the game has been live for only 4 years.  So, you have to choose.... max out specific skills to be the best at one particular thing (such as a covert-ops pilot), or put a few points in everything but never be as good as anyone who has specialized?  That's where skills shine, IMHO.

Originally posted by quixadhal
Just a couple of quick points here.

....


Another problem skill based systems often have is that players end up with cookie-cutter master-of-all-trades characters at end-game.  Instead of seeing a hundred level 70 paladins walking around, you see 200 maxed-out players who can all do everything.  Some games try to add mutual-exclusion to skills... saying if you learn "Advanced Finger Waggling", it prevents you from learning "Advanced Tin Can Opening"... but that's a sneaky form of class.  The solution that works for EVE-Online (and only because of its real-time training) is to provide far more skills than anyone can master in a given lifetime.  Someone calculated that it would take 24 years to max out every single skill in that game, and the game has been live for only 4 years.  So, you have to choose.... max out specific skills to be the best at one particular thing (such as a covert-ops pilot), or put a few points in everything but never be as good as anyone who has specialized?  That's where skills shine, IMHO.

Excellent points but Guild Wars/Fury presents the best solution to me for capping the oldest player problem by simply limiting the amount of active skills you can use. Now granted, they went extreme and made it 8. In EvE, the oldest player problem is still there because someone that has trained their skills for 4 years will have way more skills then the newbies and I'd imagine they can outfit their ships with the best equipment.

I think the Guild Wars approach is the best one atm. Since you can learn any skill but only have a certain amount active at a time. But like I pointed out before, their system flaw is only in the PvE portion (leveling up). The pvp portion at max level is really solid. Plus, it allows the hardcore players to grind out all the skills and it wont make any difference. A newbie is on even footing with a veteran.

Just pointing out their system and the one that Fury will have has already solved the 'uber template' problem. Additonally, because the skills are capped- well this allows a newbie to enjoy the game with their veteran peers

I would choose class, I dont want to go pvp and fight someone that has level 70 in archery magic and fighting, I want to fight an archer with my mage and see who wins. I wouldent hesitate to play a fun skill based game either its just class is better for me.(probabaly cause im not too creative).

I would really like a game that doesn't encourage min-maxing and racing to the end-game, but instead creates a true feeling of community.

Am I alone in this?

Hell no. The key to that problem I feel is allowing the players to create their own goals. Allowing them the freedom to be discriminating and decide amongst themselves what they want. And they must do that without making the game linear, only one way to succeed.

All the systems of a MMORPG are interconnected, thus it is impossible to debate the pros/cons of skill vs. class advancement without thinking about gear, loot, pvp rules, gameplay, etc etc etc.

Point is...

Skill vs. Class, which is better is more a product of how the rest of the game is done then anything else.

My thoughts too. Since in some skill based games you have to "level" each individual skill.

Excellent points but Guild Wars/Fury presents the best solution to me for capping the oldest player problem by simply limiting the amount of active skills you can use. Now granted, they went extreme and made it 8. In EvE, the oldest player problem is still there because someone that has trained their skills for 4 years will have way more skills then the newbies and I'd imagine they can outfit their ships with the best equipment.

Agreed. Ryzom is another example of having all the skills. The specialisation in that game came from armor and spells which you could tailor to you style.

I find myself agreeing alot with Heerobya, Kryogenic, & Vajuras. Lord Kelleyan put forward his idea about a game so i think i will put my ideal game forward. It's certainly not unique but its what i would want in a game.

Skill based: (UO model) Each skill has a maximum of 50 skill points. Every 5 skill points within a skill grants you an ability(Most useful at lower level). Each character has a max of 200 skill points. 20 skills. (rough random numbers to give an idea).

Skills do not enhance one another directly. ie NO anatomy skill bonus to damage. That sort of bonus should come from the skill of the combatant, enabled by intelligent game design.

Question are attribute points nessesary?

skill based system without question,

im not trying to appear biased, but i honestly see no appeal to class based games when compared to skill based games.

So what if people always switch to an "Uber-build", you can always experiment and try and find a better one, find one that is specifically target against said build, or experiment with it yourself.  Plus it brings together the communty.  Rarely in a skill based game can you complain about "nerfing" as you arent confined to a specific class.  the only time you could being if you were a purist build, but still the beauty with a skill system is that you can make your own "class" (or find on on the internet) and blend styles.

---

A class system is also the traditional system for this genre. Even going back as far as the original Dungeons and Dragons pen and paper game, advancement in a role-playing game has been done through classes and levels.

---

No it isnt traditional for this genre. There are plenty of skill based pen and paper games out there - Runequest, Call of Cthulu etc. It just happens that Dungeons and Dragons is the one most people (and the author) know of.

There is a lot of room for developers to think outside the box. Take Tabula Rasa - they have addressed the class problem by having an inverse class tree. So rather than picking your class at character creation everyone starts as a recruit - then at some level you decide if you want to move down the combat or specialist paths - these then branch again and again.

Originally posted by _Shadowmage

There is a lot of room for developers to think outside the box. Take Tabula Rasa - they have addressed the class problem by having an inverse class tree. So rather than picking your class at character creation everyone starts as a recruit - then at some level you decide if you want to move down the combat or specialist paths - these then branch again and again.

 

That's not new at all EQ2, Rappelz, and FFF have that. Asian MMOs been doing that for a long time now. It doesnt solve any of the problems class based MMOs have as a matter of fact it actually exponentially compounds the problem. At each juncture players can possibly make a mistake they reget forever (pick the wrong specialization). Additonally, it adds a lot more grind because system like that, like I just mentioned, usually dont let you 'respec'. So, if you screw yourself with the wrong specilization guess what you have to reroll and work your way back up. It's just a fancy coating for extreme grind (which is why many Asian MMOs use this feature). The key thing to look for is determine if they let you redistribute your points at anytime (like switch from one specilization to another w/o penalty like guild wars). Still looks like an interesting game but I just dont think that part of it is innovative so far

I say classes because its an rpg at the end of the day you need classes to have a good team, yes lots of warriors and a healer works but like wow you need to have sub classes/skills so a warriors doesnt always have to be the front line maybe wants to shoot a gun....wow does this very well, normaly i will try all the classes in a new mmo sit back see witch one i enjoyed the most and then move on from there, Eve on the other hand i started mining and oh my isnt that just boring, then u find out that you have to wait 6 months to be able to be a pvp fighter. no fun

I still think some of the new games in dev at the moment may find the perfect mix of both class and skill, because this debate will go on forever untill someone works out how you mix a class system with a skill system and still have a good game, maybe the answer is as easy as havin classes but being able to change your class (say make a max lvl warrior, then change and start again as a healer but still have to choose to swap beween them as you wish) while keeping all the sub skills like crafting and mounts and such? have i come on the answer? please pick hole in my idea we the players must know the answer hell you know what they say about moneys and skakespear....

cheers Doc