Classes vs. Skills in MMOGs

Hybrid system by Kelson · 2006-08-29 06:45 · Score: 5, Interesting

The debate reminds me of the hybrid system used in Might and Magic IX. For all the game's flaws, it had an interesting tree-based class system. You started each character off as either a spellcaster or a fighter, and as they advanced in levels, they would specialize as clerics, mages, knights, etc. IIRC there were three tiers, with 2 low-level classes, four mid-range, and eight advanced.

The disadvantage is that if you want a particular advanced class, you need to plan ahead -- and have the manual page that shows the tree. On the plus side, it means you can get a feel for what you need during gameplay, rather than try to guess from the start.

I'm not sure how well this would translate to MMORPGs, because I'm one of the three people online who doesn't play any. But it seems this would be simpler than a fully skill-based system, and more flexible than a static class system.

Re:Hybrid system by Burlap · 2006-08-29 06:58 · Score: 4, Interesting

I prefer Anarchy Onlines skill/class system. Every class has access to the same skills, only some classes can raise them higher and "easier" (cost less improvement points) then others.

EG: a nanomake and agent can both use the rifle skill... only the agent can get it far higher (both in base skill and self only biffs) and cost less then the mage. But if the mage REALLY wants to use rifles then she can.

it allows for a good amount of customization and also allows the devs to 'nudge' the player base in a specific direction. Of course it can be abused (caterwall rifle was so destructive in PVP that EVERY class used it untill it was made agent only) but what system cant be?
Re:Hybrid system by Red+Flayer · 2006-08-29 08:57 · Score: 2, Interesting

What I like about it was that it really discouraged players from treating combat as the sole method of meeting challenges. Yes, a combat between two PCs and 3 NPCs might take 8 hours to resolve... but that one marathon rolL-playing session would have been preceded by 6 rolE-playing sessions, maybe with some stealth, etc, thrown in.

As compared to AD&D and WH, which seemingly resolved around combat after combat after combat.

Yes, part of it depended on the GM, and YMMV, but I felt the system really guided players towards making more realistic decisions.

--
"Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
Re:Hybrid system by garylian · 2006-08-29 12:13 · Score: 2, Interesting

They did that at launch, but one of the Live Updates scrapped it, for several reasons.

The most prominent reason was that it was really a pain in the butt to create a mage class, play it to level 10 and then say "you know, I want to be a nuker" and select said subclass. Then, you work your way to level 20, and say "I think I'll be a warlock" only to find out you don't really like the warlock. Now you've just spent 20 levels to find out the basics of how your class will behave. It hurt.

There was a whole lot of characters being dumped and re-rolled. I barely held on to my warlock, but I really look back and knew I should have gone wizard, instead. The difference between the two? Warlocks deal more mob-group damage via group-AoE spells. Wizards do more damage against a single target, grouped or not.

Soloing, the warlock often had a harder time against powerful single mobs that the wizard would smoke. I was trying to solo to catch up to guildies, and once I hit 20, I suddenly had a character that couldn't do that. Boy, what a disappointment.

In reality, this isn't really what the article is talking about. They are talking more about the way UO did it. You could basically have like 675 points allocated to various skills, with 100 being the maximum. With about 40-50 skills (I don't remember how many) you could really have diverse characters. But you didn't. The best players had 6 skills at 100, with the other 75 points scattered. And most of the players had those 100 points in the same things, with the only variations often being weapon type.

In a way, many games try to hybrid the thing. AA points are one example from EQ and EQ2. Talent trees from WoW is another example. You have levels, but you also can add skills to it.
Re:Hybrid system by ByteGuerrilla · 2006-08-29 12:32 · Score: 2, Interesting

EVE-Online uses what I consider a really nice system for skills and classes. Although there is really no concrete 'class' system, your character creation involves you choosing paths through race, education establishment, and specialisation. Each of those choices determines the skills you start out with and their levels, and also your attributes. Attributes are Memory, Intelligence, Charisma, Perception, and Willpower, and each skill has one of these as a primary and secondary attribute. The higher your Perception and Willpower, for example, the quicker your skills that are based in those attributes (such as the ship-piloting skills) will train. Your attributes can be increased by training the relevant skills in the Learning area.

As a result, you're never locked into a set of skills, but you're encouraged to pursue skills you will be able to train more quickly.

--
A block of code, sufficiently well-written, is indistinguishable from magick.

Trial and error. by zyl0x · 2006-08-29 06:48 · Score: 5, Interesting

It's been tried and tested with all the other MMOs. When you give the players such an open system like a skill-based system, the developers have exponentially more work on their hands. They have to make sure all the combinations are viable gaming options. Nevermind the balance for PvP systems. Skill-based systems are way easier to exploit, as opposed to class-based systems, where the developers have direct control over what the players can be, and what they cannot be. It's a hard balance to strike, though, since players in a class system often feel as though they're being oppressed, but every game needs a structure, and skill-based structures are too close to chaos.

--
Blerg.

Re:Trial and error. by Anonymous Coward · 2006-08-29 07:04 · Score: 1, Interesting

If you allow different effectiveness levels for different skillsets, then you'll unavoidably have overpowered ones. If my major skills are crafting and mining, and I can't kill anything because of it, then i'm underpowered and other skillsets that can kill things are overpowered. The only solution is to have all skillsets reach a norm value of effectiveness, so that none are underpowered by comparison. Of course, a game where effectiveness is a very varied concept and the goal is not only "killing things" would help, though I have only seen those become games obsessed with economies.
Re:Trial and error. by everphilski · 2006-08-29 07:11 · Score: 2, Interesting

It is the overpowered class that has the instant solo win card up his/her sleeve that we are concerned about, not the underpowered class. A single overpowered class can screw over a game.
Re:Trial and error. by hey! · 2006-08-29 07:36 · Score: 3, Interesting

Skill-based systems are way easier to exploit, as opposed to class-based systems, where the developers have direct control over what the players can be, and what they cannot be.

But isn't that where a lot of fun in a skill based system is for players? Less in any campaigns or quests the devlopers create and more around creating strategies to boost certain skills, so you can use them to, umm boost other skills? In the end it's pointless of course, but we are talkings games after all.

It's a hard balance to strike, though, since players in a class system often feel as though they're being oppressed, but every game needs a structure, and skill-based structures are too close to chaos.

I guess my point is why is the chaos a problem if people are enjoying the game?

I can see that a sufficiently fanatical player with sufficient time on his hands can create a character that is so powerful it's not interesting to play anymore. In that case force some tradeoffs for the character; after all that's what these games are about on an abstract level. Maybe your advancement level in a skill is a function of the total level for all your skills, not the total level in that skill. So if you are a high level enchanter and a low level fighter, you can advance a level in fighting but it's just as hard as advancing a level in magic. The player would have to undertake increasingly more difficult tasks to advance his player's skills at all. Ultimately, characters would reach a point where they could not, in practical terms, gain any more skills. If the point is to take the emphasis off of skill acquisition, then the player would have to shift to playing that character in whatever scenarios you devise. Naturally serious players will have several characters, which means more revenue.

--
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Re:Trial and error. by ebyrob · 2006-08-29 10:26 · Score: 3, Interesting

Have you played Ultima Online?

They had a system where it was actually more difficult for everyone in the world to gain in certain skills based on how popular they were, or how many other people were also trying to gain at that skill at the same time.

Think if it kind of like the WoW PvP ladder, but for every single skill. You had to compete with the entire realm just to gain another .1% on your stat sheet.

UO did some other pretty revolutionary stuff too. For instance, all items, weapons and other goods decayed when used. Sure, you could get them repaired, but they'd still eventually wear out to the point they weren't worth repairing any more. A similar system kept mages in check. Every single spell cast required massive amounts of reagents, also in limited supply. This meant mages might well be the most powerful class in the game, but it came at an extremely high monetary cost.

This meant you might be able to slice down a town full of wood-cutters, miners, blacksmiths and herb-gathers as an archer-mage, but you'd be begging them later on to sell you enough goods to keep yourself equipped. (At least, that's how it was supposed to work in theory)
Re:Trial and error. by MrAnnoyanceToYou · 2006-08-29 10:34 · Score: 2, Interesting

Try EVE. It rocks. I've been playing for a month now and I still have my real life, too. It's an amazing concept.

--
My little site.

Simplicity always wins... by Manip · 2006-08-29 06:51 · Score: 4, Interesting

I think World of Warcraft has shown that a good mix of both is a nice compromise. With simple classes (e.g. Priest, Warrior, Hunter etc) but allowing players to further customise those roles for their play style (E.g. Priest healer or Priest for damage).

You don't need to pick black or white, good or evil... Better to have a compromise between the two... A shade of grey as it were.

Perhaps Blizzard's ability to stay in the "Shades of Grey" is why it has 50% of the MMPORPG market at the minute?

Re:Simplicity always wins... by Wilson_6500 · 2006-08-29 07:20 · Score: 3, Interesting

With simple classes (e.g. Priest, Warrior, Hunter etc) but allowing players to further customise those roles for their play style (E.g. Priest healer or Priest for damage)

Great, so I have slightly more ways to be pigeonholed. I can be a "healing priest," or a "damage priest," or a highly ineffective combination of the two that will get me killed endless times and put me at a huge disadvantage to specialized priests in PvP.

Naturally, some "builds" have to be more useful than others, but in modern MMOs there's woefully little in the way of innovation when it comes to player skill sets. Barring changes after patches, hardcore players VERY quickly filter out the most "respectable" builds, which then begin to propagate themselves among the players. Everyone wants to get their player's various numbers as high as they can as fast as they can, and so they settle down into a variety of the most effective builds. The players who aren't savvy to these builds will clunk along, having various amounts of success depending on the way the game is designed. If I want to play a Wizard that has a morbid aversion to fire, but all the "good" Wizard spells are fire-based, then my Wizard's going to have a hell of a time finding people who'll put up with his "useless" Freeze Orb + Mystic Heal combination when--as EVERYONE knows--you MUST have Hell Dagger + Burning Pee in order to kill Trogdors in the Highlands. Why kill Trogdors in the Highlands? Because they drop the only sword that a Chevalier should ever use: Cloudbranch.

That's going to lead into the whole damn field of item builds, which I don't wanna get into since I've basically gotten completely away from my point. I will say that total randomization of item character would go a long way to preventing the "must have" mentality that plagues so many MMO builds--e.g. your Bow-Using Amazon (in Diablo 2) _must_ use this certain ultra rare Bow to have a snowball's chance in hell in PvP.

An issue for more than just MMOs by dorbabil · 2006-08-29 06:53 · Score: 5, Interesting

I've been working a few RPG ideas over in my head for the past few years, piling details on as I find ideas I like or think I could improve upon in other games, and the class vs. skill debate is something I'm very familiar with.

I think the biggest problem with the skill system is that it makes the experience way too "loose" for the incoming player, and in MMOs or traditional CRPGs, that can be a serious problem. With a class-based system, you can make the player focus on one or two things early on instead of allowing them to run free, which gives them an ample chance to learn the game, the interface, and to get familiar with the characters and story. With a skill-based system, there's more of an unstructured feeling. You can't really force everyone into doing a few basic skills right away, because if those skills don't interest the person, they are going to feel like they are wasting their time. Since a lot of the developers who make large scale games, esspecially MMOs, don't have the time/money/desire to put a lot of instruction and guidance in for every single skill combination in the early game, it can be tough for people to stick with it long enough to find their niche.

I think that's why a lot of MMOs go with a sort of combination of the two. You get a class (or even just give characters generic experience levels that effect statistics and the ability to use equipment), and then later allow them to learn and explore different trade-skills. Some MMOs even go for keeping the character as a jack-of-all-trades earlier on, and then allowing the player to specialize once they are familiar with the different skills that they can use.

I still think that some of the best games only have skills. UnReal World is one of my favorite roguelike CRPGs, and I really enjoy it's skill system.

Experiential vs. Formalized Knowledge by mhazen · 2006-08-29 06:58 · Score: 4, Interesting

I've come to prefer the system used in the Elder Scrolls series quite a bit, being a directed version of the skill-based subsumed in a class-based world. That is to say, you have a class, yes, but when you level, the options you are given to improve your character's stats directly reflect what you've actually been doing in the world.

Yes, it would take a spellcaster longer to level if they're focused on hand-to-hand combat (it would actually happen incidentally, through repated use of the skills that are associated with their class, but when they do eventually level, they would have the ability to increase their strength significantly more than if they had focused exclusively on spellcasting.

I find this to be a surprisingly effective compromise, and it reflects somewhat on the nature of experience and growth in the real world (minus the spellcasting, of course). By this I mean that if I were a surgeon, the more surgeries I participate in, the higher my skill is likely to grow, and therefore, my standing as a surgeon (overly simplified example, yes). This does not, however, preclude the option I have for taking tae kwon do lessons and improving my martial skills. Since I don't make my living as a martial artist however, even though my ability is improving in other arenas, it does not reflect back on my ability as a surgeoun.

Consider it as 'career track' versus 'personal development'.

--
Rock is dead. Long live scissors and paper!

Ultima Online by Anonymous Coward · 2006-08-29 07:00 · Score: 2, Interesting

The only MMORPG enjoyed was Ultima Online. And it used a very simple system: you can grandmaster 7 skills, be it fishing, archery, magic, mining, etc. (UO has a great variety of skills, by the way.) This system felt more "real" to me; I wasn't confined to some stupid class template. It also allowed for more customization. My secondary character, for example, could learn skills that would make him an ideal miner. And all skills increased through their use, not some ridiculous level system.

I quit UO years ago, but I believe subsequent expansion packs have toyed with this system, allowing you to gain more than 100 points in each skill.

MMO's by OoZz · 2006-08-29 07:06 · Score: 2, Interesting

While I do currently play World of Warcraft (only because it is the least buggy and simply best MMO on the market right now) I favor games like old school star wars galaxies. In that game you had over 30 professions to choose from and you could customize your charcter any way you wanted pulling certain skills from those professions. Diversity is what really attracted me to that game because no two people were exactly the same, whether it was skills that they had, the way they looked, or even the outfits they wore. You could customize your character around you. In games like WoW you are totally restricted in that because within your own class you really only have 2 options to choose from and those 2 options are based around what you want to do, PVP or Raid End Game Instances. So there is no real diversity, in the end everyone is shooting for the same armor, looks the same, and has the same skill sets.

Old School SWG is the perfect example of what I consider to be a great MMO, unfortunatly with the success of WoW, SOE decided they wanted to take a chance and make the game more WoW like in hope of stealing some of their market share. SOE failed and all SWG is now is a cheap WoW wannabe with a diminishing player base.

Re:a successful skill-based MMORPG... by AuMatar · 2006-08-29 07:10 · Score: 1, Interesting

Eve isn't really a skill based game. You don't need to pick between skills because you eventually get them all. You just pick which one to get first. A skill based game generally assumes that you need to pick some, but not all, skills to have at any given time.

--
I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?

Best argument for class based systems I heard... by aralin · 2006-08-29 07:25 · Score: 3, Interesting

... is that it is closest to how our brain works. We need names for concepts in order to grasp them, describe them, use them in the thought process and exchange information about them. How can you talk about a player in skill based system? Either you place him in some type of stereotype or he will feel like a heap of different grain seeds. You can sort of grasp most of them and hold them in your palm, but never get quite the same handfull and always some fall between your fingers. When the communication gets complicated, the social aspect of the game suffers. That leads to the fact that most of the skill based games are promoting individualism and solo play, while the class based systems heavily promote group play. But the most important distinction is that for the difficulty to grasp the concept of skill based game, it is hard to gain new players for your game.

Also, look at the real life. Do we say that some employee can do a bit of accounting, some direct marketing, little bit of sales and has extensive skills in drafting legal contracts? So how do you find a job for such person? How do you talk about him? How can you put him in a social context? Or do you just say he is a "Contract Lawyer" with some extra business skills? We simply tend to stereotype that is how our brain works.

--
If programs would be read like poetry, most programmers would be Vogons.

Re:Perhaps a moot point by Dewser · 2006-08-29 08:46 · Score: 2, Interesting

not to be a troll :D And not to pick on Digitrev but I've seen a number of comments come out using games that don't have a PvP enviroment. The argument comes out because who cares if you use a specific skill set/class build whatever to exploit the game in a PvE game? Developers will eventually find out about it and quench it. The real problem comes up when a player is consistently over-powered in a PvP environment by another player not because that player is good at what he does but because they found an exploit with a specific skill build. Developers can't find all the combinations of skills during the intitial run of the game, because they are still humans (I think) and they may not think like you or me. Someone out there may see something that the developer didn't and exploit it.

Also games that are not Online aren't really effected by this debate since the game is set to do one thing and once the game is beaten, thats it. How you get that far whether it be with cheats or pure skill is up to you. But when it affects other customers of the publisher then considerations need to be made to try an balance the playing field or else you start losing customers. Go and use WoW again, there are very few classes that can go toe-to-toe with a warlock other than other warlocks. Is this over-powered? No, since bother factions have warlocks. Just because most classes can't go 1vs1 with them, doesn't mean the game is imbalanced. Now if Shamans or Paladins had the same thing going on then the factions would be imbalanced, since they are (for now)strictly Faction based classes.

Ok I'm done, time to go home :D

--
Dewser - all around techy "In the immortal words of Socrates - 'I drank what?'"

Re:Further improvement to hybrids in GW by WhodoVoodoo · 2006-08-29 09:57 · Score: 2, Interesting

One of my biggest gripes (aside from the boring click-and-lean-back-and-occasionally-press-1-2-or- 3-every-30-seconds combat) with Anarchy Online was the implant and buff system.

There is something wrong when you might have to go to such lengths as paying a trader to skill wrangle you to cast some buff to install an implant. Laddered buffs (in ANY system, not just spells or items or whatnot) like that are terrible. I'm of the opinion that buff spells and item equiping should be limited to *BASE* stats only, with buffed stats taken into account of course for combat or other actions like success rates or crafting. But never should you be able to buff yourself in order to buff yourself in order equip a buffing item. That's just obnoxious (and expensive.) Though I suppose item (like armor or ring) buffs counting for anything is okay -- just really no spells.

My favorite part of AO was the universe: the scenery, the armor and the factions, it was all wonderful. The skill system was ruined by this crap.

Re:Further improvement to hybrids in GW by Shilkanni · 2006-08-29 12:25 · Score: 2, Interesting

I do like the Guild Wars approach of Primary/Secondary, and the ease with which you can reconfigure your character (changing Skills, Secondary Class, and Armour with relative ease) however, I have to call you out on this:

...everyone is perfectly happy to be healed by a Ritualist or an Elementarist/Monk or a Mesmer/Monk who are running healer builds despite not being primary monks.

This is not true, some people will discriminate against people who are not the build which they consider optimal for a particular 'role' (healing in this case). Also, many people will assume that a Monk/* is a healer without asking, or sometimes even when they say they are not... so it's not always the wonderful happy place you make it out to be. That said I've joined pickup groups with Elementalist/Monk healers before who did an excellent job and I have no hesitation partying up with anyone who communicates before we go on a quest/mission.

However, these problems are not unique to Guild Wars and I strongly suspect they are insurmountable. I can't think of any way for their to be 'variety' without some builds being better than others. As long as some builds are better than others, there will be some who don't want you in their party/guild unless you have the particular class/skill/equipment/implants/spells/build that they're looking for.

EVE Online uses skill system in the best way by pacinpm · 2006-08-29 20:17 · Score: 1, Interesting

EVE Online uses skill system. Each skill improves your abilities only a little (like %5 more damage to your guns). Skills have only 5 levels and each level take more time to learn. Learning is done in realtime wven if you are offline. Longest skills can take more than month to train from level 4 to level 5. If you never heard of EVE Online go check it. It's massive multiplayer Elite (old game for Sinclair Spectrum) and it uses SINGLE universe with currently upto 25-30 thousands people in it at the same time. It has working economy and player politics. Skill system and very brutal game (pvp is non-consensual and every loss really hurts) is what makes EVE unique.

23 of 224 comments (clear)