Quote from: gleichmanI think yours is needlessly harsh, as by it I ofter no nich protection at all in my games.

And yet I know I offer less than original D&D, and far more than HERO or Deadlands to name but a handful of examples.

If your version of it is the one commonly held, then I need a new term.

hmm, strange, I was thinking the same about your definition.

Bill

Quote from: NicephorusI find AD&D level niche protection limiting in trying to model character concepts.  But D20 amounts of niche protection don't bother me.

I always found "Wizards can't ever wear armour" to be much more a PITA than a benefit. Of course I found the addition of an exception for Elven Chain to be salt in the wounds, YMMV.

Quote from: NicephorusEven point buy systems often have some degree of niche protection.  If you have to spend lots of points (relative to allotment) or prerequisites to get X, then you can almost guarantee that no one will be good at X without being decent at Y and Z.  

That protection tends to break down easily. If you have campaign caps (HERO suggests these for OCV, DCV, damage class, etc), character advancement will reach these rather quickly and may even reach them with less than the starting character points. Thus additional points start pouring over into other niches.

Even without campaign caps, many games reach a point of dimishing returns that inspire nich creep. Yes, person A may have a edge- but it's not a significant edge and it costed him a lot to get there. Meanwhile it's very easy for other characters to buy into the niche to a significant degree.

This is not to say that one can't manage niche protection in HERO or the like. Just that it takes more GM effort and judgement to pull it off. And that often to do so for the long campaign- it means shutting off further XP.

Quote from: HinterWeltSo, I really truly abhor niche protection. It reeks of an artificial construct that will totally knock me right out of my SOD. To that end, I created my own system that, more or less, dumps that convention. It is one of those items that sometimes works for me and sometimes against me with new players. Essentially, you can have a fighter who is the best thief, a thief who is the best fighter or a sage that can do it all. Some classes have advantages in their field but nothing that bars others, just enables them to be the best X possible.

So:
1. What games have you experienced that have the strongest niche protection? Weakest or none?

2. How was it accomplished?

3. Do you like Niche protection? Hate it? Indifferent to it in favor of other elements?

Thanks,
Bill

I used to think like you, when I discovered RuneQuest (the first game I played was D&D, we had the Basic, Expert, Companion and Master) it was like a revelation to me, no classes, every character can do anything, cool! A long time later, I found myself having a lot of fun with an RPG with niche protection (namely Rolemaster), and I saw the point in it. During our last campaign our characters were a magician, an animist and a fighter. The magician was the artillery, the animist the healer and the fighter the tank, who protected the other characters. And it worked! So I changed my stance, now I like RPGs with niche protection, and the ones without it.

One of my favourites is WFRP 2E's progressive niche protection. Starting characters are on a roughly even keel, with similar stats and drawing their skills from the same broad pool. As they specialise into their advanced careers they start to look very different indeed.

Game with the most Niche Protection:

Any iteration of D&D. Although the First Edition had the best defined Niches.

Game with the least (while still actually having Niches):

Exalted. Anyone can take any charm for their Exalt type (Solar, Lunar...etc.) This lead to you Dawn Caste (the combat specialist) usually being not much more effective than say...your Night Caste (stealth and espionage) who wanted to be an assassin. The only edge being their Anima Banners.

Games with none:

Gurps, BESM, WoD (standard), AFMBE or pretty much any open ended point buy system. Players can create their own niches in any game, but mechanically these have absolutely none.

I think just about all RPGs have niche protection - just varying levels of it. Specifically, some RPGs are open about niche protection - they have classes or templates or kits or something which gives explicit names to the niches - and some are less so.

However, I've never encountered an RPG where a starting character can be competent in every skill area that the game is likely to regularly feature - no SR characters who can be the party fighter, magician, negotiator, sneak-ninja, and hacker, for example. In most games, if you try to make such a character, you'll end up with someone who manages to be mildly incompetent at everything, whereas if you go for a particular niche you can be competent at one - or even several - areas of expertise, while relying on other PCs for others.

And that's the key. In a game which truly has no niche protection, there's no reason to have more than one PC: if it's possible for one player character to cover all the bases, then what do the other players' characters do? And if it's not possible for one PC to cover all the bases, then by definition you have niche protection.

Quote from: WarthurAnd that's the key. In a game which truly has no niche protection, there's no reason to have more than one PC: if it's possible for one player character to cover all the bases, then what do the other players' characters do? And if it's not possible for one PC to cover all the bases, then by definition you have niche protection.

Two experts-of-all-trades > one expert-of-all-trades. Because there is more that can be done simultaneously.

Also, two characters can deal out and absorb more damage than one, and can split their attention between more opponents. Besides, as I suggested above, in some games it's not so much what you are as who you are.

Or what you stand/fight/bleed/die for.

Quote from: ClaudiusI used to think like you, when I discovered RuneQuest (the first game I played was D&D, we had the Basic, Expert, Companion and Master) it was like a revelation to me, no classes, every character can do anything, cool! A long time later, I found myself having a lot of fun with an RPG with niche protection (namely Rolemaster), and I saw the point in it. During our last campaign our characters were a magician, an animist and a fighter. The magician was the artillery, the animist the healer and the fighter the tank, who protected the other characters. And it worked! So I changed my stance, now I like RPGs with niche protection, and the ones without it.

Just to be clear, It is not that I believe niche protection "doesn't work" so much as it does not bring an element I enjoy.

Another poster said it better along the lines of role protection. I want to build a character that is needed because of what he does for the group, not some artificial profession designation. Anyone should be able to be trained to pick locks, swing a sword or repair a comm satellite. I dislike that you are restricted from learning those skills based on one profession decision.

Bill

Quote from: HinterWeltJust to be clear, It is not that I believe niche protection "doesn't work" so much as it does not bring an element I enjoy.

Another poster said it better along the lines of role protection. I want to build a character that is needed because of what he does for the group, not some artificial profession designation. Anyone should be able to be trained to pick locks, swing a sword or repair a comm satellite. I dislike that you are restricted from learning those skills based on one profession decision.

Bill

As usual, I was going to post basically the same thing! What I dislike is the artificial enforcement of niches. It feels cheap and awkward. Niches should arise out of the situation and the characters naturally because of what the group chooses to do.

-clash

Quote from: WarthurAnd that's the key. In a game which truly has no niche protection, there's no reason to have more than one PC: if it's possible for one player character to cover all the bases, then what do the other players' characters do? And if it's not possible for one PC to cover all the bases, then by definition you have niche protection.

Ah, grasshopper, you see, there are many reasons for multiple characters beyond mechanics. The least of which would be having number on your side. The strongest, imo, would be story. However, if you are a fan of niche protection, you likely will be looking to mechanics for all solutions and answers. Niche protection, imo, is about forcing a split of party skills in a manner to simulate fantasy genre stories. The classic Barbarian+Wizard+thief=Party.

Again, nothing "wrong" with niche protection, just not my preference.

Bill

Quote from: flyingmiceAs usual, I was going to post basically the same thing! What I dislike is the artificial enforcement of niches. It feels cheap and awkward. Niches should arise out of the situation and the characters naturally because of what the group chooses to do.

-clash

Yes....Clash for the win!

Bill

Quote from: blakkieTwo experts-of-all-trades > one expert-of-all-trades. Because there is more that can be done simultaneously.

True, but if all PC#2 provides at the end of the day is an extra pair of hands there's not much differentiating them from PC#1. If two players could swap their characters for a session and have pretty much the same experience in a game, something's wrong in my book.