One of the more annoying parts of elf-games in my opinion is that they tend to be fairly limited in their class options. After reading the Spheres of X books I can't imagine playing vanilla elf-games.

There are so many topics I could discuss: the Christmas tree effect, linear warriors quadratic wizards, weaboo fighting magic, yadda yadda. But I'll limit myself.

There are about four aspects of class design that I think could be used to inform customization options for games in the future: roles, spheres, traditions and power sources. I've synthesized these concepts from a variety of sources like D&D, PF, and the Spheres of X books (mostly the latter).

A role is the basic role that a character serves in a party. In early editions this was something like fighting-man, thief, magic-user and priest. In 4e it was called striker, defender, leader and controller. In Spheres of X these are called spherecasters and practioners classes.

A sphere is the capabilities that a character specializes in. In other words this is your spell list/school, martial maneuver list, class feature list, talent trees, etc. For example: healing, conjuring, fencing, beastmastery, etc. (The Spheres of X mechanics divide spheres into magic and martial. In contrast to traditional magic-user classes, spherecasters have to specialize in order to develop competence. Martial spheres include physics-defying effects, but these are segregated with a "legendary" tag in case the DM wants to arbitrarily gimp them compared to magic-users.)

A tradition is a layer of customization that gives the character additional flavor. For example: traditional classes/kits/archetypes/etc like wizard, barbarian, cavalier, etc would be examples of traditions. Traditions may be placed under the umbrella of power sources (see below).

A power source (or maybe "essence") is more fluff than crunch, but essentially explains where a character's capabilities come from. For example: martial arts, arcane magic, divine magic, psionics, primal spirits, phantasmal/shadow magic, etc. While the other aspects are more or less mandatory, this one is optional and arbitrarily defined.

I welcome any questions, criticism or advice.

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;1087825One of the more annoying parts of elf-games in my opinion is that they tend to be fairly limited in their class options. After reading the Spheres of X books I can't imagine playing vanilla elf-games.
...

I'll give my opinion, which is worth exactly what you are paying for it...

When you start to get into Multi-classing or adding lots of layers onto a Class/Level based system, like role, traditions etc..

Why are you playing a game with a strict class system?

Play a different fantasy RPG.

Lots of Skill based systems out there that are not pure point buy.

Sounds more like it reflects one author's view of a fantasy setting then something of general utility.

My view is that a class is no different than a Hero System package, or a GURPS Template. A collection of ability along with a structure of advancement that reflect how something works within a setting. The main difference between a class versus package and template is that the latter two are built from a toolkit of mechanics while a class is written for the most part as a standalone element.

The criteria for how good a class is how well does it reflect an element of a setting or genre.  It benefit is clarity. "Oh this what a Thothian Mage is and what they learn over time." The downside that hybrids are more difficult to come with it than it with packages and templates. It take more design work to allow somebody to make a character that was a Thothian mage for a few years but since became a warrior mercenary.

For example these are some of the classes I came with for my Majestic Wilderlands

Berserkers
Berserkers are infused with the divine power of the god Thor and sent against the monsters inhabiting the world.

Fighter
Fighters are trained in battle and the use of armor and weapons.

Knight
Armored warriors trained in fighting from horseback.

Soldier
Soldiers excels at teamwork in battle.

Paladin of Mitra
Paladins are called by the Goddess of Honor and Justice to be her divine champion

Magic User
The mysterious lone practitioner of arcane powers and spells.

Mages of the Order of Thoth
Mages are practitioners of arcane spells and have a singular advantage over the other orders of magic, the Shield of Magic. The Order of Thoth organize themselves into conclaves for mutual support and protection.

Wizards of the Order of Trehaen
Wizards have the ability to cast arcane spells without memorization. This results from a deep understanding of magic as taught by the Elves. The prices is that the number of spells at their disposal is limited compared to the other Orders.

Rune-casters of the Order of Thor
Rune-casters can only cast spells through long rituals or runes created by a process similar to creating scrolls. This form of magic originated among the Dwarves who pioneered their own form of magic separate from the Elves.

Burglar
Burglars are trained in abilities used by secret societies, thieves' guild, and gangs. They learn those abilities at the expense of combat expertise.

Thug
Thugs are the rank and file of secret societies, thieves' guild, and gangs. Thugs are chosen mainly for their strength.

Mountebank
Mountebanks are trained in a combination of magic and various skills. Most Mountebanks specialize in anti-divination spells, illusions, and other forms of magic to allow Burglars and Thugs to operate without fear of detection. A common slang term for them is Fogger.

Merchant Adventurer
Merchant Adventurers deal with illegal or dangerous trade. They are somewhat adept at fighting and know several skills useful to commerce. Merchant Adventurers are found as smugglers, black marketers, caravan masters, pirate lords, treasure hunters, and ship captains. They often organize expeditions into unknown lands.
 
Clerics
Clerics represents the militant arm of the deity's religion.

Dannu
Dannu is the goddess of mercy, love, home, and fields. Dannu is worshipped by agricultural societies throughout the world. The church of Dannu works to bring aid and relief to farmers and the poor. The church of Dannu often co-exists alongside several churches including those of Veritas, Thor, and Silvanus.

Mitra
Mitra is the goddess of justice, and honor. Mitra defends the helpless, and protects the weak form those who prey on them. There is great enmity between the church of Mitra and the church of Set.

Nephthys
She is the goddess of fate, wealth and pleasure. Her religion originated in the desert and spread through the trade routes to other regions. Now she is widely worshipped by merchants and others involved in trade and commerce. The hedonistic element of her ceremonies helps with her popularity.

Silvanus
Silvanus is the good of dreams, magic, and the forest, revered by the Elves. His worship involves mysticism, complex meditation, and magic. Silvanus' Clerics are known as Rangers in Human cultures.

Thor
Thor is a battle god of lightning and storms. He is popular in the hearts of many for his heroic deeds in saving worshippers from the depredations of monsters and giants. He rewards any follower who is willing to undertake similar quests. His shrines and temples are used as bases in quests against the monsters of the wild.

Thoth
Thoth is the god of knowledge. He is charged by Veritas with the keeping of the Covenant between the Gods and the recording of all that transpires in the world. His religion is mainly organized into monasteries which engage in the collection of lore. Often these monasteries are bases for expeditions to recover lost artifacts or explore an unknown region.

Veritas
Veritas is the god of creation, craftsmen, and truth. He is revered by the Dwarves. He is the eldest of the god and the first to arrive after the creation of the world. He is known as the High Lord among the elves. In lands influenced by Elven culture he forms a trinity with Dannu, and Silvanus.

Quote from: estar;1087834Sounds more like it reflects one author's view of a fantasy setting then something of general utility.

My view is that a class is no different than a Hero System package, or a GURPS Template. A collection of ability along with a structure of advancement that reflect how something works within a setting. The main difference between a class versus package and template is that the latter two are built from a toolkit of mechanics while a class is written for the most part as a standalone element.
.

While I think that non class based systems that do use a Package/Template/archetype system at PC creation to be superior to pure point buy.

I view the Package/Template as I have seen them implemented to be a bit different beast than the d20 Class/Level based system.


Packages/Templates, are a PC starting point at character generation. Yes those initial beginning point allocations on your Package/Template influence character advancement, but you are not explicitly tied to them once actual play starts.

The d20 Class/Level based systems  - advancement is tied to your Class for the entire game.

Depending on your preferences the standard Class/Level dynamic is either a feature or a bug.

I think that ONCE you start down the multi-class/customizing classes rabbit hole, it is a sign that the restrictions brought on by class/level based systems are not for you.

Much easier to go to a different system, i.e. one where you pick a than to write lengthy house-rules for what you are currently using.

I think the class-as-template metaphor is a reasonably good one. While systems that use templates ostensibly are more open with regard to development, my experience is that people will min-max the crap out of that to the point where they might as well be playing a class and level game anyway.

Quote from: Jaeger;1087839Depending on your preferences the standard Class/Level dynamic is either a feature or a bug.

I argue that is solely about preference. My response is about how Class & level can work just as well a GURPS style toolkit RPG in representing a setting or genre.

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;1087825One of the more annoying parts of elf-games in my opinion is that they tend to be fairly limited in their class options. After reading the Spheres of X books I can't imagine playing vanilla elf-games.

There are so many topics I could discuss: the Christmas tree effect, linear warriors quadratic wizards, weaboo fighting magic, yadda yadda. But I'll limit myself.

There are about four aspects of class design that I think could be used to inform customization options for games in the future: roles, spheres, traditions and power sources. I've synthesized these concepts from a variety of sources like D&D, PF, and the Spheres of X books (mostly the latter).

A role is the basic role that a character serves in a party. In early editions this was something like fighting-man, thief, magic-user and priest. In 4e it was called striker, defender, leader and controller. In Spheres of X these are called spherecasters and practioners classes.

A sphere is the capabilities that a character specializes in. In other words this is your spell list/school, martial maneuver list, class feature list, talent trees, etc. For example: healing, conjuring, fencing, beastmastery, etc. (The Spheres of X mechanics divide spheres into magic and martial. In contrast to traditional magic-user classes, spherecasters have to specialize in order to develop competence. Martial spheres include physics-defying effects, but these are segregated with a "legendary" tag in case the DM wants to arbitrarily gimp them compared to magic-users.)

A tradition is a layer of customization that gives the character additional flavor. For example: traditional classes/kits/archetypes/etc like wizard, barbarian, cavalier, etc would be examples of traditions. Traditions may be placed under the umbrella of power sources (see below).

A power source (or maybe "essence") is more fluff than crunch, but essentially explains where a character's capabilities come from. For example: martial arts, arcane magic, divine magic, psionics, primal spirits, phantasmal/shadow magic, etc. While the other aspects are more or less mandatory, this one is optional and arbitrarily defined.

I welcome any questions, criticism or advice.

Sounds like you should be using this Spheres of Power system for your RPGs.

Quote from: SavageSchemer;1087856I think the class-as-template metaphor is a reasonably good one. While systems that use templates ostensibly are more open with regard to development, my experience is that people will min-max the crap out of that to the point where they might as well be playing a class and level game anyway.

So what if they min-max. As long everything make sense in terms of the setting and the referee is willing to follow up on the social and metaphysical complications that are built in, then it just how works.

For example the Elves are a superior choice in terms of mechanics in my Majestic Wilderlands supplements. When asked why doesn't everybody play an elf, my reply is "Well, if they do I guess the campaign is about a group of Elves".

The reason I don't have players playing elves in campaign after campaign is because I fleshed out the rest of the setting to the point where are a number of equally interesting possibilities for adventure even though the character mechanics are not as optimal.

I wasn't implying that min-maxing is necessarily a bad thing, only that doing so tends to lead to a certain consistency in character design choices that don't differ meaningfully from what a class would look like in a class and level system.

Quote from: SavageSchemer;1087865I wasn't implying that min-maxing is necessarily a bad thing, only that doing so tends to lead to a certain consistency in character design choices that don't differ meaningfully from what a class would look like in a class and level system.

I'll +1 this.

In a reasonably high optimization group, point-buy systems often have fewer real options in practice than class systems.

In the same way that even semi-competitive CCG players tend to have one of only a few viable decks with (maybe) minor variations despite having nearly infinite theoretical decks. Most are just terrible. The only reason that MtG has as many viable decks as it does is the five different colors - which are really just the CCG version of classes.

Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;1087825One of the more annoying parts of elf-games in my opinion is that they tend to be fairly limited in their class options. After reading the Spheres of X books I can't imagine playing vanilla elf-games.

That's why people play GURPS...so everyone can be a Fighter Mage!

The concept of classes is a tight archetype. It's a shorthand for "WTF does your PC do in this party?"

There are plenty of good systems with open character development. True20 did a good job. GURPS and Fantasy Hero have their audiences.

Warrior, Rogue and Mage is a heavily supported FREE RPG that allows quick and superflexible chargen.
http://www.stargazergames.eu/games/warrior-rogue-mage/

If you prefer more open chargen with classes in OSR-ish framework, I suggest the also FRE RPG Exemplars & Eidolons.
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/144651/Exemplars--Eidolons

Quote from: SavageSchemer;1087865I wasn't implying that min-maxing is necessarily a bad thing, only that doing so tends to lead to a certain consistency in character design choices that don't differ meaningfully from what a class would look like in a class and level system.

Interestingly I said the nearly the same thing in a gaming conversation the other day. I was talking to A about R and his incessant habit of min maxing, D&D 5e kitchen sink in this case. My comment was, "You know it gets old, granted he comes up with interesting combat tactics but his characters are all variations of the same note. It like hearing somebody playing jingle bells with one finger over and over again. A different key, but the same plink, plink,plink, plinking all the damn time."

Quote from: Jaeger;1087829I'll give my opinion, which is worth exactly what you are paying for it...

When you start to get into Multi-classing or adding lots of layers onto a Class/Level based system, like role, traditions etc..

Why are you playing a game with a strict class system?

Play a different fantasy RPG.

Lots of Skill based systems out there that are not pure point buy.

Thank you for your concern. I have considered skill-based and point buy systems. In fact, I think using point buy to generate the classes is probably the best way to adjudicate.

For the purpose of this discussion, I decided to focus on class-based systems. Customization isn't the only reason, I think. All long-running class-based systems eventually suffer from class bloat, and explicit design axes like I suggested would go a long way to preventing that. Or at least make it more manageable.

As always, Your mileage may vary.

You may be able to get some useful ideas from ACKS (the Adventurer, Conqueror, King System) and, specifically, the ACKS Player's Companion, which includes a system for designing custom classes for a B/X-D&D-style game.  The resulting classes, in general, seem reasonably balanced and the class design rules were used to create all of the "official" classes in published products.

However, I doubt you'd want to use the ACKS rules directly, as they're based in the B/X D&D mindset rather than the 4e/5e D&D mindset, which means no lists of quasi-magical abilities for fighter types, so I suspect you would view non-caster classes as "arbitrarily gimp[ed] compared to magic-users" by default.  (Never mind that it's actually designed to make the various types balanced relative to each other without depending on every class having "no, really, it's not a spell" spell lists.)

Quote from: Jaeger;1087829When you start to get into Multi-classing or adding lots of layers onto a Class/Level based system, like role, traditions etc..

Why are you playing a game with a strict class system?

I tend to agree, but, then, I'm not a fan of class-and-level systems in the first place.  There is a difference, though, between something like the ACKS custom class rules and a GURPS-style point-buy system, in that the ACKS rules front-load all of the customization and then you just follow that path from level 1 to level 14, while GURPS allows you to change direction at any point.  (IMO, this is a weakness of strict class-and-level systems, but YMMV and all that.)

Quote from: estar;1087834It benefit is clarity. "Oh this what a Thothian Mage is and what they learn over time."

Of course, that's a purely subjective benefit.  Personally, I consider it a huge drawback when you can say "this character is a 5th level Thothian Mage" and that's sufficient to tell me everything there is to know about the character in terms of game mechanics.  Various things have been tried over the years to provide more mechanical variety between characters of the same class and level (multiple versions of multiclassing, feats, proficiencies, skill systems...) but they generally strike me as ineffective, over-complicated, or both in comparison to using a non-class-based system from the start.

(For the record, the one class-and-level system I've seen which didn't strike me as having this "problem" is RoleMaster, but that's basically a skill-based system for all practical purposes.  Your class functions primarily to determine which skills you can improve at higher or lower development point costs and level is just a mechanism to regulate how often you get a pile of development points to spend.)

I think classes have to mean something simple and archetypal and setting oriented.

I'm not sure having classes just represent role within the part or combat role really works.  And mix and matching these things feels just two complicated.

3.0 D&D really bears the legacy of being written at a time when class level systems were generally perceived as backward and it took a lot from point buy design.  As a result some of its class design lacks a good clear sense of identity (Fighters and Rogues especially and the way multi-classing works) and this still haunts 5E to some extent.

I think it's interesting that we see what are basically class systems without levels, but not the opposite, levels without classes.  I think this is probably because a clear sense of classes helps make a game more immediately marketable.  But I think it's a shame because I think a lot of the benefits of levels, such as in particular being able tier character abilities, guard against the tendency toward over-extreme specialisation and incommensurate niches, and have some clear sense of character power and ability to handle threats over the long run, would be really beneficial even for systems that don't wont to encode classes in their systems.