Class Based vs Classless Systems

Be sure to read and follow the guidelines for our forums.

Jan 23, 2020 4:15 am
What are your thoughts on ttrpg systems that use classes (D&D, Pathfinder, BFRPG, etc) vs those that offer a classless approach (Savage Worlds, GURPS, etc)?

As of right now I feel that D&D and those class based systems work best for fantasy... I can’t quite pinpoint why, I just feel they do and other classless systems, like Savage Worlds work better for Pulpy adventure, horror, maybe sci-fi and such. To me, if it is a game rooted a bit more in the real world...often human only...then those classless systems work pretty awesome. But, if we are in Forgotten Realms the prior fits better... just my $0.02. What about you?
Jan 23, 2020 4:17 am
Not sure why this posted twice. Sorry.
Jan 23, 2020 4:59 am
I see them both as the same thing, with the difference being that Classes have all of their "options" pre-determined. If you break apart all of the D&D classes, put them up as options that characters can take (in the vein of feats), then you essentially end up with a fully-customizable, classless D&D system.

A class system restricts and pigeon-holes the player into a specific role and play-style - some players like that, others don't. I don't see it as inherently good or bad.

A player who has no real idea of how to mechanically build a particular character concept will like a class system because the game makes those choices for them. On the other hand, a player with a very concrete idea of their character concept might feel restricted by a class system because the system might be prescribing options that don't fit their idea.
Jan 23, 2020 3:40 pm
They both have their pros and cons. I see class systems as being more newbie-friendly as a new player might feel overwhelmed by all the options of a classless system. On the other hand, a classless system allows you to make your character they way you want it to be, however, character creation can take longer because of all those options.
Jan 23, 2020 3:59 pm
GURPS offers a great compromise. It is a classless system but offers templates (e.g. archer, scout, necromancer).

I prefer classless but like them both. I'm used to classes and they speed up character creation.
Jan 23, 2020 4:01 pm
rpgventurer says:
GURPS offers a great compromise. It is a classless system but offers templates (e.g. archer, scout, necromancer).

I prefer classless but like them both. I'm used to classes and they speed up character creation.
Indeed. Savage Worlds does this as well. I know with their various settings they offer character "archetypes" or whatever is appropriate for that specific setting.
Jan 23, 2020 4:27 pm
I often choke at the limitations of class based systems. They make you go through absurd hoops to do something seemingly innocuous. "A wizard with a spear? Rubbish!"

That being said, I'm not sure how much like typical FANTASY Savage Worlds feels in play, as I've mostly played other settings with SW.
Jan 23, 2020 5:42 pm
True... I haven't really done SW with a Fantasy setting yet either... Mostly western, pulpy type stuff. Hmmm....
Jan 23, 2020 11:48 pm
rpgventurer says:
GURPS offers a great compromise. It is a classless system but offers templates (e.g. archer, scout, necromancer).

I prefer classless but like them both. I'm used to classes and they speed up character creation.
This has been a rather new development though. I happened in the last few years of 3rd edition revised. Before that, you were pretty much on your own...
Jan 24, 2020 12:04 am
I didn't know that. I was first introduced to GURPS a few years ago with a 3rd edition. I did purchase the two core books for 4th last year though. Neat stuff, but I have yet to run/play it.
Jan 28, 2020 12:19 am
I play hybrid -- class systems with tweaks to make them more player friendly if that is what the player wants -- in the end all you are trying to do is make each character is balanced against the rest in order not to get lopsided situations as those tend to hurt the gaming experience

Back in 2e I was able to create more generic classes -- and then that got even easier with 3.5e -- I had 9 basic classes representing no-magic, arcane-magic and divine-magic it played very nicely and folks could pretty much play it as they went to create their idea of the character they wanted to play
Jan 28, 2020 12:46 am
DeJoker says:
I play hybrid -- class systems with tweaks to make them more player friendly if that is what the player wants -- in the end all you are trying to do is make each character is balanced against the rest in order not to get lopsided situations as those tend to hurt the gaming experience

Back in 2e I was able to create more generic classes -- and then that got even easier with 3.5e -- I had 9 basic classes representing no-magic, arcane-magic and divine-magic it played very nicely and folks could pretty much play it as they went to create their idea of the character they wanted to play
Very cool. What were your 9 base classes? Just curious.
Jan 28, 2020 4:16 pm
Mundane -- Skills Mostly (Rogue), 50/50 Mix, Combat Mostly(Fighter)
Arcane -- Skills Mostly(Magician), 50/50 Mix, Magic Mostly(Wizard)
Divine -- Skills-Combat Mostly, 50/50 Mix(Cleric), Divine Mostly(Wizard version of a Cleric)

The 3 Major Class Types were based on whether you learned magic or not and what kind of magic -- as the time to learn the usage of that was outlined as being prohibitive to learn after character creation

Then the 3 Class Types were basically broken down into what the character focused on the most Mundane skills/combat -- others skills-combat/magic --- the divine depending on ones patron tended to focus on combat over skills but again some patrons were not much about combat so that could vary some

Also the 2 types of magic used the same "spell lists" (as they do in 5e) but Arcane magic was dynamic while Divine magic was maximized static (but then Divine magic was also restricted to the spells that a particular patron approved of -- and they were prayers that were learned and never forgotten but you could cast any prayer you had learned and your learning scaled with your category with so many prayers per level more if you were focused on magic and less if you were not)

Like I said it worked really well and no one ever need to multi-classed because you could choose whatever feats you felt fit your character concept -- you wanted to play a typical Rogue -- I had a template for that -- which is to say if you wanted to pre-fix your character's growth path you got a small bonus for that but you could be fully dynamic as well -- the bonus was for every 2 pre-fixed feats you gained an extra pre-fixed one --- this basically allowed the creation of the various standard classes as well as going with whatever the player wanted to create

And the most important element was everything was balanced -- not particular class progression was over powered and no felt that they were restricted due to pre-definition as that would be their choice
Last edited January 28, 2020 4:20 pm
Feb 4, 2020 12:33 pm
Classes probably seem work in fantasy because they represent archetypes which are particularly strong in fantasy settings, however I think even for "real life" types settings, there are still archetypes and for lack of a better word classes.

For instance, I work in IT, most of the people I know work in IT, all tend to have similar skill sets, similar interests, and similar strengths...
The guys who work upstairs on spreadsheets, same hair, all watch sportball, all listen to the same music, use the same sort of language, it's the same thing.

It doesn't take a lot to make D&D classless, and you can also build archetypes into toolbox esq games like savage worlds, you create a set of requirements for an archetype and as long as you satisfy those requirments you maybe get some sort of extra bonus and maybe some extra restriction.

You do not have permission to post in this thread.