Can you imagine a game where every PC and NPC uses the same simplistic and restrictive playbook - and they also basically know a very similar set of spells? That's Harry Potter RPG using most class-based mechanics.
Dm: Alright, so, let's see your character. Orphan, living with your aunt and uncle and cousin, want to do magic. You took a lot of sport ranks? Player: Yeah, I was hoping to be like a jock type? But bullied because of a grand destiny. Dm: Yeah, I see that... hmmm.... tell you what. I'll get back with the other players, see if I can't cobble together some homebrew from GURPS, and maybe we can do a school or something. Player: Cool. And grand destiny? Dm: BBEG tried to kill you as a baby, but bullshit prevented him and now all of their minions are trying to come after you in the future? Player: Perfect.
Yeah. I had a buddy in college who wanted to introduce his homebrew AD&D race. Imagine Jurassic Park's velociraptor as a fully intelligent and speaking race. Yeahhhh... they were better than Humans or Elves in practically every way, by a good margin.
Yes, I have some things I like to do, like Drow Hexblade Urchin, but I don't do homebrew (except, perhaps, one non-combat feat on starting character, like Drow High Magic). Feats are such an interesting part of the game, but sacrificing an ASI to get a feat is sometimes a bad choice (especially on something like a Monk).
@@douglasdea637 I make a lot of homebrew. I have two very important questions I always ask myself before I decide my homebrew is solid and ready. Or more realistically, when one of my players wants to play something that isn't standard and a homebrew needs to be made for it. I outright ban all "I found this homebrew" because all of them don't follow these two rules. Rule 1: When you are finished with the homebrew, ask yourself this question. "Is there a scenario where this isn't the best option to pick? Will there be any scenarios where the standard options are the better choice?" If the answer is "No", sorry, homebrew failed, start over. If the answer is "YES", then so far so good, however be careful because you might have made it too weak of an option. Rule 2: When you are finished with the homebrew, ask yourself this question. "Is there a scenario where you would actually pick this option? Will there be any scenarios where this option is a better choice over the standard options?" If the answer is "No", sorry, homebrew failed, start over. If the answer is "YES", then so far so good, however be careful because you might have made it too OP. When you answer "NO" to both questions, you are at least on the right path which is the most important part. After that, just make sure you follow the patterns. The reason I make the homebrew instead of letting my players find them online is because most of the time when I'm brought online homebrew, the answer to question 1 is "NO" and on the off chance the answer is actually a "YES", then during those rare moments, I usually find the answer to the second question is a "NO".
I loved that. These videos are just getting better and better. Good to see the evolution. I don’t even want to make any suggestions for improvement because I don’t want anything to come across as a detractive statement. I only have good things to say here! ^__^
I played in a skill based game once where it was opposing rolls to determine everything. I made a doctor because I figured no one would be playing anything to heal anyone. Classic.... Well first thing the party does upon the first fight is scatter, no one wanted to fight because they were scared of the system. I get captured and thrown in jail. Later when the guards came one of them was holding his gun lazily and I said eh why not there are 4 other people in the cell and only 2 guards I'll make a grab for his gun and maybe I can get out with the chaos. Rolled and I got the gun. I'm sitting there going "That wasn't supposed to work... I'm not good at this." Guard rolls and takes his gun back now holding it on me. I roll again and again get the gun. We do this back and forth about 3 times more before I use an extra action to shoot him. Chaos happens and I'm once again captured. Later I'm being lead to a ship to take me to a prison off planet. None of the party is around but I again have NPC's that are criminals. So I try again, I mean the skill improved. Yep I get the gun and start blasting. Make it to the ship. Take out a couple guards look around manage to pilot the ship up and almost off planet. There's of course a lot of ships waiting and I get captured again. The rest of the party is captured and we are all on the same transport ship. Fight happens and we are seeming victorious. Until the big boss with a HUGE minigun comes out. He's close to me and just for laughs I say. "I'll take his gun." I rolled max and the enemy rolled minimum. So now I'm standing there with a mini gun going "How does this keep happening!" The game ended with no one knowing I made a doctor. I was just the guy who stole guns from guards
Food for thought and not a criticism of this great video: I actually think it's more of a *trichotomy* instead of a *dichotomy*. What I mean by that is that instead of an axis of "Skill vs Class", there is another, third, factor: Levels. Normally we lump class and levels together conceptually due to D&D, but there are so many interactions in various games between these separate factors that it _isn't_ always a given that they are related. A class-based game with extensive skills may not emphasize (or even have) levels. The example of Cyberpunk in the video at 17:43 isn't an "exception" to this proposed trichotomy, it's an _example_ of it as there are classes and skills in Cyberpunk, but no levels. Likewise, a game with levels may not have a meaningful definition of "class". After all, if there is only one very flexible class (such as in Knave, which has levels and no real skills, just abilities/characteristics), then it's not a class so much as merely how all PCs work. I know this video is an introduction to Skill-Based RPGs and a comparison/contrast of them to things like D&D, and is not attempting to provide an exhaustive overview of possible RPG categories. It does that well! Still, I think the concept of a trichotomy of Skills vs Classes vs Levels is helpful when comparing and describing RPGs. If nothing else, it's a diverting thought exercise to use it to compare games like Tunnels & Trolls, Vampire, Rolemaster, Traveller (but not TNE), Kult (various editions), WHFRP, HeroWars/HeroQuest, etc.
In this sense it still seems like his argument is a dichotomy but rather than being about classes vs skills it's levels vs skills. Since classes are mostly unrelated, like how despite being a skill point system cyberpunk 2020 still has job specific abilities.
Committing necromancy. An example of the third in the trichotomy can be found in the videogame Final Fantasy X-2. Yeah you level up your trio (YRP) for base stats but the currently used dress sphere (class) gives a multiplier to the stats. They have to use the class to learn acquire beyond starter abilities. second example below . While Final Fantasy X a sphere grid a limited skill based but does classes by having sections of the sphere grid be dedicated to a single role each. Fast Striking Support, heal mage, rogue, dps mage, accurate ailments, heavy hitting debuffer and in the center of the grid is jack of all trades. That section has the shortest path to all roles except Heavy Hitter. Even at max power each character does have a unique overdrive, Yuna being extra special for being the party's summoner.
Levels are just a determining factor to create a balanced system of two opposing forces, nothing more. You can call them what you want: Power Level, Difficulty Class, etc, but it all boils down to balance.
Powers & Perils is a good example of a game that doesn't have classes, but does have levels. You basically have a magic Expertise Level (EL) or Combat EL. Used to love playing that game. These days I play GURPS. Levels and classes seem too restrictive.
One interesting characteristic of some skills-based games--especially the ones that use experience points--is that they allow players to choose the "steady progression" of character development (i.e., pretty much spending their experience points whenever they're earned) or save up their points for more dramatic upgrades. It's fun when the party has both types of players in it.
Traveller is an excellent example of "unexpected character evolutions" even during character creation xD Skill based tabletop RPGs always seemed dauntingly complex to me, I'm super glad I stumbled onto your channel and made a convincing argument to give them a chance. My new favorite RPG is now Pulp Cthulhu, for playing and running :)
Call of Cthulhu is my choice for 1-shots or mini-campaigns (like 2 adventures), but Pulp Cthulhu is my choice if we want to keep a campaign going for longer. Pulp is a teeny bit more complex due to Pulp Talents and Luck Spends, but still simple enough I can get a new player introduced to it and confidently playing in no time at all.
@@SSkorkowsky I just love how flexible CoC 7e is as a whole, my first proper game I ran was for regular CoC based within the Alien universe, used CoC 7e and the Icarus setting, I'm still running it after two years now with the same group.
With Traveller, you kinda have to be at peace with not getting exactly what you want. It works fine for a campaign about randoms who just got a ship and are trying to get by, but in other campaigns, such as, say, officers on a military vessel, there are other character generation methods that will give more suitable characters than trying to random roll. In a pinch, the GM can help put a thumb on the scales to make traditional chargen work for less traditional traveller games.
The more I’ve played and designed my own games the more I’ve come to prefer skill based games. My players have come to appreciate the ability to design their characters the way they want rather than being shoehorned into a set class.
Unexpected developments in characters all so fun, and we've had some in FFG's Star Wars, as my medic turned out to be the only one with social skills (except the spy, but coercion is not always a good option) so I had to use those skills and they became my main thing. It helped me train my social skills in the table also, learning how to take space, finding a way to make myself heard when I'm not as loud as the others, and just being an actual part of a group. When it became clear my medic was the one who knew about politics, it first gave me faith that others will hear me out in those areas and stop to ask my opinion. As time passed, I learned to actually take space in the conversations and voice my opinions because I trusted them, and I'm a bit more social nowadays.
In my experience, I've been among 2 kinds of ttrpg gamers (speaking broadly). The first kind begins with level-based games, usually d&d, and then has a growing desire for more skill-based games over time. The second kind begins the same way, but chooses to continue with level-based games simply because they just don't want to go through learning a different system.
meh, it is down to the GM. a GM can always hot fix the insane home brews, or eject the character as it becomes a problem. the core problem is the GM (and often players) are not comfortable changing the rules, even in home brews.
I'm not a big fan of homebrew, unless it's "brewed" at the table. But there are exceptions. And I think for me it's because most homebrew I've seen doesn't care to really jibe with the system it's brewed for, might misinterpret (or disregard) some fundamental elements of the game or exists because of someone misunderstanding the core game (it fixes a problem that doesn't really exist). But yeah, there are some homebrew things that are made with sincerity and skill and care. Skill that sometimes rivals the official creators. Also, sometimes a homebrew can just be boiled down to changing some flavor text to achieve the same desired effect.
Id prefer homebrew over reflavoring since the latter doesnt always do the concept justice and im aware that some designers try to balance their creations to make the official stuff viable.
@@vidard9863 I’ve found that the player who sends me his insane homebrew doesn’t understand game balance, and that trying to fix it is a pain in the ass as he will try to fight it at every point while only *just slightly* making it less broken. I have a lot of homebrew in my own game, and I know how it’s going to affect it. He doesn’t.
I think class based games are great for the same reason theme based campaigns can be great. Narrowing the field of possibilities inspire creativity and gives players a general purpose or perspective on the game, a common direction. The more flexibility you have, the less identity you get. The characters may not feel apart from the countless NPCs they interact with, or they may feel lost, unsure of what they can accomplish. It is the difference between Prose and Verse. One makes its own beauty in whatever way it wants, the other follows a code that instill the poem an innate beauty and may force one to be creative in unexpected way to express their personality.
You raise an important point in your distinction between Level- and Skill-Based RPGs: the limitations a Level-Based system holds over the GM, and not just players, especially in designing adventures. The massive hit point pools of high-level characters mean that even threats like gravity become nerfed, as in the oft-quoted example of falling off a cliff and being able to shrug the damage, or (in games with firearms) safely ignoring having a gun pointed at you. I think BRP coined the term 'satisfyingly fragile' characters to illustrate this difference.
Yep. I got annoyed when a high level character would see a 60 foot drop and figure "I can survive that, just give me a couple heals after." Ever stand on the roof of a 6 story building? I have, it's high up! Most people will die from that fall.
While that's true and a reasonable objection, speaking as a GM, the flip side of that is that you really have to avoid realistic threats if your player characters are realistically fragile. It is much harder to plan threats and plan epic and visually exciting threats in a system like BRP where one bad role gets a player character squished. As such, I find that I GM more with my kid gloves on when I'm GMing in system that is skill based, and I can really afford to take them off only if it's the horror genre and the players are good with high body counts and sudden TPKs. When in a skill-based game, I rarely push my player's backs to the wall as much as I do in a class-based game because it's so hard to know where that line is and so much is just random and unpredictable. So while you can do stories that are awesome in both systems, the sort of stories that you do are different.
Its easy to fix some of the high hit point problems by making some damage % based. Makes perfect sense for something like falling. You can even increase the % past 100 which also makes sense. A terminal velocity fall say 1500 feet is going to do a massive overkill amount of damage that no save is going to fix. If they take to much fall damage in a go they should also take wounds. Broken legs will change their minds about fall damage very quickly. Bigger issues tend to be spells like featherfall or levitation.
One thing that I will have to say regarding Skill-Based games is that characters will still fulfill a role or archetype just like Class-Based games do. You’re going to lean in one direction either way, it’s just that Skill-Based games give you a lot more wiggle room.
indeed that how my homebrew game is i help the party make their characters so they know how the game works and with roles in mind for each car tho their is some overlap.
Yea but it also doesn't limit the character to that archetype. That's what I like the most. The characters (can) actually feel like real people, not copy&paste cutouts with one or two meaningful differences between each other.
@@theatheistbear3117 Sure and depending on the system you can make very interesting combinations for sure. I am mostly speaking in terms of the extreme. DnD 5e has almost no ability to make you character anything but the archetype itself with some RP quirks. 3.5 is a much different beast already.
I have to say that both systems have pros and cons. It largely depends on the kind of gaming group you play with and on the taste of each particular GM. Anyway, great video. Keep them coming!
Although I started tabletop roleplaying in the mid '90s with class-based 2E AD&D (and beyond) and was always into making homebrew classes specific to the campaigns I ran, I did play some skill-based games like Star Wars d6 and (Old) World of Darkness throughout the late 90s. Sometime in the mid 2000s, I really began developing a love for skill-based games such as Mythras by the Design Mechanism (which is itself somewhat derivative of Runequest), especially after I discovered BRP's Big Gold Book. I feel like 3rd Edition's craziness with classes/prestige classes from all kinds of sources sort of burned me out of class-based systems to a degree, especially when I was noticing players spending far too many hours just on build crafting and not bothering to let their characters develop more naturally within the game (something I also fell victim to for a time before I took a step back and noticed it). However, even with that minor burnout, I still have some class-based RPGs that I'd love to try, such as Rolemaster Classic or HARP, Warhammer Fantasy 2E, and What's Old Is New (the latter two are more of a lifepath-style system, but what's nice is that players SPEND experience to improve individual skills/attributes or, in WOIN's case, to "level up" and gain access to higher dice pool maximums, so they make for nice hybrids that leave plenty of choice in the player's hands, not forcing them into a mold).
Started the same place, went to ShadowRun, Eclipse Phase, CthulhuTech, DarkTraitorWarWatchTrader40k, and others. Much prefer skill based. Want a skill based Palladium Multiverse. May have to make it myself.
@@bob_the_barbarian I've read/owned all the game books you mentioned, but only ever got to play one session of Eclipse Phase (1E). I adore Shadowrun 2E-3E timeline and would love to run/play someday. I played some Rifts back in the 90s (Glitter Boy and Ley Line Walker are my favorite OCCs, but there are so many I never got to try). I LOVE that setting and still occasionally read the world books just for the lore, but man, I take one look at the mechanics (especially when you get into vehicles/mechs) and want to crawl under a rock. They're not difficult to understand, just.... too much. If you get a basic foundation for a skill-based Palladium system going, I'd totally support it, maybe even help where I can (schedule pending). :)
@@LordSephleon I exactly the opposite. I never got to play Rifts, though I wanted to, badly... But, Siembieda's preoccupation and predilection with level based systems is legendary... I think he includes a "Why class systems?" section in every rulebook he publishes. 🤷🏼♂️🤣 I'm not going to dox myself, but I had some input on some Eclipse Phase supplements. Advantages to having everything Creative Commons and interacting directly with the owners/devs on the forums.
@@bob_the_barbarian Yeah, even back then in high school, I found Siembieda's "explanations" for level-based systems to be an odd thing to add to his game books almost as an introduction. I always ignored them and just played/read the material, but it's not nearly as realistic as he makes it out to be. It almost comes off as justification for why the game exists. And yes, I think I've seen THAT section at least in the core books of his systems (Palladium Fantasy, Rifts, Dead Reign, etc.). I'm currently drawing a blank as to whether his supplements/World books have them too since I automatically skip the beginning out of habit. :D Oh, sweet! No worries about details. I did back the Eclipse Phase 2E kickstarter because I had played 1E that one time and the whole setting interested me. However, I'm a die-hard fantasy and/or horror (usually both) DM, as Sci-Fi games are much more intimidating for me to run since I want to have like 75% of the details in place before a Session Zero even happens; you can imagine how exhausting that is. Don't get me wrong: I love me some good Sci-Fi (I prefer Trek over Wars, if you're wondering, but still love both), but it's more daunting for me to run than a well-detailed epic, high, or dark fantasy, or even a modern-day game - usually but not always dark or gritty, though I have run Spycraft 1.0 quite a bit during the 3E days, and I love some World of Darkness once in a blue (especially if the players play as regular humans).
@@LordSephleon I've read some WOD and nWOD, but never played. I also consider fantasy games easier, it's the lack of required realism, I think, that allows you to do whatever you want... But, my heart lies with Sci-fi. Trek over Wars? Reeeeeeeeeeee! Sus AF! IMPOSTOR! HERESY! SOMEONE CALL THE INQUISITION! 😁 The Empire did nothing wrong. 🤷🏼♂️ But, I actually prefer grittier settings than either. Trek is too utopian, and Wars is to "space wizardy." Though, admittedly, I've wanted to be a Mandalorian since I was 12. 40kRPG for the "over the top," "cranked up to 11" type win. CthulhuTech's shiny surface, and hopeless, rotting core is awesome, too. ShadowRun... Me needum cyber arms and legs and reflexes, chummer. 🥺🤤
Thank you! I try so often to explain skill-based games to people, and I always get this blank stare and the question, "So, Elder Scrolls?" I also prefer skill-based to class-based, whether it's video game or ttrpg, but I've noticed the ones I like most are purely one thing or another. Either pure class-based, like D&D 1E or earlier, or pure skill-based, like the Chaosium BRP system that Call of Cthulhu popularized. I will admit that I have found a couple great systems that are more in the grey area. One is the Atlantis RPG (a.k.a. "The Arcanum," by Bard Games) which did a very good job letting you choose how much you'd follow a class progression or customize the character while still having the whole game operate on a unified skill system. Another good one is Savage Worlds, which locks skill improvements behind level-ups and has enough features to give the illusion of character classes, while still firmly rooting the game-play in the skill system (and it has a set target number and a form of the "exploding dice" mechanic :) Honestly, though, I still like giving "class" templates (or pregen characters) to new players to provide initial structure and then letting everything grow naturally. Or even giving them cool new equipment and spells in lieu of level-ups! :)
I mean, honestly, if they think Elder Scrolls, you've actually done a pretty good job of explaining it, LOL. I mean, you have levels which increase HP in all the Elder Scrolls games, but other than Arena, they all have a free form, character develops through skill use kinda vibe. Skyrim doesn't even have the illusion of classes anymore (although I have NEVER chosen a class in an Elder Scrolls game that wasn't Arena).
IMO: The rules system of an RPG is like the meter and rhyme scheme of a poem. The structure has a profound effect on the mood and tenor of the product BUT should be largely invisible from the inside. If it draws too much attention to itself it weakens the effect. You want the forest hidden by the trees--but ideally you invoke the forest and NOT the trees if that makes sense.
I remember an RPG-horror story about a "one-trick-pony" who was a total combat oriented character in a game of Vampire the Masquerade, but with no social skills at all.
@@greglong7170 My experience with VtM was that everyone needed to be more of an Average Joe. If you didn't have at least decent abilities across the board, you were going to get the party into some kind of trouble, and everyone had to be able to fight at least reasonably well. Might be different with larger groups though, mine was a party of 3.
@@daltigoth3970 Even in parties of 3 you can specialize and be one trick ponies in VtM. Especially if you take the D&D approach to party creation in which everyone has a niche to fill. You can have your combat junkie, your social one trick pony, and then some other role like a know it all and do just fine in VtM. And when it comes to combat, unless your ST is tossing you up against werewolves, and powerful and ancient vampires you could do very well in combat with just a few dots in combat skills. The vampire condition made soaking damage easy and recovery from it super easy. More so if you weren't trying to be super humane. I once had my non-combat skill having sabbat social vampire make an entire pack of other sabbat wanting to kill him back down with just a cell phone. I spent time wineing and dining all the right players in the local sabbat. When that pack came up on my Venture antrib he pulled out his cell phone and said "I have the number to the most lethal pack in the city on speed dial. They owe me a few favors. You may kill me but not before I place my call and identify you fuckers. I hope you enjoy a very short and painful unlife." They backed down. My character had no true combat skills to speak of. Like a 1 or 2 in Firearms, which would have been useless in that fight. What he did have was money out the ass, high social skills, and a creative mind that outfitted the most deadliest pack in the city with the best gear and bought another pack a monster truck with a harpoon gun in the bed and introduced them to the fun fun game of Cam fishing where we drove into the Cam held city and harpooned Cam vampires from the back of the truck since I also was able to ferret out some of thier regular hangouts. You could very much over specialize and be a one trick pony in VtM. You just had to make sure that one trick was a good one.
My favorite skill-based system is definitely GURPS. In GURPS you don't buy just skills with points, but also stats, advantages, powers, reputation, allies, and even your gear if you want to use optional rules for that. It's insanely flexible.
But with only 4 stats and a meh resolution system it's not wonder GURPS never really took off Also the material is poorly presented making it harder than it should be for newcomers. Only thing I like about GURPS are the sourcebooks to draw inspiration but I would use Chaosium's BRP anytime over it
@@Entropy3ko I don't know why the number of stats should matter. The resolution system actually does, but I like it. 3d6 roll under has a bell curve distribution so high-skill characters actually feel good at what they do. I agree the presentation isn't as good as it could be though.
GURPS, to me, is just over-designed. As a GM you need to heavily restrict what people can buy, and none of those systems are what we'd call balanced, so why bother with the points system, if we're leaving it up to table judgement anyways? I've always preferred how Mythras provides a set of sane defaults, and examples of how to screw with things through other Mythras-based games the devs publish. All the flexibility without ten thousand acronyms and all the math.
A middle path is Warhammer Fantasy Role Play 2e. It’s a percentile skill based game, but you have progression paths like dnd. Since it’s not combat centric, you just have to make sure that combats make sense in the story(even and especially if it’s an “unfair” combat). I like how easy it is for me to run, but my players don’t really get to theory craft and power game their characters(which is unfortunate since a couple of my players really enjoy that aspect of Pathfinder).
I could listen to your content for hours . I used it finally to create my own version of role-playing game using only my voice and the other player's voice. With a choose your own adventure kinda vibe. You get Two choices or three , every response takes a minimum 30 seconds for questions and insights. It is an easy game for two people doing a job and have enough to breathe between talking.
This is a great video for this subject. I find that I get into a lot of "trouble" when I suggest to those who seem to be having such a hard time in one game or another to find a system that works for their gaming needs. But because there are so many new people out there discovering RPGs now they have no idea what any of those might be. There's great examples of different systems here on TH-cam with people playing Vampire: The Masquerade, Blades in the Dark, Numeria / Cypher system (which can be anything), even Exalted. Finding what you like is a huge win when gaming. I'm personally with you on enjoying "Skill Based Games" due to the ease of working a more collaborative story into it with high stakes and really a huge lack of murder hobo since you really can't make an OP character as easy.
This is some of the best content I've ever seen on youtube. Your pace and candor is great to listen to; the editing and effects (scenes with graphics) were meaningful and well managed, but your presence on camera is really well done. Kudos
I know I have posted on various videos of yours in the past that I generally dislike skill-based systems, but it's certainly just my opinion. Certainly, I never tried to run down skill-based systems as a whole, and I respect your opinions and takes, Seth, even if I disagree on some. I always love your videos, even if I will likely never play many of the modules you review. Keep up the awesome work!
@@The1Ryu That's not how the system works. GM who have half a brain do not have characters who are skilled in a task roll unless there is a chance to fail. With extremely high levels of skill you auto succeed most checks just as you don't have the barbarian roll to pick up something heavy.
@@sirxarounthefrenchy7773 It's based on my experiences. Our group from a few years ago (2014-2016...ISH?) played a "season" of Shadow Run, and while I love the setting, the lore, and a lot about the game, I have never been able to create a SR toon, and I have tried... many times. Our GM ended up writing up my Runner for me based on the kind of toons I generally like to play in 3.5 and Pathfinder (which was what we had been playing prior). I became proficient with PLAYING the toon he crafted, but I simply cannot wrap my head around creating a toon in SR. This was exasperated by a single session of Superhero System/Champions (which ended up being the death of that gaming group), which was a disaster on multiple levels. I wasn't able to grasp toon creation in SR, and Superhero System/Champions is even more complex, and the GM running that session (who had previously run our season of Pathfinder, and he did that wonderfully) was extremely unhelpful (which was extremely unlike him), because he basically told us (4 players, 3 of us having absolutely ZERO experience with this brand new, super complex system) "create a toon from scratch, you have 30 min." This put unrealistic pressure on me, and between not comprehending the system AT ALL, and being tasked with creating a completely original toon from the ground up in 30 MINUTES, I just basically shut down. Then the GM acted pissed off when I couldn't come up with anything and begrudgingly handed me a folder of MORE THAN FIFTY toons he had already created to choose one from, and the entire session was awkward from there. So, that's my experience, but I just generally prefer the straight forwardness of class/level-based systems and a more satisfying sense of progression they provide. While I enjoyed playing Shadow Run, the lack of what, TO ME, felt like meaningful progression hurt the experience. Obviously, I've been told that I shouldn't let one or two experiences determine my opinion. However, imagine trying a new food for the first time, and you then get the worst case of food poisoning you've ever experienced. It's a negative association thats just damned hard to shake. But that's just my opinion.
@@randomnerdery6511 I think it's just your dm who was bad. He expected you to picked it up easily like I think he did. I honestly just like the liberty you have to create your character. You can make anything whereas in class based you're more limited. I also prefer the more linear progression of skill based rather than the levels where you gain a lot of things at once. My love fpr skill based may also come from waht I dislike in dnd 3.5 that is the enormous quantity of classes, prestige classes and feats that ended up in unorganic character as the players wanted to multiclass into so many different things in order to have more quickly that one feat that allow them to wreck anything the dm throw at them
@@The1Ryu Percentile have it's own problem I agree, but the dice pool I complety disagree, I've played SR and the more your dice pool goes up, the more you suceed, you also see a lot more 1 or 2s (which are failures) but you suceed more easily at thing you couldn't quite do as much when you had 4 dice left and you struggle as hard against things that are balanced around your dice pool.
Congrats Seth on the upgrade. There is more of a learning curve than people believe when it comes to tech used to make videos. If its ok to do a bit of constructive criticism, the TP is on your left and its pretty obvious when you are reading it. I had no idea it was a new toy but I was distracted at your eyes darting over to it. One thing that will help is to put it perfectly centered that way you can read and go into those normal freestyle times. One other thing, if you can back up that helps as well, Your eyes will move less when the TP is farther back plus you were cropped pretty heavily this time where your head was chopped off but you were focused on your Wayland shirt more. Other than that I love your content and it really helps me out more than you know!
This reminds me of when i first made a character for Earthdawn. Me "So I chose a class, and a race." GM" Yes" Me "Then that class gives me certain talents" GM" Yes" Me "But then as i level up and gain LP(xp), i chose certain talents and spend LP(xp) to gain single points to improve my talents" GM" No, leveling up is different. Yes you spend your LP(xp) on improving your talents, but you don't level until you have so many talents at a high enough rank AND find someone to train you" Me "And that's what is shown on this table on 221 and 223. so i have to go to town to level" GM "Yes. But you can up your talents anywhere, you just need some time to meditate." Me "Ok...is there a limit to how much you can rank a talent?" GM "Well the LP(xp) gets exponentially higher each rank, but no there is no limit" Me "...Wait... this sounds like a skill based system. Why do i chose a class then?" GM "To give you certain talents, like melee weapons" Me "Wait... I cant even punch someone unless my class has it?" GM "Yeah you can, but you really suck at it. btw that would be unarmed combat, not melee weapons" Me "So the game kinda wants me to put my skills everywhere" GM "Hold on, skills are different. Although skills are bought thru the other table on 221 and rank up the same way, max of 10. Talents are like magical abilities that you are imbued with." Me "So for me being a swordmaster: swinging around a sword... is magic?" GM "Yes" Me "... huh..." (entire worldview changed)
ran a 6 player campaign for 3 years. loved the game and its world. one of my favorite features was the history connection. I designed numerous items, that as the character studied the Astral energy (spent xp), they unlocked new abilities or improved existing abilities. some items that seemed good or neutral at first, were cursed. while giving some nice benefits, also caused significant problems. the mixing of medieval and cthulu worked really well.
@@guyman1570 it was, but honestly you get used to it like you get used to any system. The thing I really enjoy about Earthdawn is that each and every mechanic has an in universe reason for existing. So rationally your characters learn the mechanics along with the players. Its not enough to take one or two things from this game and run with them, the whole system relies on the rest of the system being there, and the world itself is part of that system. Im really not going into how the dice works. If you want to know that, there are so many better places to learn than from a random person in a comments section. But it took several sessions for me to get used to it, and a year to really appreciate it (use your karma and strain every chance you can. Its always worth it.) But if you get the chance, try out Earthdawn. If anything, its Different.
good to see some love for this game. best world ever. didn't love the rules, but the world and narrative elements that justified things like classes or magic items were unparalleled.
The script for this one must have taken University-Research-Paper levels of effort. The teleprompter came at just the right time! Excellent, thoughtful, and informative... not to mention entertaining. I give it an A+.
There are interesting hybrids to the class/Skill based template too - Runequest is a Skill based BRP system, but the character's affinity to the runes provides the focus that a class would. I think having a character concept step in character creation also helps provide the sort of role-based focus that can be missing in skill-based systems. Some games even extend this to having the group create shared assets and a shared identity in character generation, which really reinforces clear roles and a clear group identity in a game.
Right before you mentioned the teleprompter I was thinking about how smoothly you were delivering this presentation. I was wishing I could speak to a group with such a flawless delivery. I think it’s a good investment for sure. Love this channel.
Excellent work as always Seth! For me it's really a matter of mood sometimes I prefer one over the other. I mostly play dnd 5e, but despite my limited experience with skill based games and thanks in no small part of this channel I've been really trying to play more skill based games, I'm holding out for a Pulp Cthullu game.
I'd personally use the term "tone" rather than "mood", but I think you're on the money here. Skill-based games are much better (IMHO) at delivering a grittier play experience, while class-based is better at delivering a more "heroic" (for want of a better word) experience. It really comes down to what you and your players want for the game you're running now.
People who make one-trick-ponies are fooling themselves, completely forgetting that at character creation, they are only just entering their career, not supposed to be uber-skilled at their chosen ability. And I admit, I tend to make painfully average characters if given the chance...deliberately allowing myself a lot of room to grow at the cost of not surviving long enough to actually grow...
In the True20 system, damage is a modifier on a save where you get your armor and con bonus. The other big stat is the Combat bonus (used for both your attack bonus and your Defense,) so a high level warrior is hard to hit and has bonuses to hit, but is still probably almost as vulnerable to damage as any PC.
Wanted to say I love your videos, been watching them for about a year now. Really got me interested in the Traveler system, and though I've never had a chance to play the system, love the CoC vids. Here's to another year of great content from Seth Skorkowsky!
I'm always looking to see how unique and cool a character I can build. If a skill based game lets me build awesome characters, that's great, particularly if there's a wide array of talents and powers to go with the skills. If not, then it can leave me feeling a bit flat. If a class based game offers cool, unique classes, e.g. Fanged Deserter, Libertine, Carrion Priest, or Ardent Giant of Corda, then I'm all about it. If it's offering Thief, Mage, Warrior, or Priest, then I'm bored.
each of my skills in my homebrew do mostly 1 thing but their is flexibility Being a Summoner aka Summoning skill will let you summon creatures that you have create a bond with over time those creatures will become elemental version of them selves, tho they only get stronger if you create a permanent bond and you can only have 2 of them. their are basic skill such as Guns swords destruction magic ectra witch just get stronger dark magic skill or Old magic are dangerous as if you fail the roll you can hurt your self or other and maybe summon a Demon it also has a change to create wild magic on your character so any time you cast it could go wild. not had any bad things happen yet with 1 of my player using necromancy thank god
Seth your videos are always great. I love the way you present topics or discussions, review scenarios, insert humour. Its been a great help and a source of inspiration over the years. Keep up the good work.
Excellent explication of class-based vs skill based games, including the fact that there is a substantial gray area of overlap between the two “categories”. A game that falls squarely in that gray area, and is my favorite fantasy genre RPG, is Warhammer Fantasy Role Play 4th edition. Characters have a Career, which determines what skill and talent packages they have access to, and PC’s can progress to higher ranks within their career unlocking access to more skills and assets. However, individual skills are improved via expenditure of xp, and characters have the ability to change careers (at a cost). Overall, I’d consider it more of a skill-based game than a class-based game, but the Career mechanic adds some class-based feel to it. Glad to know your channel has received some recognition, as I consider it the best TTRPG related channel on TH-cam. Always glad to see new content, and am eagerly working my way through your back catalog!
The difference in my mind is that class based games give characters a set path of what they’re capable of and backstory and traits (and how/if you multi class) are what make the character interesting and unique. For skill based you have more control at building a characters strengths and weaknesses from the start but the improvement and changes over time might be more limited.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding you here and if so I apologize, but imo skill based are less limited than class games when it comes to improvement and changes over time. For instance I might start out as the crew's pilot but during the campaign the ships engineer died and so my pilot decided to try and get better at that to help keep the ship running smoothly. That means that there was enough freedom to make that change and it fits with the roleplaying aspect too since it makes sense for a pilot to be atleast somewhat handy with a wrench.
@@MRCHEEZUS I meant limited since it might be slow to branch out since you have to have the character use and work on skills they might not be great at to make them useable. It’s rewarding but it might be slow.
There's a third path: Point-Based RPGs. They've got the measurable power level from a class based game and the flexibility of Skill-Based RPGs. They've also got a whole host of the troubles of both, though mostly the skill based issues. The key difference is that in a point based system, you can buy any available trait with XP. You want that NPC you saved to owe you a favor, that's one XP. If you instead want to increase your strength score, that's 10 XP. Want to pick up the Weapon Master trait for a few more options in combat? 20 XP. The awesome custom spell that gives the person you point at a heart attack? 70 XP or more (I didn't bother stating one up for this). In some systems you even trade cash rewards for XP and vice versa. You get all the same problems of under and over specialization, with a certain bit of power creep (Say you start with 200 points, and give out an average of 2 XP per session. Only a year of weekly sessions later, the party is 300 points).
Those games also tend to have problems with balance- it's a lot harder to make a balanced game when you are trying to be so unrestrictive. Also, the amount of choice can be overwhelming. Still great fun in the right hand, though!
Point-buy systems are, basically, skill-based though. Yes, they are more flexible and you aren't reliant on luck to get you that high-strength bruiser, but the skills and skill advancements aren't any different. Personally, I don't understand why all games aren't point-buy.
@@davidmorgan6896 this is point-buy in the sense that you spend XP to buy individual features, as seen in games like Mutants And Masterminds not point-buy ability scores.
@@blandedgear9704 quite a few games have half-hearted point-buy mechanics. I prefer the GURPS and Hero System approach where everything is configured through points.
@@davidmorgan6896 I wouldn't really call them skill based. They have some similarities, but adding whole mechanics and features to your character that other characters in the party don't have makes them more like class-based systems. They have some similarities to each, and some similarities to Kult-style make-your-own-abilities games, but they are basically their own whole thing.
It's interesting that two of the grey zoned games is Swedish because it is kind of an example of Swedish TTRPG design philosophy and history. In the 1980s when the first homegrown Swedish RPG to become a commercial success (in Sweden) Drakar & Demoner was published; it had classes just like DnD but it didn't use levels per say but more a skill based percentile type system. And ever since then most Swedish designed RPGs have followed the same pattern of being a combination of skill based mechanics with a class or archetype guided character creation
If you have not already I highly recommend taking a look at call of Cthulhu, the system is still very similar to how it was 40 years ago, but it has been tweaked and balanced at least 7 times. While it may use different points, skills, or dice the system itself should give you ideas on what you can add to your own.
@@bruced648 I don't even know what your going on about. I replied with something called "Sarcasm". I started in on that stuff 30 years ago. Also. NONE OF THOSE have anything to do with building a game SYSTEM, those are all setting. A setting I will not be using because I don't really enjoy it. I have my setting picked out and am very happy with it.
I found that earlier in D&D, one of the things I was doing was multiclassing multiple times just so I could make a character that fits the vision in my head (Knowledge Cleric + Divination Wizard for a fortune teller, Hexblade Warlock + Barbarian + Fighter for an unlikely hero being trained by a sapient weapon who would take over if things got rough) Now I focus more on what kind of class I want to play and less on my character's style and personality. It's been noted by my GM that the newer characters I make are less like characters and more like bundles of stats.
One of the benefits of a level based game is you can use it to mark out the points of the THE MONOMYTH (THE HERO'S JOURNEY) which I use a lot narratively.
Earthdawn, at least 1st and 2nd edition, is a combination of both skill-based and class-based. Classes are known as Disciplines and Skills are known as Talents (although there are skills in the game as well). The Legend Points (their equivalent of experience points) you gain by adventuring can help you raise your Talent ranks, which determine when you "level up".
that sounds a little like merp, where you levelled up but got to develop your skills using development points. It was harder for a mage to pick up combat skills, but you could do it without breaking the balance. I'd love to play a skills based fantasy game.
Aww yeah, 8th level aint ever happening! I kinda missed the gang in this one, but it didn't hurt the message, just made it less pulpy and fun to have the gang be pro one or the other. Maybe a future skit eh! Also, I like the idea of skill-based more, but it does lead into analysis paralysis, completely Broken/OP characters such as I've heard from Symbaroum. There is so much to balance, and as much as i absolutely LOVE the idea of Improvement points in Cyberpunk, i Really hate the cyberpunk setting, so I'll probably never really get the natural idea for it, and it increases the amount of paperwork to keep track off behind the screen. Sure, this can be fixed with players helping, but it's something everyone has to be in on more or less, but I would love the idea of figuring out how much one has to do a Novice skill to become an Adapt and then a Master.
I've never played a skill-based game. What's a good one for "medieval fantasy" gameplay. So, essentially, a D&D-like game, only skill-based and not class-based?
My experience with Medieval Fantasy skill-based games is extremely limited, but check out RuneQuest, maybe Modiphius's Conan (that one is gray-zone, but I consider it far more skill than class-based). There are free quickstarts for both of those on DTRPG. While I haven't played them and can't say for certain (word on the street says they're skill-based), maybe check in to The Witcher and some of the Savage Worlds fantasy setting. If you're a fan of Arthurian legends, King Arthur's Pendragon is supposed to be amazing (though it might be more Historic Dark Ages than you're wanting).
Hey Seth have you ever played any Super heroes type game? I find they are very helpful as a Game Master to learn how to deal with creating diverse challenges for all types of characters and players from interpersonal day to day challenges to boss fights.
@@SSkorkowsky I felt the same way till my players said they wanted to play low powered realistic type heroes vs crazy powered villains. If I was ever stranded on a desert island and could only have one book it would be Villains and Vigilantes! 47 pages of pure genius, with it I could run any game imaginable from D&D to Cybers to Hi tech or Hi fantasy to skilled super spies. I wish I could give every Gm A copy!
@@shadowandson3550 I haven't had a chance to play it, but I would suggest aberrant. Preferably the original version put out by white wolf, because I have no idea what the reboot is like. Basically they had 10 different categories that you could put up to five dots into, covering categories such as fire, electricity, gravity. And that was it. You built a superhero by coming up with the concept and then putting the necessary points in the categories to give you what you wanted. The Human Torch for example would have points in Fire and Air and probably one point in gravity. It is the White Wolf Old World Darkness system, so it isn't very heavy on crunch. But it provided enough flexibility to where you could come up with whatever you wanted, and you could easily just go off on your own setting. I've also been told the Champions is an excellent game, but I've never had a chance to play it either, and I don't think I have any of the books for it. I do recall it being very crunchy. Lastly I could suggest Palladium games Heroes Unlimited. I know it's popular on sites like rpgnet make fun of Palladium, because the game mechanics are a little odd at times and there's never been a revision in 30 years, but Heroes Unlimited was a huge staple of my friends and I in the 90s. Palladium has kept their cost down so for the cost of one new 5th edition book you could acquire Heroes unlimited and the two expansions to it, villains unlimited and Aliens Unlimited. They have a universal game mechanic, so if that's your speed you can even add in other Palladium books such as ninjas and super spies.
Very thoughtful treatment of the subject. I’m a few weeks away from a beta with a universal skills-based system that has a template mechanism to create classes or demi- classes. Your video helps me think about this from a different perspective during this rules wrap up. Bravo!
Yesterday I saw someone ask how to make someone from Fast and Furious in Cyberpunk Red. Top answer was ‘He’s a nomad. Skills are 1: Family, 2: Family, 3: Family.’
In the 'Tatters of the King' campaign I had a player who's character was a nurse working for another PC's alienist. She had high strengh and medium size and wound up becomming very proficient in Fist. She was very terrifiyng...
As a gamer since the 70s, this was a GREAT explanation of the two main types of games out there! Grats on the 'promter, and it'll get way easier as you go! Keep em coming!
Great video!! You covered a TON in 22 minutes. Not critical but I would have probably added ~1-2 min to talk about "templates" for skill-based games -- makes it easier and faster to create skill-based games - i.e. pick a template and then tweak that template (templates are super common in supers skill-based games). Supers lends itself really well for skill-based games -- in fact, I can't think of a supers game that is class-based. And "point buy" was actually first created in Superhero 2044 way back in 1977 for a supers game. Your "exceptions" section was excellent!! -- I'd even add that games like D&D 5e and Pathfinder 2e are not purely class-based. There is a large pull of general skills and general feats you can improve in those games (and you have multi-classing to access some feats from other classes). So, it sits on that continuum that you described -- although more on the class-based side. Actually, not many pure class-based fantasy systems anymore -- on the fantasy side you have to look at old OSR games, old versions of D&D, and Castles & Crusades if you want fairly pure class-based games.
3e D&D had far more ability to build around skills, though still being level-based; unfortunately, there was too much overlap, and developing them was fairly slow-going. 5e is more streamlined, bu I miss being able to build a character with an esoteric skillset.
Cobbling a skill system into D&D was always a bad fit and it particularly disadvantaged newer players who didn't realise that you needed to max out a skill or not bother with it if you actually wanted to use it in-game (ie. the reason you want the skill in the first place). The system seemed to promise complete flexibility and in the lower levels would seem to deliver it. It wasn't until they reached the mid-game that players who didn't max out their skills found out that having a couple points in a skill was functionally equivalent to having no points in that skill. That Fighter with five points in Pick Locks was almost never going to have a scene in the game where they actually picked a lock. Using a class-based proficiency system is much more appropriate to a class based game as a PC's skill will always keep pace with the difficulty of the campaign. And you _can_ make a character with an esoteric skillset in 5e. You just can't make a character who's useless. A PC who knows how to pick locks will always pick locks at a skill level appropriate to their class level. Have you checked out PF2 yet? Their system of "Trained", "Expert", "Master" and "Legend" might be more what you are looking for, while still being directly connected to the class-based progression. Or just go straight for a skill-based system from the get-go.
@@The1Ryu Actually, it's a very good example as the lock DCs _needed_ to be that high to challenge players who knew how the system worked and built their characters accordingly. And yes, it got absurd at higher levels. Which was my point. Unless you maxed out your lockpicker's Pick Locks skill, your PC would not keep pace with the assumed progression. A lock designed to be a moderate challenge for a typical 12th level Rogue would be impossible for a PC who had taken Pick Locks as a cross-class skill to pick. Make the lock easier so the cross-class lockpicker can pick it and the Rogue would pick it automatically. Either way, the player who took Pick Locks as a cross-class skill never got the payoff of that decision coming in clutch at some point. Which is kind of a problem if you only work this out after a year of playing that PC. This is actually a primary reason for the "bounded accuracy" in 5e. It's totally possible in 5e for your Street Urchin turned Paladin to pull out a set of lockpicks and open a locked door.
@@nickwilliams8302 I'm aware of Pathfinder 2.0, but it looks like they're now going to compete with WotC in how far they will cowtow to a vocal minority and shove their head up their own butts, so I'm not interested in giving them my money.
There are other ways that they have been discussed in the past, such as "Level based vs level-less" games or "class based vs class-less" (as stated in the video). I'd say about 35% are "skill based," 35% are "class based," 25% are very solidly middle-ground hybrids, and the last 5% are something weird and different.
It's basically the difference between final fantasy 8 and final fantasy 9 games I like the idea of archetypes within skill based games....basically it's choose a class
It saddens me to see how utterly forgotten GURPS is nowadays :/ I barely see people mentioning it, despite it being quite important in overall the history of RPGs. I thought it would at least be cited on the video... For me, even if the system is quite complex, flawed and not really practical to play, GURPS is amazing at teaching the essence of freedom and universality that RPGs inherently have. People should give it a read, even if only for contemplation and gain in knowledge, it really opens my mind when I need to homebrew something into what I play. Anyway, amazing video Seth, glad to see this topic being brought to light :D
No one will ever forget about GURPS because fans of GURPS always bring up GURPS. I have no problems with GURPS, but I haven't played it (skimmed it, but no play time). Because I haven't played it, I don't mention it. Last thing I want is to cite it incorrectly. The reason I didn't pick up GURPS in the 90s was rabid GURPS fans who finished every sentence with "You need to play GURPS," usually after blasting whatever I was playing (mostly D&D).
@@SSkorkowsky sorry, I didn't mean to imply anything about the video, neither be one of those pesky rabbid fans! My comment was more about the overall popularity of it. Nowadays I find GURPS quite impractical to play, to be honest, but I admire how the system is made and it helped me a lot to see things in a broader spectrum. Back in the 90's and early 2000's, it was one of the few systems translated here in Brazil, together with Vampire and Werewolf if I recall. I only saw D&D material when the 3rd edition launched, and I was crazy to find anything about ad&d since I knew it's existence from some computer and console games. Because of that, GURPS was quite influential, and inspired some local systems that helped making the hobby a little more known (Daemon and 3d&t). That's why I get sad that it's not relevant nowadays, in this new surge of RPG popularity. But I can understand why, since SJ games basically abandoned it :/
No worries. My experience was GURPS has never hit huge popularity, but always maintained a very devoted following. But, what I do find interesting is your mentioning how it and Vampire were received up in Brazil. Are they still popular there? I enjoy learning how different games became dominant in different countries
GURPS is long forgotten around here nowadays. When d&d 3rd and specially 3.5 came trasnslated, they rapidly took it's place. Together with that, we also had the growth of 3d&t, a local made system that was really cheap and simplified. RPG books were always quite expensive around here, so being cheap and easily accessible helped a lot. By the time GURPS 4th arrived with a translation, it was far too late. Vampire, Werewolf, and even Mage were quite popular back in the days too, I daresay even more than GURPS, since they had a really good translation and high quality books, but they were the most expensive of the bunch. I don't know how they are faring at the momment with the new edition, but I think they lost a little of their popularity, not quite as much as GURPS did tho. These days, the most popular systems around here are d&d 5e, Pathfinder and Tormenta RPG, wich is a quite unbalanced system based on D20System from the same 3d&t guys with some anime thematic. CoC is getting a rise in popularity too, and Vampire is always here and there.
@@Archos777 I find that interesting. Some longtime gamer friends of mine in the UK were telling me how RuneQuest was the big thing there in the 80s, and they found it kind of weird that D&D became king in the US. I explained that was due to the Satanic Panic and how all the bad press of D&D making your kid go insane ended up boosting sales through the roof. Dungeons & Dragons was a household name in the US. Since the UK didn't have the Satanic Panic, D&D didn't get the same spotlight. D&D has eventually won the UK market, but there's still a huge RuneQuest fanbase there. Meanwhile Call of Cthulhu is the biggest game in Japan. I don't know if it's the giant monster coming out of the water like a kaiju, the tentacles, or the fact it focuses on mysteries and horror. Personally I suspect it's due to them not having the same cultural ties to European history with knights in shining armor and all that which conventional fantasy games draw from. I dunno. Hopefully the latest Vampire edition stays popular there. I love the idea of various contrives all having some game they identify with more or specialize in. It keeps it interesting.
A really interesting breakdown of the divide! Do you have any thoughts on this from a GM's perspective? Is running skill-based games any different to running class-based ones? Also, on what you said about introducing new characters- in almost all skill-based games, an experienced character will be stronger than a weak one (maybe not in CoC), and in ways that look harder to balance out than 'we're level 6 and we have a couple of uncommon magical items'.
Personally I find that at least comparing Pathfinder/D&D with some of the skill based games I've run I find it a bit easier to improvise with skill based games. Will depend on the system but the ones I enjoy tend to be a bit more condensed with the stats so I find it easier to just throw something together on the fly. Of course D&D 5th is a bit better in this area as well from what I've heard (though I've not run it).
I don't know about other skill based games, but Call if Cthulhu is super easy to learn and play as a player but a lot harder to GM (the horror aspect is probably a part of that) So skill based is usually a lot easier to understand your own character, but harder to plan out adventures. At least with D&D vs CoC.
@@Wolfgang9Hype Interesting! There are class based games like Index Card RPG which also have very simple designs and a focus on making improv easy, so maybe it's just a tendency rather than an absolute...
"in almost all skill-based games, an experienced character will be stronger than a weak one" I think there are no stronger chars in heavily skill based games other than literally: they have high strength. Which usually is pretty meaningless unless you want to lift or carry stuff or punch someone in the face. Which is pretty situational. Of course it is true that a combat monster with lots off skill points in combat skills is better at combat than a character that has less points in combat skills but that is not directly linked to the experiences. Furthermore because of the way HP work in most skill based systems combat skills scale differently. Even the combat monster needs to play smart and use tactics. Just charging in and trying to face tank will not work. In my experience its allmost 100 % like presented in the video. Its easy to have chars with different experience in skill based games but not really viable in class/level based games.
One of the biggest advantages of class-based games is that they're designed for some inherent niche protection. This makes it a bit easier for a GM to share spotlight time among the players, since each character has his or her own "thing" and that can be made important relatively easily. Conversely, in a skill-based game, it can be easy for a character to never be the best at anything, even if he is competent at several things. This can be especially a problem if some of the players are better at character construction than others, or even if some of the players simply know the GM better than the other players. On the other side of the equation, class-based games tend to increase character power exponentially, while skill-based are likely to be much closer to a linear power curve. (It's unlikely to be truly linear, since players will tend to concentrate on skills that synergize.) The result is that it's easier to run the same characters for long periods of time without the power of the game getting out of hand so completely. And as you noted, character builds are constrained more by the imagination of the players than by the imagination of the designers. My preference is pretty strongly for skill-based, but network effects are an even stronger constraint on the games I play. You need a group interested in whatever game you intend to play for most games, and if the other players have different preferences, well, gaming in a suboptimal system is better than not gaming at all.
Agreed. I think that skill based systems work best when the pool of starting skill points is small. This helps prevent a situation where you have a party where every character can do everything.
So...wat ya saying is....class based are for idiots? (the main reason classes still persist is because they are predefined packets, no imagination required, so anyone can play, you don't need to bring much to the table to start moving, Its basically a microwave ready meal, no effort, no time, no talent? no problem, Or maybe a bike with training wheels, no sense of balance? not a problem, I don't like other peoples interpretation of what a fighter or wizard should be, I don't like limits and sometimes don't like cliches, (I like some cliches,....) but most of all I really dislike trying to squeeze round pegs (their version of a fighter say) through square holes (trying to make it conform to the character I envisioned)
@@Tony-lc5kc look, its ok to have tastes. its ok to prefer doing all the work yourself, its absolutely *not* ok to denigrate other people simply for preferring something else. no, class based isn't 'for idiots'. or 'people that lack talent' (whatever TF that means). Preferring to not have to select every single detail of your character, every time you create a character, is not bad, nor should it be looked down on. get the fuck over yourself, the existence of things that exist outside your preference aren't some personal insult to your preferences.
@@sillyking1991 Relax.... Okay, so stupid was not PC enough, ...."creatively disadvantaged"?? (WAT!! WAT!!!) It's got nothing to do with preference, its all to do with creative freedom, (or lack of thereof) ya know, like having a personal opinion? (I know what you are thinking, "should be a law against it!" right?) And I never saw anything stupid as a personal insult (no, I only see "personal insults" as "personal insults" (I know, I know, "I'm so literal" sigh...) so please, take a moment, count to ten, then get "the fuck over yourself" (maybe you wouldn't feel so insulted if you had a sense of humour?, or did I hit a nerve of truth?...?!?!?!?!?1 I HIT A NERVE DIDN'T I!!!!!) Look on the upside, one day, chances are you will forget about this comment, Sure its the "booby prize" ........but who doesn't like boobies?
Great video. As a big Mongoose Traveller player the need to not just max out one stat really rings true. I created an arty, talky, computer character but I had to make her leave her art career when she turned 30 to ensure that she actually had SOME skills with weapons and vaccsuits as otherwise she wasn't going to last long in a hostile scifi game! Character evolution by training skills is also fantastic in the game. We needed a broker when we started trading, so she studied up during some journeys. My other character is working on her mechanic skills as our group are lacking that. Our "tank" has been working on his med skills as we don't have anyone else who even knows what the right end of a scalpel is!
I started on Worlds of Wonder (Basic Role-Playing), and painfully average was one of my biggest sins for a while. I was so worried about not having a skill, I'd spread out my points as far as possible, trying to be a jack of all trades, but ending up being a jack of crap.
I was feeling trepidation while preparing to run Traveller for the first time... my players LOVE class based progression, but I think running them through Annic Nova is going to change their minds. Thanks for all your great videos!
Back in the late 80's, early 90's when I was introduced to skill based games (Champions, GURPs) I couldn't go back to 2nd ed D&D. I was already so irked with the limitations of the classes in D&D that I wanted nothing to do with them. By the time 3.0 came out, I realized it wasn't necessarily class based vs. level based that really pissed me off. It was the artificial limitations posed by the way classes were designed in older games. Today, I love both kinds of games. 5e is probably my favorite D&D and I'm still happily exploring different sub class options in the various classes. I also love a good skill based system that doesn't lose itself in minutia like some of those older games did (Champions, omg). Ultimately, I think the thing a GM needs to be concerned with, or at least aware of, is niche protection. How do you help your players find those moments where their character gets the spotlight and gets to be the competent bad ass. It's incredibly frustrating as a player to think you're making a character good at a thing only to find out someone else made a character who is even better at it. Level based can sometimes mitigate that (though not completely). Of course, with skill based games, I do find that players who don't choose a role for the group often just make bland, less than competent jacks-of-all-trades.
I like to actually play in a way that me and others mark a CoC skill for upgrade after we fail it, not succeed, which means the better You are the harder it is to master, whereas the basics are easy to learn
I often wish Seth (you) had played the Hero System (e.g. Champions). Given the comments, in this video, about one-trick ponies and Mr. Average, I'd like to see how Hero System fit in that area particularly given its mechanic that allows players to build unique powers/spells based on special effects and modifiers. I know that Hero can be intimidating at the outset but really isn't that difficult. It is, in my opinion one of the best purely skill-based and level-free RPGs. One of the parents of HS, was The Fantasy Trip (by Steve Jackson - also creator of GURPS) which, while level free, felt like a level game since XP accumulated toward advances in total attribute points which determined new skill purchases. There is the example of a system that is skill-based but not entirely level-free. (There was also a small drift into Class-Based systems in that characters were either heroes or wizards with physical/mental skills or spells being respectively cheaper. At any rate, I often wish I could hear Seth's take on those systems.
I'm not Seth, but I've played a few GURPS style games before and to be honest I'm kinda iffy on them. To me their greatest strength (their flexibility) also contributes to their greatest weakness. The most telling thing to me was a pregen character I saw in one of the core books: It was something like courtesan or diplomat or something, and the only way they could reflect the social prowess of these characters was by giving them actual mind-control powers. The game can do almost every genre imaginable, but you can really feel it straining when you ask it to do something it's not good at. Things like consumables, situations where the characters are improvising using weapons/tools they don't generally use, or someone trying to do a thing that a person would be able to do (like hide, or convince someone to do something) without having an associated power with it. It's been a long time since I've played one of these though, so maybe my criticism is outdated or I'm misremembering, and none of these flaws are insurmountable, it's just more work for the game master to have to power through.
@@kevingriffith6011 GURPS attempts to quantify more things as discrete skills than the Hero System does. The two systems aren't interchangeable nor equivalent. Hero System defines the effect and allows the player to define how the effect is achieved which avoids mind controlling courtesans (unless that's actually what you're after). I'd say that the biggest flaw to the hero system is how experienced players tend to go overboard in extracting every finest essence of an ability (while less experienced players opt for more granularity). The system allows players to go as deep as they want.
@@RockOfLions Ah, I must have gotten some wires crossed. It's also entirely possible that I missed something when I played, I've only ever played with GURPS about 4 times, but I felt like if the player wanted to do something challenging that didn't fit into one of the powers they selected then there wasn't much in the way of rules to help them out. I'll have to re-read it though.
@@kevingriffith6011 unfortunately I'm not really an expert on GURPS. I've played its predecessor TFT for decades and Hero System countless times but I mainly know GURPS from reading the rulebook in several editions.
I started with skill based games, VtM was my first game and I can never got on with level/class based. It always felt very limiting to me as a gm and player, but i also prefer slow, dark plots where the world is unveiled and revealed to be this vast complex monstrosity of politics, horror and intrigue. Class based is a lot more dumb fun, not derogatorily said, it's more akin to like watching an action movie, defined roles, cool action and at the end of it you saved the day. I also do feel the damage point. I'd say some of the best moments in any rpg have been when dealing with being frail. One particular time, in a wreckage during a DH game, someone got the drop on me and blasted me through the leg, leaving me unable to move and bleeding out bad, there was something more of an urgency there with characters trying to fix it and our hobbling escape across the snow as i trailed my blood, being propped up by other acolytes. The drama of injury is not something that really works too well in D&D and games like it.
I just discovered your channel so cudos for that, you have a new follower. And as far as styles of RPGs, i began playing level based systems with the original D&D but i was presented a system called harmaster (skilled base system) in 1983 and i fell in love with it. My problem is that i never was able to convince my friends to try it so i have lived a class based life ever since. The Skill based approach is probably still the underdog because of the D&D monster which is just too big and widespeard. It's even worst today with all the RPG streamers that expose new and potential players to that system alone. It's not a bad thing per se though, we just want to have fun... but i't unfortunate that a great way to enjoy RPGs is trumped because of that. Seeing your video has just motivated me to try again and push my friends to try harmaster one time before we kick the bucket :) Thanks.
I tend to prefer "class" based games. Pathfinder 2e is my current go to. I like and play skill games as well but they always feel lower power to me. Classes can have lots of interesting and unique abilities that can't just be represented by being better at a skill.
Well, there are skill based games from White Wolf (or Onyx path) - like Vampire or Werewolf (or even Exalted for way bigger than life heroes) - it's skill based games with archetypal classes - some overlap is still possible, each "class" have something other classes can't have or spend lot of resources to obtain it in game
I represent unique abilities with perks, when you have a certain amount of ranks in a skill you may use experience points to buy perks for that skill, perks can be those unique options like sneak attack or spell like abilities or combat maneuvers (from D&D battlemaster). It also serves as a way to specialize into a narrower part of a skill.
in many skill based systems there are magic and other special abilities, they are just done differently. I mean, in RuneQuest you can have characters who are basically "Fighters" but who have taken points in Folk Magic that can do many of the things that a "Ranger", "Paladin", or whatever they are calling mage knights these days. You just have to think about it differently.
Yo I don't think I quite expected the DEEP dive on this (I don't know what I expected, this is Seth!) -- I really appreciate your experienced take on this, Seth. You hit on a lot of things I don't think I was ever quite able to articulate about the issues around each style game!
I started playing back in 1981 (D&D) and while I still play class based games now from time to time I have always liked skill based games a little more. I like having the freedom to decide what I think is important for the character I am creating, as a DM I have also noticed that after I introduce players to skill based games they do have a session or two of being overwhelmed by choices. I was running Call of Cthulhu 1e when it first released (and Elf Quest, Runequest etc). I now try and encourage players to try a skill based game, but usually after they cut their teeth on a OSR game just to get them prepared for what Role-playing is. The other big thing I have noticed about new games that lean more toward skills based is that they usually have a perks/hindrances mechanic that helps characters feel more like they are playing a person than a bunch of stats.
I started out being all about the "Class" because of the simplicity and that particular point about as a GM it's easier to match adventures to PCs. I railed a little at Runequest after playing D&D for a few years because I didn't like the slow development and notion that you might forget to stat an important skill when creating a character and end up being crappy in the role. I was about 13 or 14 at the time. Then I found "Call of Cthulhu" and everything changed. I still run D&D games for my old friends, but gradually I'm drawing them into BRP, and particularly Mythras Classic Fantasy. MCF is essentially AD&D but using the Cthulhu/Runequest/BRP ruleset. The publishers have even come up with a way that you CAN have "Classes" and Levels in a Skill Based games. Quite Simply, when you have achieved a certain rank in specific skills you are able to go up a level and gain access to new Abilities that enhance the skills that are specific to that Class. (New rules for "Multi-Classing are even coming out in the new "Unearthed Companion" which after about 6 years of promising FINALLY lands this year.) MCF has the Low Hitpoint "Scary Combat" element, (and Mythras/Runequest IMO has the best Combat System out there). You can follow a Class Template while also being free to choose any skills on the sheet. Level Ups are slow, but the Abilities they unlock are well balanced and while providing a noticeable improvement, don't break the game. It also has a very cool "Luck Point" system that is very different to Call of Cthulhu 7E's but is equally Fun in play. If you love the feel of old school D&D, but feels the rules are just too restrictive, and particularly that Combat sucks, MCF is the game you should try. They also have a free introductory version called Mythras Classic Fantasy Imperative, that you can download from The Design Mechnism or DTRPG, which is a complete ruleset in its own right, but only covers the four basic classes, Fighter, Magic User, Cleric and "Rogue" (I wish they'd called it Thief, but you can't have it all your own way.)
I prefer 2E but Rm is a great system once your characters are built. I think people should also know about Central Castings. Its long out of print, but it is THE BEST background generator. Its like Traveller on steroids.
One thing I enjoy about class based systems is the challenge of working with restrictions. I'm a proponent of the philosophy of "Limitation breeds creativity" and building characters within the bounds of a class based system forces me to really consider my thematic and mechanical priorities. That said, if you were to tally up my list of prefered games it turns out that I do have a slight preference for skill based systems. I love games like Cyberpunk 2020/Red, Shadowrun, Alien, and Runequest. Unfortunately it is very difficult for me to find the opportunity to play those games partially because my options for game groups is very limited, and many of the people I play with tend towards D&D and/or PbtA system games. For some of them its a matter of convenience (its very easy to start up a game of D&D 5e because of its familiarity and popularity, and PbtA games are very simple to pick up because everything you need for character creation is found in whatever playbook a player decides to use) while for others it's simply because they are very entrenched in the 3.5 e/Pathfinder mindsets (not shaming, just saying) so getting them to try out something new and different is often more of a headache than its worth.
Personally, I'll always prefer class-based. Regardless, I suspect skill-based systems are much harder to design well. For example, it was so easy to completely break your character in Elder Scrolls: Oblivion.
If I may share, there's one more downside to many skill-based systems that I have encountered: a lack of benchmarks. In class-based systems you usually have a good idea of how you measure up to everyone else in the world and if you use your limited customization to be good at something you're above the curve for your level. But with skill-based, you often don't know if your skill level is good or not unless you have some benchmarks. I was playing in a game once and I made a cool stealthy assassin character and pumped a lot of points into stealth because I wanted to be able to practically disappear into the environment. I think I had a skill level of 80 or so which seemed high and was like twice as much as all my other good skills. But then a session or two in and random minion ninjas appear with a stealth level of like 120 and I was disappointed because that was my specialty and these random minions were better than me. But I'm not saying that skill-based is bad, just saying that you really need to work with everyone to establish what number is good for a skill. If I had made the same character in a class-based system I would just be a stealthy class with a feat or perk or specialization in stealth and I'd know I was better at my skill than others at my level.
I've been going down the ICRPG rabbit hole this week: loot based progression is such a foreign concept to me but I want to try it. Thanks for the video!
@@zhangbill1194 professor dungeon master just did a review of the newest update of ICRPG on his Dungeon Craft channel. (I don't know how to link to another channel). It's an excellent review of a loot based system.
I prefer class system as I feel it is more streamlined than skill based system as it’s easier to make characters in class system than skill, also I can’t wait for Seth to review Call of Cthulhu Masks module. It will be funny to seen Jack’s reaction to the campaigns events.
Managed to find a hybrid. Fragged Empire 2e has you pick up traits every level up (which happens every 3 sessions), and during downtime you can roll to aquire new equipment or upgrade your current equipment.
I've been gaming since 1998. I have always wanted to find a great skill-based game, but every one of them I've tried it was painfully obvious that there were a few builds that were very powerful and focusing in anything else was a waste of time. Class-based games actually offered me MORE flexibility. The skill-based games I tried were just full of false choices. That said, I'm sure there are some great ones out there, I just haven't played them.
Much depends on how you gamemaster them and set up scenarios. No one has climbing skill? Too bad when you face a lot of cliffs and walls and vertical tunnels. Need to cross a river? Anyone have a woodcrafting skill? Or boating? Swimming? What's this guy saying? Anyone know his language? Remember the scene in A Knights Tale when the guy had to learn how to dance? I would love to play more skill-based games such as Hero system, GURPS or Fate. But my players default always to AD&D/Pathfinder. Some skill based games are logical. In Hero Fantasy to be a mage you have to learn, for example, how to Create Water and Shape Water before you can make an ice ball and throw it. I wish more games did that. (You can cast Fireball but you can't make a fire or otherwise control it? Interesting.) Edit: It's the GURPS magic system I was thinking of, not Hero Fantasy.
You should look into the 7th Sea RPG. The best way to describe it as a skill based game with classes in it. I haven't had a chance to play 2nd edition, but the old system focuses on skills, and the classes are based on fighting styles that provide very specific benefits. Plus swashbuckling is fun.
@@douglasdea637 To be fair, HERO is so open, that you could, in fact, create such a system if you wanted to through creative use of power disadvantages, I.E. (Can only be leaned by a character with the "Make Water" spell, -1/2) or something like that. Its been almost a decade since I pulled out the HERO books, but if you sat and thought about it long enough, you could make anything you wanted. I found it especially powerful for GMs that like to customize or create. Most of my players never learned the super detailed character creation mechanics, I would just make packages for different "classes" or archtypes (soldier, or mage, or starship navigator) and let them spend the points to take on those packages, using their left over points to increase this that or the other thing, or to add new skills, perks, or powers that were outside of that base concept. Sped up creation, and I had fun thinking up all the different packages for them. Also helped to prevent the One-Trick Pony and the Boringly Average issues.
Please do a basic run down video covering the very basics of each of the TTRPGs you have run or played. That might stir conversation on different systems and be a new starting point into other series of videos.
I once had a player who played a paladin who had no problem stepping into a pit or off a cliff see how deep it was. As a player he claimed it was his paladin's faith that his God would protect him. In reality he out leveled terminal velocity damage and as a player knew that. The only reason I allowed it was because it added to the story, but as a GM I hate metagaming. I actually chose skill base games after having to deal with this player in many circumstances. As a GM I don't have to deal with all the b******* anymore.
This is a prime example of why I use Gygaxian falling rules. 40' fall isn't 4d6 damage, it's 10d6. 1d6 for 10 2d6 for 20 3d6 for 30 4d6 for 40 10d6 total. Makes the ability to ignore certain amount of fall distance actually important.
While I have been playing D&D for most of my time in the hobby, I have played several skill based games. The most notable ones were the West End Games Star Wars d6 system and Vampire: the Masquerade and Vampire: Dark Ages. My first experience as a GM was not in D&D but in Star Wars. Besides having lots of tips on how to run a cinematic style game, the game was very good at explaining how powerful the characters were for a scenario. The game's starting players and all NPCs used classlike templates, which defined attributes and which skills the character could start with, but nothing could stop a character from learning any skill in the game, even the three Force skills.
I like to use a loose class system: a class will give you different abilities and specific perks like a Vandal gets an option for the "Krushing Attack" perk when they gain a perk point. But all the skills increase as you use them. Also different player races can give buffs and debuffs to skills and stats: an Orc has a naturally higher strength and overall toughness as well as can be more procient melee brawlers than say a human but won't be as agile or have the same level of stealth and lockpicking
I feel that skill-based games that allow you to improve skills by using them successfully should do the reverse and have you improve your skills by failing at them. That means that as you get better at a skill you need to take on progressively harder challenges to still have a chance to fail.
Some games do handle it that way, and one thing you'll learn playing skill-based games (particularly anything BRP-based) is that you can change stuff like that so long as you know how it'll change the game.
One hybrid system that I found interesting (and that also neatly explained away how and why players tended to acquire skill and power so much faster then most normal people, but that's another thing entirely) was FASAs old Earthdawn game, while true to fasa style the system did suffer from some not so minor issues. The game had the at least from what I have played a unique concept of a combination of classes with skills and once you had increased your current skills enough you unlocked the next class level that unlocked new skills and spells.
I have the impression the skill based systems seems to be about regular people on a certain scenario, like a detective, a doctor, a scientist, etc. Meanwhile class based systems seems to turn the player's characters into what would be anime protagonists or superheroes.
Thank you much, sir. That 100k mark is close, but I swear the closer I get, the steeper that remaining gap feels. Having a channel is very much its own Level-Based game.
Ive always been in the skills>>>class camp by a significant margin basically since forever. *However*, I will say that if you want a really well done class based system do check out Shadow of the Demon Lord.
only five years, damn i guess ive seen most of your content by now. keep doing what you love and do it on your own terms, a social contract extends past the board.
"You're a character that must select skills Harry" - Hagrid
Yes, Professor McGonagall only has one Time-Turner, so only one student can select all the skills.
Funny enough he does do that throughout the books. Harry Potter ttrpg would totes be a skill based game.
Can you imagine a game where every PC and NPC uses the same simplistic and restrictive playbook - and they also basically know a very similar set of spells? That's Harry Potter RPG using most class-based mechanics.
@@marekjurko4548 Everyone levels up almost exactly the same with the same access to the same spells and abilities at the exact same time.
Dm: Alright, so, let's see your character. Orphan, living with your aunt and uncle and cousin, want to do magic. You took a lot of sport ranks?
Player: Yeah, I was hoping to be like a jock type? But bullied because of a grand destiny.
Dm: Yeah, I see that... hmmm.... tell you what. I'll get back with the other players, see if I can't cobble together some homebrew from GURPS, and maybe we can do a school or something.
Player: Cool. And grand destiny?
Dm: BBEG tried to kill you as a baby, but bullshit prevented him and now all of their minions are trying to come after you in the future?
Player: Perfect.
Lol. "He did in fact regret this". As a lifer DM I can relate to that part.
Yeah. I had a buddy in college who wanted to introduce his homebrew AD&D race. Imagine Jurassic Park's velociraptor as a fully intelligent and speaking race. Yeahhhh... they were better than Humans or Elves in practically every way, by a good margin.
Yes, I have some things I like to do, like Drow Hexblade Urchin, but I don't do homebrew (except, perhaps, one non-combat feat on starting character, like Drow High Magic). Feats are such an interesting part of the game, but sacrificing an ASI to get a feat is sometimes a bad choice (especially on something like a Monk).
@@douglasdea637 I make a lot of homebrew. I have two very important questions I always ask myself before I decide my homebrew is solid and ready. Or more realistically, when one of my players wants to play something that isn't standard and a homebrew needs to be made for it. I outright ban all "I found this homebrew" because all of them don't follow these two rules.
Rule 1: When you are finished with the homebrew, ask yourself this question. "Is there a scenario where this isn't the best option to pick? Will there be any scenarios where the standard options are the better choice?" If the answer is "No", sorry, homebrew failed, start over. If the answer is "YES", then so far so good, however be careful because you might have made it too weak of an option.
Rule 2: When you are finished with the homebrew, ask yourself this question. "Is there a scenario where you would actually pick this option? Will there be any scenarios where this option is a better choice over the standard options?" If the answer is "No", sorry, homebrew failed, start over. If the answer is "YES", then so far so good, however be careful because you might have made it too OP.
When you answer "NO" to both questions, you are at least on the right path which is the most important part. After that, just make sure you follow the patterns. The reason I make the homebrew instead of letting my players find them online is because most of the time when I'm brought online homebrew, the answer to question 1 is "NO" and on the off chance the answer is actually a "YES", then during those rare moments, I usually find the answer to the second question is a "NO".
@@douglasdea637 the way you balance overpowered races is they get a 300% exp penalty. When everyone else is level 10, they’re level 3 or 4.
I loved that. These videos are just getting better and better. Good to see the evolution. I don’t even want to make any suggestions for improvement because I don’t want anything to come across as a detractive statement. I only have good things to say here! ^__^
I played in a skill based game once where it was opposing rolls to determine everything. I made a doctor because I figured no one would be playing anything to heal anyone. Classic.... Well first thing the party does upon the first fight is scatter, no one wanted to fight because they were scared of the system.
I get captured and thrown in jail. Later when the guards came one of them was holding his gun lazily and I said eh why not there are 4 other people in the cell and only 2 guards I'll make a grab for his gun and maybe I can get out with the chaos.
Rolled and I got the gun. I'm sitting there going "That wasn't supposed to work... I'm not good at this." Guard rolls and takes his gun back now holding it on me. I roll again and again get the gun. We do this back and forth about 3 times more before I use an extra action to shoot him. Chaos happens and I'm once again captured.
Later I'm being lead to a ship to take me to a prison off planet. None of the party is around but I again have NPC's that are criminals. So I try again, I mean the skill improved. Yep I get the gun and start blasting. Make it to the ship. Take out a couple guards look around manage to pilot the ship up and almost off planet. There's of course a lot of ships waiting and I get captured again.
The rest of the party is captured and we are all on the same transport ship. Fight happens and we are seeming victorious. Until the big boss with a HUGE minigun comes out. He's close to me and just for laughs I say. "I'll take his gun."
I rolled max and the enemy rolled minimum. So now I'm standing there with a mini gun going "How does this keep happening!"
The game ended with no one knowing I made a doctor. I was just the guy who stole guns from guards
"How do you keep stealing their guns so easily?"
"Well, removing a gun isn't much different than removing an appendix..."
you played gurps didn't you ?
Food for thought and not a criticism of this great video: I actually think it's more of a *trichotomy* instead of a *dichotomy*. What I mean by that is that instead of an axis of "Skill vs Class", there is another, third, factor: Levels. Normally we lump class and levels together conceptually due to D&D, but there are so many interactions in various games between these separate factors that it _isn't_ always a given that they are related.
A class-based game with extensive skills may not emphasize (or even have) levels. The example of Cyberpunk in the video at 17:43 isn't an "exception" to this proposed trichotomy, it's an _example_ of it as there are classes and skills in Cyberpunk, but no levels. Likewise, a game with levels may not have a meaningful definition of "class". After all, if there is only one very flexible class (such as in Knave, which has levels and no real skills, just abilities/characteristics), then it's not a class so much as merely how all PCs work.
I know this video is an introduction to Skill-Based RPGs and a comparison/contrast of them to things like D&D, and is not attempting to provide an exhaustive overview of possible RPG categories. It does that well! Still, I think the concept of a trichotomy of Skills vs Classes vs Levels is helpful when comparing and describing RPGs. If nothing else, it's a diverting thought exercise to use it to compare games like Tunnels & Trolls, Vampire, Rolemaster, Traveller (but not TNE), Kult (various editions), WHFRP, HeroWars/HeroQuest, etc.
In this sense it still seems like his argument is a dichotomy but rather than being about classes vs skills it's levels vs skills. Since classes are mostly unrelated, like how despite being a skill point system cyberpunk 2020 still has job specific abilities.
Committing necromancy. An example of the third in the trichotomy can be found in the videogame Final Fantasy X-2. Yeah you level up your trio (YRP) for base stats but the currently used dress sphere (class) gives a multiplier to the stats. They have to use the class to learn acquire beyond starter abilities.
second example below
.
While
Final Fantasy X a sphere grid a limited skill based but does classes by having sections of the sphere grid be dedicated to a single role each. Fast Striking Support, heal mage, rogue, dps mage, accurate ailments, heavy hitting debuffer and in the center of the grid is jack of all trades. That section has the shortest path to all roles except Heavy Hitter. Even at max power each character does have a unique overdrive, Yuna being extra special for being the party's summoner.
It is insane to me that anyone would lump classes and levels together. Absolutely blew my mind.
Levels are just a determining factor to create a balanced system of two opposing forces, nothing more. You can call them what you want: Power Level, Difficulty Class, etc, but it all boils down to balance.
Powers & Perils is a good example of a game that doesn't have classes, but does have levels. You basically have a magic Expertise Level (EL) or Combat EL. Used to love playing that game. These days I play GURPS. Levels and classes seem too restrictive.
One interesting characteristic of some skills-based games--especially the ones that use experience points--is that they allow players to choose the "steady progression" of character development (i.e., pretty much spending their experience points whenever they're earned) or save up their points for more dramatic upgrades. It's fun when the party has both types of players in it.
0:33 Sadly, I think "How dare you not hate what I hate!" is an even bigger problem.
Traveller is an excellent example of "unexpected character evolutions" even during character creation xD
Skill based tabletop RPGs always seemed dauntingly complex to me, I'm super glad I stumbled onto your channel and made a convincing argument to give them a chance. My new favorite RPG is now Pulp Cthulhu, for playing and running :)
Call of Cthulhu is my choice for 1-shots or mini-campaigns (like 2 adventures), but Pulp Cthulhu is my choice if we want to keep a campaign going for longer. Pulp is a teeny bit more complex due to Pulp Talents and Luck Spends, but still simple enough I can get a new player introduced to it and confidently playing in no time at all.
@@SSkorkowsky I just love how flexible CoC 7e is as a whole, my first proper game I ran was for regular CoC based within the Alien universe, used CoC 7e and the Icarus setting, I'm still running it after two years now with the same group.
@@SSkorkowsky I havent played CoC in like 20 years but the campaign was.... memorable lol.
With Traveller, you kinda have to be at peace with not getting exactly what you want. It works fine for a campaign about randoms who just got a ship and are trying to get by, but in other campaigns, such as, say, officers on a military vessel, there are other character generation methods that will give more suitable characters than trying to random roll. In a pinch, the GM can help put a thumb on the scales to make traditional chargen work for less traditional traveller games.
@@PanzehVideos Or with your character dying during his last tour of duty before you finish rolling him up.
The more I’ve played and designed my own games the more I’ve come to prefer skill based games. My players have come to appreciate the ability to design their characters the way they want rather than being shoehorned into a set class.
Unexpected developments in characters all so fun, and we've had some in FFG's Star Wars, as my medic turned out to be the only one with social skills (except the spy, but coercion is not always a good option) so I had to use those skills and they became my main thing. It helped me train my social skills in the table also, learning how to take space, finding a way to make myself heard when I'm not as loud as the others, and just being an actual part of a group. When it became clear my medic was the one who knew about politics, it first gave me faith that others will hear me out in those areas and stop to ask my opinion. As time passed, I learned to actually take space in the conversations and voice my opinions because I trusted them, and I'm a bit more social nowadays.
Ffg star wars is a werried skill and class based mix. İt is a great System.
In my experience, I've been among 2 kinds of ttrpg gamers (speaking broadly). The first kind begins with level-based games, usually d&d, and then has a growing desire for more skill-based games over time. The second kind begins the same way, but chooses to continue with level-based games simply because they just don't want to go through learning a different system.
The insane things some people come up with for homebrew are why decent and fair homebrew often never get to see play, sadly.
That's why I always look into the homebrew my players present and make a decision from there instead of just a flat out rule that says no homebrew.
meh, it is down to the GM. a GM can always hot fix the insane home brews, or eject the character as it becomes a problem. the core problem is the GM (and often players) are not comfortable changing the rules, even in home brews.
I'm not a big fan of homebrew, unless it's "brewed" at the table. But there are exceptions. And I think for me it's because most homebrew I've seen doesn't care to really jibe with the system it's brewed for, might misinterpret (or disregard) some fundamental elements of the game or exists because of someone misunderstanding the core game (it fixes a problem that doesn't really exist).
But yeah, there are some homebrew things that are made with sincerity and skill and care. Skill that sometimes rivals the official creators.
Also, sometimes a homebrew can just be boiled down to changing some flavor text to achieve the same desired effect.
Id prefer homebrew over reflavoring since the latter doesnt always do the concept justice and im aware that some designers try to balance their creations to make the official stuff viable.
@@vidard9863 I’ve found that the player who sends me his insane homebrew doesn’t understand game balance, and that trying to fix it is a pain in the ass as he will try to fight it at every point while only *just slightly* making it less broken.
I have a lot of homebrew in my own game, and I know how it’s going to affect it. He doesn’t.
I think class based games are great for the same reason theme based campaigns can be great.
Narrowing the field of possibilities inspire creativity and gives players a general purpose or perspective on the game, a common direction.
The more flexibility you have, the less identity you get. The characters may not feel apart from the countless NPCs they interact with, or they may feel lost, unsure of what they can accomplish.
It is the difference between Prose and Verse.
One makes its own beauty in whatever way it wants, the other follows a code that instill the poem an innate beauty and may force one to be creative in unexpected way to express their personality.
You raise an important point in your distinction between Level- and Skill-Based RPGs: the limitations a Level-Based system holds over the GM, and not just players, especially in designing adventures. The massive hit point pools of high-level characters mean that even threats like gravity become nerfed, as in the oft-quoted example of falling off a cliff and being able to shrug the damage, or (in games with firearms) safely ignoring having a gun pointed at you. I think BRP coined the term 'satisfyingly fragile' characters to illustrate this difference.
Yep. I got annoyed when a high level character would see a 60 foot drop and figure "I can survive that, just give me a couple heals after." Ever stand on the roof of a 6 story building? I have, it's high up! Most people will die from that fall.
While that's true and a reasonable objection, speaking as a GM, the flip side of that is that you really have to avoid realistic threats if your player characters are realistically fragile. It is much harder to plan threats and plan epic and visually exciting threats in a system like BRP where one bad role gets a player character squished. As such, I find that I GM more with my kid gloves on when I'm GMing in system that is skill based, and I can really afford to take them off only if it's the horror genre and the players are good with high body counts and sudden TPKs. When in a skill-based game, I rarely push my player's backs to the wall as much as I do in a class-based game because it's so hard to know where that line is and so much is just random and unpredictable. So while you can do stories that are awesome in both systems, the sort of stories that you do are different.
@@The1Ryu True but with huge hit point pools often comes near instantly fast healing and zero consequence injurie systems where you alive or dead.
Its easy to fix some of the high hit point problems by making some damage % based. Makes perfect sense for something like falling.
You can even increase the % past 100 which also makes sense.
A terminal velocity fall say 1500 feet is going to do a massive overkill amount of damage that no save is going to fix.
If they take to much fall damage in a go they should also take wounds. Broken legs will change their minds about fall damage very quickly.
Bigger issues tend to be spells like featherfall or levitation.
@@The1Ryu Then you haven't seen GURPS. With optional rules, you can even suffer consequences long after you recover from the HP loss
One thing that I will have to say regarding Skill-Based games is that characters will still fulfill a role or archetype just like Class-Based games do. You’re going to lean in one direction either way, it’s just that Skill-Based games give you a lot more wiggle room.
indeed that how my homebrew game is i help the party make their characters so they know how the game works and with roles in mind for each car tho their is some overlap.
I like that wriggle room, gives customizability!
Yea but it also doesn't limit the character to that archetype.
That's what I like the most. The characters (can) actually feel like real people, not copy&paste cutouts with one or two meaningful differences between each other.
@@cptKamina That’s where things like Feats and Multiclassing come in.
@@theatheistbear3117 Sure and depending on the system you can make very interesting combinations for sure. I am mostly speaking in terms of the extreme. DnD 5e has almost no ability to make you character anything but the archetype itself with some RP quirks. 3.5 is a much different beast already.
I have to say that both systems have pros and cons. It largely depends on the kind of gaming group you play with and on the taste of each particular GM. Anyway, great video. Keep them coming!
Although I started tabletop roleplaying in the mid '90s with class-based 2E AD&D (and beyond) and was always into making homebrew classes specific to the campaigns I ran, I did play some skill-based games like Star Wars d6 and (Old) World of Darkness throughout the late 90s. Sometime in the mid 2000s, I really began developing a love for skill-based games such as Mythras by the Design Mechanism (which is itself somewhat derivative of Runequest), especially after I discovered BRP's Big Gold Book.
I feel like 3rd Edition's craziness with classes/prestige classes from all kinds of sources sort of burned me out of class-based systems to a degree, especially when I was noticing players spending far too many hours just on build crafting and not bothering to let their characters develop more naturally within the game (something I also fell victim to for a time before I took a step back and noticed it). However, even with that minor burnout, I still have some class-based RPGs that I'd love to try, such as Rolemaster Classic or HARP, Warhammer Fantasy 2E, and What's Old Is New (the latter two are more of a lifepath-style system, but what's nice is that players SPEND experience to improve individual skills/attributes or, in WOIN's case, to "level up" and gain access to higher dice pool maximums, so they make for nice hybrids that leave plenty of choice in the player's hands, not forcing them into a mold).
Started the same place, went to ShadowRun, Eclipse Phase, CthulhuTech, DarkTraitorWarWatchTrader40k, and others.
Much prefer skill based. Want a skill based Palladium Multiverse. May have to make it myself.
@@bob_the_barbarian I've read/owned all the game books you mentioned, but only ever got to play one session of Eclipse Phase (1E). I adore Shadowrun 2E-3E timeline and would love to run/play someday.
I played some Rifts back in the 90s (Glitter Boy and Ley Line Walker are my favorite OCCs, but there are so many I never got to try). I LOVE that setting and still occasionally read the world books just for the lore, but man, I take one look at the mechanics (especially when you get into vehicles/mechs) and want to crawl under a rock. They're not difficult to understand, just.... too much.
If you get a basic foundation for a skill-based Palladium system going, I'd totally support it, maybe even help where I can (schedule pending). :)
@@LordSephleon I exactly the opposite. I never got to play Rifts, though I wanted to, badly... But, Siembieda's preoccupation and predilection with level based systems is legendary... I think he includes a "Why class systems?" section in every rulebook he publishes.
🤷🏼♂️🤣
I'm not going to dox myself, but I had some input on some Eclipse Phase supplements. Advantages to having everything Creative Commons and interacting directly with the owners/devs on the forums.
@@bob_the_barbarian Yeah, even back then in high school, I found Siembieda's "explanations" for level-based systems to be an odd thing to add to his game books almost as an introduction. I always ignored them and just played/read the material, but it's not nearly as realistic as he makes it out to be. It almost comes off as justification for why the game exists. And yes, I think I've seen THAT section at least in the core books of his systems (Palladium Fantasy, Rifts, Dead Reign, etc.). I'm currently drawing a blank as to whether his supplements/World books have them too since I automatically skip the beginning out of habit. :D
Oh, sweet! No worries about details. I did back the Eclipse Phase 2E kickstarter because I had played 1E that one time and the whole setting interested me. However, I'm a die-hard fantasy and/or horror (usually both) DM, as Sci-Fi games are much more intimidating for me to run since I want to have like 75% of the details in place before a Session Zero even happens; you can imagine how exhausting that is.
Don't get me wrong: I love me some good Sci-Fi (I prefer Trek over Wars, if you're wondering, but still love both), but it's more daunting for me to run than a well-detailed epic, high, or dark fantasy, or even a modern-day game - usually but not always dark or gritty, though I have run Spycraft 1.0 quite a bit during the 3E days, and I love some World of Darkness once in a blue (especially if the players play as regular humans).
@@LordSephleon I've read some WOD and nWOD, but never played. I also consider fantasy games easier, it's the lack of required realism, I think, that allows you to do whatever you want...
But, my heart lies with Sci-fi.
Trek over Wars? Reeeeeeeeeeee! Sus AF! IMPOSTOR! HERESY! SOMEONE CALL THE INQUISITION!
😁
The Empire did nothing wrong.
🤷🏼♂️
But, I actually prefer grittier settings than either. Trek is too utopian, and Wars is to "space wizardy." Though, admittedly, I've wanted to be a Mandalorian since I was 12.
40kRPG for the "over the top," "cranked up to 11" type win. CthulhuTech's shiny surface, and hopeless, rotting core is awesome, too.
ShadowRun...
Me needum cyber arms and legs and reflexes, chummer.
🥺🤤
Thank you! I try so often to explain skill-based games to people, and I always get this blank stare and the question, "So, Elder Scrolls?"
I also prefer skill-based to class-based, whether it's video game or ttrpg, but I've noticed the ones I like most are purely one thing or another. Either pure class-based, like D&D 1E or earlier, or pure skill-based, like the Chaosium BRP system that Call of Cthulhu popularized. I will admit that I have found a couple great systems that are more in the grey area. One is the Atlantis RPG (a.k.a. "The Arcanum," by Bard Games) which did a very good job letting you choose how much you'd follow a class progression or customize the character while still having the whole game operate on a unified skill system. Another good one is Savage Worlds, which locks skill improvements behind level-ups and has enough features to give the illusion of character classes, while still firmly rooting the game-play in the skill system (and it has a set target number and a form of the "exploding dice" mechanic :)
Honestly, though, I still like giving "class" templates (or pregen characters) to new players to provide initial structure and then letting everything grow naturally.
Or even giving them cool new equipment and spells in lieu of level-ups! :)
I mean, honestly, if they think Elder Scrolls, you've actually done a pretty good job of explaining it, LOL. I mean, you have levels which increase HP in all the Elder Scrolls games, but other than Arena, they all have a free form, character develops through skill use kinda vibe. Skyrim doesn't even have the illusion of classes anymore (although I have NEVER chosen a class in an Elder Scrolls game that wasn't Arena).
IMO: The rules system of an RPG is like the meter and rhyme scheme of a poem. The structure has a profound effect on the mood and tenor of the product BUT should be largely invisible from the inside. If it draws too much attention to itself it weakens the effect. You want the forest hidden by the trees--but ideally you invoke the forest and NOT the trees if that makes sense.
Thats a really smooth description, Doc
I remember an RPG-horror story about a "one-trick-pony" who was a total combat oriented character in a game of Vampire the Masquerade, but with no social skills at all.
Shovel head lol
When you Gangrel or Bruja too hard
I've seen one trick social ponys in VtM. VtM tended to encourage one tricks ponies of all stripes.
@@greglong7170 My experience with VtM was that everyone needed to be more of an Average Joe. If you didn't have at least decent abilities across the board, you were going to get the party into some kind of trouble, and everyone had to be able to fight at least reasonably well. Might be different with larger groups though, mine was a party of 3.
@@daltigoth3970 Even in parties of 3 you can specialize and be one trick ponies in VtM. Especially if you take the D&D approach to party creation in which everyone has a niche to fill. You can have your combat junkie, your social one trick pony, and then some other role like a know it all and do just fine in VtM. And when it comes to combat, unless your ST is tossing you up against werewolves, and powerful and ancient vampires you could do very well in combat with just a few dots in combat skills. The vampire condition made soaking damage easy and recovery from it super easy. More so if you weren't trying to be super humane.
I once had my non-combat skill having sabbat social vampire make an entire pack of other sabbat wanting to kill him back down with just a cell phone. I spent time wineing and dining all the right players in the local sabbat. When that pack came up on my Venture antrib he pulled out his cell phone and said "I have the number to the most lethal pack in the city on speed dial. They owe me a few favors. You may kill me but not before I place my call and identify you fuckers. I hope you enjoy a very short and painful unlife." They backed down. My character had no true combat skills to speak of. Like a 1 or 2 in Firearms, which would have been useless in that fight. What he did have was money out the ass, high social skills, and a creative mind that outfitted the most deadliest pack in the city with the best gear and bought another pack a monster truck with a harpoon gun in the bed and introduced them to the fun fun game of Cam fishing where we drove into the Cam held city and harpooned Cam vampires from the back of the truck since I also was able to ferret out some of thier regular hangouts.
You could very much over specialize and be a one trick pony in VtM. You just had to make sure that one trick was a good one.
My favorite skill-based system is definitely GURPS. In GURPS you don't buy just skills with points, but also stats, advantages, powers, reputation, allies, and even your gear if you want to use optional rules for that. It's insanely flexible.
But with only 4 stats and a meh resolution system it's not wonder GURPS never really took off
Also the material is poorly presented making it harder than it should be for newcomers.
Only thing I like about GURPS are the sourcebooks to draw inspiration but I would use Chaosium's BRP anytime over it
@@Entropy3ko I don't know why the number of stats should matter. The resolution system actually does, but I like it. 3d6 roll under has a bell curve distribution so high-skill characters actually feel good at what they do.
I agree the presentation isn't as good as it could be though.
GURPS, to me, is just over-designed. As a GM you need to heavily restrict what people can buy, and none of those systems are what we'd call balanced, so why bother with the points system, if we're leaving it up to table judgement anyways? I've always preferred how Mythras provides a set of sane defaults, and examples of how to screw with things through other Mythras-based games the devs publish. All the flexibility without ten thousand acronyms and all the math.
GURPS is a toolkit, so it's kinda designed to allow for anything. You're not supposed to use all of it at the same time@@colbyboucher6391
A middle path is Warhammer Fantasy Role Play 2e. It’s a percentile skill based game, but you have progression paths like dnd. Since it’s not combat centric, you just have to make sure that combats make sense in the story(even and especially if it’s an “unfair” combat). I like how easy it is for me to run, but my players don’t really get to theory craft and power game their characters(which is unfortunate since a couple of my players really enjoy that aspect of Pathfinder).
I could listen to your content for hours . I used it finally to create my own version of role-playing game using only my voice and the other player's voice. With a choose your own adventure kinda vibe. You get Two choices or three , every response takes a minimum 30 seconds for questions and insights. It is an easy game for two people doing a job and have enough to breathe between talking.
This is a great video for this subject. I find that I get into a lot of "trouble" when I suggest to those who seem to be having such a hard time in one game or another to find a system that works for their gaming needs. But because there are so many new people out there discovering RPGs now they have no idea what any of those might be. There's great examples of different systems here on TH-cam with people playing Vampire: The Masquerade, Blades in the Dark, Numeria / Cypher system (which can be anything), even Exalted. Finding what you like is a huge win when gaming. I'm personally with you on enjoying "Skill Based Games" due to the ease of working a more collaborative story into it with high stakes and really a huge lack of murder hobo since you really can't make an OP character as easy.
This is some of the best content I've ever seen on youtube. Your pace and candor is great to listen to; the editing and effects (scenes with graphics) were meaningful and well managed, but your presence on camera is really well done. Kudos
I know I have posted on various videos of yours in the past that I generally dislike skill-based systems, but it's certainly just my opinion. Certainly, I never tried to run down skill-based systems as a whole, and I respect your opinions and takes, Seth, even if I disagree on some. I always love your videos, even if I will likely never play many of the modules you review. Keep up the awesome work!
What do you dislike in them ? I like both honnestly with a preference for skill based.
@@The1Ryu That's not how the system works. GM who have half a brain do not have characters who are skilled in a task roll unless there is a chance to fail. With extremely high levels of skill you auto succeed most checks just as you don't have the barbarian roll to pick up something heavy.
@@sirxarounthefrenchy7773 It's based on my experiences. Our group from a few years ago (2014-2016...ISH?) played a "season" of Shadow Run, and while I love the setting, the lore, and a lot about the game, I have never been able to create a SR toon, and I have tried... many times. Our GM ended up writing up my Runner for me based on the kind of toons I generally like to play in 3.5 and Pathfinder (which was what we had been playing prior). I became proficient with PLAYING the toon he crafted, but I simply cannot wrap my head around creating a toon in SR.
This was exasperated by a single session of Superhero System/Champions (which ended up being the death of that gaming group), which was a disaster on multiple levels. I wasn't able to grasp toon creation in SR, and Superhero System/Champions is even more complex, and the GM running that session (who had previously run our season of Pathfinder, and he did that wonderfully) was extremely unhelpful (which was extremely unlike him), because he basically told us (4 players, 3 of us having absolutely ZERO experience with this brand new, super complex system) "create a toon from scratch, you have 30 min." This put unrealistic pressure on me, and between not comprehending the system AT ALL, and being tasked with creating a completely original toon from the ground up in 30 MINUTES, I just basically shut down. Then the GM acted pissed off when I couldn't come up with anything and begrudgingly handed me a folder of MORE THAN FIFTY toons he had already created to choose one from, and the entire session was awkward from there.
So, that's my experience, but I just generally prefer the straight forwardness of class/level-based systems and a more satisfying sense of progression they provide. While I enjoyed playing Shadow Run, the lack of what, TO ME, felt like meaningful progression hurt the experience.
Obviously, I've been told that I shouldn't let one or two experiences determine my opinion. However, imagine trying a new food for the first time, and you then get the worst case of food poisoning you've ever experienced. It's a negative association thats just damned hard to shake.
But that's just my opinion.
@@randomnerdery6511 I think it's just your dm who was bad. He expected you to picked it up easily like I think he did. I honestly just like the liberty you have to create your character. You can make anything whereas in class based you're more limited. I also prefer the more linear progression of skill based rather than the levels where you gain a lot of things at once. My love fpr skill based may also come from waht I dislike in dnd 3.5 that is the enormous quantity of classes, prestige classes and feats that ended up in unorganic character as the players wanted to multiclass into so many different things in order to have more quickly that one feat that allow them to wreck anything the dm throw at them
@@The1Ryu Percentile have it's own problem I agree, but the dice pool I complety disagree, I've played SR and the more your dice pool goes up, the more you suceed, you also see a lot more 1 or 2s (which are failures) but you suceed more easily at thing you couldn't quite do as much when you had 4 dice left and you struggle as hard against things that are balanced around your dice pool.
Congrats Seth on the upgrade. There is more of a learning curve than people believe when it comes to tech used to make videos. If its ok to do a bit of constructive criticism, the TP is on your left and its pretty obvious when you are reading it. I had no idea it was a new toy but I was distracted at your eyes darting over to it. One thing that will help is to put it perfectly centered that way you can read and go into those normal freestyle times. One other thing, if you can back up that helps as well, Your eyes will move less when the TP is farther back plus you were cropped pretty heavily this time where your head was chopped off but you were focused on your Wayland shirt more. Other than that I love your content and it really helps me out more than you know!
This reminds me of when i first made a character for Earthdawn.
Me "So I chose a class, and a race."
GM" Yes"
Me "Then that class gives me certain talents"
GM" Yes"
Me "But then as i level up and gain LP(xp), i chose certain talents and spend LP(xp) to gain single points to improve my talents"
GM" No, leveling up is different. Yes you spend your LP(xp) on improving your talents, but you don't level until you have so many talents at a high enough rank AND find someone to train you"
Me "And that's what is shown on this table on 221 and 223. so i have to go to town to level"
GM "Yes. But you can up your talents anywhere, you just need some time to meditate."
Me "Ok...is there a limit to how much you can rank a talent?"
GM "Well the LP(xp) gets exponentially higher each rank, but no there is no limit"
Me "...Wait... this sounds like a skill based system. Why do i chose a class then?"
GM "To give you certain talents, like melee weapons"
Me "Wait... I cant even punch someone unless my class has it?"
GM "Yeah you can, but you really suck at it. btw that would be unarmed combat, not melee weapons"
Me "So the game kinda wants me to put my skills everywhere"
GM "Hold on, skills are different. Although skills are bought thru the other table on 221 and rank up the same way, max of 10. Talents are like magical abilities that you are imbued with."
Me "So for me being a swordmaster: swinging around a sword... is magic?"
GM "Yes"
Me "... huh..." (entire worldview changed)
ran a 6 player campaign for 3 years. loved the game and its world. one of my favorite features was the history connection. I designed numerous items, that as the character studied the Astral energy (spent xp), they unlocked new abilities or improved existing abilities. some items that seemed good or neutral at first, were cursed. while giving some nice benefits, also caused significant problems.
the mixing of medieval and cthulu worked really well.
my favorite game system
To OP:
That... sounds confusing
@@guyman1570 it was, but honestly you get used to it like you get used to any system.
The thing I really enjoy about Earthdawn is that each and every mechanic has an in universe reason for existing. So rationally your characters learn the mechanics along with the players. Its not enough to take one or two things from this game and run with them, the whole system relies on the rest of the system being there, and the world itself is part of that system.
Im really not going into how the dice works. If you want to know that, there are so many better places to learn than from a random person in a comments section. But it took several sessions for me to get used to it, and a year to really appreciate it (use your karma and strain every chance you can. Its always worth it.)
But if you get the chance, try out Earthdawn. If anything, its Different.
good to see some love for this game. best world ever. didn't love the rules, but the world and narrative elements that justified things like classes or magic items were unparalleled.
The script for this one must have taken University-Research-Paper levels of effort. The teleprompter came at just the right time!
Excellent, thoughtful, and informative... not to mention entertaining. I give it an A+.
There are interesting hybrids to the class/Skill based template too - Runequest is a Skill based BRP system, but the character's affinity to the runes provides the focus that a class would. I think having a character concept step in character creation also helps provide the sort of role-based focus that can be missing in skill-based systems. Some games even extend this to having the group create shared assets and a shared identity in character generation, which really reinforces clear roles and a clear group identity in a game.
Right before you mentioned the teleprompter I was thinking about how smoothly you were delivering this presentation. I was wishing I could speak to a group with such a flawless delivery. I think it’s a good investment for sure.
Love this channel.
Excellent work as always Seth! For me it's really a matter of mood sometimes I prefer one over the other. I mostly play dnd 5e, but despite my limited experience with skill based games and thanks in no small part of this channel I've been really trying to play more skill based games, I'm holding out for a Pulp Cthullu game.
I'd personally use the term "tone" rather than "mood", but I think you're on the money here.
Skill-based games are much better (IMHO) at delivering a grittier play experience, while class-based is better at delivering a more "heroic" (for want of a better word) experience. It really comes down to what you and your players want for the game you're running now.
People who make one-trick-ponies are fooling themselves, completely forgetting that at character creation, they are only just entering their career, not supposed to be uber-skilled at their chosen ability.
And I admit, I tend to make painfully average characters if given the chance...deliberately allowing myself a lot of room to grow at the cost of not surviving long enough to actually grow...
In the True20 system, damage is a modifier on a save where you get your armor and con bonus. The other big stat is the Combat bonus (used for both your attack bonus and your Defense,) so a high level warrior is hard to hit and has bonuses to hit, but is still probably almost as vulnerable to damage as any PC.
Wanted to say I love your videos, been watching them for about a year now. Really got me interested in the Traveler system, and though I've never had a chance to play the system, love the CoC vids. Here's to another year of great content from Seth Skorkowsky!
I'm always looking to see how unique and cool a character I can build. If a skill based game lets me build awesome characters, that's great, particularly if there's a wide array of talents and powers to go with the skills. If not, then it can leave me feeling a bit flat.
If a class based game offers cool, unique classes, e.g. Fanged Deserter, Libertine, Carrion Priest, or Ardent Giant of Corda, then I'm all about it. If it's offering Thief, Mage, Warrior, or Priest, then I'm bored.
each of my skills in my homebrew do mostly 1 thing but their is flexibility
Being a Summoner aka Summoning skill will let you summon creatures that you have create a bond with over time those creatures will become elemental version of them selves, tho they only get stronger if you create a permanent bond and you can only have 2 of them.
their are basic skill such as Guns swords destruction magic ectra witch just get stronger
dark magic skill or Old magic are dangerous as if you fail the roll you can hurt your self or other and maybe summon a Demon it also has a change to create wild magic on your character so any time you cast it could go wild.
not had any bad things happen yet with 1 of my player using necromancy thank god
Seth your videos are always great. I love the way you present topics or discussions, review scenarios, insert humour. Its been a great help and a source of inspiration over the years. Keep up the good work.
Excellent video. Love to see more contrasts between systems.
Thank God,
Excellent explication of class-based vs skill based games, including the fact that there is a substantial gray area of overlap between the two “categories”. A game that falls squarely in that gray area, and is my favorite fantasy genre RPG, is Warhammer Fantasy Role Play 4th edition. Characters have a Career, which determines what skill and talent packages they have access to, and PC’s can progress to higher ranks within their career unlocking access to more skills and assets. However, individual skills are improved via expenditure of xp, and characters have the ability to change careers (at a cost). Overall, I’d consider it more of a skill-based game than a class-based game, but the Career mechanic adds some class-based feel to it.
Glad to know your channel has received some recognition, as I consider it the best TTRPG related channel on TH-cam. Always glad to see new content, and am eagerly working my way through your back catalog!
The difference in my mind is that class based games give characters a set path of what they’re capable of and backstory and traits (and how/if you multi class) are what make the character interesting and unique. For skill based you have more control at building a characters strengths and weaknesses from the start but the improvement and changes over time might be more limited.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding you here and if so I apologize, but imo skill based are less limited than class games when it comes to improvement and changes over time. For instance I might start out as the crew's pilot but during the campaign the ships engineer died and so my pilot decided to try and get better at that to help keep the ship running smoothly.
That means that there was enough freedom to make that change and it fits with the roleplaying aspect too since it makes sense for a pilot to be atleast somewhat handy with a wrench.
@@MRCHEEZUS I meant limited since it might be slow to branch out since you have to have the character use and work on skills they might not be great at to make them useable. It’s rewarding but it might be slow.
@@bossman4799 ah ok now I gotcha :)
This video successfully made me want to play a skilled base game. It also provided a clear definition of what skilled based games are. Thank You!
There's a third path: Point-Based RPGs. They've got the measurable power level from a class based game and the flexibility of Skill-Based RPGs. They've also got a whole host of the troubles of both, though mostly the skill based issues. The key difference is that in a point based system, you can buy any available trait with XP. You want that NPC you saved to owe you a favor, that's one XP. If you instead want to increase your strength score, that's 10 XP. Want to pick up the Weapon Master trait for a few more options in combat? 20 XP. The awesome custom spell that gives the person you point at a heart attack? 70 XP or more (I didn't bother stating one up for this). In some systems you even trade cash rewards for XP and vice versa.
You get all the same problems of under and over specialization, with a certain bit of power creep (Say you start with 200 points, and give out an average of 2 XP per session. Only a year of weekly sessions later, the party is 300 points).
Those games also tend to have problems with balance- it's a lot harder to make a balanced game when you are trying to be so unrestrictive. Also, the amount of choice can be overwhelming. Still great fun in the right hand, though!
Point-buy systems are, basically, skill-based though. Yes, they are more flexible and you aren't reliant on luck to get you that high-strength bruiser, but the skills and skill advancements aren't any different. Personally, I don't understand why all games aren't point-buy.
@@davidmorgan6896 this is point-buy in the sense that you spend XP to buy individual features, as seen in games like Mutants And Masterminds not point-buy ability scores.
@@blandedgear9704 quite a few games have half-hearted point-buy mechanics. I prefer the GURPS and Hero System approach where everything is configured through points.
@@davidmorgan6896 I wouldn't really call them skill based. They have some similarities, but adding whole mechanics and features to your character that other characters in the party don't have makes them more like class-based systems. They have some similarities to each, and some similarities to Kult-style make-your-own-abilities games, but they are basically their own whole thing.
It's interesting that two of the grey zoned games is Swedish because it is kind of an example of Swedish TTRPG design philosophy and history. In the 1980s when the first homegrown Swedish RPG to become a commercial success (in Sweden) Drakar & Demoner was published; it had classes just like DnD but it didn't use levels per say but more a skill based percentile type system. And ever since then most Swedish designed RPGs have followed the same pattern of being a combination of skill based mechanics with a class or archetype guided character creation
I've played both. I'm currently designing a Skill based system. Your videos have helped guide my research on a lot of topics.
If you have not already I highly recommend taking a look at call of Cthulhu, the system is still very similar to how it was 40 years ago, but it has been tweaked and balanced at least 7 times.
While it may use different points, skills, or dice the system itself should give you ideas on what you can add to your own.
@@B00Radl33 you mean the second most talked about game on this channel? Never heard of it
@@bruced648 I don't even know what your going on about. I replied with something called "Sarcasm". I started in on that stuff 30 years ago. Also. NONE OF THOSE have anything to do with building a game SYSTEM, those are all setting. A setting I will not be using because I don't really enjoy it. I have my setting picked out and am very happy with it.
I found that earlier in D&D, one of the things I was doing was multiclassing multiple times just so I could make a character that fits the vision in my head (Knowledge Cleric + Divination Wizard for a fortune teller, Hexblade Warlock + Barbarian + Fighter for an unlikely hero being trained by a sapient weapon who would take over if things got rough) Now I focus more on what kind of class I want to play and less on my character's style and personality. It's been noted by my GM that the newer characters I make are less like characters and more like bundles of stats.
Both Fantasy Trip and Against the Darkmaster / Merps use both class and skill, and are my faves.
Rolemaster 2E :D
One of the benefits of a level based game is you can use it to mark out the points of the THE MONOMYTH (THE HERO'S JOURNEY) which I use a lot narratively.
Earthdawn, at least 1st and 2nd edition, is a combination of both skill-based and class-based. Classes are known as Disciplines and Skills are known as Talents (although there are skills in the game as well). The Legend Points (their equivalent of experience points) you gain by adventuring can help you raise your Talent ranks, which determine when you "level up".
that sounds a little like merp, where you levelled up but got to develop your skills using development points. It was harder for a mage to pick up combat skills, but you could do it without breaking the balance. I'd love to play a skills based fantasy game.
Awesome as usual!! Im looking forward to jump to Skill Based Games and this video boost my resolve to do it even more. Thanks Seth!
Aww yeah, 8th level aint ever happening! I kinda missed the gang in this one, but it didn't hurt the message, just made it less pulpy and fun to have the gang be pro one or the other. Maybe a future skit eh!
Also, I like the idea of skill-based more, but it does lead into analysis paralysis, completely Broken/OP characters such as I've heard from Symbaroum. There is so much to balance, and as much as i absolutely LOVE the idea of Improvement points in Cyberpunk, i Really hate the cyberpunk setting, so I'll probably never really get the natural idea for it, and it increases the amount of paperwork to keep track off behind the screen. Sure, this can be fixed with players helping, but it's something everyone has to be in on more or less, but I would love the idea of figuring out how much one has to do a Novice skill to become an Adapt and then a Master.
I've never played a skill-based game. What's a good one for "medieval fantasy" gameplay. So, essentially, a D&D-like game, only skill-based and not class-based?
My experience with Medieval Fantasy skill-based games is extremely limited, but check out RuneQuest, maybe Modiphius's Conan (that one is gray-zone, but I consider it far more skill than class-based). There are free quickstarts for both of those on DTRPG.
While I haven't played them and can't say for certain (word on the street says they're skill-based), maybe check in to The Witcher and some of the Savage Worlds fantasy setting. If you're a fan of Arthurian legends, King Arthur's Pendragon is supposed to be amazing (though it might be more Historic Dark Ages than you're wanting).
Hey Seth have you ever played any Super heroes type game?
I find they are very helpful as a Game Master to learn how to deal with creating diverse challenges for all types of characters and players from interpersonal day to day challenges to boss fights.
This question occurred to me as well.
Oh yes I would like to know that too
Never tried them. The genre just never appealed to me.
@@SSkorkowsky I felt the same way till my players said they wanted to play low powered realistic type heroes vs crazy powered villains.
If I was ever stranded on a desert island and could only have one book it would be Villains and Vigilantes! 47 pages of pure genius, with it I could run any game imaginable from D&D to Cybers to Hi tech or Hi fantasy to skilled super spies.
I wish I could give every Gm A copy!
@@shadowandson3550 I haven't had a chance to play it, but I would suggest aberrant. Preferably the original version put out by white wolf, because I have no idea what the reboot is like.
Basically they had 10 different categories that you could put up to five dots into, covering categories such as fire, electricity, gravity. And that was it. You built a superhero by coming up with the concept and then putting the necessary points in the categories to give you what you wanted. The Human Torch for example would have points in Fire and Air and probably one point in gravity.
It is the White Wolf Old World Darkness system, so it isn't very heavy on crunch. But it provided enough flexibility to where you could come up with whatever you wanted, and you could easily just go off on your own setting.
I've also been told the Champions is an excellent game, but I've never had a chance to play it either, and I don't think I have any of the books for it. I do recall it being very crunchy.
Lastly I could suggest Palladium games Heroes Unlimited. I know it's popular on sites like rpgnet make fun of Palladium, because the game mechanics are a little odd at times and there's never been a revision in 30 years, but Heroes Unlimited was a huge staple of my friends and I in the 90s. Palladium has kept their cost down so for the cost of one new 5th edition book you could acquire Heroes unlimited and the two expansions to it, villains unlimited and Aliens Unlimited. They have a universal game mechanic, so if that's your speed you can even add in other Palladium books such as ninjas and super spies.
Very thoughtful treatment of the subject. I’m a few weeks away from a beta with a universal skills-based system that has a template mechanism to create classes or demi- classes. Your video helps me think about this from a different perspective during this rules wrap up. Bravo!
Yesterday I saw someone ask how to make someone from Fast and Furious in Cyberpunk Red. Top answer was ‘He’s a nomad. Skills are 1: Family, 2: Family, 3: Family.’
This checks out as True.
This comment gives me hope for humanity
Great video Seth. Also enjoying your Traveller videos as well, along with some of the other none TTRPG specific videos.
In the 'Tatters of the King' campaign I had a player who's character was a nurse working for another PC's alienist. She had high strengh and medium size and wound up becomming very proficient in Fist. She was very terrifiyng...
I'm just imagining a 6'3" German woman saying "it's time to take your medicine."
As a gamer since the 70s, this was a GREAT explanation of the two main types of games out there! Grats on the 'promter, and it'll get way easier as you go! Keep em coming!
Blades in the dark is a combination of both. Characters can do anything but the class called playbooks let you specialise
It’s the closest to Narrative based games that the Story based games get. It’s choice👍
Great video!! You covered a TON in 22 minutes. Not critical but I would have probably added ~1-2 min to talk about "templates" for skill-based games -- makes it easier and faster to create skill-based games - i.e. pick a template and then tweak that template (templates are super common in supers skill-based games). Supers lends itself really well for skill-based games -- in fact, I can't think of a supers game that is class-based. And "point buy" was actually first created in Superhero 2044 way back in 1977 for a supers game.
Your "exceptions" section was excellent!! -- I'd even add that games like D&D 5e and Pathfinder 2e are not purely class-based. There is a large pull of general skills and general feats you can improve in those games (and you have multi-classing to access some feats from other classes). So, it sits on that continuum that you described -- although more on the class-based side. Actually, not many pure class-based fantasy systems anymore -- on the fantasy side you have to look at old OSR games, old versions of D&D, and Castles & Crusades if you want fairly pure class-based games.
3e D&D had far more ability to build around skills, though still being level-based; unfortunately, there was too much overlap, and developing them was fairly slow-going. 5e is more streamlined, bu I miss being able to build a character with an esoteric skillset.
Cobbling a skill system into D&D was always a bad fit and it particularly disadvantaged newer players who didn't realise that you needed to max out a skill or not bother with it if you actually wanted to use it in-game (ie. the reason you want the skill in the first place).
The system seemed to promise complete flexibility and in the lower levels would seem to deliver it. It wasn't until they reached the mid-game that players who didn't max out their skills found out that having a couple points in a skill was functionally equivalent to having no points in that skill. That Fighter with five points in Pick Locks was almost never going to have a scene in the game where they actually picked a lock.
Using a class-based proficiency system is much more appropriate to a class based game as a PC's skill will always keep pace with the difficulty of the campaign. And you _can_ make a character with an esoteric skillset in 5e. You just can't make a character who's useless. A PC who knows how to pick locks will always pick locks at a skill level appropriate to their class level.
Have you checked out PF2 yet? Their system of "Trained", "Expert", "Master" and "Legend" might be more what you are looking for, while still being directly connected to the class-based progression. Or just go straight for a skill-based system from the get-go.
@@The1Ryu Actually, it's a very good example as the lock DCs _needed_ to be that high to challenge players who knew how the system worked and built their characters accordingly. And yes, it got absurd at higher levels. Which was my point.
Unless you maxed out your lockpicker's Pick Locks skill, your PC would not keep pace with the assumed progression. A lock designed to be a moderate challenge for a typical 12th level Rogue would be impossible for a PC who had taken Pick Locks as a cross-class skill to pick. Make the lock easier so the cross-class lockpicker can pick it and the Rogue would pick it automatically.
Either way, the player who took Pick Locks as a cross-class skill never got the payoff of that decision coming in clutch at some point. Which is kind of a problem if you only work this out after a year of playing that PC.
This is actually a primary reason for the "bounded accuracy" in 5e. It's totally possible in 5e for your Street Urchin turned Paladin to pull out a set of lockpicks and open a locked door.
@@nickwilliams8302 I'm aware of Pathfinder 2.0, but it looks like they're now going to compete with WotC in how far they will cowtow to a vocal minority and shove their head up their own butts, so I'm not interested in giving them my money.
Great break down as always. My group just started playing Skill-based games recently and I love how they work/progress.
I had never actually heard anything about the divide between class and skill games. This was super interesting
There are other ways that they have been discussed in the past, such as "Level based vs level-less" games or "class based vs class-less" (as stated in the video). I'd say about 35% are "skill based," 35% are "class based," 25% are very solidly middle-ground hybrids, and the last 5% are something weird and different.
It's basically the difference between final fantasy 8 and final fantasy 9 games
I like the idea of archetypes within skill based games....basically it's choose a class
It saddens me to see how utterly forgotten GURPS is nowadays :/ I barely see people mentioning it, despite it being quite important in overall the history of RPGs. I thought it would at least be cited on the video...
For me, even if the system is quite complex, flawed and not really practical to play, GURPS is amazing at teaching the essence of freedom and universality that RPGs inherently have.
People should give it a read, even if only for contemplation and gain in knowledge, it really opens my mind when I need to homebrew something into what I play.
Anyway, amazing video Seth, glad to see this topic being brought to light :D
No one will ever forget about GURPS because fans of GURPS always bring up GURPS.
I have no problems with GURPS, but I haven't played it (skimmed it, but no play time). Because I haven't played it, I don't mention it. Last thing I want is to cite it incorrectly.
The reason I didn't pick up GURPS in the 90s was rabid GURPS fans who finished every sentence with "You need to play GURPS," usually after blasting whatever I was playing (mostly D&D).
@@SSkorkowsky sorry, I didn't mean to imply anything about the video, neither be one of those pesky rabbid fans! My comment was more about the overall popularity of it.
Nowadays I find GURPS quite impractical to play, to be honest, but I admire how the system is made and it helped me a lot to see things in a broader spectrum.
Back in the 90's and early 2000's, it was one of the few systems translated here in Brazil, together with Vampire and Werewolf if I recall. I only saw D&D material when the 3rd edition launched, and I was crazy to find anything about ad&d since I knew it's existence from some computer and console games.
Because of that, GURPS was quite influential, and inspired some local systems that helped making the hobby a little more known (Daemon and 3d&t).
That's why I get sad that it's not relevant nowadays, in this new surge of RPG popularity. But I can understand why, since SJ games basically abandoned it :/
No worries. My experience was GURPS has never hit huge popularity, but always maintained a very devoted following.
But, what I do find interesting is your mentioning how it and Vampire were received up in Brazil. Are they still popular there? I enjoy learning how different games became dominant in different countries
GURPS is long forgotten around here nowadays. When d&d 3rd and specially 3.5 came trasnslated, they rapidly took it's place. Together with that, we also had the growth of 3d&t, a local made system that was really cheap and simplified. RPG books were always quite expensive around here, so being cheap and easily accessible helped a lot. By the time GURPS 4th arrived with a translation, it was far too late.
Vampire, Werewolf, and even Mage were quite popular back in the days too, I daresay even more than GURPS, since they had a really good translation and high quality books, but they were the most expensive of the bunch. I don't know how they are faring at the momment with the new edition, but I think they lost a little of their popularity, not quite as much as GURPS did tho.
These days, the most popular systems around here are d&d 5e, Pathfinder and Tormenta RPG, wich is a quite unbalanced system based on D20System from the same 3d&t guys with some anime thematic. CoC is getting a rise in popularity too, and Vampire is always here and there.
@@Archos777 I find that interesting. Some longtime gamer friends of mine in the UK were telling me how RuneQuest was the big thing there in the 80s, and they found it kind of weird that D&D became king in the US. I explained that was due to the Satanic Panic and how all the bad press of D&D making your kid go insane ended up boosting sales through the roof. Dungeons & Dragons was a household name in the US. Since the UK didn't have the Satanic Panic, D&D didn't get the same spotlight. D&D has eventually won the UK market, but there's still a huge RuneQuest fanbase there.
Meanwhile Call of Cthulhu is the biggest game in Japan. I don't know if it's the giant monster coming out of the water like a kaiju, the tentacles, or the fact it focuses on mysteries and horror. Personally I suspect it's due to them not having the same cultural ties to European history with knights in shining armor and all that which conventional fantasy games draw from. I dunno.
Hopefully the latest Vampire edition stays popular there. I love the idea of various contrives all having some game they identify with more or specialize in. It keeps it interesting.
A really interesting breakdown of the divide! Do you have any thoughts on this from a GM's perspective? Is running skill-based games any different to running class-based ones?
Also, on what you said about introducing new characters- in almost all skill-based games, an experienced character will be stronger than a weak one (maybe not in CoC), and in ways that look harder to balance out than 'we're level 6 and we have a couple of uncommon magical items'.
I'm not seth, but being a game master is tons easier when you don't have to constantly rebalance all your battles every time players gain a level.
Personally I find that at least comparing Pathfinder/D&D with some of the skill based games I've run I find it a bit easier to improvise with skill based games. Will depend on the system but the ones I enjoy tend to be a bit more condensed with the stats so I find it easier to just throw something together on the fly. Of course D&D 5th is a bit better in this area as well from what I've heard (though I've not run it).
I don't know about other skill based games, but Call if Cthulhu is super easy to learn and play as a player but a lot harder to GM (the horror aspect is probably a part of that)
So skill based is usually a lot easier to understand your own character, but harder to plan out adventures. At least with D&D vs CoC.
@@Wolfgang9Hype Interesting! There are class based games like Index Card RPG which also have very simple designs and a focus on making improv easy, so maybe it's just a tendency rather than an absolute...
"in almost all skill-based games, an experienced character will be stronger than a weak one"
I think there are no stronger chars in heavily skill based games other than literally: they have high strength. Which usually is pretty meaningless unless you want to lift or carry stuff or punch someone in the face. Which is pretty situational.
Of course it is true that a combat monster with lots off skill points in combat skills is better at combat than a character that has less points in combat skills but that is not directly linked to the experiences. Furthermore because of the way HP work in most skill based systems combat skills scale differently. Even the combat monster needs to play smart and use tactics. Just charging in and trying to face tank will not work.
In my experience its allmost 100 % like presented in the video. Its easy to have chars with different experience in skill based games but not really viable in class/level based games.
Hell yeah, another banger from my main man Seth!
Keep up the awesome content!
One of the biggest advantages of class-based games is that they're designed for some inherent niche protection. This makes it a bit easier for a GM to share spotlight time among the players, since each character has his or her own "thing" and that can be made important relatively easily. Conversely, in a skill-based game, it can be easy for a character to never be the best at anything, even if he is competent at several things. This can be especially a problem if some of the players are better at character construction than others, or even if some of the players simply know the GM better than the other players.
On the other side of the equation, class-based games tend to increase character power exponentially, while skill-based are likely to be much closer to a linear power curve. (It's unlikely to be truly linear, since players will tend to concentrate on skills that synergize.) The result is that it's easier to run the same characters for long periods of time without the power of the game getting out of hand so completely. And as you noted, character builds are constrained more by the imagination of the players than by the imagination of the designers.
My preference is pretty strongly for skill-based, but network effects are an even stronger constraint on the games I play. You need a group interested in whatever game you intend to play for most games, and if the other players have different preferences, well, gaming in a suboptimal system is better than not gaming at all.
Agreed. I think that skill based systems work best when the pool of starting skill points is small. This helps prevent a situation where you have a party where every character can do everything.
@@robertburns4429 to be fair that can also be prevented by having 'skills' have a fairly high vertical ceiling, to discourage minimal investment.
So...wat ya saying is....class based are for idiots?
(the main reason classes still persist is because they are predefined packets, no imagination required,
so anyone can play, you don't need to bring much to the table to start moving,
Its basically a microwave ready meal, no effort, no time, no talent? no problem,
Or maybe a bike with training wheels, no sense of balance? not a problem,
I don't like other peoples interpretation of what a fighter or wizard should be, I don't like limits and sometimes don't like cliches, (I like some cliches,....) but most of all I really dislike trying to squeeze round pegs (their version of a fighter say) through square holes (trying to make it conform to the character I envisioned)
@@Tony-lc5kc look, its ok to have tastes. its ok to prefer doing all the work yourself, its absolutely *not* ok to denigrate other people simply for preferring something else.
no, class based isn't 'for idiots'. or 'people that lack talent' (whatever TF that means). Preferring to not have to select every single detail of your character, every time you create a character, is not bad, nor should it be looked down on. get the fuck over yourself, the existence of things that exist outside your preference aren't some personal insult to your preferences.
@@sillyking1991
Relax....
Okay, so stupid was not PC enough,
...."creatively disadvantaged"?? (WAT!! WAT!!!)
It's got nothing to do with preference,
its all to do with creative freedom, (or lack of thereof) ya know, like having a personal opinion? (I know what you are thinking, "should be a law against it!" right?)
And I never saw anything stupid as a personal insult (no, I only see "personal insults" as "personal insults" (I know, I know, "I'm so literal" sigh...) so please, take a moment, count to ten, then get "the fuck over yourself" (maybe you wouldn't feel so insulted if you had a sense of humour?, or did I hit a nerve of truth?...?!?!?!?!?1 I HIT A NERVE DIDN'T I!!!!!)
Look on the upside, one day, chances are you will forget about this comment,
Sure its the "booby prize"
........but who doesn't like boobies?
Great video. As a big Mongoose Traveller player the need to not just max out one stat really rings true. I created an arty, talky, computer character but I had to make her leave her art career when she turned 30 to ensure that she actually had SOME skills with weapons and vaccsuits as otherwise she wasn't going to last long in a hostile scifi game!
Character evolution by training skills is also fantastic in the game. We needed a broker when we started trading, so she studied up during some journeys. My other character is working on her mechanic skills as our group are lacking that. Our "tank" has been working on his med skills as we don't have anyone else who even knows what the right end of a scalpel is!
I started on Worlds of Wonder (Basic Role-Playing), and painfully average was one of my biggest sins for a while. I was so worried about not having a skill, I'd spread out my points as far as possible, trying to be a jack of all trades, but ending up being a jack of crap.
I've been there. It's always my first knee jerk reaction with any new system.
I was feeling trepidation while preparing to run Traveller for the first time... my players LOVE class based progression, but I think running them through Annic Nova is going to change their minds. Thanks for all your great videos!
Back in the late 80's, early 90's when I was introduced to skill based games (Champions, GURPs) I couldn't go back to 2nd ed D&D. I was already so irked with the limitations of the classes in D&D that I wanted nothing to do with them. By the time 3.0 came out, I realized it wasn't necessarily class based vs. level based that really pissed me off. It was the artificial limitations posed by the way classes were designed in older games.
Today, I love both kinds of games. 5e is probably my favorite D&D and I'm still happily exploring different sub class options in the various classes. I also love a good skill based system that doesn't lose itself in minutia like some of those older games did (Champions, omg).
Ultimately, I think the thing a GM needs to be concerned with, or at least aware of, is niche protection. How do you help your players find those moments where their character gets the spotlight and gets to be the competent bad ass. It's incredibly frustrating as a player to think you're making a character good at a thing only to find out someone else made a character who is even better at it. Level based can sometimes mitigate that (though not completely). Of course, with skill based games, I do find that players who don't choose a role for the group often just make bland, less than competent jacks-of-all-trades.
I like to actually play in a way that me and others mark a CoC skill for upgrade after we fail it, not succeed, which means the better You are the harder it is to master, whereas the basics are easy to learn
I often wish Seth (you) had played the Hero System (e.g. Champions). Given the comments, in this video, about one-trick ponies and Mr. Average, I'd like to see how Hero System fit in that area particularly given its mechanic that allows players to build unique powers/spells based on special effects and modifiers. I know that Hero can be intimidating at the outset but really isn't that difficult. It is, in my opinion one of the best purely skill-based and level-free RPGs.
One of the parents of HS, was The Fantasy Trip (by Steve Jackson - also creator of GURPS) which, while level free, felt like a level game since XP accumulated toward advances in total attribute points which determined new skill purchases. There is the example of a system that is skill-based but not entirely level-free. (There was also a small drift into Class-Based systems in that characters were either heroes or wizards with physical/mental skills or spells being respectively cheaper.
At any rate, I often wish I could hear Seth's take on those systems.
I'm not Seth, but I've played a few GURPS style games before and to be honest I'm kinda iffy on them. To me their greatest strength (their flexibility) also contributes to their greatest weakness. The most telling thing to me was a pregen character I saw in one of the core books: It was something like courtesan or diplomat or something, and the only way they could reflect the social prowess of these characters was by giving them actual mind-control powers. The game can do almost every genre imaginable, but you can really feel it straining when you ask it to do something it's not good at. Things like consumables, situations where the characters are improvising using weapons/tools they don't generally use, or someone trying to do a thing that a person would be able to do (like hide, or convince someone to do something) without having an associated power with it.
It's been a long time since I've played one of these though, so maybe my criticism is outdated or I'm misremembering, and none of these flaws are insurmountable, it's just more work for the game master to have to power through.
@@kevingriffith6011 GURPS attempts to quantify more things as discrete skills than the Hero System does. The two systems aren't interchangeable nor equivalent. Hero System defines the effect and allows the player to define how the effect is achieved which avoids mind controlling courtesans (unless that's actually what you're after). I'd say that the biggest flaw to the hero system is how experienced players tend to go overboard in extracting every finest essence of an ability (while less experienced players opt for more granularity). The system allows players to go as deep as they want.
@@RockOfLions Ah, I must have gotten some wires crossed. It's also entirely possible that I missed something when I played, I've only ever played with GURPS about 4 times, but I felt like if the player wanted to do something challenging that didn't fit into one of the powers they selected then there wasn't much in the way of rules to help them out. I'll have to re-read it though.
@@kevingriffith6011 unfortunately I'm not really an expert on GURPS. I've played its predecessor TFT for decades and Hero System countless times but I mainly know GURPS from reading the rulebook in several editions.
The reasoning if you like something you must automaticaly dislike something else is so silly ! Great video !!
I started with skill based games, VtM was my first game and I can never got on with level/class based. It always felt very limiting to me as a gm and player, but i also prefer slow, dark plots where the world is unveiled and revealed to be this vast complex monstrosity of politics, horror and intrigue.
Class based is a lot more dumb fun, not derogatorily said, it's more akin to like watching an action movie, defined roles, cool action and at the end of it you saved the day.
I also do feel the damage point. I'd say some of the best moments in any rpg have been when dealing with being frail. One particular time, in a wreckage during a DH game, someone got the drop on me and blasted me through the leg, leaving me unable to move and bleeding out bad, there was something more of an urgency there with characters trying to fix it and our hobbling escape across the snow as i trailed my blood, being propped up by other acolytes.
The drama of injury is not something that really works too well in D&D and games like it.
D&d does not do horror very well at all.
I just discovered your channel so cudos for that, you have a new follower. And as far as styles of RPGs, i began playing level based systems with the original D&D but i was presented a system called harmaster (skilled base system) in 1983 and i fell in love with it. My problem is that i never was able to convince my friends to try it so i have lived a class based life ever since. The Skill based approach is probably still the underdog because of the D&D monster which is just too big and widespeard. It's even worst today with all the RPG streamers that expose new and potential players to that system alone. It's not a bad thing per se though, we just want to have fun... but i't unfortunate that a great way to enjoy RPGs is trumped because of that. Seeing your video has just motivated me to try again and push my friends to try harmaster one time before we kick the bucket :) Thanks.
I tend to prefer "class" based games. Pathfinder 2e is my current go to. I like and play skill games as well but they always feel lower power to me. Classes can have lots of interesting and unique abilities that can't just be represented by being better at a skill.
Well, there are skill based games from White Wolf (or Onyx path) - like Vampire or Werewolf (or even Exalted for way bigger than life heroes) - it's skill based games with archetypal classes - some overlap is still possible, each "class" have something other classes can't have or spend lot of resources to obtain it in game
I represent unique abilities with perks, when you have a certain amount of ranks in a skill you may use experience points to buy perks for that skill, perks can be those unique options like sneak attack or spell like abilities or combat maneuvers (from D&D battlemaster). It also serves as a way to specialize into a narrower part of a skill.
in many skill based systems there are magic and other special abilities, they are just done differently. I mean, in RuneQuest you can have characters who are basically "Fighters" but who have taken points in Folk Magic that can do many of the things that a "Ranger", "Paladin", or whatever they are calling mage knights these days. You just have to think about it differently.
Yo I don't think I quite expected the DEEP dive on this (I don't know what I expected, this is Seth!) -- I really appreciate your experienced take on this, Seth. You hit on a lot of things I don't think I was ever quite able to articulate about the issues around each style game!
I started playing back in 1981 (D&D) and while I still play class based games now from time to time I have always liked skill based games a little more. I like having the freedom to decide what I think is important for the character I am creating, as a DM I have also noticed that after I introduce players to skill based games they do have a session or two of being overwhelmed by choices. I was running Call of Cthulhu 1e when it first released (and Elf Quest, Runequest etc). I now try and encourage players to try a skill based game, but usually after they cut their teeth on a OSR game just to get them prepared for what Role-playing is. The other big thing I have noticed about new games that lean more toward skills based is that they usually have a perks/hindrances mechanic that helps characters feel more like they are playing a person than a bunch of stats.
I started out being all about the "Class" because of the simplicity and that particular point about as a GM it's easier to match adventures to PCs. I railed a little at Runequest after playing D&D for a few years because I didn't like the slow development and notion that you might forget to stat an important skill when creating a character and end up being crappy in the role.
I was about 13 or 14 at the time.
Then I found "Call of Cthulhu" and everything changed. I still run D&D games for my old friends, but gradually I'm drawing them into BRP, and particularly Mythras Classic Fantasy.
MCF is essentially AD&D but using the Cthulhu/Runequest/BRP ruleset. The publishers have even come up with a way that you CAN have "Classes" and Levels in a Skill Based games. Quite Simply, when you have achieved a certain rank in specific skills you are able to go up a level and gain access to new Abilities that enhance the skills that are specific to that Class. (New rules for "Multi-Classing are even coming out in the new "Unearthed Companion" which after about 6 years of promising FINALLY lands this year.)
MCF has the Low Hitpoint "Scary Combat" element, (and Mythras/Runequest IMO has the best Combat System out there). You can follow a Class Template while also being free to choose any skills on the sheet. Level Ups are slow, but the Abilities they unlock are well balanced and while providing a noticeable improvement, don't break the game. It also has a very cool "Luck Point" system that is very different to Call of Cthulhu 7E's but is equally Fun in play.
If you love the feel of old school D&D, but feels the rules are just too restrictive, and particularly that Combat sucks, MCF is the game you should try.
They also have a free introductory version called Mythras Classic Fantasy Imperative, that you can download from The Design Mechnism or DTRPG, which is a complete ruleset in its own right, but only covers the four basic classes, Fighter, Magic User, Cleric and "Rogue" (I wish they'd called it Thief, but you can't have it all your own way.)
I enjoyed Rolemaster Standard System a lot. It always seems like a good mix. You have levels but skills are so important.
I agree. I loved Middle-Earth Roleplaying, which used Rolemaster. I still use RM’s crit tables for my Pathfinder campaign to add flavor to combat.
I prefer 2E but Rm is a great system once your characters are built. I think people should also know about Central Castings. Its long out of print, but it is THE BEST background generator. Its like Traveller on steroids.
Holy shit I was searching for that terminology in system types, thank you so much!
One thing I enjoy about class based systems is the challenge of working with restrictions. I'm a proponent of the philosophy of "Limitation breeds creativity" and building characters within the bounds of a class based system forces me to really consider my thematic and mechanical priorities.
That said, if you were to tally up my list of prefered games it turns out that I do have a slight preference for skill based systems. I love games like Cyberpunk 2020/Red, Shadowrun, Alien, and Runequest. Unfortunately it is very difficult for me to find the opportunity to play those games partially because my options for game groups is very limited, and many of the people I play with tend towards D&D and/or PbtA system games. For some of them its a matter of convenience (its very easy to start up a game of D&D 5e because of its familiarity and popularity, and PbtA games are very simple to pick up because everything you need for character creation is found in whatever playbook a player decides to use) while for others it's simply because they are very entrenched in the 3.5 e/Pathfinder mindsets (not shaming, just saying) so getting them to try out something new and different is often more of a headache than its worth.
Personally, I'll always prefer class-based. Regardless, I suspect skill-based systems are much harder to design well. For example, it was so easy to completely break your character in Elder Scrolls: Oblivion.
If I may share, there's one more downside to many skill-based systems that I have encountered: a lack of benchmarks. In class-based systems you usually have a good idea of how you measure up to everyone else in the world and if you use your limited customization to be good at something you're above the curve for your level. But with skill-based, you often don't know if your skill level is good or not unless you have some benchmarks.
I was playing in a game once and I made a cool stealthy assassin character and pumped a lot of points into stealth because I wanted to be able to practically disappear into the environment. I think I had a skill level of 80 or so which seemed high and was like twice as much as all my other good skills. But then a session or two in and random minion ninjas appear with a stealth level of like 120 and I was disappointed because that was my specialty and these random minions were better than me.
But I'm not saying that skill-based is bad, just saying that you really need to work with everyone to establish what number is good for a skill. If I had made the same character in a class-based system I would just be a stealthy class with a feat or perk or specialization in stealth and I'd know I was better at my skill than others at my level.
This makes SO MUCH SENSE to me. I just realized why I clash so much with one of my friends when it comes to playing different RPGs.
I've been going down the ICRPG rabbit hole this week: loot based progression is such a foreign concept to me but I want to try it.
Thanks for the video!
That sounds very intersting, care to share a loot based TTRPG?
@@zhangbill1194 As I mentioned, this is new to me, but ICRPG is the one loot-based that I know of.
th-cam.com/video/tZ1Lg1l1pHY/w-d-xo.html
@@zhangbill1194 professor dungeon master just did a review of the newest update of ICRPG on his Dungeon Craft channel. (I don't know how to link to another channel). It's an excellent review of a loot based system.
look at basic D&D and advanced D&D. while you gained xp from being murder hobo's, you also gained xp from the treasures you "liberated".
I love your videos ! The way express your battle tested experience while still being respectful to one another is perfect.
Thank you.
I prefer class system as I feel it is more streamlined than skill based system as it’s easier to make characters in class system than skill, also I can’t wait for Seth to review Call of Cthulhu Masks module. It will be funny to seen Jack’s reaction to the campaigns events.
Managed to find a hybrid. Fragged Empire 2e has you pick up traits every level up (which happens every 3 sessions), and during downtime you can roll to aquire new equipment or upgrade your current equipment.
I've been gaming since 1998. I have always wanted to find a great skill-based game, but every one of them I've tried it was painfully obvious that there were a few builds that were very powerful and focusing in anything else was a waste of time. Class-based games actually offered me MORE flexibility. The skill-based games I tried were just full of false choices. That said, I'm sure there are some great ones out there, I just haven't played them.
Much depends on how you gamemaster them and set up scenarios. No one has climbing skill? Too bad when you face a lot of cliffs and walls and vertical tunnels. Need to cross a river? Anyone have a woodcrafting skill? Or boating? Swimming? What's this guy saying? Anyone know his language? Remember the scene in A Knights Tale when the guy had to learn how to dance? I would love to play more skill-based games such as Hero system, GURPS or Fate. But my players default always to AD&D/Pathfinder.
Some skill based games are logical. In Hero Fantasy to be a mage you have to learn, for example, how to Create Water and Shape Water before you can make an ice ball and throw it. I wish more games did that. (You can cast Fireball but you can't make a fire or otherwise control it? Interesting.)
Edit: It's the GURPS magic system I was thinking of, not Hero Fantasy.
You should look into the 7th Sea RPG. The best way to describe it as a skill based game with classes in it. I haven't had a chance to play 2nd edition, but the old system focuses on skills, and the classes are based on fighting styles that provide very specific benefits. Plus swashbuckling is fun.
@@douglasdea637 To be fair, HERO is so open, that you could, in fact, create such a system if you wanted to through creative use of power disadvantages, I.E. (Can only be leaned by a character with the "Make Water" spell, -1/2) or something like that. Its been almost a decade since I pulled out the HERO books, but if you sat and thought about it long enough, you could make anything you wanted. I found it especially powerful for GMs that like to customize or create. Most of my players never learned the super detailed character creation mechanics, I would just make packages for different "classes" or archtypes (soldier, or mage, or starship navigator) and let them spend the points to take on those packages, using their left over points to increase this that or the other thing, or to add new skills, perks, or powers that were outside of that base concept. Sped up creation, and I had fun thinking up all the different packages for them. Also helped to prevent the One-Trick Pony and the Boringly Average issues.
Please do a basic run down video covering the very basics of each of the TTRPGs you have run or played.
That might stir conversation on different systems and be a new starting point into other series of videos.
I once had a player who played a paladin who had no problem stepping into a pit or off a cliff see how deep it was. As a player he claimed it was his paladin's faith that his God would protect him. In reality he out leveled terminal velocity damage and as a player knew that.
The only reason I allowed it was because it added to the story, but as a GM I hate metagaming. I actually chose skill base games after having to deal with this player in many circumstances. As a GM I don't have to deal with all the b******* anymore.
This is a prime example of why I use Gygaxian falling rules.
40' fall isn't 4d6 damage, it's 10d6.
1d6 for 10
2d6 for 20
3d6 for 30
4d6 for 40
10d6 total.
Makes the ability to ignore certain amount of fall distance actually important.
That's the homebrew rule for falling damage that I use for my group
While I have been playing D&D for most of my time in the hobby, I have played several skill based games. The most notable ones were the West End Games Star Wars d6 system and Vampire: the Masquerade and Vampire: Dark Ages. My first experience as a GM was not in D&D but in Star Wars. Besides having lots of tips on how to run a cinematic style game, the game was very good at explaining how powerful the characters were for a scenario. The game's starting players and all NPCs used classlike templates, which defined attributes and which skills the character could start with, but nothing could stop a character from learning any skill in the game, even the three Force skills.
I like to use a loose class system: a class will give you different abilities and specific perks like a Vandal gets an option for the "Krushing Attack" perk when they gain a perk point. But all the skills increase as you use them. Also different player races can give buffs and debuffs to skills and stats: an Orc has a naturally higher strength and overall toughness as well as can be more procient melee brawlers than say a human but won't be as agile or have the same level of stealth and lockpicking
Great video. Really Got me interested in skill based games. And the quality of your videos has skyrocketed.
I feel that skill-based games that allow you to improve skills by using them successfully should do the reverse and have you improve your skills by failing at them. That means that as you get better at a skill you need to take on progressively harder challenges to still have a chance to fail.
Some games do handle it that way, and one thing you'll learn playing skill-based games (particularly anything BRP-based) is that you can change stuff like that so long as you know how it'll change the game.
One hybrid system that I found interesting (and that also neatly explained away how and why players tended to acquire skill and power so much faster then most normal people, but that's another thing entirely) was FASAs old Earthdawn game, while true to fasa style the system did suffer from some not so minor issues. The game had the at least from what I have played a unique concept of a combination of classes with skills and once you had increased your current skills enough you unlocked the next class level that unlocked new skills and spells.
I have the impression the skill based systems seems to be about regular people on a certain scenario, like a detective, a doctor, a scientist, etc.
Meanwhile class based systems seems to turn the player's characters into what would be anime protagonists or superheroes.
Brilliant. Required viewing, in fact, for any game designer. "He did, in fact, regret this." Laughed out loud. Can't wait to see you hit 100k.
Thank you much, sir. That 100k mark is close, but I swear the closer I get, the steeper that remaining gap feels. Having a channel is very much its own Level-Based game.
@@SSkorkowsky I know the feeling. I got to 70k quickly but every sub after that feels like crawling up Mount Doom.
Ive always been in the skills>>>class camp by a significant margin basically since forever. *However*, I will say that if you want a really well done class based system do check out Shadow of the Demon Lord.
SotDL's system has similarities with Warhammer Fantasy RP in the career hopping sense. Lots of mix & match options.
only five years, damn i guess ive seen most of your content by now.
keep doing what you love and do it on your own terms, a social contract extends past the board.