3 hours ago, 2P51 said:

They also lead to vanilla flavored everyone looks the same characters, which I've already said. I think classless systems suck.

I think it depends on the game and the genre.

I've played in a number of superhero RPGs, almost all of which are classless by design and definition, and none of the heroes were "vanilla" or looked the same, or in many cases even operated the same in combat.

I've also run a few sessions of 7th Sea 2nd edition, which itself is largely a "classless" system (closest it has are Backgrounds, and nothing is stopping players from all choosing the exact same background combos), and yet I've yet to have a character that was exactly the same as any other character in the group.

Played plenty of FATE too, from Dresden Files to Fate Accelerated Edition, and not one character in our group was the exactly same as the other.

WEG's D6 Star Wars is another RPG that is essentially classless, as nothing says you have to use the templates provided, and a player can quite easily build their own character however they wish. And again, not once have I been in a group for that game were any of the PCs were the same, even in those rare instances where there was more than one Force user in the bunch (though having a naïve Quixotic Jedi and a grizzled Failed Jedi in the same party certainly lead to more than a little hilarity).

Honestly, I think it comes down to the type of players you've got, and if you've got a bunch of min-maxing cheese-weasels that are only after the biggest bonuses or the most advantageous builds as opposed to creating actual characters, then yes a classless system is going to have problems. Of course, those same types of players are probably going to create generally uniform builds even in a class-based system; I've heard more than a few tales of D&D 3.5 groups comprised almost entirely of Clerics with a single Wizard for "versatility" simply because of how powerful Clerics were in that edition.

But, if your experiences with classless RPGs have all been sour, then probably not much that me or anyone else can say that will convince you otherwise. My own experiences with classless RPGs have been pretty positive, with the only people that "ruined it" by being min-maxing cheese-weasels being the types of players that would ruin any RPG due to them being min-maxing cheese-weasels.

I'm a big fan of classes, careers, and specializations. I like having varied mechanical diversity in my groups and being able to fill niches. I cut my teeth on 3.5, so that probably has a lot to do with it. I also like to build the mechanics of my characters first (supplemented by whatever base concept I may already have in mind) and fill in the fluff as I go.

The crunchy class is where I like to hang my RP fluff on.

That's a point of view I can get behind. Classes definitely have a sort of allure, giving you a nice structured character archetype to build upon. Classless RPGs are really a blank canvas, which can be a bit hard to work with unless you've already got a solid idea in mind.

Definitely think arguments of classless systems having no variation are an issue of playing with the wrong people, though.

Wow, I'm excited to see this development! Most of my friends are not into Star Wars, and prefer to RPG in a fantasy setting, so maybe I can use this to wean them off their old school antagonistic D&D-based style. Fingers crossed.

I don't mind classes, as long as they're open-ended like EotE. However, I do wish the talent trees were a) a bit more centred around a suite of knowledge, and b) not so artificially constrained to a 4x5 grid. The current system works okay for most classes, but some of them feel forced...I'd never play a Thief, for example, there are other ways to build one that seem better to me.

I'd prefer something like taking a base class to start...I mean really base like Leader, Warrior, Rogue, Healer, Smartypants. This would have a core set of career skills, and a core set of talents that define the archetype (also not all necessarily in a 4x5 grid). From there you can buy into spec trees that would define a type of activity, such as melee combat, mounted combat, navigation, slicing, investigation, etc. Some of these trees may be discounted by your base choice. These spec trees would have varying structure (i.e.: not always a 4x5 grid), and if you filled out the spec tree you could qualify for "prestige" trees (kind of like signature abilities). Some trees might have Ability or Skill rank prerequisites, but nothing would be off limits. I'd also do away with the ever-increasing surcharge for new trees.