Fighter Rogue Mage Cleric and class purity

[Tiamat-86]

@Tai_MT its funny how you mention "not sure how nuke exists with sword" and FF6 right back to back.
because FF6 has the weapon unleash kinda equipment. attack with X sword equipped has %chance to autocast Y spell on same target.

 

[Tai_MT]

@Tiamat-86 Oh, you mean proc the enchanted sword? I mean... okay... But, that's just being a Magic Knight again. Enchanted Sword. At that point, it's not the class that is doing the skill, but the equipment. So... really, anyone who could use the equipment could cast the spell.

Not sure that's what the OP is talking about, especially since they're referring to classes instead of equipment.

The closest to "Sword Nuke" I've seen is in Final Fantasy 6 using Sword Tech. But, I mean, it's still physical damage, and it just basically "hits all enemies". So... it's being a Knight, but being a more powerful Knight.

If we're talking, "He swings a sword and magic proc's", then all we're talking about is "enchanted equipment" or maybe "weaker Magic Knight".

Or... does "Knights of the Round" from Final Fantasy 7 count? Though, really, that's just a ton of like whacking a dude with multiple swords.

 

[ATT_Turan]

Not sure I know how "a big nuke" exists with a sword and not using magic. I guess he just hits really really really super hard?

That's kind of what I was guessing...but, again, there are tons of existing examples of it. All of the warrior characters in Final Fantasy with limit breaks, the Grandia series, Disgaea, Etrian Odyssey...it's not a neglected concept.

 

[Tiamat-86]

really theres next to no difference between mage skills and fighter skills.
MP vs TP, no different then versions of stamina systems ive seen
MP = stamina, you run out your just to fatigued to add any oomph to it.
an exhausted wood cutter can still swing an axe (ive done it plently)
TP = stamina, thats just spikes of adrenaline.
resting up doing simple tasks after 10k run when rando pulls a knife on you... ya...

the only real difference between magic users and melee users is which status ailments cripple you more.
silence and berserk will cripple a magic user while root and blind will cripple melee.

 

[ATT_Turan]

I would say that's an over-simplification. If you're going to go that far abstract, then there's no difference between dealing damage or curing your party, they both allow you to participate in more battles before resting

 

[Tiamat-86]

eh man, glass canon builds and meat shield builds exist for a reason. just 2 sides of the same coin.
it really is just that simple. math is math
doesnt matter what formula you use to get there as long as the end result is 0 to 1 in your favor and solving the problem didnt result with a controller in your tv.

 

[Tai_MT]

solving the problem didnt result with a controller in your tv.

Man... giving me flashbacks to the type of weird degenerates I've had as friends who thought this was acceptable. Man, if your instinct, when you lose and get frustrated, is to throw your controller or hit a wall or whatever... You need some anger management classes and need to reprioritize your life.

I mean... you're playing a game. A GAME. If you aren't having fun, you turn it off and do something else.

Man... I haven't thrown a controller since I was six and got my butt whooped for it. Weird to think we got people older than that who throw temper tantrums like children when they lose a game. Worst I do now is yell at my TV for like 10 seconds, realize I'm angry, and just turn the game off.

Anyway, back to topic:

I'm not really sure I follow the reasoning with the MP and TP mechanics. I've always looked at meters like "TP" as building up Adrenaline or Rage. I typically use it as a "Rage" mechanic, myself. It builds up from getting hit a lot... hitting others a lot... having party members die... whatever. High Stress Situations. I've always looked at MP as "This is the limit of skills you can use". I use it sometimes for Magic and sometimes for other skills. I tend to just label it "Potential" and make it a universal thing across all classes. Sure, you might be able to swing your axe... but you aren't able to do a backflip with it when you're exhausted. Standard Movement while winded makes sense for me when you're out of MP, but anything that would be some type of "flourish", would be pretty much impossible.

And, if we're honest here...

There really is a large difference between damage output and healing. If you can inflict more damage, you have fewer turns in battle where you'd take damage and need less resources to recover it. If you can heal a lot more... well... you're just expending a bunch of resources to stay alive. It's always far more efficient to take as little damage as possible rather than heal it away.

 

[Tiamat-86]

There really is a large difference between damage output and healing.

damage output and damage mitigation is where the difference is smaller.
if have 4 party members but every turn 3 of them need to be healing then clearly you need more damage mitigation. glass canons can only get so far before you start needing a minimum defense and hp requirement.
when raising your def/mdf boosts your damage output by 200% but doubling your atk/mat only results in +33%, lol math

closest ive come to throwing a controller in the last 20years in not using the wrist strap with the wii. smacked my leg a few times though. try again with the exact same setup when wake up and it usually turns into a cake walk. some people will try and mark it up to RNG when it was just human error.

 

[Seacliff]

The four-party class system is a product of older tabletop games, where mechanics were equally about stuff outside of combat as they were inside of combat.

Looking at ODnD rules, Wizards were designed to be pretty overpowered at higher levels. They had spells that could do pretty much anything, from unlocking doors to slinging fireballs. Their limitation was that they had a resource to do any of this.

The Fighter was to provide sustainable DPR in combat without the need for a resource. They couldn't do much more than swing a weapon, but they could at least do that all day

The Thief class was originally third-party homebrew because players wanted to be Bilbo from The Hobbit. They provided out-of-combat utility without needing a resource, but kind of sucked at it back then.

Finally, the Cleric. They were front-line supports in combat and out-of-combat healers. See, going to an inn to get a full recovery didn't exist back then. Characters only restored 1hp a day. A Cleric made sure the party didn't have to wait multiple in-game months before setting out on another adventure.

So the four basic party roles of yore heavily relied on resource management, which gets a bit muddy when by the mid-90s you started to see a lot of Video Games tie resources to both magical and physical capabilities. Even back in the 80s and early 90s, most 'skills' you see in video games were magic.

Personally, if you are going to go down that route, I think you should drop to concept of traditional party roles altogether. It simply becomes arbitrary. Think of the roles in combat YOUR game needs for it's combat system.

 

[Lunesis]

Why? Because it makes sense. It's a theme, a trope. A frail character would naturally gravitate towards a non physical combat specialty. It's natural. Same thing with elements. You could create an element called Star, but what would it be? The 8 elements that are used in every RPG already make sense and interrelate with each other. Just because something is different doesn't mean it's good, and just because something is a trope doesn't mean it's bad. I have seen some surreal RPGs that were just too out there for me. What I crave is a beautiful, colorful high fantasy setting. The trick is finding ways to be creative with those tropes.

 

[MarxMayhem]

Lately I've been wondering, why do nearly all class based games use these?

Familiarity. This lineup works, both in a balancing and a playstyle sense.

But in a single player game ... I wonder, is it necessary?

If you are making the player manage multiple charavters at any given time, then yes, I would argue that it is necessary. If you want a game that uses RPG progression but only manage 1 dude, play Shiren the Wanderer.

But why? I mean, it stems from the old Dungeons and dragons adventuring party didn't it?
The fighter is up front, tanking some skeletons
The cleric is healing this booboos.
The wizard is being a bit of a neckbeard for most of the session because he only has one spell, and he's not wasting it on 'trash' while the ...
The rogue is ... Well, he's not really doing much of anything really, because there's no traps to disarm this encounter, and skeletons are immune to Backstabbing.

You are absolutely right that D&D of old had this problem. This is why every edition after the 1st one made steps to solve it in each new edition (though arguably a favorable solution didn't happen until 4e).

A lot of wonky game design stems from 40 years ago.
Why are we still using these mechanics combined with these ... Archetypes?
I mean, I get storywise why we get Fighters Rogues Clerics and Mages. They appeal to different fantasies.
The heroic knight, the wise yet fragile mage, the nimble rogue, compassionate cleric/white mage.
These are great story tropes and character fantasies, but ...
Why do they have to link to the mechanics in such a ... predictable way?

If I choose to be the mage as a 'character fantasy' but I want to play a tank as mechanical identity?
What If I want to be the Rogue that heals?
Why can't my fighter be the one throwing around the big nukes?
Why shouldn't my white mage be slicing and dicing sometimes, Vampire hunter style?

If this is on a tabletop, then the only thing that keeps you from doing that is your DM not allowing you to have that freedom (which probably meant that he's a super rules lawyer who doesn't let you do fun things because it "breaks the rules").

If this is on video games, you have to realize that not all games will have a high detail of customization that you seek for a character, specially if you are to manage multiple characters. Aside from such a system being impossible or "not worth it", if this sytem is made poorly, you can just build a party combination of just the same one set and then just use that to dominate everything, which is a not-fun experience.

Class balance? I mean, I got a whole lot to say about that, and I think ... Classes as a package traditionally require a whole lot of things to be 'Bundled together'.
Why is the wizard frail? Because his spells deal more damage.
Why can't the cleric attack? Because he can heal.
Why does the fighter get beter defense? Because he gets nothing else.

A few things:
* Wizards are frail because they have crappy hit dice.
* Clerics can attack! They're just not allowed to draw blood or they get traumatized or something.
* Fighters do get more sword swings as well, but that does pale in comparison to Wizards getting better spells. Linear Fighters, Quadratic Wizards and all that jazz.

I just feel like there is so much more combat design space if those things are loosened up a lot more.

...Have you checked out 4e before? I feel like much of your issues has been resolved by that edition...

Maybe the rogue uses Potions better, his fireball is a molotov coctail, when he is standing as a tank he dodges and counterattacks.

Some people call that "Alchemist". 4e has a sort-of equivalent in the Artificer. Remove the item tactics, and you can argue that a Warlord can suit your needs.

A way to mitigate incoming damage (You know, Aggro and Tank stuff)
A way to to recover HP
A way to deal consistent Single target Damage
A way to deal consistent AoE damage
A way to burst Single target Damage
A way to Burst multitarget Damage
Offensive Buffs
Defensive Buffs
Debuffs
Removing ailments

What you're saying here is not wrong, but at the same time, a party does not need all of this to be successful. It just needs the good'ol Fighter/Mage/Cleric combo with a good side of tactics. Heck, it's because of tactics that classes have built-in weaknesses: you build your party to exploit enemy weaknesses while covering up your own, and/or bolstering your advangates while hindering your enemy's. One class should not be able to come close to achieving all of those on its own, and if one class does, something truly went wrong in the game balance phase.

TL,DR: Why are the character fantasies (Brave knight, robe dressed wizard) always linked to mechanical identities (Tank, Healer, Single target or AoE DPS)?

It works and it's easy to understand. I'm sure there are games and stories out there that have broken that norm, but a cliche is a cliche for a reason.

 

[Tiamat-86]

If this is on video games, you have to realize that not all games will have a high detail of customization that you seek for a character, specially if you are to manage multiple characters. Aside from such a system being impossible or "not worth it", if this sytem is made poorly, you can just build a party combination of just the same one set and then just use that to dominate everything, which is a not-fun experience.

i would like to argue this point with examples of FF1. many people have done runs with 4 of the same class.
the only 1s that weren't fun was 4 thieves because overall just weak in later levels compared to fighters, monks, redmages. or 4 blackmages because the low defense and HP while being more then strong enough in offense.
4 fighter, redmage or whitemage parties are kind of iconic though. people have been doing them since the games release and will still run those parties for fun in the modern remakes.
i know of 1 guy that beat the game solo whitemage with 3 dead lv1 party members

 

[AssumedPseudonym]

i know of 1 guy that beat the game solo whitemage with 3 dead lv1 party members

　I tend to do that with a Black Belt, personally. I usually go Fighter, Thief, Black Belt, Red Mage, but four Black Belts is ridiculously silly.

　I’ve seen the whole tank/sneak/mage/healer foursome for decades, and it works because the various characters’ strengths help cover other characters’ weaknesses. Even in single player games. …So what happens when you run into games where you get a three character party? Or five? Or games where you have lots more characters in the party than you can actually take into battle at one time? It might be the most used setup — “tried and true” and all that — but it’s far from being the [/i]only[/i] setup used.

 

[MarxMayhem]

i would like to argue this point with examples of FF1. many people have done runs with 4 of the same class.

That is, believe it or not, a choice of tactics that you can do, as I mentioned earlier. Is it fun? That's subjective, but people have done it for fun, with AssumedPseudonym testifying to it

 

[Lnik3500]

At first, I actually tried to avoid generic classes, trying to make class playstyles feel a bit out of what feels stereotypical, but I had the idea of using a subclass system. Suddenly, 16 classes transformed into 256 combinations possible.

How can I make the player get creative with a class system that he wouldn't be familiar with? Perhaps some would push harder to make them unique, but my answer was making them generic with skills that can be used well for any combinations. You could combine 2 Tank classes, 2 DPS, 2 Healers, or 1 Tank / DPS, 1 DPS / Healer and 1 Healer / Tank.

When the Dev decides to get creative, he's got to ask himself: "Would **I** even bother with a system like that if I was the one playing the game?". If you answer yes, you get to make sure that all the informations about the class system doesn't stay in your head and has ways of letting your player learn easily. Maybe with 1 class introduced at a time or something like that.

 

[lianderson]

You are thinking like a true artist by asking the right questions!

Good job human.