[crossfire] races, classes, and play style

[Mark Wedel]

  As per note in thread about new login method, figuring out what classes/races 
should be present really comes down to what type of play we want to have.

  I know this has been discussed before, but opinions change, so I thought I'd 
restart the conversation.

  This much more drives classes and how they work than races.  OTOH, some races 
are really aimed for a specific class - maybe not a bad thing, but if that gets 
tied too closely together, one can than start asking what the point is of having 
that race.

  As I see it, there are basically 3 different approaches to classes (note for 
now, I'm hoping more to focus on what style we want, and once that is decided, 
worry about the technical way to enforce this):

1) Classes really just determine the characters starting skill set (and stat 
bonuses), but the player can pick up most all other skills at later time, so 
that fighter could become a cleric or mage, etc.  For all practical purposes, 
there is no limit on levels and or how good a mage that fighter is, save for any 
handicap based on stat points.  This is way crossfire currently works.

2) Classes are strict - what you start out with is what you will be your entire 
life - picking up other class skills is impossible - that fighter will never 
learn spellcasting (there are some number of non class skills like smithery, 
jeweler which the character could learn).  One could look at this as the AD&D 
model (ignoring the fact that AD&D has multiclassing)

3) Something in between - starting class is important - there may be some 
exclusive skills to the class, or maybe the quality of the skill (rate of exp 
gain, exp cap, etc) mean that the no matter how hard a player tried, that 
fighter would never be as good a wizard as that wizard is.

  I personally favor #3, #2, and #1 in that order (I like #3 the best).  My 
thought is that as a player, it gives more reason to try a few different classes 
- if the first class I choose can do everything equally well, I'm not going to 
learn/see much new with a different class (I'd note that one of the things that 
drove some of the special races is just this).

  But perhaps this also goes back to my playing AD&D, and fact that most games 
have some for of class restriction.  I also think that such a system may 
generate more player interaction - if I can do every class really well on one 
character, not as much reason to play with others.  Likewise, if I can use every 
item I ever find, no reason to trade/sell things off.  But if (as a mage) I 
couldn't use that 2-handed sword, well now I might want to try to trade it for 
something I could use.

  I think #2 is a bit too restrictive - while comment about player interaction 
above stands, at same time, a lot of play is probably solo, so not being able to 
do some other stuff probably gets too restrictive, but I'm not sure how that 
would really play out (presuming we still allow anyone to use wands, scrolls, 
potions, and a suitable supply is about, one could probably get around).  It 
would certainly be a different game.