Building Characters With No Class

[October]

Alternate title: The Non-Class PC (Ten Steps To Freedom!).

I'm not a fan of classes in RPGs; I find them too limiting.  So I whipped up a non-class version of the Character Generation steps (below) for myself (and anyone else who wants to give it a try).

Advancing the Non-Class PC beyond 1st will work just like normal (but eliminates the need for "Acquire a new Class").  Where it says "Class Ability" substitute "Trained Ability".

Building Characters With No Class:

1.  Start with a vision and Social Status.  Rolling for Social Status is optional.  You can just choose.
2. Choose Race.  Write down the AdCost, MR, WL, IM, Perks, and Sperks.  Keep a tally of your AdCost as you continue the steps below.
3. Choose Trained Abilities.  Each Ability chosen adds +1 to the AdCost.  Trained Abilities start at +1.  Using untrained Abilities begets a -4 to AR rolls.
4. Determine Wound Level (WL).  +1 to AdCost for each additional Wound Level above racial WL.
5. Choose additional Perks and Flaws (Optional).  +1 to AdCost for each Perk; A one-time bonus of +1 to your next Advancement Roll is granted for each Flaw.  Flaws may be acquired later during play with the same bonus.
6. Choose SPerks (Optional).  +1 AdCost for each SPerk added.
7. Improve & Acquire.  You get 4 Improvement Points (IP) to:
• Improve a Trained Ability.  Each +1 to AR =  1 IP.
• Purchase additional Powers, if applicable.  IP cost = to ¼ the Power’s TN.
• Purchase Mana.  1d6 Mana = 1 IP
8. Purchase Equipment.  1d6 x $100 for armour, weapons, and gear, subject to GM approval.
9. Update Character Stats.  Record the following on your character sheet:
• Experience Level (Lvl). New characters start at 1^st level.
• Movement Rate (MR).  Based on race.
  
• Wound Limit (WL): Based on race, plus any added in step 4.
  
• Defense (DF): Typically zero (0), adjusted by armour worn.
  
• Resistance (RS): AR Bonus = to experience level.
  
• Initiative Modifier (IM): Typically zero (+0), adjusted by race and weapon size.
  
•  Advancement Cost (AdCost): The sum of your race and steps 3, 4, and 5.
10. Finishing Touches.  Motivations, future goals, background notes, Boons & Baggage (optional), alignment (optional), and a Name.
    

[esmale]

Hi October,

At first blush, it looks like what you're doing is replacing Class Abilities with Trained Abilities, then providing an option to increase Wound Limit. Your AdCost pricing for each is identical to that suggested for creating a new class, so I can't argue your logic or balance.

The only question is about Sperks. The intent is for Sperks to be unique talents tied to a race or class - I see in Step 6 of your No Class Character you can choose Sperks, but I'm wondering what choices are available. Do you get to choose Sperks from all Classes?

Cheers,

-Erin

[October]

Hi, Erin!

Essentially, since it's a classless option.  Racial Sperks (if any) would still be there as normal, so no change there.  I made a master list of Class sperks gleaned from the Class descriptions to choose from.  Of course any Sperk chosen should have something to do with the vision for the character, subject to GM approval.

~October

[esmale]

Sperks are tricky. They can be potentially very powerful, so the throttle is tying them to an existing race or class, or letting them "unlock" some aspect of an Ability in the hands of a certain class (e.g., anyone can Wield, but only certain classes have Sperks to wield powers). In all cases, these limitations translate to an associated AdCost, so ultimately, as long as the character pays for the Sperk, he can do what he wants.

But I told you that story to tell you this one: I think Sperks are really best defined by the setting. Maybe you have fighters with spell-casting ability. Maybe the clerics of your assassin god can back-stab. I know I'm using class names, but the point is that you can mix and match all over - so long as payment is made. A roster of "adventurer" or "PC-only" Sperks could work.

That said, I do think you'll end up defining classes at some point - true, they may be more loosely-defined archetypes, but it's difficult not to codify some manner of class in an RPG. Of course, that's just my experience. The idea of a classless character came up several times during playtesting (mostly in an effort to break the system), so some of this is a bit of "tried-it-and-failed" response. But that's Curmudgeon-Erin talking. Don't listen to him.

So yeah - right on - I'm eager to see how this works out. ;)

Cheers,

-Erin

[October]

Sure.  I think we agree more than we disagree.  I don't see much of a difference in building a "class-less" character to specify exactly what you had in mind for your vision than in combining two or more classes to accomplish the same thing (which you've done as example in the rules), except you have more control over what you put into it.  I agree that ultimately, it's the vision for the character and the requirements of the setting that drive the combinations you choose. I also agree there willl probably be loosely-defined classes, because that's what we all cut our teeth on and that's what appears in the literature.  GURPS has never had defined classes like D&D, and that's what I was going for here.

It would be the GMs job to limit the list of Sperks you could choose from (or to create new Sperks to choose from) based on the setting.  You wouldn't allow power access Sperks if your world didn't have magic (or technology capable of replicating powers).  And sure, sometimes a Thief is still a Thief.  If the class as written works for your vision, there's no reason to change it just because you can.  Alternately, you could take the class as written as a base and add on to it via on the non-class system, so long as you pay the costs.  I think it's very flexible to player (and GM) preference because you've written such a flexible system.

~October

[esmale]

This interests me, because I'm now getting a better picture of how writing broad rules for a system differs from writing specific crunch for a setting. Probably obvious to many, but I'm slow that way...

I really do like the idea of a character that's built of component Abilities, Perks, and Sperks. I hear you on the GURPS model, and Savage Worlds does a good job of "classless" characters, too. From a game balance perspective, I think it can be done as long as characters pay for what they get (in terms of AdCost). The "label" of class does impact Sperk choice and some advancement details, but nothing one couldn't work around.

So (just thinking out loud, while typing) you might say here's a group of humans, let's call them Cimmerians, and they live in this cold, hilly place. OK, that's your race, so you have some base stats, some Perks, and a few Sperks to choose from. Now, instead of saying, "Pick a class," you follow the class-less method above, which is totally in-line with the Chimera rules, because the AdCost values are the same. 

But when it comes to Sperks, you consult your custom Sperks table - base it on region, or archetype/character vision, or maybe even social background (?). Maybe they're good at backstab, but don't necessarily have to be a "thief." Maybe you could get a power-school Sperk, and just say, "Yeah, my character apprenticed with some sorcerer." Difference here is that the Sperks are justified by the character's role in the setting, not the class as defined by the system. 

Anyway, I see how this could work, and now that I'm thinking on it, one could mix-and-match the Sperk lists in any combination desired. This actually fits in very well with the describe-a-setting-through-game-mechanics mantra I've been on about lately.

Thanks much for this, October - please keep me (us) posted!

-Erin