Re: [dq-rules] DQ and newer systems

[Bruce Probst <bprobst@netspace.net.au>]

On Mon, 20 Jan 2003 15:28:54 -0800 (PST), Steven Wiles
<mortdemuerte@yahoo.com> wrote:

>I've gotten more of a feel of characters as organic,
>living beings who change and adapt as time goes on
>than in any other system.  You know, like real people
>do.  I suppose this is part of its "class"-less
>structure, but it also feels like more than that to
>me.

It is inaccurate to describe DQ as a "classless" system.  It would be more
accurate to say that the classes are optional and non-rigid, but DQ "skills"
(Thief, Merchant, Healer, etc.) are functionally equivalent to "classes" in
games like D&D etc.  By this I mean a DQ "skill" is actually a collection of
(vaguely) related sub-skills that are developed together; in a truly
classless system (e.g., RuneQuest) each of those sub-skills would be
developed independently.

Perhaps the best way to describe DQ would be as a class-based system that
permits effortless multi-classing.

>Do others feel that its just some
>ineffable quality of this game that encourages rich
>character development, like I do?

Not really.  I think any non-rigid game system will lead to such characters.
It's just that there haven't really been a huge number of non-rigid game
systems for generic FRPGs out there, so any individual such game tends to
stand out from the crowd.

----------------------------------------------------------------
Bruce Probst              bprobst@netspace.net.au    ICQ 6563830
Canberra, Australia       MSTie #72759  SCA #80160
"Perhaps booze would alleviate this situation."
ASL FAQ              http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ