Monday, October 1, 2007


My favorite part of the game so far is the tactical map + weapon system. I won't talk about it right now, though, because I figure I have the most to say about the Classes.

In this design, I wholeheartedly embrace the ethic that Class Abilities are things that no one else is able to do (instead of doing the things that everyone can do but better). I think that these areas of 'breaking the rules' are the grabby parts of the system. By defining them, you not only remind people of what the rules ARE but also what they could do differently.

This doesn't mean, however, that there can't be some formula for defining the Classes - at least, not in my mind.

Here's the rubric I think I'd use at this point to create a Class:

1 One Ability that alters the Rules Drastically
2 One Ability that works with the Weapons Rules
3 One Ability that works with the Arenas Rules
4-5 Two Abilities that increases the Flavor of the Class

I'll come back later with an example of how I'd rework one of the Classes with this model (or simply demonstrate its efficacy).


Eric Provost said...

Hrm. That's pretty good stuff.

As a point of interest, as I was creating the the initial abilities I had two categories I tried to adhere to:

1. Something about combat
2. Something that these guys can do that no one else can.

But weren't you thinking of creating new classes? Or at least ironing out the existing classes into a better defined shape?

What I'd really like to see (and if you don't do it, I will) is an outline of 7 classes, sans abilties, with a short description of what makes each class unique.

FYI, I'm completely cool with tossing out the existing classes and starting from scratch. But I would prefer to stick with the 4+3 formula.

Mark Causey said...

I'll get to work!