Top Mud Sites Forum Return to TopMudSites.com
Go Back   Top Mud Sites Forum > Mud Development and Administration > Advanced MUD Concepts
Click here to Register

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 12-23-2003, 01:41 PM   #21
Azeroth
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 69
Azeroth is on a distinguished road
Send a message via ICQ to Azeroth
I think when you begin to talk about class vs. classless you start breaking open the box of stereotypes... Why does it either have to be PvP or RP? Why can't it be both? In real life we are PvP every day, whether it be competitive sports, rivalry among employees, or nation vs. nation. So here is the thing...if you want to keep it simple and focus on the inner workings of your combat system, spell system, etc. so you can truly enhance PK...then go with classes. It keeps it simple and allows you to quickly balance things so you can put your focus on constantly updating and improving skill selection and so forth.

I personally prefer classless because I am geared more towards RP. It isn't realistic to have a defined class because each character should have the option to choose their own destiny. Like it was already stated by KaVir, their skills should define their occupation, not the other way around. On our mud we have gone completely leveless and classless (classes are gone from the player perspective, though not from the code). Every new character starts with a generic "class", with a set of skills that is common to anyone. Then from there they can decide what path to take. Do they wish to be a farmer? How about an aristocrat? Maybe a craftsman? Whatever they choose they will have skills available to them that reflect that path. Of course they can diversify and gain more skills, but if the focus leans towards one group and away from others...their less-used skills can atrophy.

So, indirectly, they have chose their *own* destiny simply by what skills they focused on. A character advances through skill usage, as there is no experience to be had. The other way they advance is through RP. But, as in RL, there is plenty of PvP and even City vs. City, Nation vs Nation, etc. So I think you can have your cake and eat it to, it's all in what you are going for.

Az
Azeroth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-24-2003, 12:55 AM   #22
visko
Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 98
visko is on a distinguished road
Send a message via ICQ to visko Send a message via AIM to visko
I have a slightly different approach, for a slightly different type of game....

Whatever the new name of the MUD is going to be, it's always been about hit-the-ground-running total-pk, which usually implies a classless, levelless, raceless world. All players walk in with every skill at an arbitrary value (probably 50% or so) and increase skill level with "learning", which has a lot of facets; watching other people do it, failing at it, succeeding at it, etc.

A while ago (this project has its very large peaks and valleys) the team was discussing "getting rusty" with lack of use. In effect, a player will start to lose %ages (or however we measure your ability in the area) after a certain amount of time. This has the same effect that some of the other systems proposed; your character evolves into a specific skill set because he/she simply doesn't use the other skills enough to maintain a high level of ability in them. (Having skills drop to 0% and fall off your list of usable skills, and then only get back on through watching other people use that skill has been discussed. It's a fun one to think about; that, and having mobs learn and use skills as they see them performed.)

My couple of bits.

-Visko

<PK flag> -- the flag I'd like to see Synozeer implement to forewarn of the perhaps less broad focus of our ilk.
visko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-24-2003, 09:43 AM   #23
Delerak
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Name: Dan
Location: New York
Posts: 716
Delerak is on a distinguished road
Send a message via ICQ to Delerak Send a message via AIM to Delerak Send a message via MSN to Delerak Send a message via Yahoo to Delerak
Obviously my definition of roleplaying is far different from Azeroths. You say you prefer classless because you are geared toward roleplay. Well, I believe classes make a better roleplay mud then a classless one does, simply because if you are an innovative roleplayer you need not customise the skills of your character. Your character is not defined by the skills but by the character's actions. If my human/warrior becomes a merchant, oh well, so I don't have a bunch of crafting skills, but I can still take on that role with the warrior skills and simply let him learn how to be a merchant. Just because he doesn't have the hard-coded skills of another merchant does not mean that he is not a merchant in the virtual world. Getting through to you?
Delerak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-24-2003, 10:42 AM   #24
Azeroth
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 69
Azeroth is on a distinguished road
Send a message via ICQ to Azeroth
While I agree that your actions defines your character...I think it's safe to say that in real life most of us are, at least in part, classified by what we do. Who I am, at least for now, is in part being in Sales. It is a career choice and I will probably always be in Sales. So what I was getting at is that, as in real life, limiting and categorizing a character by one particular "Class" is like saying to me "you can never have any other job than being in Sales". While it may very well be true that *that* is all I would ever want to be...the lack of choice is bad.

Anyway, I am not trying to say your method is bad by any means. I am just trying to strive for a more realistic view of RP. To me, choice is good. I think most RP'rs would agree. One of our slogan lines is "choice an identity, not a race; a home, not a starting point; a destiny, not a class"...I think a detailed enough classless system allows full customization for a player to make their character exactly what thier life leads them to be. Just my 2 cents.

Az
Azeroth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-24-2003, 01:07 PM   #25
Delerak
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Name: Dan
Location: New York
Posts: 716
Delerak is on a distinguished road
Send a message via ICQ to Delerak Send a message via AIM to Delerak Send a message via MSN to Delerak Send a message via Yahoo to Delerak
I'm still not understanding how you expect someone to customize their character with skills, then go into the world and roleplay into something else? Correct me if I am wrong but if you choose your skills when you start, then you are already setting your destiny, just as if you had a class, because you are choosing what you want your character to have then, not what he makes of himself in the game after he is created, right? A class however takes a basic set of skills, gives them to you, and says here, make something out of this, even if it seems utterly impossible for your merchant who has no combat abilities whatsoever to become a mercenary, you can still do it by roleplaying and actually BE a mercenary. Sure a mercenary who can make jewelry and cook up a storm, but you are still a mercenary because that's what your character became through roleplaying, not the skills you customize when you first started the character.

-Delerak
Delerak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-24-2003, 03:53 PM   #26
Jazuela
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: New England
Posts: 849
Jazuela will become famous soon enoughJazuela will become famous soon enough
Class-based or class-less, I think it's important to remember aptitude.

Sure, in most games I can either pick a class of skills and be stuck with it forever and not be able to do something dramatically different, or I could pick anything I want and not give any thought to whether or not my character -should be capable- of doing these things.

Aptitude is so often overlooked. It's great that a mercenary can cook, and still be a mercenary. But if he's spending all his time improving his babka recipe, he's not spending all that much time doing merc stuff. And something's gotta give. In addition, I would hate to play a game that allows me to be proficient in *everything.*

I like limitations, it's what gives your character..character. Knowing that yeah he's a nasty buff uber blademaster who also happens to be lousy with defense.. or maybe the thief who can't cook at all. I mean, if he could cook, he wouldn't need to steal the food would he? He'd just make his own. And probably a lot better than that stupid bakery anyway.

Or what about the leathercrafter, why would he have -any- aptitude whatsoever in perfuming? I mean..the guy's sitting in a room filled with vats of bat guano for 10 hours a day, there's no way you can convince me he has ANY sense of smell.

Aptitude - that's a great key that's very undervalued and underused in many muds. Let the players decide what their characters are -capable of- and then give them a base set of skills that coincide with their aptitude, and allow those skills branch into more complex things related to the base set over time.
Jazuela is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-24-2003, 05:20 PM   #27
Azeroth
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 69
Azeroth is on a distinguished road
Send a message via ICQ to Azeroth
Actually you are 100% correct Delerak. You really *can't* customize your character much by choosing a bunch of skills at the start. That has been my contention the entire thread *chuckle*. I never mentioned it being advantageous to choose skills at the beginning at all. My original post mentioned the fact of starting with a generic character at the beginning, with a few basic skills...and then customizing their character throughout their life. So...that would even allow a once mercenary to leave that aspect of life to become a cook! Or maybe he is like Steven Segal and is a deadly cook. You have to expand your horizons a little I think Delerak. The entire point here is *choice*. If the player cannot choose different paths or a combination of them at any given moment in their journey...then it really isn't giving them full capability with their character. Their RP *relies* on their character's identity, which is made up at least in part by their occuption. Just some food for thought.

Az
Azeroth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-24-2003, 07:12 PM   #28
Jherlen
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 47
Jherlen is on a distinguished road
Jherlen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-24-2003, 09:11 PM   #29
Azeroth
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 69
Azeroth is on a distinguished road
Send a message via ICQ to Azeroth
I agree with Jherlen on this one. But, one comment was made about skill selection at the beginning being a killer because of not understanding what is needed. I think that is a philosophy often linked with combat oriented muds. While combat is essential to any thriving mud, it isn't always paramount. And good documentation relieves any stresses you might have as to which skills to choose. We have gone with some archtypes on our mud:

Aristocrat
Arcane
Bardic
Combatant
Craftsman
Divine
Laborer
Monk
Rogue

This is just the 1st tier of an almost endless system. *Every* skill in the game is under one or more of these. The thing is, you don't have to limit yourself to any one...you could choose to be any or all of these. But let's say a character was going to grow up as a farmer...he would select the laborer's guild in order to learn the skills of his trade. Let's say as a young adult he decides that farming is not for him and takes a skill he has also practiced all these years, smithing, and tries to become an apprentice for a local smith. Ok so this can easily be done and he doesn't have to worry about that being outside of his class, or waiting until he can multiclass. There are also people in our world who can train you to be a "grand master" of maybe a weapon, or perhaps you can learn spells from books you find. These are additional ways to strengthen RP in a way that also gives the character something related to occupation. I just think this blows the doors off any class system I have ever heard of.

Az
Azeroth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-24-2003, 10:05 PM   #30
Delerak
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Name: Dan
Location: New York
Posts: 716
Delerak is on a distinguished road
Send a message via ICQ to Delerak Send a message via AIM to Delerak Send a message via MSN to Delerak Send a message via Yahoo to Delerak
I think that's the whole point Jherlen, not every mercenary is going to be a massively strong fighter who can tear your throat out three ways, stab you five times, and parry a hail of arrows while doing it. I greatly admire people who can take a class that is not meant to do something and they do it with that class, because not every character should be the same. If every mercenary in a certain guild was all warriors, how boring would that be? Someone playing a merchant or undercover spy adds to the whole realistic side of the mud. Especially if you look at the real life side of it, not every person in the army can do 200 push-ups, 300 sit-ups and still be able to climb up a 30 foot tall rope, not everyone has that ability, nor does everyone have the personality for it, so some people in the army are not classed as warriors, they might be great thinkers and philosphers, so they are more of a mercantile class that has no choice but to join the army under a scrutinizing father who was a high ranking officer..

Anyway my point is that customizing your skills leaves you with no starting point, it leaves you kind of laying there with a set of skills you probably will use because you already set out what you want to do with that character instead of playing the character and reacting accordingly to what happens in character and then using your hard-coded skills if you need to. I bet if you can pick backstab - and you really want a strong character you will pick backstab, parry, kick, bash, - and so on, classes leave balance because it leaves your charater with more then just a set of skills, it leaves them with a small persona of their own, a warrior class will compensate for a small percentage of people who have the ability to fight well, whether it's innate or not only your roleplaying can tell, the same goes for all other classes on a good roleplaying mud, if you look at it the right way.
Delerak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2004, 09:07 PM   #31
LittleJohn
New Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 2
LittleJohn is on a distinguished road
I prefer a class-based system.

On the code I'm developing, players choose a class at creation.  And can progress in that class the entire game.  Or, if they want, they can "dual-class" when they reach a new player level. (There's a difference between player levels and class levels).  If  they dual-class they stop gaining exerience for their previous class, and start gaining experience in their new class.  They'll keep any skills they've learned from their old class.   They won't recieve any hero feats (or not as many... depending on when they switched over), and won't be as strong of a [mage/fighter/thief/etc].

Then there's also the option of multi-classing at creation, which is only available to humans, elves, half-elves, and gnomes.  Multi-classing is where a player advances as 2 classes at the same time, with experience they recieve being divided between both of their classes.

As far as "your skills make the profession" theory, I'd say I have to disagree.  A person can go through 4 years of electrical engineering school, but when he graduates he gets a job as a dictionary salesman.  When people ask him what his profession is, he'll say "I'm a dictionary salesman"... in spite of the fact that he has all the skills to be an electrical engineer.  Same thing in the fantasy world... if a person was trained since birth to be a master pick-lock... but gets employed by The Red Wizard of Azakanassa to fight in his army.  That person would say, "I'm a fighter", not "I'm a thief".  Although he might tell you, "I'm a fighter with many thieving abilities."
LittleJohn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2004, 02:33 AM   #32
Azeroth
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 69
Azeroth is on a distinguished road
Send a message via ICQ to Azeroth
While it is true that you could spend quite a bit of time learning one particular skillset, and then never use it in your occupational career...I think it still defines you.  I started in sales when I was 21, did it for quite some time...but when I moved to a different state was unable to find a job in sales.  So I managed a Pizza Hut.  Then I worked at a prison.  But as soon as a sales position opened up I forsook the prison job and quickly took the sales position.

My point is this: I suppose "your skills define your occupation" is not necessarily valid...touche.  *But*, to say that they don't to some degree define you is wrong.  To limit a character's possibilities by offering him/her a "tree" or "multiclassing chart" or whatever...is fundamentally flawed.  No matter how much multiclassing someone does, he/she is still bound by the limitations of that class/multiclass.  

Overall I suppose a good argument could be made for either side.  What I find is that when one tries to "improve" upon a class based system, the end up changing it and improving it with elements of a classless system.  So why not just go classless and call it good?
Azeroth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2004, 04:24 AM   #33
JilesDM
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 66
JilesDM is on a distinguished road
This is actually the best argument that can be made for a skill-based system. In a class-based system, your skills are inextricably tied to your profession. Addressing this very problem is, in fact, one of the primary goals of many skill-based systems, which decouple skills from professions entirely.
JilesDM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2004, 05:27 PM   #34
Delerak
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Name: Dan
Location: New York
Posts: 716
Delerak is on a distinguished road
Send a message via ICQ to Delerak Send a message via AIM to Delerak Send a message via MSN to Delerak Send a message via Yahoo to Delerak
Jiles that makes no sense. Your skills are NOT tied to your profession, I think that is the point. People grow and become different, just because the warrior has kick, bash, and disarm, doesn't mean the warrior cannot become a well off smuggler who has a sharp tongue for business, and a sharper blade by his side. You have to understand that the skills do not define you or your character, they simply give you what you were made to have. Some people are natural fighters, it's in their blood, hence warriors. And some people are intelligent, witty, undeniably quick with their minds, these can be magic-users or rogues. What I'm trying to make you see is that whether you have a class-based or a classless it's still not going to matter, the problem with classless is that you have no starting point for your character's persona, he is just sitting their with a bunch of skills YOU the player picked, and so she has no way to start out in the gaming world except for you to decide more things that are probably not going to stay flush with the character's persona, since you picked all of the skills for character you have to make a lot more decisions like how they would react to this or that situation. With a class you at least have somewhere to start and then work your way up into the character's personality and "profession".
Delerak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2004, 12:54 PM   #35
OnyxFlame
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 153
OnyxFlame is on a distinguished road
Post

Delerak, you're neglecting an important factor here. In a classless system, what says you pick what skills your char will have when you create him? I know some muds work that way, but not all by any means. And even if you do start out with several skills, what says you're any good at them? If you start out with a minimal skill level in them, and then discover you'd rather learn something else instead, you can always neglect that skill and learn others.

In DM, the only skills you start out with are the absolute minimum required to function in game - fluency in the common tongue, and in your racial language(s). After that, what you learn is entirely up to you. Some combinations are next to impossible to learn properly, but that doesn't keep you from trying to learn them anyway. And since there *is* no skill for "talking your way out of a situation where a baron wants to kill you" or "persuading someone to do what you want" or "becoming popular", there are plenty of ways for chars to do things they don't actually have skills for.
OnyxFlame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2004, 04:48 PM   #36
Azeroth
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 69
Azeroth is on a distinguished road
Send a message via ICQ to Azeroth
Thank you OnyxFlame.  Apparently I wasn't articulating myself well enough because that has been one my main points.  I think one of the ways a classless system is more realistic is *because* you don't have to choose your skills form the beginning.  Ideally each character would start with the very basic skillset (as you described, with the racial language and a few other remedial skills), then they have the freedom to gain whatever skills they wish...whatever is suitable for their path.  

Skills all start out at an unskilled level, and upon usage grow.  Skills that are neglected...atrophy.  Just like riding a bike, you may never forget how but you might be a bit rusty after 20 years of having not ridden one (at the very least you might not be able to pull off that bunny hop you did when you were 10).  Anyway, I think the lines have clearly been drawn in this debate.  There are those who like class based and those who like classless.  And neither side seems to want to budge *chuckle*.
Azeroth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2004, 07:43 PM   #37
Delerak
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Name: Dan
Location: New York
Posts: 716
Delerak is on a distinguished road
Send a message via ICQ to Delerak Send a message via AIM to Delerak Send a message via MSN to Delerak Send a message via Yahoo to Delerak
I'm not saying you have to be good at them. I'm saying your character will have no base to grow from when you have no class. I can classify people in the real world, and you can do it on games, that's why they are their. When you don't use classes you leave everything in the hands of the player, who probably just wants every combat skill that the game has. And I am just speculating here, I don't know what classless is all about, but I do know it has too many holes, especially if we are talking about being in character. Classes help shape and create the character because you the player pick what your character is going to naturally have, then you go from there. Plus, when you have a class-based system you can still have skills added by the staff of the Mud. In a classless system I doubt this ever happens because apparently everything is "open" for you the player to gain at your own leisure. I don't see that as being much fun.

-D
Delerak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2004, 10:16 PM   #38
tresspassor
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Minneapolis
Posts: 45
tresspassor is on a distinguished road
If you don't know what it is all about how can you claim that a class based system is better?

...err then how do you know that?

The real problem is that you cannot say one system will promote better roleplay then another. There is NO WAY that a class or classless system will allow more rp.

Example 1)

A player builds a long description of his/her character. Detailed history stuff. The administration then help the player build a character with skills based off that player character's history.

So if your character grew up on a farm that was burned down by pirates and then joined a roving band of marauders then you may get skills like:

Agriculture, swords, shield, horseback riding, leather armor, fishing.

How does this make it "harder" to role-play that character?

In this example, if this character was going to be put into a class system what would you classify them as? Fighter/Warrior? Does that really make it easier to RP this character (who grew up on a farm, knows how to fish, knows his way around a sword but has never worn plate mail)?

Example 2)

Your character dies so it is up to you to create a new character on the same game, now the admin don't need to make a character for you (or walk you through the process).

So you make up your character history, detail everything out. Basically your character was a pirate who burned down a farmstead and then ran off to join the circus.

So your skills are:

Sailing, Rapier, Elephant Training, Juggling, Pick Pockets, and Trading

Now, what would you classify this character as? Possibly a Thief or maybe a Merchant? And explain how this makes it easier to roleplay this ex pirate ex circus worker.

Class or no class it isn't going to make RP easier. That is like saying "what is more fun, apocalyptic or cyberpunk"
tresspassor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2004, 08:30 AM   #39
The Doctor
New Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Pac NW
Posts: 2
The Doctor is on a distinguished road
Send a message via MSN to The Doctor
Delerak posted: I can classify people in the real world.

Yes, people are classifiable, but think about this. A Jewish man is about to be born, he speaks with God, and during this conversation he choses his hair, eyes, stature, a string of text that defines him to others, and a name his friends can call him. He really wants to be painter... but no, Jewish men dont get the Painter class choice, so he has to be a merchant....

I do not know about you, but if I was going to compare Role-Play Mud char. creation to RL, then I would think it through....

Classifiably I am Classless. I like to read, cook, womanize, mud, study, photograph, play musical intruments, statical theory fascinates me, philosophy, theology, meta-physics, make buisness stratedgies, and fight. That is me IRL to a degree... The only thing truely classifiable about me is that I am a white caucasian male, early twenties, and sexy.

I prefer a Class-less Skill-Based Mud. By which I mean that not only is it classless, but your skill increases by using the skill in a manner realistic to learning irl, not by accumulation of XP. For example IRL I am a guitar player, if I play what i already know I dont get better, if I attempt something too hard I do not get better either... I have to find the most effecient material to practice given my time commitment and skill. A true Skill Based system, done well, uses this type of system.

The question of balance has come up early in the thread too...
Some distinguish balance issues being different in PvP. It is. However balance is not always solved by obvious means... OnyxFlame mentioned that in Dartmud a young fighter has the advantage over a young mage... In toe to toe fighting this would be true... however there is no mention of any reason why the mage would not run away, being that death by a pure fighter in DM is not exactly instant, especially if the fighter is young. The young mage has the advantage of a different social enviroment than the fighter... most fighters are solitary, young mages have many friends whom just by being associated with would make a would be assassine think twice. Young mages also have spells that help them survive easier than a young fighter. What OnyxFlame meant I believe is that if a young mage and young fighter fought till the death the fighter would win... this isnt the nature of Dartmud so it is a moot point... Balance is a broader issue than just winning fist to fist.

The next question in relation is Permadeath... wether or not you have Permadeath greatly effects how you design skills and classes and such in your mud. Permadeath makes everything you do important... who your friends are, who your enemies are, what image you project, etc... nothing is then meanial... because you could die because of it... perma. Becoming an expert acrobat for instance... is it really worth it ? Attempting your first swan dive into a pool, land wrong and break your head, no one is around, your corpse rots and your soul is taken by the goddess ? Being able to evolve in an unrestricted PvP perma-death mud is essential to survival, classless-ness allows you the freedom to move through changing political structures, social circles, and economic malfunctions with greater ease. There are penalties involved in learning skills that conflict with each other, so as to not have demi-gods running around. Being a phenom of a "multi-classer" in Dartmud takes time and wit, so if a char can live that long without ****ing off the wrong group of people then they earned having the flexiblity and power of being a jack of all trades. But a good assasine, or mage with wit could kill the multiclasser just as easily as the other way around... But the mutliclasser is more powerfull in less tangable ways. It is complex, my post and the rest of this thread really dont do this issue justice... there are many nuances to consider.

Despite the outwardly non-logical statement Jiles made, if you pick his brain you will find he has very detailed thoughts on these things, and if given the opportunity has very valuable insite to Mud Creation. Honestly his statement did make sense. How I read it: Noone likes to be put in a box, boxes define people who are enslaved to some title, free minds dont define themselves by their skills, they define themselve by who they are. Their skills are a secondary effect of who they are. The purpose that drives us toward learning one thing or another defines more acturately than the skill itself.
Correct me if I am wrong Jiles.

LittleJohn, *I* do not define myself by my occupation... *I* am not a Crimminal Justice Professional... *I* am *I*. Nor do I define my mud characters by their skills or their class, I define them by what part of myself I am choosing to express and the purpose or "role" that character will have within a given enviroment, skills I choose to learn will help to fullfill that purpose.
The Doctor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2004, 11:56 AM   #40
Delerak
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Name: Dan
Location: New York
Posts: 716
Delerak is on a distinguished road
Send a message via ICQ to Delerak Send a message via AIM to Delerak Send a message via MSN to Delerak Send a message via Yahoo to Delerak
I guess literature isn't one of your "many" nuances of life. Learn to spell.
Delerak is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools


Classless System vs. Class Based Systems - Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Enjoy Customized AND Class-Based Character! Amaranthe Advertising for Players 0 08-11-2006 06:06 PM
Not Exactly Classless... Rykkan Advanced MUD Concepts 4 02-15-2006 10:16 PM
Eternal Struggle has a New Classless System Nutai Advertising for Players 0 08-13-2004 05:58 PM
What class are you? Chapel Roleplaying and Storytelling 15 09-24-2002 01:52 AM
Class or Level System? tresspassor Roleplaying and Storytelling 4 07-08-2002 12:11 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:14 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Style based on a design by Essilor
Copyright Top Mud Sites.com 2022