Design classes in games: not only RPG

Classes can be found everywhere. Formerly exclusive RPGs, today class systems are used in many kinds of games. We all know the standard “warriors” or “wizards” of classic fantasy, but what can we learn in class design from other games?

First we need to answer the question: what is a class? The definition of this term in games is rather vague, and several correct answers can be given. In RPGs such as Dungeons & Dragons, classes are defined by rules and are a list of abilities that a player’s character may have.

If you want to be a secretive killer or werewolf, then you need to choose the appropriate class. The trick is that the choices are not limited to this: you can choose a race (elf or dwarf) and a character’s story (criminal or noble person), which also affects the choices in the game. What is the difference between race and class? If a character can spew out flames because he is half a dragon, is this different from being able to shoot fireballs from his hands? In fact, these aspects should be considered as variations of the concept of classes.

Therefore, when discussing classes, we are talking not only about standard classes and races from RPG, but also about armies in Starcraft, Street Fighter characters and even Mario Kart cars. It seems strange to put them all in one category, but they all have something in common: the choice that the player makes outside the game determines his capabilities in the gameplay.


In Age of Mythology, classes are divided into races, and then also into individual gods.

Why use classes?

So why bother with classes at all? What do they add to the game? There are many reasons, but one of the simplest is adding content. More classes = more ways to play the game = more ways to have fun. If you look at World of
Warcraft, you can often see players with several high-level characters.

Tails (Tails) became so popular as an additional character in the games of the Sonic series, that later the developers added Knuckles, Shadow (Shadow), Cream (Cream) and many other characters. The Dungeons & Dragons Additional Rules have many classes available to players. In extreme manifestations, some games exist only due to the variety of classes - imagine Smash Bros, in which Mario turned out to be the only character. Fights are interesting mainly because they allow many characters to interact, that is, each couple should have its own strategy.

Another reason for the usefulness of classes is that they contribute to versatility. This is especially important in competitive multiplayer games, where (usually) everyone wants to be the best. If you want to do an MMO in which players can add points to their skills, then you think that users will create many different types of characters. In fact, as we see in the example of such MMOs as Ultima Online, it inevitably turns out that the players strive for the “optimal configuration”.

Usually a small percentage of users who have mastered the game well perform mathematical calculations and publish optimal characteristics, while the rest simply copy them. Such "copying" behavior is not unique to MMOs (players in Magic: The Gathering have been discussing the pros and cons of optimal decks - "netdecking" for some time), and in any other game where you can choose skills, there are discussions of the best configurations.

Of course, the introduction of classes does not solve the problem completely - in World of Warcraft, despite the presence of many classes, configurations are actively discussed - but at least they create a little variation. Instead of creating one “standard tank,” the player can choose between a warrior tank, a paladin tank, or a druid tank.

And finally, classes narrow the gap between experienced and inexperienced players. New players are always annoyed by the fact that everything is better than them, but if everyone plays with the best characters, it is doubly annoying. It may seem to new players that the game punishes them for lack of knowledge, while professional players may spend time searching for combinations abusing the game mechanics.

In addition, new players risk "making the wrong choice" by spending points on useless skills - we have already considered the concept of "traps for noobs" . Forcing players to choose between pre-created classes, developers again shift focus from character creation back to gameplay.

So do classes have any problems? Well, obviously, developers need to spend a lot of time on them. But from the point of view of design, there is really only one problem: class systems limit the player’s ability to experiment with interesting configurations or implement some ideas. Players like to create, and limiting their creativity can reduce the fun of the game.

One can argue that in competitive games the introduction of self-creation systems can be an extremely dangerous idea, because one too powerful combination is enough to destroy the entire game. But in some games, it is character creation that becomes the most interesting part of the game.


Impossible Creatures is an RTS in which players can cross creatures to create their own armies and participate in the battles of crazy scientists.

So, if we assume that we want to introduce classes, then what should be their design? In general, this is a very deep topic - even if you restrict yourself to a certain genre, you can write a whole book, and at the same time barely consider the very basics. So let's better focus on the common standard cases that apply everywhere.

Strict and free class design

The word "class" has many meanings, so let's introduce a new concept: the division into strict and free classes.

• A strict class defines a skill set available to the player.
• The free class gives limited new opportunities or bonuses for a certain style of play.

In general, a more complex system is likely to be rigorous.

In Diablo 3, players can choose from classes such as barbarian, monk, and sorceress. All these classes have special skills, and these skills determine what the character is capable of. Only the monk has the Hurricane Strike, and only the sorcerers have the Hydra. Classes at specific levels receive special skills, and can never learn the skills of other classes. Diablo 3 is a very strict system.

Compare it to a game like Desktop Dungeons, which is a free system. When a player chooses a class, he simply gives the player a slight advantage: berserkers have 50% magic resistance. Priests inflict double damage on undead. A berserker can do the same thing as a priest, but in certain situations it behaves better (or worse).

Obviously, there is no clear distinction between “strict” and “free”, and some games can be ranked on both sides. Vampire: The Masquerade allows players to select a clan, and although each clan has unique forces, these forces do not determine the character and everything else the game is controlled through the standard points purchase system.

But what happens in other genres? Well, in Hearthstone, a player can choose a class, and this gives him a class ability that can be used in the game, for example, creating minions or getting additional cards. Since this ability gives a slight advantage in the game, it is considered an advantage of the "free" class.

However, there are still class maps in Hearthstone that only certain classes can use. Cards such as Backstab or Sap are only for Rogues, but theoretically they are useful for any class. This map restriction means that Hearthstone uses a “strict” class design because each class has many features that are not available to other players.

But why is all this important? The more strict the game, the more obvious are the advantages of the class system (as we said above in the section “Why use classes?”). More variability between classes, less "traps for noobs", more fun for players. In addition, strict design allows you to create amazingly distinct classes. Playing Hearthstone as a priest, you feel that you are playing a priest (as far as this can be achieved in a card game). Each class seems unique, and this uniqueness allows the user to play in many different ways (by finding the one that suits his style of play).

The disadvantage of a strict system is mentioned above - the player is limited by the game styles invented by the developers. The game does not allow for more in-depth research. And since each class has its own style of play, sometimes a player can understand what the game will be like from the first move or the first drawn card.

It can be nice (if you win) or annoying (otherwise). If it is difficult for you to defeat the robbers and the game constantly gives them to opponents, then this can very soon become boring. Depending on the currently playing styles of the game or "meta" this may not be one class, but one deck or character configuration, and such a monotonous confrontation can be quite boring.

However, mechanical design is only one aspect of character creation. we need to ask what players want from games, and there may be several answers. The newest players do not think about the mechanics of each class - most often they want to play as a cool soul-stealing ninja, or devouring the flesh of a “stranger”. This side of character design, which includes aspects such as its story or visual image, is often called “fluff” or “flavor.” This is also an important part of the design process, but it itself is a separate topic, so we will consider it another time.

Another question that players often ask is: “what does the character do?” Sometimes the answer is obvious, sometimes not quite - but in general the player tries to find a class that allows him to play in a way that suits him.


The Jew class in South Park: The Stick of Truth is a custom class with very powerful abilities in the later stages of the game.

Roleplaying

In general, the class’s task is to allow the user to play in their favorite style. Not everyone likes to play for magic classes, so it’s important not to force players to choose roles they don't like. Of course, in multi-player games, some players are forced to play certain roles, but in general they play for those characters that they are most interested in.

In some games (such as MMO), the ability to get into a role becomes doubly important. If your party is about to fight the Dragon Emperor, then you should probably work out a strategy. Typically, the main roles are a tank / damage dealer / healer, while other roles (controller, leader, tracker, and so on) depend on the game.

The number of free places in the party is usually limited, so it is important that your team takes the most out of them - the party of the healers alone will not gain much. To maximize the chances of success, players strive to choose roles that complement each other, which means that they can choose their favorite classes and feel their usefulness to the team.

Regardless of the style of the game, you need to create classes so that they provide interesting gameplay. Class design determines how players will play. If all your characters are warriors with swords, then the gameplay will focus on melee. If you add a single sniper to the game, then suddenly the whole dynamics changes - the environment and shelters become more important, and rush in open areas ceases to be a viable tactic.

You need to understand what you want to get from the game, and the roles and abilities created should stimulate the desired style of gameplay. If you do not want the players to perform roles, then just do not add them to the game. Do not like the fact that healers slow down the gameplay? Take them away. This is your game, and there is no reason to stick with the “traditional” design roles.

Despite the fact that many games use a traditional design with tanks / damages dealers / healers, there are many reasons to avoid them. The most obvious of them is that if you create a game design based on these classes, then everything that does not meet these criteria will turn out to be bad. Imagine a banker or a farmer joining a warrior, a robber, and a cleric. There is no reason that players could not play these alternative classes, but there is a chance that they will not fit into the Holy Trinity team. Classes should be balanced not only relative to each other, but also to the game itself.

Class balancing

However, sometimes we become too obsessed with concepts such as balance, and strive for the use of each class to be fair. Although it is necessary in some games, you can do without it in some single-player games. Bad classes can create added complexity or balance factors for experienced players. “The Lost” from The Binding of Isaac can fly, but dies with one hit. Street Fighter Dan Hibiki is a frequent joke item. Such "bad classes" are actually additional choices to make the game more complicated. In addition, if each class is perfectly balanced, then what's the difference? Who should I choose?

We must ask ourselves the question - what are we balancing? Do we balance based on the ratio of victories? Or compared in a one on one battle? Some genres, in particular MMOs, strive to balance the character for both PVE and PVP. In The Binding of Isaac, the damage is often called the “divine indicator” of the characters - not only because it is incredibly convenient to kill everyone in one shot - the game rewards quick play with secret bosses, and the player’s lack of damage is called “devilish objects”, powerful objects that can instantly strengthen an already good character. Slow, "tank" characters like Magdalen look good in theory, but they can’t compete with the bonuses that characters with high damage receive. While The Lost is an interesting character due to a deliberate increase in complexity, Magdalene is just a boring character.


The Lost, one of many characters in The Binding of Isaac.

League of Legends fully supports this approach and calls this idea an “ideal imbalance” that allows you to keep the gameplay fresh. The game is incredibly complex, and balancing more than 130 characters is impossible. Designers not only need to think about how the characters interact - in fact, even any slightest change in theory can ruin the balance.

They try to make sure that no character is too strong, but there are a lot of “bad characters” in the game, and sometimes, due to the evolution of the game, the characters that seemed bad become quite viable. The complexity and ever-changing nature of the game means that players must constantly reevaluate their winning strategies, and this ensures that the gameplay is never “solved”.

“Solution” is a problem for many games. Sometimes you can record all the abilities of the characters and find out what each class is capable of. This means that in team games, classes are often selected according to simple metrics: how much damage he can inflict, how quickly he can heal, or how quickly he can reach the end. The character has one task, and the best character is the one with the highest scores. This poses an interesting question for us: is it better to create a class that is intended only for one task, or a class capable of satisfactorily solving everything?

Specialization and versatility

When creating a class, we should have a rough idea of ​​what we want from it. In an MMO, an ideal tank is essentially a granite rock that takes all the blows while the rest of the team brings death to the enemy. This creates a kind of “arms race” when the most specialized characters (almost always) are the best for the job.

But the problem here is that if one character is ideal for some task, then all the others will not (by default) be the best - why would someone intentionally play a bad character? This is a problem for MMOs who are trying to juggle the balance of dozens of character classes. Why play with robbers if DPS mages are taller?

Imagine creating a game similar to Civilization, in which the player seeks to conquer the world. He can achieve victory by political, military or cultural means. The player can also choose a race, and each race has its own advantage: elves are better at politics, orcs are at war, and so on. Why would a war enthusiast choose someone other than orcs? And if he plays against the orcs, then why should he invest in political defense? Specialization of races limits the style of play and forces you to choose specific options.


The races in Civilization IV motivate players to use certain tactics without forcing them to move along a particular road.

This is one of the most serious problems of specialized classes. If in some ways specialization is good, then it means that it is bad in everything else. If the key component of the gameplay is the choice, then repeating the same actions over and over is a poor design. Many games face this problem, and it manifests itself especially strongly for classes of healers .

So how to solve the problem? As I said in the article on healers, you need to make the player have a lot of choices during the game. This is one of the most fundamental aspects of game design: the player must be passionate. If a player does not make a choice in his actions, then he is not passionate, and the game begins to become boring. That is, when creating a class, you need to make sure that it can always take part in the game. If you are creating an RPG design, then make sure that all classes have skills for playing during fights and out of combat, rather than turning the character into a "monkey to use the skill." If you are creating a game with different ways of winning, then make sure that each race has the opportunity to win in different ways.

Allow players to adapt to the flow of the game, and if they realize that tactics need to be changed, then let them do it. The more specialized a class or race is, the greater the likelihood that they will be able to do just one thing, and that they will constantly repeat actions over and over again. The choice is important.

Soft and hard countermeasures

Players love to win. In a competitive game with classes, players usually choose the best class. "Best" is often a subjective concept, it depends on the skill of the player, the style of play, map and even recent changes in gameplay. For most players, the “best” is the one that “defeats the enemy.”

In some games, this means trying to predict what the opponent will play. In collectible card games like Magic and Hearthstone, players talk about " meta"- the most popular decks and cards at the moment, which opponents are likely to play. The player can choose a deck to defeat the" meta "and use cards that interfere with certain decks. In Magic, some deck archetypes can be completely discounted with a single card, which means that the game "meta" is an effective way to win.

In other games, players take turns recruiting their characters. If you know what your opponent has chosen, you can pick up a "countermeasure" and this becomes very important. Tactics in which the player strives It takes you to take a character or class specifically to defeat the enemy called counterpicking. The presence of countermeasures in games is usually good mechanics. It allows players to a certain extent to do the balancing themselves, because a player using a very powerful class can expect to be played against him more often by countermeasure classes. The existence of a meta-game allows players to discuss the best tactics, the best countermeasures to these tactics, and the best ways to play in the current environment.

The question then is to what extent countermeasures should be effective. In the general case, countermeasures are divided into “soft” and “hard” ones.

Soft countermeasures are classes that have a small bonus against certain types of characters. Fast characters are usually a countermeasure for snipers - although a sniper can win, he must be skilled or lucky in order to have a chance.


“Meet the Spy” from Team Fortress 2. There is debate about whether a spy can be considered a soft or hard countermeasure to a sniper, although this depends a lot on the skill and attentiveness of the player.

Tough countermeasures are classes that almost completely destroy another class with little effort. Spearmen often become tough countermeasures against cavalry units - although cavalry can win, the likelihood of this is small. And to cope with the spearmen, it is better to call archers.

What is better for your game - soft or hard countermeasures? Obviously, it depends on your intentions, but for almost every game the answer is simple: soft countermeasures are better.

The reason for this is simple: tough countermeasures make any counterplay meaningless. A more difficult game due to the choice of countermeasures is normal, the inability to do anything is bad. Soft countermeasures can usually be circumvented, but hard countermeasures leave no room for creativity or tactical steps.

So can a tough countermeasure be an acceptable design? Yes, in two cases:

1. The player can change the class during the game, allowing you to find countermeasures against countermeasures.
2. The player is part of a larger team and can "reset" the problem to someone else.

I do not want to say that in such situations harsh countermeasures are acceptable, but the problem is less pronounced in them. The player still has some choice, and he can "avoid" the problem.

To summarize

What conclusion can be drawn from all this? In fact, class design is not particularly complicated. It can be reduced to a simple thought:

Let the user play in such a way that he enjoys it.

Here it is, the great secret to class design. It doesn’t matter what kind of game you are doing, the main thing is that it captivates the players.

The very essence of class design, as we have repeated many times, lies in the choice. It lies in the fact that the player chooses to play what he likes, makes a significant choice during the game and how this choice interacts with his difficulties, whether it be an enemy AI or other players.

And since new games often contain a large world of information, classes allow you to make choices more meaningful. A new player can be confused by 100 different characteristics, but if you give him a limited number of options - ask what class he wants to play, he will easily answer. He does not need to worry about how many points to spend on vitality - he just chooses the class and starts the game.

The class gives players additional ways to play the game, and in a sense, each class creates a completely new game. As long as new classes do not prevent players from having fun, this is completely normal.

And don't forget, after all, every game is unique. There is nothing “right” in game design, and no doubt many successful games may violate some of these rules (or even all). Just consider them when creating the game and do not be afraid to go beyond the borders and try something new. All this serves one simple idea: the game must be exciting.