Hello...I'm going to ask a question but do so without any sort of framework supporting why specifically I need to know, outside of that obviously I am in the process of designing a game. The reason I wish to keep this question generic is I am looking for a level of honesty, perhaps gut reactions. I want to tap into what people feel and why, without coloring any answers with whatever bias extra details and game mechanics might inject into the discussion. I'm fishing, and will happily check out anything that is on the hook.

So this is it: just on a personal level, what do you prefer more, level based progression (as typified in Dungeons and Dragons) or skill based progression (as in say, GURPS). I know there are many more ways of doing this and many ways to combine the two, but basically, it is a question of what is more interesting to play, more rewarding as a player...the sudden and definite reward of level, or of the vague, detailed progression of skill.

Thanks~!
Craig :0)

Personally I prefer Skill Based Advancement. I like that the skills I use get improved, which better represents the characters growth. Also I like the extra dimension to the character given by that form of stat advancement.

Hi Craig, welcome to the forge!

Opinion polling isn't a part of the forge, sadly (well, not that sadly). Its more about working on what you've decided to do, rather than poll to decide what to do. So instead of polled answers your going to see 'Well, which suits your design goals better? What are your design goals?'  That's all we work from here, no polls.

What are your design goals? Go on, tell me! :) Please! :)

Well the thing is I was hoping to avoid making any further comment as to my motives until I had many more answers, and I hope THIS entry will not influence others in their answers. The reality is I am at an impasse where my game cannot be further developed until I have solved the internal problems I am dealing with (as opposed to external problems, like when Works crashed after an hour and a half of particularly inspired writing). This question therefore IS in fact entirely about what I want in my game, in as much as the answers people give will help (or I should say, hopefully help) me focus on those elements which are important and clarify some underlying arguments I have in the for/against category of thought.

Vague, maybe, but I just wanted to explain my motives to a reasonable degree before everyone just dumped out 'no polling' as an answer.

However if the moderators feel this is an improper use of the board I will happily retract my question and post no further, as I don't like making waves.

OK.  I would say that I view Level Based bonuses as like getting Skill Packages : I get a level of Fighter, I get a bunch of Fighting Bonus skills.  If I get a level of Wizard, I get a bunch of Arcane-based skills. 

As far as design goes, it's much easier to design levels (since you balance a whole series of packages, rather than individual skills) than skills.  IMHO.  You don'[t need to worry about someone buying a bunch of melee skills, and also a bunch of wizard skills, since you can make the two packages exclusive.  You can also tie a bunch of restrictions into the packages that make them more exclusive (can't cast spells in armor, etc.)

So, as a player, naturally I prefer Skill-based systems, because I can make that Warrior/Cleric easier, since the chioce of which skills to spend my XP on is at my control (I don't need to spend time learning to Turn undead, just on slaying them) and is more immediate, instead of worrying about the level grind (Well, if we take out those kobolds, I'll level up, and then we can take on the dragon).

A simple poll responce? I like skill systems better.

Also, get in the habbit of being a bit obsessive about saving. Make it a reflex.

These are my main reasons for disliking levels and classes:

1. They're an abstraction that was useful for simple early rules sets, but make little sense in systems that do have skills. As far as I can tell D&D is actualy skills based nowadays, with levels only serving to package up skills into bundles. You actualy do spend points to buy skills in D&D now. Therefore the level mechanics are just an unecessary administrative overhead.

2. Restrictions such as no spellcasting in armour don't need a class system to hang them off, you just impose that rule if that's what you want.

3. Characteristics, skills, hit points, etc are abstractions of real attributes that people have. But so far as I can tell real people don't have anything corresponding to levels or character classes.

4. Finaly character class and level systems often seem to skew the social structure of the game world, warping it to fit the game mechanics.

craig wrote: This question therefore IS in fact entirely about what I want in my game, in as much as the answers people give will help (or I should say, hopefully help) me focus on those elements which are important and clarify some underlying arguments I have in the for/against category of thought.

Everyone else, stop responding to the poll if you decided to take up the forge on its invitation to act in a forgey way. Running polls and responding to them isn't part of this places invitation.

Callan is absolutely correct. Simon, you should know better, especially following Callan's first post.

Everyone else - this is not a site where you can "feel" and react to questions like this.

Craig, you're new, you're not being spanked or dissed - instead, I'm going to suggest exactly the right thing to do. Post in Actual Play about experiences you've personally had with both methods of character design. This will generate a discussion which will yield real information and real insight, not the meaningless reaction-fest of a poll.

This thread stops here. No more posting by anyone, please.

Best, Ron