Sounds like a good idea @EvilKitten it gives people something familiar before they jump into the deep end of customization.
Likes:
Vedemin
Here is the problem with attempting a truly classless system, it cannot exist.
Now, hold your horses, stop that furious typing; ill explain.
The meta idea behind classes is how they function, and what effects they produce. For example, a healer focuses on keeping the team in the fight longer, or a tank soaking up the damage for the team, preventing the softer targets from taking as much damage. Almost everyone who plays any sort of MMO will needlessly already understand this. But i am laying out a groundwork of my explanation here. Secondly, a system of complete customization creates scenarios of the "jack-of-all-trades." Which in a classless system WILL exist as a product of the best possible combinations, these combinations will take time; the more components to a system, the longer it will take to hash out the best combination. But nonetheless a god-tier build will emerge, if anyone else played DDO, you will understand the strength of a warforged-arcane.
This brings me to my point i was originally stating, a truly classless system cannot exist without dooming the game to meta-builds. Which will, inevitably become the dreaded "jack-of-all-trades" builds.
From here, what can we hypothesis.
1. There will need to be restrictions in place to prevent that Tanky/healer/dps build from emerging.
2. Archetypes exist not only for balance reasons, but also as a way to categorize ourselves in the line of combat.
3. Meta will exist whether we like it or not, elitist players will always find the best out of any scenario that offers customization.
4. Sidegrades are ALWAYS upgrades unless they have a tradeoff
Where can we go from here?
Players will always associate their play style into a general archetype, this forms the 6 pointed star of EVERY MMO out there, Three super classes Tank, Healer, DPS. And the 3 Hybrid classes Tanky DPS, Support DPS and Tanky Healer. This playstyle is almost inescapable, even without classes and given a freeform customization, players will find these 6 classes to be the absolute most effective when in parties. They will also find that a jack-of-all-trades is also necessary when running content solo (it will always happen).
Attempting to rewrite this formula will lead us into narrow windows of opportunity where we will have to place severe restrictions on certain builds simply for the sake of "preventing classes", which seems ludicrous when you actually take the time to think about it. What we need to do is not try everything we can to totally shatter any sort of meta, but use it to make the meta classes less defining.
I have seen the analogy to path of exile (which i have extensively played) to suggest that each sub-class not have a specific role, but just something that they have a propensity towards, but does not in any way define a specific build for them. I am absolutely onboard with the idea of a tree SIMILAR to the PoE skill tree. There would obviously need to be some changes to the direct stats that the skill tree there gives, but that could easily allow for a large number of builds.
Consider this, a circle with 6 starting points DPS, Support DPS, Healer, Tanky Healer, Tank, Tanky DPS. Names can be given to each starting areas so as not to directly class each starting area. Each player gets customization points that can start from any of the 6 starting points, from there they bridge out. Allocating nodes will give direct benefits such as increased damage absorption (found near the tanky side of the tree). Throughout this tree is Abilities, these abilities will be the skills that the player will use. For a player to attempt a tanky/healer/dps, they would sacrifice stat upgrades to make the journey to other sides of the tree. For example, a tanky healer starting zone COULD get dps abilities but would require significant investment to do so, BUT will not, and should not stop them from doing so though if that is the intention of their build.
I Like the idea of a limited range of abilities, 3 abilities and an ultimate (preferably on a charge system) that is directly tied with the playstyle of that ability, such that a defense/Tank style ultimate (80% damage reduction for a short time, for example) would charge through the player taking/blocking damage and an offense/DPS ability charging through critical hits or large chain kills. This way the player is rewarded for playing a specific way (this isn't intended to force roles on a player, rather reduce the jack-of-all-trades extreme strength that would result from the access to every ability)
Sounds like i want a classed system, right? Well, yes and no... I don't feel that we should be pigeon-holed into specific classes, but i don't like the ability to make that oppressively overpowered jack-of-all-trades that would result if you simply gave access to any ability. The trick is in balancing the meta classes with the ability to create a completely new class that fits the player.
At the same time, i feel that each player should have 3 "Configurations" that the player could swap to at any time without going back to a safe zone. These configuration changes would (and should) reset the charge on the ultimate and would require, say 10 seconds to reconfigure the frame. Now what do i mean by this? A player could have several setups (indeed far more than 3) but they can only have available at any time three of them. The player can switch their configuration out in the field between these three configurations as needed for a fight or specific situation. The action would cause the player to go into a short "reconfiguration" state which would cause a 5-10 second self stun while the player changes configuration. The player could swap out the available reconfigurations at a safe zone, but not in the field.
To prevent this game from being a simple oneoff without any sort of progression the player could have to fulfill tasks and sink crafting components to unlock more parts of the tree to deepen their customization. For example a task for the tank hex of the tree could be to use a shield to block X amount of damage, then research the upgrade with crafting materials. This is not forcing a tank role on a player, but causing them to play in a specific way if they wish to further delve into a damage absorption side of their playstyle.
I also love the idea of engine limitations where a light engine cannot effectively charge for large amounts of damage, or a heavy engine cannot fly long distances. I love the idea of tradeoffs for specific SIDEGRADES. Never forcing upgrades on a player, since upgrades cause wasted space in a video game.
Now, hold your horses, stop that furious typing; ill explain.
The meta idea behind classes is how they function, and what effects they produce. For example, a healer focuses on keeping the team in the fight longer, or a tank soaking up the damage for the team, preventing the softer targets from taking as much damage. Almost everyone who plays any sort of MMO will needlessly already understand this. But i am laying out a groundwork of my explanation here. Secondly, a system of complete customization creates scenarios of the "jack-of-all-trades." Which in a classless system WILL exist as a product of the best possible combinations, these combinations will take time; the more components to a system, the longer it will take to hash out the best combination. But nonetheless a god-tier build will emerge, if anyone else played DDO, you will understand the strength of a warforged-arcane.
This brings me to my point i was originally stating, a truly classless system cannot exist without dooming the game to meta-builds. Which will, inevitably become the dreaded "jack-of-all-trades" builds.
From here, what can we hypothesis.
1. There will need to be restrictions in place to prevent that Tanky/healer/dps build from emerging.
2. Archetypes exist not only for balance reasons, but also as a way to categorize ourselves in the line of combat.
3. Meta will exist whether we like it or not, elitist players will always find the best out of any scenario that offers customization.
4. Sidegrades are ALWAYS upgrades unless they have a tradeoff
Where can we go from here?
Players will always associate their play style into a general archetype, this forms the 6 pointed star of EVERY MMO out there, Three super classes Tank, Healer, DPS. And the 3 Hybrid classes Tanky DPS, Support DPS and Tanky Healer. This playstyle is almost inescapable, even without classes and given a freeform customization, players will find these 6 classes to be the absolute most effective when in parties. They will also find that a jack-of-all-trades is also necessary when running content solo (it will always happen).
Attempting to rewrite this formula will lead us into narrow windows of opportunity where we will have to place severe restrictions on certain builds simply for the sake of "preventing classes", which seems ludicrous when you actually take the time to think about it. What we need to do is not try everything we can to totally shatter any sort of meta, but use it to make the meta classes less defining.
I have seen the analogy to path of exile (which i have extensively played) to suggest that each sub-class not have a specific role, but just something that they have a propensity towards, but does not in any way define a specific build for them. I am absolutely onboard with the idea of a tree SIMILAR to the PoE skill tree. There would obviously need to be some changes to the direct stats that the skill tree there gives, but that could easily allow for a large number of builds.
Consider this, a circle with 6 starting points DPS, Support DPS, Healer, Tanky Healer, Tank, Tanky DPS. Names can be given to each starting areas so as not to directly class each starting area. Each player gets customization points that can start from any of the 6 starting points, from there they bridge out. Allocating nodes will give direct benefits such as increased damage absorption (found near the tanky side of the tree). Throughout this tree is Abilities, these abilities will be the skills that the player will use. For a player to attempt a tanky/healer/dps, they would sacrifice stat upgrades to make the journey to other sides of the tree. For example, a tanky healer starting zone COULD get dps abilities but would require significant investment to do so, BUT will not, and should not stop them from doing so though if that is the intention of their build.
I Like the idea of a limited range of abilities, 3 abilities and an ultimate (preferably on a charge system) that is directly tied with the playstyle of that ability, such that a defense/Tank style ultimate (80% damage reduction for a short time, for example) would charge through the player taking/blocking damage and an offense/DPS ability charging through critical hits or large chain kills. This way the player is rewarded for playing a specific way (this isn't intended to force roles on a player, rather reduce the jack-of-all-trades extreme strength that would result from the access to every ability)
Sounds like i want a classed system, right? Well, yes and no... I don't feel that we should be pigeon-holed into specific classes, but i don't like the ability to make that oppressively overpowered jack-of-all-trades that would result if you simply gave access to any ability. The trick is in balancing the meta classes with the ability to create a completely new class that fits the player.
At the same time, i feel that each player should have 3 "Configurations" that the player could swap to at any time without going back to a safe zone. These configuration changes would (and should) reset the charge on the ultimate and would require, say 10 seconds to reconfigure the frame. Now what do i mean by this? A player could have several setups (indeed far more than 3) but they can only have available at any time three of them. The player can switch their configuration out in the field between these three configurations as needed for a fight or specific situation. The action would cause the player to go into a short "reconfiguration" state which would cause a 5-10 second self stun while the player changes configuration. The player could swap out the available reconfigurations at a safe zone, but not in the field.
To prevent this game from being a simple oneoff without any sort of progression the player could have to fulfill tasks and sink crafting components to unlock more parts of the tree to deepen their customization. For example a task for the tank hex of the tree could be to use a shield to block X amount of damage, then research the upgrade with crafting materials. This is not forcing a tank role on a player, but causing them to play in a specific way if they wish to further delve into a damage absorption side of their playstyle.
I also love the idea of engine limitations where a light engine cannot effectively charge for large amounts of damage, or a heavy engine cannot fly long distances. I love the idea of tradeoffs for specific SIDEGRADES. Never forcing upgrades on a player, since upgrades cause wasted space in a video game.
Likes:
Beerdog6
I think a lot of people in this thread are stuck in their old "stinkin, thinkin". You should be thinking like a military unit.
You do have people that play roles, but like the Marines , "everyone is a rifleman". Anyone can do anything, depending on what equipment they buy and learn to use(play). If you want to have some skill bonuses for experience, fine. But everyone can accumulate that without penalties.
FOR example. I started out life learning to hunt(shoot a rifle ) at an early age, and use a map and compass.
I learned how to work on cars, program computers and work as a line cook in a restaurant all before I was 18. When I went into the Army, I improved my skill in shooting a little, learned how to jump out of airplanes, and then learned all about Single channel communication, from how to climb a telephone pole to eventually portable Satcom, and Multichannel cellphone systems. Along the way I picked up air assault skills, basic heavy weapons, medium first aid/ems skills, and basic hand to hand( which I actually used twice to disarm someone with a knife). My equipment
changed around me, but I learned and adapted. Now I am learning to race sailboats and use a 3d printer.
I thought the system in the Beta FF was a pretty good start.
I thought the basic scale of the armor/frame was good. A little larger than life, but not too big.
I would say pick a size of frame and power plant, then what you want you want to play. If you want a healer that has a ton of armor and moves real slow. play it and see what happens. A raider with a BFG and no armor, go for it. a miner, a cargo specialist, a buffalo hunter, what ever. Let the game go where it may. The Devs can adjust.
With a decently customizable system, that should be possible. Having predesigned kits is only logical and normal.
not everyone wants to build their own Drifter race car. But they might like to add on that hot new control unit.
And you could switch out components in some systems, but it would take a shop/mechanic/armorer. Did I mention I can rebuild an engine? But in a realistic design, a medevac helo is only partially able to equip guns and it takes a crew chief/mechanic. easier to pull out the Apache out of the hanger.
And no penalties for switching. I might want to play a healer one day, and an gunship the next. Just buy or build the equipment. Yep I can still make a mean omelet, and I really like to go to the gunrange with my Sig P227 Nitron.
Maybe more than my two cents this time.
You do have people that play roles, but like the Marines , "everyone is a rifleman". Anyone can do anything, depending on what equipment they buy and learn to use(play). If you want to have some skill bonuses for experience, fine. But everyone can accumulate that without penalties.
FOR example. I started out life learning to hunt(shoot a rifle ) at an early age, and use a map and compass.
I learned how to work on cars, program computers and work as a line cook in a restaurant all before I was 18. When I went into the Army, I improved my skill in shooting a little, learned how to jump out of airplanes, and then learned all about Single channel communication, from how to climb a telephone pole to eventually portable Satcom, and Multichannel cellphone systems. Along the way I picked up air assault skills, basic heavy weapons, medium first aid/ems skills, and basic hand to hand( which I actually used twice to disarm someone with a knife). My equipment
changed around me, but I learned and adapted. Now I am learning to race sailboats and use a 3d printer.
I thought the system in the Beta FF was a pretty good start.
I thought the basic scale of the armor/frame was good. A little larger than life, but not too big.
I would say pick a size of frame and power plant, then what you want you want to play. If you want a healer that has a ton of armor and moves real slow. play it and see what happens. A raider with a BFG and no armor, go for it. a miner, a cargo specialist, a buffalo hunter, what ever. Let the game go where it may. The Devs can adjust.
With a decently customizable system, that should be possible. Having predesigned kits is only logical and normal.
not everyone wants to build their own Drifter race car. But they might like to add on that hot new control unit.
And you could switch out components in some systems, but it would take a shop/mechanic/armorer. Did I mention I can rebuild an engine? But in a realistic design, a medevac helo is only partially able to equip guns and it takes a crew chief/mechanic. easier to pull out the Apache out of the hanger.
And no penalties for switching. I might want to play a healer one day, and an gunship the next. Just buy or build the equipment. Yep I can still make a mean omelet, and I really like to go to the gunrange with my Sig P227 Nitron.
Maybe more than my two cents this time.
Likes:
Grammaton
You mean like the real Army works? This is a great idea. no classes just different equipment that one can change out according to ones needs.
Likes:
EvilKitten and Beerdog6
I want to refer to my post in another thread
Take starting in the tank area for example, you can move towards DPS AND/OR Support as you see fit, or you can expand out into the nodes in the tank area. The idea is that you balance a character/build by what they wish to achieve. In this case, a tank will have to sacrifice stat bonus allocation points to reach the support-DPS side of the tree. The idea of a tree like this will to prevent oppressively powerful JoaT (Jack-of-all-Trades) builds from emerging. By limiting their expansion into other areas of power by making the player choose between expansion or core strength.
It was stated that there will be subclasses in the game, i sincerely doubt that attempting to change this in the way that has been suggested will bring longevity to the game. A game should always allow for depth and interchangibility, it is to this regard that i have suggested this system as a way to BALANCE the classes vs each other.
We want to encourage the general player to do whatever they desire, But the top 5% of any game will look to exploit any strengths JoaT builds give, especially geared against certain content. We should aim not to try and prevent situational builds, but give them definitive tradeoffs for doing so.
Take starting in the tank area for example, you can move towards DPS AND/OR Support as you see fit, or you can expand out into the nodes in the tank area. The idea is that you balance a character/build by what they wish to achieve. In this case, a tank will have to sacrifice stat bonus allocation points to reach the support-DPS side of the tree. The idea of a tree like this will to prevent oppressively powerful JoaT (Jack-of-all-Trades) builds from emerging. By limiting their expansion into other areas of power by making the player choose between expansion or core strength.
It was stated that there will be subclasses in the game, i sincerely doubt that attempting to change this in the way that has been suggested will bring longevity to the game. A game should always allow for depth and interchangibility, it is to this regard that i have suggested this system as a way to BALANCE the classes vs each other.
We want to encourage the general player to do whatever they desire, But the top 5% of any game will look to exploit any strengths JoaT builds give, especially geared against certain content. We should aim not to try and prevent situational builds, but give them definitive tradeoffs for doing so.
Likes:
MattHunX
Yes, definitely!
One thing that people seem to not be paying attention to here is that for every bonus, a penalty should be applied to lend balance. In this way, you may optimize towards a certain role. Starting with differing component armor classes as a base is only logical, given a common system core, and allows for a wider degree of optimization and customization than strictly relying on module driven optimization. Adding system core optimization to the mix would give an even greater degree of flexibility and optimization for role-based builds and would prevent the sort of meta builds which most people seem to be worrying over.
Further, weapons should rightly be restricted based on the physical limitations of the frame components themselves. For instance, the heaviest weapons, such as a rotary cannon, would require the heavier, reinforced mounts which are only available on heavier base frame components while lighter weapons, such as an assault rifle, would be usable with all base frame components. Further along those lines, certain classes of energy weapons (think Plasma Cannons from Firefall) could be restricted based on both weapon mounts and energy requirements which would only be met by certain classes of base frame components in combination. Consider that the energy requirements in this case could easily be met by lighter base frame components yet prohibited by the greater energy requirements needed to move the heaviest frame, while the physical mount requirements could only be met by medium and heavy base frame components. In such a scenario, it would be optimal to build around medium base frame components to make use of the weapon. The possibilities for customization are endless and restrictive at the same time, which could create sort of pseudo-classes.
Well played in referencing BL:R as that game did the shooter meta build and balance very well. Only difference is that there are no abilities, though those could easily be equivocated by Gear items and such.
One thing that people seem to not be paying attention to here is that for every bonus, a penalty should be applied to lend balance. In this way, you may optimize towards a certain role. Starting with differing component armor classes as a base is only logical, given a common system core, and allows for a wider degree of optimization and customization than strictly relying on module driven optimization. Adding system core optimization to the mix would give an even greater degree of flexibility and optimization for role-based builds and would prevent the sort of meta builds which most people seem to be worrying over.
Further, weapons should rightly be restricted based on the physical limitations of the frame components themselves. For instance, the heaviest weapons, such as a rotary cannon, would require the heavier, reinforced mounts which are only available on heavier base frame components while lighter weapons, such as an assault rifle, would be usable with all base frame components. Further along those lines, certain classes of energy weapons (think Plasma Cannons from Firefall) could be restricted based on both weapon mounts and energy requirements which would only be met by certain classes of base frame components in combination. Consider that the energy requirements in this case could easily be met by lighter base frame components yet prohibited by the greater energy requirements needed to move the heaviest frame, while the physical mount requirements could only be met by medium and heavy base frame components. In such a scenario, it would be optimal to build around medium base frame components to make use of the weapon. The possibilities for customization are endless and restrictive at the same time, which could create sort of pseudo-classes.
Well played in referencing BL:R as that game did the shooter meta build and balance very well. Only difference is that there are no abilities, though those could easily be equivocated by Gear items and such.
Likes:
Vladplaya
Umm...no thanks !?!...that "Skill Forest" is a bloated and shallow mess.
Would rather see a system were I could aim for only the stuff I want and are going to use instead of wasting time with an aligned "path" drowning my "skill sheet" in stuff I'm never gonna use.
...of course balance is needed.
To answer OP's post, I voted "Little bit of both".
Never liked tech trees but like "limitless" choices.
I like the "kit" idea, but not when it's that specific.
This is just an example:
You can have a maximum of 3 skills from either Tank, Healer and DPS category.
Picking 1 from each will not give you any bonus but 2-3 from the same category will give a bonus aimed for that specific category.
i.e. 2 Heal and 1 DPS will give me something that boosts healing/support.
Instead of a fixed bonus it could also be a perk chosen from a list.
2 heals = 1 perk
3 heals = 2 perks
In addition to that, it also doesn't matter which combination of the 2-3 heals I'm picking...as long as the skills is in the heal/support category, the perks will also come from there.
Would rather see a system were I could aim for only the stuff I want and are going to use instead of wasting time with an aligned "path" drowning my "skill sheet" in stuff I'm never gonna use.
...of course balance is needed.
To answer OP's post, I voted "Little bit of both".
Never liked tech trees but like "limitless" choices.
I like the "kit" idea, but not when it's that specific.
This is just an example:
You can have a maximum of 3 skills from either Tank, Healer and DPS category.
Picking 1 from each will not give you any bonus but 2-3 from the same category will give a bonus aimed for that specific category.
i.e. 2 Heal and 1 DPS will give me something that boosts healing/support.
Instead of a fixed bonus it could also be a perk chosen from a list.
2 heals = 1 perk
3 heals = 2 perks
In addition to that, it also doesn't matter which combination of the 2-3 heals I'm picking...as long as the skills is in the heal/support category, the perks will also come from there.
Last edited:
Likes:
Grammaton
I would rather move away from class-loadouts. It forces more singular roles on players and prevents them from doing anything else during a battle. It also means that almost everyone will be using the same loadouts, which becomes stale faster than if you don't have kits and can mix your loadouts more.
Take Firefall. The Biotech was a healer and DOT specialist, but couldn't really fulfill any other tasks. Firefall at least made everyone a damage dealer so everyone could join the fight, but you were still stuck in that role from start to finish of any fight.
I would rather make the classes a side-role. Being a medic gives you some standard perks, like faster reviving of allies and/or the ability to heal other players, but the weapons, abilities and armors you equip are available to all classes and each have a different role. Preferably you can't have overlapping roles. So if you pick a weapon with a crowd-control role (probably an AOE weapon or high ROF weapon) you can't pick an ability that also serves as a crowd control role.
We can change the roles of each weapon, ability, calldown and armor to do something specific you might want to accomplish in the game world. What this role is can be wildly different. From dealing more damage to an armored unit to helping you explore.
And for that we should first look at the world we'll get. Firefall was filled for a large part with king-of-the-hill gameplay. Thumpers, towers, invasions. Almost everything was tied to a single spot. The "only" places where this wasn't the case was the jobs you could do all around the world. In the crafted caverns players mostly did assault style gameplay, and only the first time you came there you could explore to find the pieces of a bomb or the datapad. Afterwards you would find the same bomb pieces and datapads in the same areas and knew what to expect everywhere.
But that can change. Take the crashed thumper job. You get there, grab some pieces, fix up the thumper while critters try to eat you and send it off. This can easily be expanded to a king-of-the-hill&exploration type of gameplay. The pieces required to fix it won't be in sight and easily found 20m away, they might actually be hidden. This gives players with exploration abilities and weapons a nice edge during these events.
And this way you can create weapons and abilities that fulfill each role. I would prevent players to pick the a weapon and ability of the same role, that way there's less min/maxing and more "anything has both good and bad sides, what would you want to be able to do?"
Take Firefall. The Biotech was a healer and DOT specialist, but couldn't really fulfill any other tasks. Firefall at least made everyone a damage dealer so everyone could join the fight, but you were still stuck in that role from start to finish of any fight.
I would rather make the classes a side-role. Being a medic gives you some standard perks, like faster reviving of allies and/or the ability to heal other players, but the weapons, abilities and armors you equip are available to all classes and each have a different role. Preferably you can't have overlapping roles. So if you pick a weapon with a crowd-control role (probably an AOE weapon or high ROF weapon) you can't pick an ability that also serves as a crowd control role.
We can change the roles of each weapon, ability, calldown and armor to do something specific you might want to accomplish in the game world. What this role is can be wildly different. From dealing more damage to an armored unit to helping you explore.
And for that we should first look at the world we'll get. Firefall was filled for a large part with king-of-the-hill gameplay. Thumpers, towers, invasions. Almost everything was tied to a single spot. The "only" places where this wasn't the case was the jobs you could do all around the world. In the crafted caverns players mostly did assault style gameplay, and only the first time you came there you could explore to find the pieces of a bomb or the datapad. Afterwards you would find the same bomb pieces and datapads in the same areas and knew what to expect everywhere.
But that can change. Take the crashed thumper job. You get there, grab some pieces, fix up the thumper while critters try to eat you and send it off. This can easily be expanded to a king-of-the-hill&exploration type of gameplay. The pieces required to fix it won't be in sight and easily found 20m away, they might actually be hidden. This gives players with exploration abilities and weapons a nice edge during these events.
And this way you can create weapons and abilities that fulfill each role. I would prevent players to pick the a weapon and ability of the same role, that way there's less min/maxing and more "anything has both good and bad sides, what would you want to be able to do?"
The reason that every MMO has meta's is because of vertical progression, if there is a "best" method of playing then people will naturally progress in that direction, even Firefall had that problem (Bastions = Thumping?) If you make sure that any horizontal drift is kept purely that, IE where every "bonus" you get also comes with an equal drawback), then it really comes down to playstyle rather than what pushes out the most raw DPS. Sure you will still have meta's because many people NEED to have something in a box that they can easily understand, but as long as Mark and the rest of the dev's are careful I think we can make the classless system work.
Classless system doesn't mean that you won't have any specific role in the game.
It is olympic season so think about a sports for example.
I was a competitive swimmer for 10 years, wasn't very good, only regional competition level. Anyway, I was good at backstoke compare to other methods but that doesn't mean that I am backstroke player or something. It is just a swimmer all the same.
In classless system with horizontal progression, you will find what you are good at and that will be your role most of the time. Good thing is, you don't have to be in that one specific role all the time.
It is olympic season so think about a sports for example.
I was a competitive swimmer for 10 years, wasn't very good, only regional competition level. Anyway, I was good at backstoke compare to other methods but that doesn't mean that I am backstroke player or something. It is just a swimmer all the same.
In classless system with horizontal progression, you will find what you are good at and that will be your role most of the time. Good thing is, you don't have to be in that one specific role all the time.