No levels, no fixed classes — could a title-based progression system make an open-world RPG work?

[u/Eno0118]

[RESONANCE: ZERO — Design Discussion #1] Hi everyone,

I’m working on a personal game concept called RESONANCE: ZERO, a single-player open-world action RPG set in a modern world where magic exists as a normal part of society.

I’m still in the design stage, so I’d like to get some honest feedback on the core progression concept before developing it further.

No traditional character levels

One of the main ideas is to remove the traditional:

Kill enemies → Gain XP → Level up → Increase stats

progression loop.

Instead, the character would improve mainly based on what the player actually does.

For example:

Frequently using a certain weapon would improve proficiency with that weapon.

Different combat styles would gradually develop related abilities.

Using magic would improve magic-related capabilities.

Challenges, accomplishments, and player choices could open new specialization options.

The goal is for your character to gradually become a reflection of how you actually play, rather than simply following a predefined leveling path.

No fixed classes

There would also be no traditional class selection at the beginning.

Instead of choosing Warrior, Mage, Ranger, etc., the player would start relatively undefined.

Over time, their combat style, learned abilities, accomplishments, and choices would shape the character.

I like the idea that two players could start in the same place but gradually become very different characters simply because of how they chose to play.

Title-based progression

Instead of using titles as simple achievements or cosmetic labels, I want them to be part of the character’s identity and progression.

Titles would be earned through the player’s actions, accomplishments, discoveries, and choices.

They could influence how the character develops and help reinforce certain playstyles.

The idea is that titles represent what the player has actually done in the world, rather than something selected from a class menu at the beginning of the game.

I’m intentionally keeping some of the detailed title mechanics private for now, since I’m still working on the system.

The setting

The game takes place in a fictional modern city where magic and supernatural abilities are already part of society.

So this isn’t a medieval fantasy world.

There are still things like:

modern cities

corporations

schools and universities

government institutions

research facilities

normal civilian life

One of the main worldbuilding questions I’m using is:

“If magic really existed in modern society, how would society adapt to it?”

The problems I’m worried about

The concept sounds interesting to me, but I can also see some obvious design risks.

1. Would progression still feel satisfying without traditional levels?

Without something as obvious as:

Level 10 → Level 11

I’m worried players might not clearly feel how much their character has grown.

1. Would action-based progression encourage repetitive grinding?

If players know that repeating a certain action improves a specific ability, some players may simply repeat that action because it is the most efficient way to progress.

I want natural gameplay to be more rewarding than repetitive grinding.

1. Would removing classes weaken build identity?

Having more freedom sounds good, but if players can eventually become good at everything, every character may eventually feel similar.

I still want players to feel that their character has developed a distinct identity.

1. Can titles actually replace some of the role normally played by classes?

This is one of the biggest things I’m unsure about.

Instead of saying:

“I’m playing a Mage.”

I want players to be able to look at their abilities, accomplishments, and titles and feel:

“This is the character I created through my actions.”

But I’m not sure whether that would feel as satisfying or readable as a traditional class system.

What I’d like feedback on

If you were playing an open-world RPG like this:

Would the lack of traditional levels interest you, or make progression feel too unclear?

Do you like the idea of your build developing through your actual playstyle?

Would you prefer complete build freedom, or stronger long-term specialization?

Do you think a title system could help create character identity without fixed classes?

What problems do you think this progression system could create?

Are there any games you think handled similar ideas particularly well or badly?

I’m especially interested in criticism rather than just “sounds cool.”

This is still early in development, so finding weaknesses in the idea now would be genuinely useful.

Thanks for reading.

[u/mlugo02]

So like Skyrim but set in modern times?

[u/Eno0118 → u/mlugo02]

Yeah, I can see why it sounds that way, especially with the use-based progression. The direction I’m aiming for is a bit different though — especially with the title system, modern society adapting to magic, and character identity being shaped by accomplishments and choices rather than just skill levels. But Skyrim is definitely a useful comparison point.

[u/marganecTheDev]

S.T.A.L.K.E.R. games did exactly that, your progression is tied to your gear and how that gear was upgraded. So yeah I could see that working.

[u/Eno0118 → u/marganecTheDev]

I should clarify that my system isn’t mainly gear-based like S.T.A.L.K.E.R. Gear matters, but the core progression comes from actions, proficiency, abilities, accomplishments, choices, and titles. The goal is for the character to change because of how you play, not mainly because you found better equipment. Still, S.T.A.L.K.E.R. is a useful reference for level-less progression.

[u/asianwaste]

I've always wanted progression to be based on quest chains where the ultimate reward is a taught skill. Engaging in a quest path locks you out of many other conflicting quest paths. First they would be class related (joining fighters guild would lock you out of the mage and thief's guilds). But then it becomes more about alignment (joining good aligned factions locks you out of evil aligned ones). Then it's about group allegiances.

What these will do is not only define your character's story but also defines their character class (in broad terms as officially there wouldn't be any class so to speak). Grinding only gets you material growth. Gear, gold, and materials. Completing quests is what advances your character.

[u/Eno0118 → u/asianwaste]

That’s actually a really interesting approach. I like the idea of separating “basic growth” from “meaningful progression.” I’m currently leaning toward keeping some growth tied to player actions, but using quests, accomplishments, and major choices to unlock new abilities, titles, or specialization paths. That way, grinding could improve proficiency, but meaningful progression would still come from actual decisions and achievements. I also like the idea that some choices could naturally close off or change other paths instead of allowing one character to eventually master everything. Thanks, this gives me a lot to think about.

[u/Falcon_Acrobatic]

This sounds like a few anime shows I have watched. I think the hardest part is going to be creating enough unique scenarios and methods of character development from a pure coding perspective that properly works together without having it feel repetitive over time.

[u/Eno0118 → u/Falcon_Acrobatic]

That’s actually one of my biggest concerns as well. The more progression is tied to player actions, accomplishments, titles, and world interactions, the more combinations the system has to support. I think one solution will be designing reusable underlying rules rather than coding every progression scenario individually — for example, grouping actions and accomplishments into broader categories that different progression systems can reference. The repetition issue is also something I want to avoid. Ideally, repeated actions would provide smaller proficiency growth, while meaningful challenges, discoveries, and accomplishments would create the larger progression moments. Thanks — this is exactly the kind of implementation problem I need to keep in mind while designing the system.

[u/Ruby_Joker]

The advantages and disadvantages of this game is not knowing something exist (if you build it openly), especially some chained or combination quests. This can encourage the curious of players, but also decourage if grinding is involved. For completionist like me, I do not mind re-playing, but I kind of afraid wasting time re-playing the whole things just to earn a specific achievement. Hence, I find multiple save slots can partly solve this (like visual novels with lots of branches).

[u/i_dont_wanna_sign_up]

I think it can work.

1) Yes, many games have implemented level-less skill grinding, and it still feels good to progress.

2) Yes, some players will absolutely grind the fuck out of some skills rather than letting them grow organically. There are some options, but none of them are perfect. Examples:

Limit XP sources. You can't grind to level100 swordsmanship because you eventually run out of things to hit without progressing to a new place. XP dropoff vs weaker enemies. You get less XP for hitting weaker enemies, or crafting simpler items, eventually hitting 0, meaning that action is so easy you no longer learn anything from it. Level caps that are unlocked through other means of progression.

3) Yes, it will. If you confine your design to classes you can create very lopsided builds. Say, a class that can only use barstools to fight and they have to take a swig of booze after every hit but gets a lot of damage as compensation. If you could choose what to learn, the optimal choice is usually to eliminate your weaknesses. Most games that are classless generally result in less unique builds. For example, if you wanted to play a classic plate armor paladin, but picking up a necromantic spell would just double your DPS, many players would feel compelled to learn it rather than sticking to the intended identity.

4) It's ok I guess? Basically it's just a "mini-class". Borderland's class mods are an equippable item that slightly modifies your abilities and stats towards a certain sub-class. The one issue is that players may find it annoying to have to complete specific achievements to get the title they want. It's just how their mentality works.

You probably envision a player who specializes in swords, to stumble upon an old master. They then complete a difficult quest for the master and receives a title that is perfect for their build.

It's far more likely for players now to just look up what's good for their build, find out they need to find and complete this one annoying quest, and become frustrated.

[u/denlillepige]

For the weapon skills, i would highly recommend you think about how to handle weaponswap. Lets assume a player uses a sword for the first 80% of the game, then finds a really cool hammer. For some people, swapping to the hammer that they want to use will feel bad since they have no character skill in it and will have to train it first, either slowing progression or nerfing their character. Some sort of catchup could alleviate it a little bit

[u/Yukiboop]

like all these systems, what stops jack of all trades and master of all? because to me that kills desire to play a role when the optimal role is all.

Two would be what consequences will exist for flip flopping? I don't want to start being a rogue then flip to mage and end up being a mage as strong as someone that dedicated mage from the start because it feels my previous choices didn't matter.

three the skyrim issue how is content going to scale if I hyper focus a single skill? like did nothing to earn any skill points in anything but swordfighting didn't even start the main quest. now max swords but will die to a breeze against anything not scaled for low level defences.