Well, advanced weapons can have up to 5 weapon abilities, so the two characters would also have to have the same gear and use the same weapon abilities for them to be functionally the same..
Likely, they would be choosing class abilities and weapon abilities that best fit their visions of the secondary classes they chose, so unlikely they would be functionally the same.
Secondary class also affects stat growth, so that will likely be significantly different as well.
That is a fair point about weapons.
Going back to the Guardian/Warden comparison from earlier in this thread though, if I am a Warden, but I don't select any augments from my Ranger subclass, why would I want a bow?
Since all of my abilities as a Warden are given to me via my Tank primary class, if I don't use any augments from my Ranger secondary class I don't see a need for a bow. One could then ask why pick Ranger as a second class - to which I would then say "hence the title of the thread".
To be fair, if this does turn out to be the case, it wouldn't be the first game to have this as an issue/feature. In Archeage, if you are a Demonologist (Sorcery/Occultism/Witchcraft) and don't put any points in Witchcraft, you are functionally no different to a Revenant (Sorcery/Occultism/Auramancy) that has no points put in Auramancy. If both classes equip the same gear and put their points in the same abilities, they are identical.
Again, I am not saying this is probable. I am saying with what we know so far it is possible. I assume there is something we don't know about that will generate an inherent difference between the subclasses - and if so that would be awesome.
Going back to the Guardian/Warden comparison from earlier in this thread though, if I am a Warden, but I don't select any augments from my Ranger subclass, why would I want a bow?
Since all of my abilities as a Warden are given to me via my Tank primary class, if I don't use any augments from my Ranger secondary class I don't see a need for a bow. One could then ask why pick Ranger as a second class - to which I would then say "hence the title of the thread".
To be fair, if this does turn out to be the case, it wouldn't be the first game to have this as an issue/feature. In Archeage, if you are a Demonologist (Sorcery/Occultism/Witchcraft) and don't put any points in Witchcraft, you are functionally no different to a Revenant (Sorcery/Occultism/Auramancy) that has no points put in Auramancy. If both classes equip the same gear and put their points in the same abilities, they are identical.
Again, I am not saying this is probable. I am saying with what we know so far it is possible. I assume there is something we don't know about that will generate an inherent difference between the subclasses - and if so that would be awesome.
We have to see where abilities are actually placed.
Currently, in the MMORPG, abilities are all placed on the character, rather than on the weapons. I think in the live game, the basic weapon attack, like Bow's Combo will be on the bow. Fleeting Shot and Sniper's Eye might be Ranger abilities rather than weapon abilities.
We don't know enough about abilities, or Ranger augments specifically, to discuss Guardian v Warden adequately.
We do know that Paladin's get, at least, a self-heal augment, which would likely be a very compelling reason to be a Paladin, rather than a Guardian. But, for an adequate assessment, we would have to know if there are Node, Racial, Religious, or Social Org augments that would provide a Guardian with group heals or self-heals.
If I'm a Tank and can only get self-heal augments by becoming a Paladin, that is more than just a flavour change.
For a Summoner, the difference between summoning multiple things and one large thing will probably be significant... especially in terms enemy focus of crowd control.
Also, the differences in damage types will probably be significant as well.
We just don't know enough about augments to reach any reasonable conclusions at this point.
0
Options
NagashMember, Leader of Men, Kickstarter, Alpha One
I am at a conflict.
I dont care for the classes of games like ArcheAge (too many) and I also dont care for classes like those in ESO (too few).
I cannot see all those combinations that IS is proposing for AoC to make a real impact and have any sense of identity.
I would prefer if we could have about 10-15 solid classes and do away with the combination theme.
I like the theory, I cant see the application.
It's best if the ideas behind the 64 classes get concetrated in a much smaller number to create unique playstyles with a true class mechanics.
I still think that we only have 8 real classes (fighter, tank, ranger, rogue, mage, cleric, bard and summoner) and the rest are just flavour changes.
That's how I see it as well
Same and that’s not a bad thing.
8 classes is still quite a lot if IS can make them distinctive from one another. Being able to heavily customize them via augments and gear and whatever else is even better. I’m not at all concerned about variety if they deliver what they’ve promised thus far.
I actually think it would be better for the game if Intrepid looked at their class system as being 8 classes rather than 64.
If you were only ever given a characters primary class when inspecting them, there is no scope for "class prejudice", which although silly, is enough of a real concern for it to be considered during development.
Further, if players come to the understanding that they are a "tank" class rather than a "Guardian" class, it will mean players are generally more willing to switch up their secondary class if the content requires it (though obviously there will still be some players that prefer to stick to one sub-class - which is fine).
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Hahaha!
0
Options
desoquaddubMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
who wants 8 i didn't backed for 8 regular classes if they had said 8 classes too choose from i would've bought the cbt founders packs lol
0
Options
AtamaMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
who wants 8 i didn't backed for 8 regular classes if they had said 8 classes too choose from i would've bought the cbt founders packs lol
They literally said 8 main classes. They’ve never said anything else. What are you blathering about.
in your small mind theres 8
0
Options
Undead CanuckMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
There are only 8. If you notice, the other 56 subclasses are combinations of the 8 classes.
Read over the grid. On the top and the side, all 8 are the same.
0
Options
desoquaddubMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
There are only 8. If you notice, the other 56 subclasses are combinations of the 8 classes.
Read over the grid. On the top and the side, all 8 are the same.
i see 64
0
Options
Undead CanuckMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Subclasses
2
Options
AtamaMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
There are only 8. If you notice, the other 56 subclasses are combinations of the 8 classes.
Read over the grid. On the top and the side, all 8 are the same.
i see 64
So if you understood the world better then you’d make better decisions. That makes sense.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Considering that the most current info is that secondary classes don't come into play until level 30; you are basically only playing the 8 classes.
those 8 classes you guys so proud of dont mean anything until you double down on the same class technically is 56 classes
1. We are not "proud" to have 8 classes, it is pretty much a fact and we cant change it, so we accepted it.
2. Why do you think it is 64 classes? We have 8 main classes, that each can then specialise into one of 8 other subclasses. A weapon master (fighter/fighter) and a shadowblade (fighter/rogue) will still be a fighter at heart and they will still do the same thing. The main difference between those two for example will be the execution of that task! Intrepid wants the fighter to be that fighting genius ala. D&D, slicing through the enemy lines and wreacking havoc upon the enemies.
Lets look upon how they could achieve that:
The ONE skill we actually know about for the fighter is "Rush" - Rush toward a target; and upon reaching the target, deal an amount damage with a chance to knock the target down.
Example for Weapon Master augmentation:
Bladerush - Rush toward the target, striking all enemies you pass and inflicting a bleed effect on them, knock down all enemies surrounding the target in a 2m radius.
Example for Shadowblade augmentation:
Shadowrush - Rush towards the target through the shadows. User is untargettable during travel. Once you reach the target slow them for x% for 3sec.
All three abilities achieve the same thing in different ways. Bladerush doubles down on the idea of the basic Rush, while Shadowrush incorporates the basic design of a rogue (keeping to the shadows and isolating a target).
1
Options
desoquaddubMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Considering that the most current info is that secondary classes don't come into play until level 30; you are basically only playing the 8 classes.
those 8 classes you guys so proud of dont mean anything until you double down on the same class technically is 56 classes
1. We are not "proud" to have 8 classes, it is pretty much a fact and we cant change it, so we accepted it.
2. Why do you think it is 64 classes? We have 8 main classes, that each can then specialise into one of 8 other subclasses. A weapon master (fighter/fighter) and a shadowblade (fighter/rogue) will still be a fighter at heart and they will still do the same thing. The main difference between those two for example will be the execution of that task! Intrepid wants the fighter to be that fighting genius ala. D&D, slicing through the enemy lines and wreacking havoc upon the enemies.
Lets look upon how they could achieve that:
The ONE skill we actually know about for the fighter is "Rush" - Rush toward a target; and upon reaching the target, deal an amount damage with a chance to knock the target down.
Example for Weapon Master augmentation:
Bladerush - Rush toward the target, striking all enemies you pass and inflicting a bleed effect on them, knock down all enemies surrounding the target in a 2m radius.
Example for Shadowblade augmentation:
Shadowrush - Rush towards the target through the shadows. User is untargettable during travel. Once you reach the target slow them for x% for 3sec.
All three abilities achieve the same thing in different ways. Bladerush doubles down on the idea of the basic Rush, while Shadowrush incorporates the basic design of a rogue (keeping to the shadows and isolating a target).
i want you to know thats too much reading i dah just read the first sentence n the last sentence at the bottom n that lets me know what your talking about
0
Options
unknownsystemerrorMember, Phoenix Initiative, Royalty, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Count DeMoney: It is said the people are revolting!
King Louis: You said it! They stink on ice.
Those are not the terms the devs use.
Ashes has 8 primary archetypes and 64 classes, per official terminology.
That terminology is also nearly 2 years old with no further confirmation. They already said that some mevhanics or terms, like the idea that secondary classes grow stats further, was removed. The sme could be the case for this.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
8 Solid classes are just fine. Damage mitigation, support, and damage; both magical and physical. Throw in the secondaries to alter exactly how they accomplish their job, while also being able to change that secondary? Sounds good to me. My only worry is they've already said that change won't be a necessarily quick thing, and i don't want the raids or dungeons to become, "only bring x role to this fight."
Will a subclass augment change the baseline functionality of an ability? Can we add an augment from a social organization onto it to make minor changes like damage type? Will a social organization augment completely overwrite the subclass augment? Will subclass augments be stronger or have more general use than social org augments? If a social augment is super niche, in what situation will it be better than a subclass aug?
I’m hoping the subclass augments do entire overhauls on abilities functionality, and that social org augments will minorly tweak those altered abilities.
Ex: A Tank would have an ability that bashes an enemy with their shield that can stun. A Tank/Rogue would have a dash that leads into a shield bash that can stun. A Tank/Rogue with an augment from the Thieve’s Guild would have a dash that leads into bash with a shield or 1H weapons that can stun.
Ex: A Tank would have an ability that bashes an enemy with their shield that can stun. A Tank/Rogue would have a dash that leads into a shield bash that can stun. A Tank/Rogue with an augment from the Thieve’s Guild would have a dash that leads into bash with a shield or 1H weapons that can stun.
Two things we do not know.
Is there an allowance to have an augment from our secondary class as well as an augment from a social organization, religion, race or other factor on an ability at the same time?
Second, are augments gained from non subclass avenues specific to class (meaning they would need to make 64 every time they want to have one as a reward), or will it be primary class specific (meaning they need to make 8 every time they want to reward one).
If neither of these above are true - and I suspect this would be the case - then a tank/ranger with that augment from the Thieves Guild would then have the exact same ability as the tank/rogue with that augment from the thieves guild.
If this is the case, then in terms of that specific ability, secondary class really doesn't matter. If there are enough such augments to load out a class completely, secondary class may well not matter at all.
Comments
That is a fair point about weapons.
Going back to the Guardian/Warden comparison from earlier in this thread though, if I am a Warden, but I don't select any augments from my Ranger subclass, why would I want a bow?
Since all of my abilities as a Warden are given to me via my Tank primary class, if I don't use any augments from my Ranger secondary class I don't see a need for a bow. One could then ask why pick Ranger as a second class - to which I would then say "hence the title of the thread".
To be fair, if this does turn out to be the case, it wouldn't be the first game to have this as an issue/feature. In Archeage, if you are a Demonologist (Sorcery/Occultism/Witchcraft) and don't put any points in Witchcraft, you are functionally no different to a Revenant (Sorcery/Occultism/Auramancy) that has no points put in Auramancy. If both classes equip the same gear and put their points in the same abilities, they are identical.
Again, I am not saying this is probable. I am saying with what we know so far it is possible. I assume there is something we don't know about that will generate an inherent difference between the subclasses - and if so that would be awesome.
I dont care for the classes of games like ArcheAge (too many) and I also dont care for classes like those in ESO (too few).
I cannot see all those combinations that IS is proposing for AoC to make a real impact and have any sense of identity.
I would prefer if we could have about 10-15 solid classes and do away with the combination theme.
I like the theory, I cant see the application.
It's best if the ideas behind the 64 classes get concetrated in a much smaller number to create unique playstyles with a true class mechanics.
That said, I am looking at the system in Ashes and I am thinking that the game will play like it has 8 classes.
I still think that we only have 8 real classes (fighter, tank, ranger, rogue, mage, cleric, bard and summoner) and the rest are just flavour changes.
Currently, in the MMORPG, abilities are all placed on the character, rather than on the weapons. I think in the live game, the basic weapon attack, like Bow's Combo will be on the bow. Fleeting Shot and Sniper's Eye might be Ranger abilities rather than weapon abilities.
We don't know enough about abilities, or Ranger augments specifically, to discuss Guardian v Warden adequately.
We do know that Paladin's get, at least, a self-heal augment, which would likely be a very compelling reason to be a Paladin, rather than a Guardian. But, for an adequate assessment, we would have to know if there are Node, Racial, Religious, or Social Org augments that would provide a Guardian with group heals or self-heals.
If I'm a Tank and can only get self-heal augments by becoming a Paladin, that is more than just a flavour change.
For a Summoner, the difference between summoning multiple things and one large thing will probably be significant... especially in terms enemy focus of crowd control.
Also, the differences in damage types will probably be significant as well.
We just don't know enough about augments to reach any reasonable conclusions at this point.
That's how I see it as well
8 classes is still quite a lot if IS can make them distinctive from one another. Being able to heavily customize them via augments and gear and whatever else is even better. I’m not at all concerned about variety if they deliver what they’ve promised thus far.
If you were only ever given a characters primary class when inspecting them, there is no scope for "class prejudice", which although silly, is enough of a real concern for it to be considered during development.
Further, if players come to the understanding that they are a "tank" class rather than a "Guardian" class, it will mean players are generally more willing to switch up their secondary class if the content requires it (though obviously there will still be some players that prefer to stick to one sub-class - which is fine).
in your small mind theres 8
Read over the grid. On the top and the side, all 8 are the same.
i see 64
(8 Classes)^2 = 64Subclasses
Formerly T-Elf
those 8 classes you guys so proud of dont mean anything until you double down on the same class technically is 56 classes
1. We are not "proud" to have 8 classes, it is pretty much a fact and we cant change it, so we accepted it.
2. Why do you think it is 64 classes? We have 8 main classes, that each can then specialise into one of 8 other subclasses. A weapon master (fighter/fighter) and a shadowblade (fighter/rogue) will still be a fighter at heart and they will still do the same thing. The main difference between those two for example will be the execution of that task! Intrepid wants the fighter to be that fighting genius ala. D&D, slicing through the enemy lines and wreacking havoc upon the enemies.
Lets look upon how they could achieve that:
The ONE skill we actually know about for the fighter is "Rush" - Rush toward a target; and upon reaching the target, deal an amount damage with a chance to knock the target down.
Example for Weapon Master augmentation:
Bladerush - Rush toward the target, striking all enemies you pass and inflicting a bleed effect on them, knock down all enemies surrounding the target in a 2m radius.
Example for Shadowblade augmentation:
Shadowrush - Rush towards the target through the shadows. User is untargettable during travel. Once you reach the target slow them for x% for 3sec.
All three abilities achieve the same thing in different ways. Bladerush doubles down on the idea of the basic Rush, while Shadowrush incorporates the basic design of a rogue (keeping to the shadows and isolating a target).
i want you to know thats too much reading i dah just read the first sentence n the last sentence at the bottom n that lets me know what your talking about
King Louis: You said it! They stink on ice.
Every archetype can choose between 8 sub classes or none , if you pick one and us only augment from religion , race , guilds ect
From my point of view there are more than 64 play styles in AoC.
Ashes has 8 primary archetypes and 64 classes, per official terminology.
That terminology is also nearly 2 years old with no further confirmation. They already said that some mevhanics or terms, like the idea that secondary classes grow stats further, was removed. The sme could be the case for this.
Will a subclass augment change the baseline functionality of an ability? Can we add an augment from a social organization onto it to make minor changes like damage type? Will a social organization augment completely overwrite the subclass augment? Will subclass augments be stronger or have more general use than social org augments? If a social augment is super niche, in what situation will it be better than a subclass aug?
I’m hoping the subclass augments do entire overhauls on abilities functionality, and that social org augments will minorly tweak those altered abilities.
Ex: A Tank would have an ability that bashes an enemy with their shield that can stun. A Tank/Rogue would have a dash that leads into a shield bash that can stun. A Tank/Rogue with an augment from the Thieve’s Guild would have a dash that leads into bash with a shield or 1H weapons that can stun.
Is there an allowance to have an augment from our secondary class as well as an augment from a social organization, religion, race or other factor on an ability at the same time?
Second, are augments gained from non subclass avenues specific to class (meaning they would need to make 64 every time they want to have one as a reward), or will it be primary class specific (meaning they need to make 8 every time they want to reward one).
If neither of these above are true - and I suspect this would be the case - then a tank/ranger with that augment from the Thieves Guild would then have the exact same ability as the tank/rogue with that augment from the thieves guild.
If this is the case, then in terms of that specific ability, secondary class really doesn't matter. If there are enough such augments to load out a class completely, secondary class may well not matter at all.