Glorious Alpha Two Testers!
Alpha Two Phase II testing is currently taking place five days each week. More information about testing schedule can be found here
If you have Alpha Two, you can download the game launcher here, and we encourage you to join us on our Official Discord Server for the most up to date testing news.
Alpha Two Phase II testing is currently taking place five days each week. More information about testing schedule can be found here
If you have Alpha Two, you can download the game launcher here, and we encourage you to join us on our Official Discord Server for the most up to date testing news.
Comments
Rly?
Anyway light armor is realistic, in the past it was pretty common to wear gambeson ... even though this armor is actually not that light.
So are you saying that mages will wear plate? There will be no leather armor? It can be pretty damn good and original.
Cool ... armored mages , bards, rangers .. it make sense actually. A monk with armor maybe is a realistic option then.
I'm not saying light armor isn't realistic.
You are contraddicting yourself a little bit
If nobody is going to wear light armor becouse it's not realistic then light armor must be unrealistic. so you are right, gambeson is a pretty heavy armor ... even though is made my linen and wool.
I don't even know how to respond to any of your arguments. You just don't make any sense.
Edit: calling me contradictive to myself is pretty hypocrite, first saying light armor is realistic and then saying it actually isn't...
12 focused and possibly more in theme archetypes may be better received and enjoyed by a wider audience than the nebulous dozens of base/augment 'classes'.
perhaps the concern was the varying specializations for each base class could be considered other classes and require all the work of building out anyways then why not just split them all up and name them individual classes. issue is there's just too many and some popular archetypes dont mesh with the base/aug of another base theme.
seems if you're going to be married to the trinity may as well build classes to the trinity. all the classes have the primary default archetype (and trinity role) however can specialize into either of the other two trinity roles.
fighter - dps
> knight - tank
> paladin - healer
wizard - dps
> battle mage - tank
> necromancer - healer (dont ask if you dont want to know..)
etc..
all that said the trinity doesnt serve popular fantasy archetypes that well and is mostly the result of inheriting the early simple video game group mechanics.
archetypes:
Fighter - heavy armor / sword and board / two hand weapons / sometimes heavy crossbow
> Paladin - Fighter/Cleric hybrid
Wizard - overly dramatic robes while casting / staff / destruction via the arcane arts / utility magic too
> Sorcerer - innately magical caster often via some mystical bloodline
> Summoner - Wizard in pet class form
>> Warlock - Summoner in shadowy dark arts caster form
>> Necromancer - Summoner that's really into death metal themes
Cleric - heavy armor / mace and board / two hand non-edged weapons / healing powers / strong anti undead
> Druid - nature themed Cleric also shape shifting sometimes animal pet class as well
> Priest - A heal blasting Wizard / mostly the result of forcing this archetype into the healer game trinity role
Rogue - stealth / daggers / pick locks / ..
> Ranger - Rogue/Fighter hybrid, bow, sword(s), tracking, wilderness survival, .. sometimes hybrid with druid
it all depends if you consider the gambeson a light or a middle tier armor. I Corrected myself in my previous comments , saying that actually the gambeson is not light but just something in the middle.
But if you consider all the type of armor the gambeson is the worst one.
in reality the light armor as intended in the common fantasy doesn't exist at all, a dress is not an armor usually.
Anyway .. nevermind, i lost the point of the discussion ^^ ... but looking back in the discussion when you said ... " I just don't see any other classes wearing basically nothing. Light armor is more than basically nothing."
i thought that your idea of monk is a naked nudist ... and maybe gay too
I see a monk as one wearing no upper body armor atleast. But I don't consider a dress as light armor, maybe cloth (armor) or less.
Well if everyone can wear everything then it could be very liberating and offer new possibilities in your outfit design. You could have a tattoo that replaces the chest piece so you could go bare chested. That sounds like an interesting option to me and more options is never a bad thing.
Dude mages usually wear the same too, a long dress and ... maybe pants hehe .
What's the difference with the monk? A cleric dress can make the monk pretty decent. The monk is a fighting priest. You can find a monk for every religion in the world ... not just shaolin ones. Do they have to create asiatic style dresses just for the monk class? no.
If you can figure out a FIGHTING monk for every religion, sure. Usually though, monks of all creeds see no point in learning to fight. Similarly, societies with ample access to weapons usually see no point in learning to fight without it. An unarmed fighter in a medieval fantasy world works around a problem that doesn't exist.
Similarly, if you want to play a fighter with light armor, just go for it. Go naked even. The game lets you, without even restrictions it seems.
A rogue? It's a fighter with light armor at the end.
Actually the melee combat is pretty important even in the modern battles , with shotguns.
In the past knowing how to fight without weapons was pretty strong. If you lose the sword or you are unable to use it, expecially for armored knights, a punch can be more effective of a sword.
In the medieval time the martial art was rly effective, the weapon makes it multiplicatively stronger... so yea ... the monk is pretty much a fantasy class, they need magic.
A good and common monk weapon is the stick .. or bo.