Bard/Bard - Minstrel Should Be Something Beautiful!
BannerGuard
Member
Minstrel
A minstrel was a medieval European entertainer. Originally describing any type of entertainer such as a musician, juggler, acrobat, singer or fool, the term later, from the sixteenth century, came to mean a specialist entertainer who sang songs and played musical instruments.
A minstrel was a medieval European entertainer. Originally describing any type of entertainer such as a musician, juggler, acrobat, singer or fool, the term later, from the sixteenth century, came to mean a specialist entertainer who sang songs and played musical instruments.
I feel with all of the combinations that Bard has, Minstrel shouldn't try and be something that could easily be attained by combining Bard primary with other secondaries.
A player that has decided that they want to play Minstrel is dedicating themselves to a class that needs to fulfil all the dreams that other MMORPG "Bard" classes have failed at. Other games portray the bard as a class that is a less fun and less effective typical "warrior" or "archer" class that has spells where you pull out a harp to buff people and then continue to shoot your target with an arrow. I feel that doing this either makes the player think that they might as well just play the more effective "warrior" or "archer" class and perform their job better or that they get enjoyment out of the 10% of gameplay that involves the bard spells and put up with the core gameplay of the class.
Minstrel needs to embrace the initial picture players get in their head when they create their character to play this class!
I don't want to have to shoot a bow and arrow and play 5 seconds of a song to buff people, I want to have a sick flute in my hands and pump out such amazing music that everyone around me is buffed in a way that only MY sick flute skills can give them!
I'm using a flute as an example but there are so many more items/weapons that could be specialised for different buffs.
Why not having a flute equipped makes your attacking buffs more effective, having a lute improve your healing buffs or having a drum equipped make you the best defensive buffer available!
Choosing Minstrel over Songcaller(Bard/Summoner), Song Warden(Bard/Ranger) or any other Bard combination should mean that you've dedicated your character to a specific playstyle and you should be rewarded with something unique and a playstyle that isn't just "Attack with your sword/bow for 90% of the time then pop your song spells every 30 seconds"
I am very very excited to see what playstyle differences the Bard combinations have but my hopes for Ashes to finally use Minstrel to pull off the epic Musical support class that I've always envisioned Bard should be are so damn high! Please don't let us down!
1
Comments
I haven't specifically come across any of these in data gathering, I just oppose limiting any potential ones unnecessarily.
BUT with the amount of classes you can combine with Bard there should be combinations for all types of playstyles! I get some people may not want to dedicate their whole character to something but that's what the other combinations are for, If you want Bard that is also absolutely solid with cracking people with a sword then great, choose a combination that adheres to that type of gameplay.
People planning on playing Minstrel I think are a special type of player who wants to dedicate their character to a playstyle that fully embodies the conventional Bard that everyone initially envisions!
Here is context for why I'm asking.
You could be right. Not a single Minstrel really said that they wanted to do anything specific. But I am on a crusade to prevent unnecessary restrictions based on 'fake' conflicts between priorities that don't really exist.
So, if you meet a Bard that doesn't care about any other secondary Archetype, but still wants to hit things... what is your reaction?
If their goal is to play Ashes as a Minstrel with the desire to fulfil the role of the traditional DPS then it shouldn't be optimal in the slightest. I feel that trying to make every class combination GOOD at everything would be a huge mistake. Class combinations should devote themselves to different goals and playstyles.
The example of a player who wants to play Minstrel but still hit things with the intention of fulfilling the dps role should be comparable to a Warcraft player choosing the Priest class, choosing the Holy spec(only chosen to fulfil the healing role) and then expecting to be able to compete with DPS role intended classes.
If however your example is a player who wants to play Minstrel, wants to fulfil the support role and nothing else but also wants to hit things I also feel shouldn't be remotely optimal or suggested gameplay. If you want to be a viable melee support or a viable ranged attacking support then play something else that fits the Class fantasy more.
I oppose your position, but I also don't think that the design specs that I expect will cause a problem. With four different Augment schools, I figure that melee Minstrels will put something to help with that, on their skills, and backline Minstrels will put something to help that, on all their skills, and both will be happy.
So I thank you for your data. Mmm, data.
I feel like these examples shouldn't be playing Minstrel and dedicating themselves to Bard/Bard. Somebody who wants to be a Bard but fulfil the role of lets say...
"Melee Minstrels" should choose a combination like Bard/Fighter(Tellsword), Bard/Tank(Siren) or Bard/Rogue(Trickster)
"Backline Minstrels" should choose a combination like Bard/Mage(Magician), Bard/Ranger(Song Warden) or Bard/Summoner(Songcaller)
Minstrel should be something uniquely different to these other combinations playstyle and fully embrace the guy at the back rocking away with a flute in hand and a lute at the ready.
It is possible to fit both styles. It does not currently seem like it would significantly harm or limit either style, to do so, given the probable Augments system.
So there's no reason to limit Melee Minstrels unnecessarily.
There will be Minstrels who enjoy weapons like Swords, Staffs, and Bows - in addition to musical weapons.
Which will be fine since any class can use any weapon.
I expect it will be more likely that augments make your buffs more powerful since augments affect Active Skills. Non-Bards will also be able to wield musical instruments as weapons, so even weapons that are musical instruments will most likely be dealing damage via Weapon Skills in some fashion, rather than "buffs".
Also, highly likely that Bards will want to be bashing or shooting stuff while they wait for their Mana to regenerate.
I understand your points however I disagree entirely!
Trying to make every class perform well at every role or playstyle leads to homogenization. Classes would no longer feel special and class choices become less meaningful. Classes should be individual and unique drawing players in for specific reasons!
There's a reason why some players would rather play a typical warrior dps vs a mage type dps and it's because of the class fantasy. Starting to merge the class fantasy together can be really cool, a Melee warrior that casts spells like a mage for example however these typical class merges is exactly what the class combinations like Bard/Mage(Magician), Bard/Ranger(Song Warden), Bard/Fighter(Tellsword) or Bard/Tank(Siren) are there for.
Class fantasy shouldn't be belittled to try and make all classes viable in different roles. That is what makes classes feel less different and less of a meaningful choice.
Why not? They don't have to be 'best DPS'. They don't have any of the other things that stand out like Rogue's stealth or Fighter's gap closing or Tank's powerful threat generation and mitigation. They do what everyone else in the game is able to do. Hit things for damage.
If they have nothing else, why can't there be a person that thinks 'I want to do decent damage and not necessarily have the most powerful buffs' that still doesn't want a different secondary archetype?
I've explained already that in my opinion trying to make every class perform well or be viable at every role or playstyle leads to homogenization and that's not what I want or expect from Ashes!
What makes 'a Warrior standing at the back shooting their bow' a bad thing if the Warrior is not completely ignoring their other skills or the purpose of them?
If the Bard is buffing (which they will do because it impacts their DPS too) and their melee DPS is good, in fact, let's go so far as to assume they have the top melee DPS in the group because the enemy type doesn't move a lot, doesn't use knockbacks or stuns, and they can therefore just stab it with their personal buffs (assuming no Fighter in this group who would have their own Attack Buffs to stack).
I would love this. In the situation where 'just keeping up the rhythm and hitting the enemy' was the best plan, if the Minstrel is the best DPS, I don't have a problem nor do I see how this messes with the class identity.
In fact I'd encourage it. If the question comes down to 'should I buff my own damage or give the Mage more mana regen?' there's many situations where I want them to just buff their own damage.
And if someone else wants to play a Minstrel who makes Mana Regen stronger so that the Mage can do more damage, that's fine too.
If they can make a 'possible top DPS Minstrel', are you saying that they should not?
I didn't say anything about trying to make every class perform well at every role or playstyle.
What I said is that we should expect musical instruments that are weapons to do damage rather than making buffs more powerful.
Augments are more likely to be what augments a Bard's buffs.
Typically, in RPGs, a class is not stuck only doing one thing. In D&D and Pathfinder, Clerics aren't stuck only healing - they also deal damage. Same for Bards. Bards use magical instruments as weapons and also use daggers and swords and crossbows.
A class doesn't only have one role...even Minstrel. Tanks use magic. Guardians use magic. Mages use weapons in addition to spells. Summoners wield weapons in addition to Summoning minions. Rogues cast spells. Assassins cast spells.
That doesn't mean they all do the same things the same ways.
In Ashes gameplay, a Minstrel has the same Active Skills as a Trickster. In WoW gameplay, a Minstrel would have different Active Skills than a Trickster.
In Ashes, both a Minstrel and a Trickster might be standing at the back using a Bow while they wait for Active Skills on cooldown or for their Mana to regen.
A Minstrel might be augmenting their Combat Performance AoE with an augment from the Bard's Regeneration School... a Trickster might be augmenting their Combat Performance AoE with an augment from the Rogue's Bleed School.
Just because they're using the same weapon, doesn't mean they are playing exactly the same way.
But, any class can use any weapon, so it may be that the Minstrel wields a Bow, while the Trickster wields a Spear. Or it may be that the Minstrel wields a Flute while the Trickster wields a Drum.
But, both the Flute and Drum will have to primarily deal damage rather than just provide buffs because they are weapons that could be used by a Summoner or a Mage or a Fighter, if they wanted to.
Weapons don't heal, so it would be a bit odd to have heal buffs as a Weapon Ability.
Heal buffs should be coming from Passive Skills, Active Skills and augments.
In Ashes, how much good a Weapon Master will do for their group if they stand in the back wielding a Bow will depend on what racial stats they have, what Passives they've skilled into, what Weapon Abilities they've skilled into and which augments from the Fighter Schools, Social Org, Religion, Node and Race they have applied.
If they spec the Bow well, they might be helping the Rogue stack Bleeds and the Ranger stack Roots and Snares.
Part of the fun of the Paragon was chaining the buff effects together. You'd throw out a buff that refreshes when another buff is added, so you had to time them just right to get their full effect and make the best use of it. Was really good fun, and what I based my "bard skills" on when Wandering Mist made his "Design your own spells" thread a while back.