Class fantasy

I really hope this game does well from launch. The one thing I find unsatisfying in current MMOs is that classes are either too restricted (not enough choice) or lack class identity.

So far, with 64 classes to choose from we can't say classes will be restricted and I am glad that IS is going for a Archeage type of class combos. However, my concerns go to class identity. In Archeage, you hardly get a feel for the class.

For example, from the classes to choose from in AoC, would the Falconer play with a Falcon? Do you guys think classes will have that class identity as per their names?

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Ironhope

Noaani wrote: »

I think a key thing you are missing here is that the concept of a hybrid is from you, not from Intrepid.

How so? To my knwoeldge AoC will be using the trinity system so how would that be different from any other mmo such as WoW for example?

The hybrid concept is another simple, old and well established one (since the days of D&D if I remeber correctly)

Noaani wrote: »

To Steven, a tank/mage isn't a hybrid. It is a tank. A mage/tank isn't a hybrid, it is a mage.

If you look at the class system from this perspective, this entire point you are arguing ceases to even exist.[/quote]

If it's a dps focused class but it can also do some basic healing or tanking it's a hybrid.
If it's a heal focused class but it can also do some basic dps or tnaking it's a hybrid.

And so on.
Nothing that complicated or different to the D&D days Steven seems to be so heavily inspired by.

I ask you again, how would you design the hybrid classes then? A Templar for example? Would it do any damage or would it just be a healer with.... /fighter added for lols because it doesn't actually do anything besides healing despite the name of the class.

ThornyDevil

You guys have hijacked a post that was originally meant for class fantasy to talk about class design

Ironhope

we are talking about class design Thorny

I'm sorry if this is not the way you hoped the thread to evolve

what other form of class design would you have wanted discussed?

Atama

Ironhope wrote: »

I ask you again, how would you design the hybrid classes then? A Templar for example? Would it do any damage or would it just be a healer with.... /fighter added for lols because it doesn't actually do anything besides healing despite the name of the class.

It's simple. You don't have them. Hybrid classes either (A) do too many things too well, so are overpowered and overused. Or (B), they do many things but suck at them and aren't worth playing.

Instead, you have 4 roles (not a trinity precisely). Damage, tanking, healing, and support. (Support involves things like giving buffs to allies and debuffs to enemies.)

Tanks tank, Clerics heal, and Bards offer support. Rangers do ranged physical damage, and Mages do ranged magical damage. Fighters and Rogues do melee physical damage. (There is no melee magical damage as far as I have seen.)

Summoners are the odd one out, they don't fit any one role, but they aren't hybrids either. A hybrid is able to fill multiple roles simultaneously, while a Summoner can fill any role temporarily but only one at a time (depending on what they summon).

Augments can bring in the features of another role to modify the way you perform the role you have, but it still won't be to the degree of being a hybrid. That's what our understanding is at any rate. We haven't actually been able to test the system yet.

Noaani

Ironhope wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

I think a key thing you are missing here is that the concept of a hybrid is from you, not from Intrepid.

How so? To my knwoeldge AoC will be using the trinity system so how would that be different from any other mmo such as WoW for example?

The hybrid concept is another simple, old and well established one (since the days of D&D if I remeber correctly)

I didn't say you invented the concept of hybrids, I said you are the one applying them to Ashes - Intrepid is not.

Ironhope wrote: »

If it's a dps focused class but it can also do some basic healing or tanking it's a hybrid.
If it's a heal focused class but it can also do some basic dps or tnaking it's a hybrid.

This is untrue.

Every single class in every single MMO can do damage, and every single class in every single MMO is able to take a hit.

As such, by your definition above, every single class in every single MMO is a tank/DPS hybrid. Even healers.

A hybrid is where you are able to fulfil two roles in a group, and players in that group would be happy with that situation.

If you are a Paladin, and a group is happy for you to be a tank, but not happy for you to be a healer, then you are a tank, not a hybrid.

Ironhope

Atama wrote: »

It's simple. You don't have them.

We clearly hvae them.

Cleric/tank, dps/cleric, cleric/dps, dps/tank, etc

Atama wrote: »

Hybrid classes either (A) do too many things too well, so are overpowered and overused. Or (B), they do many things but suck at them and aren't worth playing.

You could say the exact same thing about specialized classes and it would be just as true.

I don't see why hybrids would be particularly hard to balance.

A dedicated dps class can have 80% of its performance come from its dps and 20% from its class-themed abilities, be they stealth, stuns, slows, debuffs, etc

A hybrid dps/healer class (for example) can have 70% of its performance come from its dps and 30% from its healing, buffs, etc

Atama wrote: »

Summoners are the odd one out, they don't fit any one role, but they aren't hybrids either. A hybrid is able to fill multiple roles simultaneously,
.

Filling multiple roles simultaneously in different amounts.

Realistically, a summoner with his bear will be able to tank at least as an off-tank, much like demonology warlocks could in WoW.

Ironhope

Noaani wrote: »

I didn't say you invented the concept of hybrids, I said you are the one applying them to Ashes - Intrepid is not.

I see AoC using the standard rpg trinity system so I don't see why you think Intrepid is seeing things different when it comes to class roles including hybrids.

Ironhope wrote: »

Every single class in every single MMO can do damage, and every single class in every single MMO is able to take a hit.
As such, by your definition above, every single class in every single MMO is a tank/DPS hybrid.

You misunderstood what I meant.

Sure all classes can do some damage and all classes can take at least some damage but no, that's not what makes them hybrids.

A hybrid will have intrinsic abilities that will allow it to do not just one role but two or even three, in different amount, the player usually specializing only into 1 field while keeping basic abilities/traits.

Ironhope wrote: »

If you are a Paladin, and a group is happy for you to be a tank, but not happy for you to be a healer, then you are a tank, not a hybrid.

The simple fact it is in the paladin's nature to be able to heal (it's an instrinsic aspect of the paladin) at least to some decent level (even if not specialized in healing but in tanking or dps) makes you a hybrid, not the role your friends want you to fill.

If you friends want to use your car as a locker and not a car, the car is still a car.

Personally I think post-vanilla World of Warcraft did a good job with hybrids and AoC should implement it.

Noaani

Ironhope wrote: »

I see AoC using the standard rpg trinity system so I don't see why you think Intrepid is seeing things different when it comes to class roles including hybrids.

Simple, hybrids are not a part of the trinity.

Ironhope wrote: »

The simple fact it is in the paladin's nature to be able to heal (it's an instrinsic aspect of the paladin) at least to some decent level (even if not specialized in healing but in tanking or dps) makes you a hybrid, not the role your friends want you to fill.

This only holds true in games like WoW.

There are other games out there where the Paladin is a healer, and others still where it is a tank. In EQ2 for example, the Paladin was a tank, but rather than mitigating damage like some tanks, or avoiding damage like some other tanks, they were able to heal themselves of some damage.

That doesn't make them a healer though, because they were not able to fulfil the role of a healer in a group.

Ironhope wrote: »

Personally I think post-vanilla World of Warcraft did a good job with hybrids and AoC should implement it.

I don't.

Post vanilla WoW can be best described by the notion of treating players as disposable.

While the LFG system was the key culprit in this, having a system where most classes could fulfil most roles in a group added to it. It meant that in any group, there were likely to be 3 or 4 people that could tank or heal, and everyone could be DPS.

This is not a good thing, as it means people are disposable, and when people are disposable, others are happy to dispose of them at the first sign of any inconvenience.

Hybrids are a bad thing for MMO's. I think this is the key part here that you do not seem to grasp.

Ironhope

@Noaani I'll cut straight to the chase, its a fact that in team games such as AOC based on the trinity system its far better to have 40 players each specialized into one of the trinity corners rather than 40 jacks of all trade, it's just how not only games but reality also works (we're not all a bit of a doctor, a bit of a lawyer, a bit of a policemen, a bit of a etc, we tend to specialize into one field because its a far better system).

WoW's system allowed hybrids to specialize into one corner of the trinity with the rest of their performance coming from another/the two other corners of the trinity, and that's how hybrids (several notable class-specs) ceased to be dead-specs and memes which only served to waste people's time and to mock them resulting in many people leaving.

It's clear AOC will have hybrid classes since it uses the trinity system and it allows us to combine archetypes belonging to different corners of the trinity.

If it works like Vanilla WoW and the hybrids are jacks of all trade basic in all but good at none then what happened in vanill and classic will happen again.

People will pick a hybrid class, level it to max, find it out sicks and that the game wasted their time and mocked them and they will quit.

If however the hybrid class can be good in one field, like post-vanilla WoW allowed, then it will work.

Noaani wrote: »

Hybrids are a bad thing for MMO's. I think this is the key part here that you do not seem to grasp.

I strongly disagree, hybrids are bad if done badly, just like specialized classes are bad if done badly.

Either way the discussion is pointless since we're clearly going to have hybrids (Paladins, Templars, Knights, etc)

And you still refuse to answer my question:

How would you design said hybrids which are clearly coming?

How would you design a healer/dps hybrid for example (the Templar)?

What would be his role in a group and how % of his performance would come from his healing and how much from his dps?

What % of a dps/dps class would a healer/dps (Templar in this example) be? 50%, 66%, 80% ?

Noaani

Ironhope wrote: »

Either way the discussion is pointless since we're clearly going to have hybrids (Paladins, Templars, Knights, etc)

This isn't clear, and I gave you an example in a previous post of a game (a game that a LOT of developers at Intrepid worked on, I might add) that had a paladin that was absolutely not a hybrid.

As such, as far as I am concerned, in Ashes, a Paladin is 100% tank and 0% healer. Any healing ability it has will be to bolster it's tanking ability to be on par with other tanks. The notion of running a group with a paladin as the healer is simply not going to happen.

Edit - in that same game as the Paladin above, a Templar was the strongest healer, and had the lowest damage output of any class in the game.

Your idea that these classes are hybrids just because of their name is really odd.

daveywavey

I just can't see that any Tank skill will outperform or replace a Cleric skill like Devotion, Divine Light, etc. Any Tank skill augmented to add a little healing isn't going to compare to an actual proper Cleric healing skill. I'm very interested to see how the augments affect the primary skills, but I can't see them being as powerful. We'll have to wait and see!

Atama

Ironhope wrote: »

We clearly hvae them.

Cleric/tank, dps/cleric, cleric/dps, dps/tank, etc

And you’re falling for Intrepid’s marketing BS now. They call those classes but Steven admitted they aren’t.

A cleric/DPS in Ashes is the equivalent of being a WoW Cleric and going Discipline. Would you call that class a hybrid because it can heal while zapping enemies? Or is it just a healer with some ability to damage enemies with Penance?

Ironhope

Atama wrote: »

Cleric/tank, dps/cleric, cleric/dps, dps/tank, etc

I meant that we will have hybrids in the game.

And honestly, I'm still hoping what Intrepid calls ''classes'' will at be be like WoW specs, so maybe not such an abuse of the word ''class''.

i don't have that much hope but still.

Atama wrote: »

A cleric/DPS in Ashes is the equivalent of being a WoW Cleric and going Discipline.

That's the pessimist scenario.

Imagine this dialogue

Player 1: ''so, what did you pick for your second archetype my cleric best friend?''
Player 2: ''I chose a dps archetype''
Player 1: ''Nice, so you now can also do some dps? Right... ?''
Plater 1: ''Right.... ?''
Player 2: ''Apparently not...''

I mean, I can't imagine what the logic behind a tank/dps or healer/dps even existing under these circumstances.

Also, Disciple to my knwoledge wasn't a dps spec it was still a support spec using shields as opposed of heals (preventing dmg instead of healing it).
Shadow was the hybrid spec as it was focused on damage while also being capable of some notable healing despite having abandoned it's ''healing talent path''.

TrUSivraj

Ironhope wrote: »

Atama wrote: »

Cleric/tank, dps/cleric, cleric/dps, dps/tank, etc

I meant that we will have hybrids in the game.

And honestly, I'm still hoping what Intrepid calls ''classes'' will at be be like WoW specs, so maybe not such an abuse of the word ''class''.

i don't have that much hope but still.

Atama wrote: »

A cleric/DPS in Ashes is the equivalent of being a WoW Cleric and going Discipline.

That's the pessimist scenario.

Imagine this dialogue

Player 1: ''so, what did you pick for your second archetype my cleric best friend?''
Player 2: ''I chose a dps archetype''
Player 1: ''Nice, so you now can also do some dps? Right... ?''
Plater 1: ''Right.... ?''
Player 2: ''Apparently not...''

I mean, I can't imagine what the logic behind a tank/dps or healer/dps even existing under these circumstances.

Also, Disciple to my knwoledge wasn't a dps spec it was still a support spec using shields as opposed of heals (preventing dmg instead of healing it).
Shadow was the hybrid spec as it was focused on damage while also being capable of some notable healing despite having abandoned it's ''healing talent path''.

You need to broaden your imagination here... they've already claimed to have evasion tanks in the game... what combo of Tank would likely have evasion as its form of tanking specialization? Tank/RANGER and/or Tank/ROGUE. Just because the subclass archetype is dps, doesn't mean in any way that your going to be thrown tons of dmg, you could instead be thrown a niche mitigation mechanic from said dps archetype just the same (evasion).

You can just as easily expect a cleric/fighter to have more party healing through dmg dealing, but that dmg won't be on par with a primary dps for obvious reasons. You're clearly obsessed with this hybrid class thing, as you be been shown countless times how that system will NOT exist..

ThornyDevil

Ironhope wrote: »

we are talking about class design Thorny

I'm sorry if this is not the way you hoped the thread to evolve

what other form of class design would you have wanted discussed?

It's ok this is where the discussion has gone. I wasn't looking to debate on class design at all, be it the viability of hybrid classes, roles, balance, etc. i think we know too little for that yet.

Before talking about the meta, I was interested to discuss about expectations around various archetype combinations but more on a flavour/identity level. For example, what would people would like to see for a Shadowcaster opposed to an Acolyte or an Oracle.

Noaani

Ironhope wrote: »

I mean, I can't imagine what the logic behind a tank/dps or healer/dps even existing under these circumstances.

There are two ways a tank/mage could go.

Either they could be the best tanks in the game against magical enemies (the mage aspect of the class adding magical defenses to the tanks abilities), or they could be the best way for the tank to solo due to adding an amount of DPS - though not enough to bring them along in a group for their damage output.

Of these two possible ways the tank/mage class could go, the former is the most likely.

A tank/rogue is likely to be an avoidance tank - where the idea is to dodge incoming hits rather than rely on mitigating them.

A tank/summoner may well be the best tank in the game at tanking multipole targets simultaneously, being able to pass some targets off to a pet (though I would wager it would be a temporary pet).

A tank/bard is likely to be the best crowd control class in the game, using CC to control the battlefield.

bloodprophet

Ironhope wrote: »

Atama wrote: »

.

Also, Disciple to my knwoledge wasn't a dps spec it was still a support spec using shields as opposed of heals (preventing dmg instead of healing it).
Shadow was the hybrid spec as it was focused on damage while also being capable of some notable healing despite having abandoned it's ''healing talent path''.

Discipline used to be mitigation healer. I played the spec through BC and Wrath. Now it is a cheap meme of a spec, knock off of Rift"s Chloromancer. They tried to make it more of a DPS spec.

Need to expand your horizons and abandon WOW for a good long while and see how other games have done things. They did some thing right in the beginning and fell hard after Wrath and the game has only gotten worse over time. Sure they have a lot of subs but most of the game lacks any kind of soul. As Noaani said they made players disposable. Didi it through many ways. Be it LFG or allowing people to switch spec's on the fly the game stopped being an MMO and devolved into a single player game with other people getting in the way.

TrUSivraj

ThornyDevil wrote: »

Ironhope wrote: »

we are talking about class design Thorny

I'm sorry if this is not the way you hoped the thread to evolve

what other form of class design would you have wanted discussed?

It's ok this is where the discussion has gone. I wasn't looking to debate on class design at all, be it the viability of hybrid classes, roles, balance, etc. i think we know too little for that yet.

Before talking about the meta, I was interested to discuss about expectations around various archetype combinations but more on a flavour/identity level. For example, what would people would like to see for a Shadowcaster opposed to an Acolyte or an Oracle.

I could see mage/rogue (shadowcaster) being a very exciting mage variant, probably comparable to mage/ranger (spellhunter). Both would specialize in more mobility and slipperiness, having different forms of "warp" augments, I even mention the tether warp arrow augment for SH in an earlier response.

SC could have the ability to displace themselves a short distance while casting, or create a shadowclone to bait enemy CDs while proceeding to burst them down from the opposite direction. (Think shaco or LeBlanc in LoL)

Acolyte I can see being a life stealer, and obviously not the only one, but they'd specialize in augmenting their abilities to heal them based on dmg dealt to one or more targets. Think channeling skill augments here. As long as you stay in their range or allow them to channel, they'll literally suck the life out of you. Maybe have one big burst dmg skill that will heal them for only 10% of the dmg too. Strong duelist variant.

Oracle could easily be the party sister of Acolyte, stealing from enemies to give to allies. I can picture a sick channeling heal where the Oracle grabs the life of 5-10 enemies with a multitude of light beam siphons (aggressive sound effects due to it being one of their stronger heals), then once it all gets absorbed by the cleric, it explodes and heals their entire party/raid by 300% of the dmg. (Since its going to be low dmg but High aoe healing, opposite of Acolyte's high single target/aoe dmg and moderate self-healing, possibly balanced by little to no cc).

I very much like the thought of two mirrored variants such as these two having similar abilities but for different roles.

Spurius

Noaani wrote: »

Ironhope wrote: »

The simple fact it is in the paladin's nature to be able to heal (it's an instrinsic aspect of the paladin) at least to some decent level (even if not specialized in healing but in tanking or dps) makes you a hybrid, not the role your friends want you to fill.

This only holds true in games like WoW.

There are other games out there where the Paladin is a healer, and others still where it is a tank. In EQ2 for example, the Paladin was a tank, but rather than mitigating damage like some tanks, or avoiding damage like some other tanks, they were able to heal themselves of some damage.

That doesn't make them a healer though, because they were not able to fulfil the role of a healer in a group.

What if they were able not to fulfill, but supplement the role of a healer? What if a paladin would be tanking and at the same time healing not only himself, but others in his group as well? Doing, lets say, 20% of a healer's HPS? You still need a main healer, but that kind of paladin would just make a life of that healer somewhat easier.
Would that kind of paladin be a hybrid? And would that paladin be bad for the game in some way?

Atama

Spurius wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

Ironhope wrote: »

The simple fact it is in the paladin's nature to be able to heal (it's an instrinsic aspect of the paladin) at least to some decent level (even if not specialized in healing but in tanking or dps) makes you a hybrid, not the role your friends want you to fill.

This only holds true in games like WoW.

There are other games out there where the Paladin is a healer, and others still where it is a tank. In EQ2 for example, the Paladin was a tank, but rather than mitigating damage like some tanks, or avoiding damage like some other tanks, they were able to heal themselves of some damage.

That doesn't make them a healer though, because they were not able to fulfil the role of a healer in a group.

What if they were able not to fulfill, but supplement the role of a healer? What if a paladin would be tanking and at the same time healing not only himself, but others in his group as well? Doing, lets say, 20% of a healer's HPS? You still need a main healer, but that kind of paladin would just make a life of that healer somewhat easier.
Would that kind of paladin be a hybrid? And would that paladin be bad for the game in some way?

It’s moot since we’ve already been told that having Cleric as a secondary class only gives you self-healing. Your paladin scenario can’t happen, sorry. This is why we’re saying forget about the hybrid idea. In this game, they want roles to be pretty rigid.

https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Healing

Child Item