Your suggestion is akin to the people that come in here and ask for PvE servers because they dont like PvP.
I can only conclude that you misunderstood what I suggested and did so in a very dramatic way.
No, I understood what you said.
You asked for a way for players to gloss over the fact that they are playing a given class, so that they can imagine instead that they are playing a subclass within that class.
If this is not what you are asking for - in essence - then perhaps restate what it is you are asking for. Everything you have said about it points to this being what you are asking for, however.
Players shouldnt be spending the first 20 levels trying to "feel" like they are playing a specific class, and they absolutely should not need to use 'talents' to achieve that. Players already have a means to gradually move in to their secondary class, it just starts AFTER they pick said secondary class.
I mean, your abilities aren't changing when you pick your secondary class, all it does is give you access to augments that you can then apply as you continue to level up, and these augments provide that flavor, as well as function.
You are essentially asking for that to happen before you have a secondary class, meaning players will be able to have archwizard as their secondary, but still have some flavor of warlock from this idea of yours.
Further to that, if Intrepid were to do this, it would require players be presented with 8 'talent' options per ability, that list both the effects the 'talents' have, as well as the subclass they are designed to give the feeling of. That is just too much right there, and it literally going against the reason many games want to have their starting experience use fewer classes than their end game experience.
"You have reached level 2, please choose between the following abilities so we know which Variant you are playing:
[1] Judgement: Smite your enemy with a Hammer and weaken them
[2] Devotion: Heal your ally."
I am a 'misdirection' Cleric (just assume it's the same as any other 'standard Healer fantasy'). I choose Devotion.
"You have reached level 4, please choose between the following abilities so we know which Variant you are playing:
[1] Judgement: Smite your enemy with a Hammer and weaken them
[2] Castigation: Strike your enemy with a magic whip."
[3] Devotion II: Heal your ally, but better."
[4] Blessing: Heal your ally, but on a delay."
I am still the same style of PLAYER, here it makes a little difference because I wanna do SOME damage. Castigation.
"You have reached level 4, please choose between the following abilities so we know which Variant you are playing:
[1] Judgement: Smite your enemy with a Hammer and weaken them
[2] Castigation II: Strike your enemy with a magic whip."
[3] Devotion II: Heal your ally, but better."
[4] Blessing: Heal your ally, but on a delay."
Now I take Blessing, again, 'normal healer'.
Most games tell you 'here are the skills and talents for your class, pick the ones you like the best. But almost all those games, lots of people pick 'the best ones'. Or the game makes it simple, it 'chooses for you'. It never really asks you this. Or worse, they do both. They choose a sub-path for you and THEN tell you to choose some options anyway with the 'options' not really mattering to the sub-path because all they do is make you slightly more like one of the others instead of more effective at your 'class fantasy'.
Ashes in Alpha-1 didn't do that.
You take Judgement, Castigation, Judgement II, decide if you even care about taking EITHER healing spell.
I take Castigation, both healing spells, and never touch Judgement. I'm not a Templar.
This could start a whole argument about how 'If I play Cleric but I don't heal, people won't group with me!', but that's just a delay on something that was going to happen anyway IF it was going to happen. If you picked a DPS Cleric and it didn't do enough DPS, the sort of person that would never pick you for DPS role is never going to pick you anyway because you tried to blend DPS and 'healer' in the first place and that sort of person doesn't like hybrid builds.
Or, DPS Cleric will just WORK and there is some group out there where you fit perfectly. Point is, that 'problem' isn't the one you care about here. You care about 'feeling like a Templar'.
2Handed Hammer. Heavy Armor. Judgement, Castigation, Judgement II, passives that make you hit harder. If you can't DPS at that point, that is your problem, not 'do you feel like/appear to be a Templar'. If Ashes' MAIN skill Trees for Cleric don't allow you to choose a group of skills that fall under your class fantasy of 'Templar'. It doesn't matter what your Augments do exactly. You mostly want those because they probably offer more useful effects/changes to the TYPE of skills a Templar picks, theoretically you shouldn't need them. It's like being able to choose 'Judgement IV' at level 25 and having your "Judgement IV" be a Templar-exclusive version.
You already did the 'usual thing' and raised Judgement up to Judgement III by then, probably.
EDIT: Fixed 'choices' because I'm too ranty to remember how BBCode works.
Your issue was noted as 'wanting to be a heavy armor DPS Cleric' right? Just do that. Take Cleric skills that match up with that, use passives that match that, equip weapons that match that.
Yeah I will try that but based on the explanations received so far, it's unlikely to work.
Note that I still agree with you that level 25 is 'too long to wait'. But if you are at level 15 and you chose 8 skills that 'Are good for a DPS Cleric' then you already got what you wanted.
I don't think playing Fighter would even make you end up as a Ret Paladin, compared to playing Templar.
I mean, if things stay as they are and choosing a secondary archetype doesn't change your role, you basically have no chance of becoming a DPS as cleric, because you would still be, regardless of talents, gear, etc a healer role.
You asked for a way for players to gloss over the fact that they are playing a given class, so that they can imagine instead that they are playing a subclass within that class.
I asked that talents allow a slow organic road to a secondary archetype, preferably gameplay wise focused.
So that a lvl 15 mage already has notable warlock traits because that's the talent path he set on taking, while a different mage player at lvl 15 already has notable sorcerer traits because the talent path he decided on taking.
What's wrong with a slow, organic evolution as opposed to one abrupt choice at halfway leveling?
Players shouldnt be spending the first 20 levels trying to "feel" like they are playing a specific class, and they absolutely should not need to use 'talents' to achieve that.
Why not?
Why is an abrupt, unnatural evolution via one click better than a slow, organic, natural evolution?
I mean, your abilities aren't changing when you pick your secondary class,
Secondary Archetype will change the already existing abilities, howevever, if you change an ability enough is it the same ability even?
For example, if your ''summon wolf'' ability is now an aoe and summons several skeletons of fallen enemies around you and is named ''raise dead'' is it even the same ability?
Technically yes, it does the exact thing, it's a summoning ability. Maybe it even has the same cooldown and mana cost. But is it really the same ability? Let's be real.
Until alpha 2 or at least an extensive stream (not the ''ohh we're going to reveal the ranger'' --> reveals a handful of abilities and some bow shooting) we're just not going to know.
Further to that, if Intrepid were to do this, it would require players be presented with 8 'talent' options per ability, that list both the effects the 'talents' have, as well as the subclass they are designed to give the feeling of.
Not necesarelly, the ''talent path'' could just affect a few abilities, not all. I did explicitly say it should be a slow, organic journey.
Or, DPS Cleric will just WORK and there is some group out there where you fit perfectly. Point is, that 'problem' isn't the one you care about here. You care about 'feeling like a Templar'.
The problem is we've actually gone into two issues and if I went down this path here I would be reviving a dead topic as bloodprophet initially accused me (initially with 0 basis however).
2Handed Hammer. Heavy Armor. Judgement, Castigation, Judgement II, passives that make you hit harder. If you can't DPS at that point, that is your problem, not 'do you feel like/appear to be a Templar'. If Ashes' MAIN skill Trees for Cleric don't allow you to choose a group of skills that fall under your class fantasy of 'Templar'. It doesn't matter what your Augments do exactly. You mostly want those because they probably offer more useful effects/changes to the TYPE of skills a Templar picks, theoretically you shouldn't need them. It's like being able to choose 'Judgement IV' at level 25 and having your "Judgement IV" be a Templar-exclusive version.
You already did the 'usual thing' and raised Judgement up to Judgement III by then, probably.
EDIT: Fixed 'choices' because I'm too ranty to remember how BBCode works.
Yeah I mean, Templar is a case where you're not going to have a problem living the fantasy because even if it doesn't work in practice you can still put on the heavy gear and 2h as a cleric.
Problem is with classes like Highsword where... well, good luck making the fighter feel like a retribution paladin at least until secondary archetype choice.
And that's unfair for the rpg players who would opt for that fantasy. Same goes for warlocks, shamans, paladins, etc
And that's unfair for the rpg players who would opt for that fantasy. Same goes for warlocks, shamans, paladins, etc
This right here is - imo - the root of your problem.
You are trying to fulfill a pre-existing fantasy in a word that is designed to create it's own.
Why would you go in to Ashes looking for a WoW RP experience? If you want a WoW RP experience, play WoW. If you want to play Ashes, let it create it's own class themes, rather than trying to push yours on to it.
I mean, Warlock is a great example here. I've played games in which a warlock was a Male witch. I've played games in which a warlock was a sorcerer that used poison and disease magic. I've played games where a warlock uses dimensional magic.
None of the above are wrong, and it is up to Intrepid to decide what they want a Verra warlock to be.
You seem to be expecting each class in Ashes to conform to your assumption about them.
To your point about how the first few levels are the most important - they are. This is why developers tend to guide players through that period far more strictly than other aspects of the game. One of the things developers do is give players fewer choices so they do not become overwhelmed.
If your suggestion has any effect on the abilities at all, then it is just going to cause confusion. If a player picks the warlock 'talent' because they want that specific effect that it adds to their ability, but then opts instead to pick Archwizard as a secondary, they then - according to you - lose that effect they wanted on that ability.
At level 20, this is not really something that should happen.
Now, if you are suggesting that these effects not alter the effect of an ability, just the feel, then what you are talking about are essentially ability cosmetics. If this is indeed what you are talking about, I *STRONGLY* believe Intrepid will sell themed packs of ability cosmetics on the store.
This right here is - imo - the root of your problem.
You are trying to fulfill a pre-existing fantasy in a word that is designed to create it's own.
Why would you go in to Ashes looking for a WoW RP experience? If you want a WoW RP experience, play WoW. If you want to play Ashes, let it create it's own class themes, rather than trying to push yours on to it.
Again you're misunderstanding what I said (weird as other users such as az did not, probably because he actually reads my rather short posts).
These fantasies (rather loose concepts to begin with) are not being re-created, there is no evidence of this, on the contrary, everything we've seen in terms of class fantasy is 100% within the norms of the general mmo rpg class fantasy realms.
I did not say you should have the WoW warlock in AoC or anything like that.
A warlock is a dark magic, demon summoning caster. It's a very beloved and very common choice of mmo-rpg players everywhere.
And unlike other classes here its not available from lvl 1, together with many other basic fantasy classes.
Nowhere did I say for them to bring the wow class system. That's a strawman. A pseudo-pov you invented yourself and now are attacking.
I said the lower level talents should allow players to evoke, to go on a path that makes them start looking and feeling, at least to some degree, like the secondary archetype they plan to choose.
None of the above are wrong, and it is up to Intrepid to decide what they want a Verra warlock to be.
What does this have to do with the AoC warlock (which will fit in the general warlock fantasy, again there is no evidence of it being anything out of the ordinary) not being available from lvl 1?
You seem to be expecting each class in Ashes to conform to your assumption about them.
I seem based on what?
The problem I noted is that there is no lvl 1 warlock or shaman or paladin or highsword or whatever while there are lvl 1 fighters, tanks, mages, rangers, etc
Where did I complain about them not being what I expect?
If your suggestion has any effect on the abilities at all, then it is just going to cause confusion. If a player picks the warlock 'talent' because they want that specific effect that it adds to their ability, but then opts instead to pick Archwizard as a secondary, they then - according to you - lose that effect they wanted on that ability.
1. you massively overestimate the level of low level ''path'' talents I suggested.
2. I explicitly said the talent ''paths'' would be mutually exclusive, so if you went into warlock low lvl talents you would lock out the, let's say, spellstone talents.
A warlock is a dark magic, demon summoning caster.
My dude, that is a Blizzard warlock.
Many, many IP's dont have warlocks as being able to summon at all.
In EQ a warlock is a sorcerer that uses disease and poison in place of elements.
In Pillars of Eternity a warlock is a multi class wizard/barbarian.
A Morrowind warlock has Distruction, Illusion, Restoration, light armor and short blade as its major skills. Conjuration isnt even a minor skill.
In D&D a warlock is a spell caster that gets their magic from a patron (usually a fiend). There isnt inherently any summoning of said fiend as a part of this class.
You cant claim that you are not trying to fulfill a pre-existing fantasy, and then make the claim above as to what a warlock is.
That's an absurd claim, that's how a 15th century peasant would describe a warlock.
That's how a warlock looked and worked in D&D on which AoC is to a great degree based on.
That's how warlock worked in the first pc rpg games.
I have no idea where you're getting your claims from but do you have any evidence of warlocks in AoC being non-dark-magic and demon based casters?
In virtually every single example you gave, upon checking I found dark magic use and demon summoning. EQ indeed seems to have no summon ability (it does summon shadows as a buff tho, so still in the fantasy area in question).
In AoC we get warlock by mixing a mage and a SUMMONER.
Do you have any evidence of any sort AoC is doing something unique which won't even involve SUMMONING and stuff like that?
Because as far as I can tell you're just grasping at straws.
You're not allowed to play your class (fantasy + gameplay style) of choice for 25 levels while others can from the start. That is unfair to say the least.
I suggested talents slowly allow you to morph at least partially until the lvl 25 major choice, into that said class, at least to some visual degree if nothing notable gameplay wise.
You're not allowed to play your class (fantasy + gameplay style) of choice for 25 levels while others can from the start. That is unfair to say the least.
Maybe the game will call you a Rogue for the first 25 levels and only after that you will be an Assassin.
Not sure if from game-play point of view is important.
September 12. 2022: Being naked can also be used to bring a skilled artisan to different freeholds... Don't summon family!
You're not allowed to play your class (fantasy + gameplay style) of choice for 25 levels while others can from the start. That is unfair to say the least.
This would then imply that all the people who'd want to play their archetype as their main "class" would never be able to come back to it after those 25 lvls. Which in the grand scheme of things is barely even 1% of the overall gameplay time.
And no doubling down on the same archetype wouldn't let you play your preferred "class". I want to play Tank, but if I want to play optimally I'll have to get a secondary archetype and change from Tank to something else. That is unfair to say the least.
This would then imply that all the people who'd want to play their archetype as their main "class" would never be able to come back to it after those 25 lvls. Which in the grand scheme of things is barely even 1% of the overall gameplay time.
Well no, it does not imply that since you can choose mage + mage or fighter + fighter for your secondary archetype.
So it's the game base fantasy just reenforced.
I want to play Tank, but if I want to play optimally I'll have to get a secondary archetype and change from Tank to something else. That is unfair to say the least.
Well, you can from level 1.
You can keep said fantasy after 25 by choosing tank again.
Somebody who wants to start his adventure as a warlock for example can't. He has to level a mage to 25.
Which is weird and unfair.
Well, you can from level 1.
You can keep said fantasy after 25 by choosing tank again.
Somebody who wants to start his adventure as a warlock for example can't. He has to level a mage to 25.
Which is weird and unfair.
That's my whole point - I can't. I want to be a Tank, not a fucking guardian (whatever the hell that means). But the game forces me to choose something that is not Tank. And then it forces me to play the rest of the game like that. And that potentially years of gameplay. Sounds way more unfair than just a few days that all those classlovers need to play before getting their preferred char.
While I love the concept of mixing base archetypes to obtain classes, I feel that the inability to start off (from lvl 1) as the class (fantasy-gameplay style) you want is going to be a pretty bitter pill to swallow for a lot of mmo-rpg fans.
You're probably going to have hundreds of thousands of people who are going to come into this and be like ''okay I want to start playing a warlock/dps holy knight/death knight/shaman/etc'' and find out... they just can't.
Which is a particularly bitter pill to swallow when the whole game is... well, an RPG.
A game where you get to form a personal connection with your character, with the first levels being the most critical-enjoyable in any case, serious period in this relationship.
And with the system as it is... well, that connection is sabotaged early on because you just can't play the class (fantasy/gameplay style you want).
For example, to play a dps holy knight (equivalent of WoW's retribution paladin) I will have to level a fighter (warrior) to level 25... but I don't want to play a warrior to that level, I want to play a dps melee heavy armour cleric. But if I play a melee heavy armour cleric I will never end up as a dps class.
So it's just a profoundly flawed system from this point of view and I'm aware there is no way this is going to change in any SIGNIFICANT WAY but...
but, hear me out
can we at least put some honey on the bitter pill?
Can we add some early on, holy/shadow/elemental/etc magic to the leveling warrior, cleric, mage, etc?
so that, a fighter wanting to end up as a highsword (equivalent of retribution paladin) can get some holy healing/dps/magic absorption spells earlier on?
Or a mage wanting to end up as a warlock can use shadow magic from early on, maybe have a cruse added to some of his spells, maybe even summon an imp or something under certain conditions.
I think that would at least help a bit.
I see what you're saying but I'm not sure just adding choices of flavor before choosing a class is the right answer.
Maybe shift the level where you choose to 20?
Or allow changing to different secondaries to be easier before level cap.
You're not allowed to play your class (fantasy + gameplay style) of choice for 25 levels while others can from the start. That is unfair to say the least.
I suggested talents slowly allow you to morph at least partially until the lvl 25 major choice, into that said class, at least to some visual degree if nothing notable gameplay wise.
What is wrong with that?
the game already has too many choices given to the player when it comes to character development. the good thing is they are spread out and not given to you all together at the same time at level 1. that would be too overwhelming.
thats why you gotta wait until level 25.
also, from a fantasy/roleplay perspective, just pretend you are an apprentice and then decide to become a warlock later on
#1: Idk how it will actually go but my impression is this (I'll relate it to WoW):
If you want to become a DeathKnight, you have to lvl your Warrior or Paladin up to lvl 55 then you go through a process to become a DK.
That's not how it actually works in WoW but in a RP sort of way that's what would make sense.
If you ask me, I think a Ret Paladin would probably start off as a Cleric fledgling, some baby priest who starts using swords or whatever. But what comes first? devotion to the light?- and you use holy stuff mostly and suck with weapons at first? or the battle skills of a fighter, and only later do you get holy influence? and when do you start to blend the two? at lvl 1? 25?
From what it sounds like you want to lvl them both up in tandem, and that's fair. I suppose the RP for you might be off if you have no Holy influence while you lvl up to 25 as a magicless fighter.
But given the circumstances, maybe you'd like the Cleric->Fighter more and try using more melee weapons in your kit somehow. As long as this is a viable DPS option and you aren't pidgin held into being a caster/healer somehow
#2: Mage Vs Warlock
What is a Warlock? you talkin about summoning demons? or using shadow and fire magic? Don't Warlocks start out as mages and get influenced by fel or whatever? I think in WoW Illidan Stormrage was a mage right? and he started messing with demons and fel artifacts or something and that's how he kinda became a warlock or demon influenced right?
Unless you're talking about summoning demons, and even then, to be a summoner what are you? Are you using the arcane to summon? are you creating golems out of the elements? or are you just calling wild animals? All three of these examples might have different sources of magic for how they attain the summoned unit. But if you ask me, I think a Warlock is a corrupted mage baseline
That's my whole point - I can't. I want to be a Tank, not a fucking guardian (whatever the hell that means
I'd agree with your point if not for one problem.... the Guardian is the exact Tank fantasy with a different name. There is no reason to believe othewise and based on the way the doubling-down system has been presented, that's the only logical conclusion.
So you can play tank both from lvl 1 and lvl 25+.
If I want to play a highsword from lvl 1 I can't and my friend can't join me to play a a lvl 1 warlock.
We're going to have to play completely different fantasies from lvl 1 to 25.
So your problem is with a name.
The problem I signal is with a whole visual style and gameplay style (while we do not know to what extent the second archetype will alter gameplay, it is safe to assume, based on the explanations given so far, it will be notable).
the game already has too many choices given to the player when it comes to character development. the good thing is they are spread out and not given to you all together at the same time at level 1. that would be too overwhelming.
But what do you think about my suggestion of allowing a player to choose a certain talent path (a set of talents) making him slowly gather, for example, warlock traits from early lvls, if he is a mage for example? Or a highsword if he is a fighter?
So you can have a lvl 10 mage but he already has some degree of warlock flavor or battlemage flavor, even tho he is not yet a battlemage and still has a lot more to evolve until even making that ''final'' serious choice.
also, from a fantasy/roleplay perspective, just pretend you are an apprentice and then decide to become a warlock later on
That's a decent suggestion but what do you think about mine?
Also, I'd like to note that this is not a personal problem as many have suggested.
I will probably barely have the time to play the game at all (work and familly need to come first) but I really like the team, the project and I was explicitly asked for suggestions so here I am.
If you ask me, I think a Ret Paladin would probably start off as a Cleric fledgling, some baby priest who starts using swords or whatever. But what comes first? devotion to the light?- and you use holy stuff mostly and suck with weapons at first? or the battle skills of a fighter, and only later do you get holy influence? and when do you start to blend the two? at lvl 1? 25?
From what it sounds like you want to lvl them both up in tandem, and that's fair. I suppose the RP for you might be off if you have no Holy influence while you lvl up to 25 as a magicless fighter.
But given the circumstances, maybe you'd like the Cleric->Fighter more and try using more melee weapons in your kit somehow. As long as this is a viable DPS option and you aren't pidgin held into being a caster/healer somehow
Personally this isn't a problem for me.
If I even have the time to play the game at all for any significant amount of time I will level a Templar (cleric + fighter) and a Highsword (fighter + cleric) to see what works more.
But I do think its an unfair system and the softcore solution (which doesn't even alter the design in any way shape or form, as I'm simply suggesting making talents in a certain way, talent system which will be in the game anyway) I suggested is allowing players to choose talents that will give them a ''class flavour'' earlier on (such as a lvl 10 or 15 mage having some talents which give him a warlock flavour, even tho he still has a way to go until he can make that serious choice of picking a secondary archetype to make his class).
The problem I signal is with a whole visual style and gameplay style (while we do not know to what extent the second archetype will alter gameplay, it is safe to assume, based on the explanations given so far, it will be notable).
Notable is exactly right. And "we don't know" is right too. We have no clue how the main archetype will change even if you double-down on it. I choose to believe that a guardian would be quite different from a tank. You choose to believe the same about mage and warlock. in other words, we agree, except I don't want to play as a guardian but will have to for the rest of the game after lvl25, while you want to play as a warlock and would only have to play as a mage for a few days (if that).
My struggle seems quite a bit bigger than yours. That's just unfair.
That's an absurd claim, that's how a 15th century peasant would describe a warlock.
15th century peasants knew of the video game developer and producer Blizzard?
My understanding of the middle ages is clearly lacking.
However, your description is still that of a Blizzard warlock
That's how a warlock looked and worked in D&D on which AoC is to a great degree based on.
D&D warlocks have you have a fiend as a patron, you are not a demon summoner. I covered that in the post you quoted. You don't even need to use a demon to get said powers - fey are equally appropriate.
That's how warlock worked in the first pc rpg games.
The earliest computer RPG I can find - from 1980 - had warlocks as essentially being any wizard that has specific training to be effective in times of war. This is the Ultima series - that is how warlocks started out in that franchise.
I'm curious as to what games you are talking about here.
I have no idea where you're getting your claims from but do you have any evidence of warlocks in AoC being non-dark-magic and demon based casters?
I'm not making any claims at all as to what they are, I'm simply pointing out to you that warlocks are probably the most varied RPG class that exists.
In virtually every single example you gave, upon checking I found dark magic use and demon summoning. EQ indeed seems to have no summon ability (it does summon shadows as a buff tho, so still in the fantasy area in question).
Yeah, dark magic is a common (though not always) present factor. Keep in mind, a warlock is LITERALLY a male practitioner of witchcraft. When witchcraft was illegal, males accused of this practice were literally called warlocks.
But you could expand your knowledge a little more of warlocks in fantasy settings;
In Artemis Fowl, a warlock is a fairy with strong magic skills who is highly trained in the magical arts.
A warlock in Destiny is more akin to a Jedi than anything.
In AoC we get warlock by mixing a mage and a SUMMONER.
Do you have any evidence of any sort AoC is doing something unique which won't even involve SUMMONING and stuff like that?
Not at all, but I am not assuming what Intrepid will do with any class.
You are.
As such, you are the one that needs to provide evidence to back up the claim you are making. Since I am literally not making a claim as to what Ashes warlocks will be, I don't see why I would need to provide any evidence. I'm not even sure what evidence would be applicable to point out that I am not claiming to know what Intrepid will do with warlocks - other than pointing out how vastly different warlocks are in various fantasy IP's.
Because as far as I can tell you're just grasping at straws.
Not at all.
If I don't have a firm foundation for what I am saying, I tend to just not say anything to begin with.
Sure, Ashes warlocks may be a wizard/summoner. So what? That doesn't make them Blizzard warlocks, which is what your fantasy is based on.
Let me give you a specific quote from Steven here;
If you are a mage primary with an summoner secondary class you're really going to be able to pull from the identity of that summoner: Being able to temporarily put a servant on the battlefield that might be this fire elemental.
So, correct me if I am wrong, but a character with a mage primary and a summoner secondary would be a warlock, correct?
In this quote, Steven is talking about a warlock summoning a fire elemental, correct?
How sure are you about your specific fantasy of a warlock in Ashes being a dark magic casting, demon summoning caster?
15th century peasants knew of the video game developer and producer Blizzard?
15th century peasants would describe a warlock as it appears generally in modern mmo-rpgs and know it to be different from a mage (wizard).
very much like 10.000 BC men could describe a warrior or hunter very much as it appears generally in our modern mmo-rpgs.
And with this I'm done with the warlock fantasy off-topic aspect because you're turning this whole topic into an off-topic derailed joke.
Will you answer my question already and tell me what's wrong with having a few talents early on that give you the oportunity to at least slightly evoke your secondary archetype earlier on (such as having a low lvl mage with warlock flavour or a low lvl fighter with a crusaer=highsword flavour)?
Sure, Ashes warlocks may be a wizard/summoner. So what? That doesn't make them Blizzard warlocks, which is what your fantasy is based on.
There is no distinct blizzard warlock fantasy, warlocks are by definition dark magic + demon summoning casters.
In this game we get warlock by choosing SUMMONER as secondary archetype and I don't know what you expect besides dark magic.... holy warlocks? Okay. Thanks for driving this whole discussion off-topic insanely much.
Comments
You asked for a way for players to gloss over the fact that they are playing a given class, so that they can imagine instead that they are playing a subclass within that class.
If this is not what you are asking for - in essence - then perhaps restate what it is you are asking for. Everything you have said about it points to this being what you are asking for, however.
Players shouldnt be spending the first 20 levels trying to "feel" like they are playing a specific class, and they absolutely should not need to use 'talents' to achieve that. Players already have a means to gradually move in to their secondary class, it just starts AFTER they pick said secondary class.
I mean, your abilities aren't changing when you pick your secondary class, all it does is give you access to augments that you can then apply as you continue to level up, and these augments provide that flavor, as well as function.
You are essentially asking for that to happen before you have a secondary class, meaning players will be able to have archwizard as their secondary, but still have some flavor of warlock from this idea of yours.
Further to that, if Intrepid were to do this, it would require players be presented with 8 'talent' options per ability, that list both the effects the 'talents' have, as well as the subclass they are designed to give the feeling of. That is just too much right there, and it literally going against the reason many games want to have their starting experience use fewer classes than their end game experience.
"You have reached level 2, please choose between the following abilities so we know which Variant you are playing:
[1] Judgement: Smite your enemy with a Hammer and weaken them
[2] Devotion: Heal your ally."
I am a 'misdirection' Cleric (just assume it's the same as any other 'standard Healer fantasy'). I choose Devotion.
"You have reached level 4, please choose between the following abilities so we know which Variant you are playing:
[1] Judgement: Smite your enemy with a Hammer and weaken them
[2] Castigation: Strike your enemy with a magic whip."
[3] Devotion II: Heal your ally, but better."
[4] Blessing: Heal your ally, but on a delay."
I am still the same style of PLAYER, here it makes a little difference because I wanna do SOME damage. Castigation.
"You have reached level 4, please choose between the following abilities so we know which Variant you are playing:
[1] Judgement: Smite your enemy with a Hammer and weaken them
[2] Castigation II: Strike your enemy with a magic whip."
[3] Devotion II: Heal your ally, but better."
[4] Blessing: Heal your ally, but on a delay."
Now I take Blessing, again, 'normal healer'.
Most games tell you 'here are the skills and talents for your class, pick the ones you like the best. But almost all those games, lots of people pick 'the best ones'. Or the game makes it simple, it 'chooses for you'. It never really asks you this. Or worse, they do both. They choose a sub-path for you and THEN tell you to choose some options anyway with the 'options' not really mattering to the sub-path because all they do is make you slightly more like one of the others instead of more effective at your 'class fantasy'.
Ashes in Alpha-1 didn't do that.
You take Judgement, Castigation, Judgement II, decide if you even care about taking EITHER healing spell.
I take Castigation, both healing spells, and never touch Judgement. I'm not a Templar.
This could start a whole argument about how 'If I play Cleric but I don't heal, people won't group with me!', but that's just a delay on something that was going to happen anyway IF it was going to happen. If you picked a DPS Cleric and it didn't do enough DPS, the sort of person that would never pick you for DPS role is never going to pick you anyway because you tried to blend DPS and 'healer' in the first place and that sort of person doesn't like hybrid builds.
Or, DPS Cleric will just WORK and there is some group out there where you fit perfectly. Point is, that 'problem' isn't the one you care about here. You care about 'feeling like a Templar'.
2Handed Hammer. Heavy Armor. Judgement, Castigation, Judgement II, passives that make you hit harder. If you can't DPS at that point, that is your problem, not 'do you feel like/appear to be a Templar'. If Ashes' MAIN skill Trees for Cleric don't allow you to choose a group of skills that fall under your class fantasy of 'Templar'. It doesn't matter what your Augments do exactly. You mostly want those because they probably offer more useful effects/changes to the TYPE of skills a Templar picks, theoretically you shouldn't need them. It's like being able to choose 'Judgement IV' at level 25 and having your "Judgement IV" be a Templar-exclusive version.
You already did the 'usual thing' and raised Judgement up to Judgement III by then, probably.
EDIT: Fixed 'choices' because I'm too ranty to remember how BBCode works.
Perfect.
Yeah I will try that but based on the explanations received so far, it's unlikely to work.
I mean, that would be great.
I mean, if things stay as they are and choosing a secondary archetype doesn't change your role, you basically have no chance of becoming a DPS as cleric, because you would still be, regardless of talents, gear, etc a healer role.
I asked that talents allow a slow organic road to a secondary archetype, preferably gameplay wise focused.
So that a lvl 15 mage already has notable warlock traits because that's the talent path he set on taking, while a different mage player at lvl 15 already has notable sorcerer traits because the talent path he decided on taking.
What's wrong with a slow, organic evolution as opposed to one abrupt choice at halfway leveling?
Why not?
Why is an abrupt, unnatural evolution via one click better than a slow, organic, natural evolution?
So very late in the most crucial part of their experience with the game.
Secondary Archetype will change the already existing abilities, howevever, if you change an ability enough is it the same ability even?
For example, if your ''summon wolf'' ability is now an aoe and summons several skeletons of fallen enemies around you and is named ''raise dead'' is it even the same ability?
Technically yes, it does the exact thing, it's a summoning ability. Maybe it even has the same cooldown and mana cost. But is it really the same ability? Let's be real.
Until alpha 2 or at least an extensive stream (not the ''ohh we're going to reveal the ranger'' --> reveals a handful of abilities and some bow shooting) we're just not going to know.
To happen in a small amount as a ''demo'' of what the actual secondary archetype choice will represent.
No.
I explicitly said the paths should be mutually exclusive.
Not necesarelly, the ''talent path'' could just affect a few abilities, not all. I did explicitly say it should be a slow, organic journey.
The problem is we've actually gone into two issues and if I went down this path here I would be reviving a dead topic as bloodprophet initially accused me (initially with 0 basis however).
To be short on it, I care about both aspects.
Yeah I mean, Templar is a case where you're not going to have a problem living the fantasy because even if it doesn't work in practice you can still put on the heavy gear and 2h as a cleric.
Problem is with classes like Highsword where... well, good luck making the fighter feel like a retribution paladin at least until secondary archetype choice.
And that's unfair for the rpg players who would opt for that fantasy. Same goes for warlocks, shamans, paladins, etc
This right here is - imo - the root of your problem.
You are trying to fulfill a pre-existing fantasy in a word that is designed to create it's own.
Why would you go in to Ashes looking for a WoW RP experience? If you want a WoW RP experience, play WoW. If you want to play Ashes, let it create it's own class themes, rather than trying to push yours on to it.
I mean, Warlock is a great example here. I've played games in which a warlock was a Male witch. I've played games in which a warlock was a sorcerer that used poison and disease magic. I've played games where a warlock uses dimensional magic.
None of the above are wrong, and it is up to Intrepid to decide what they want a Verra warlock to be.
You seem to be expecting each class in Ashes to conform to your assumption about them.
To your point about how the first few levels are the most important - they are. This is why developers tend to guide players through that period far more strictly than other aspects of the game. One of the things developers do is give players fewer choices so they do not become overwhelmed.
If your suggestion has any effect on the abilities at all, then it is just going to cause confusion. If a player picks the warlock 'talent' because they want that specific effect that it adds to their ability, but then opts instead to pick Archwizard as a secondary, they then - according to you - lose that effect they wanted on that ability.
At level 20, this is not really something that should happen.
Now, if you are suggesting that these effects not alter the effect of an ability, just the feel, then what you are talking about are essentially ability cosmetics. If this is indeed what you are talking about, I *STRONGLY* believe Intrepid will sell themed packs of ability cosmetics on the store.
Again you're misunderstanding what I said (weird as other users such as az did not, probably because he actually reads my rather short posts).
These fantasies (rather loose concepts to begin with) are not being re-created, there is no evidence of this, on the contrary, everything we've seen in terms of class fantasy is 100% within the norms of the general mmo rpg class fantasy realms.
I did not say you should have the WoW warlock in AoC or anything like that.
A warlock is a dark magic, demon summoning caster. It's a very beloved and very common choice of mmo-rpg players everywhere.
And unlike other classes here its not available from lvl 1, together with many other basic fantasy classes.
Nowhere did I say for them to bring the wow class system. That's a strawman. A pseudo-pov you invented yourself and now are attacking.
I said the lower level talents should allow players to evoke, to go on a path that makes them start looking and feeling, at least to some degree, like the secondary archetype they plan to choose.
What does this have to do with the AoC warlock (which will fit in the general warlock fantasy, again there is no evidence of it being anything out of the ordinary) not being available from lvl 1?
I seem based on what?
The problem I noted is that there is no lvl 1 warlock or shaman or paladin or highsword or whatever while there are lvl 1 fighters, tanks, mages, rangers, etc
Where did I complain about them not being what I expect?
So why not be guided in your fantasy & gameplay style of choice but in another?
1. you massively overestimate the level of low level ''path'' talents I suggested.
2. I explicitly said the talent ''paths'' would be mutually exclusive, so if you went into warlock low lvl talents you would lock out the, let's say, spellstone talents.
My dude, that is a Blizzard warlock.
Many, many IP's dont have warlocks as being able to summon at all.
In EQ a warlock is a sorcerer that uses disease and poison in place of elements.
In Pillars of Eternity a warlock is a multi class wizard/barbarian.
A Morrowind warlock has Distruction, Illusion, Restoration, light armor and short blade as its major skills. Conjuration isnt even a minor skill.
In D&D a warlock is a spell caster that gets their magic from a patron (usually a fiend). There isnt inherently any summoning of said fiend as a part of this class.
You cant claim that you are not trying to fulfill a pre-existing fantasy, and then make the claim above as to what a warlock is.
That's an absurd claim, that's how a 15th century peasant would describe a warlock.
That's how a warlock looked and worked in D&D on which AoC is to a great degree based on.
That's how warlock worked in the first pc rpg games.
I have no idea where you're getting your claims from but do you have any evidence of warlocks in AoC being non-dark-magic and demon based casters?
In virtually every single example you gave, upon checking I found dark magic use and demon summoning. EQ indeed seems to have no summon ability (it does summon shadows as a buff tho, so still in the fantasy area in question).
In AoC we get warlock by mixing a mage and a SUMMONER.
Do you have any evidence of any sort AoC is doing something unique which won't even involve SUMMONING and stuff like that?
Because as far as I can tell you're just grasping at straws.
I suggested talents slowly allow you to morph at least partially until the lvl 25 major choice, into that said class, at least to some visual degree if nothing notable gameplay wise.
What is wrong with that?
Not sure if from game-play point of view is important.
And no doubling down on the same archetype wouldn't let you play your preferred "class". I want to play Tank, but if I want to play optimally I'll have to get a secondary archetype and change from Tank to something else. That is unfair to say the least.
Well no, it does not imply that since you can choose mage + mage or fighter + fighter for your secondary archetype.
So it's the game base fantasy just reenforced.
How so? It would be reenforcing the same fantasy and gameplay style.
Well, you can from level 1.
You can keep said fantasy after 25 by choosing tank again.
Somebody who wants to start his adventure as a warlock for example can't. He has to level a mage to 25.
Which is weird and unfair.
I see what you're saying but I'm not sure just adding choices of flavor before choosing a class is the right answer.
Maybe shift the level where you choose to 20?
Or allow changing to different secondaries to be easier before level cap.
the game already has too many choices given to the player when it comes to character development. the good thing is they are spread out and not given to you all together at the same time at level 1. that would be too overwhelming.
thats why you gotta wait until level 25.
also, from a fantasy/roleplay perspective, just pretend you are an apprentice and then decide to become a warlock later on
If you want to become a DeathKnight, you have to lvl your Warrior or Paladin up to lvl 55 then you go through a process to become a DK.
That's not how it actually works in WoW but in a RP sort of way that's what would make sense.
If you ask me, I think a Ret Paladin would probably start off as a Cleric fledgling, some baby priest who starts using swords or whatever. But what comes first? devotion to the light?- and you use holy stuff mostly and suck with weapons at first? or the battle skills of a fighter, and only later do you get holy influence? and when do you start to blend the two? at lvl 1? 25?
From what it sounds like you want to lvl them both up in tandem, and that's fair. I suppose the RP for you might be off if you have no Holy influence while you lvl up to 25 as a magicless fighter.
But given the circumstances, maybe you'd like the Cleric->Fighter more and try using more melee weapons in your kit somehow. As long as this is a viable DPS option and you aren't pidgin held into being a caster/healer somehow
#2: Mage Vs Warlock
What is a Warlock? you talkin about summoning demons? or using shadow and fire magic? Don't Warlocks start out as mages and get influenced by fel or whatever? I think in WoW Illidan Stormrage was a mage right? and he started messing with demons and fel artifacts or something and that's how he kinda became a warlock or demon influenced right?
Unless you're talking about summoning demons, and even then, to be a summoner what are you? Are you using the arcane to summon? are you creating golems out of the elements? or are you just calling wild animals? All three of these examples might have different sources of magic for how they attain the summoned unit. But if you ask me, I think a Warlock is a corrupted mage baseline
I'd agree with your point if not for one problem.... the Guardian is the exact Tank fantasy with a different name. There is no reason to believe othewise and based on the way the doubling-down system has been presented, that's the only logical conclusion.
So you can play tank both from lvl 1 and lvl 25+.
If I want to play a highsword from lvl 1 I can't and my friend can't join me to play a a lvl 1 warlock.
We're going to have to play completely different fantasies from lvl 1 to 25.
So your problem is with a name.
The problem I signal is with a whole visual style and gameplay style (while we do not know to what extent the second archetype will alter gameplay, it is safe to assume, based on the explanations given so far, it will be notable).
But what do you think about my suggestion of allowing a player to choose a certain talent path (a set of talents) making him slowly gather, for example, warlock traits from early lvls, if he is a mage for example? Or a highsword if he is a fighter?
So you can have a lvl 10 mage but he already has some degree of warlock flavor or battlemage flavor, even tho he is not yet a battlemage and still has a lot more to evolve until even making that ''final'' serious choice.
That's a decent suggestion but what do you think about mine?
Also, I'd like to note that this is not a personal problem as many have suggested.
I will probably barely have the time to play the game at all (work and familly need to come first) but I really like the team, the project and I was explicitly asked for suggestions so here I am.
Personally this isn't a problem for me.
If I even have the time to play the game at all for any significant amount of time I will level a Templar (cleric + fighter) and a Highsword (fighter + cleric) to see what works more.
But I do think its an unfair system and the softcore solution (which doesn't even alter the design in any way shape or form, as I'm simply suggesting making talents in a certain way, talent system which will be in the game anyway) I suggested is allowing players to choose talents that will give them a ''class flavour'' earlier on (such as a lvl 10 or 15 mage having some talents which give him a warlock flavour, even tho he still has a way to go until he can make that serious choice of picking a secondary archetype to make his class).
What do you think about this suggestion?
My struggle seems quite a bit bigger than yours. That's just unfair.
My understanding of the middle ages is clearly lacking.
However, your description is still that of a Blizzard warlock D&D warlocks have you have a fiend as a patron, you are not a demon summoner. I covered that in the post you quoted. You don't even need to use a demon to get said powers - fey are equally appropriate. The earliest computer RPG I can find - from 1980 - had warlocks as essentially being any wizard that has specific training to be effective in times of war. This is the Ultima series - that is how warlocks started out in that franchise.
I'm curious as to what games you are talking about here.
I'm not making any claims at all as to what they are, I'm simply pointing out to you that warlocks are probably the most varied RPG class that exists.
Yeah, dark magic is a common (though not always) present factor. Keep in mind, a warlock is LITERALLY a male practitioner of witchcraft. When witchcraft was illegal, males accused of this practice were literally called warlocks.
But you could expand your knowledge a little more of warlocks in fantasy settings;
In Artemis Fowl, a warlock is a fairy with strong magic skills who is highly trained in the magical arts.
A warlock in Destiny is more akin to a Jedi than anything.
Not at all, but I am not assuming what Intrepid will do with any class.
You are.
As such, you are the one that needs to provide evidence to back up the claim you are making. Since I am literally not making a claim as to what Ashes warlocks will be, I don't see why I would need to provide any evidence. I'm not even sure what evidence would be applicable to point out that I am not claiming to know what Intrepid will do with warlocks - other than pointing out how vastly different warlocks are in various fantasy IP's. Not at all.
If I don't have a firm foundation for what I am saying, I tend to just not say anything to begin with.
Sure, Ashes warlocks may be a wizard/summoner. So what? That doesn't make them Blizzard warlocks, which is what your fantasy is based on.
Let me give you a specific quote from Steven here;
So, correct me if I am wrong, but a character with a mage primary and a summoner secondary would be a warlock, correct?
In this quote, Steven is talking about a warlock summoning a fire elemental, correct?
How sure are you about your specific fantasy of a warlock in Ashes being a dark magic casting, demon summoning caster?
15th century peasants would describe a warlock as it appears generally in modern mmo-rpgs and know it to be different from a mage (wizard).
very much like 10.000 BC men could describe a warrior or hunter very much as it appears generally in our modern mmo-rpgs.
And with this I'm done with the warlock fantasy off-topic aspect because you're turning this whole topic into an off-topic derailed joke.
Will you answer my question already and tell me what's wrong with having a few talents early on that give you the oportunity to at least slightly evoke your secondary archetype earlier on (such as having a low lvl mage with warlock flavour or a low lvl fighter with a crusaer=highsword flavour)?
So why the text-wall arguing that we shouldn't expect classical dark magic + demon summoning notable aspects?
Taking SUMMONER as secondary archetype is literally how you make a warlock in AoC.
What would you expect?
What more is there to prove?
There is no distinct blizzard warlock fantasy, warlocks are by definition dark magic + demon summoning casters.
In this game we get warlock by choosing SUMMONER as secondary archetype and I don't know what you expect besides dark magic.... holy warlocks? Okay. Thanks for driving this whole discussion off-topic insanely much.
Uhhhh......
https://wowpedia.fandom.com/wiki/Fire_Elemental_(Warcraft_I)
Regardless.
Again, will you answer my question?