So im trying to figure out why you refuse to look at it the way they are intending, and trying to look at the two combing together like its a new archetype suddenly.
Because if you give the archetype combinations cool names, people are going to assume they are cool classes.
What Im suggesting is that instead of making the combinations adhere to the names they have already chosen, they could instead. Just advertise the 8 base classes, implement the augment system with NO additional names for any of the 56 combo archetypes and then rename them later based on how people end up customizing their augments.
That way if Tank/Cleric doesn't really FEEL like a Paladin in game they can rename it something that fits the archetype better.
Whilst I fully understand that there won't be 64 classes per say and more or less will be 8 flavours of one class, I think intrepid should do their best to make sure that each of the 64 classes do get at least 1 or 2 new spells unique only to their class whilst the rest of the skills will mostly be for flavour
0
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
So im trying to figure out why you refuse to look at it the way they are intending, and trying to look at the two combing together like its a new archetype suddenly.
Because if you give the archetype combinations cool names, people are going to assume they are cool classes.
What Im suggesting is that instead of making the combinations adhere to the names they have already chosen, they could instead. Just advertise the 8 base classes, implement the augment system with NO additional names for any of the 56 combo archetypes and then rename them later based on how people end up customizing their augments.
That way if Tank/Cleric doesn't really FEEL like a Paladin in game they can rename it something that fits the archetype better.
Would you be okay with THAT?
This sound like a more you issue with overhype.
This sound more like an issue of you not answering the question
I think @Rippley is right, if we refer to the classic vision of the Paladin in D&D-inspired MMOs.
But it's also true that every studio arranges the classes in their own way, more or less faithfully to D&D.
Still, a Paladin is not a mixture of Cleric and Tank. I'm not going to reopen the debate on the Tank archetype, which is a crappy name. But a Paladin is rather a mix of Cleric and Fighter/warrior (classic STR, CONST, WIS).
But since Intrepid already didn't have enough imagination to come up with a name other than Tank, I realized that I should avoid asking too much of them in terms of storytelling and concentrate on the mechanics of the classes before judging them.
Implying that people who assume Paladin means the same thing in AoC that it has in every RPG for the past 20 years somehow lack critical thinking skills is pretty disingenuous.
What is a Paladin in AOC ? In AOC a Paladin is a damn Cleric, so a Paladin is a Christian at the top of damn Clergy.
It's literally gonna be 8 classes with each one of them having augments that apparent to other classes. I wouldn't call that 64 different classes. Even Guild Wars 2 with their 36 professions doesn't call that classes because it's not what it is.
I think the problem is that people see the chart showing the archetype combos and those names (Templar, Paladin, Songbow, Nightblade, etc) really EVOKE a sense of flavor and uniqueness. If the multi-class system doesnt deliver on those expectations its going to leave a lot of players feeling disappointed.
Those players should pay subscription based on what they see in the game not on wiki.
The wiki will also change a lot meanwhile but the game is important.
If you think about the alpha 2 key owners, the feeling of disappointment is a risk at this moment for anyone paying for it and should know that big changes happened in the past, the deep ocean was added, freeholds became limited, node specific currencies were added... But you should know that because
I dont wan't to know what you think Intrepid will tell you a Highsword is. I want you to IMAGINE what you think a Highsword is and describe it to me.
You can’t always get what you want.
What is it like to be born with a terminal lack of imagination?
To me, the people that lack imagination in regards to this discussion are the people that want classes in Ashes to remind them of classes of the same name that they have played in other MMORPG's.
That is a complete lack of imagination - it is literally wanting the same thing you used to have. At least with Dygz, he is willing to be open to what Intrepid come up with.
I dont wan't to know what you think Intrepid will tell you a Highsword is. I want you to IMAGINE what you think a Highsword is and describe it to me.
You can’t always get what you want.
What is it like to be born with a terminal lack of imagination?
To me, the people that lack imagination in regards to this discussion are the people that want classes in Ashes to remind them of classes of the same name that they have played in other MMORPG's.
That is a complete lack of imagination - it is literally wanting the same thing you used to have. At least with Dygz, he is willing to be open to what Intrepid come up with.
You musn't be afraid to dream a little bigger darling.
Ashes of Creation has a chance at true greatness if they manage to nail the archetype system they are proposing. The people talking about class fantasy and unique gameplay elements for each sub-type are just trying to help Intrepid hit the mark.
I don't think anyone wants Ashes Paladin to be exactly like WoW Paladin, they just want to make sure that Paladin is distinct from the other Tank/X archetypes. And even though I have suggested things that are outside the bounds of the Augment system that doesn't mean that I think they should scrap it.
You musn't be afraid to dream a little bigger darling.
Not at all.
I am of the opinion that I want Ashes to play and feel like Ashes - not WoW, ESO, FFXIV, or anything else.
Threads like this - people complaining that Ashes class system probably doesn't allow for their class fantasy - are literally saying that they want this game to remind them of what they have previously played (or watched, or read), as opposed to wanting this game to be itself. Even if you are claiming that you just want each class to play different - that is still you not accepting Ashes for what it is.
Ashes is what Ashes is. the way to "move forward" is not to suggest Ashes needs to change, but rather for people to accept the game for what it is.
Basically, it isn't Ashes that needs to change, it's you.
You musn't be afraid to dream a little bigger darling.
Not at all.
I am of the opinion that I want Ashes to play and feel like Ashes - not WoW, ESO, FFXIV, or anything else.
Threads like this - people complaining that Ashes class system probably doesn't allow for their class fantasy - are literally saying that they want this game to remind them of what they have previously played (or watched, or read), as opposed to wanting this game to be itself. Even if you are claiming that you just want each class to play different - that is still you not accepting Ashes for what it is.
Ashes is what Ashes is. the way to "move forward" is not to suggest Ashes needs to change, but rather for people to accept the game for what it is.
Basically, it isn't Ashes that needs to change, it's you.
Ashes doesn't exist yet. Its an idea that is still being formulated. You don't know what Ashes plays like or feels like because you have never played it or felt it.
You don't have a monopoly on what the game is or should be.
I want the game to be good. I want the class system (arguably the most important system of them all) to be the best class system we have ever had in an MMO. I don't want the developers to stop innovating and iterating. I want them to use every scrap of design space available to them. I want a class system SO GOOD that both you and I can get exactly what we want out of it.
You like augments? Cool so do I. Lets do that. But if they can do augments AND make each of the 64 sub-types feel unique and flavorful, WHY ON EARTH would you not want both?
1
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Ashes doesn't exist yet. Its an idea that is still being formulated. You don't know what Ashes plays like or feels like because you have never played it or felt it.
And we won't know until the game devs implement Steven's vision and we get a chance to test it.
Go make a Kickstarter, like Steven did, if you want to play your vision instead of Steven's vision.
You don't have a monopoly on what the game is or should be.
But, Steven did. And it's his game that I backed. So, I want to be able to test his vision.
Then we can give meaningful feedback about what we would like to have tweaked.
I want the game to be good. I want the class system (arguably the most important system of them all) to be the best class system we have ever had in an MMO. I don't want the developers to stop innovating and iterating. I want them to use every scrap of design space available to them. I want a class system SO GOOD that both you and I can get exactly what we want out of it.
Yep. Everyone -including the very experienced Intrepid game devs want the game to be good.
If you think you've got more to offer, convince Steven to hire you as a game dev for Ashes and see if they will adopt your ideas.
I dunno why think the dev team will stop innovating and iterating if they don't embrace your ideas.
You like augments? Cool so do I. Lets do that. But if they can do augments AND make each of the 64 sub-types feel unique and flavorful, WHY ON EARTH would you not want both?
They are already giving us both - as far as I know.
Of course, that depends on what, exactly, you mean by "unique".
1
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Still, a Paladin is not a mixture of Cleric and Tank. I'm not going to reopen the debate on the Tank archetype, which is a crappy name. But a Paladin is rather a mix of Cleric and Fighter/warrior (classic STR, CONST, WIS).
In the Ashes game setting, a Paladin is the combo of Cleric Primary Archetype and Tank Secondary Archetype.
But since Intrepid already didn't have enough imagination to come up with a name other than Tank, I realized that I should avoid asking too much of them in terms of storytelling and concentrate on the mechanics of the classes before judging them.
Since Steven decided to use his imagination rather than be a sheep...
(there, i fixed it for you)
What is a Paladin in AOC ? In AOC a Paladin is a damn Cleric, so a Paladin is a Christian at the top of damn Clergy. A Paladin is a Christian if it's a Cleric.
In the Ashes game setting, a Paladin is the combo of Cleric Primary Archetype and Tank Secondary Archetype. Christians are not part of the Ashes setting.
Paladins are devoted to and gain Divine Powers from their patron deities.
In D&D 3E - 5E, Paladins can be Holy or Unholy, depending on their patron deity.
In Ashes, a Paladin can wield Radiant or Shadow Damage. Ashes also has a "twisted path" that Paladins (really any player) can pursue.
If I understood your point of view, Intrepid should sell a dictionary with the game because they reinvent a new definition for every word?
I doubt they will sell their glossary of terms as a separate product, but yes, Steven and Intrepid have some non-standard definitions. Remember that dictionaries simply report the way words are used - which is why there is language drift over time.
That's who we get to scenarios like:
"What would you like to drink?"
"I'd like a Coke, please."
"What kind of coke would you like? We have Pepsi, Fanta Orange, Fanta Grape, Dr. Pepper and 7-Up."
0
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Ashes doesn't exist yet. Its an idea that is still being formulated. You don't know what Ashes plays like or feels like because you have never played it or felt it.
And we won't know until the game devs implement Steven's vision and we get a chance to test it.
Go make a Kickstarter, like Steven did, if you want to play your vision instead of Steven's vision.
You don't have a monopoly on what the game is or should be.
But, Steven did. And it's his game that I backed. So, I want to be able to test his vision.
Then we can give meaningful feedback about what we would like to have tweaked.
I want the game to be good. I want the class system (arguably the most important system of them all) to be the best class system we have ever had in an MMO. I don't want the developers to stop innovating and iterating. I want them to use every scrap of design space available to them. I want a class system SO GOOD that both you and I can get exactly what we want out of it.
Yep. Everyone -including the very experienced Intrepid game devs want the game to be good.
If you think you've got more to offer, convince Steven to hire you as a game dev for Ashes and see if they will adopt your ideas.
I dunno why think the dev team will stop innovating and iterating if they don't embrace your ideas.
You like augments? Cool so do I. Lets do that. But if they can do augments AND make each of the 64 sub-types feel unique and flavorful, WHY ON EARTH would you not want both?
They are already giving us both - as far as I know.
Of course, that depends on what, exactly, you mean by "unique".
So basically you want everyone to shut up and wait until the game is so far into development that its too late to course correct and THEN give feedback?
0
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
edited August 30
You can talk as much as you want.
Expect most people here to tell you that you should not expect Intrepid to add any of your suggestions until we have had a chance to test what the game devs implement during Alpha 2.
"So far into devdelopment..." appears to be your own internal fear that really has nothing to do with the way Intrepid has been working.
You musn't be afraid to dream a little bigger darling.
Not at all.
I am of the opinion that I want Ashes to play and feel like Ashes - not WoW, ESO, FFXIV, or anything else.
Threads like this - people complaining that Ashes class system probably doesn't allow for their class fantasy - are literally saying that they want this game to remind them of what they have previously played (or watched, or read), as opposed to wanting this game to be itself. Even if you are claiming that you just want each class to play different - that is still you not accepting Ashes for what it is.
Ashes is what Ashes is. the way to "move forward" is not to suggest Ashes needs to change, but rather for people to accept the game for what it is.
Basically, it isn't Ashes that needs to change, it's you.
Ok first off you need to differentiate several things.
The Theme of a game is it's superficial visual and narratives, the game has a 'high fantasy' theme which is a well established set of tropes, Paladins and many other types of specialized combatants are a well established part of that theme, any creative medium which uses the name Paladin is invoking this theme the same as when they use the word 'magic' or 'orc', this carries an implicit promise to the audiance.
That promise will be broken if the delivery falls far short of expectations. For example if you say your game has orc and they are just the normal humans model with green skin then audiances will be rightly pissed because they percive low effort work being over-sold. But at the same time audiances do crave newness so a depections of orcs which looked exactly like WoW orcs would be mildly disapointing and called uncreative. The best solution is to have a modest twist on the basic theme, such as Ashes Asian hairstyle and face structure themed orcs. Enouch classic elements to fufill the promise but enough innovation to be intereting and people are more forgiving of unmet expectations when it looks like effort was expended then when it wasn't.
How something 'plays' in a game is very seperate from it's theme. Look at the Tanks in overwatch, their themes are all over the place and the play is also unique due to differences in skill and weapon kits, but it's also all under the umbrella of Tank which is role. Thematic regidity that would be expected of a Paladin would be enough to confine them to a Tank role or at very fringes a very tanky fighter. But it's not so narrow that it makes every paladin in every game play the same. Some commonality of many games implementation of Paladins is that they are more shield centric then other tanks, that's a good start for making AoC's Paladin unique amoungst it's fellow tank varients.
In a game which uses branching character development one will invariably compare a Paladin with it's base classes and alternative branching options. If these comparisons are poor such as a Paladin playing almost no differently then the other tanks then it will be the worst outcome because it will be percived as low effort failure. And that should be avoided at all costs.
0
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
edited August 30
LMFAO
Tell us you don't know how creative narratives work without telling us you don't know how creative narratives work.
That implicit promise will certainly be broken because it is a delusion in your own head.
Intrepid did not actually make the implicit promise you claim they did.
Playing almost no differently than other Tanks is also a paranoid delusion in your own head.
We'll test what the game devs implement during Alpha 2 and then provide meaningful feedback based on actual evidence.
1
MissionCreepMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
I think the problem is that people see the chart showing the archetype combos and those names (Templar, Paladin, Songbow, Nightblade, etc) really EVOKE a sense of flavor and uniqueness. If the multi-class system doesnt deliver on those expectations its going to leave a lot of players feeling disappointed.
It's not going to work out to be 64 classes. Even if it was supposed to work like that when they launched the Kickstarter (and I don't believe it really was) as soon as they started doing the actual coding and design work, they would have figured out that was impossible almost immediately. Or realized that it would have cost them another year and another $10 million to implement as such.
Even aside from that, just imagine localizing (ergo, translating) this into multiple languages; it was literally the first thing I thought of when I saw that 8x8 seven years ago or whenever it was. There's no way those special words were going to end up as much more than flavor.
Flavor isn't exactly the word, though, obviously it has an effect; it just doesn't have an effect that merits its own special title.
It would be like having a special class/archetype title for each variety of mage: Lightning, cold, etc. Sure, you could do that, but once you start doing that, where do you draw the line at saying that any given build decision creates a new "class?" What if you're AoE versus single-target? Instant versus DoT? DPS versus control?
Does every build get it's own class designation?
Ashes doesn't exist yet. Its an idea that is still being formulated. You don't know what Ashes plays like or feels like because you have never played it or felt it.
And we won't know until the game devs implement Steven's vision and we get a chance to test it.
Go make a Kickstarter, like Steven did, if you want to play your vision instead of Steven's vision.
You don't have a monopoly on what the game is or should be.
But, Steven did. And it's his game that I backed. So, I want to be able to test his vision.
Then we can give meaningful feedback about what we would like to have tweaked.
I want the game to be good. I want the class system (arguably the most important system of them all) to be the best class system we have ever had in an MMO. I don't want the developers to stop innovating and iterating. I want them to use every scrap of design space available to them. I want a class system SO GOOD that both you and I can get exactly what we want out of it.
Yep. Everyone -including the very experienced Intrepid game devs want the game to be good.
If you think you've got more to offer, convince Steven to hire you as a game dev for Ashes and see if they will adopt your ideas.
I dunno why think the dev team will stop innovating and iterating if they don't embrace your ideas.
You like augments? Cool so do I. Lets do that. But if they can do augments AND make each of the 64 sub-types feel unique and flavorful, WHY ON EARTH would you not want both?
They are already giving us both - as far as I know.
Of course, that depends on what, exactly, you mean by "unique".
So basically you want everyone to shut up and wait until the game is so far into development that its too late to course correct and THEN give feedback?
He wants everyone to actually see or experience the system, and then give feedback on it to Intrepid.
Right now, we have nothing but speculation, and misinterpretation of what little info we have.
So the best option right now is to see how Intrepid want to implement the system, which means we need more information, and we need to see how it is going to work.
Then we can provide feedback, ask for it to be revamped, or whatever else in any case it's not good or you can let them know if you don't like it.
The Theme of a game is it's superficial visual and narratives, the game has a 'high fantasy' theme which is a well established set of tropes, Paladins and many other types of specialized combatants are a well established part of that theme, any creative medium which uses the name Paladin is invoking this theme the same as when they use the word 'magic' or 'orc', this carries an implicit promise to the audiance.
If you are going to say that the these is the superficial elements of the game (a notion I mostly agree with), there there is nothing at all in the current class system that prevents a Paladin in Ashes from having the same basic theme (superficial elements) as a Paladin in any other IP.
However, your premise that just because something has a "theme" it needs to conform to the same basic principles as other IP's in that same theme is flawed. Tolkien and Elder scrolls Orcs (to use an example you gave) are VERY different from each other, as is magic in each IP (to use the other example you gave).
How about this take, I’m pretty aware of what the design intention of the augment system is and I’m fairly certain classic and modern mmorpg players will be dissapointed if their character can’t be “unique”ly different from other same-primary, different secondary class combos. And I’m talking more than just a little difference in their charge stats, or they apply a new debuff, etc. Not every ability needs to transform in a grand way, but I’ve seen a lot of sentiment about wanting some unique class fantasies from the second archetype.
Also @Dygz you sound incredibly patronizing. The amount of people closely following ashes right now is like 1% of the players that will end up touching the game on or by launch. There will be a lot of people coming from genres that depict paladins as Holy warriors/light warriors. You’re being incredibly disingenuous about the general populace’s thought on that “class”. Could you even list 3 RPGs that a paladin does not have connections to a warrior aligned with Light or Order or Religion? Thats what that guy said.
Not every ability needs to transform in a grand way, but I’ve seen a lot of sentiment about wanting some unique class fantasies from the second archetype.
My assumption is that a good amount of this will come from the store.
What most people want (even if they don't know) is that they want their class to look a specific way. It's largely a cosmetic thing.
This is - to me - the thing that makes the most sense. Some people will want their Paladin to be all about light, order, good, what ever - but some will want the fallen paladin aesthetic. Both desires are equally valid, but both can't exist without requiring the player to make a concious choice.
Since we know a good amount of the games cosmetics will be sold on the store (not all, just a good amount), having spell effects packs there as well only makes sense.
How about this take, I’m pretty aware of what the design intention of the augment system is and I’m fairly certain classic and modern mmorpg players will be dissapointed if their character can’t be “unique”ly different from other same-primary, different secondary class combos. And I’m talking more than just a little difference in their charge stats, or they apply a new debuff, etc. Not every ability needs to transform in a grand way, but I’ve seen a lot of sentiment about wanting some unique class fantasies from the second archetype.
Also @Dygz you sound incredibly patronizing. The amount of people closely following ashes right now is like 1% of the players that will end up touching the game on or by launch. There will be a lot of people coming from genres that depict paladins as Holy warriors/light warriors. You’re being incredibly disingenuous about the general populace’s thought on that “class”. Could you even list 3 RPGs that a paladin does not have connections to a warrior aligned with Light or Order or Religion? Thats what that guy said.
When u augment a skill and it has a change to it in the effect and the look of it, matching the class fantasy. That is the only thing people will care about. The 99% not following the game will accept paladin for what it is so long as it matches that.
It is only that .0000000000000000000001% that is trying to use that as a argument for changing something they dont really know how the details on how things will be, or thinking the devs can't do it.
This is why you see them trying to use language of "the masses" even though the masses are not caring or watching right now. So long as the end result is good and make sense is the only thing the masses will care about.
If you are going to say that the these is the superficial elements of the game (a notion I mostly agree with), there there is nothing at all in the current class system that prevents a Paladin in Ashes from having the same basic theme (superficial elements) as a Paladin in any other IP.
However, your premise that just because something has a "theme" it needs to conform to the same basic principles as other IP's in that same theme is flawed. Tolkien and Elder scrolls Orcs (to use an example you gave) are VERY different from each other, as is magic in each IP (to use the other example you gave).
It sounds like you didn't read my second paragraph where I specifically said "The best solution is to have a modest twist on the basic theme, such as Ashes Asian hairstyle and face structure themed orcs. Enouch classic elements to fufill the promise but enough innovation to be intereting and people are more forgiving of unmet expectations when it looks like effort was expended then when it wasn't.". ESO Orcs and magic would be an example of exactly what I recomended.
Applying that logic to the Paladin or other classes, variation would be encouraged. But if the gap between expectation and delivery is from the fact that the augment system just dosn't produce much gameplay distinction between Tanks then the reaction will be much more negative because it's percived as low-effort rather then innovation that missed the mark.
D&D bastardized the historical Paladin and what it means. A Paladin is a fighter. The difference between a regular fighter and a Paladin is character. Character is up to the player. The other historical context is being one of the peers of Charlemagne.
I remember a lot of people in D&D absolutely hated playing with a Paladin. First because they were Lawful Stupid. Second, because they tended to limit what other players wanted to do.
0
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
How I sound to you is irrelevant.
Facts are facts.
But, I'd say that the OP claiming to know how to design the Augment system better than the Creative Director before the OP has tested the feature is the epitome of patronizing.
And, yep, Steven and the devs have made it very clear that the Ashes take on Classes is unique.
If people take the time to read about Ashes, they should know that the system is non-standard.
And then decide if they want to try it out or not.
Comments
I dont wan't to know what you think Intrepid will tell you a Highsword is. I want you to IMAGINE what you think a Highsword is and describe it to me.
This sound like a more you issue with overhype.
What is it like to be born with a terminal lack of imagination?
This sound more like an issue of you not answering the question
But it's also true that every studio arranges the classes in their own way, more or less faithfully to D&D.
Still, a Paladin is not a mixture of Cleric and Tank. I'm not going to reopen the debate on the Tank archetype, which is a crappy name. But a Paladin is rather a mix of Cleric and Fighter/warrior (classic STR, CONST, WIS).
But since Intrepid already didn't have enough imagination to come up with a name other than Tank, I realized that I should avoid asking too much of them in terms of storytelling and concentrate on the mechanics of the classes before judging them.
What is a Paladin in AOC ? In AOC a Paladin is a damn Cleric, so a Paladin is a Christian at the top of damn Clergy.
How ?
A Paladin is a Christian if it's a Cleric.
If I understood your point of view, Intrepid should sell a dictionary with the game because they reinvent a new definition for every word?
Those players should pay subscription based on what they see in the game not on wiki.
The wiki will also change a lot meanwhile but the game is important.
If you think about the alpha 2 key owners, the feeling of disappointment is a risk at this moment for anyone paying for it and should know that big changes happened in the past, the deep ocean was added, freeholds became limited, node specific currencies were added... But you should know that because
To me, the people that lack imagination in regards to this discussion are the people that want classes in Ashes to remind them of classes of the same name that they have played in other MMORPG's.
That is a complete lack of imagination - it is literally wanting the same thing you used to have. At least with Dygz, he is willing to be open to what Intrepid come up with.
You musn't be afraid to dream a little bigger darling.
Ashes of Creation has a chance at true greatness if they manage to nail the archetype system they are proposing. The people talking about class fantasy and unique gameplay elements for each sub-type are just trying to help Intrepid hit the mark.
I don't think anyone wants Ashes Paladin to be exactly like WoW Paladin, they just want to make sure that Paladin is distinct from the other Tank/X archetypes. And even though I have suggested things that are outside the bounds of the Augment system that doesn't mean that I think they should scrap it.
I am of the opinion that I want Ashes to play and feel like Ashes - not WoW, ESO, FFXIV, or anything else.
Threads like this - people complaining that Ashes class system probably doesn't allow for their class fantasy - are literally saying that they want this game to remind them of what they have previously played (or watched, or read), as opposed to wanting this game to be itself. Even if you are claiming that you just want each class to play different - that is still you not accepting Ashes for what it is.
Ashes is what Ashes is. the way to "move forward" is not to suggest Ashes needs to change, but rather for people to accept the game for what it is.
Basically, it isn't Ashes that needs to change, it's you.
Ashes doesn't exist yet. Its an idea that is still being formulated. You don't know what Ashes plays like or feels like because you have never played it or felt it.
You don't have a monopoly on what the game is or should be.
I want the game to be good. I want the class system (arguably the most important system of them all) to be the best class system we have ever had in an MMO. I don't want the developers to stop innovating and iterating. I want them to use every scrap of design space available to them. I want a class system SO GOOD that both you and I can get exactly what we want out of it.
You like augments? Cool so do I. Lets do that. But if they can do augments AND make each of the 64 sub-types feel unique and flavorful, WHY ON EARTH would you not want both?
Go make a Kickstarter, like Steven did, if you want to play your vision instead of Steven's vision.
But, Steven did. And it's his game that I backed. So, I want to be able to test his vision.
Then we can give meaningful feedback about what we would like to have tweaked.
Yep. Everyone -including the very experienced Intrepid game devs want the game to be good.
If you think you've got more to offer, convince Steven to hire you as a game dev for Ashes and see if they will adopt your ideas.
I dunno why think the dev team will stop innovating and iterating if they don't embrace your ideas.
They are already giving us both - as far as I know.
Of course, that depends on what, exactly, you mean by "unique".
Since Steven decided to use his imagination rather than be a sheep...
(there, i fixed it for you)
In the Ashes game setting, a Paladin is the combo of Cleric Primary Archetype and Tank Secondary Archetype. Christians are not part of the Ashes setting.
Paladins are devoted to and gain Divine Powers from their patron deities.
In D&D 3E - 5E, Paladins can be Holy or Unholy, depending on their patron deity.
In Ashes, a Paladin can wield Radiant or Shadow Damage. Ashes also has a "twisted path" that Paladins (really any player) can pursue.
I doubt they will sell their glossary of terms as a separate product, but yes, Steven and Intrepid have some non-standard definitions. Remember that dictionaries simply report the way words are used - which is why there is language drift over time.
That's who we get to scenarios like:
"What would you like to drink?"
"I'd like a Coke, please."
"What kind of coke would you like? We have Pepsi, Fanta Orange, Fanta Grape, Dr. Pepper and 7-Up."
Thank you for proving my point
So basically you want everyone to shut up and wait until the game is so far into development that its too late to course correct and THEN give feedback?
Expect most people here to tell you that you should not expect Intrepid to add any of your suggestions until we have had a chance to test what the game devs implement during Alpha 2.
"So far into devdelopment..." appears to be your own internal fear that really has nothing to do with the way Intrepid has been working.
Ok first off you need to differentiate several things.
The Theme of a game is it's superficial visual and narratives, the game has a 'high fantasy' theme which is a well established set of tropes, Paladins and many other types of specialized combatants are a well established part of that theme, any creative medium which uses the name Paladin is invoking this theme the same as when they use the word 'magic' or 'orc', this carries an implicit promise to the audiance.
That promise will be broken if the delivery falls far short of expectations. For example if you say your game has orc and they are just the normal humans model with green skin then audiances will be rightly pissed because they percive low effort work being over-sold. But at the same time audiances do crave newness so a depections of orcs which looked exactly like WoW orcs would be mildly disapointing and called uncreative. The best solution is to have a modest twist on the basic theme, such as Ashes Asian hairstyle and face structure themed orcs. Enouch classic elements to fufill the promise but enough innovation to be intereting and people are more forgiving of unmet expectations when it looks like effort was expended then when it wasn't.
How something 'plays' in a game is very seperate from it's theme. Look at the Tanks in overwatch, their themes are all over the place and the play is also unique due to differences in skill and weapon kits, but it's also all under the umbrella of Tank which is role. Thematic regidity that would be expected of a Paladin would be enough to confine them to a Tank role or at very fringes a very tanky fighter. But it's not so narrow that it makes every paladin in every game play the same. Some commonality of many games implementation of Paladins is that they are more shield centric then other tanks, that's a good start for making AoC's Paladin unique amoungst it's fellow tank varients.
In a game which uses branching character development one will invariably compare a Paladin with it's base classes and alternative branching options. If these comparisons are poor such as a Paladin playing almost no differently then the other tanks then it will be the worst outcome because it will be percived as low effort failure. And that should be avoided at all costs.
Tell us you don't know how creative narratives work without telling us you don't know how creative narratives work.
That implicit promise will certainly be broken because it is a delusion in your own head.
Intrepid did not actually make the implicit promise you claim they did.
Playing almost no differently than other Tanks is also a paranoid delusion in your own head.
We'll test what the game devs implement during Alpha 2 and then provide meaningful feedback based on actual evidence.
It's not going to work out to be 64 classes. Even if it was supposed to work like that when they launched the Kickstarter (and I don't believe it really was) as soon as they started doing the actual coding and design work, they would have figured out that was impossible almost immediately. Or realized that it would have cost them another year and another $10 million to implement as such.
Even aside from that, just imagine localizing (ergo, translating) this into multiple languages; it was literally the first thing I thought of when I saw that 8x8 seven years ago or whenever it was. There's no way those special words were going to end up as much more than flavor.
Flavor isn't exactly the word, though, obviously it has an effect; it just doesn't have an effect that merits its own special title.
It would be like having a special class/archetype title for each variety of mage: Lightning, cold, etc. Sure, you could do that, but once you start doing that, where do you draw the line at saying that any given build decision creates a new "class?" What if you're AoE versus single-target? Instant versus DoT? DPS versus control?
Does every build get it's own class designation?
He wants everyone to actually see or experience the system, and then give feedback on it to Intrepid.
Right now, we have nothing but speculation, and misinterpretation of what little info we have.
So the best option right now is to see how Intrepid want to implement the system, which means we need more information, and we need to see how it is going to work.
Then we can provide feedback, ask for it to be revamped, or whatever else in any case it's not good or you can let them know if you don't like it.
However, your premise that just because something has a "theme" it needs to conform to the same basic principles as other IP's in that same theme is flawed. Tolkien and Elder scrolls Orcs (to use an example you gave) are VERY different from each other, as is magic in each IP (to use the other example you gave).
Also @Dygz you sound incredibly patronizing. The amount of people closely following ashes right now is like 1% of the players that will end up touching the game on or by launch. There will be a lot of people coming from genres that depict paladins as Holy warriors/light warriors. You’re being incredibly disingenuous about the general populace’s thought on that “class”. Could you even list 3 RPGs that a paladin does not have connections to a warrior aligned with Light or Order or Religion? Thats what that guy said.
What most people want (even if they don't know) is that they want their class to look a specific way. It's largely a cosmetic thing.
This is - to me - the thing that makes the most sense. Some people will want their Paladin to be all about light, order, good, what ever - but some will want the fallen paladin aesthetic. Both desires are equally valid, but both can't exist without requiring the player to make a concious choice.
Since we know a good amount of the games cosmetics will be sold on the store (not all, just a good amount), having spell effects packs there as well only makes sense.
When u augment a skill and it has a change to it in the effect and the look of it, matching the class fantasy. That is the only thing people will care about. The 99% not following the game will accept paladin for what it is so long as it matches that.
It is only that .0000000000000000000001% that is trying to use that as a argument for changing something they dont really know how the details on how things will be, or thinking the devs can't do it.
This is why you see them trying to use language of "the masses" even though the masses are not caring or watching right now. So long as the end result is good and make sense is the only thing the masses will care about.
It sounds like you didn't read my second paragraph where I specifically said "The best solution is to have a modest twist on the basic theme, such as Ashes Asian hairstyle and face structure themed orcs. Enouch classic elements to fufill the promise but enough innovation to be intereting and people are more forgiving of unmet expectations when it looks like effort was expended then when it wasn't.". ESO Orcs and magic would be an example of exactly what I recomended.
Applying that logic to the Paladin or other classes, variation would be encouraged. But if the gap between expectation and delivery is from the fact that the augment system just dosn't produce much gameplay distinction between Tanks then the reaction will be much more negative because it's percived as low-effort rather then innovation that missed the mark.
I remember a lot of people in D&D absolutely hated playing with a Paladin. First because they were Lawful Stupid. Second, because they tended to limit what other players wanted to do.
Facts are facts.
But, I'd say that the OP claiming to know how to design the Augment system better than the Creative Director before the OP has tested the feature is the epitome of patronizing.
And, yep, Steven and the devs have made it very clear that the Ashes take on Classes is unique.
If people take the time to read about Ashes, they should know that the system is non-standard.
And then decide if they want to try it out or not.