Down time and res, can more classes have this skill?

Having one healer in the game also means down time, out of combat reses can cause fatigue to Healers. Most MMOs give other classes out of combat reses. With no fast travel this will be even more important IMO.

My thought it Bards should have at least an out of combat res. Maybe even when people pick their secondary class of Cleric, maybe they also can have an out of combat res.

I have been in games where resing is limited to one class. Mending mana and chain casting res after a wip, is not fun for anyone. Thoughts?

Edit: this will also help people that have a team of not a fully balanced team. This would make that play style viable as well.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Azherae

Remember that we're supposed to have items as an option for this.

At that point it just becomes part of the preparation Risk/Reward schema. You can risk not taking your equivalent of https://ffxiclopedia.fandom.com/wiki/Reraiser or whatever because it's expensive or takes long to get, and then face the consequences if something happens...

Or you can 'know you are going into a dangerous situation and prepare accordingly'. I don't know if it suits the current target audience to have to rely on everyone to actually be prepared rather than 'just gathering the right grouping', but I would say it does fit with the established design philosophy so far, to have people rely on items to fill the gaps when the Cleric is exhausted.

Lodrig

Is the goal to save the Cleric time, to save the group time or to remove the requirement for a cleric in every group to do an out of combat res?

If the first or second goal then let the Cleric do a group res, maybe they have to individually touch each victim while channeling a spell that will be lost on taking any damage and then finising the cast will resurect everyone. This basically sets a bar to establish that combat has actually ended to access a more efficient mass res.

If the second or third then adding some kind of out of combat res to other classes is a solution. I would not restrict it to the Bard though as that just makes that class another mandatory one. Give it to everyone but make it slow and very limited, maybe it would require multiple characters to collectivly channel to get any kind of reasonable speed like 5 minutes/channelers so 7 people can res 1 person in 43 second, but their is no way anyones gonna do it in combat. But it is an option to recover if my group is moving around without a cleric and someone gets ganked randomly (or if we only have 1 cleric and THEY are the one which gets ganked, cause lets be honest that's who will be targeted). And I do not like the idea that every group needs 2 clerics, as much as Steven might love that.

Otr

I would like the other class to be the summoner. Basically summoning the player soul back into is it's body.

rollox

Otr wrote: »

I would like the other class to be the summoner. Basically summoning the player soul back into is it's body.

Exactly what I was thinking. Summoner would have an out of combat rez. Along with having to not have any summons active. This I like the sound of.

Lodrig

No, if your gonna introduce an out of combat rez DO NOT restrict it to just one archetype, that wold be incredibly stupid as your just mandating that second archetype also be in the party. If it exists for any archetype other then clerics then it shold exist for all.

Apok

This is what you call streamlining, it makes a lot of modern games suck which is why this game got backed in the first place

Smaashley

The same question as why there is only one healer ? There are so many ways to heal in a game. Of course some other class shouod be able to revive, but differently.

Apok

Smaashley wrote: »

The same question as why there is only one healer ? There are so many ways to heal in a game. Of course some other class shouod be able to revive, but differently.

well if you think about it, there's only so much you can do for abilities. you can play with cool downs, areas, heal/damage over time, shields, buffs, etc. but there's only so much you can do. It would make more sense to pack that into one archetype and let the players choose their play style.

question is are we going to be able to tweak and build around these play styles. can we build a healer who applies shields with a focus on getting the biggest possible shield on someone or a heal over time, crit, aoe healer etc.

Smaashley

Apok wrote: »

Smaashley wrote: »

The same question as why there is only one healer ? There are so many ways to heal in a game. Of course some other class shouod be able to revive, but differently.

well if you think about it, there's only so much you can do for abilities. you can play with cool downs, areas, heal/damage over time, shields, buffs, etc. but there's only so much you can do. It would make more sense to pack that into one archetype and let the players choose their play style.

question is are we going to be able to tweak and build around these play styles. can we build a healer who applies shields with a focus on getting the biggest possible shield on someone or a heal over time, crit, aoe healer etc.

I agree. But exactly what I meant is why there is only one archetype that can heal while others could also do it with what they are known for in their lore ? For example, necromancers can suck the soul/blood out of their victim to give it back to parry members as HP overtime/% regen. I know there isn't necromancer in AoC but I'm sure it could fit well another archetype.

Apok

Smaashley wrote: »

Apok wrote: »

Smaashley wrote: »

The same question as why there is only one healer ? There are so many ways to heal in a game. Of course some other class shouod be able to revive, but differently.

well if you think about it, there's only so much you can do for abilities. you can play with cool downs, areas, heal/damage over time, shields, buffs, etc. but there's only so much you can do. It would make more sense to pack that into one archetype and let the players choose their play style.

question is are we going to be able to tweak and build around these play styles. can we build a healer who applies shields with a focus on getting the biggest possible shield on someone or a heal over time, crit, aoe healer etc.

I agree. But exactly what I meant is why there is only one archetype that can heal while others could also do it with what they are known for in their lore ? For example, necromancers can suck the soul/blood out of their victim to give it back to parry members as HP overtime/% regen. I know there isn't necromancer in AoC but I'm sure it could fit well another archetype.

Necro is summoner + cleric, cleric will spec into both light and dark magic. I think cleric will have some leeching abilities too. gonna have to check the video again for it

nanfoodle

Apok wrote: »

Smaashley wrote: »

Apok wrote: »

Smaashley wrote: »

The same question as why there is only one healer ? There are so many ways to heal in a game. Of course some other class shouod be able to revive, but differently.

well if you think about it, there's only so much you can do for abilities. you can play with cool downs, areas, heal/damage over time, shields, buffs, etc. but there's only so much you can do. It would make more sense to pack that into one archetype and let the players choose their play style.

question is are we going to be able to tweak and build around these play styles. can we build a healer who applies shields with a focus on getting the biggest possible shield on someone or a heal over time, crit, aoe healer etc.

I agree. But exactly what I meant is why there is only one archetype that can heal while others could also do it with what they are known for in their lore ? For example, necromancers can suck the soul/blood out of their victim to give it back to parry members as HP overtime/% regen. I know there isn't necromancer in AoC but I'm sure it could fit well another archetype.

Necro is summoner + cleric, cleric will spec into both light and dark magic. I think cleric will have some leeching abilities too. gonna have to check the video again for it

A class that plays with life and death would be a good move for another class having a e's IMO. I also think the summer would be a good choice as well. IMO we do need 2-3 options for out of combat rss. Without it, it would be really hard to make teams when there is no Clerics. Life is not perfect, we won't always have balanced teams.

Depraved

i like no res better. less abuses in pvp

Vargan

Lineage 2 had the consumable item "Scroll of Resurrection" that anybody could use, in and out of combat. The downsides were that it had a long casting time (~30s) and could be interrupted by CC.
I wouldn't mind seeing a form of that implemented in Ashes. Preferably obtainable through the Artisan system (Alchemy?).

Depraved

Hurst wrote: »

Lineage 2 had the consumable item "Scroll of Resurrection" that anybody could use, in and out of combat. The downsides were that it had a long casting time (~30s) and could be interrupted by CC.
I wouldn't mind seeing a form of that implemented in Ashes. Preferably obtainable through the Artisan system (Alchemy?).

yeah but bres was too op. also, bp, ee, see and pp could res u almost instantly if fully buffed ( you were useless tho if no noble).

there's probs gonna be res items in aoc, but you probably shouldn't be able to just jump back in action almost instantly after a res and basically undo and erase all the effort the enemies put into killing you.

nanfoodle

I think a class or scroll that does out of combat res should follow a rule that you come back lower health then a Cleric out of combat res and should have a long cast time as well. I like the idea of a scroll tied to that as well. Would limit how many times that can be done. Also would be a good way for crafters to make some money.

Child Item