Dev Discussion #18 - Class Demarcation

124

Comments

  • greyfiregreyfire Member, Phoenix Initiative, Royalty
    I personally dont't like it when everyone can do everything. Therefore i think a specialist for the specific role is the way to got.

    So in this case we got the 8 archetypes who each have a role and now we augment it with the second choice.
    This could be a Fighter choosing a Tank as a secondary and we now have the "Dreadnought" class.

    The Fighter should be the should now be a Fighter who is slighty more tanky. How much this is, is up to Intrepid, but i think it should not be so much that they can replace a pirmary Tank, but still noticeable.
    It will be hard to balance everything.

    I also dont think that every class should get a infight heal, especially a damage dealer. The only exception in this case is, if they choose a secondary which can heal. Infight healing should be the job of the healer classes and for a emergency a poition. (Crafting should also be important in fights with support items in my opinion.)

    And if a class can do every thing they should be a jack of all trades, but master on none.

    Greetings

    Greyfire
  • tremtrem Member, Leader of Men
    Well I would rather have, that I could switch all the classes on my character, not just the subclasses. But it would be bound to a certain place. For example in big cities, at an NPC or something like a runestone or temple. That would eliminate the "on the fly" class swapping. It would be similar to switching to an alt, perhaps even more time consuming, but still a cool option.
    Because of the racials, people who want to minmax would have to create alts anyhow, but it would be nice to be able to play all the classen on one character if I so chose, it would feel more free.
  • smee86smee86 Member
    Oh and what would be really neat, is if we could have augments based on the development of the node we are citizens of.
    like if it is a dwarven village we get a choice of augmentation to our smithing or something similar.
  • ilisfetilisfet Member, Braver of Worlds
    I come from games where classes are, at best, a suggestion. So, I would be more familiar with (and therefore prefer) each class being capable of as much as possible. I do understand classes have specializations, so shouldn't be masters of everything but that doesn't preclude dabbling. Classes should be capable of doing everything, but how they go about it is where they're different.

    For example, a mage levitates up to a ledge while a summoner conjures one of their aids up top then swaps places with them, meanwhile a rogue scrambles up the wall and a ranger uses a consumable item. The end result is all the same: reaching the high ground, but the methods are all different.
  • consultantconsultant Member
    edited May 10
    Is it role necessary
    I think you should be thinking in terms of a need for role in live runs. What happens when the rubber meets the road.

    In a wow heroic dungeon with gear only from that dungeouns or appropirate gear what is the dps role. Well I tanked and all I really needed decent healer even (even novice healer was just fine just smaller pulls) and enough dps so I would not wipe. Could only tank bosses and mini bosses for so long so as a group need certain amount of dps or wipe. So did not really need stuns slows roots, As far as interupts go well I played a protection pally so had good array of abilities to interupt with. Time period is end of MoP beginning of WoD
    Plus mini bosses or boss were immune to cc.

    I also played a hunter and in PVE dps rotation in Dungeouns and Raids was just three button rotation plus Beastial wrath stampede, level 90 ability and so on point is you could get away with just pushing your dps abilities for entire dungeoun. Guessing 7 or less buttons Number of active abilities for hunter was around 59 just what I counted in the spell but does not include pet control and targeting system.

    Hunter class could do so many things through pets and had such a wide array abilities that they could do so many things close to everything. But do not like using the word everything cause in this case every thing is an infinite value cause no limit to creativity or what a class can do in a virtual world. In PvP a hunter with a full set of abilities and if he learned to use the tools in his tool kit is an immersive intricate class full of abilities that were situational so you had to learn when to use them and not waste them.

    So what I am saying even though you can make very versatile classes if there is no demand for it then it is kind of point less. Or a player may have lots of choices but not much of one.


    Now lets take a tank. Just think about if there is a tank in your group are you going to want to him to dps or do off heals. No since the tank class should be the best tanking (if not design mistake in my book) then why would a tank attempt to do any thing else. By the way Intrepid Studios made Tank class not a tank role same thing with helars made cleric class not role. So in this case it is always neccesary for tanks to tank. No point in Warrior tanking if tankis around right? They can just do it better so better for warrior to be dps and tank and healer healand that is what the Trinity is plus game already designed that way.
    I know that tank could spec out for more dps if content is easy enough but technically not necessary cause have full array of dps classes.

    I am playing League of Legends and playing Malphite so what happens in live runs. Roles in LoL go something like this your champion has a specialty but not limited to anything in particlur somewhat true.
    Well Malphite has a really cool Ultimate ability that is a long ranged charge that turns into area of affect stun. Really good for closing the gap since he is a melee champion. Works really goon for picking of players in 1v1 or 1v2 or 2v2 but in the end game it is more like 4v4 and 5v5 so when that guy charges into enemy territory even if he kills one he gets attacked instantly by other 3 or 4 teammates and dies so fast that does not do team that much good. Matter of fact could die before he kills any one. So that guy is pretty much stuck with tank build especially in higher brackets. So because his Ultimate ability puts in more danger than he like to be in better for him to just do tank build. Does he have plenty of choices yes does that matter NO

    Now was taking a look at ranger abilities looks like he has a slow, knock back, snare, and trap. So here we go....

    If mobs had morale checks and sometimes ran away in dungeouns and there was some consequence like lot less lot less experience or becomes a whistle blower point is party should let mob get away then hunter could us root ability and slow abilty.

    If knock back which is kind of a stun but not really interupted enrages and mobs would occasionally enrage then that would make knock back necessary.

    Traps stun so already pretty usefull can be used to interupt spells and enrages. But in another post said something about mobs using potions like healing potion basically making it so have to kill mob close to 2 thimes. If that potion can be ripped out of their hands when stunned or if a rogue them being pick pockets and all could use their disarm to steal potion through sleight of hand then dps class would have more to do than just dps. I am sure the devs at Intrepid Studios could come up with lot better stuff i am just presenting Ideas.

    So the big take away from this post is It is more important to have actaull in game reason to use full set of abilities in dungeouns/raids. Than having a lot of abilities and options. So you could actually have a more immersive and fun hunter in dungeons than the hunter in WoW that can do just about everything thourgh dungeouns and raid design not class design.

    Last thing I want to say is that some abilities are alot more usefull in pvp than pve just the way it goes. But want to say that if have an ability that is almost useless in either pvp or pve that ability needs to changed.
    One example was WoW hunter ability Flare useful in PvP but useless in PvE. But if abiliy couls be used to detect invisible monsters in dungeouns or light up dark light areas to see some hiding demonic bunnies and if it could be used in choke points or entrances to check ro traps on floor. Then they would have that role to play in PvE.

    Still have lot more to say but calling it good for now. Also wanted to add that it does make sense for bosses to be immune to cc but a stun could have an effect on a raid boss like next boss take 5 percent more damage for 3 seconds. This way classes that are cc heavy can use those abilities on bosses and mini bosses.
    Now you may be thinking you are talking about abilities not roles. Guessing talking about the skill augments and and abilities getting from items and how powerful they should be. Well before you start making all this roles per say and options and so on you have to create a reason for toons to do that. Have plety of options is not enough.
  • allusirallusir Member
    I really like in GW2 that each class can fill the different roles. Of course some can do it better than others, but overall as long as you have some friends, you can go to a dungeon (well.. back when dungeons were a thing in that game). There will also be a META and some people will always push to only have META team comps, but as long as I can just go where I want to go and do things and have fun, I'm happy.

    Also, I like only having one or two combat characters. Most of my alts in games (like BDO especially) are crafters, fishers, and the like.
  • edited May 11
    Question 1
    ==========
    Toast wrote:
    Should all classes be able to perform all roles expected of their archetype?

    YES !

    I believe the answer to this question should be absolutely, unequivocally yes, so much so that this is a deal-breaker for many people I know including myself. As in, if the answer ends up being no, and classes will only be able to fulfill the role of their primary archetype and not their secondary archetype at all (and that primary archetype is fixed) then I think many people will be unlikely to stay with this game long term.

    I know I personally have played too many MMO's over the past 20+ yrs, where you only had 1 role, that role was fixed and could never be changed, and there were too few classes that could do key roles (usually tank & healer). This led to major shortages of those roles, and unwanted excess of others (usually dps), huge delays trying to form groups, barriers to entry, shoe-horning people into having to play primary tanks & healers which are painful to level, etc etc.

    Most games if they do insist on using this model initially eventually realise that players these days just don't want to play games like this, and end up reversing it and allowing respeccing, multiple roles, etc etc anyway further down the track.

    Please don't do this to Ashes! It might sound like over-stating it, but I honestly believe the decision around secondary archetype viability is a critical success factor of the game. Please make secondary archetypes actually viable to fulfil their role and not just 'flavour modifiers'.

    IMPORTANT DISTINCTION 1

    It's super important to understand the distinction between saying that a) a class is able to perform a role, and b) a class is the best choice for performing that role in all circumstances. These things are not remotely the same.

    It is totally ok to say that a Tank/Tank should be the uber-tank, and if you are pushing end-game large-group content you need your primary tank(s) to be them. Other secondary tanks (Class X/Tank) should still be viable as off-tanks under certain circumstances, for not-so-challenging content, or ad-hoc small-group stuff.

    Same goes for Cleric/Cleric, this should be the uber-healer, and you won't be able to do really challenging or large group content without one (or more than one?). But for easier stuff, or small-group stuff, secondary healers (Class X/Cleric) should still be able to do it.

    IMPORTANT DISTINCTION 2

    It's super important to understand the distinction between saying that a) a class is able to perform multiple roles, and b) an individual char can be built, geared, specced to be good at multiple roles at once. These things are not remotely the same.

    It is totally ok to say that a paladin (Tank/Cleric) can be played as either a tank or a healer, and that those roles require different skills, different talents, different gear, and learning a whole new way to play. Then if someone wishes to do be able to do both, they will need to maintain multiple gearsets, multiple builds (assuming builds can even be changed?) and player skill in both roles, and EVEN THEN still cannot use more than one at any given time.

    Question 2
    ==========
    For anyone else who is also confused here is an example from Toast from the discord:
    the question is more about - say you're a cleric, and clerics can tank/heal. should you be expected to do both if you play that character, or do you want to specialize?

    (Note: I don't really understand this question since IIUC clerics are not a class they are an archetype, and they cannot tank they are the preminent healer. Now if the question had said "say you're a *PALADIN* ...." then it would make sense to me. So, assuming the question is as I have restated it, then ...)

    NO !

    Noone should be expected to play roles if they don't want to. If someone wants to play a character the way they want to play it, then that should be totally up to them to do so.

    IMPORTANT DISTINCTION 3

    It's super important to understand the distinction between saying that a) a class is able to be perform multiple roles, and b) a class that is the only healer or tank archetype in the game can choose to not perform either of those roles and still expect to be prioritised in groups. These things are not remotely the same.

    It is totally ok to say that if the game supports only 1 single archetype that can tank and only 1 that can heal (as above, please please PLEASE don't do this!), then groups are going to have to have classes with those archetypes doing those functions first and foremost in order to be viable. In that case, if someone is playing a Cleric and doesn't want to heal, that's fine if another Cleric can be found to heal, then the first Cleric can dps. However, if they can't, then that Cleric needs to either heal or there isn't a viable group.

    Side Note
    =========
    Jahlon wrote:
    No.
    All classes should not be able to perform all roles. Tanks should be tanks, Healers should be healers and Damage Dealers should be the primary source of damage.
    When you let everyone do everything you end up with meaningless classes.

    This is the most common misunderstanding of the issue IMHO. This is the equivalent of saying that (to use Wow classes as reference points) Paladins, Monks & Druids are meaningless classes because they can do everything. The truth is that these classes can choose which things they want to do from all 3 roles (as opposed to most classes which can choose from 2 roles), but cannot do more than one at a time.

    This doesn't end up with meaningless classes at all, it ends up with the majority of players picking one role and building, gearing & learning for it and sticking to it, and some who can bring the flexibility to groups to swap from one to another depending on the needs of the group, but still only doing one at a time.
  • CaelronCaelron Member, Braver of Worlds
    I definitely think all classes and roles should be different. Even within the classes themselves, there should be more and more specialized roles. Everything should have a cost and a benefit.

    As an example,
    A cleric that focuses on tanking or damage mitigation should not be able to heal nearly as effectively as if he/she focused on healing.
    Likewise, a cleric that goes pure healer, shouldn't be as effective as a tank.

    In the same way - a pure fire mage should not be able to do as much damage against a fire-resistant/immune target as a pure frost mage. Likewise, a pure fire mage should be way more effective against an ice target, and an ice mage should barely have an effect (in terms of damage). Perhaps maybe a fire mage melts the ice, whereas a frost mage can manipulate the frost within the creature, but not the same concept in terms of damage spells.

    Especially if the game ends up not allowing dps/healing meters. It makes the most sense to me to have the broadest range of variability that allow hyper-specialization even within archetypes.
    If there's a pure DPS class that's by far the best at dealing out damage, there should be some serious flaws to that class/specialization as well... like being sneezed on practically kills them. Or maybe that have zero utility somehow. Likewise, a pure tank class that barely takes damage probably won't have the best mobility, or damage, or healing... or maybe all of those things. That's totally fine!

    Without the variability, what's the point of having 8 different archetypes?
    If all of them can deal damage just as effectively as the other... what's the point?

    On the other side, though - If a mage wanted to hyper-focus (hypothetically) on defensive and shield magic and become a walking immunity bubble - basically a mage-tank. I think that's perfectly fine. And funny. But I wouldn't expect that same mage to do much damage at all.
  • blurblur Member, Founder
    edited May 11
    Caelron wrote: »
    As an example,
    A cleric that focuses on tanking or damage mitigation should not be able to heal nearly as effectively as if he/she focused on healing.
    Likewise, a cleric that goes pure healer, shouldn't be as effective as a tank.

    Absolutely correct @Caelron. This was my whole point, earlier. Otherwise, is the system just there to look interesting and draw people to the game ("Look at all these different things you can be, kids!"), but have no real application in the game itself? Because that would be really disappointing and a missed chance, I think.
  • omgreb0rnomgreb0rn Member
    Classes should be specialized. If one person can do everything you are basically a god at that point, and it does not work well in an MMO environment. MMOs are basically living another life to some people. Working together and making friends with others because i have to makes the game more enjoyable. MMOs are more about the storytelling and social aspect.That is why WoW was so successful back in the day.
  • disobedientdisobedient Member
    edited May 27
    I think filling other roles is fine but a pure should be a true pure. A person who chose cleric as their primary and anything other than cleric as their secondary, should still be able to heal, but not quite as effectively -or maybe not be able to heal as many people at once- as someone who went pure cleric/cleric. The same principle should be applied to the entire trinity system, otherwise everyone who goes primary dps will just focus tank or cleric as their secondary because it doesn't dilute their potential damage enough. There should be clear opportunity costs in picking classes.
  • MorashtakMorashtak Member, Braver of Worlds
    Homogenization of classes is not what I am looking for in an MMO - Tanks tank, healers heal, DPS deal damage, support classes buff/de-buff.

    Example; a Cleric that augments their main class by taking the Tank augment should not become a Tank; the augment is only an augment. The Cleric may be a bit beefier but should not be able to soak/deflect damage in the exact manner a tank/whatever can. The Cleric/Tank might be able to off-tank in an emergency but only in a brief amount of time and will be very limited in tanking abilities.

    Augmenting the main class is only augmenting, not changing the main class into the secondary. Go slow with augment abilities; start with very few changes, very few abilities, and small stat changes. As the devs gather feedback from the players in Alpha and Beta the stats/abilities can be slowly adjusted to best fit the combo that the design docs were expressing.
    owuEH4S.png
  • SarevokSarevok Member
    edited May 13
    I may be crazy but what if a Cleric/Cleric or a Tank/Tank was no different than any other Cleric/X or Tank/X but it only came down to how the secondary augment adjusted your primary archetype's abilities. In other words, the secondary augment only made your abilities different in some shape or form but not weaker than say a "pure" Tank/Tank or Cleric/Cleric?

    What if this whole time we were thinking Tank/Tank was going to be the ideal main tank for raids when in actuality the secondary augment was only just a little spice to our primary archetype skills?

    Then it just comes down to the playerstyle of the player and what they enjoy...
    Looking for a future PvP guild in AoC? Want to learn from vets and git-gud? Check us out at http://www.fml-guild.com/
    w2QE7gN.png
  • ireriireri Member
    Every choice should have consequences. Each class should be good at something to the detriment of other areas of expertise. The classes allow folks to choose what fits their play style. Whatever they choose for their path, their other abilities should be markedly less proficient. I always play a healer so my examples relate to that. How the healing is done should be reflected in the class chosen.
    Class one focus: single target burst healing
    Class two focus: single target HoTs
    Class three focus: AOE burst healing
    Class four focus: AOE HoTs
    Class five focus: heals that produce little agro
    Class six focus: heals that occur based on dmg taken
    Class seven focus: heals that travel between party members
    Class eight focus: fast revival of players upon death
  • I honestly don't like the trinity setup much.

    I like classes playing niche roles, but I feel the trinity makes it way to unbalanced in group dynamics.

    You only need 1 tank in a group, which makes it harder to find groups as a tank. Having 8 man groups only exaggerates that issue. There's no reason to sacrifice a player slot for a second tank that won't do as much damage as another DPS focused character. You only need 1 healer as well, and again that makes finding groups tough. DPS becomes the most popular choice simply because you ALWAYS need more DPS.

    So if each class had a specialty role, but could perform other roles in addition to their specialty based on their secondary class, that would likely be best.

    Trickster buffs/debuffs, but also does considerable damage. Paladin controls the battlefield, but also heals themselves and allies. Juggernaut deals immense damage, but also controls the battlefield.

    With an effective 64 classes to play with, you need a more modular method to diversify the game play. Not all Bard classes should "Bard" the same way. Some should jump into melee combat and mix it up with the enemy directly, others should hold a middle ground and play music. You absolutely will have players who want to play either style (or both).

    I'm always looking for classes that make me do more than just one thing, because I love versatility in a class. However, that's me. Not everyone is me. So I'd look for ways to allow for both specialization AND versatility to be equally effective based on circumstance.
  • Personally I love how much variety is in games like GW2 and ESO, there are limits from the classes but merely based on the imagination of the creator and the player who maneuvers it. Making my character my own to some extent even in that way, rather than just having some rotation to repeat for every fight like FFXIV and WOW. It's part of the thing I have the most fun within MMOs, however, due to what's already there with the class system, I would say that's not viable.

    What would make the most sense to me, is to have the Primary class as the overarching theme or focus. For Example, the Fighter is a close-ranged melee-focused class, but then the secondary class sort of fulfills the role per se and augments the base abilities to fit the role. In this example a Fighter/Bard like the Bladedancer might be a support for the other close-ranged players, making it a Support class that actually on the front lines. In this case, the Bladedancer's damage scaling would theoretically not be as much as say a Fighter/Fighter like the Weaponmaster. This would give player freedom, and it would even help further with people knowing what they are getting in general, all without changing the already established system too much.

    Personally I love skill trees, but since I am not really sure how bad it would be on the development side for work, not sure if it would be possible, but it would be even cooler if each type maybe had even something so small as a Specialization from GW2 that affected the abilities in different ways within the roles, to even not make the Meta so stagnant in the endgame as well. They had a pretty simple formula for each specialization where it was 3 required passives, and then 3 sets of 3 choices of rising degrees of impact to give them other passives, ending up with every specialization having 6 different passives turned on at any one point in time. In this case, it would be cool if there were Primary class passives, but also Secondary class passives, but again not sure how extensive or hard this would be.

    There would still be the seeming four types that the company is going for like Support, Healer, Tank, and Damage, but more determined by the Secondary class, while the theme and base abilities being determined by the Primary Class. However, there would be limits and would make the Meta flow and change more, as players find the way they want to play their class. Due to the Primary Class Lock, this would also lessen the number of alts one felt the need to actually bring to the table as well. In some ways, this would be similar to the class change mechanic of FFXIV and if the Elite Specialization mechanic of GW2, then decided to have a baby.
  • RepkarRepkar Member, Founder
    AntVictus wrote: »
    No. This was an issue we ran into in ESO, nightblades (rogues essentially) could tank, sorcs could tank, templars could tank, every damn class can tank. Same with healing, same with dmg. The whole concept of a role ie: tank, healer, dps, support encompasses a class and gives it an identity. So when you let every class do the same stuff, there is no class identity...might as well not even have classes at that point and just call everyone rocks.

    Feel free to say i'm wrong or whatever but, there should never be a situation in which any class can do everything, or two things equally. This comes down to the skills that are given to those classes, as well as other underlying factors, aggro generation and the ability to retain it or mitigate it, etc. So no, a rogue with a secondary as tank should not be able to tank, neither should a mage with the second of tank. The only tanks, should be tank primaries.

    Personally, I hate the trinity. As a tank in wow, I would love to effectively PVP with my mate as a tank, but I will never be as effective as a dps (current gear excluded, Blizzard said they screwed up.) Same goes with a healer, I love the GW2 thinking where pretty much everyone can support everyone, sure this may lead to a "meta" but when you have so many classes in a game with no calculators, can there really be a meta? As far as class identity, I don't think the role should ever define the identity. A ranger "tank" using their pet to tank the fight and focusing on healing and protecting their pets is way different than a warrior holding up a shield to block, or a mage casting shield spells to protect or slowing spells to kite.
  • grisugrisu Member
    If it's just about a single class, then I think I should be able to redo my choice
    If I play a Ranger and have the option to specialize into meele/traps/utility/offtanking or into range/burstdps/aoe I think I do want to specialize into one of it, but have the ability to redo my choice and experience a different play style.
    I don't think I should be able to do both at any given point of time with 100% effectiveness, but as said if I choose to go range today instead of meele, I would want to be able to switch.

    I'm not entirely sure I understood this times question, but that's how I feel about it.
    I can be a life fulfilling dream. Grisu
    I can be a life devouring nightmare. Zekece#1819
  • CaelronCaelron Member, Braver of Worlds
    Sarevok wrote: »
    I may be crazy but what if a Cleric/Cleric or a Tank/Tank was no different than any other Cleric/X or Tank/X but it only came down to how the secondary augment adjusted your primary archetype's abilities. In other words, the secondary augment only made your abilities different in some shape or form but not weaker than say a "pure" Tank/Tank or Cleric/Cleric?

    What if this whole time we were thinking Tank/Tank was going to be the ideal main tank for raids when in actuality the secondary augment was only just a little spice to our primary archetype skills?

    Then it just comes down to the playerstyle of the player and what they enjoy...

    I understand what you're saying, and I agree in the generic principle, but not overall.

    For example,
    Tank/Tank - Should specialize in being the best physical damage mitigation tank. Possibly all types of damage, but especially physical, since the class doesn't seem to have innate magical ability.
    Tank/Fighter - Should specialize in mitigating damage as well as parries, sword skills, etc. Not necessarily pure armor.
    Tank/Rogue - Mitigates damage, but more tries to focus on dodging the damage than pure mitigation. Perhaps related to concealment and ways to force the enemy to miss.
    Tank/Ranger - Perhaps focuses more on knockbacks, traps, or other various crowd control abilities. Maybe environmental or animal companion related.
    Tank/Mage - Uses magic to bolster his defenses. Perhaps could be the most versatile, since magic can be augmented in any way. Maybe buffs damage mitigation like a Tank/Tank, or focuses more on mitigating magical damage. Or maybe applies magic to focus more on aoe-tanking instead of single-target.
    ...
    Etc.

    Using that as an illustration. We don't know how the secondary classes affect the primary, nor do we know how the other augments to abilities will affect the class, skills, etc. Some might be purely cosmetic. I just happen to think that it should also change the function, making it more specific. A tank/tank focused primarily on physical damage would not be the same as a tank/mage that focuses on mitigating magical damage.

    But there 'is' the possibility that it's just cosmetic for primary skills as well. Steven gave the example of a Fighter charge. A fighter/fighter might charge fast to the enemy whereas a Fighter/Mage might do a short teleport instead. Exact same ability, potentially the exact same damage, time-to-target, etc. There might even be boosts to the abilities that match. A fighter/fighter would get a little bonus damage, since his momentum adds velocity to the charge, whereas a fighter/mage teleport might surprise the enemy and get a small bonus to damage, or a better chance to hit (like a "surprise attack" in D&D where someone is ignored their Dex bonus to AC).
  • LieutenantToastLieutenantToast Moderator, Staff
    Thanks all for sharing your thoughts on this latest Dev Discussion! I'm gathering your notes up now for the team, but please feel free to continue posting your feedback here in the meantime <3

    We'll see ya around for our next topic!
    3ztrsitvhj3s.gif
  • MarzzoMarzzo Member, Braver of Worlds
    All classes should not be able to do all roles. This will force you developers to make bland and non-unique characters. This is what is destroying many MMOs. Make classes unique, make them stick out. Give them unique abilities and uses. This is what makes your character feel special.

    No offence but anyone who disagrees is objectivly wrong. Sure, a warrior could go dps or tank

    A mage could go dps or support...

    But making every class everything is the same as having 1 single class with different colors on abilites.
  • neeko2loneeko2lo Member
    In general this is very simple:

    Allowing Players a diverse set of tools to customize their character is what the aim should be.
    To add on to this, giving every class multiple similar tools an avenues to compensate for their specific class choice removes Identity. Class Identity is something a vast majority of Players personally identifies with and therefore can't be taken lightly.

    So what is the Solution?
    Allowing Classes to choose different tools to be a supportive magician archetype or allow a melee dps to spec into a more bruiser heavy build is very healthy for the game BUT allowing any class to fill out any roll is probably the furthest away you can be from a successful RPG experience.

    ~Neeko2lo
  • marllessmarlless Member
    edited May 17
    https://imgur.com/a/FkRpIYC
    hello everyone, so I, like many others, are looking forward to the ashes of creation, that's why we are concerned with the gameplay and development of the characters in question, classes / status build / runes etc. but on the question that all classes can do everything (I totally disagree).
    I say this because they are a very wide range of combinations giving freedom and also limitations, ex (class 1 ° TANK + 2 ° RANGER which results in class WARDEN), I believe that what has to prevail is the primary class, that is to say it will be a class tank however it will not be a '' true tank equal to GUARDIAN which is the result of 1 ° TANK + 2 ° TANK ", another example is the" true CONJURER which is the true summoner of the game), so summarizing the classes should be free but objective , with defined identity where you look at another player on the map and then recognize his class and definition. I thank the attention.
  • JudeJude Member
    Templars should be templars, clerics should be clerics and mages should be mages.


    Please don't let players solo in your game, MMORPGs were made to be played with teams.

  • NagashNagash Member, Leader of Men
    Jude wrote: »
    Templars should be templars, clerics should be clerics and mages should be mages.


    Please don't let players solo in your game, MMORPGs were made to be played with teams.

    They should all stay the F away from me and my dead
    nJ0vUSm.gif

    The dead do not squabble as this land’s rulers do. The dead have no desires, petty jealousies or ambitions. A world of the dead is a world at peace
  • JudeJude Member
    edited May 18
    Nagash wrote: »
    Jude wrote: »
    Templars should be templars, clerics should be clerics and mages should be mages.


    Please don't let players solo in your game, MMORPGs were made to be played with teams.

    They should all stay the F away from me and my dead

    Playing with a team makes you able to prove you're the best (by playing with a group of players and do better than them) and makes quests more fun and grinding more faster, that's what MMORPGs were meant for.

    What's the point of playing an online game that have classes like tank, healer and support..etc if you don't play with a team? it's like using social media without connecting with someone.
  • NagashNagash Member, Leader of Men
    Jude wrote: »
    Nagash wrote: »
    Jude wrote: »
    Templars should be templars, clerics should be clerics and mages should be mages.


    Please don't let players solo in your game, MMORPGs were made to be played with teams.

    They should all stay the F away from me and my dead

    Playing with a team makes you able to prove you're the best (by playing with a group of players and do better than them) and makes quests more fun and grinding more faster, that's what MMORPGs were meant for.

    What's the point of playing an online game that have classes like tank, healer and support..etc if you don't play with a team? it's like using social media without connecting with someone.

    I was talking about all the holy classes :D
    nJ0vUSm.gif

    The dead do not squabble as this land’s rulers do. The dead have no desires, petty jealousies or ambitions. A world of the dead is a world at peace
  • TsukasaTsukasa Member
    edited May 20
    You're the one who came up with the augmentation system. You should decide this by yourself. This is a complicated matter, following one or two certain rules is not enough.

    Classes like Cleric/Tank and Magic/Rogue can surely become META picks for the playstyle alone.

    For example: Cleric subclass.
    Melee classes with Cleric subclass shouldn't fill the role of the healer for the party but should have some self-heal advantage like lifesteal to self-sustain in the frontline(can fill for tank/PvP initiator). That's how you could create an entirely new class(or a class) that isn't useless with Cleric subclass. For mages, to use magic they essentially have the ability to manipulate the environment and befriending spirits like fairies, so healing others is normal to them without the need of cleric subclass in my opinion. If we add Cleric subclass to 'this' mage, it might either be strong enough to fill the healer role in a small party while doing decent DPS, or becomes a class that isn't good at both.
    Angel of Justice
  • RyufuRyufu Member
    I enjoy games with more ways to specialize your character. Older games like Diablo2, you could create unique builds with different skill trees and they weren't completely broken or terrible. Some were just slightly more or less.

    I also feel an incentive to play a class that the majority are not playing so that you become more recognizable or possibly more rare class skill-wise. Limiting specialization would really be a waste in a game like this.
Sign In or Register to comment.