Remove Class Names

Class names won't matter, buffs (icons next to character's name) will show primary and secondary archetypes instead of the class name (because of cosmetics and transmogs stuff) along with the armor type you are wearing. So seeing this and seeing how people have issues with the class names, why not just let people name their own class in their profile and this will make people happy, people don't even refer to most classes because people don't know them, they have to talk I like "tank/mage." If they mention a class people will often ask them what archetypes are those, because seriously people will not use them.

So my suggestion is just to remove class names and let people call their combination whatever they want to call them, class names will probably fall into Roleplay anyway and profiles are mostly for RPers.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Karthos

This is how you get people running around with "Ass Smasher", "Dick Kicker", "Greg's Mom" and "Fat Penis" as a class.

ViBunja

Karthos wrote: »

This is how you get people running around with "Ass Smasher", "Dick Kicker", "Greg's Mom" and "Fat Penis" as a class.

I do agree, but you know there will be a huge text box in everyone's profiles, right? So that's going to happen regardless this option is taken into consideration.

Vhaeyne

I would be all for just having the player select a (Tank, DPS, or Healer) Icon for PvE. In PvP of course this information would be useless as people would just lie to trick people. Letting the player also name their class or build is not a bad idea. You would see many people running around with the class "Big Dick DPS", but that is fine by me. Ultimately, I think it would be cool to just make up a name for your build and have others see it.

You are right, the class name nomenclature is pointless in a game that allows for high build customization. I have been saying for decades that DDO needs to just allow people to choose role icons instead of class icons.

RocketFarmer

Would be nice for them to pick something and stay consistent with it. The current Alpha character creator references Class rather than Primary Archetype.

I don’t mind Class = Primary Archetype + Secondary Archetype. Or just refer to the Primary Archetype as Class and the Secondary Archetype as Specialization. So eight classes with 64 specializations. That might even be referred to as Class Specialization since there are other ways to specialize via the augment system based on race, social associations, religion, etc.

Seems like some players just get lost at archetype. Probably makes them wonder if they are dealing with a game or Jungian psychology.

Dreoh

RocketFarmer wrote: »

Would be nice for them to pick something and stay consistent with it. The current Alpha character creator references Class rather than Primary Archetype.

I don’t mind Class = Primary Archetype + Secondary Archetype. Or just refer to the Primary Archetype as Class and the Secondary Archetype as Specialization. So eight classes with 64 specializations. That might even be referred to as Class Specialization since there are other ways to specialize via the augment system based on race, social associations, religion, etc.

Seems like some players just get lost at archetype. Probably makes them wonder if they are dealing with a game or Jungian psychology.

To be fair that's probably why they did "class" in the alpha. Since it is publicly viewable, until archetype mixing is actually introduced, just calling the primary archetype "class" reduces confusion for people new to the game just tuning into streams or videos.

Or someone fucked up, that's also a possibility lol

Gizban

In Asheron's Call (which didn't have a class system) if you didn't select one of the pre-selected skill packages (with names all over the place) you got the glorious title of: Adventurer

Dygz

Or Class is just quicker and easier to fit in the UI of the Alpha.

ViBunja

And just to make sure you people know, class names won't exist as titles for your character, just your name, and guild, plus your buffs (primary archetype, secondary archetype, and armor type). Your class name will never be visible, only in your profile where there will be a backstory for roleplay, so just allowing people to name their class (which will only be for RP purposes), so everyone can name their own class and have fun, and PVPers will get nothing different than the rest of people. You could even name your class as it is right now and it will make zero difference.

Galux

I'm all for naming my own class

And if people would use this in weird ways then go ahead, as long as it isn't offensive to someone (which in that case people can just report)

Ebro Epaito

Id like to see a "reputation" title system like in UO....karma & fame....

ie....Glorious Lord Toyota Grand Master Paladin...its a mouthful for sure....bad karma Dread Lord Aries Grand Master Summoner....for those that like corruption ...or something like that...just a thought.

daveywavey

ViBunja

Galux wrote: »

I'm all for naming my own class And if people would use this in weird ways then go ahead, as long as it isn't offensive to someone (which in that case people can just report)

Yeah! They don't plan on using the character's class hovering on the name, so it will be in the profile. Not many people will check the profile that isn't into RPing. So this will be a great addition for the Roleplayers.

Enigmatic Sage

I think it would be cool to have titles associated with race and potentially class that players unlock through simple mechanics.

The first part of the title could be race, the second part could be associated with primary archetype.

Example:

Kaelarian Warlord <player name>

Warlord could have a series of options based on gameplay unlocks that in which the player would choose from. Options from PvE, PvP, Crafting/professions. Perhaps something even with religions and node types.
So many cool options.

P.S.
That shredder-esque armour is awesome looking!

Enigmatic Sage

But to be honest, I would not want to be on a battlefield with potentially a few hundred players and having this sea of letters all bleed together.

It would be better suited with a visual proximity range if it was somethings that would be added to the game or at least some sort of visual restriction or toggle.

Example:
having it only show up if you select a target, groups members etc.

It could be quite the pollution during combat especially with all the special effects current quality etc

The more I think about it, the more problematic it seems in terms of visual pollution.

Hmm..

ViBunja

Enigmatic Sage wrote: »

But to be honest, I would not want to be on a battlefield with potentially a few hundred players and having this sea of letters all bleed together.

It would be better suited with a visual proximity range if it was somethings that would be added to the game or at least some sort of visual restriction or toggle.

Example:
having it only show up if you select a target, groups members etc.

It could be quite the pollution during combat especially with all the special effects current quality etc

The more I think about it, the more problematic it seems in terms of visual pollution.

Hmm..

I do have to remind you that class titles will not be shown on your name. The plan for AoC is show Icons (called buffs) which will show primary and secondary (in form of icons) next your name. So you will never ever see anyone's class names unless you click their profiles. So why not just let players pick their class name instead. Class names in AoC don't even matter for game mechanics, it's just roleplay mechanics.

Enigmatic Sage

ViBunja wrote: »

Enigmatic Sage wrote: »

But to be honest, I would not want to be on a battlefield with potentially a few hundred players and having this sea of letters all bleed together.

It would be better suited with a visual proximity range if it was somethings that would be added to the game or at least some sort of visual restriction or toggle.

Example:
having it only show up if you select a target, groups members etc.

It could be quite the pollution during combat especially with all the special effects current quality etc

The more I think about it, the more problematic it seems in terms of visual pollution.

Hmm..

I do have to remind you that class titles will not be shown on your name. The plan for AoC is show Icons (called buffs) which will show primary and secondary (in form of icons) next your name. So you will never ever see anyone's class names unless you click their profiles. So why not just let players pick their class name instead. Class names in AoC don't even matter for game mechanics, it's just roleplay mechanics.

oh my bad, that is interesting!

I suppose the titles/names wouldn't really matter then if it can be anything and only seen on your profile.
So what are they going to do for actual debuffs and what not? more icons under the name aside from the icons beside your name.

Also, where does your guild name go? under your name? or is it going to be an icon beside your name like in new world? Then you'd have several icons beside your name?

Either way, it sounds like a lot of clutter around a name especially with the potential for many players around you.

Dygz

People can call themselves whatever they want anyways.
But, it's best for the devs to have official names so that we know what they're talking about.

ViBunja

Dygz wrote: »

People can call themselves whatever they want anyways.
But, it's best for the devs to have official names so that we know what they're talking about.

They already have them. Primary and secondary archetypes.

Conrad

I wish we could also name the cities however we want ngl. I really want to found Baldurs Gate in Verra xD

Dygz

Precisely why we will be choosing from a dev-prepared list of names.

Child Item