Percimes wrote: » If the augment system could bring this much diversity it would be awesome. The role of the tank would be the same, but how the job is done could depend on the secondary.
McShave wrote: » This is a quick little design chart I made to describe some ideas on the trinity system and secondary archetype augmentation. I am not a graphic designer, if someone can do this better please do lol. Through this chart, I try to explain that picking your primary archetype is the most important decision when it comes to your trinity role in group content. However, the more you augment your abilities towards a certain role, the more effective you become at that role. A Tank/ DPS will always be better at tanking than a DPS/ Tank, such that a DPS/ Tank will always be better at DPS thank a Tank/ DPS. Also it might not have come out clearly, but there is also a scale to how much you venture away from the pinnacle of your trinity corner. You can augment a couple, many, or all your abilities to venture however far away from your trinity role that you prefer.
McShave wrote: » A Tank/ DPS will always be better at tanking than a DPS/ Tank, such that a DPS/ Tank will always be better at DPS thank a Tank/ DPS.
ptitoine wrote: »
ptitoine wrote: » McShave wrote: » A Tank/ DPS will always be better at tanking than a DPS/ Tank, such that a DPS/ Tank will always be better at DPS thank a Tank/ DPS. Normally it would. But I was wondering if it was the case in term of building like the primary archetype. Like Mage/Tank or Cleric/Tank Build building Prot and wearing Plate/Shield. To have different type of protection. Just to have a different set of starter abilities. Im curious to see its its duable and if its worth. Cause im not really a fan of the tank abilties. But i could be for Mage or Cleric but still want to be a tank. If its duable but hard could be really fun to see the combo people can come up with
Dygz wrote: » I'm pretty sure that it's a triangle rather than a quadrilateral, and healing falls under Support. There is overlap, in that Secondary Archetype allows you to slide closer to another role.
ptitoine wrote: » McShave wrote: » A Tank/ DPS will always be better at tanking than a DPS/ Tank, such that a DPS/ Tank will always be better at DPS thank a Tank/ DPS. Like Mage/Tank or Cleric/Tank Build building Prot and wearing Plate/Shield. To have different type of protection.
McShave wrote: » Different archetypes have higher proficient with different types of armor and weapons. If you were primary mage, it might be very detrimental to wear such heavy gear as plate, and a mage might be very bad with a shield. We know they can use it, but it depends on how Intrepid implements these proficiencies.
McShave wrote: » Normally people would think of it as a triangle, but I feel like a bard provides a distinctly different utility than healing. You need a healer to run a dungeon, but you don't need a bard. However, a bard doesnt provide damage like a true dps archetype would. A bard enhances the capabilities of the party, without directly damaging or healing or tanking.
McShave wrote: » This is a quick little design chart...
McMackMuck wrote: » McShave wrote: » This is a quick little design chart... I love that the "trinity" has four corners... and that it is also a really good model for this discussion! That triggers my quirky sense of humor, many thanks!
SirChancelot11 wrote: » McShave wrote: » Normally people would think of it as a triangle, but I feel like a bard provides a distinctly different utility than healing. You need a healer to run a dungeon, but you don't need a bard. However, a bard doesnt provide damage like a true dps archetype would. A bard enhances the capabilities of the party, without directly damaging or healing or tanking. You're good, I agree with you here. The only real hole is that opposite corners don't touch. You don't have a slide on here for a Bard/tank. Unless you took your map and folded it over a sphere so they wrapped around to each other, and left summer at the core of the sphere.
McShave wrote: » SirChancelot11 wrote: » McShave wrote: » Normally people would think of it as a triangle, but I feel like a bard provides a distinctly different utility than healing. You need a healer to run a dungeon, but you don't need a bard. However, a bard doesnt provide damage like a true dps archetype would. A bard enhances the capabilities of the party, without directly damaging or healing or tanking. You're good, I agree with you here. The only real hole is that opposite corners don't touch. You don't have a slide on here for a Bard/tank. Unless you took your map and folded it over a sphere so they wrapped around to each other, and left summer at the core of the sphere. I think it would be more accurate if it was just a combination of left/ right sliders, and each slider would just be a combination of 2 roles. My chart would be more accurate if you could augment using each archetype as a secondary instead of just one, since you could go a combination of bard with tank and cleric and be somewhere in the blue still. But, since you can only have one secondary archetype, it is actually much linear. Maybe religious, racial, and other augmentations will push it into the more planar model.
SirChancelot11 wrote: » McShave wrote: » SirChancelot11 wrote: » McShave wrote: » Normally people would think of it as a triangle, but I feel like a bard provides a distinctly different utility than healing. You need a healer to run a dungeon, but you don't need a bard. However, a bard doesnt provide damage like a true dps archetype would. A bard enhances the capabilities of the party, without directly damaging or healing or tanking. You're good, I agree with you here. The only real hole is that opposite corners don't touch. You don't have a slide on here for a Bard/tank. Unless you took your map and folded it over a sphere so they wrapped around to each other, and left summer at the core of the sphere. I think it would be more accurate if it was just a combination of left/ right sliders, and each slider would just be a combination of 2 roles. My chart would be more accurate if you could augment using each archetype as a secondary instead of just one, since you could go a combination of bard with tank and cleric and be somewhere in the blue still. But, since you can only have one secondary archetype, it is actually much linear. Maybe religious, racial, and other augmentations will push it into the more planar model. Oh I was thinking of it more as a plane and the different colored zones were what role you could fill in the party. Then the various class combinations were a scatter plot on it and then depending on how you kit them out would shift your Dot.
McShave wrote: » SirChancelot11 wrote: » McShave wrote: » SirChancelot11 wrote: » McShave wrote: » Normally people would think of it as a triangle, but I feel like a bard provides a distinctly different utility than healing. You need a healer to run a dungeon, but you don't need a bard. However, a bard doesnt provide damage like a true dps archetype would. A bard enhances the capabilities of the party, without directly damaging or healing or tanking. You're good, I agree with you here. The only real hole is that opposite corners don't touch. You don't have a slide on here for a Bard/tank. Unless you took your map and folded it over a sphere so they wrapped around to each other, and left summer at the core of the sphere. I think it would be more accurate if it was just a combination of left/ right sliders, and each slider would just be a combination of 2 roles. My chart would be more accurate if you could augment using each archetype as a secondary instead of just one, since you could go a combination of bard with tank and cleric and be somewhere in the blue still. But, since you can only have one secondary archetype, it is actually much linear. Maybe religious, racial, and other augmentations will push it into the more planar model. Oh I was thinking of it more as a plane and the different colored zones were what role you could fill in the party. Then the various class combinations were a scatter plot on it and then depending on how you kit them out would shift your Dot. Ya, that was the plan. But as we know right now, a character's plot on the graph has only the option to be on one particular line. If you go DPS/ tank, you can only be on the particular line of DPS/tank. But if you plot the group's composition on a single graph, this could work to see where the strengths of your group lie.
SirChancelot11 wrote: » McShave wrote: » SirChancelot11 wrote: » McShave wrote: » SirChancelot11 wrote: » McShave wrote: » Normally people would think of it as a triangle, but I feel like a bard provides a distinctly different utility than healing. You need a healer to run a dungeon, but you don't need a bard. However, a bard doesnt provide damage like a true dps archetype would. A bard enhances the capabilities of the party, without directly damaging or healing or tanking. You're good, I agree with you here. The only real hole is that opposite corners don't touch. You don't have a slide on here for a Bard/tank. Unless you took your map and folded it over a sphere so they wrapped around to each other, and left summer at the core of the sphere. I think it would be more accurate if it was just a combination of left/ right sliders, and each slider would just be a combination of 2 roles. My chart would be more accurate if you could augment using each archetype as a secondary instead of just one, since you could go a combination of bard with tank and cleric and be somewhere in the blue still. But, since you can only have one secondary archetype, it is actually much linear. Maybe religious, racial, and other augmentations will push it into the more planar model. Oh I was thinking of it more as a plane and the different colored zones were what role you could fill in the party. Then the various class combinations were a scatter plot on it and then depending on how you kit them out would shift your Dot. Ya, that was the plan. But as we know right now, a character's plot on the graph has only the option to be on one particular line. If you go DPS/ tank, you can only be on the particular line of DPS/tank. But if you plot the group's composition on a single graph, this could work to see where the strengths of your group lie. So a Rogue or a mage start off in the corner of brown. Then you choose tank or bard as a secondary and it slides you closer to the red or blue zones. What I was getting at earlier was with enough of the other effects and choices I want to be able to move my DOT into either the red or blue zone and fulfill those roles for the group. have a rogue bard that is fully into being a stealthy support for his team. Or a mage tank capable of tanking... Getting the slide to move between two at once is probably for the best. I think if they made a class that could be tanky, deal good damage, and heal all at once we will get an op class, or in the attempts to Nerf it inline with others it would become bad at all of those things. Although I think that your two direction rule could also be broken by using the summoner through the middle. If summoners can summon tank, heal, or DPS minions, you could probably push your character in different directions at once if you tried, although without a focus you'll probably just end up half-assing those things... A bard/summoner with DPS and heal pet stuff?... Sounds like it would get messy fast. That kind of falls in line with my worries for a tank/cleric. Put enough self healing into a tank and he will be really hard to kill in the wild... 1v1 even with average DPS, he will eventually win the war of attrition...
Azherae wrote: » It's more of a 'Pyramid'. Four corners on the ground, the Summoner is 'above' at the top, and has to 'choose a direction to come down, or stay up there and only send a minion down when needed'. Everyone else has to go 'up' to get something technically a little closer to the others, but since balance is by Active Skills, it's seeming unlikely that /Summoner will give Bard much DPS from summons (in the form of a DPS minion) compared to others.
Azherae wrote: » As for your Tank/Cleric worries, assume that Healing usually only works when using an ability that hits the opponent. This isn't enough to do it, but Paladins, even if they are the absolute masters of the Mitigation part of the Janken, won't necessarily be able to kill opponents without risking their own lives. Open world PvP, especially 1v1, is going to involve a lot of running away, based on the 'we are not balancing for 1v1' concept. Mitigation class sees most Attrition classes coming? Run. Attrition sees Cooldown based burst damage class coming? Run. Cooldown class sees Mitigation class coming? They'd probably at least test things out before they ran, but most likely, still run.
