Greetings, glorious adventurers! If you're joining in our Alpha One spot testing, please follow the steps here to see all the latest test info on our forums and Discord!
Options
A Discussion on What Summoner Could Be
SarahCo
Member
Hiya AOC Community!
I'm Sarheys [Apotheosis], you can call me Sarah, Sarheys or Sarahco.
In this post, I want to discuss my thoughts on what summoner could be, why I think what I think, and hopefully open up some discussion.
Right now, this is my TLDR understanding of primary archetypes in AOC:
Tank: Primarily focused around mitigating and taking damage, makes team tankier
Cleric: Primarily focused on healing allies
Mage: Artillery/siege-oriented, magical AOE, magical burst
Ranger: Ranged poke and burst damage
Fighter: Melee burst/AOE damage
Rogue (not yet previewed): Sneaky sneak stealth burst (e.g., healer worst nightmare)
Bard (not yet previewed): Anthem effect class, buffs allies through songcraft
Summoner (not yet previewed): "Jack of all trades"
I want to specifically focus on the Summoner, and want to slightly push back against the idea of a "jack of all trades" concept. That is because I think that means Summoner will be okay at a lot of things but not really great at anything, leaving us to desire more from the class.
Right now, I think the primary archetypes are missing a dark magic oriented class, something maniacal or sinister. Examples of ways I think we could take the summoner are like this:
Venomancer from Perfect World International. This is a class that is focused on debuffing, control and uses scarab magic to summon noxious spirits and necrotic magics.
Malediction and Occultism sorcery from ArcheAge. Skirmisher dark mage with control.
Arcanist from FFXIV. Not every summon has to be a creature. It but the concept of a summoning book to call upon dark powers and forces has potential.
Other concepts could be to make the class damage-over-time oriented, through the use of siphons, life-stealing mechanics or other DOT damage.
I hope this gives us something to think about with the summoner.
Sarah
I'm Sarheys [Apotheosis], you can call me Sarah, Sarheys or Sarahco.
In this post, I want to discuss my thoughts on what summoner could be, why I think what I think, and hopefully open up some discussion.
Right now, this is my TLDR understanding of primary archetypes in AOC:
Tank: Primarily focused around mitigating and taking damage, makes team tankier
Cleric: Primarily focused on healing allies
Mage: Artillery/siege-oriented, magical AOE, magical burst
Ranger: Ranged poke and burst damage
Fighter: Melee burst/AOE damage
Rogue (not yet previewed): Sneaky sneak stealth burst (e.g., healer worst nightmare)
Bard (not yet previewed): Anthem effect class, buffs allies through songcraft
Summoner (not yet previewed): "Jack of all trades"
I want to specifically focus on the Summoner, and want to slightly push back against the idea of a "jack of all trades" concept. That is because I think that means Summoner will be okay at a lot of things but not really great at anything, leaving us to desire more from the class.
Right now, I think the primary archetypes are missing a dark magic oriented class, something maniacal or sinister. Examples of ways I think we could take the summoner are like this:
Venomancer from Perfect World International. This is a class that is focused on debuffing, control and uses scarab magic to summon noxious spirits and necrotic magics.
Malediction and Occultism sorcery from ArcheAge. Skirmisher dark mage with control.
Arcanist from FFXIV. Not every summon has to be a creature. It but the concept of a summoning book to call upon dark powers and forces has potential.
Other concepts could be to make the class damage-over-time oriented, through the use of siphons, life-stealing mechanics or other DOT damage.
I hope this gives us something to think about with the summoner.
Sarah
2
Comments
Then we can have Fighters choose Summoner as their secondary Archetype and instead of Bladecaller their name can be EdgeLord.
Intrepid has specifically asked us for our Class Fantasy before.
They did it enough times that I considered this to be a very serious aspect of their development process. Basically, I choose to trust that it's not just them attempting to 'create or maintain hype'.
I have multiple large datasets now. Not everyone searches the forums for threads about such things though, so they make their own posts.
Will it do anything? Who knows. But we do know that they have implied that they care, and in the end, isn't that what we all want? Games that are designed by people who care enough to listen?
I don't know if Intrepid is actually like that, but I've never encountered that in any of my design spaces.
Part of the reason I so easily believe them, is because I have experienced how incredibly valuable all this is, and the last community I did this seriously for was more active than this one.
So, I don't know if it matters to anyone reading, but know that if it were me, I would not be laughing without telling you, I'd either be seriously taking notes, or asking sarcastic questions to make you trip up on your own absolute ignorance of game design.
Back in 2018 summoner was described as a sort of jack of all trades, yes, and the way Jeff Bard said it, it sounds like the summoner will be the second pick if the group can't find the main archetype for the role they need.
I am definitely not happy if they stick to that philosophy too much.
One way to get around it is to create hard PvE content where a jack of all trades is better than a master of one. Varied encounters, where the summoner have to switch things up from fight to fight, regardless of their primary spec. In other words, let the versatility be a boon and almost a requirement. Let summoners be the key role to clearing content in the same way tanks and clerics often are.
Balancing for PvP is a different topic. We'll have to see. They can be beasts or pathetic or anywhere in between.
As for the more sinister archetype thing, we do have the necromancer (summoner/cleric), but I would be ok with an overall dark-ish tone to all 8 summoner classes.
And since my prior response was a bit too... something.
I would not be ok with that. The 'edgelord' reference, in my mind, was made specifically because I really don't like when people attempt to attach an 'attitude' or 'alignment' to a roleplayed class in an MMORPG.
Yes, I hate the Alignment system. If we must oversimplify, may I suggest a half-and-half split with the Emotional Spectrum from DC Comics?
Tag yourself, I'm 'Chaotic Orange'.
I think if you have to start off qualifying something with "no offense" there's usually an offense. Just my 2 cents.
Anyway. They frequently asked for feedback and I think we should keep the remainder of the comments focused on the topic post, and if you want to talk about the fruitfulness of threads like this, then you can make your own discussing that.
I’m hoping they do really take a look into Warlock from WoW cause alot of good ideas/spells/abilities that got neglected or overlooked that AOC can pick up and tweak for Summoner in general.
I should probably have clarified, when I say dark-ish tones, I don't mean edge-lord
For example, sacrificing a puppy in a blood ritual for every summon is edge-lordy, but having all summons be created by draining the surrounding area of some life-force, shown through the spell effect and told through lore, is a dark-ish tone to me. It doesn't have to involve any game-mechanic effect at all, it can just be visuals and lore.
It's like the fighter having some blood themes no matter which secondary archetype is chosen (probably). I also consider that dark-ish tones.
It wasn't unclear to me, if that helps.
I absolutely still have the same opinion, since there wasn't any confusion to begin with.
You are right about the fact that they ask for feedback. However, as you mentioned yourself, this is not feedback, this is a discussion, to be precise. Of course, you are free to talk about anything. The reason why I asked what I asked is the fact that there were 3 threads related to summoners recently that got no engagement from devs/mods. So I was wondering, whether it actually makes sense to discuss topics like that before we see the class preview.
Threads that I was referring to:
1) https://forums.ashesofcreation.com/discussion/59245/will-the-summoner-have-a-spec-with-druid-like-abilities
2) https://forums.ashesofcreation.com/discussion/59210/summoner-bard-idea
3) https://forums.ashesofcreation.com/discussion/58986/summoner-necromancer-specifically-class-discussio
Peace
Maybe/LIKELY -> being able to use them as Shield(Buff) for him/herself, making this Class actually to be taken SERIOUS in Combat,
not overpowering, but not to be underestimated "ONE-versus-ONE" when Somone just thinks he or she can just go and "MURDER a Summoner". It would be funny if Summoner's actually have some powerful skills.
You're off topic. That's kidna it.
I was thinking it would be cool if they focused on debuffs and taps. So you'd have bards doing the buffing and summoners do the debuffing sorta thing. Some ideas would be slows... plus maybe tap builds so people can play a traditional necromancer.
We are all very aware that the devs read much, if not all, of the posts on the forums. We don't know what information they take back and relay to the team. That alone is grounds for this kind of discussion to make sense. Theorycrafting has long been a part of many genres of games, including MMORPGs. Perhaps the devs are stuck in some way with the development of the Archetype and/or subsequent class(es) involving summoner and ideas such as the ones presented in the OP can help nudge them along. Perhaps Azherae's opinion that conflicts with the OP rings true for some of the devs.
My point is, we do not know what information the devs are taking back to the team or what kind of affect it has on their process. Intrepid is and has been requesting our input, without limiting the format or topic, since the beginning. I would imagine that any discussion like this is is helpful, in some way, to the process.
Don’t ever rule summoner as “just a pet class” cause I’m hoping we will command demons like these.
I feel as though a 5 or 10% loss on ultimate-capacity for a Summoner with all the best DPS & Heal & Tank gearsets is a fair off-set from the other classes' maximums, in exchange for the ability to swap between different group-roles.
XIV's summoner was a lot faster paced where it's main focus was keeping dots up and you maintain your summon. the alternate to the summoner is the scholar whose a healer but used to have awesome dot capabilities too.
I wouldn't mind seeing a middle ground of these two, one's way to slow paced and the other is quite frantic. if the summoner ends up being a good dot archertype I hope to run cleric/smn to make a healer with decent dot dps to minimize time spent doing content that doesn't require heavy healing