oneADseven said:Fair point. Just like there is a huge difference in terms of what VR can control and what they should control to help tell their story. VR could prevent Skar from grouping with Elves, the same way that WoW prevents Horde grouping/communicating/trading with Alliance. If an Elf walks up to the Skar village ... would it be fair to assume that they are KoS? Why are Elven PC's allowed to interact with Skar PC's differently than NPC's? Should an Elf have to grind a bunch of Skar faction before they can group with them? People talk about how important the story is ... and how this is a roleplaying game ... but where is the consistency? This is the main problem with trying to socially engineer character development and putting our stories on rails. If you allow players to break from the unrealistic stereotypes that govern the entire NPC population of a given race, it then becomes plausible that players of opposing races can interact with each other in ways that might contradict established lore.
It sounds like you want every player to be a special snowflake. You want your cake and you want to eat it too. You buy into this philosophy that these restrictions add a sense of realism to the world but there is no consistency with how these things are enforced. That is why these restrictions are being called artificial/arbitrary. Elves/Skar will be able to group, trade, and get married even though these things could easily be restricted. There comes a point where you have to weigh the relative cost of imposing these restrictions and my argument is centered around the idea that pigeonholing race/class options will lead to countless creative/fun casualties. It's obvious that "fun" is subjective, but for many, the "fun" is absolutely being sapped from the experience. Again ... the main appeal of open-world gameplay is allowing players to develop their characters and their behavior the way they see fit. I understand that rules and restrictions have a place but I think it's a bit obnoxious to arbitrarily bombard players with them during what should be a fun/interactive/creative character creation screen.
That's a really good point. Frankly, I would be 100% in favor of Pantheon having split factions such that the evil faction can't group with the good faction. Maybe you would have the option of improving your faction standing with the other alignment over time to become neutral. Actually, I think it would be a really cool system. Being able to group with either side would be a strong bonus to playing a neutral race, but perhaps there could be some other bonuses to sticking with a pure evil or good alignment.
zoltar said:Riahuf22, once again you don't know WTF you are talking about. As Darch pointed out, you're using a completely made up, nonsensical idea of a paladin being "holy" and a cleric not. Paladins and clerics are literally in the exact same religous order. Paladins are simply clerics that decide to focus on combat rather than strictly following the dogma of the order. If anything, the paladins would be considered less "holy" because they're more focused on vengance than prayer.
Riahuf22 said: but seriously why would a race full of hatred want to be a paladin, they WOULDN'T it simple that simple and the sooner we can agree with this the faster we can agree that class restriction will make sense.Oh, i don't know, perhaps because HATRED IS A CORE PART OF THE PALADIN. From the class description: "Perhaps most iconically, the Paladin is driven by an unquenchable hatred of Undeath". And they use WRATH as a class resource for goodness sake!
"Tell me if your so right than why can't dark mrys be paladins than, boomProbably because the primary object of Dark Mry hatred is the Nytherian Red (see below) moreso than undead. My entire argument for Dark Mry paladins is that it's not necessary to draw this distinction (hating undead vs hating something else). Dark Mry clerics taking up arms to seek vengance should make them paladins regardless of whether their vengance is fixated solely on the undead or the undead and some other group.
you guys realize that the dark myr killed their mother rightWrong. It was a different sect of the Mry (the Nytherian Red) that did this. The Nytherian Red were devoted to another Mry god who had already sacrificed himself to try to save them. They considered Syronai's action to be blasphemy towards their favored god, so they struck her down in vengance. Hmm, sounds quite paladin'ish. Anyway, the Dark Mry were the remaining group of Mry after the Nytherian Red ran off. So none of the Dark Mry had anything to do with killing Syronia.
How about instead of trying to get me to reread the lore how about you reread it where it specifically says after they lost their goddess that their heart became pisoned as much as the seas of terminus to them, and they became bitter, full of hatred, and DARKNESS. hmm weird darkness that's sounds like a paladin trait for sure, oh wait that a dire lord trait what am I talking about almost got confused with all the wrong information on this topic I almost got them messed up.
Riahuf22 said:How about instead of trying to get me to reread the lore how about you reread it where it specifically says after they lost their goddess that their heart became pisoned as much as the seas of terminus to them, and they became bitter, full of hatred, and DARKNESS. hmm weird darkness that's sounds like a paladin trait for sure, oh wait that a dire lord trait what am I talking about almost of confused with all the wrong information on this topic I almost got them messed up.
This is a comically superficial analysis. Nobody is saying that a Dark Mry paladin is going to be running through fields, catching butterflies, and singing kumbaya. Bottom line: if Dark Mry can be clerics, which they can, then their bitterness, hatred, and darkness is just more motivation for them to transition to being paladins.
Aich said:Syrif said:I think it’s safe to say that in the world of Terminus the Paladin will be a good-aligned, virtuous tank whereas the Dire Lord will certainly be evil-aligned (same with the Necromancer).
Thats true but shoun't the class define the race "player" not vice versa? :) Maybe an chance for the Progeny system to allow for all/all. (How MUDs did it)
I think they go hand-in-hand, hence the unique race/class combos in the matrix. I can see all/all being in other games, but I’m with VR and I really can’t see all/all being utilized well in this game.
zoltar said:Riahuf22 said:How about instead of trying to get me to reread the lore how about you reread it where it specifically says after they lost their goddess that their heart became pisoned as much as the seas of terminus to them, and they became bitter, full of hatred, and DARKNESS. hmm weird darkness that's sounds like a paladin trait for sure, oh wait that a dire lord trait what am I talking about almost of confused with all the wrong information on this topic I almost got them messed up.
This is a comically superficial analysis. Nobody is saying that a Dark Mry paladin is going to be running through fields, catching butterflies, and singing kumbaya. Bottom line: if Dark Mry can be clerics, which they can, then their bitterness, hatred, and darkness is just more motivation for them to transition to being paladins.
Okay zoltar, whatever you say lol, than tell me wise one why is it your saying all of this but the devs have clearly not made them paladins if it is so obvious to you? I mean clearly you are right and the devs have made a mistake and should fix it at once. But the devs are right aren't they? I mean clearly it is their game and their vision and you are saying they are making their game incorrectly and that they should bend to your way of thinking just because you keep twisting words into you perspective to make it seem like dark mrys should be paladins at all cost just because they can be clerics.......pfft is all I got to say.
Syrif said:Aich said:Syrif said:I think it’s safe to say that in the world of Terminus the Paladin will be a good-aligned, virtuous tank whereas the Dire Lord will certainly be evil-aligned (same with the Necromancer).
Thats true but shoun't the class define the race "player" not vice versa? :) Maybe an chance for the Progeny system to allow for all/all. (How MUDs did it)
I think they go hand-in-hand, hence the unique race/class combos in the matrix. I can see all/all being in some games, but I’m with VR and I really can’t see all/all being utilized well in this game.
Yeap they do. This topic has alot of promise. If any class should allow all races its Monk.
zoltar said:Riahuf22 said:How about instead of trying to get me to reread the lore how about you reread it where it specifically says after they lost their goddess that their heart became pisoned as much as the seas of terminus to them, and they became bitter, full of hatred, and DARKNESS. hmm weird darkness that's sounds like a paladin trait for sure, oh wait that a dire lord trait what am I talking about almost of confused with all the wrong information on this topic I almost got them messed up.
This is a comically superficial analysis. Nobody is saying that a Dark Mry paladin is going to be running through fields, catching butterflies, and singing kumbaya. Bottom line: if Dark Mry can be clerics, which they can, then their bitterness, hatred, and darkness is just more motivation for them to transition to being paladins.
Exactly @Zoltar. That would make sense if VR was actually using lore to determine their race/class combinations, but they are not. The lore is just there to give the players that enjoy lore, but the lore has nothing to do with the actual race/class matrix. If we try to make sense of it we will just argue with each other all day because you can argue every single one for or against. We need to just accept that VR made their choices to manipulate player's emotions in an attempt to lessen restrictions at a later date to obtain/maintain subscriptions... i.e. taking advantage of the addictive nature of people that play MMOs to create a macro-transaction by creating a psychological/subconcious desire and later providing a "fix" for a fee. Blizzard was the master of this; And this is why a lot of people left/are leaving it. People are figuring out that engagement should not be synonymous with compulsion. https://youtu.be/tWtvrPTbQ_c?t=155
How is having class rwtrictions have to do with any of that, for one like I've said and I'm sure many feel if they made the game all/all many would be upset and probably argue that it being all/all doesn't fit the lore at all.
But of course you can keep saying false accusations about pantheon all you want, just feel free to be reported when you fo.
I never said they were wrong to not allow Dark Myr paladins. In fact, I think the lack of Dark Myr paladins is based on a fairly logical reason. But despite the reason being logical, IMO it is unnecessarily strict and is in the realm of splitting hairs. There are two parts to making a paladin in Pantheon.
1) A pissed off cleric decides to focus on battle
and
2) in order to go kill some undead.
The Dark Mry are certainly pissed off, moreso than any other race to be honest. And they have clerics who have ample justification to take up arms and go off to kill something. There's just this technicality that they're probably more motivated to go hunting the Nytherian Red than they are undead. So yea, there's this tiny missing piece where they don't fully align with the idea of a paladin. But in the parts where they do align with the idea of a paladin, they REALLY fit in well. So my bottom line point is that the game would IMO be better served by slightly expanding the concept of a pladin to include any pissed off cleric that focuses on battle in order to go kill some hated enemy.
So you agree it's logical, than disagree, than say it strict in a class restriction matrix, which literally what class restriction does, which btw dark myr can be almost every class but like 3 but yet you want them to have more and you say they are splitting hairs. And you can try to describe what makes a paladin but for literally 20 years paladin has always been known as a holy knight that walks a righteous path, and the righteous path in literally in the description on pantheon and I don't see how, a race that has its heart poisoned with hatred, and darkness could possibly walk a righteous path, it would literally counterdict itself. You can keep trying to twist around all the words in the lore as you like but that doesn't mean what you are saying is actually correct.
Riahuf22 said:And you can try to describe what makes a paladin but for literally 20 years paladin has always been known as a holy knight that walks a righteous path, and the righteous path in literally in the description on pantheon and I don't see how, a race that has its heart poisoned with hatred, and darkness could possibly walk a righteous path, it would literally counterdict itself. You can keep trying to twist around all the words in the lore as you like but that doesn't mean what you are saying is actually correct.
Dude, this isn't my opinion. This is LITERALLY what VR has said. Here is a direct quote from the creative director of the game:
"It's not your classic righteous, do-goodly paladin. It's more of a- there's a little bit of a vengeance story here in that the paladin is on a righteous mission to exterminate this presence".
https://youtu.be/4vebn1AN6KY?t=1259
The righteousness aspect of the paladin in Pantheon doesn't imply that they are pure as the driven snow like you're talking about. It's more that their actions come from and "outraged sense of justice" to quote Webster's definiteion of "righteous". You should back it up to 19:41 for the whole explanation. Pretty much everything that I've been trying to tell you is in that interview, straight from the horses's mouth.
The class/race choices/restrictions are made by our lead writer and creative director, based on the game's lore.
There is no conspiracy theory here, no "manipulation of players' emotions" either, just our vision for our classes and races based on our lore. You don't have to like it but nothing will change or be up for discussion until we get much further into testing as I posted previously.
If you guys continue to argue over opinions, assumptions and misinformation, your posts will be removed and the thread may be locked. Please respect your fellow community members and leave the thread if you do not have anything respectful/constructive to say, keeping in mind my official response.
Riahuf22 said:it specifically says after they lost their goddess that their heart became pisoned as much as the seas of terminus to them, and they became bitter, full of hatred, and DARKNESS.
Just wanted to add: thank you Riahuf for clarifying this lore. That’s how I read their history as well. I do see the Dark Myr as more evil with Ogres and Skar sharing an alliance of some sort. Their classes make sense. The lore of Pantheon is both rich and beautiful. It‘s a joy to read :)
Kilsin said:The class/race choices/restrictions are made by our lead writer and creative director, based on the game's lore.
There is no conspiracy theory here, no "manipulation of players' emotions" either, just our vision for our classes and races based on our lore. You don't have to like it but nothing will change or be up for discussion until we get much further into testing as I posted previously.
If you guys continue to argue over opinions, assumptions and misinformation, your posts will be removed and the thread may be locked. Please respect your fellow community members and leave the thread if you do not have anything respectful/constructive to say, keeping in mind my official response.
boom. all arguements shutdowned. class/race design is based on lore.
Kilsin said:You don't have to like it but nothing will change or be up for discussion until we get much further into testing as I posted previously.
Thanks Kilsin :)
I think this subject is something that does need to be discussed by the community but we also need to be realistic about it. The truth of things is that both gameplay and lore evolve during development. What was true a few years ago might not be as true in six months. I do hope that the team plans to revisit the race/class Matrix prior to release and ask the simple question "does this still make sense?"
For myself - I think the biggest issue I have with the current matrix is that it simply doesn't feel quite right for humans to have every option while other races are so very limited. If there are going to be limits, I feel like there should be some class choices that are not available to humans as well. Obviously I want that to make sense in context of the game world, but given the lore that's been shared, there's a few easy targets in the class list that I feel could be dropped as starting choices for humans.
Apart from that, really what I'd like to see is a re-examination of each race based on three factors: Culture, geographic placement, and class definitions.
I say culture rather than ideology, because I think it's a really bad idea to start classifying races as 'good' or 'evil'. The lore as written really does not support that for most races, and bucketing races into good or evil would also imply some sort of brotherhood between them that doesn't exist. The background we have on each race suggests that they have a unique perspective shaped by the world they came from, the events surrounding their arrival on Terminus, and the amount of time they've been here. Are the Skar truly evil, or is it just that culturally they have learned that survival means you can't trust anyone, not even other Skar? Are the ogres evil, or do they just have a societal tradition based on strength and power over others, coming from their tribal origins? Are the elves truly good, or do they have divisions and differing opinions between the Ashen, the Ember, and the Lucent about whether to trust the other races of Terminus and how much? My point here is if that if we paint all the races with a broad brush as to good and evil, we lose a lot of what makes them truly special by turning them into caricatures.
Geographic placement is simply a practical concern. Gnomes are a good example of this - they are extremely limited in their class and role choices. now, if Skyhold is right next door to another relatively friendly race, that may not be a practical issue. But if it's a continent away from the nearest race that can choose a tank role, that reality may force some very odd design decisions in terms of where content is placed and (if poor choices are made) impact the experience of any player starting a gnome as their first character. So we as players can't view the race/class matrix only via a lore lens. There may have to be some concessions based simply on insuring that each race can be a viable choice for a new player.
Finally, the class definitions. If race defines a character in terms of their society and upbringing, then class defines a character in terms of what they do. In other games, classes have been described as inherently "good" or "evil". But at least so far for Pantheon, classes have been described in much more neutral terms. By the description, a paladin isn't a holy warrior of goodness - they're a former cleric who has taken it upon themselves to root out and destroy the undead and the supernatural. Dire Lords aren't inherently evil, but they have learned to use fear and pain as a weapon on the battlefield (with the help of a little of what might be called blood magic). Some societies might see these classes as good or evil but that perception is going to differ from one society or culture to the next.
I think a healthy debate is good for the community and good for the game. I'm personally hopeful that Terminus ends up feeling a lot more like a world with many different perspectives and shades of grey, rather than a game with a black/white divide between "good" and "evil".
Nephele said:Kilsin said:You don't have to like it but nothing will change or be up for discussion until we get much further into testing as I posted previously.
Thanks Kilsin :)
I think this subject is something that does need to be discussed by the community but we also need to be realistic about it. The truth of things is that both gameplay and lore evolve during development. What was true a few years ago might not be as true in six months. I do hope that the team plans to revisit the race/class Matrix prior to release and ask the simple question "does this still make sense?"
For myself - I think the biggest issue I have with the current matrix is that it simply doesn't feel quite right for humans to have every option while other races are so very limited. If there are going to be limits, I feel like there should be some class choices that are not available to humans as well. Obviously I want that to make sense in context of the game world, but given the lore that's been shared, there's a few easy targets in the class list that I feel could be dropped as starting choices for humans.
Apart from that, really what I'd like to see is a re-examination of each race based on three factors: Culture, geographic placement, and class definitions.
I say culture rather than ideology, because I think it's a really bad idea to start classifying races as 'good' or 'evil'. The lore as written really does not support that for most races, and bucketing races into good or evil would also imply some sort of brotherhood between them that doesn't exist. The background we have on each race suggests that they have a unique perspective shaped by the world they came from, the events surrounding their arrival on Terminus, and the amount of time they've been here. Are the Skar truly evil, or is it just that culturally they have learned that survival means you can't trust anyone, not even other Skar? Are the ogres evil, or do they just have a societal tradition based on strength and power over others, coming from their tribal origins? Are the elves truly good, or do they have divisions and differing opinions between the Ashen, the Ember, and the Lucent about whether to trust the other races of Terminus and how much? My point here is if that if we paint all the races with a broad brush as to good and evil, we lose a lot of what makes them truly special by turning them into caricatures.
Geographic placement is simply a practical concern. Gnomes are a good example of this - they are extremely limited in their class and role choices. now, if Skyhold is right next door to another relatively friendly race, that may not be a practical issue. But if it's a continent away from the nearest race that can choose a tank role, that reality may force some very odd design decisions in terms of where content is placed and (if poor choices are made) impact the experience of any player starting a gnome as their first character. So we as players can't view the race/class matrix only via a lore lens. There may have to be some concessions based simply on insuring that each race can be a viable choice for a new player.
Finally, the class definitions. If race defines a character in terms of their society and upbringing, then class defines a character in terms of what they do. In other games, classes have been described as inherently "good" or "evil". But at least so far for Pantheon, classes have been described in much more neutral terms. By the description, a paladin isn't a holy warrior of goodness - they're a former cleric who has taken it upon themselves to root out and destroy the undead and the supernatural. Dire Lords aren't inherently evil, but they have learned to use fear and pain as a weapon on the battlefield (with the help of a little of what might be called blood magic). Some societies might see these classes as good or evil but that perception is going to differ from one society or culture to the next.
I think a healthy debate is good for the community and good for the game. I'm personally hopeful that Terminus ends up feeling a lot more like a world with many different perspectives and shades of grey, rather than a game with a black/white divide between "good" and "evil".
Very well said @Nephele.
I would also like to point out that I am hopeful for change to the race/class combo matrix that gets its inspiration from the lore... especially since the matrix came before the completion of the lore.
Syrif said:Riahuf22 said:it specifically says after they lost their goddess that their heart became pisoned as much as the seas of terminus to them, and they became bitter, full of hatred, and DARKNESS.
Just wanted to add: thank you Riahuf for clarifying this lore. That’s how I read their history as well. I do see the Dark Myr as evil with Ogres and Skar sharing an alliance of some sort. Their classes make sense. The lore of Pantheon is both rich and beautiful. It‘s a joy to read :)
The lore is really cool. It was what first drove me to pledge. And one of the most interesting things about the lore is the nature of these "evil" races. I don't see them as being evil in the same sense that orcs in LOTR an orcs/demons in Warcraft (pre-WC3) are "evil" or "corrupted". Case in point: the ogres and Dark Myr both allied with other "sacred six" races (humans/dwarves/elves/archai) to fight the revenant. The Ogres and Dark Mry are just unfriendly and warlike, not objectively evil. The Skar are pretty close to a truly evil race, and there's definitely an argument to be made that they're inherently evil. But even with the skar, a lot of their current nature came about due to their enslavement and the torture they endure as punishment for uprising. So there is at least some room for a sympathetic view towards the skar.
@Nephele,
I agree with everything you said. If you're going to label the Ogres/Myr/Skar as an "evil" faction, then it's based more on the subjective viewpoint of the other races than it is any kind of objective morality. That and the likelihood of there being a design goal of having symmetry in alignment (3 good, 3 neutral, 3 evil races).
As far as the paladin and dire lord go, I think some people are looking at those through the lens of the way the Shadow Knight and Paladin in EQ were considered to be mirrors of each other with the SK being the evil version of the Paladin. But as we've both said (and supported by quotes from VR) , the Paladin in Pantheon is not the classic do-good holy crusader. Likewise, the Dire Lord has little to do with the Shadow Knight.
Nephele said:For myself - I think the biggest issue I have with the current matrix is that it simply doesn't feel quite right for humans to have every option while other races are so very limited.
Nephele - I think that is what’s amazing about Pantheon‘s rich lore; is that perspective you mention already exists in Pantheon and it exists as the Human perspective. I think it’s critical we realize that Ogres & Skar for example are not just merely different in norms and culture, but they are different racially from Humans. If we look at the Human race - there may be different cultures/ethnicities within that race. But Ogres for example are an entirely different race (and species) within their own nature. Hence the vast difference with Humans in the matrix and other things.
I don‘t think it’s necessarily true where you mention it may just be “good” vs “evil” in Pantheon. I imagine there will be ‘good vs evil’ in addition to “indifferent,” “neutral” etc mixed into the world as well.
I just wanted to add this to help you see where VR is coming from in the lore and matrix (I do think VR’s current matrix makes sense when I read the lore). I don’t mean any of it to be negative. :)
Here is an excerpt from the 02/2017 Newsletter when the race/class matrix was revealed:
"One of the more immersive elements, and cornerstone facets, of a high fantasy role-playing game is that of playable races and classes. While many games feature no restrictions and others use seemingly inane ones, Pantheon’s matrix is grounded in a lore and practicality based approach that simply poses the question; “Would it make any sense?” In keeping with fantasy lore, Humans in Pantheon will be able to play any class, but will most likely lack some perks that other class/race combos may enjoy. Dark Myr will also have a large selection of specializations available, but in keeping with lore they will not be able to master the arts of the Paladin, Shaman or Ranger. Not all combo restriction are due to lore however, some are based on stature and physique - sadly Ogres just don’t possess the fine motor skills to master the lute or sneak about the shadows."
The issue that I have with the above is that the "immersion" of how every character is perceived is being filtered through the lens of "Would it make any sense" -- Whether or not something "makes sense" is clearly subjective. Seeing that this is acknowledged as a cornerstone facet of what makes a world feel like a world, and our characters feel like living/breathing characters, players are being forced to look through a subjective lens as if that perception is some sort of unwavering truth. Maybe it does make sense that ogres can't master the lute ... but does it really make sense that it's impossible for them to try? Not to me, sorry. For that reason, these restrictions are very much a "Game > World" decision. People can argue that these restrictions were always part of some elaborate master plan but that isn't really the case.
Let's rewind a little bit and take a look at an excerpt from the 08/2016 Newsletter:
Posted date / 8.10.16
"Back when the spark that would eventually become the MMORPG wildfire was first ignited in the late 90’s none of us knew just how integral these games would become to our lives as both a form of entertainment and an integral form of self-expression."
Approximately one week later the topic of race/class restrictions had come up during an AMA with Brad:
Q4A-5. What are the plans for race-restricting classes? What about XP penalties for certain classes?
"Race based class restrictions are still under discussion, but I think they do make sense in some cases. Racial innate abilities should also play a role, both potentially benefitial and detrimental. XP penalties though? That's probably taking it too far for me."
Does that sound like a comment that suggests race/class restrictions are attached to the beating heart of the vision? Let's take a look at another question that was asked during that same AMA:
Q5A-6. What does Pantheon have to offer a sandbox player like me?
"Pantheon is definitely more open world and sandboxy than many MMOs, but it is still at its core a game system, not a true sanbox sans rules. But they key point is that you can go where you want to go, take on whatever you want to take on (tho you may die), and travel to wherever you can see (assuming you don't freeze to death enroute). So the decisions are yours -- you are not being led around by the game on rails, with only so many options."
Now I really appreciate the underlined section in the above response because it embodies the essence of what open-world gameplay is all about. I think it's really unfortunate that in a matter of months ... "some cases" from the previous response ended up swelling into roughly 50% of all options. As it was suggested in the newsletter a week prior to that AMA -- the nature of open-world MMORPG's offer an integral form of self-expression. Apparently not ... not when our ability to express character identity is governed by whether or not it would "make sense." These restrictions are a "game rule" that contradicts the spirit of an open-world game, especially when it was acknowledged that "community matters" before highlighting the significance of self-expression.
A couple months after that AMA Brad published a blog on matchmaking. It ended with this:
"And if that post didn't scare you sufficiently, just stay tuned, LoL :) I really do love you guys, the fantastic community we have, combined with having the time to do it right, reach the goals and dreams we outlined months ago, and the *freedom* we have to try to really move this genre forward even if that truly involves thinking outside of the box and trying out some really wild and crazy stuff. Start-ups are hard, indies are faced with truly unique challenges, but I’ll take it all any day vs how it used to be!"
I appreciate the sentiment and I guess I'm a tad bit jealous. What matters (in the context of our freedom to roleplay and enjoy self-expression) is whether or not something "makes sense." We don't get the freedom to think outside the box and try out some really wild and crazy stuff. Apparently, some of that would come off as crazy, and allowing that wouldn't make sense. Self expression can be dangerous when it doesn't conform to the tradition of idealistic stereotyping. That aspect of the game simply requires that we buckle up for a ride on rails before our character ever sets foot on the planet. It's tragic, really. When the shaman class was originally revealed (12/2016, the first time race/class restrictions were revealed to the public) -- it didn't include the option for humans or elves. At that point in time, it simply didn't make sense. A month later, allowing humans to become all classes suddenly made sense per the lore. It just goes to show how subjective these decisions really are and why I have a hard time buying into the philosophy that just because something makes sense to one person that it has to be unwavering truth to me.
I believe anyone can formulate their own conclusions to what his or her own version of said game should be, but at the end of the day VR has made their lore and matrix. Of course, the game is still being developed. When it is finished, some people will love their game and some may not. I think what VR has developed thus far is simply breathtaking, and in my opinion easily beats anything else out there in the mmorpg market. I look forward to future development.
Syrif said:I believe anyone can formulate their own conclusions to what his or her own version of said game should be, but at the end of the day VR has made their lore and matrix. Of course, the game is still being developed. When it is finished, some people will love their game and some may not. I think what VR has developed thus far is simply breathtaking, and in my opinion easily beats anything else out there in the mmorpg market. I look forward to future development.
Except it isn't the "end of the day" yet because they're still creating lore, and just as the lore has changed the race/class matrix once before (beause it "made sense" to someone) I am hoping that this will happen again. The few of us that have voiced our opinion about things like Dark Myr Paladins existing due to the arguably conflicting lore of Dark Myr vs the core tenets of the Paladin will hopefuly have our opinions heard. I agree with you that anyone can formulate their own conclusion, but these forums are designed for us to discuss concerns like this and hopefuly have them addressed. When the pros outweigh the cons of something like this, what is the reasoning behind it? i.e. What negative comes from loosening "some" of the class restrictions compared to what harm will come from not allowing people more options to play a game how they want (instead of reluctantly playing something because it is all that is available... at that time)?
Add: How many people would be likely to quit because more races were allowed to be a different class compared to the opposite? A lot of people became supporters before the race/class matrix was "officially" published.
Darch said:Syrif said:Except it isn't the "end of the day" yet because they're still creating lore, and just as the lore has changed the race/class matrix once before (beause it "made sense" to someone) I am hoping that this will happen again. The few of us that have voiced our opinion about things like Dark Myr Paladins existing due to the arguably conflicting lore of Dark Myr vs the core tenets of the Paladin will hopefuly have our opinions heard. I agree with you that anyone can formulate their own conclusion, but these forums are designed for us to discuss concerns like this and hopefuly have them addressed. When the pros outweigh the cons of something like this, what is the reasoning behind it? i.e. What negative comes from loosening "some" of the class restrictions compared to what harm will come from not allowing people more options to play a game how they want (instead of reluctantly playing something because it is all that is available... at that time)?
Add: How many people would be likely to quit because more races were allowed to be a different class compared to the opposite? A lot of people became supporters before the race/class matrix was "officially" published.
it obviously has to make sense to the creative designer. i became a supporter after i saw a class race matrix. i would have felt uncomfortable if there wasn't. it really even isn't fair to say restrictions. too many people are getting the wrong idea when it's said. is a design choice by the creator to achieve distinctiveness between the races.
stellarmind said:is a design choice by the creator to achieve distinctiveness between the races.
At the expense of players being able to achieve distinctiveness amongst themselves. It's a game rail, plain and simple. Some schools require children to wear identical uniforms. Many occupations do the same. Open-World MMORPG's are supposed to cultivate self-expression rather than dictate dress code.
stellarmind said:it obviously has to make sense to the creative designer. i became a supporter after i saw a class race matrix. i would have felt uncomfortable if there wasn't. it really even isn't fair to say restrictions. too many people are getting the wrong idea when it's said. is a design choice by the creator to achieve distinctiveness between the races.
The matrix is one of the things that have made me a supporter & interested in Pantheon too. :)