Forums » General Pantheon Discussion

Class and race restrictions need to change

This topic has been closed.
    • 1894 posts
    March 31, 2020 3:22 PM PDT

    Counterfleche said: @Iksar I really like your idea and it basically gives the lore reason for the exception. Characters would have to unlock a friendship with the other race (or maybe even the trainer specifically). Other possibilities: Have a few race-flexible NPCs in some small camps throughout the world. Have NPC trainers in the racial home city, but you don't know they train for the forbidden class until you are playing that class. They keep it very hush-hush. This would be especially interesting since you could find out that that secretive, creepy NPC you've known for ages is actually a secret trainer.

    That's how most LitRPG books do it.

    • 204 posts
    March 31, 2020 5:35 PM PDT

     I am a big proponent of race/class restrictions, it adds flavor to rolling different races. Humans in most fantasy settings are seen as the most versatile but at the cost of being "master of none". For me personally I don't like seeing an ogre wizard unless the lore specifically states ogres in the game are geniuses. Same with gnome warriors (something that existed in EQ by the way, I thought it was stupid but whatever). Honestly gnome and halfling warriors always bothered me in MMOs because it doesn't make sense on it's face and the lore rarely justifies how the little guys would hold up in melee combat. Star Wars explained how tiny Yoda could fight well for example by being strong in the force. But most MMORPGs don't go into detail of how a race with pitifully low strength would be good at swinging a battle axe or taking a dragon claw to the face.

     An evil race like the dark elves shouldn't be able to become paladins. Or in Pantheon's lore for example having a Skar Paladin would be downright nonsensical. EQ eventually added Erudite shadowknights but they included quite a bit of lore and explaination when they did it, that was an example of how to do it right if you are going to have something controversial. When you create a backstory and a general disposition for a race/civilization you don't want to have players create a character that directly contradicts the lore. Just because somebody thinks a Tauren Rogue is a neat idea doesn't mean the game should allow players to roll such a class, it doesn't fit into the lore at all and makes zero sense since its a massive minotaur with hooves, it's not gonna be sneaky. Even worse the Tauren are honorable and rogues don't follow the same kind of moral code.

     If lore in the game does not matter at all or is minimal then sure, any race any class. The argument that any race any class is good for roleplaying only makes sense if players are ignoring the lore the game developers established. I don't see that as a good thing. Players should be roleplaying in the framework of the lore of the game. Maybe I'm a stickler but that's how I see it.


    This post was edited by Ziegfried at March 31, 2020 5:37 PM PDT
    • 1560 posts
    March 31, 2020 5:58 PM PDT

    Chris has mentioned liking the idea that extra race/class options might open up through the use of the progeny system.  

    They have also talked about the fact that they do plan on loosening some of the restrictions.  Archai summoner was the given example.  

    I wouldn't be to concerned with the restrictions.  It sounds like they won't be as strict as some people, like the OP, thinks.


    This post was edited by philo at March 31, 2020 6:05 PM PDT
    • 52 posts
    March 31, 2020 6:05 PM PDT

    MauvaisOeil said:

    I'm fine with it. It's more a matter of expectations you put into your desires vs adaptating to the game.

     

    All/all games are bland and feel like race choice is just cosmetic, which to me is hindering the whole experience.

    I agree...


    I like the idea of specific races having specific class choices personally. It adds more depth. We all have our "wish list" combos...but it is what it is. :)

     

     

    • 38 posts
    April 1, 2020 12:49 AM PDT

    This discussion has been here for, like, 100 times.

    Brad said that he didn't do games but worlds. And this implies that the underlying fundament of his world/game is lore. To be consistent with that, every (or at least most) decisions must be lore driven. EQ is an excellent example - for instance a controversial decision to allow for Iksar monks has been quite believably explained by the lore.

    So if the current team wants to continue with this legacy, it seems obvious to me that there will be race/class restrictions because the lore simply doesn't allow for any combinations. One can turn it like one wants but a weak race wouldn't make warriors for the simple reason that they would all die out. An intellectually weak race wouldn't make enchanters for the same reason. A violent and agressive race wouldn't make meditative sages because they would have been ostracized. Etc.

    So while some players might want to have many or even all race/class combination, as long as Pantheon development is lore driven this will not happen.

    Personnaly I am perfectly OK with it because I like consistent and lore driven worlds and always choose my race on the basis of the lore first and my class second. In EQ I chose a Gnome who learned necromancy and became a famous tinkerer what made very much sense in the context of Norrath. I didn't even register that my Gnome could not be monk or druid because it simply wouldn't have made any sense.

    • 766 posts
    April 1, 2020 2:39 AM PDT

    opps lol, wrong thread...

    deleted!


    This post was edited by Hokanu at April 1, 2020 2:40 AM PDT
    • 29 posts
    April 1, 2020 8:09 AM PDT

    Progeny - YES - you don't even need to add bonuses to combat if you do this.  Having the ability to play a unique race/class combo is awesome!

     

    Iksar said:

    MauvaisOeil said:

    I'm fine with it. It's more a matter of expectations you put into your desires vs adaptating to the game.

     

    All/all games are bland and feel like race choice is just cosmetic, which to me is hindering the whole experience.

    This. The game does not need more race/class options opened up unless it is through progeny, which I support entirely.

    Vandraad said:

    Counterfleche said: Player has to unlock a race by getting another character of the same race to max level

    Ok.  That's something which will be very easy to do.  But, say you really want that Skar Wizard so you level up a Skar Warrio to 50 and then create your Skar Wizard.  There you are in Skargol...with no wizard class trainers.  The race doesn't offer wizards so there wouldn't be class trainers around. Are you just going to run off to the Human city then?  The city where you're KOS to everyone and everything too.

    And what about years later when the level cap inevitably goes up?  Is the rule still stuck at 50 or does it climb to the new level cap?

    The easy solution here is having the unlock/progeny option for something like a Skar Wizard require maxing the original characters faction with whichever race they want their progeny to start in. Then their new character can start just barely above KOS in whichever city that has/trains Wizards. 

     

    The idea with a system like this is it cuts out the "but muh RP" arguments by quite a bit. Instead of people forming their own assumed backstory about how their grandpa left the ogres of Broken Maw and gained the friendship and eventual acceptance of the humans of Thronefast, thus allowing their character to be raised as a wizard, the game would force them to MAKE that story. You want that? Make it happen. Play the grandpa first. Everyones first character starts as an average member of whichever race, future characters can take on a more storied history based on the accounts character history. 

    • 1357 posts
    April 1, 2020 8:41 AM PDT

    It's why EQ2 went ARAC.  The argument goes something like this:
    What's the point in having a class when it can only be played by a subset of races?  Why limit your customers in this way?  Why put the same development time and effort into something that objectively will be played less?

    An answer is:  Let's not, and get the largest possible audience we can. (EQ2 ARAC)
    Another answer is: Because "reasons" or lore. (EQ1, Warhammer Online, others)

    It does kind of suck for the classes that can only be played by two races, like Paladins, and Clerics/Rangers that can only be played by three, though.  That right there puts the iche in niche. ;)
    If they are going ARAC through Progeny, now would be a good time to confirm that as a launch day public design goal.

    • 1560 posts
    April 1, 2020 9:00 AM PDT
    The flip side is you dont want to add a race/class combo that is definitely better than the others.

    I can see a scenario where every melee dmg dealer has to be an ogre or they are considered not as good. That is the type of balance issue that needs to be avoided if they loosen the restrictions.
    • 1357 posts
    April 1, 2020 9:04 AM PDT

    Easy enough to avoid by tying initial racial benefits to the deity system, and then allowing arbitrary deity worship through difficult quests or progeny. 
    That way, if desired, anyone can worship any deity with enough faction, sacrifice, donation, time and effort, and thus gain the subset of all available deity benefits.
    Then... you can make things really powerful, and distinctive, and no-one can cry foul.  If you want it?  You can get it.  Either be that race, use progeny, or start your deity quest. :)

    • 38 posts
    April 1, 2020 9:04 AM PDT

    There are good lore reasons behind why there are restrictions. For example, Gnomes are essentially ethereal magic essence, so why would they be Warriors or any other tank? You wouldn't use glass as a shield. And yes, the devs could change the lore at will, but they've spent years refining the lore, so it seems silly to think they can just make something up lorewise just to expand the race/class combos. That being said, Joppa has said before that they are constantly revisiting the race/class combo list and changing it when it makes sense as the lore and world evolve, so the current one may not reflect what we'll see at launch, or even in beta, alpha, or PA5

    • 280 posts
    April 1, 2020 11:11 AM PDT

    lutorin said:

    This discussion has been here for, like, 100 times.

    Brad said that he didn't do games but worlds. And this implies that the underlying fundament of his world/game is lore. To be consistent with that, every (or at least most) decisions must be lore driven. EQ is an excellent example - for instance a controversial decision to allow for Iksar monks has been quite believably explained by the lore.

    snip...

    Exactly "Worlds" - as players; we need to deal with the laws, physics and Lore that created the world.  If you lobbying to change it even before you play is just crazy talk.  Let the world rest on it's own merits.  Any changes you are pushing will just be bending this new world, into the "cookie cutter worlds" that are already out there.  If it is about the play style you like, that's even a better reason not to make changes to race/class system.

    • 108 posts
    April 1, 2020 11:35 AM PDT

    uneko said:

    There are good lore reasons behind why there are restrictions. For example, Gnomes are essentially ethereal magic essence, so why would they be Warriors or any other tank? You wouldn't use glass as a shield. And yes, the devs could change the lore at will, but they've spent years refining the lore, so it seems silly to think they can just make something up lorewise just to expand the race/class combos. That being said, Joppa has said before that they are constantly revisiting the race/class combo list and changing it when it makes sense as the lore and world evolve, so the current one may not reflect what we'll see at launch, or even in beta, alpha, or PA5

     

     

    Still trying to understand the lore behind Gnome rogue's that one just doesnt make sense to me. I do like keeping the class race combos lore based but wouldn't mind seeing a little more of a selection. I also think Vjek's diety quest sounds very interesting could have alot of potential.


    This post was edited by SugarWood at April 1, 2020 11:37 AM PDT
    • 360 posts
    April 1, 2020 12:54 PM PDT

    i am 'ok' with the current race/class matrix, but i understand the 'want' as well.

    i do question a couple of the restrictions; no elf or hafling Clerics? 

    all good, i'll just go human. (will do dwarf if I can NOT be blue or gray) don't want to be a smurf or dark-iron 

    • 3380 posts
    April 1, 2020 2:48 PM PDT

    Roleplaying existed way before MMO's.  Unlike standard video game RPG's where you follow a prescribed story, one of the main allures of an open-world MMORPG is that you don't have to follow the golden path.  You should be able to forge your own backstory and history when your character enters the world rather than being born as the hero that is destined to save it.  If players can break out of the matrix through progeny that would be a huge plus when it comes to character development and players taking ownership of their identity/story.  A few roleplaying quotes to consider:

    "But roleplaying is not purely educational. It's also one of the most creative possible entertainments. Most entertainment is passive: the audience just sits and watches, without taking part in the creative process. In roleplaying, the "audience" joins in the creation, may introduce huge impact to the project. The GM is the chief storyteller, but the players are responsible for portraying their characters. If they want something to happen in the story, they make it happen, because they're in the story."

    "In some ways, the emphasis on character development has impeded progress in storytelling with RPGs. The central premise of these [computer RPGs] is that the player steadily builds his abilities by acquiring wealth, tools, weapons, and experience. This emphasis on character development tends to work against the needs of dramatic development - dramatic twists and turns clash with the prevailing tone of steady development. Fortunately, this impediment is not fundamental to the RPG genre; it is a cultural expectation rather than an architectural necessity."


    This post was edited by oneADseven at April 1, 2020 2:53 PM PDT
    • 588 posts
    April 1, 2020 3:20 PM PDT

    So first, I support having lore based restrictions on the race/class options, and I do NOT support removing those restrictions wholesale. But I find that when I chart the race and class options in the following ways, I notice that a couple of the races and classes at the bottom of each chart seem overwhelmingly restricted compared to the rest.

    While I don't dispute any part of VR's interpretation of lore, I think many new players at the time of release may well consider the restrictions an unfair burden on a race or class they are attracted to. I also think that friends who want to start and play together will be seriously dissuaded from considering Gnomes or Ogres from their choices due to the lack of group roles available.

    VR has done a great job so far of making every race & class interesting and appealing. I think a loosening of restrictions on Gnome & Ogre, Ranger & Paladin (maybe Cleric & D.L.) will draw more than a few potential players come opening day.

     

    Race    #Classes        #Group Roles   (Tank, Healer,Cc,Dps)
                  available       available
    ___________________________
    Human    14                4
    D. Myr     11                4
    Elf             9                4
    Archai*     7                4
    Dwarf       6                4
    Skar          6                4
    Halfling    5                4
    Gnome     5                2 C,D    
    Ogre         4                2 T,H    
     

    Class    #Races        #Continents
                  to Play         can start on
    _______________________
    Warrior      8              3
    Rogue        7               3
    Bard          6               3
    Druid        6               3
    Enchtr       5              3
    Shaman    5               3
    Wizard      5               3
    Summon*5               3
    Monk        4               3
    Necro       4               3
    D. Lord    4               2 Not on Whitethaw
    Cleric       3               3
    Ranger     3               1 Only on Kingsreach    
    Paladin     2               2 Not on Reignfall  

    *Has been announced that Summoner will be available to Archai


    This post was edited by Jothany at April 1, 2020 3:24 PM PDT
    • 1710 posts
    April 1, 2020 5:11 PM PDT

    @Jothany Just playing devil's advocate, I don't dispute the disparity, but I wonder: why does it matter?

    Are some players so attached to Gnome or Ogre that they won't play the game because of limited class choice?

    Are we bothered that we won't see many Gnomes or Ogres around, given an even class/role distrubtion?

    That's just a couple of questions, but I guess my overall point is: Given we aren't offending real races of people by under-representing them (or some such weirdness) why does it matter?

    What if elves could only play wizards? So what? *shrug*

    Are a good proportion of people *really* that attached to a particular race and class combo that they will be upset that VR's lore precludes them?

    I repeat: I'm just playing devil's advocate (though I actually do not see the big deal hehe)


    This post was edited by disposalist at April 1, 2020 5:11 PM PDT
    • 588 posts
    April 1, 2020 7:03 PM PDT

    disposalist said: @Jothany Just playing devil's advocate, I don't dispute the disparity, but I wonder: why does it matter?

    I already said why I thought it mattered: "I think many new players at the time of release may well consider the restrictions an unfair burden on a race or class they are attracted to. I also think that friends who want to start and play together will be seriously dissuaded from considering Gnomes or Ogres from their choices due to the lack of group roles available."

    Perhaps I need to explain that (in my opinion) if a game mechanic makes a potential player feel like the character they wish to play has been shortchanged in some manner that denies them as big a role in the game as MOST of the other characters will get, then that will inherently reduce their happiness with the game and (obviously) the odds of them buying it. For a real example of this, just go to the Dire Lord forums and note the discussions where people have been (and some still are) concerned that D.L. will be excluded from SOME content because he can't wear plate armor, regardless of how much total content he CAN play.

    Many gamers won't be interested in Pantheon because of foundational qualities of the game that just don't interest them, and I've never endorsed (to my recollection) making major changes in the game rules to broaden its appeal. Removing all race/class restrictions would be such a suggestion.

    There's no denying that more customers will generally be better for VR (and us) then fewer. My comment suggests changing a few limitations that seem to me to have the most likelihood to cause a negative impact.

    As for most of the rest of your questions, the general answer is that I think my suggestion will make Pantheon a better game for everyone. If you think it will make the game worse in some way, you'll have to make a specific point if you wish me to respond to it.

     

     

    • 1710 posts
    April 2, 2020 1:05 AM PDT

    @Jothany I suppose the question really was: Do we really think there will be any significant number of people that are actually put off the whole game because they are so attached to their pet race-class and it doesn't exist?

    I totally get that there will be some individuals. There always are *some* individuals that can't appear to let go a certain race-class, even though what they are holding onto is from a different game/lore.

    (Incidentally, there was a guy in the PA with me that was moaning about the dire lord getting chain, not plate, because he likes the image of a plate warrior, but then when we got him a full set of chain, he was really pleased with how it looked. I really think that some folks that might be 'upset' about pet race-class combos maybe just need to get over it, though I realise if they don't try it in the first place, they can't get over it).

    To flip the idea, I've read in other threads some people that are annoyed that the races are largely too much alike to other games/books/films representations of hero races, and why can't we have something completely different.

    What I'm getting at is: Is it worth homegenising the race-class choices in order to avoid upsetting a minority of extreme fans of a particular race-class combo?

    And to answer your "If you think it will make the game worse in some way" question; Yes, making all races-class combos available will require, so some extent, either all races or all classes or both to be so similar that there is little interesting diversity left (ironically, raising the race-class choice reduces the diversity of the individual races and classes). To make all/all available is to undo a lot of what makes each race and class distinct and interesting.

    In my experience and opinion, all-all race-class combos is one of the many things that 'modern' MMORPGs have introduced, thinking it's a cool and harmless idea, but it has quite deep impact with significant, and maybe too much, negative effect. You just end up with one race, somewhat homogenised classes with a variety of race/class-based 'skins'.

    Again, I repeat, I'm just being devil's advocate, really. I don't have super strong feelings about it and I exaggerate somewhat to make the point (though clearly I lean toward maintaining distinct race-class choices). I am hoping not to sound combative - I'm just interested in your opinion ;^)

    • 1787 posts
    April 2, 2020 2:14 AM PDT

    Perhaps 15 years of more and more loose MMO simply put players in a position where they are used to get what THEY want instead of choosing what they can.

     

    Same goes over the covid with a non negligible part of the population beeing unable to stay at home because they are used to do what they want.

    • 56 posts
    April 2, 2020 3:07 AM PDT

    I like class race restrictions as long as they fit the lore.
    But it doesn't seem to fit all right now. Combinations like halfling fighters, the magical race gnome as non magical rogues, the military race Ogres as druid. The bitter Myr scream to be paladins, but I never seen any lore having them to fight of undead. so that might fit, but they only need one incident. Dwarves who themselves are created out of earth and ice cannot be summoners instead they are charismatic enchanters ?  
    And in case of humans, they are versatile, but should they really be that versatile ? 

    If Lore is chosen as meaning for class race restriction. Then please really stick with it and explain it well. 

    A side effect of class race restriction is that you will see less of the races with a limited number of classes. Myr and Humans will be the most played race. But that only means they are the most succesful race Lorewise. That fits with the world





    This post was edited by Qulash at April 2, 2020 3:07 AM PDT
    • 259 posts
    April 2, 2020 7:40 AM PDT

    I would prefer class restrictions based on race and lore remain intact.

    Is the matrix that they have currently, the golden rule for me? Not necessarily... But there should be some restrictions (even if not the current form) in place to add to the idea that "decisions matter" from character creation all the way until end game. 

     

    Some races based on their stature should not be tanking...

    Some races based on their intelligence should not be casting...

    Some races lack the wisdom to heal and should not be healing...

    Some races are inherently evil and should not be a good aligned class...

    Some races are inherently good and should not be an evil aligned class...

    etc etc...

    • 155 posts
    April 2, 2020 1:37 PM PDT
    Choices only matter if you can actually choose.
    • 3380 posts
    April 2, 2020 1:53 PM PDT

    Imagine if certain classes could only be played by males or females due to lore.  Would that add value to the game?  Would that be a meaningful choice?  So you want to play a female?  Enjoy the reduced matrix since females are inherently more/less this/that.  Terminus is supposed to be a world, not a game.  Wisdom is not something that is inherent.  Wisdom is something that is developed.  If you want to talk about meaningful choice there are plenty of ways to achieve that outside of these artificial restrictions.  Racial passives/actives could come into play.  Starting stats could come into play.  Perception pings could come into play.  Convenience could come into play.  So you want to be a gnome warrior?  Your racial passive/active is balanced more around mage-like qualities.  Your HP is lower than other races and the extra mana pool you get for being a gnome is wasted.  The warrior class trainer might be on a remote side of the city, unlike the popular wizard/necromancer/enchanter/summoner trainers.  Or, maybe the gnome city just doesn't have a warrior trainer at all and players would be forced to travel to a different city in order to unlock/upgrade some of their abilities.

    There are countless ways to make sure that each race has a certain feel to them, that their culture is properly realized in the world, and that they have race-specific traits that help distinguish them.  Players make the world truly feel alive.  We should be able to create our own backstory and make real choices when it comes to developing our character.  That is what an open-world game is all about ... making choices.  Going where you want to go, doing what you want to do, being what you want to be, for better or worse.  Preventing gnome warriors from existing because they "don't make sense" is hand-holding.  There are plenty of people who would purposely play some of the oddball combos because they embrace challenge.  Allow freedom and let players enjoy responsibly.  If something like that requires progeny, so be it.


    This post was edited by oneADseven at April 2, 2020 1:58 PM PDT
    • 445 posts
    April 2, 2020 2:39 PM PDT

    Simple answer NO ..... no need to change the race restrictions , lore and faction matters .. so no .. dont change it unless necessary  to change it due to lore or faction .