Reading through the latest thoughts made me wonder.
Yes, humans being a 'younger race' might well preclude them from the Shaman class.
Gnomes and the state of their being do not mesh well with the rogue.
If necromancy does not require a high charisma, I could see Ogres using their might as a wedge in dominating the undead.
Dropping rogue from the dwarves in favor of summoning is intriguing. I like the whole aspect of a mystic and artisan decking out their 'mentals.
I assumed, (and you know what that does) druids and rangers have much the same relationship that clerics and paladins do. Seems odd that a race with the druid as a choice does not have a ranger as well.
Shoehorning elves into a Divine line of work and away from nature is odd upon reflection.
NOW, I can agree with game lore influencing race/class matrix.
Add: For those questioning the Halfling Dire Lord decision, the devs have addressed that Halflings have a special affiinity with the Dire... and the Warrior focuses on physical stature and strength. Manouk also mentioned Elfs not being Shaman due to their longevity disqualifying them from communicating with esoteric spirits, and I would argue the exact opposite - having long lives would make elven spirits that much more esoteric (especially compared to a Human spirit).
Iksar said: If physical stature/strength were limitations disallowing warriors then the same should hold true for Dire Lord, Ranger, and even Rogue.
I disagree.
Of course, real history would suggest that ALL characters that wear heavy armor and use melee weapons should be huge and very muscular to be successful, but this is fantasy so you have to draw a line somewhere...
From the info we have about the 3 Tanks, the Warrior is quite arguably the most 'physical' oriented of them, with little to no magic to draw on and abilities that depend upon physical strenth and several combat abilities that boost that strength.
Conversely, Dire Lord is pretty clearly the most magically oriented Tank and currently the only one who doesn't list Endurance as one of his combat resources. Using fear, intimidation and an almost Monk-like control over his own body - specifically his blood and his Essence, which sounds very similar to Chi - he would be the most resonable tank for a race of small stature to do well as.
As far as Rogue and Ranger go, there is a long history of successful melee fighters who depend on superior coordination and quick reflexes to overcome larger, stronger opponents both in fantasy and in real life. A perfect example is Bruce Lee, who sources say was 5'7" (1.71m) and no more than 150 lbs. (65-70 kg) throughout his career.
Well, I've thought about this one for several days and it's been difficult for me to come with anything for this specific conversation...and then it just finally hit me.
You've said that there were going to be updates to the race/class matrix for quite a while and here it is!! So all I have to add is
"THANK YOU for sharing this with us :)!!"
Then maybe not have a tank. VR are the ones that brought real world into the fantasy by taking away warrior because they are too small.
I'd doubt there would be much difference in weight between chain and plate and carrying around/swinging double weapons or two-handers seems to me like they would take the same cut of strength. Unless we are getting more class lore here where The Dire enhances the individual at all times allowing them to basically be superhuman(or superhalfling) then it seems kind of lame to take warrior away. A tiny person getting absolutely smashed by notably larger foes seems like it would be a detriment regardless, especially since DL has less direct physical mitigation by being more focused on magical mitigation.
Rogue and Ranger, sure precision/speed is part of it but strength plays a large role in effectiveness. Bow draw strength or generally being able to puncture armor/hides/bone with melee or otherwise effectively harm all manor of fantasy creatures.
While we are at it, why do gnome still have rogue? It seemed to sort of make sense when rogue was based on magical stealth etc but I don't see it now...
Darch said:For those questioning the Halfling Dire Lord decision, the devs have addressed that Halflings have a special affiinity with the Dire...
How and why though? Did it come with their curse? I don't remember seeing anything about that in the lore...sorry if I missed it.
Even if they do have the connection to the dire, why do they choose to use it? They have fire but do not choose wizards nor enchanting, but for some reason they choose to use their dire to become incredibly..dark.. people. As opposed to the uppity and frivolous nature halflings are portrayed with.
Archai- I am happy with the class options.
Dark Myr - I am happy with the class options.
Dwarf - I am happy with the class options
Elf - I am happy with the class option, plus the number of options makes sense given there are two factions in the race.
Gnome - I am happy with the class options. It makes sense that they would mostly be limited to spell casters based on their lore. The rogue option does confuse me a bit, but maybe there is something in their lore that explains that.
Halfling- I am happy with the class options. I could see them possibly being enchanters, but I also think there are enough enchanter options.
Human- I understand why humans can be everything, however, I hope that their base stats are mostly generic to reflect the fact that they can be everything.
Ogre- I will come back to this race below.
Slar - I am happy with the class options and the addition of the ranger class. I kind of think head hunters when I think skar + rangers.
Ogres- These guys really need more options. I think I would start by adding bard to their available classes. I could see their tribal nature lending itself to music in the form of war drums and battle songs.
Other than that I feel like the game is lacking a two-handed melee DPS option. I don't know how DPS options are going to be added to the current tanking classes, but right now those classes are really the only ones that would make use of most two-handed weapons (staves excluded). With strict class roles and classes being designed around those roles I have to ask which tanks are going to want to use two-handed weapons as their taking option. I could see Dire Lords using two-handed weapons to tank, but warriors and paladins preferring a two-handed to tank is a bit harder to imagine. Getting back to the Ogres, if a two-handed melee DPS option is added, I could see ogres being a prime candidate for this class.
FatedEmperor said:
Ogres- These guys really need more options. I think I would start by adding bard to their available classes. I could see their tribal nature lending itself to music in the form of war drums and battle songs.
Other than that I feel like the game is lacking a two-handed melee DPS option. I don't know how DPS options are going to be added to the current tanking classes, but right now those classes are really the only ones that would make use of most two-handed weapons (staves excluded). With strict class roles and classes being designed around those roles I have to ask which tanks are going to want to use two-handed weapons as their taking option. I could see Dire Lords using two-handed weapons to tank, but warriors and paladins preferring a two-handed to tank is a bit harder to imagine. Getting back to the Ogres, if a two-handed melee DPS option is added, I could see ogres being a prime candidate for this class.
The trouble with ogres is that if we give them physical dps classes, their passive abilities would frankly be incredible. Stun resistance, strength to damage, and crit chance, all in one place? It's crazy.
Two handed dps options might be something like a berserker, but remember that VR may want to save some class ideas for expansions so they sell better. Also, rangers and monks will very likely have powerful 2h options.
Also, rangers and monks will very likely have powerful 2h options.
Have you heard something, or is that just optimism?
Currently, there are 8 known 2-hand melee weapons in the game.
Ranger can use 2, Great Sword & Great Blade.
Monk can use 1, Long Staff. Rogue can use 1, Long Spear.
BeaverBiscuit said:The trouble with ogres is that if we give them physical dps classes, their passive abilities would frankly be incredible. Stun resistance, strength to damage, and crit chance, all in one place? It's crazy.
Two handed dps options might be something like a berserker, but remember that VR may want to save some class ideas for expansions so they sell better. Also, rangers and monks will very likely have powerful 2h options.
There will always be races that are stronger for different classes. I mean healing-wise, elves take the cake. So I wouldn't mind seeing others with class options that maximize their racials.
As for Monks and Rangers. Monks can only use Martial Fists, Fist Weapons, and Handwraps according to their class page, and now apparently staves. I could see pole axes/spears as well, but I won't hold my breath until confirmation is made. Rangers have some two-handed options but a lot of their kit appears to focus on bow use and weaving in and out of combat based on that bow use. They have some ability to DPS with two-handed weapons but a good portion of their DPS is most likely going to be tied to their range weapon.
I also understand that VR wants to save some classes for future expansions which is fine. However, that doesn't mean I can't look at the current classes and see where there is a hole. I think looking at the classes available to ogres and trying to figure out what fits with that race, just further puts put that hole under the microscope.
The impact of racial abilities will depend on many things which we do not know yet. Since anything we see before alpha may change - perhaps dramatically. Since we still have the completion of pre-alpha, development of alpha, complation of alpha and development of beta ahead of us. Major changes after beta is released - unlikely.
Factors include what the final racial adjustments will be, how significantly they actually affect things at low level, how rapidly characters typically get to higher level and how significantly the racials affect things at higher level.
Thus if an ogre racial is significant at level 1, a bit nice at level 10 and lost in rounding error at level 20 most of us will not worry too much about it.
dorotea said:Thus if an ogre racial is significant at level 1, a bit nice at level 10 and lost in rounding error at level 20 most of us will not worry too much about it.
If this ends up being true for any racial active or passive, then it wasn't a good idea in the first place. That's just terrible design. The differences between races and how they affect a class available to that race should remain tangible, noticeable, from level 1 to 50 (and beyond when the level cap is inevitably raised). Anything less is unacceptable.
If this ends up being true for any racial active or passive, then it wasn't a good idea in the first place. That's just terrible design. The differences between races and how they affect a class available to that race should remain tangible, noticeable, from level 1 to 50 (and beyond when the level cap is inevitably raised). Anything less is unacceptable.
Definitely agree with this. If racial abilities only matter for a bit and then fade gradually to not mattering anymore than having different racial abilities is pretty pointless.
Ranarius said:If this ends up being true for any racial active or passive, then it wasn't a good idea in the first place. That's just terrible design. The differences between races and how they affect a class available to that race should remain tangible, noticeable, from level 1 to 50 (and beyond when the level cap is inevitably raised). Anything less is unacceptable.Definitely agree with this. If racial abilities only matter for a bit and then fade gradually to not mattering anymore than having different racial abilities is pretty pointless.
To what extent though? If those races still have differences that can be noticeable but can otherwise be achiveved by others later on via item progression or buffs etc then are they still "pointless"? Dark Myr have water breathing and swim speed; does the availability of the following render their racials as bad?
Imbue Trait: Swiftgill’s Fin
Imbue the aquatic nature of the Swiftgill into an ally, increases their swimming speed and allowing them to breathe underwater.
Same thing for Ogre an stun immunity, which I recall being granted via other buffs that aren't listed on this site anymore but likely still exist?
To the extent that "Imbue Trait: Swiftgill's Fin" should not be an ability that all characters earn, but a buff that dark Myr get naturally and others can get from a buff cast on them, I suppose.
Dark Myr will still be the only race that can breath under water without a buff, and I'd assume their increased swim speed would be faster at "max level" compared with other races swim speed at their "max level."
If it all "evens out in the end" by natural progression I think it's a waste. The racial abilities should probably be above and beyond buffs and items...and if they are not I suppose it would mean you hit some sort of hard cap sooner with less items or buffs, and your "bonus" is that you can use those item slots for something else that other players couldn't.
I don't know exactly :) I just think it's important that racial abilities are "in play" for their entire life.
BeaverBiscuit said:Darch said:For those questioning the Halfling Dire Lord decision, the devs have addressed that Halflings have a special affiinity with the Dire...
How and why though? Did it come with their curse? I don't remember seeing anything about that in the lore...sorry if I missed it.
Even if they do have the connection to the dire, why do they choose to use it? They have fire but do not choose wizards nor enchanting, but for some reason they choose to use their dire to become incredibly..dark.. people. As opposed to the uppity and frivolous nature halflings are portrayed with.
Darch said:As far as halflings being portrayed as "uppity and frivolous" - who's to say that psychopaths aren't uppity and frivolous? =)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bPgXZAQegRY
Here is a good explanation of Halfling losing warrior and gaining Dire Lord (they don't want to have too many "spoilers"):
https://youtu.be/vKFiPnbKYIA?t=273
Thank you!
While I'm not sure if the next step of trickery is sucking your and other people's blood and then very violently killing (with that blood), This does bring me some hope that the decision was made intelligently by VR. Hopefully perceptive Halfling Direlords can learn about this connection to the dire.
Jothany said:Also, rangers and monks will very likely have powerful 2h options.Have you heard something, or is that just optimism?
Currently, there are 8 known 2-hand melee weapons in the game.
Ranger can use 2, Great Sword & Great Blade.
Monk can use 1, Long Staff. Rogue can use 1, Long Spear.
well, yea, monks with 2h staffs in eq were very strong, as an example most people here will understand.
Having limited options doesn't mean you won't use those options well. Your abilities having more damage because you use a 2hander can typically apply to better burst damage, which is certainly useful. Of course, there is no actual information yet.
To switch your argument, we really have no information that rogues will be all that competitive with daggers, either. Backstab could always have too much cooldown or resource cost compared to long spear options.
FatedEmperor said:
As for Monks and Rangers. Monks can only use Martial Fists, Fist Weapons, and Handwraps according to their class page, and now apparently staves. I could see pole axes/spears as well, but I won't hold my breath until confirmation is made. Rangers have some two-handed options but a lot of their kit appears to focus on bow use and weaving in and out of combat based on that bow use. They have some ability to DPS with two-handed weapons but a good portion of their DPS is most likely going to be tied to their range weapon.
I don't think we know that rangers will be primarily ranged, I could be wrong, but it seems aimed at giving you the ability to use both equally. Either way, if you can be effective with a 2h sword all is well while you wait for a berserkish class, no?
Vandraad said:dorotea said:Thus if an ogre racial is significant at level 1, a bit nice at level 10 and lost in rounding error at level 20 most of us will not worry too much about it.
If this ends up being true for any racial active or passive, then it wasn't a good idea in the first place. That's just terrible design. The differences between races and how they affect a class available to that race should remain tangible, noticeable, from level 1 to 50 (and beyond when the level cap is inevitably raised). Anything less is unacceptable.
I entirely agree that one's race should be significant far beyond the early levels. This leads into inevitable discussions of ability and gear "creep" and whether the racial abilities are absolute or relative.
By gear creep I mean that if an ogre gets plus one strength and by level 50 she can get plus 50 to strength using gear or easily obtained buffs - the racial isn't so meaningful. May all the Gods of Pantheon grant that we get much closer to the original D&D system where +1 makes a large difference even later in life.
By relative abilities I mean that if the Gods fail to heed my prayer the ogre shouldn't get +1 at all. She should get e.g. a 10% increase to strength including strength from items and buffs, but never below +1.
Of course, the Gods answer all prayers. This fact is not universally accepted because almost always the answer is "no".
I overall like the new mastrix changes, and really appreciate you all taking the feedback of the community so seriously.
I do also echo several others in stating ogres need more options. I would say even one caster dps would be fine. Either necro or summoner would fit well I think.
They already seem to be one of the least played classes in most games that have them, so why not give them some more love? Would be fun to play with their stats/gear on a caster considering the racials they have.
As I said above, I really appreciate the new matrix, but if I were to change anything more at this point it would be to remove a class or two from the Humans. If I were to use any kind of reasoning, it would be either to remove Necromancer and/or Shaman; I say one (or both) of those because one could argue that (for Druid) death is a "natural" part of the life cycle, and manipulating that is "unnatural" and an unforgivable heracy to Masae, and (for Shaman) a short lived race, relatively new to Terminus, would be less likely to have bonds with esoteric spirits (when excluding Dwarves and Halflings(?)).
But again, I like the changes regardless of the unrealistic assignment of Humans being the master race.
Thunderleg said:Gnomes and the state of their being do not mesh well with the rogue.
I think gnome rogues fit just fine if they spin it properly. Make Gnome rogues poison masters. They focus on espionage for intel gathering and assassinations through complex alchemic poisons. It would be a perfect thematic fit to focus on the int side of rogues and not simply dex rogue stabs good.
The matrix is fine. Nice spread generally. I would like to see a class or two (new ones) that it didnt make sense for humans to be able to practice. Something embedded into the world that humans are not capable of understanding/feeling/attaching to. For the future though :D