In original EQ you had some classes that required a decent amount of skill and attention to play. Then you had the bard class which kept you crazy busy keeping them songs weaved. Then you had the cleric which *at times* simply stayed meditating until it was time to pop up and toss in a heal and then back down you went. Warriors and rogues also had very few skills to use in group combat.
Are there times when you just want to unwind and play a class that is simple to play or do you think all classes should require at least a moderate amount of skill to play properly?
I wouldn't say boring classes, and if we are going to say 'boring' classes then I don't think it is a good thing. Simple classes however, I think can be a good thing (and I don't always find that boring, especially if the depth of the class is variable). It might be worth it to have some kind of trade-off for this however, like maybe classes that are more complex have more utility or a higher damage ceiling (accompanied by a lower floor ... sortof a higher risk and reward scale).
Not to offend, or step on toes :P
But some people might prefer that less-demanding class. And frankly some people *should* be playing those classes. If you bother to learn other classes, or have a decent amount of common sense, you can notice when someone doesn't really care about how they play.
The pet-class that doesn't micro manage their pet half the time, the warrior who can't handle taunting more than one or two mobs, the cleric who is slow to heal. Some people either simply don't have the attention span for it, or maybe are just too social and can't multitask - I DON'T KNOW THE REASON.
But I'd wager we've all seen it. In those instances, everyone would benefit from those people playing the more simple classes, a nuker who can at least fulfill their dmg requirement by throwing out the occasional nuke. The support heal class that can help when needed but isn't required 90% of the time to keep from wiping.
I would be fine with a class or two being that end of the spectrum, but personally I'd rather see most classes have the bard type of range for potential of usefulness.
Every class should have the ability to be boring and get the requisite grinding done without pushing envelopes, but every class should have combos, synergies, and toolkits that allow the skilled, dedicated and crafty players to push the envelope and do crazy stuff solo or in groups.
EQ1 enchanters are a great example of this. You can be slow/mezz/haste/clarity for the rest of time, but add in charm, and the game gets way more fun and involved, and you push envelopes. It's as much fun as a game can be imho, and the "may break any second and you cannot get that aggro off you" aspect of Charm makes it really exciting.
Zandil said:
A Boring class is subjective, what one person calls boring another calls complex.
This is certainly true to an extent, but I think we can all agree classes like EQ1's warrior that only had auto attack and a taunt button were pretty simplistic compared to playing many other classes.
I suppose you might think I was bored sitting there as a gnome cleric meditating but more often than not I was on the edge of my chair yelling, 'come on, come on!" at the mana bar as I watched my tank hit the purple club and where oh where did the ranger pick up that add and why in the world is the chanter getting his ass kicked and the rogue thought he'd get a pickpocket in and got smacked for it....
Boring? Not really...because sometimes it's the antici.....
pation that gets you!
I'm not sure there can really be such a thing as a "boring" class - ok, there probably could... but I don't think there ARE any. I DO think there are classes that some people like and some people don't... those they don't like are more likely to be relegated to the "boring" pile for them personally.
I think the detrimental thing for an MMO is if all classes are the SAME... or even if there are all different classes, but not enough of a diverse selection. Give folks several choices, let them pick. Some will gravitate to this, some to that. And that is good.