Forums » Pantheon Classes

Beastlord?

    • 5 posts
    August 18, 2016 1:24 PM PDT

    Beastlord has been favorite toon in EQ is there any chance that we might see one in Pantheon.

    • 2013 posts
    August 19, 2016 12:16 PM PDT

    Im sure we will, but probably in an expansion.

    • 516 posts
    August 22, 2016 5:54 PM PDT

    LMAO - I recall at the start of EQ2 - BEASTLORDS WILL NEVER EVER APPEAR IN THIS TITLE!!!!

    • 28 posts
    September 19, 2016 3:52 PM PDT

    Nephretiti said:

    LMAO - I recall at the start of EQ2 - BEASTLORDS WILL NEVER EVER APPEAR IN THIS TITLE!!!!

     

    LOL I remember that too!   so much for that --- as well as other "we'll never haves"  ....  and there were one or two more 

    • 103 posts
    September 24, 2016 11:39 AM PDT

    So I have never played a Beastlord in EQ, they had just come out in EQ1 when I left the game. Can anyone ELI5 the difference between a Beastlord and something like the WoW Hunter? Is there anything similar there? What is the playstyle like for a Beastlord?

    • 5 posts
    October 5, 2016 4:28 AM PDT

    Unlike the WoW Hunter Clasic EQ beastlord was a melee toon with shammy style buffing, slow ability also.  Pets actually got buffs to haste them and do other effects such as snare, haste, etc.  EQ and Wow are differant games altogether so is hard to compare.

    • 103 posts
    October 7, 2016 8:19 AM PDT
    So more like the EQ Shadow Knight? Melee class with a melee pet and some spells?
    • 22 posts
    October 7, 2016 8:59 AM PDT

    more a hybrid of monk/shaman with a tanky pet and ghetto slows.

    • 97 posts
    October 11, 2016 6:10 PM PDT

    Loved my BL would be great to be able to play one again.

    • 516 posts
    November 17, 2016 8:31 AM PST

    I would really like to see some specific classes that are only playable by ONE race.  Sounds crazy right?  But all these races are coming in from different worlds.  It seems that they would have some styles that only they had thought of.  I would dare to say that Myrefolk have a way of fighting in the oceans that could not be used by ANY other race...

    So sure, why NOT a beastlord?  But only playable by one race.  Probably Skar or Ogre. 

    • 4420 posts
    November 17, 2016 11:56 AM PST

    Nephretiti said:

    I would really like to see some specific classes that are only playable by ONE race.  Sounds crazy right?  But all these races are coming in from different worlds.  It seems that they would have some styles that only they had thought of.  I would dare to say that Myrefolk have a way of fighting in the oceans that could not be used by ANY other race...

    So sure, why NOT a beastlord?  But only playable by one race.  Probably Skar or Ogre. 

    I like the concept, but I think a better implementation would be to make sure that Race affects so much more than just your appearance and your faction. Each race/class combination should have it's own unique feel. And I'm not talking about each race just having one special Racial ability or whatever. Race should be intertwined with all aspects of a class's playstyle. Cause you're totally right - an Ogre Warrior should feel COMPLETELY different than a Dark Myr Warrior, for example. "Warrior" is a pretty broad term. It leaves a lot of room for each race's interpretation, based on the lore. Their abilities, tactics, etc. are all gonna unique. This massively increases the game's replayability if I can roll up a Gnome Wizard and have a entirely different gaming experience from when I was leveling up my Elf Wizard because not only are the starting cities and base stats different, but a lot of the spells are different too, for example. I understand this would be a lot of work for the devs, but I think it would be worth it.

    • 8 posts
    December 4, 2016 4:14 PM PST

    As much as they've talked about having no pet classes, I can't see them ever implementing a beastlord.  I love the BL from EQ1 and like the idea that you and a pet can go to town killing something.  Let the pet off-tank or use it for extra DPS.  As much as I like the idea of a class that can take on some solo content with a pet, I think they are not going to let this happen.  The devs (somewhere) said that pets will be available to all classes, but they will provide some small buff, like mana regen for the wizard in EQ1.  They won't be full blown pet classes like mages or BL from EQ1. 

    • 1034 posts
    December 5, 2016 10:24 PM PST

    Kurgon999 said:

    So I have never played a Beastlord in EQ, they had just come out in EQ1 when I left the game. Can anyone ELI5 the difference between a Beastlord and something like the WoW Hunter? Is there anything similar there? What is the playstyle like for a Beastlord?

     

    I guess you could think of them like a survival hunter in WoW's latest xpac, or think of them just like a monk with a pet ;)

    • 1897 posts
    December 26, 2016 3:23 PM PST

    GioCefalu said:

    As much as they've talked about having no pet classes, I can't see them ever implementing a beastlord.  I love the BL from EQ1 and like the idea that you and a pet can go to town killing something.  Let the pet off-tank or use it for extra DPS.  As much as I like the idea of a class that can take on some solo content with a pet, I think they are not going to let this happen.  The devs (somewhere) said that pets will be available to all classes, but they will provide some small buff, like mana regen for the wizard in EQ1.  They won't be full blown pet classes like mages or BL from EQ1. 

    Where did I miss them saying No Pet Classes? I thought the summoner and necromancer were Pantheon's pet classes?

    Can you provide the link?


    This post was edited by Beefcake at December 26, 2016 3:24 PM PST
    • 8 posts
    December 26, 2016 4:43 PM PST

    Ok, I "think" this is the thread I was looking for.  I may be mis-remembering it some because I thought there was more back and forth discussion by devs about how they did NOT want combat based pets, but I may have been reading into it a little too much now that I am re-reading it.

    https://www.pantheonmmo.com/content/forums/topic/3470/-/view/page/1

    On a side note, I just found this one below, which does sound like they have permanent pets planned.

    https://www.pantheonmmo.com/content/forums/topic/3448/pets-and-pantheon/view/page/1

    On page 3 of the first thread, Brad lists off some specifics about how he sees pets being used, and it seems they are all very temporary to me.  See quote below; I bolded the parts that stuck out to me about the temporary or non-combat based nature of pets.  To me, this is VERY different from EQ and my thoughts of a persistent pet.  A mage/summoner pet that dies before the mobs gets to the group?  Direlord (SK) pet that turns on him?  The wizzie and ranger can't use pets during combat (in the examples below).  The shaman pet would trigger a support function but couldn't attack the enemy. He even mentions that they would be useful in combat but unable to engage.  Again, these are all just taken from the snippet below, but with all of the non-combat based examples (or limited combat abilities) that he is providing, I just don't see how they would be planning a Beastlord, which is is very much a combat based, persistent-pet based class.  While nothing is written in stone, I just don't foresee a BeastLord class coming, which is what I really wanted to play.  I kind of like the idea of a mercenary type class where I can accomplish a little more when solo as I don't have a lot of time for playing extended periods of time like I did when I fist played EQ.  Brad specifically mentions avoiding exactly what I'm kind of looking for with a pet class.  /sigh

    Aradune said:

    A Druid charms animal and it stays his pet, levels up, but can only be summoned outdoors and in certain climates...


    A Ranger summons a hound to hunt a mob or to help him forage but cannot maintain its presence while fighting.


    Between fights, a wizard summons an owl familiar to help him mem faster, but cannot maintain it during combat (he could not cast spells due to how much focus is necessary to keep the owl in this plane with him)


    A Summoner sends in a fire elemental to taunt a mob, equipping it with some items (likely not very valuable ones), but it dies before it can bring the mob to where the group is waiting...


    A Direlord summons a skeleton by animating a dead mob which then assists him in combat... until his focus fades and the skeleton turns on him.


    A Crusader leads his noble war horse into the depths even though he cannot mount it in a dungeon, and it fights by his side, weaker than a player, but very talented at taunting/rescuing.


    A Shaman summons a spirit being during a portion of combat. That being applies AoE buffs to his allies but it cannot engage the enemy directly due to its ethereal nature.


    Pets require resources. They can require focus. They can be useful during combat but not actually able to engage. They can help during non-combat exploration, travel, and resource gathering.


    They are not something every class would necessarily have access to, but in context, many (most?) of our classes would have some sort of 'pet' in a high fantasy world.


    They are not mercenaries or proxies for other group members.


    They would not be always in a summoned state making it so that if you saw 6 players in a group, you'd *always* see 12 entities.


    I continue to appreciate the comments, even the skepticsm, and the assumptions that we would do this poorly, or exactly like some other game you didn't like. I don't want you to hold back :) What I would also appreciate, however, is taking a little time, thinking this through, and imagining scenarios where this could be pretty cool. Add resource management to your thoughts, various restrictions that make sense in the context of a world where the environment truly matters, how a pet could benefit a class without just being another combattant in the group, etc.  You guys can do it -- come up with positive ideas and examples -- solutions to problems you've seen in the past.  Yeah, it's harder than just citing extreme examples of absurdity, or pointing to another game and an aspect of it you didn't like, or applying only the logic 'if not in EQ, do not want!'....  but you can do it :)  You did sign up to contribute ideas, help build upon ideas, to seek solutions and make Pantheon an amazing game, right?  It wasn't just to throw stones at design docs I open up and share with you, right?

    Look at the title to this thread -- do you want to help us *design* or just be an alarmist?

     

     

    • 1897 posts
    December 26, 2016 5:15 PM PST

    Based on the 6/3/2016 post of Aradume in the first thread you posted, I think the post you quote is more from the transient pet section, not the permanent pets.

    • 8 posts
    December 26, 2016 5:38 PM PST

    Beefcake said:

    Based on the 6/3/2016 post of Aradume in the first thread you posted, I think the post you quote is more from the transient pet section, not the permanent pets.

     

    I hope you are correct.  I am really looking forward to playing a Beast Lord / Beast Master type class.  Maybe one permanent pet and a few that you summon as needed.  I literally think of the 80s movie BeastMaster.  I think the lore would be cool, and I want the playstyle of a permanent pet class as I mentioned earlier.  Otherwise, I guess I'm going DireLord.

    • 1897 posts
    December 26, 2016 5:48 PM PST

    Don't know if a beast lord class will happen. There is a lot of backlash from the way SOE implemented it. Although the idea and theme is solid, their implementation soured people to anything called beast lord.

    However, I only played WoW shortly, but I enjoyed the hunter class and its pet options.

    • 8 posts
    December 26, 2016 6:09 PM PST

    Beefcake said:

    Don't know if a beast lord class will happen. There is a lot of backlash from the way SOE implemented it. Although the idea and theme is solid, their implementation soured people to anything called beast lord.

    However, I only played WoW shortly, but I enjoyed the hunter class and its pet options.

     

    That's precisely how I think the BL should work, in my opinion.  You have a permanent pet that you tame, level up, feed it, give it special abilities, etc.  It would become part of your character and would be able to add DPS, off-tank, etc.

    • 70 posts
    January 21, 2017 10:09 AM PST

    If there was a beastlord who could tame, train and keep wild animals... and there was a good variety of animals, including a few rare-ish ones, available for this, I know my wife would play.  Even better if they can breed the animals to produce new animals or animals with various stats/abilities. I remember something about breeding or genetically engineering animals in SWG as a pretty cool concept.

    • 1897 posts
    January 21, 2017 1:06 PM PST

    I loved the WoW Hunter, if they could do it similarly, I would like it.

    • 177 posts
    January 24, 2017 9:28 AM PST

    I too loved the Beastlord from EQ... would be great to see it here.

    As to it's comparison with WoW Hunter, outside the pet the classes are very different. So if you like the Hunter because of the pet, you'd probably like the Beastlord. If you like the Hunter cause of the "ranger" aspects, you won't find that in the Beastlord (at least not the EQ version).

     

    Concerning permanent pets...

    If the latest stream (from December) is any indication there will for sure be permanent pets as the Shaman had a wolf out the entire time.

    • 4420 posts
    January 24, 2017 9:32 AM PST

    Archaen said:

    Concerning permanent pets...

    If the latest stream (from December) is any indication there will for sure be permanent pets as the Shaman had a wolf out the entire time.

    But if I remember correctly, the name of the pet changed a few times throughout the stream, which means it had to be re-summoned via a spell. So it's kind of semi-permanent. Monty had it up but only because he kept casting it (and had the mana to do so).

    • 1362 posts
    January 24, 2017 11:26 AM PST

    Yeah, looked exactly the same as an EQ1 Shaman Pet, from my perspective (from the cohh stream).

    The shaman pet health bar didn't drop at all (even when it was being hit & died @ 1:29:54), and the Pet Interface was: Attack, Back Off, Follow, Stay, Hold, Dismiss.  Maybe it couldn't taunt?  Hopefully no pets can taunt, but I'm pretty anti-pet. :)

    There was no indication it was temporary, nor dumbfire, or any other thing that Brad has alluded to regarding pet balance.  There was also no ongoing mana cost, nor reduction of max mana, or any other balancing mechanic like that demonstrated.  Of course, that doesn't mean it isn't coming...  But not demo'd in that video. 
    I would say the only reason it needed to be recast (aside from dying) is because currently, pets don't follow you across zone lines.  That's a guess, but given that's a typical hurdle to overcome during devleopment, seems reasonable.

    • 4420 posts
    January 24, 2017 12:07 PM PST

    vjek said:

    Yeah, looked exactly the same as an EQ1 Shaman Pet, from my perspective (from the cohh stream).

    The shaman pet health bar didn't drop at all (even when it was being hit & died @ 1:29:54), and the Pet Interface was: Attack, Back Off, Follow, Stay, Hold, Dismiss.  Maybe it couldn't taunt?  Hopefully no pets can taunt, but I'm pretty anti-pet. :)

    There was no indication it was temporary, nor dumbfire, or any other thing that Brad has alluded to regarding pet balance.  There was also no ongoing mana cost, nor reduction of max mana, or any other balancing mechanic like that demonstrated.  Of course, that doesn't mean it isn't coming...  But not demo'd in that video. 
    I would say the only reason it needed to be recast (aside from dying) is because currently, pets don't follow you across zone lines.  That's a guess, but given that's a typical hurdle to overcome during devleopment, seems reasonable.

    True, pets probably aren't fleshed out yet, so there's really no way of knowing.