Forums » News and Announcements

Pantheon Class Discussion with Creative Director Chris Perkins

    • 523 posts
    April 12, 2018 8:57 AM PDT

    bryanleo9 said:

    Mathir said:

    If control is really going to be a key part of the game, and it should, they need to have at least three classes capable of filling that role.  Chanter and Bard is not going to cut it.  Could easily see them make the Necro a control oriented class as well.

    Any competent player playing a rooting class can act as crowd control.  Root parking is a great CC tactic.  There should be other options to not having an enchanter.  Perhaps , bringing more off tanks along. Or designong a more DPS based group.  I look fwd to thinking outside the tradition must have classes.  I use to make all pet groups in EQ, or all wizard groups.  Or the undesirables groups of rangers, necros, and wizards and had a blast experiencing this way.  If we must have a chanter or bard to progress, that would be a bad thing.  Chanters arent a very popular class.  

     

    Well sure.  And Paladins can help on heals, but it's not their role.

     

    If the game is a quad-inity, then by design definition the basic group set up should have one of each of those four roles.  Always exceptions, but for design purposes, one of each role.  No non-control class should come close to filling a control role.  Ghetto Mez (root) is fine, but the Control role needs to be a lot more than just parking mobs. I assume they are rolling regen and haste into that role and hopefully other things as well.  Anyway, they can't just have two classes for an entire role.  They need three at a minimum unless they believe Bard and Enchanter are going to be the most popular classes at launch.  They may well be, but seems to me another class is needed to give more options and ensure the role is popular enough.

     

    I'd make Necromancer control.  Between fear, summoning undead that could grab mobs, or put bone walls around mobs, there's a lot of lore, flavor, and reasoning behind building out the Necro as a control class.  Then, at that point, all roles would at least have three distinct flavors as options.  Healers have three, DPS has six, Tanks have three, Control would have three.

     

    Regardless, I'll be playing a bard.  But, I would like to see more options for the Control role, which is my favorite.  

    • 523 posts
    April 12, 2018 9:02 AM PDT

    Melingo said:

    Maybe the Druid will fill some major rolls in CC with some sort of root spell. Maybe Entangling roots come out of the ground surrounding the mob preventing it from physical action (Druid fantasy Mez). It sounded like Druids are going to be like a Discipline Priest in WoW with the "non direct healing" comment. Maybe besides just having good damage shield buffs they will have spells similar to some of the EQ cleric spells. If i remember they had buffs and debuffs that did healing to players if the mob was attacking you or if you were attacking the mob. 

     

    Good thoughts, I was thinking similar as well.

     

    As mentioned above though, while I'm sure the druid gets root and snare, they can't infringe too much on the control role.  That role has to be desired enough to be a part of every group.  That's like having a Monk or Ranger tank well enough so none of tank classes are wanted or needed due to drop in DPS.  I have no problem with Monks and Rangers tanking well short term in a pinch, but that's not their role.  I have no problem with Druids, Wizards, or Rogues helping with control in a pinch, but it's not their role.  The Bard and Enchanter (and whatever third class they come up with, Necro?) need to have a role that only they can fill reasonably well on a permanent basis.  

    • 3852 posts
    April 12, 2018 10:04 AM PDT

    Presumably there sill be a wide variation in group content - especially since such a high percentage of the content will be for groups.

    Doubtlessly there will be difficult content that requires a full group at-level with a tank, healer and DPS essential and a crowd control desirable if not essential. But there also will be content that 2-3 people can handle but that cannot be solo'd at-level (at least that is intended not to be) and that is where giving a DPS or healer some light crowd control abilities will be most useful. 

    Perhaps a true cc class will get a 30 second mez with a 30 second cooldown but another class will get a 30 second mez with a 60 second or two minute cooldown. Definitely useful but for a difficult fight you will want the good one.

    • 752 posts
    April 12, 2018 10:44 AM PDT

    I think there will be some form of CC in many of the classes. Offtanking, smoke & mirrors, even a well placed root. As for pure CC mez/calm/charm obviously those would be bard/chanter only. Pacify/harmony line as well as charm animal/elemental have a place. I don't think we will be disappointed, but there has to be a balance. 

    • 2752 posts
    April 12, 2018 10:52 AM PDT

    I know they have talked a lot about quaternity but I don't think its going to be a requirement for every group. While CC is often important it can also be circumvented by good play a lot of the time, and with many classes having access to different means of CC they can probably get by without an enchanter/bard in a lot of cases the same as groups didn't require them in EQ. 

     

    I think the CC role is more CC/Support and while groups won't necessarily need them they will want them. The amplification they bring to a group is always desired with things like mana regen, haste, slows, lowering mob resistances, etc. (assuming they have such things in Pantheon too) combined with the peace of mind that accidental overpulls or unexpected adds can be contained. Their typically mediocre damage is offset by turning the capabilities of the rest of the group up to 11, so you never regret filling a (typically) DPS slot with a CC class. 

    • 15 posts
    April 12, 2018 11:06 AM PDT

    Does anyone remember the raid in Ssra temple in EQ I can't remember which boss it was, but there were was a set of mobs that had to be mezed, a set of mobs that had to be off tanked, and then the set of mobs that needed to be killed. I hope again that in raids they do something to where you need every class role doing something to make the raid work. These show off so many cool things on how you have to deal with certain circumstances and different mob types wjile utilizing all available classes to the purpose designed best for.

    • 523 posts
    April 12, 2018 11:22 AM PDT

    dorotea said:

    Presumably there sill be a wide variation in group content - especially since such a high percentage of the content will be for groups.

    Doubtlessly there will be difficult content that requires a full group at-level with a tank, healer and DPS essential and a crowd control desirable if not essential. But there also will be content that 2-3 people can handle but that cannot be solo'd at-level (at least that is intended not to be) and that is where giving a DPS or healer some light crowd control abilities will be most useful. 

    Perhaps a true cc class will get a 30 second mez with a 30 second cooldown but another class will get a 30 second mez with a 60 second or two minute cooldown. Definitely useful but for a difficult fight you will want the good one.

     

    THIS would actually be the problem I have.  The control role needs to be essential as well.  It doesn't have to necessarily be crowd control, but whatever VR's vision of "control" is as a member of the quad-ternity, it needs to be as essential as a tank, healer, and DPS.  Otherwise we're back to EQ's holy trinity and VR is misrepresenting their four pillars concept.

     

    As someone that plans on playing the control role, the best example of control that I've played was the Dirge in EQ2.  I could battle rez, charm, mez, root, fear, snare, nuke, DoT, Melee or sit back with instruments, DeBuff, and Buff.  Raids were a hell of a lot of fun and I had many jobs to do and I rarely ever damaged the mob once.  That's control.  AoE Mez is not control, that's easy mode EQ1 enchanter.  Control can be so much more.  It's controlling the battle and to me that is all the things the EQ2 Dirge could do.

    • 523 posts
    April 12, 2018 11:25 AM PDT

    Snowman84 said:

    Does anyone remember the raid in Ssra temple in EQ I can't remember which boss it was, but there were was a set of mobs that had to be mezed, a set of mobs that had to be off tanked, and then the set of mobs that needed to be killed. I hope again that in raids they do something to where you need every class role doing something to make the raid work. These show off so many cool things on how you have to deal with certain circumstances and different mob types wjile utilizing all available classes to the purpose designed best for.

     

    You're talking about Emperor.  That was a great raid.  I had that sword on my SK.  

    • 35 posts
    April 12, 2018 1:19 PM PDT

    Mathir said:

    Well sure.  And Paladins can help on heals, but it's not their role.

     

    If the game is a quad-inity, then by design definition the basic group set up should have one of each of those four roles.  Always exceptions, but for design purposes, one of each role.  No non-control class should come close to filling a control role.  Ghetto Mez (root) is fine, but the Control role needs to be a lot more than just parking mobs. I assume they are rolling regen and haste into that role and hopefully other things as well.  Anyway, they can't just have two classes for an entire role.  They need three at a minimum unless they believe Bard and Enchanter are going to be the most popular classes at launch.  They may well be, but seems to me another class is needed to give more options and ensure the role is popular enough.

     

    I'd make Necromancer control.  Between fear, summoning undead that could grab mobs, or put bone walls around mobs, there's a lot of lore, flavor, and reasoning behind building out the Necro as a control class.  Then, at that point, all roles would at least have three distinct flavors as options.  Healers have three, DPS has six, Tanks have three, Control would have three.

     

    Regardless, I'll be playing a bard.  But, I would like to see more options for the Control role, which is my favorite.  

    if you use the entire group possibilities u should have more control.
    i believe you forget something.
    in the past they have anounced that a lot of classes will have control abilities.

    as example: rouges will have some control, monk they have best control ever feign death will be best split mechanic and if monk is the only one with fd do want remove this ability? wizard will have control (root) and so on. only thing is mana regen maybe just bard and enchanter will have or we will see some natural regen from druids? so please wait till we know more about classes and abilities before whining.


    This post was edited by Pufug at April 12, 2018 1:21 PM PDT
    • 35 posts
    April 12, 2018 1:28 PM PDT

    in the past echanter wasn't so popular because of game mechanics.

    mostly in "end content" the where useless because of less damage, no encounters where mobs could be controled. in a whole raid just one enchanter is enough for power regen.
    i am hoping VR will do a good job and no class will be useless. Yes i know progression guilds will pick just best classes for each cases but let an not optimized group/raid also be successful (if they are skilled), thats all what i want.

    • 174 posts
    April 12, 2018 1:50 PM PDT

    I'd love to see necromancer in game at launch. Also it would make sense having a third option for crowd control, given the other roles have at least 3. Perhaps they could have necros summon at caster pet, with abilities limited to crowd control spells. Zombie pet casts torpor on mob (necro dots reduced by suitable % while mobs mezzed), or maybe the necro could just cast zombie on mob which would cause it to basically do nothing until attacked.

    I'm also fine with past discussions where classes with root, classes stunning (i.e. rogue using a blackjack and such) could take over a bit of those responsibilities.

    On the subject of bards and necros, I've waited this long, I'm ok givng the developers the additional time to implement these last two classes. Beastmasters, disciples... those have to wait for expansions though! :p

    • 3852 posts
    April 12, 2018 3:38 PM PDT

    Mathir I think we were agreeing on the desirability of needing a crowd control role, not just the holy trinity classes. My comment wasn't intended to undercut that, but rather to point out that giving other classes some control abilities made sense in terms of small group content and that these abilities should be significantly less useful than a true control class would have so the true control class would still be needed for full group content.

    • 523 posts
    April 12, 2018 3:48 PM PDT

    Pufug said:

    Mathir said:

    Well sure.  And Paladins can help on heals, but it's not their role.

     

    If the game is a quad-inity, then by design definition the basic group set up should have one of each of those four roles.  Always exceptions, but for design purposes, one of each role.  No non-control class should come close to filling a control role.  Ghetto Mez (root) is fine, but the Control role needs to be a lot more than just parking mobs. I assume they are rolling regen and haste into that role and hopefully other things as well.  Anyway, they can't just have two classes for an entire role.  They need three at a minimum unless they believe Bard and Enchanter are going to be the most popular classes at launch.  They may well be, but seems to me another class is needed to give more options and ensure the role is popular enough.

     

    I'd make Necromancer control.  Between fear, summoning undead that could grab mobs, or put bone walls around mobs, there's a lot of lore, flavor, and reasoning behind building out the Necro as a control class.  Then, at that point, all roles would at least have three distinct flavors as options.  Healers have three, DPS has six, Tanks have three, Control would have three.

     

    Regardless, I'll be playing a bard.  But, I would like to see more options for the Control role, which is my favorite.  

    if you use the entire group possibilities u should have more control.
    i believe you forget something.
    in the past they have anounced that a lot of classes will have control abilities.

    as example: rouges will have some control, monk they have best control ever feign death will be best split mechanic and if monk is the only one with fd do want remove this ability? wizard will have control (root) and so on. only thing is mana regen maybe just bard and enchanter will have or we will see some natural regen from druids? so please wait till we know more about classes and abilities before whining.

     

    Man, I'm 40 years old and an attorney.  I don't whine.

     

    I'm stating my hopes that they hold true to THEIR STATEMENT that this will be a quaternity and voicing my concern that only having two classes to fill a PRIMARY role (on par with healing, tanking, and DPS) of control seems like at least one class too few.

    I understand classes will overlap with abilities.  A monk can tank in a pinch.  A paladin can heal in a pinch.  A wizard can CC in a pinch.  A Warrior can DPS in a pinch.  All that is fine.

    No matter how they decide to define "Control", and I hope they use the EQ2 Bard as a primary example of what *to* do, they need to have at least another class that's primary focus is control so that those of us that want to play this style have more than two options.  I want to make sure the quaternity concept is alive and well, and on par in terms of significance with Healing, Tanking, and DPS.  Not something that is "nice" to have, but something that is "required" to have, at least to the same extent a tank, healer, or dps is "required".

     

    That's not whining, that's voicing a concern and hoping the VR team takes the time to answer my concern.  

    • 523 posts
    April 12, 2018 3:52 PM PDT

    Pufug said:

    in the past echanter wasn't so popular because of game mechanics.

    mostly in "end content" the where useless because of less damage, no encounters where mobs could be controled. in a whole raid just one enchanter is enough for power regen.
    i am hoping VR will do a good job and no class will be useless. Yes i know progression guilds will pick just best classes for each cases but let an not optimized group/raid also be successful (if they are skilled), thats all what i want.

    Agreed here.  Though, they fixed this over time, especially with charm.  And, as mentioned, other games have shown how a true control oriented support class can shine in raids, let alone group settings.

    • 523 posts
    April 12, 2018 3:57 PM PDT

    dorotea said:

    Mathir I think we were agreeing on the desirability of needing a crowd control role, not just the holy trinity classes. My comment wasn't intended to undercut that, but rather to point out that giving other classes some control abilities made sense in terms of small group content and that these abilities should be significantly less useful than a true control class would have so the true control class would still be needed for full group content.

    I agree with your thoughts then.  I just didn't like the wording where the other three were essential and then the control class was only desireable.  I just want all roles to be equally essential, and then we can fill in the last two slots as needed.  I get that some content can be beaten without the quaternity concept, but I'd like to think anything at level or challenging will at least require one of each role the vast majority of the time.  I'm essentially going to crusade for the control role to be as important as the other three.  That and crafting, that will be my focus starting in Alpha (or as soon as they get implemented).  

    • 2752 posts
    April 12, 2018 4:11 PM PDT

    It's not quaternity in the sense that all are required in most groups to succeed but rather having each role filled will make for the strongest/most efficient group. It doesn't mean grouping can't be done with various combinations of roles, groups will have a reasonable degree of flexibility.

     

    To be completely fair even in the holy trinity, DPS isn't generally a required role for groups (outside of raiding) as you could stack up 4 or 5 tanks an a healer or two. It would likely be slow and tedious progress but it would be do-able. Or here in Pantheon it's entirely possible you could get by in a lot of content with a tank, a healer, 3 enchanters, and a bard.


    This post was edited by Iksar at April 12, 2018 4:13 PM PDT
    • 3237 posts
    April 12, 2018 5:01 PM PDT

    WTB Symbiote as the first expansion class.  It would fulfill the control role and be a new class never before seen in an MMO:

    https://www.pantheonmmo.com/content/forums/topic/5163/symbiote

    • 4 posts
    April 12, 2018 5:01 PM PDT

    I just hope being a support roll doesnt turn into what Enchanters did for some parts of expansions, Buff Bots. Alot of true enchanter mains turned to other classes because after buffing the group that eventually lasted hours with duration increasing items, Enchanters were not very needed. Alot of groups could just have easily have a mage pet offtank a add or have a ranger knockback root a mob. What im getting at with this post for me looking to play an enchanter, i hope there is balance. I hope they are "not needed but wanted" as a few other people have mentioned. Maybe there is a camp that does't require much need for CC in the area. I would hope that the buffing style increase to damage is good enough to want and they bring enough dps to the group to offset not just having another dps in the group. If buffs are poop and dps is poop outside of our CC role there isnt much use for them. I like to think of it this way. As an enchanter, there is talk of the nukes restore mana. At the end of a fight maybe the group has 10% more mana than they would have if the chanter wasn't in the party. Maybe bringing another dps class would just kill the mob faster so everyone else in the party didnt need to use the 10% mana saved if the enchanter was in the group. If they do to much dps then you run into the issue of a support class out DPSing a pure DPS class which isnt good.

    I always felt like Bards in early EQ didnt do enough damage. The buffs were nice, but they felt way to weak looking at parses. Again not saying they should be anywhere near a rogue or monk, but not super weak.

    • 96 posts
    April 12, 2018 7:28 PM PDT

    Awesome video. Thanks for doing this Baz!

    • 19 posts
    April 12, 2018 7:44 PM PDT

    It was a great interview. Have watched it mutiple times to make sure i dont miss anything. Great info to try and decide what i will going into the world with. I know my wife is looking forward to bringing her cleric out of retirement.

    • 2756 posts
    April 13, 2018 3:30 AM PDT

    Melingo said:...I always felt like Bards in early EQ didnt do enough damage. The buffs were nice, but they felt way to weak looking at parses. Again not saying they should be anywhere near a rogue or monk, but not super weak.

    Lol, yeah, did less damage... but could do it to the entire zone of pulled mobs simultaneously ;^)

    • 523 posts
    April 13, 2018 6:06 AM PDT

    Melingo said:

    I just hope being a support roll doesnt turn into what Enchanters did for some parts of expansions, Buff Bots. Alot of true enchanter mains turned to other classes because after buffing the group that eventually lasted hours with duration increasing items, Enchanters were not very needed. Alot of groups could just have easily have a mage pet offtank a add or have a ranger knockback root a mob. What im getting at with this post for me looking to play an enchanter, i hope there is balance. I hope they are "not needed but wanted" as a few other people have mentioned. Maybe there is a camp that does't require much need for CC in the area. I would hope that the buffing style increase to damage is good enough to want and they bring enough dps to the group to offset not just having another dps in the group. If buffs are poop and dps is poop outside of our CC role there isnt much use for them. I like to think of it this way. As an enchanter, there is talk of the nukes restore mana. At the end of a fight maybe the group has 10% more mana than they would have if the chanter wasn't in the party. Maybe bringing another dps class would just kill the mob faster so everyone else in the party didnt need to use the 10% mana saved if the enchanter was in the group. If they do to much dps then you run into the issue of a support class out DPSing a pure DPS class which isnt good.

    I always felt like Bards in early EQ didnt do enough damage. The buffs were nice, but they felt way to weak looking at parses. Again not saying they should be anywhere near a rogue or monk, but not super weak.

    Agreed.

    My feeling on "Control" classes is that they are group centric and do minimal damage, mainly because while in a group or raid setting, they are focused on other tasks.  I think "Charm" has to be a staple of Control classes and allows them the ability to solo or do DPS though at some risk to themselves when it breaks.  I also like how WoW did it with the possession thing from priests where you could take over mobs, gain excess to new abilities and buffs, and then use them as long as you had possession, but of course you lose the ability to use your character while this is in place.  Raids just need to have some of those type of mobs so Control classes have some options. 

    Then they need to not have long term buffs, but rather something else that removes the ease of just making a control class a buffbot and parking it afk behind the group.  I don't want to be casting buffs every five seconds, but I don't want to be trivialized into a box toon role either.  I think the answer here is simply to have nukes that "splash" haste on party members.  They are already doing this with mana regen, so that's a good step IMO.  Instead of a permanent buff, the benefits of the Control class are gained fight by fight.  This keeps them from being a buff bot and keeps them engaged. 

    But, in a given encounter, and specifically from a Bard perspective, I would like to pull the mob (run speed, levitate, lull), debuff the mob (slow/debuffs), buff the group (haste/DS/Resists), Charm/Mez adds (situational), Snare/Root (If Mobs flee), and then Rinse and Repeat.  Wherever I can in there, I'll chip in some DPS.  My goal is to "Control" when the fight begins, control how fast/strong the enemy attacks, control how fast/strong my group attacks, control the battle field in terms of adds, control when the fight ends and if the mob can flee, and then control the overall pace of our xp grind by chain pulling as needed.

    On raids, I would like to be rounding up adds, focusing on mezzing, charming, kiting.  Buffing/Debuffing throughout the fight, and I enjoyed battle rezzing on the bard in EQ2.  If the raids are designed well with a lot of adds, that gives me plenty to do and control.  

    • 56 posts
    April 13, 2018 8:09 AM PDT

    One thing i would like to see for classes and all classes. Is some sort of dual class ability.  They have abilities that only work if another one of their class is with them. Not action style game combos. But make it so two of the same grouped is worth not a negative. Have a Rogue ability that allows them to use a posion only, if mob is bleeding from another rogue.  Or Rogues could do double hamstring rooting mob instead of just snaring, hell you could just say certian abilites. like hamstring do better with another class member in range. 

    Enchanter could have a buff they cast on another Enchanter losing their ability while buff is up to mez, but allowing the other enchanter to mezz a mob that is usually unmezzable. in turn the non mezzing Enchanter gets self a buff during duration and DPS goes a %. This would give reasons for having two of one class in party.  

    • 3852 posts
    April 13, 2018 8:09 AM PDT

    I don't think it is desirable to have a class that is so heavily focused on crowd control that it is almost impossible to solo with it, and not wanted in any group that isn't doing the most difficult content. 

    Essentially all groups will want a tank other than for trivial content. Essentially all groups will want a healer other than for trivial content. Hopefully essentially all groups will want the control class other than for trivial content, but to get there we need to give it an edge in non-control abilities. Buffing is one approach. Movement abilities (run speed, summoning, extra binds) is one approach. Versatility is one approach (off-healer abilities, off-tank abilities, DPS not too much less than a true DPS - all or a combination of these).

    A good example is the loremaster in LOTRO. Very good crowd control, soloes quite well with its pet, decent DPS, can feed mana to the healer or DPS as needed, can off-heal briefly in a pinch.

    My model of the type of specialization not to have is the Midgard healer in Dark Ages of Camelot. Good at healing but so weak everywhere else that it was 50-50 whether it could kill a mob 2-3 levels lower and if it did it took forever. Yes I know this is a group game but no class should be unplayable outside of groups. Some classes will solo better than others but I hope every class will be able to get by without a group when none is available or the player doesn't have the time for a group or feels anti-social that day.

    • 523 posts
    April 13, 2018 4:52 PM PDT

    dorotea said:

    I don't think it is desirable to have a class that is so heavily focused on crowd control that it is almost impossible to solo with it, and not wanted in any group that isn't doing the most difficult content. 

    Essentially all groups will want a tank other than for trivial content. Essentially all groups will want a healer other than for trivial content. Hopefully essentially all groups will want the control class other than for trivial content, but to get there we need to give it an edge in non-control abilities. Buffing is one approach. Movement abilities (run speed, summoning, extra binds) is one approach. Versatility is one approach (off-healer abilities, off-tank abilities, DPS not too much less than a true DPS - all or a combination of these).

    A good example is the loremaster in LOTRO. Very good crowd control, soloes quite well with its pet, decent DPS, can feed mana to the healer or DPS as needed, can off-heal briefly in a pinch.

    My model of the type of specialization not to have is the Midgard healer in Dark Ages of Camelot. Good at healing but so weak everywhere else that it was 50-50 whether it could kill a mob 2-3 levels lower and if it did it took forever. Yes I know this is a group game but no class should be unplayable outside of groups. Some classes will solo better than others but I hope every class will be able to get by without a group when none is available or the player doesn't have the time for a group or feels anti-social that day.

    Agreed, but that's where charm comes in.  All control classes should have charm, which would allow them the abiliy to solo, though it might be risky.  I also don't like the idea of the role being referred to as "crowd control", yes, that is an aspect of the Control Role, but it should just be an aspect, one of the many I pointed out in above posts.  The "Control Role" should be about controlling the fight in all it's forms, not just parking mobs.  That would be insanely lazy developing.