If you are a magic user, you will have to wield a staff. And then you are like all other magic wielders with that staff, no matter what your class is. The class skills just add some flavor.
Definitely not in ESO. You can use magic with many weapons, just just staves.
And in NW, magic users have staves but also gauntlets.
Actually, what you are describing is closer to EQ/WoW class based clones, where magic classes are indeed often stuck with staves or wands.
If you are a magic user, you will have to wield a staff. And then you are like all other magic wielders with that staff, no matter what your class is. The class skills just add some flavor.
Definitely not in ESO. You can use magic with many weapons, just just staves.
And in NW, magic users have staves but also gauntlets.
Actually, what you are describing is closer to EQ/WoW class based clones, where magic classes are indeed often stuck with staves or wands.
I think this may be, at least in part, misperception.
WoW has multiple casters that don't use wands or staves. Heck, one of the BiS weapon for WoW Classic Mages was a sword and off-hand.
Paladins wielded melee weapons. Same for Shamans. Both are casters.
Those weapons were stat sticks because they were casters in that game, and their role wasn't physical combat (well, Ret Pally and Shaman both had one talent spec for melee). But they definitely didn't wear robes or hold wands to use magic.
If you are a magic user, you will have to wield a staff. And then you are like all other magic wielders with that staff, no matter what your class is. The class skills just add some flavor.
Definitely not in ESO. You can use magic with many weapons, just just staves.
And in NW, magic users have staves but also gauntlets.
Actually, what you are describing is closer to EQ/WoW class based clones, where magic classes are indeed often stuck with staves or wands.
I think this may be, at least in part, misperception.
WoW has multiple casters that don't use wands or staves. Heck, one of the BiS weapon for WoW Classic Mages was a sword and off-hand.
Paladins wielded melee weapons. Same for Shamans. Both are casters.
Those weapons were stat sticks because they were casters in that game, and their role wasn't physical combat (well, Ret Pally and Shaman both had one talent spec for melee). But they definitely didn't wear robes or hold wands to use magic.
And in the same way, many weapons that aren't primary magic weapons in ESO and NW (and I'll add GW2 to that list) have effects and skills that are akin to magic.
If you are a magic user, you will have to wield a staff. And then you are like all other magic wielders with that staff, no matter what your class is. The class skills just add some flavor.
Definitely not in ESO. You can use magic with many weapons, just just staves.
And in NW, magic users have staves but also gauntlets.
Actually, what you are describing is closer to EQ/WoW class based clones, where magic classes are indeed often stuck with staves or wands.
I think this may be, at least in part, misperception.
WoW has multiple casters that don't use wands or staves. Heck, one of the BiS weapon for WoW Classic Mages was a sword and off-hand.
Paladins wielded melee weapons. Same for Shamans. Both are casters.
Those weapons were stat sticks because they were casters in that game, and their role wasn't physical combat (well, Ret Pally and Shaman both had one talent spec for melee). But they definitely didn't wear robes or hold wands to use magic.
And in the same way, many weapons that aren't primary magic weapons in ESO and NW (and I'll add GW2 to that list) have effects and skills that are akin to magic.
What I didn't like about ESO was that you only have 5 abilities at any one time. If you want to use any other abilities, you have to swap your weapon, even if the weapon has nothing to do with the abilities.
I've only played NW a little, but it seemed the same. You have a small handful of abilities at any one time, and you hve to swap your weapon to use any different abilities.
I detest the entire concept of an equipped weapon 'granting' skills. Characters have skills, items have attributes. I don't necessarily agree with classes, it's just a convenient label for an amalgamation of skills that a character learns.
There needs to be a better way applied to MMORPGs; there isn't enough flexibility in classes for me. I don't want to go to a Ranger school to come out with exactly the same skill set as every other Ranger. Let me worry about assigning my character a label.
Weapons don't grant skills in ESO. Each weapon has abilities associated with it, but you need not learn any of them. You can use any active abilities you want with a weapon save those from other weapons.
Accordingly archers can be quite diverse in the game. If you use a bow on both bars it essentially doubles your ranged versatility.
You could instead have a bow on the front bar and a staff on the back, and have a different type kind of ranged adaptability.
Switching a bow for a bow in fight. Makes perfect sense.
Give me 10 slots instead of 2x5 or 2x6 can't remember
I detest the entire concept of an equipped weapon 'granting' skills. Characters have skills, items have attributes. I don't necessarily agree with classes, it's just a convenient label for an amalgamation of skills that a character learns.
There needs to be a better way applied to MMORPGs; there isn't enough flexibility in classes for me. I don't want to go to a Ranger school to come out with exactly the same skill set as every other Ranger. Let me worry about assigning my character a label.
Weapons don't grant skills in ESO. Each weapon has abilities associated with it, but you need not learn any of them. You can use any active abilities you want with a weapon save those from other weapons.
Accordingly archers can be quite diverse in the game. If you use a bow on both bars it essentially doubles your ranged versatility.
You could instead have a bow on the front bar and a staff on the back, and have a different type kind of ranged adaptability.
Switching a bow for a bow in fight. Makes perfect sense.
Give me 10 slots instead of 2x5 or 2x6 can't remember
I detest the entire concept of an equipped weapon 'granting' skills. Characters have skills, items have attributes. I don't necessarily agree with classes, it's just a convenient label for an amalgamation of skills that a character learns.
There needs to be a better way applied to MMORPGs; there isn't enough flexibility in classes for me. I don't want to go to a Ranger school to come out with exactly the same skill set as every other Ranger. Let me worry about assigning my character a label.
Weapons don't grant skills in ESO. Each weapon has abilities associated with it, but you need not learn any of them. You can use any active abilities you want with a weapon save those from other weapons.
Accordingly archers can be quite diverse in the game. If you use a bow on both bars it essentially doubles your ranged versatility.
You could instead have a bow on the front bar and a staff on the back, and have a different type kind of ranged adaptability.
Switching a bow for a bow in fight. Makes perfect sense.
Give me 10 slots instead of 2x5 or 2x6 can't remember
Same with bows really, can't say for sure but my guess is medieval longbowmen kept a spare shortbow nearby for when the fighting got a lot more up close and personal.
Two weapons actually makes a lot of sense, never know when one might need to switch from a crushing mace to a more piercing weapon in the right circumstances.
I get it, you don't like it or want to do it, neither did I for a long time until I took the time to learn it last year in ESO, really wasn't that hard.
Now, light attack weaving was like magic to me, I never really got good at it, I never generated DPS much above 55K but those even half way decent could routinely so 75K or more.
The masters of FOTM DK / Necro builds could hit 155K in special raid circumstances.....I bow to their prowess.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
I detest the entire concept of an equipped weapon 'granting' skills. Characters have skills, items have attributes. I don't necessarily agree with classes, it's just a convenient label for an amalgamation of skills that a character learns.
There needs to be a better way applied to MMORPGs; there isn't enough flexibility in classes for me. I don't want to go to a Ranger school to come out with exactly the same skill set as every other Ranger. Let me worry about assigning my character a label.
Weapons don't grant skills in ESO. Each weapon has abilities associated with it, but you need not learn any of them. You can use any active abilities you want with a weapon save those from other weapons.
Accordingly archers can be quite diverse in the game. If you use a bow on both bars it essentially doubles your ranged versatility.
You could instead have a bow on the front bar and a staff on the back, and have a different type kind of ranged adaptability.
Switching a bow for a bow in fight. Makes perfect sense.
Give me 10 slots instead of 2x5 or 2x6 can't remember
Same with bows really, can't say for sure but my guess is medieval longbowmen kept a spare shortbow nearby for when the fighting got a lot more up close and personal.
Generally it was a pike or an arming sword, not another bow.
I don't mind weapons having their own skill lines with abilities to use. That element (mostly) makes sense to me on the premise of certain weapons have certain styles/techniques. I'd rather that part feed into a different core combat/combo system though than be things you slot onto the hotbar, which would then be dedicated to more transient skill lines.
I'm personally not that big on classes, but I do value them as far as being used as archetypes. I kinda loved Ryzom's approach to skills in general because I loved being able to open up skills and customize their cost, effects, etc to really tailor my own build.
Dunno that I expressly need that, as much as I'd at least like to have functional skill lines that can be matched together freely to generate approximate classes. ESO lives close on that one, much like Rift, and Archeage does it as well.
Think my biggest gripe with any of them though is aesthetics. Like in ESO it just bothers me that early cosmetics for undead stuff all used red colorings, but then the class itself uses black/blue, so it makes for a visual mis-match between undead mounts, bone weapons, and necro powers.
I'd pretty much just love there to be core ability trees with clear mechanical features, and at least partial control over the visual element and colors.
I certainly have what I'd think of an an optimal skill system, but I do think there's more than one viable method for such, and really it's more about how much control any given system gives me over fulfilling any given theme.
I detest the entire concept of an equipped weapon 'granting' skills. Characters have skills, items have attributes. I don't necessarily agree with classes, it's just a convenient label for an amalgamation of skills that a character learns.
There needs to be a better way applied to MMORPGs; there isn't enough flexibility in classes for me. I don't want to go to a Ranger school to come out with exactly the same skill set as every other Ranger. Let me worry about assigning my character a label.
Weapons don't grant skills in ESO. Each weapon has abilities associated with it, but you need not learn any of them. You can use any active abilities you want with a weapon save those from other weapons.
Accordingly archers can be quite diverse in the game. If you use a bow on both bars it essentially doubles your ranged versatility.
You could instead have a bow on the front bar and a staff on the back, and have a different type kind of ranged adaptability.
Switching a bow for a bow in fight. Makes perfect sense.
Give me 10 slots instead of 2x5 or 2x6 can't remember
It makes sense in the context of ESO. It's not as though you need to have same bow on each bar and their differing attributes will improve the characters performance when applied correctly.
Also, a single bar would prevent the use of two different weapons, which would also cripple many character builds.
Your preference would break the game for all except those that choose to use only one bar in combat, foregoing weapon swapping entirely.
I detest the entire concept of an equipped weapon 'granting' skills. Characters have skills, items have attributes. I don't necessarily agree with classes, it's just a convenient label for an amalgamation of skills that a character learns.
There needs to be a better way applied to MMORPGs; there isn't enough flexibility in classes for me. I don't want to go to a Ranger school to come out with exactly the same skill set as every other Ranger. Let me worry about assigning my character a label.
Weapons don't grant skills in ESO. Each weapon has abilities associated with it, but you need not learn any of them. You can use any active abilities you want with a weapon save those from other weapons.
Accordingly archers can be quite diverse in the game. If you use a bow on both bars it essentially doubles your ranged versatility.
You could instead have a bow on the front bar and a staff on the back, and have a different type kind of ranged adaptability.
Switching a bow for a bow in fight. Makes perfect sense.
Give me 10 slots instead of 2x5 or 2x6 can't remember
Actually, it COULD make sense...
Recurve shortbow vs Longbow. Two different uses.
That doesn't matter in ESO. Bows are treated the same regardless of sizeand shape. Only the stats associated and customization chosen define their performance, and whether it is part of set that it contributes to the completion of.
"Classes" aren't really for the player playing them, but for the thousands of other players playing the game. Yes, one could for a healer, but that doesn't say much. Clerics heal better than Druids heal better than Bards heal better that Fighters with bandages.
I often see exchanges in games similar to this paraphrase:
P1: I want use a longsword and a shield for fighting.
P2: Oh! Like a fighter.
P1: DON'T CALL ME A FIGHTER!!!! I'm so much more than that constricting label....
I see so many chafe at "labels", but they help us identify each other. L33t speak came from this. It was a quick easy way to seek a specific player type. Of course, this was when players actually talked to each other
I remember back in AD&D the game had levels. It also had "titles" for those levels. Myrmidon for a fighter of third level, or Prestidigitator for a wizard of first level, or Thug for a 2nd level thief. It was "roleplaying" in MMORPGs using titles like those to communicate one's level and class. Many were cheesy like, "I'm a Bard of the 4th song (or cycle)." For many, this play style was "immersive."
Weapons cause damage, NOT give skills. Players (or their characters) have skills. I don't get the "riposte" by simply picking up a rapier. I have that skill. Damage is a type, be it blunt, slashing, or piercing. One could add in "magical", "elemental", and even "poison" or "acid" damage, too. Weapon type matters here.
Skeletons are brittle bones. Piercing doesn't damage them like a blunt attack that cracks bones. Ghosts are ethereal and don't take damage from non-magical attacks, though these can be damaged with magically imbued weapons.
I understand that many players don't want "complicated", so they want a simple attack 1, attack 2, attack 3, and an alpha strike on a timer. They don't care how those attacks come about, just that they deal damage. For me, that is button mashing at it's most basic.
I'm getting long winded here. I prefer classes. I have yet to "switch" to another weapon to have "skills granted." However, I understand that certain weapons ALLOW for specific attacks (NOT skills). So If I use a sword and shield, my character knows a move or two utilizing these in combination and I need to have those equipped to execute those maneuvers, That is not saying that weapons "give skills", but allows players to utilize skills are already have. I guess it's a nuance kind of thing
tl/dr: I prefer classes, with all of their "limitations"
[edit]
PS to add that way back when, magic users spent their days studying magical tomes, NOT practicing with weapons of every make and model. It was "time restraint", not a "skill restraint."
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
I'm getting long winded here. I prefer classes. I have yet to "switch" to another weapon to have "skills granted." However, I understand that certain weapons ALLOW for specific attacks (NOT skills). So If I use a sword and shield, my character knows a move or two utilizing these in combination and I need to have those equipped to execute those maneuvers, That is not saying that weapons "give skills", but allows players to utilize skills are already have. I guess it's a nuance kind of thing
tl/dr: I prefer classes, with all of their "limitations"
[edit]
PS to add that way back when, magic users spent their days studying magical tomes, NOT practicing with weapons of every make and model. It was "time restraint", not a "skill restraint."
It depends on the game you play.
In ESO when one uses a sword and shield the only thing that can't be slotted on the bar is abilities not associated with other weapons. One need not slot any abilities related to the weapon being used, or even acquire them for that matter.
In GW2, when one uses a sword and shield the character is locked into the abilities associated with that weapon for their class. No substitutions are allowed, and so far as I know one can't even swap them between positions on the bar. To have different abilities in combat one must use a different weapon. Some classes have passives that apply to certain weapon types but that is pretty much the extent to which the character contributes in terms of their inherent ability.
In ESO the weapon you wield determines little in terms of available abilities. In GW2 it is essentially the opposite, with that wielded entirely determinant.
Classes. look at New World. Weapon Swap as a replacement is not good
Classes suck. Ultima Online, Asheron's Call or even NW offer WAY more freedom. Be what you want to be, not what the devs want you do be.
Look at LOTRO for instance. They have a lot of classes, captain, champion... none corresponds exactly to any of the book/movie characters.
It's kinda funny that you can "clone" Aragorn better in Ultima Online or New World than in LOTRO !
Aragorn's look and weaponry weren't very unique, though.
He literally wears the normal outfit of a lightly armored swordsman, including a cape and leather armor. He swung a sword like every other man. He was really good at it, of course, but it's not like he carried a recognizable extra silver sword as a key part of his look like, say, Geralt. What Aragorn is wearing when Frodo first spots him was not, at all, a recognizable or unique look. Pretty sure part of the entire point of his character was that he wasn't a wizard or anything, just a man like those he fought to protect.
His outfit is actually consciously put together (at least at that point in the story) to avoid standing out.
Had a Witcher MMORPG been made where Witchers don't carry silver swords, I would find this critique more effective.
To be perfectly honest, Gandalf, Gimli, and Legolas even had far more unique looks and fighting styles than did Aragorn.
Classes. look at New World. Weapon Swap as a replacement is not good
Classes suck. Ultima Online, Asheron's Call or even NW offer WAY more freedom. Be what you want to be, not what the devs want you do be.
Look at LOTRO for instance. They have a lot of classes, captain, champion... none corresponds exactly to any of the book/movie characters.
It's kinda funny that you can "clone" Aragorn better in Ultima Online or New World than in LOTRO !
Aragorn's look and weaponry weren't very unique, though.
He literally wears the normal outfit of a lightly armored swordsman, including a cape and leather armor. He swung a sword like every other man. He was really good at it, of course, but it's not like he carried a recognizable extra silver sword as a key part of his look like, say, Geralt. What Aragorn is wearing when Frodo first spots him was not, at all, a recognizable or unique look. Pretty sure part of the entire point of his character was that he wasn't a wizard or anything, just a man like those he fought to protect.
His outfit is actually consciously put together (at least at that point in the story) to avoid standing out.
Had a Witcher MMORPG been made where Witchers don't carry silver swords, I would find this critique more effective.
I agree mostly because I always thought the Champion class in LotRO fit Aragorn pretty well just how the burglar class fits the 4 hobbits.
His core point that you can fine tune a build without class restriction to better emulate any fictional character you want to emulate still stands though.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
Classes. look at New World. Weapon Swap as a replacement is not good
Classes suck. Ultima Online, Asheron's Call or even NW offer WAY more freedom. Be what you want to be, not what the devs want you do be.
Look at LOTRO for instance. They have a lot of classes, captain, champion... none corresponds exactly to any of the book/movie characters.
It's kinda funny that you can "clone" Aragorn better in Ultima Online or New World than in LOTRO !
Aragorn's look and weaponry weren't very unique, though.
He literally wears the normal outfit of a lightly armored swordsman, including a cape and leather armor. He swung a sword like every other man. He was really good at it, of course, but it's not like he carried a recognizable extra silver sword as a key part of his look like, say, Geralt. What Aragorn is wearing when Frodo first spots him was not, at all, a recognizable or unique look. Pretty sure part of the entire point of his character was that he wasn't a wizard or anything, just a man like those he fought to protect.
His outfit is actually consciously put together (at least at that point in the story) to avoid standing out.
Had a Witcher MMORPG been made where Witchers don't carry silver swords, I would find this critique more effective.
I agree mostly because I always thought the Champion class in LotRO fit Aragorn pretty well just how the burglar class fits the 4 hobbits.
His core point that you can fine tune a build without class restriction to better emulate any fictional character you want to emulate still stands though.
True, I just felt it wasn't the best example, because LOTRO very clearly builds their Classes by taking inspiration from the characters in the book.
This also doesn't affect the point, but not all skill-based systems give you that freedom, even if it looks like it on paper. Most often, certain skill lines clearly complement certain other skill lines best (and I'm talking about conscious design choices, not just happenstance) , and trying to go against that means creating a relatively weak character. Or, it could literally lock you out of certain combos by the number of skill points required to master the lines, as SWG does.
The freedom of the skill system is definitely a double-edged sword.
Classes. look at New World. Weapon Swap as a replacement is not good
Classes suck. Ultima Online, Asheron's Call or even NW offer WAY more freedom. Be what you want to be, not what the devs want you do be.
Look at LOTRO for instance. They have a lot of classes, captain, champion... none corresponds exactly to any of the book/movie characters.
It's kinda funny that you can "clone" Aragorn better in Ultima Online or New World than in LOTRO !
Aragorn's look and weaponry weren't very unique, though.
He literally wears the normal outfit of a lightly armored swordsman, including a cape and leather armor. He swung a sword like every other man. He was really good at it, of course, but it's not like he carried a recognizable extra silver sword as a key part of his look like, say, Geralt. What Aragorn is wearing when Frodo first spots him was not, at all, a recognizable or unique look. Pretty sure part of the entire point of his character was that he wasn't a wizard or anything, just a man like those he fought to protect.
His outfit is actually consciously put together (at least at that point in the story) to avoid standing out.
Had a Witcher MMORPG been made where Witchers don't carry silver swords, I would find this critique more effective.
To be perfectly honest, Gandalf, Gimli, and Legolas even had far more unique looks and fighting styles than did Aragorn.
I think Captain is my favorite class in LoTRO. Currently my captain has about 15 abilities slotted that are used pretty frequently. He uses a 2-H sword.
In ESO, you can't have 15 abilities, period. You can have 10, but only 5 at a time. If you want to use the other 5, you have to swap your weapon. Why? To use the other 5 class skills, I have to swap to what, another 2-H sword?
Totally immersion breaking to me. NW has a similar limitation.
Aragorn's strength wasn't really as a fighter. He inspired those around him to do better (buffer). He could heal pretty well (healer). He was a decent fighter, although not the best. And most of all, he was resistant to Sauron's powers, because of his lineage and past. I think the Captain does a pretty good job of being the best class for Aragorn.
Classes. look at New World. Weapon Swap as a replacement is not good
Classes suck. Ultima Online, Asheron's Call or even NW offer WAY more freedom. Be what you want to be, not what the devs want you do be.
Look at LOTRO for instance. They have a lot of classes, captain, champion... none corresponds exactly to any of the book/movie characters.
It's kinda funny that you can "clone" Aragorn better in Ultima Online or New World than in LOTRO !
Aragorn's look and weaponry weren't very unique, though.
He literally wears the normal outfit of a lightly armored swordsman, including a cape and leather armor. He swung a sword like every other man. He was really good at it, of course, but it's not like he carried a recognizable extra silver sword as a key part of his look like, say, Geralt. What Aragorn is wearing when Frodo first spots him was not, at all, a recognizable or unique look. Pretty sure part of the entire point of his character was that he wasn't a wizard or anything, just a man like those he fought to protect.
His outfit is actually consciously put together (at least at that point in the story) to avoid standing out.
Had a Witcher MMORPG been made where Witchers don't carry silver swords, I would find this critique more effective.
To be perfectly honest, Gandalf, Gimli, and Legolas even had far more unique looks and fighting styles than did Aragorn.
I think Captain is my favorite class in LoTRO. Currently my captain has about 15 abilities slotted that are used pretty frequently. He uses a 2-H sword.
In ESO, you can't have 15 abilities, period. You can have 10, but only 5 at a time. If you want to use the other 5, you have to swap your weapon. Why? To use the other 5 class skills, I have to swap to what, another 2-H sword?
Totally immersion breaking to me. NW has a similar limitation.
Aragorn's strength wasn't really as a fighter. He inspired those around him to do better (buffer). He could heal pretty well (healer). He was a decent fighter, although not the best. And most of all, he was resistant to Sauron's powers, because of his lineage and past. I think the Captain does a pretty good job of being the best class for Aragorn.
I thought it fit, too, but the movies created an Aragorn that only reluctantly led men and had a lot of doubts about himself being a king, which is why I can see some feel a class called Captain wouldn't really fit him.
It fits the book Aragorn far better, though. And I also think trying to build a character aesthetic around him specifically would lead to a pretty generic looking swordsman class.
He was a great and memorable character, but not because of the way he dressed or his fighting style. It was, as you say, more about what he represented to the kingdoms of men.
"Classes" aren't really for the player playing them, but for the thousands of other players playing the game. Yes, one could for a healer, but that doesn't say much. Clerics heal better than Druids heal better than Bards heal better that Fighters with bandages.
I often see exchanges in games similar to this paraphrase:
P1: I want use a longsword and a shield for fighting.
P2: Oh! Like a fighter.
P1: DON'T CALL ME A FIGHTER!!!! I'm so much more than that constricting label....
I see so many chafe at "labels", but they help us identify each other. L33t speak came from this. It was a quick easy way to seek a specific player type. Of course, this was when players actually talked to each other
I remember back in AD&D the game had levels. It also had "titles" for those levels. Myrmidon for a fighter of third level, or Prestidigitator for a wizard of first level, or Thug for a 2nd level thief. It was "roleplaying" in MMORPGs using titles like those to communicate one's level and class. Many were cheesy like, "I'm a Bard of the 4th song (or cycle)." For many, this play style was "immersive."
Weapons cause damage, NOT give skills. Players (or their characters) have skills. I don't get the "riposte" by simply picking up a rapier. I have that skill. Damage is a type, be it blunt, slashing, or piercing. One could add in "magical", "elemental", and even "poison" or "acid" damage, too. Weapon type matters here.
Skeletons are brittle bones. Piercing doesn't damage them like a blunt attack that cracks bones. Ghosts are ethereal and don't take damage from non-magical attacks, though these can be damaged with magically imbued weapons.
I understand that many players don't want "complicated", so they want a simple attack 1, attack 2, attack 3, and an alpha strike on a timer. They don't care how those attacks come about, just that they deal damage. For me, that is button mashing at it's most basic.
I'm getting long winded here. I prefer classes. I have yet to "switch" to another weapon to have "skills granted." However, I understand that certain weapons ALLOW for specific attacks (NOT skills). So If I use a sword and shield, my character knows a move or two utilizing these in combination and I need to have those equipped to execute those maneuvers, That is not saying that weapons "give skills", but allows players to utilize skills are already have. I guess it's a nuance kind of thing
tl/dr: I prefer classes, with all of their "limitations"
[edit]
PS to add that way back when, magic users spent their days studying magical tomes, NOT practicing with weapons of every make and model. It was "time restraint", not a "skill restraint."
and.. true to form.. DDO, does all this.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
I like lots of abilities. Sick of these games that have only a few abilities. If I have to deal with weapon swaps to get lots of abilities then I can deal with it.
Playing gw2 right now, while I like the game and don't mind the mechanics at all I tend to have more fun with a class that has its own skills that are not tied to weapons. eso was ok with class skills then weapon skills but it still felt a little off as well. Something feels right about leveling your character up as a specific class, learning how each skill works then really fine tuning it in the end game.
Comments
You can use magic with many weapons, just just staves.
And in NW, magic users have staves but also gauntlets.
Actually, what you are describing is closer to EQ/WoW class based clones, where magic classes are indeed often stuck with staves or wands.
My computer is better than yours.
WoW has multiple casters that don't use wands or staves. Heck, one of the BiS weapon for WoW Classic Mages was a sword and off-hand.
Paladins wielded melee weapons. Same for Shamans. Both are casters.
Those weapons were stat sticks because they were casters in that game, and their role wasn't physical combat (well, Ret Pally and Shaman both had one talent spec for melee). But they definitely didn't wear robes or hold wands to use magic.
And in the same way, many weapons that aren't primary magic weapons in ESO and NW (and I'll add GW2 to that list) have effects and skills that are akin to magic.
My computer is better than yours.
------------
2024: 47 years on the Net.
Locked skills to a weapon and weapon swapping is a instant no go for me.
Hated locked weapon skills in gw2.
I hate switching between my weapons in eso. Like who puts his sword out just to take it back and use sword and Shiel due a fight.
It screams limitation, and I hate that.
Give me 10 slots instead of 2x5 or 2x6 can't remember
Actually, it COULD make sense...
Recurve shortbow vs Longbow. Two different uses.
My computer is better than yours.
I set it so it would be a one button thumb push on my Logitech 604 gaming mouse.
In some builds I switched from a weapon, to the same weapon to take advantage of additional skills in the same line.
Same with bows really, can't say for sure but my guess is medieval longbowmen kept a spare shortbow nearby for when the fighting got a lot more up close and personal.
Two weapons actually makes a lot of sense, never know when one might need to switch from a crushing mace to a more piercing weapon in the right circumstances.
I get it, you don't like it or want to do it, neither did I for a long time until I took the time to learn it last year in ESO, really wasn't that hard.
Now, light attack weaving was like magic to me, I never really got good at it, I never generated DPS much above 55K but those even half way decent could routinely so 75K or more.
The masters of FOTM DK / Necro builds could hit 155K in special raid circumstances.....I bow to their prowess.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
I don't mind weapons having their own skill lines with abilities to use. That element (mostly) makes sense to me on the premise of certain weapons have certain styles/techniques. I'd rather that part feed into a different core combat/combo system though than be things you slot onto the hotbar, which would then be dedicated to more transient skill lines.
I'm personally not that big on classes, but I do value them as far as being used as archetypes. I kinda loved Ryzom's approach to skills in general because I loved being able to open up skills and customize their cost, effects, etc to really tailor my own build.
Dunno that I expressly need that, as much as I'd at least like to have functional skill lines that can be matched together freely to generate approximate classes. ESO lives close on that one, much like Rift, and Archeage does it as well.
Think my biggest gripe with any of them though is aesthetics. Like in ESO it just bothers me that early cosmetics for undead stuff all used red colorings, but then the class itself uses black/blue, so it makes for a visual mis-match between undead mounts, bone weapons, and necro powers.
I'd pretty much just love there to be core ability trees with clear mechanical features, and at least partial control over the visual element and colors.
I certainly have what I'd think of an an optimal skill system, but I do think there's more than one viable method for such, and really it's more about how much control any given system gives me over fulfilling any given theme.
It makes sense in the context of ESO. It's not as though you need to have same bow on each bar and their differing attributes will improve the characters performance when applied correctly.
Your preference would break the game for all except those that choose to use only one bar in combat, foregoing weapon swapping entirely.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
https://biturl.top/rU7bY3
Beyond the shadows there's always light
In ESO when one uses a sword and shield the only thing that can't be slotted on the bar is abilities not associated with other weapons. One need not slot any abilities related to the weapon being used, or even acquire them for that matter.
Philosophy of MMO Game Design
Classes suck. Ultima Online, Asheron's Call or even NW offer WAY more freedom.
Be what you want to be, not what the devs want you do be.
Look at LOTRO for instance. They have a lot of classes, captain, champion... none corresponds exactly to any of the book/movie characters.
It's kinda funny that you can "clone" Aragorn better in Ultima Online or New World than in LOTRO !
My computer is better than yours.
He literally wears the normal outfit of a lightly armored swordsman, including a cape and leather armor. He swung a sword like every other man. He was really good at it, of course, but it's not like he carried a recognizable extra silver sword as a key part of his look like, say, Geralt. What Aragorn is wearing when Frodo first spots him was not, at all, a recognizable or unique look. Pretty sure part of the entire point of his character was that he wasn't a wizard or anything, just a man like those he fought to protect.
His outfit is actually consciously put together (at least at that point in the story) to avoid standing out.
Had a Witcher MMORPG been made where Witchers don't carry silver swords, I would find this critique more effective.
To be perfectly honest, Gandalf, Gimli, and Legolas even had far more unique looks and fighting styles than did Aragorn.
His core point that you can fine tune a build without class restriction to better emulate any fictional character you want to emulate still stands though.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
This also doesn't affect the point, but not all skill-based systems give you that freedom, even if it looks like it on paper. Most often, certain skill lines clearly complement certain other skill lines best (and I'm talking about conscious design choices, not just happenstance) , and trying to go against that means creating a relatively weak character. Or, it could literally lock you out of certain combos by the number of skill points required to master the lines, as SWG does.
The freedom of the skill system is definitely a double-edged sword.
------------
2024: 47 years on the Net.
It fits the book Aragorn far better, though. And I also think trying to build a character aesthetic around him specifically would lead to a pretty generic looking swordsman class.
He was a great and memorable character, but not because of the way he dressed or his fighting style. It was, as you say, more about what he represented to the kingdoms of men.
My computer is better than yours.