If any of you actually PLAYED Everquest or Everquest 2, you would realize that weapon/armor limitations were one of the CORE aspects of the game. Rogues had entire AA skill lines devoted to backstab and dagger use. It was built in from the very beginning of the game. It lasted two games and 15 years and spawned an entire genre of hundreds of games. Seemed to work out pretty well, right?
Paladins cannot dual wield, SOE game both Pal/SK crusader specific weapons and abilities that took into account the class restrictions. Mages, Druids, Bards, Monks....all had restrictions and all had things to deal with those restrictions. Monks had innate AC bonus but could not wear armor without a severe weight penalty. Druids could use scimitars but could not dual wield or double attack.
It would not be Everquest if it did not have the core EQ classes. And that means class/armor restrictions.
Had a similar discussion on a Facebook regarding another game universe and it being linked to certain mechanics. Put bluntly if you think Everquest is a themepark and all it is ever going to be is a themepark then you do a greater disservice to your game than anything you think I am doing.
Put simply this game is not Everquest 3, it is Everquest Next, that implies evolution and MMOs evolve into virtual worlds and virtual worlds are based on freedom of choice. If you want a game with fixed classes you said it best: There are literally hundreds of those, if you want the next evolution of Everquest then you play this game, mechanics be damned, the universe is what counts and anyone that says otherwise needs to stop looking at a cube dead on and calling it a square.
EQ1 vets (myself included) are hoping to see some of the core classic aspects of the original game return. I for one would love to see SOE finally do the EQ name justice and return to their roots in terms of game difficulty and risk vs. reward. Given the trend almost all games since EQ1 (1999-2003ish era) have set; no one wants to see more World of Warcraft type games. Classes with armor/weapon limitations are a must if you ask me. Why? Because it divides players into needed categories. The level of item greed that limitless restrictions will promote will be sickening. If I am a warrior in a group with excellent 2H slashing skills and some 2 handed sword drops from a mob, is it fair that just because a wizard is able to wield the item, they should be allowed to compete for gear that is much less useful to them? Some may say yes, he participated in the content so he should have a stake at the item.. I don't know, but it was always cool seeing an item that was specifically made for specific or select classes drop; this also eliminated for the most part so much bickering over equipment. Sure there were items such as the Fungi Tunic that would sometimes create drama because so many players could use it and benefit from it, but it was also extremely valuable and like almost every piece of equipment in EQ1; it was able to be sold/traded. Thoughts?
I agree it would be wrong to award it based solely on the fact that the wizard could equip it, (using your example), but if the wizard had excellent 2h slashing skills (same as the warrior), maybe there could be some sort of a "skill check" the game could apply before allowing the wizard to roll on it. For example: in order to be granted permission to roll on the "greatsword of inferno" the game checks to see who has a 2h skill of 200+ and only allows those players to roll.
Your skill check system is something to ponder on. I guess my point is, I don't think wizards should be running around with gear that is designed for warriors. If the gear is able to be equipped but is less effective, then why bother? Why would someone take an item from someone else simply because they can? I believe this just opens the door to all sorts of greed, especially if you are dealing with people that are used to the instant gratification games of today. I think this would happen if items didn't get appropriately flagged for certain classes. Ok, lets take it one step further. Lets say that the sword has some +melee skills like dodge/attack power/damage also attached to the item and some +stats that are geared toward tanking/fighting classes; lets say 5 stamina and 5 strength. Would it still be ok for the Wizard to take the item? I can just see all kinds of rolling paybacks! Warriors rolling against casters who stole their swords and rolling on those robes! Maybe it would police itself this way? I just don't get the point of no item restrictions.
Throw out the notion of "designed for" because swords are made to kill and plate mail to protect, nothing more or less, view them as tools not as extensions of something, then you will be able to see things better.
Ok, fair enough then. Let's say there are no item restrictions, and all items are "designed for" no particular class. Yet, a fine steel breastplate offers warriors 50% damage reduction because his class gains more from wearing plate then other classes. Lets say the BP also has a stat that benefits multiple classes something like +10 stamina. When the BP is equipped by wizards they gain only 10% damage reduction and the +10 stamina yet they are free to wear the item. Do players want this type of freedom? Does it come at a cost? I guess at the end of the day, you would just have to hope that the community was mature enough to award items based on benefits first and want second. Most guilds and groups of friends would never have to worry about this being an issue. However, as i stated earlier a lot of people are looking for instant gratification these days. Perhaps though, EQN will have a system in place that we've never seen when it comes to item progression and this would be no issue. I personally would be fine with item/gear/class restrictions and limited roles. I like to play a class and stand out for being able to do specific and very special things that other classes cannot access.
x1000 for mat drops with very rare whole gear out of larger mobs.
So far some compelling arguments for restriction have been AA lines and too many people rolling on the same gear. I can see those arguments but very little would have to be tweaked in order to give people more freedom over thier characters.
I just agree with the traditional archetype angle. There are many instances of breaking archetype gearing in games and stories (thank Dihoru for the Gandolf meme) that cross traditional lines. In a free system people still can equip what they consider appropriate gearing, nothing is stopping them.
Not to be taken literal but I looked at the EQN painting again and noticed pieces of plate with cloth and a faster that is holding a warhammer. Take that for what you will
While I am huge proponent of skill based progression and no restrictions, that would not be EQ to me.
EQ for me was about finding the right fit within the limitations they set forth. I tried EVERY race and class combo (loved all the servers and 8(?) characters per server) just to see what they were like.
It also seems to me, and I could be wrong, that whenever an MMO tries to let players fiddle with their character build, it boils down to 1 or 2 "most efficient" builds. Even EQ had a bit of this with their attributes. If an Enchanter did not put all their points into Charisma, they were thought of as gimped. After awhile, EQ just took away the adding of attribute points on leveling and did it for you.
Seeing a Wizard in plate carrying a 2-handed battle axe is just not EQ to me.
- 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 generally prefer open ended systems with limitations if you are using the "wrong" weapon and/or bonuses for using the "right" weapon. I.e., see Demon's Souls, DnD, etc.
This argument is so absurd... Of course EQN will have gear restrictions. No mage is going to use a staff and cloth armor, if they can use a shield and plate armor.
Even when not considering the completely obvious balance consequences, think of how big a nightmare grouping/raiding will be when it comes time to loot... It would be utter anarchy and drama. Everyone would want everything and constant bitching and arguments would ensue.
This argument is so absurd... Of course EQN will have gear restrictions. No mage is going to use a staff and cloth armor, if they can use a shield and plate armor.
Even when not considering the completely obvious balance consequences, think of how big a nightmare grouping/raiding will be when it comes time to loot... It would be utter anarchy and drama. Everyone would want everything and constant bitching and arguments would ensue.
This whole idea is just stupid.
Not sure if you're being facetious or not. Most games with open gear have drawbacks for mages wearing plate armor and the like. In DnD, mages have issue casting spells if they wear armor. I mean, I am not sure if you just didn't think about this, didn't play games where this was implemented, or what?
This argument is so absurd... Of course EQN will have gear restrictions. No mage is going to use a staff and cloth armor, if they can use a shield and plate armor.
Even when not considering the completely obvious balance consequences, think of how big a nightmare grouping/raiding will be when it comes time to loot... It would be utter anarchy and drama. Everyone would want everything and constant bitching and arguments would ensue.
This whole idea is just stupid.
A good way to avoid rash judgments against other's ideas, and accusations of other people's ideas as stupid is detailed below.
After formulating your well thought out thesis on why your fellow poster is "stupid," perform the following steps:
Step 1: Ask yourself, "Am I just talking about World of Warcraft?"
Step 2: Think of possible modes, styles, and paradigms that are not exactly like World Of Warcraft. As if another type of game is possible if that helps.
Step 3: Repeat the previous steps until your question or statement becomes irrelevant.
Comments
Ok, fair enough then. Let's say there are no item restrictions, and all items are "designed for" no particular class. Yet, a fine steel breastplate offers warriors 50% damage reduction because his class gains more from wearing plate then other classes. Lets say the BP also has a stat that benefits multiple classes something like +10 stamina. When the BP is equipped by wizards they gain only 10% damage reduction and the +10 stamina yet they are free to wear the item. Do players want this type of freedom? Does it come at a cost? I guess at the end of the day, you would just have to hope that the community was mature enough to award items based on benefits first and want second. Most guilds and groups of friends would never have to worry about this being an issue. However, as i stated earlier a lot of people are looking for instant gratification these days. Perhaps though, EQN will have a system in place that we've never seen when it comes to item progression and this would be no issue. I personally would be fine with item/gear/class restrictions and limited roles. I like to play a class and stand out for being able to do specific and very special things that other classes cannot access.
So far some compelling arguments for restriction have been AA lines and too many people rolling on the same gear. I can see those arguments but very little would have to be tweaked in order to give people more freedom over thier characters.
I just agree with the traditional archetype angle. There are many instances of breaking archetype gearing in games and stories (thank Dihoru for the Gandolf meme) that cross traditional lines. In a free system people still can equip what they consider appropriate gearing, nothing is stopping them.
Not to be taken literal but I looked at the EQN painting again and noticed pieces of plate with cloth and a faster that is holding a warhammer. Take that for what you will
"I'll never grow up, never grow up, never grow up! Not me!"
While I am huge proponent of skill based progression and no restrictions, that would not be EQ to me.
EQ for me was about finding the right fit within the limitations they set forth. I tried EVERY race and class combo (loved all the servers and 8(?) characters per server) just to see what they were like.
It also seems to me, and I could be wrong, that whenever an MMO tries to let players fiddle with their character build, it boils down to 1 or 2 "most efficient" builds. Even EQ had a bit of this with their attributes. If an Enchanter did not put all their points into Charisma, they were thought of as gimped. After awhile, EQ just took away the adding of attribute points on leveling and did it for you.
Seeing a Wizard in plate carrying a 2-handed battle axe is just not EQ to me.
- 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
It's really just a game design decision.
I generally prefer open ended systems with limitations if you are using the "wrong" weapon and/or bonuses for using the "right" weapon. I.e., see Demon's Souls, DnD, etc.
This argument is so absurd... Of course EQN will have gear restrictions. No mage is going to use a staff and cloth armor, if they can use a shield and plate armor.
Even when not considering the completely obvious balance consequences, think of how big a nightmare grouping/raiding will be when it comes time to loot... It would be utter anarchy and drama. Everyone would want everything and constant bitching and arguments would ensue.
This whole idea is just stupid.
Not sure if you're being facetious or not. Most games with open gear have drawbacks for mages wearing plate armor and the like. In DnD, mages have issue casting spells if they wear armor. I mean, I am not sure if you just didn't think about this, didn't play games where this was implemented, or what?
A good way to avoid rash judgments against other's ideas, and accusations of other people's ideas as stupid is detailed below.
After formulating your well thought out thesis on why your fellow poster is "stupid," perform the following steps:
Step 1: Ask yourself, "Am I just talking about World of Warcraft?"
Step 2: Think of possible modes, styles, and paradigms that are not exactly like World Of Warcraft. As if another type of game is possible if that helps.
Step 3: Repeat the previous steps until your question or statement becomes irrelevant.