I would like to vote yes on this, because I like that openness in a game, but I voted no because it's EQ, and I liked the way the original classes were done.
Someone early on in this thread said that they couldn't see halflings or gnomes as warriors, but even ants have warriors. Let the little guys swing for the knees. ... Would be nice if playing a warrior were more interesting than in EQ1, though. (SK bias. Sorry.)
Originally posted by Four0Six Although I leave it up to the developers to develop their games.I like having restrictions. The issue is where do you draw the lines. Hence my comment before.1. There is always going to be the group that cries, "Why cant my orc be a high INT Light Magic caster.". Nothing you can do about it except tell them, "Too bad, so sad, go play something else.". Then duck the flying debris. This falls into the, "No matter what you do, somebody will hate" Category.2. Where I see issues arising is again, the lines. Elves cant cast necro? Well what about Dark Elves? Why couldn't orcs, which spawn from the earth, (spores most commonly), cast some sort or earth magic? Yes yes, it begins to go around and around. I see one answer being lots of different "types" of classes, or maybe many facets to each class. I see a system like City of Heroes. Which leads us to the problem in that system.3. The system in City of Heroes lead to having lots of characters, Alts. Many didn't like it then, and found it restricting. Now I think even less like it, myself included.In closing, this is one of those things that even though I have feelings on one side, I tend to just take what I am given and go with it. Not a mechanic that is game breaking, more a matter of aesthetics.
Good post. When I see people debate the first point, I want to ask, "Why do you want to be an Orc? Why not be a race that has the capacity to be the class you desire?"
You are right it comes down to the line drawn by the developers. It may or may not cross the specific player's line. If it does not, great. If it does, the game is not for them.
Players complain about challenges. Restrictions are what give a player a challenge. Too many and the challenge is not fun. Too few and the challenge is non-existent. "I want to be a heavy armor (max protection), Spell wielding (good range damage), greatsword (massive melee damage) wielding character that can sneak and back stab (for the massive damage multipliers) and heal (so my massive hit points can be self healed) who worships a nature God (so the animals love me and will not attack me that I can command as pets)." Where is the challenge in that? Where is the inherent weakness to make the game a challenge?
But there is a line for each and every individual player.
- 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
Players complain about challenges. Restrictions are what give a player a challenge. Too many and the challenge is not fun. Too few and the challenge is non-existent. "I want to be a heavy armor (max protection), Spell wielding (good range damage), greatsword (massive melee damage) wielding character that can sneak and back stab (for the massive damage multipliers) and heal (so my massive hit points can be self healed) who worships a nature God (so the animals love me and will not attack me that I can command as pets)." Where is the challenge in that? Where is the inherent weakness to make the game a challenge?
The weakness in being jack-of-all-trades is that you're not particularly good at any of them. RPG systems accomplish this by limiting the number of total skills you can get and/or the amount of skills you can actively use. In games where a player's character can be anything, you'll find very few people who try to be everything. Just like in life, it's simply not practical.
Back to the orc issue - if Orcs are just dumb beasts that have no control over their "always evil" actions, then the solution is simple - don't make Orcs a playable race. Playable races need to be races with free will that one can make choices with. Or - as i mentioned before - do what LoTRO did, set up "monster play", where your character is defined as a monster and the only thing you can do with it is attack good people, you don't really get the option to go out and save the world.
"Id rather work on something with great potential than on fulfilling a promise of mediocrity."
- Raph Koster
Tried: AO,EQ,EQ2,DAoC,SWG,AA,SB,HZ,CoX,PS,GA,TR,IV,GnH,EVE, PP,DnL,WAR,MxO,SWG,FE,VG,AoC,DDO,LoTRO,Rift,TOR,Aion,Tera,TSW,GW2,DCUO,CO,STO Favourites: AO,SWG,EVE,TR,LoTRO,TSW,EQ2, Firefall Currently Playing: ESO
Originally posted by Draedz I have to vote no because things like Dark elf druids and Wood elf necromancers don't make sense.
But what if a Dark Elf was raised by a bunch of Wood Elves and learned to love nature and all its beauty?What if a Wood Elf became embittered by the stagnant nature of his people and sought more knowledge,leading him down dark paths of arcane arts and eventually to control of forces from the netherword?
While I like the scenarios you suggested, multiply that 1 Dark Elf raised by Wood Elves by 1000. Instead of being different and unique (which is what I really think a lot of players desire), they are commonplace and overdone.
These scenarios would work great in a single player game where 1 out of 1000s of Dark Elves is good. The rest are still evil. It would also add an inner dynamic to the player character about how they may feel about their race as a whole. Some conflict could arise within them self.
- 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 like restrictions. However perhaps they should not be based on the race. Kind of like in real life every body if you actually study can reasonably achieve that which they want. Only a handful of jobs are off limits...like the president, politicians in general, or a president of a specific company.
That being said I'm not sure how you would restrict the job and not have it be about race. Perhaps make it so unfavorable to achieve it since for example an orc would lack the intelligence not because he is an orc but just because he just simply lacks the intelligence to do so.
Originally posted by Four0Six Although I leave it up to the developers to develop their games.
I like having restrictions. The issue is where do you draw the lines. Hence my comment before.
1. There is always going to be the group that cries, "Why cant my orc be a high INT Light Magic caster.". Nothing you can do about it except tell them, "Too bad, so sad, go play something else.". Then duck the flying debris. This falls into the, "No matter what you do, somebody will hate" Category.
2. Where I see issues arising is again, the lines. Elves cant cast necro? Well what about Dark Elves? Why couldn't orcs, which spawn from the earth, (spores most commonly), cast some sort or earth magic? Yes yes, it begins to go around and around. I see one answer being lots of different "types" of classes, or maybe many facets to each class. I see a system like City of Heroes. Which leads us to the problem in that system.
3. The system in City of Heroes lead to having lots of characters, Alts. Many didn't like it then, and found it restricting. Now I think even less like it, myself included.
In closing, this is one of those things that even though I have feelings on one side, I tend to just take what I am given and go with it. Not a mechanic that is game breaking, more a matter of aesthetics.
Good post. When I see people debate the first point, I want to ask, "Why do you want to be an Orc? Why not be a race that has the capacity to be the class you desire?"
You are right it comes down to the line drawn by the developers. It may or may not cross the specific player's line. If it does not, great. If it does, the game is not for them.
Players complain about challenges. Restrictions are what give a player a challenge. Too many and the challenge is not fun. Too few and the challenge is non-existent. "I want to be a heavy armor (max protection), Spell wielding (good range damage), greatsword (massive melee damage) wielding character that can sneak and back stab (for the massive damage multipliers) and heal (so my massive hit points can be self healed) who worships a nature God (so the animals love me and will not attack me that I can command as pets)." Where is the challenge in that? Where is the inherent weakness to make the game a challenge?
But there is a line for each and every individual player.
Only if you can work to bypass them through the application of allot of buttsweat and man hours, otherwise it isn't a challenge, it's a limitation which in a sandbox game you want as little of as possible.
Sure you can do all that but you have 45 skill points and to max out (IE do the maximum of each role) you need to invest around 35 points into each profession in turn. Have fun.
I voted no, but with some caveat. I would like every race to be able to fill every role (tank, dps, healer and support). But I would like those roles to suit the race.
While I like the scenarios you suggested, multiply that 1 Dark Elf raised by Wood Elves by 1000. Instead of being different and unique (which is what I really think a lot of players desire), they are commonplace and overdone.
These scenarios would work great in a single player game where 1 out of 1000s of Dark Elves is good. The rest are still evil. It would also add an inner dynamic to the player character about how they may feel about their race as a whole. Some conflict could arise within them self.
Well, in a sandbox game, this would be called "emergent gameplay". If the majority of Dark Elves switch to good, the developers should move the lore accordingly and have Dark Elves no longer be an evil race and give future players a choice of being born in the Dark Elves' "evil home" or the new "good" Dark Elf enclave located in the forest. This is what a sandbox world is all about - player-driven world, supported by the developers.
That being said, if it is quite challenging to switch one's faction, it is very unlikely that this will happen. The majority of people will stick to taking the normal path.
While I don't have exact statistics, I just did a fun "test". EQ2 has leaderboards, so i picked some random criteria (in this case "total kills") and decided to see what races pop up on the first page given that in EQ2 any race can eventually become any class if they work at it. Some very unscientific results (i looked at top 10 for each class):
Paladin (good):
Human - 3
Barbarian - 3
Half Elf - 2
Wood Elf - 1
Kerran - 1
Shadowknight (evil):
Ogre - 2
Dark Elf - 2
Freeblood - 2
Human - 1
Kerran - 1
Iksar - 1
Barbarian - 1
Warden (Druid): *(note wardens in eq2 have always been a neutral class, selectable from start by anyone)
Wood Elf - 3
Dark Elf - 3
Half Elf, Halfling, Arasai, Fae - 1
Necromancer (evil):
Dark Elf - 5
Freeblood - 2
Iksar - 2
High Elf - 1
Ok.. so i know it's a very small statistical sample and it's a pretty random criteria, but it does show that for the most part, people tend to pick the more "traditional" races for their classes. Sure there are some oddballs, but for very class I looked up, the races looked "more appropriate than not".
"Id rather work on something with great potential than on fulfilling a promise of mediocrity."
- Raph Koster
Tried: AO,EQ,EQ2,DAoC,SWG,AA,SB,HZ,CoX,PS,GA,TR,IV,GnH,EVE, PP,DnL,WAR,MxO,SWG,FE,VG,AoC,DDO,LoTRO,Rift,TOR,Aion,Tera,TSW,GW2,DCUO,CO,STO Favourites: AO,SWG,EVE,TR,LoTRO,TSW,EQ2, Firefall Currently Playing: ESO
Comments
nooooooooooo please.
An ogre should NOT be a wizard.
I would like to vote yes on this, because I like that openness in a game, but I voted no because it's EQ, and I liked the way the original classes were done.
Someone early on in this thread said that they couldn't see halflings or gnomes as warriors, but even ants have warriors. Let the little guys swing for the knees.
... Would be nice if playing a warrior were more interesting than in EQ1, though. (SK bias. Sorry.)
You are right it comes down to the line drawn by the developers. It may or may not cross the specific player's line. If it does not, great. If it does, the game is not for them.
Players complain about challenges. Restrictions are what give a player a challenge. Too many and the challenge is not fun. Too few and the challenge is non-existent. "I want to be a heavy armor (max protection), Spell wielding (good range damage), greatsword (massive melee damage) wielding character that can sneak and back stab (for the massive damage multipliers) and heal (so my massive hit points can be self healed) who worships a nature God (so the animals love me and will not attack me that I can command as pets)." Where is the challenge in that? Where is the inherent weakness to make the game a challenge?
But there is a line for each and every individual player.
- 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
The weakness in being jack-of-all-trades is that you're not particularly good at any of them. RPG systems accomplish this by limiting the number of total skills you can get and/or the amount of skills you can actively use. In games where a player's character can be anything, you'll find very few people who try to be everything. Just like in life, it's simply not practical.
Back to the orc issue - if Orcs are just dumb beasts that have no control over their "always evil" actions, then the solution is simple - don't make Orcs a playable race. Playable races need to be races with free will that one can make choices with. Or - as i mentioned before - do what LoTRO did, set up "monster play", where your character is defined as a monster and the only thing you can do with it is attack good people, you don't really get the option to go out and save the world.
"Id rather work on something with great potential than on fulfilling a promise of mediocrity."
- Raph Koster
Tried: AO,EQ,EQ2,DAoC,SWG,AA,SB,HZ,CoX,PS,GA,TR,IV,GnH,EVE, PP,DnL,WAR,MxO,SWG,FE,VG,AoC,DDO,LoTRO,Rift,TOR,Aion,Tera,TSW,GW2,DCUO,CO,STO
Favourites: AO,SWG,EVE,TR,LoTRO,TSW,EQ2, Firefall
Currently Playing: ESO
These scenarios would work great in a single player game where 1 out of 1000s of Dark Elves is good. The rest are still evil. It would also add an inner dynamic to the player character about how they may feel about their race as a whole. Some conflict could arise within them self.
- 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 like restrictions. However perhaps they should not be based on the race. Kind of like in real life every body if you actually study can reasonably achieve that which they want. Only a handful of jobs are off limits...like the president, politicians in general, or a president of a specific company.
That being said I'm not sure how you would restrict the job and not have it be about race. Perhaps make it so unfavorable to achieve it since for example an orc would lack the intelligence not because he is an orc but just because he just simply lacks the intelligence to do so.
Only if you can work to bypass them through the application of allot of buttsweat and man hours, otherwise it isn't a challenge, it's a limitation which in a sandbox game you want as little of as possible.
Sure you can do all that but you have 45 skill points and to max out (IE do the maximum of each role) you need to invest around 35 points into each profession in turn. Have fun.
Simple solutions to simple problems.
Well, in a sandbox game, this would be called "emergent gameplay". If the majority of Dark Elves switch to good, the developers should move the lore accordingly and have Dark Elves no longer be an evil race and give future players a choice of being born in the Dark Elves' "evil home" or the new "good" Dark Elf enclave located in the forest. This is what a sandbox world is all about - player-driven world, supported by the developers.
That being said, if it is quite challenging to switch one's faction, it is very unlikely that this will happen. The majority of people will stick to taking the normal path.
While I don't have exact statistics, I just did a fun "test". EQ2 has leaderboards, so i picked some random criteria (in this case "total kills") and decided to see what races pop up on the first page given that in EQ2 any race can eventually become any class if they work at it. Some very unscientific results (i looked at top 10 for each class):
Paladin (good):
Human - 3
Barbarian - 3
Half Elf - 2
Wood Elf - 1
Kerran - 1
Shadowknight (evil):
Ogre - 2
Dark Elf - 2
Freeblood - 2
Human - 1
Kerran - 1
Iksar - 1
Barbarian - 1
Warden (Druid): *(note wardens in eq2 have always been a neutral class, selectable from start by anyone)
Wood Elf - 3
Dark Elf - 3
Half Elf, Halfling, Arasai, Fae - 1
Necromancer (evil):
Dark Elf - 5
Freeblood - 2
Iksar - 2
High Elf - 1
Ok.. so i know it's a very small statistical sample and it's a pretty random criteria, but it does show that for the most part, people tend to pick the more "traditional" races for their classes. Sure there are some oddballs, but for very class I looked up, the races looked "more appropriate than not".
"Id rather work on something with great potential than on fulfilling a promise of mediocrity."
- Raph Koster
Tried: AO,EQ,EQ2,DAoC,SWG,AA,SB,HZ,CoX,PS,GA,TR,IV,GnH,EVE, PP,DnL,WAR,MxO,SWG,FE,VG,AoC,DDO,LoTRO,Rift,TOR,Aion,Tera,TSW,GW2,DCUO,CO,STO
Favourites: AO,SWG,EVE,TR,LoTRO,TSW,EQ2, Firefall
Currently Playing: ESO