Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Dev Podcast Part 2
Zandil
Member UncommonPosts: 252
Some really cool info about mana systems and classes
Comments
It sounds like theres no actual specializing in the specialization system. Unless I heard incorrectly, they are planning on allowing any character to get all the paths and change at will. If thats the case, I find it very disappointing. Allowing characters to be all things and change on the fly removes a lot of the interdependence between players. This has been the case in every game its appeared. Basically what happens is people just change the spec around instead of seeking out other players. Its anti-social.
Hope I'm wrong about this.
Hmm, I haven't listened to it yet but, allowing any character to get all paths? So, kinda like Rift?
I hated that. Just become the path that's required for current the situation?
I'm going to listen to it later, but if that is correct, I will be also be diappointed.
When you can switch between roles on the fly (like in SWTOR a bounty hunter could switch between dps or healing, or dps or tanking), that is a problem. I totally agree, very anti-social.
With Pantheon's system, however, it sounds like they want you to be able to specialize, but within your own class' role. Like with the Cleric example, both specializations are healers, but accomplish healing in two different ways.
I like this new approach. Especially the fact that specializations will be unlocked and not artificially restricted. Like in other games, how they have skill trees, points, and respecing, I'm so glad the Pantheon devs aren't going that route.
Ya, I love the ideas. I love the realistic, non-UI, form of progression where you actually have to go through trials and find spells and abilities in the world itself. I love the class diversity, but each player being able to use all specializations is not good.
I suggest you actually listen to the whole thing instead of making assumptions. They clearly said you can use other Mana sources but the spells for those sources will be totally different than what the core classes of that mana type can do.
For example if you are a cleric and use an enchanters mana source, you will not gain spells that revolve around Charming.
This is a good summation Wellspring.
This is a somewhat complicated system to describe and I'm not surprised it has raised some questions (and ultimately I'm glad it has, I'm excited to see discussion about Pantheon's classes picking up across the various communities).
But I want to clarify this concern: one of the main goals of this system is to preserve Class Identity and to bring back clearly defined Class Roles. So Dullahan, what you took from the round table is definitely not what we intend, though listening back I can see where it could come across that way.
Let me address a few things specifically:
1) There are only two paths available to each Core Class and neither of those paths deviate from the Class' core role. In the case of the Cleric, both the Devout and Resolute Mastery produce a Primary Healer, and just like in EQ1, Pantheon's Cleric (either Devout or Resolute) will be the only class that can fulfill the Primary Healer role, especially later in the game. The difference is in the play style, the appearance and the tertiary utility abilities (like the Pillar Shields, for example, vs. the Tomes for Devout Cleric, which I didn't even get into!).
2) Defining 'on-the-fly': Once the Mastery paths have been unlocked, Mastery is developed and maintained purely through rare equipment and abilities that will be difficult to find and acquire. But yes, both mastery lines will be open to the player to develop. So, it is feasible for someone to slowly (we will make sure it is slowly) piece together a full set of equipment and abilities to fill-out both Mastery lines. However, while you have access to both, switching from one to the other will not be an instantaneous event by any means.
Remember, we love downtime and we love strategy - ideally, we love when downtime and strategy work together.
So let's use the example I used in the podcast. You play a Cleric and a year or two into Pantheon, you've acquired full Mastery gear and abilities for the Devout and Resolute paths. Let's say you are in a full group moving through a dungeon with your Devout Mastery active (Devout gear on, using your Devout abilities and play style). Then you come to those 3 corridors. Thankfully you have a skilled Enchanter with you, but you know you're going to have to take on your Resolute Mastery so you can block off one of those corridors.
How quickly does this happen? Well, first you have to take off all of your Devout gear and replace it with your Resolute gear. We don't want to make exchanging armor tedious, so that's not what's going to take time. What will take time is that by doing this, you effectively wipe your current mana pool completely. As you equip your Resolute gear, you will begin regenerating new mana, as your core White mana merges with the Grey mana of the Resolute gear.
You also have to memorize an entirely new set of abilities (a la EQ 1). The point is, meaningful and strategic downtime is being designed into this system to keep it from ever being 'on-the-fly'. And if we have to take additional measures, we absolutely will.
3) The overall premise of this system is that as you master what it means to be a Cleric, you are not becoming something new when you specialize. That's why I lean more towards calling it a system of Mastery, because you are essentially mastering the full expression of the Cleric class and are able to embody those expressions at will (though, not on the fly
)
Thanks for the feedback so far - I hope these clarifications are helpful!
Creative Director, Lead Game Designer | Visionary Realms, Inc.
Visit the official website of Pantheon: Rise of the Fallen at www.pantheonmmo.com!
Thanks for clarifying. I still think it should be a choice you have to make, and to change your specialization you should have to do something like in EQ where you went to temple of sol ro to change specialization. I think you should have to pick. It will give characters a different flavor making them unique and sought after for particular abilities. It also increases replayability. I can't think of a game where being able to change spec did anything but detract from player interaction and interdependence.
Everything else sounds phenomenal.
edit: actually there is one other small gripe I have and that was with clerics being the only viable primary healer. I thought it became glaringly obvious in EQ, even early on, that there needed to be more than 1 form of healer. They gave shamans and druids better heals so that in most scenarios they were capable of healing a group, but eventually they had to nerf CH and give a version to druids and shamans.
Don't get me wrong, its cool that druids and shamans may be somewhat hybrid with base damage dealing capabilities, but not allowing them to serve as a groups healer for general content would be a bad thing and a step backwards, imo.
This was talked about before Vanguard and thats why we ended up with 3 primary healer classes. With there being fewer classes in pantheon, at least at launch, I really think you should add 1 more pure healing class if you want dru/shm to maintain the hybrid identity like classic EQ and Vanguard.
Just wanted to post this here because this is exactly what I meant concerning the specialization system.
Also, in regards to having a single primary healer class. I hope the Pantheon team go back over the things that were discussed by the Vanguard team in terms of which classes, and why. The combat system proposed for Pantheon is exactly what I want. Theres the tank, cc, dps and healing roles. However, assuming each class is enjoyable and therefore the playerbase is playing all classes somewhat equally, you will end up with most of the players (90%+) needing very few (less than 8% being clerics). Each of the 4 class archetypes needs more than 1 option. You have multiple tanks right now, multiple support classes, and multiple dps classes, yet the healing and cc roles limited to a single class for each. This will lead to problems.
Not worried, I know you guys will work it out. I just wanted to bring it up as I've noticed there are some people that sound deadset on making it "just like EQ1", solely for the sake of making it just like EQ1 rather than making it better and learning from mistakes. I cant praise Vanguard class system enough, so hopefully Pantheon team will look back at it for reference. To me it stands alone, far and away, as the best class system ever in an MMORPG.
Also, in regards to having a single primary healer class. I hope the Pantheon team go back over the things that were discussed by the Vanguard team in terms of which classes, and why. The combat system proposed for Pantheon is exactly what I want. Theres the tank, cc, dps and healing roles. However, assuming each class is enjoyable and therefore the playerbase is playing all classes somewhat equally, you will end up with most of the players (90%+) needing very few (less than 8% being clerics). Each of the 4 class archetypes needs more than 1 option. You have multiple tanks right now, multiple support classes, and multiple dps classes, yet the healing and cc roles limited to a single class for each. This will lead to problems.
Not worried, I know you guys will work it out. I just wanted to bring it up as I've noticed there are some people that sound deadset on making it "just like EQ1", solely for the sake of making it just like EQ1 rather than making it better and learning from mistakes. I cant praise Vanguard class system enough, so hopefully Pantheon team will look back at it for reference. To me it stands alone, far and away, as the best class system ever in an MMORPG.
Thanks Dallahan, just to clarify, Joppa explained that he didn't word it properly with the Cleric example, there will be other healers like Shaman, Druid etc. that can all heal just as well but the Cleric will be the main pure healer, while the others may have different side roles/abilities to go with their healing skills. Joppa said for extreme fights/raids you will want to have at least one Cleric as the others may not be up to the job by themselves, so we will have to wait and see.
This was something I was curious about too, since I loved playing a Shaman class in VG (I had one of each maxed but I loved the Bear(Tuurgin)/Wolf(Rakuur) the best).
I have my reservations but I don't want to decide on whether it will work well or not until I can get in and really test it out and see for myself. I trust Chris and know he will do what is best for the game, he is a great talent when it comes to the creative side and I know that we both think a lot a like, so I am excited and can't wait to jump in and test it out with you guy's in Alpha.
At this point we really have to wait and see like you said. If they make shamans and druids healers instead of what they were originally in EQ and in Vanguard, thats one way to go about it. I still think there should be at least 1 more main healer class though. You know how people are. They will want their perfect groups and maximum efficiency. If two of the healers are more support classes and don't have adequate healing on their own, it will lead to the same situation as early EQ where groups were hard to find because everyone wants enchanter and clerics specifically.
I tend to agree with you there.
Shaman were adequate healers in VG (all the healers were), I could solo heal nearly anything on my Bear (Tuurgin) or Wolf (Rakuur)Shaman, Druid were more Dps with Invuln and healing utility in VG though.