Diversity inside classes

Lord.Bachus · September 2010

For now we have seen 2 mellee/bow classes and 2 vaster classes.

My hopes are there Will be

demonic87 · September 2010

Personally, I think the mesmer type class will use a sword in mainhand and a gun in offhand, kind of like the witchhunter in WAR. But im probably way off.

RawAttitude · September 2010

Originally posted by demonic87
Personally, I think the mesmer type class will use a sword in mainhand and a gun in offhand, kind of like the witchhunter in WAR. But im probably way off.

I think it will be something like that. Mesmers using guns and illusions sounds good and it would combine nice together.

Azzataky · September 2010

I hope mesmers wont use guns, I love mes! But so far what I heard there is still 2 adventure clasess missing, 1 scholar / caster and 1 soldier. About adventures it should be one bow, second gun, third bow+gun, about second soldier is some ppl say its gona be paragon or some kinda crusader, so maybe melee+caster class, last scholar I think is obvious - mesmer!

sfallmann · September 2010

Well - In a way that already exists.

A warrior using a bow has an aoe ability that looks like it inflicts fire damage. Sounds like a spell to me.

Really there is no outcome based difference between that and what is traditionally considered a spell.

If an Elementalist using a staff had the same ability, you'd call it a spell.

The difference is purely semantic.

Lord.Bachus · September 2010

Originally posted by sfallmann
Well - In a way that already exists.

A warrior using a bow has an aoe ability that looks like it inflicts fire damage. Sounds like a spell to me.

Really there is no outcome based difference between that and what is traditionally considered a spell.

If an Elementalist using a staff had the same ability, you'd call it a spell.

The difference is purely semantic.

This is utterly nonsense..

You know that and i know that.....

While the result is the same, the feeling of using a bow or casting a spell is like an apple and a pear...they both taste like fruit. I love apples and i don't like pears

sfallmann · September 2010

Originally posted by Lord.Bachus

Originally posted by sfallmann

Well - In a way that already exists.

A warrior using a bow has an aoe ability that looks like it inflicts fire damage. Sounds like a spell to me.

Really there is no outcome based difference between that and what is traditionally considered a spell.

If an Elementalist using a staff had the same ability, you'd call it a spell.

The difference is purely semantic.

This is utterly nonsense..

You know that and i know that.....

While the result is the same, the feeling of using a bow or casting a spell is like an apple and a pear...they both taste like fruit. I love apples and i don't like pears

Nonsense? Your answer is nonsense.

You click a button. The animation triggers, the effect hits the target, and the damage is done.

To use your craptastic analogy - you are eating an apple that looks like a pear, but you claim you don't like the taste because it looks different on the outside - yet they are both apples. The difference is superficial.

The "feeling" exists in you perhaps, but you can't say the "feeling" exists in everyone since it's intangible and completely subjective.

The bottom line is - you want a class that has what appears to be spell animations that also has abilities that have what appears to be melee like animations.

Your claim of "feel" may apply in other games, due to weapon speed, weight, whatever, but in this game all weapons do is give you bundles of skills (and most likely impact damage done based on the power of the weapon).

Yes - it might not be that in the story and description of warrior that they use spells. That's fine. I cede that point. But from a gameplay point of view that's meaningless.

Lord.Bachus · September 2010

Originally posted by sfallmann

Originally posted by Lord.Bachus

Originally posted by sfallmann

Well - In a way that already exists.

A warrior using a bow has an aoe ability that looks like it inflicts fire damage. Sounds like a spell to me.

Really there is no outcome based difference between that and what is traditionally considered a spell.

If an Elementalist using a staff had the same ability, you'd call it a spell.

The difference is purely semantic.

This is utterly nonsense..

You know that and i know that.....

While the result is the same, the feeling of using a bow or casting a spell is like an apple and a pear...they both taste like fruit. I love apples and i don't like pears

Nonsense? Your answer is nonsense.

You click a button. The animation triggers, the effect hits the target, and the damage is done.

To use your craptastic analogy - you are eating an apple that looks like a pear, but you claim you don't like the taste because it looks different on the outside - yet they are both apples. The difference is superficial.

The "feeling" exists in you perhaps, but you can't say the "feeling" exists in everyone since it's intangible and completely subjective.

The bottom line is - you want a class that has what appears to be spell animations that also has abilities that have what appears to be melee like animations.

Your claim of "feel" may apply in other games, due to weapon speed, weight, whatever, but in this game all weapons do is give you bundles of skills (and most likely impact damage done based on the power of the weapon).

Yes - it might not be that in the story and description of warrior that they use spells. That's fine. I cede that point. But from a gameplay point of view that's meaningless.

These games are all about roleplaying and not about buttons and mechanismes behind that.

sfallmann · September 2010

Originally posted by Lord.Bachus

Originally posted by sfallmann

Originally posted by Lord.Bachus

Originally posted by sfallmann

Well - In a way that already exists.

A warrior using a bow has an aoe ability that looks like it inflicts fire damage. Sounds like a spell to me.

Really there is no outcome based difference between that and what is traditionally considered a spell.

If an Elementalist using a staff had the same ability, you'd call it a spell.

The difference is purely semantic.

This is utterly nonsense..

You know that and i know that.....

While the result is the same, the feeling of using a bow or casting a spell is like an apple and a pear...they both taste like fruit. I love apples and i don't like pears

Nonsense? Your answer is nonsense.

You click a button. The animation triggers, the effect hits the target, and the damage is done.

To use your craptastic analogy - you are eating an apple that looks like a pear, but you claim you don't like the taste because it looks different on the outside - yet they are both apples. The difference is superficial.

The "feeling" exists in you perhaps, but you can't say the "feeling" exists in everyone since it's intangible and completely subjective.

The bottom line is - you want a class that has what appears to be spell animations that also has abilities that have what appears to be melee like animations.

Your claim of "feel" may apply in other games, due to weapon speed, weight, whatever, but in this game all weapons do is give you bundles of skills (and most likely impact damage done based on the power of the weapon).

Yes - it might not be that in the story and description of warrior that they use spells. That's fine. I cede that point. But from a gameplay point of view that's meaningless.

These games are all about roleplaying and not about buttons and mechanismes behind that.

To you and a relatively small subset of the players.

Lord.Bachus · September 2010

Originally posted by sfallmann

Originally posted by Lord.Bachus

Originally posted by sfallmann

Originally posted by Lord.Bachus

Originally posted by sfallmann

Well - In a way that already exists.

A warrior using a bow has an aoe ability that looks like it inflicts fire damage. Sounds like a spell to me.

Really there is no outcome based difference between that and what is traditionally considered a spell.

If an Elementalist using a staff had the same ability, you'd call it a spell.

The difference is purely semantic.

This is utterly nonsense..

You know that and i know that.....

While the result is the same, the feeling of using a bow or casting a spell is like an apple and a pear...they both taste like fruit. I love apples and i don't like pears

Nonsense? Your answer is nonsense.

You click a button. The animation triggers, the effect hits the target, and the damage is done.

To use your craptastic analogy - you are eating an apple that looks like a pear, but you claim you don't like the taste because it looks different on the outside - yet they are both apples. The difference is superficial.

The "feeling" exists in you perhaps, but you can't say the "feeling" exists in everyone since it's intangible and completely subjective.

The bottom line is - you want a class that has what appears to be spell animations that also has abilities that have what appears to be melee like animations.

Your claim of "feel" may apply in other games, due to weapon speed, weight, whatever, but in this game all weapons do is give you bundles of skills (and most likely impact damage done based on the power of the weapon).

Yes - it might not be that in the story and description of warrior that they use spells. That's fine. I cede that point. But from a gameplay point of view that's meaningless.

These games are all about roleplaying and not about buttons and mechanismes behind that.

To you and a relatively small subset of the players.

<smiles> i think thats a little narrowminded........ Most people make their character choice with a certain immage in mind... something they remember from other games or movies... thats way more important then the mechanisme behind a class..

MumboJumbo · September 2010

Originally posted by Lord.Bachus

Originally posted by sfallmann

Originally posted by Lord.Bachus

Originally posted by sfallmann

Originally posted by Lord.Bachus

Originally posted by sfallmann

Well - In a way that already exists.

A warrior using a bow has an aoe ability that looks like it inflicts fire damage. Sounds like a spell to me.

Really there is no outcome based difference between that and what is traditionally considered a spell.

If an Elementalist using a staff had the same ability, you'd call it a spell.

The difference is purely semantic.

This is utterly nonsense..

You know that and i know that.....

While the result is the same, the feeling of using a bow or casting a spell is like an apple and a pear...they both taste like fruit. I love apples and i don't like pears

Nonsense? Your answer is nonsense.

You click a button. The animation triggers, the effect hits the target, and the damage is done.

To use your craptastic analogy - you are eating an apple that looks like a pear, but you claim you don't like the taste because it looks different on the outside - yet they are both apples. The difference is superficial.

The "feeling" exists in you perhaps, but you can't say the "feeling" exists in everyone since it's intangible and completely subjective.

The bottom line is - you want a class that has what appears to be spell animations that also has abilities that have what appears to be melee like animations.

Your claim of "feel" may apply in other games, due to weapon speed, weight, whatever, but in this game all weapons do is give you bundles of skills (and most likely impact damage done based on the power of the weapon).

Yes - it might not be that in the story and description of warrior that they use spells. That's fine. I cede that point. But from a gameplay point of view that's meaningless.

These games are all about roleplaying and not about buttons and mechanismes behind that.

To you and a relatively small subset of the players.

i think thats a little narrowminded........ Most people make their character choice with a certain immage in mind... something they remember from other games or movies... thats way more important then the mechanisme behind a class..

Here a broad take on it.

All attacks derive from pushing buttons etc that's a moot point.

But the overall effect or feel should emerge as a different style or experience of gameplay. Some overlaps in attacks such as fire damage etc, but generally that's the difference between shooting a bow (faster animation and execution and range?) vs a mage with staff (wider aoe? shorter range, longer cast, higher damage) and their visually different effects provide visually and consequentially different satisfactions for different people.

So the difference between a bow and mage spell should exist by degree and widen noticeably by profession.

Adding SFX effects to each attack does sort of trivialise the realistic difference but in terms of gameplay hopefully adds some fun.

sfallmann · September 2010

Originally posted by Lord.Bachus

Originally posted by sfallmann

Originally posted by Lord.Bachus

Originally posted by sfallmann

Originally posted by Lord.Bachus

Originally posted by sfallmann

Well - In a way that already exists.

A warrior using a bow has an aoe ability that looks like it inflicts fire damage. Sounds like a spell to me.

Really there is no outcome based difference between that and what is traditionally considered a spell.

If an Elementalist using a staff had the same ability, you'd call it a spell.

The difference is purely semantic.

This is utterly nonsense..

You know that and i know that.....

While the result is the same, the feeling of using a bow or casting a spell is like an apple and a pear...they both taste like fruit. I love apples and i don't like pears

Nonsense? Your answer is nonsense.

You click a button. The animation triggers, the effect hits the target, and the damage is done.

To use your craptastic analogy - you are eating an apple that looks like a pear, but you claim you don't like the taste because it looks different on the outside - yet they are both apples. The difference is superficial.

The "feeling" exists in you perhaps, but you can't say the "feeling" exists in everyone since it's intangible and completely subjective.

The bottom line is - you want a class that has what appears to be spell animations that also has abilities that have what appears to be melee like animations.

Your claim of "feel" may apply in other games, due to weapon speed, weight, whatever, but in this game all weapons do is give you bundles of skills (and most likely impact damage done based on the power of the weapon).

Yes - it might not be that in the story and description of warrior that they use spells. That's fine. I cede that point. But from a gameplay point of view that's meaningless.

These games are all about roleplaying and not about buttons and mechanismes behind that.

To you and a relatively small subset of the players.

i think thats a little narrowminded........ Most people make their character choice with a certain immage in mind... something they remember from other games or movies... thats way more important then the mechanisme behind a class..

No offense dude, but you have a penchant for making claims based on your own parochial views but have the gonads to call someone narrowminded. Pot meet kettle.

I would say that most people DO NOT care about characer and roleplay. Ever notice the shitty shitty character names people come up with? I'm sure the guy playing a female character named SeXxYAzz because he rather stare at a female butt is not too concerned about the roleplay aspect.

sfallmann · September 2010

Originally posted by MumboJumbo

Originally posted by Lord.Bachus

Originally posted by sfallmann

Originally posted by Lord.Bachus

Originally posted by sfallmann

Originally posted by Lord.Bachus

Originally posted by sfallmann

Well - In a way that already exists.

A warrior using a bow has an aoe ability that looks like it inflicts fire damage. Sounds like a spell to me.

Really there is no outcome based difference between that and what is traditionally considered a spell.

If an Elementalist using a staff had the same ability, you'd call it a spell.

The difference is purely semantic.

This is utterly nonsense..

You know that and i know that.....

While the result is the same, the feeling of using a bow or casting a spell is like an apple and a pear...they both taste like fruit. I love apples and i don't like pears

Nonsense? Your answer is nonsense.

You click a button. The animation triggers, the effect hits the target, and the damage is done.

To use your craptastic analogy - you are eating an apple that looks like a pear, but you claim you don't like the taste because it looks different on the outside - yet they are both apples. The difference is superficial.

The "feeling" exists in you perhaps, but you can't say the "feeling" exists in everyone since it's intangible and completely subjective.

The bottom line is - you want a class that has what appears to be spell animations that also has abilities that have what appears to be melee like animations.

Your claim of "feel" may apply in other games, due to weapon speed, weight, whatever, but in this game all weapons do is give you bundles of skills (and most likely impact damage done based on the power of the weapon).

Yes - it might not be that in the story and description of warrior that they use spells. That's fine. I cede that point. But from a gameplay point of view that's meaningless.

These games are all about roleplaying and not about buttons and mechanismes behind that.

To you and a relatively small subset of the players.

i think thats a little narrowminded........ Most people make their character choice with a certain immage in mind... something they remember from other games or movies... thats way more important then the mechanisme behind a class..

Here a broad take on it.

All attacks derive from pushing buttons etc that's a moot point.

But the overall effect or feel should emerge as a different style or experience of gameplay. Some overlaps in attacks such as fire damage etc, but generally that's the difference between shooting a bow (faster animation and execution and range?) vs a mage with staff (wider aoe? shorter range, longer cast, higher damage) and their visually different effects provide visually and consequentially different satisfactions for different people.

So the difference between a bow and mage spell should exist by degree and widen noticeably by profession.

Adding SFX effects to each attack does sort of trivialise the realistic difference but in terms of gameplay hopefully adds some fun.

Ahh .. but this discussion did not originate as a difference between what a melee character can do and what a mage can do, but if a class exists that can melee and have "spells". I contend that there is no difference in results from what a warrior wielding a bow does, in GW2, to what can be considered a "spell".

maplestone · September 2010

So to sum up the exchange:

If you design a game such all classes have access to the same abstract abilities through one means or another, then you get strong game balance at the cost of risking suspension of disbelief . Whether the trade is worth it depends on your sensitivity to imbalances of power and your sensitity to symmetry if your mind pulls back the veil of graphics and lore.

sfallmann · September 2010

Originally posted by maplestone
So to sum up the exchange:

If you design a game such all classes have access to the same abstract abilities through one means or another, then you get strong game balance at the cost of risking suspension of disbelief . Whether the trade is worth it depends on your sensitivity to imbalances of power and your sensitity to symmetry if your mind pulls back the veil of graphics and lore.

More or less. I think that it doesn't apply to most players. Most people don't think too much about what's going on behind the scenes in the games they are playing. It's only the obssesive types, like us, that bother to spend time arguing about games before they are even released.

jvxmtg · September 2010

Originally posted by sfallmann

Originally posted by MumboJumbo

Originally posted by Lord.Bachus

Originally posted by sfallmann

Originally posted by Lord.Bachus

Originally posted by sfallmann

Originally posted by Lord.Bachus

Originally posted by sfallmann
Well - In a way that already exists.

A warrior using a bow has an aoe ability that looks like it inflicts fire damage. Sounds like a spell to me.

Really there is no outcome based difference between that and what is traditionally considered a spell.

If an Elementalist using a staff had the same ability, you'd call it a spell.

The difference is purely semantic.

This is utterly nonsense..

You know that and i know that.....

While the result is the same, the feeling of using a bow or casting a spell is like an apple and a pear...they both taste like fruit. I love apples and i don't like pears

Nonsense? Your answer is nonsense.

You click a button. The animation triggers, the effect hits the target, and the damage is done.

To use your craptastic analogy - you are eating an apple that looks like a pear, but you claim you don't like the taste because it looks different on the outside - yet they are both apples. The difference is superficial.

The "feeling" exists in you perhaps, but you can't say the "feeling" exists in everyone since it's intangible and completely subjective.

The bottom line is - you want a class that has what appears to be spell animations that also has abilities that have what appears to be melee like animations.

Your claim of "feel" may apply in other games, due to weapon speed, weight, whatever, but in this game all weapons do is give you bundles of skills (and most likely impact damage done based on the power of the weapon).

Yes - it might not be that in the story and description of warrior that they use spells. That's fine. I cede that point. But from a gameplay point of view that's meaningless.

These games are all about roleplaying and not about buttons and mechanismes behind that.

To you and a relatively small subset of the players.

i think thats a little narrowminded........ Most people make their character choice with a certain immage in mind... something they remember from other games or movies... thats way more important then the mechanisme behind a class..

Here a broad take on it.

All attacks derive from pushing buttons etc that's a moot point.

But the overall effect or feel should emerge as a different style or experience of gameplay. Some overlaps in attacks such as fire damage etc, but generally that's the difference between shooting a bow (faster animation and execution and range?) vs a mage with staff (wider aoe? shorter range, longer cast, higher damage) and their visually different effects provide visually and consequentially different satisfactions for different people.

So the difference between a bow and mage spell should exist by degree and widen noticeably by profession.

Adding SFX effects to each attack does sort of trivialise the realistic difference but in terms of gameplay hopefully adds some fun.

Ahh .. but this discussion did not originate as a difference between what a melee character can do and what a mage can do, but if a class exists that can melee and have "spells". I contend that there is no difference in results from what a warrior wielding a bow does, in GW2, to what can be considered a "spell".

I totally agree. Whether you are blocking with a shield or with a spell, the result is still a block. Besides, why would a Warrior want to cast a healing spell, for example, when they can use Healing Signet. Or what's the difference from a hex that gives -4 health degen from poison?

ArenaNet made their skill to be functionally the same only classified them differently.

Masa1 · September 2010

I fear that if they mix everything up, classes no longer make any difference (other than visually). The direction they are going with classes looks bad..

The only things separating classes at the moment are:

-Some special ways they handle skills, for example a necromancer using Fear or those triggerable AoE spells.

-Only some classes can use minions/pets.

-Some parts of the personal story.

-Equipment: Armor (Light, Medium, Heavy), offhand slot usage, basic attack (spammable skill) melee or ranged.

-Special aspect, for example Necromancer death shroud. Most of the classes don't seem to have any...

I know that the list is long.. but still most of the skills are just "mixed up trash". With such skills, it wouldn't make any difference to have a classless system.

NoEndInLife · September 2010

Mesmer using guns is kind of weird.

If they wield guns they'll give off the witchhunter vibe. And if you played GW1 you'd know that mesmers are nothing like witchhunters...

Idk i may be wrong. I mean it's ok if mesmers are wielding swords(I actually thought mesmers used rapiers in GW1 when i first saw the profession screen :P), but mesmers wielding guns is a little too far imo.

twrule · September 2010

Originally posted by Masa1
I fear that if they mix everything up, classes no longer make any difference (other than visually). The direction they are going with classes looks bad..

The only things separating classes at the moment are:

-Some special ways they handle skills, for example a necromancer using Fear or those triggerable AoE spells.

-Only some classes can use minions/pets.

-Some parts of the personal story.

-Equipment: Armor (Light, Medium, Heavy), offhand slot usage, basic attack (spammable skill) melee or ranged.

-Special aspect, for example Necromancer death shroud. Most of the classes don't seem to have any...

I know that the list is long.. but still most of the skills are just "mixed up trash". With such skills, it wouldn't make any difference to have a classless system.

I don't share your view at all.

There is what I believe to be a pretty healthy amount of differentiation between the classes, just looking at those that have already been announced.

Elementalists get 4 elemental attunements, glyph spells, and conjure spells (which summon different items and weapons for the party to use).

Necros get the life force/death shroud mechanic, plentiful minions each with their own special abilities (which can also combo with player abilities), wells, marks, and fear.

Rangers have their pet, spirit summons, traps, and preparations. They can can easily control the battle and fight effectively at different ranges without sacrificing CC ability.

Warriors can use a wide variety of weapon types and combos on top of having shout skills, banners, charge-up skills, and stances. They are also arguably the most mobile class available so far, with their various charge abilities, and they can actively block with a shield.

Those sound like 4 very distinct playstyles to me - not to mention that you can further customize each class with the glyph system and different weapon types (the skills of each weapon type being different for each class btw).

In a classless system, everyone has access to the same pool of skills. In the GW2 system, you have access to a variety of skills, but can only draw from the pool of skills that are unique to your class and not repeated amongst other classes.

neonwire · September 2010

Originally posted by NoEndInLife
Mesmer using guns is kind of weird.

If they wield guns they'll give off the witchhunter vibe. And if you played GW1 you'd know that mesmers are nothing like witchhunters...

Idk i may be wrong. I mean it's ok if mesmers are wielding swords(I actually thought mesmers used rapiers in GW1 when i first saw the profession screen :P), but mesmers wielding guns is a little too far imo.

Well maybe someone wants to give off that vibe. I cant see anything wrong with players being able to tailor their characters to give an impression they feel is right in their mind. Why couldnt a character who trained as a mesmer happen to have learned to fire a gun? Whats far fetched about that? Having some unspoken law that magically stops people throughout the land from learning how to use certain weapons seems pretty odd to me.

Hey you! You cant pick up that gun and pull the trigger!

Why not?

Well.....you're a mesmer. You cast spells and mess with people using illusions. You dont use guns.

Well yeah I cast spells. Thats true. I picked up this gun a while ago though and I'm finding I quite like it. I've been practicing with it a bit. I think I've got a knack for it actually. I've always considered taking up one of these since I was a kid. Never got round to it for some reason. Would you like to have a go? Its fun.

No! Most certainly not! I'm a necromancer. I cant touch it. I dont know how to pick it up and pull the trigger.

But....but....its easy. Go on....have go....here.....take it.

Nope! Get away from me you weirdo.

twrule · September 2010

Originally posted by neonwire

Originally posted by NoEndInLife

Mesmer using guns is kind of weird.

If they wield guns they'll give off the witchhunter vibe. And if you played GW1 you'd know that mesmers are nothing like witchhunters...

Idk i may be wrong. I mean it's ok if mesmers are wielding swords(I actually thought mesmers used rapiers in GW1 when i first saw the profession screen :P), but mesmers wielding guns is a little too far imo.

Well maybe someone wants to give off that vibe. I cant see anything wrong with players being able to tailor their characters to give an impression they feel is right in their mind. Why couldnt a character who trained as a mesmer happen to have learned to fire a gun? Whats far fetched about that? Having some unspoken law that magically stops people throughout the land from learning how to use certain weapons seems pretty odd to me.

Hey you! You cant pick up that gun and pull the trigger!

Why not?

Well.....you're a mesmer. You cast spells and mess with people using illusions. You dont use guns.

Well yeah I cast spells. Thats true. I picked up this gun a while ago though and I'm finding I quite like it. I've been practicing with it a bit. I think I've got a knack for it actually. I've always considered taking up one of these since I was a kid. Never got round to it for some reason. Would you like to have a go? Its fun.

No! Most certainly not! I'm a necromancer. I cant touch it. I dont know how to pick it up and pull the trigger.

But....but....its easy. Go on....have go....here.....take it.

Nope! Get away from me you weirdo.

Normally I'd agree with you, but I have to say that if there's one class/weapon combo that I could come up with a good logical reason not to occur, it's a Mesmer using a gun. The reason is simple: guns make a lot of noise, especially the older types like we'll see in GW. If your survival depends on your ability to keep your enemies ensnared in an illusory world - you would probably want to avoid wielding a weapon that produces such a racket as to easily snap them back into reality. Sure, maybe it doesn't matter if you're only fighting one enemy, since they'll already be dead if you're a decent shot. But it'd be counterproductive when fighting multiple enemies. In other words, it's not that they don't know how to use a gun, it's that they choose not to because it's not cohesive with their general approach. You could make the same argument for a stealth class with guns.

neonwire · September 2010

Originally posted by twrule

Originally posted by neonwire

Originally posted by NoEndInLife
Mesmer using guns is kind of weird.

If they wield guns they'll give off the witchhunter vibe. And if you played GW1 you'd know that mesmers are nothing like witchhunters...

Idk i may be wrong. I mean it's ok if mesmers are wielding swords(I actually thought mesmers used rapiers in GW1 when i first saw the profession screen :P), but mesmers wielding guns is a little too far imo.

Well maybe someone wants to give off that vibe. I cant see anything wrong with players being able to tailor their characters to give an impression they feel is right in their mind. Why couldnt a character who trained as a mesmer happen to have learned to fire a gun? Whats far fetched about that? Having some unspoken law that magically stops people throughout the land from learning how to use certain weapons seems pretty odd to me.

Hey you! You cant pick up that gun and pull the trigger!

Why not?

Well.....you're a mesmer. You cast spells and mess with people using illusions. You dont use guns.

Well yeah I cast spells. Thats true. I picked up this gun a while ago though and I'm finding I quite like it. I've been practicing with it a bit. I think I've got a knack for it actually. I've always considered taking up one of these since I was a kid. Never got round to it for some reason. Would you like to have a go? Its fun.

No! Most certainly not! I'm a necromancer. I cant touch it. I dont know how to pick it up and pull the trigger.

But....but....its easy. Go on....have go....here.....take it.

Nope! Get away from me you weirdo.

Normally I'd agree with you, but I have to say that if there's one class/weapon combo that I could come up with a good logical reason not to occur, it's a Mesmer using a gun. The reason is simple: guns make a lot of noise, especially the older types like we'll see in GW. If your survival depends on your ability to keep your enemies ensnared in an illusory world - you would probably want to avoid wielding a weapon that produces such a racket as to easily snap them back into reality. Sure, maybe it doesn't matter if you're only fighting one enemy, since they'll already be dead if you're a decent shot. But it'd be counterproductive when fighting multiple enemies. In other words, it's not that they don't know how to use a gun, it's that they choose not to because it's not cohesive with their general approach. You could make the same argument for a stealth class with guns.

Thats a fair point and actually a rather good one. However.....do the mesmers skills rely on absolute silence for them to work? I dont think so. If they did then.....well.....he's fucked really isnt he. The warrior guy he teamed up with nearby will be screaming his head off as he charges into battle, the mage stood over on that hill will be causing that fiery explosion off to the left, that guy over there is busy operating a mortar and is bombarding the enemies with giant rocks.....oh yeah and that massive giant dragon and his horde of gibbering, screeching minions are all being really inconsiderate and making a right old racket.

Yep battles basicly arent well known for being peaceful and quiet affairs, so I really dont think the sound of a gun firing is gonna be particularly detrimental to a mesmers spells working. Besides illusions arent all about what appears in an individuals mind. They can be external illusions too with their own visuals and sound effects.......such as an illusion of a squad of riflemen all firing big noisy guns

twrule · September 2010

Originally posted by neonwire

Originally posted by twrule

Originally posted by neonwire

Originally posted by NoEndInLife

Mesmer using guns is kind of weird.

If they wield guns they'll give off the witchhunter vibe. And if you played GW1 you'd know that mesmers are nothing like witchhunters...

Idk i may be wrong. I mean it's ok if mesmers are wielding swords(I actually thought mesmers used rapiers in GW1 when i first saw the profession screen :P), but mesmers wielding guns is a little too far imo.

Well maybe someone wants to give off that vibe. I cant see anything wrong with players being able to tailor their characters to give an impression they feel is right in their mind. Why couldnt a character who trained as a mesmer happen to have learned to fire a gun? Whats far fetched about that? Having some unspoken law that magically stops people throughout the land from learning how to use certain weapons seems pretty odd to me.

Hey you! You cant pick up that gun and pull the trigger!

Why not?

Well.....you're a mesmer. You cast spells and mess with people using illusions. You dont use guns.

Well yeah I cast spells. Thats true. I picked up this gun a while ago though and I'm finding I quite like it. I've been practicing with it a bit. I think I've got a knack for it actually. I've always considered taking up one of these since I was a kid. Never got round to it for some reason. Would you like to have a go? Its fun.

No! Most certainly not! I'm a necromancer. I cant touch it. I dont know how to pick it up and pull the trigger.

But....but....its easy. Go on....have go....here.....take it.

Nope! Get away from me you weirdo.

Normally I'd agree with you, but I have to say that if there's one class/weapon combo that I could come up with a good logical reason not to occur, it's a Mesmer using a gun. The reason is simple: guns make a lot of noise, especially the older types like we'll see in GW. If your survival depends on your ability to keep your enemies ensnared in an illusory world - you would probably want to avoid wielding a weapon that produces such a racket as to easily snap them back into reality. Sure, maybe it doesn't matter if you're only fighting one enemy, since they'll already be dead if you're a decent shot. But it'd be counterproductive when fighting multiple enemies. In other words, it's not that they don't know how to use a gun, it's that they choose not to because it's not cohesive with their general approach. You could make the same argument for a stealth class with guns.

Thats a fair point and actually a rather good one. However.....do the mesmers skills rely on absolute silence for them to work? I dont think so. If they did then.....well.....he's fucked really isnt he. The warrior guy he teamed up with nearby will be screaming his head off as he charges into battle, the mage stood over on that hill will be causing that fiery explosion off to the left, that guy over there is busy operating a mortar and is bombarding the enemies with giant rocks.....oh yeah and that massive giant dragon and his horde of gibbering, screeching minions are all being really inconsiderate and making a right old racket.

Yep battles basicly arent well known for being peaceful and quiet affairs, so I really dont think the sound of a gun firing is gonna be particularly detrimental to a mesmers spells working. Besides illusions arent all about what appears in an individuals mind. They can be external illusions too with their own visuals and sound effects.......such as an illusion of a squad of riflemen all firing big noisy guns

Well, I'd further argue that there's a difference between "absolute silence" or even a big noisy battle versus the sudden explosive crack of a gunshot. In theory you could drown out all that, or simply include similar sounds in the illusion to make them indistinguishable. The problem with a gun is that the sound is very distinct and recognizable. Anyone who hears it knows there's a gun going off - so your illusion would then have to include a gun being fired to cover it up, which I think would kind of limit what you'd be able to otherwise do with your vast illusory powers. So, at best, using a gun would significantly limit the creativity you could employ with your illusions to the point of not really being worthwhile, versus what you could do with a quieter or less recognizable weapon, such as a melee weapon or offensive magic issued from a staff/scepter/focus/etc.

But I dunno, it's their game - we'll see.

P.S. And tbh, I personally just don't like the idea of absurdly inefficient fighting methods, even though they appear in these kinds of games all the time. What's the point of trapping your opponent in a world of illusion just to shoot him in the head rather than just shooting him in the first place? Another example would be the death knight from WoW - they infect their opponent with all kinds of diseases...and then chop their head off with a giant greatsword. Seems like kind of a waste of time lol. But that's just my personal taste maybe .

neonwire · September 2010

So the sounds of a big battle (which will probably include other people firing guns and other things that are even louder.....such as dragons roaring, cannons firing and meteors falling from the sky) can be drowned out with the mesmers magic but the sound of a single gunshot would cause a problem? Come on you know that doesnt make any sense. You're definately grasping at straws.

Besides even if the victim does know that a gun is being fired, so what? He knows someone is firing a gun.....and? The point of the mesmers spells are to cause confusion and distract the enemy. His spells can still do that perfectly well regardless of what noises are being made. The mesmer might cause the sound to appear from somewhere else. He might make it look like his hands are empty.....or he might blind the enemy.....or make it look like one of the targets companions is aiming a gun at him......and so on. The possibilities are endless.

Trapping your opponent in a world of illusion so you can walk up to them, point a gun to their head and kill them with a single shot actually makes quite a lot of sense. Otherwise you have to take aim and risk missing him, while he has a chance to react and attack you. It also saves you from having to run up to your target with a quiet hand held weapon which would make it harder to concentrate on keeping the illusion going. On top of that firing a gun at someone would be a lot safer and easier than engaging that ferocious demon with the flaming warhammer. Besides if you think firing a gun would break an illusion then dont you think bashing someone over the head with a great big stick would do the same? lol

Of course in a realistic situation, knowing that someone just fired a gun wouldnt be of any use to the target. He will already have been hit due to being unable to avoid it as he never saw it coming.......and would probably be dead. But this is "game world" where hitting someone depletes a small amount of energy from a life bar instead. In "game world" very few things make any actual sense and if you look for all the things that are ridiculous then the list will be pretty much endless. The death knight example actually makes sense too. He weakens his opponents to make them less effective in battle so he can hit them easier with his bloody great big sword. Nothing wrong with that. He is a knight afterall.

twrule · September 2010

Originally posted by neonwire
So the sounds of a big battle (which will probably include other people firing guns and other things that are even louder.....such as dragons roaring, cannons firing and meteors falling from the sky) can be drowned out with the mesmers magic but the sound of a single gunshot would cause a problem? Come on you know that doesnt make any sense. You're definately grasping at straws.

As I said in my last post - all those other sounds end up lumping together into low rumbles and roars - whereas a handgun or rifle being fired nearby would be a distinct cracking sound that is easily recognizable.

Besides even if the victim does know that a gun is being fired, so what? He knows someone is firing a gun.....and? The point of the mesmers spells are to cause confusion and distract the enemy. His spells can still do that perfectly well regardless of what noises are being made. The mesmer might cause the sound to appear from somewhere else. He might make it look like his hands are empty.....or he might blind the enemy.....or make it look like one of the targets companions is aiming a gun at him......and so on. The possibilities are endless.

Again, as I admitted in my last post, it would be possible to incorporate guns into an illusion, but the number of possibilities is arguably greater when not using a gun because you don't have to compensate for the sound and making your opponent believe it was fired from somewhere else than your hand.

Trapping your opponent in a world of illusion so you can walk up to them, point a gun to their head and kill them with a single shot actually makes quite a lot of sense. Otherwise you have to take aim and risk missing him, while he has a chance to react and attack you. It also saves you from having to run up to your target with a quiet hand held weapon which would make it harder to concentrate on keeping the illusion going. On top of that firing a gun at someone would be a lot safer and easier than engaging that ferocious demon with the flaming warhammer. Besides if you think firing a gun would break an illusion then dont you think bashing someone over the head with a great big stick would do the same? lol

As I said in my original post - it'd work fine against 1 opponent (a gun), the problem would arise with multiple opponents. And yes a melee weapon would still be superior because there's a better chance you can kill 1 opponent that's trapped in illusion without his friend a few yards away realizing it right away (not as much noise, and you can target the throat with a blade to garble their deathcry). I don't quite understand what you mean about how walking up to point blank range with a gun is somehow better than walking up with a melee weapon. Even if you stop a few yards short with a gun, you're still in danger if they somehow escape the illusion, and I don't see how either way would make it tougher to maintain the illusion.

Of course in a realistic situation, knowing that someone just fired a gun wouldnt be of any use to the target. He will already have been hit due to being unable to avoid it as he never saw it coming.......and would probably be dead. But this is "game world" where hitting someone depletes a small amount of energy from a life bar instead. In "game world" very few things make any actual sense and if you look for all the things that are ridiculous then the list will be pretty much endless. The death knight example actually makes sense too. He weakens his opponents to make them less effective in battle so he can hit them easier with his bloody great big sword. Nothing wrong with that. He is a knight afterall.

Lol, if the deathknight actually weakened them it'd be one thing - he just diseases them. It's like he's giving them ebola and then killing them before the disease can do any real damage. Doesn't make sense to me .

As far as ridiculous elements to the game world, sure, I wasn't arguing that. My whole point was that the devs could have a leg to stand on if they decided to not let mesmers use guns. A lot of things might be unrealistic in the game mechanics, but that doesn't mean they couldn't adjust their lore however they like.

neonwire · September 2010

Originally posted by twrule

Originally posted by neonwire
So the sounds of a big battle (which will probably include other people firing guns and other things that are even louder.....such as dragons roaring, cannons firing and meteors falling from the sky) can be drowned out with the mesmers magic but the sound of a single gunshot would cause a problem? Come on you know that doesnt make any sense. You're definately grasping at straws.

As I said in my last post - all those other sounds end up lumping together into low rumbles and roars - whereas a handgun or rifle being fired nearby would be a distinct cracking sound that is easily recognizable.

Besides even if the victim does know that a gun is being fired, so what? He knows someone is firing a gun.....and? The point of the mesmers spells are to cause confusion and distract the enemy. His spells can still do that perfectly well regardless of what noises are being made. The mesmer might cause the sound to appear from somewhere else. He might make it look like his hands are empty.....or he might blind the enemy.....or make it look like one of the targets companions is aiming a gun at him......and so on. The possibilities are endless.

Again, as I admitted in my last post, it would be possible to incorporate guns into an illusion, but the number of possibilities is arguably greater when not using a gun because you don't have to compensate for the sound and making your opponent believe it was fired from somewhere else than your hand.

Trapping your opponent in a world of illusion so you can walk up to them, point a gun to their head and kill them with a single shot actually makes quite a lot of sense. Otherwise you have to take aim and risk missing him, while he has a chance to react and attack you. It also saves you from having to run up to your target with a quiet hand held weapon which would make it harder to concentrate on keeping the illusion going. On top of that firing a gun at someone would be a lot safer and easier than engaging that ferocious demon with the flaming warhammer. Besides if you think firing a gun would break an illusion then dont you think bashing someone over the head with a great big stick would do the same? lol

As I said in my original post - it'd work fine against 1 opponent (a gun), the problem would arise with multiple opponents. And yes a melee weapon would still be superior because there's a better chance you can kill 1 opponent that's trapped in illusion without his friend a few yards away realizing it right away (not as much noise, and you can target the throat with a blade to garble their deathcry). I don't quite understand what you mean about how walking up to point blank range with a gun is somehow better than walking up with a melee weapon. Even if you stop a few yards short with a gun, you're still in danger if they somehow escape the illusion, and I don't see how either way would make it tougher to maintain the illusion.

Of course in a realistic situation, knowing that someone just fired a gun wouldnt be of any use to the target. He will already have been hit due to being unable to avoid it as he never saw it coming.......and would probably be dead. But this is "game world" where hitting someone depletes a small amount of energy from a life bar instead. In "game world" very few things make any actual sense and if you look for all the things that are ridiculous then the list will be pretty much endless. The death knight example actually makes sense too. He weakens his opponents to make them less effective in battle so he can hit them easier with his bloody great big sword. Nothing wrong with that. He is a knight afterall.

Lol, if the deathknight actually weakened them it'd be one thing - he just diseases them. It's like he's giving them ebola and then killing them before the disease can do any real damage. Doesn't make sense to me .

As far as ridiculous elements to the game world, sure, I wasn't arguing that. My whole point was that the devs could have a leg to stand on if they decided to not let mesmers use guns. A lot of things might be unrealistic in the game mechanics, but that doesn't mean they couldn't adjust their lore however they like.

OK so a gun makes a disruptive noise that would ruin concentration. A dragon roaring, several cannons firing, a group of warriors bellowing warcries, a small meteor falling from the sky, a mage casting a loud thunderbolt and a horde of screeching demons all blend into background noise. Gotcha. You win.

Fair point about the shooting of an opponent in the head at point blank range. Shooting something at range in general makes a lot more sense though when the one weilding the gun is a “squishy” person with no heavy armour to protect them.

Funny point about the death knight. I suppose I kind of agree. Magic diseases in these games come and go with so much regularity that its hardly relevant really. They’re more like just temporary illnesses. Same as wounds. In reality every living thing in these game worlds would be driven insane with the amount of psychological trauma they must suffer from having those wounds inflicted on them and then removed every few minutes. They would be dead from shock in no time, regardless of how much magic healing gets applied to them.

But yeah anyway it has been an amusing discussion, if a tad on the silly side. If magic was real then we could perhaps prove a point but sadly this is not the case. We’ll just have to agree to disagree. You say guns are bad for mesmers. I see no problem with them. Ah well. Tis just a game.

Howdy, Stranger!

Diversity inside classes

Comments

Howdy, Stranger!

Quick Links

Diversity inside classes

Comments