I don't like class restrictions

ghoul31 · May 2006

Out of the 19 races, only 7 can be rangers. If they prohibited a couple of races from being rangers, it wouldn't be so bad. But this is just ridiculous.

This really cuts down on the variety of characters you can make.

Do we really want every ranger in the game to be an elf? Thats just boring.

Vexin · May 2006

/agree

The pre-NGE Star Wars Galaxies approach was the best I've seen so far in an MMO. Total sandbox, 32 professions, and anbody could be anything (within the limits of your 250 skill points). It was fantastic. Playing games like WoW, in contrast, seems really restrictive and artificial.

I've been a bit enthused about V:SoH as a potential replacement for my lost SWG, but putting restrictions on professions by race kinda tunes my enthusiasm down a notch.

Steelarm011 · May 2006

YES!

YES YES YES.

Finally someone else who really sees the light. This is one of the major reasons I dont like MMO's currently in general atm, becuase of character restrictions. SWG was actually good when it came out (besides the unholy grind) because it was a total sandbox. Class restrictions not only make the game boring and repetivive but it muffles the player in what they really want to become. Another example of the beauty of custimization is Asheron's Call. Even though its old, almost every player I talked to LOVED THE GAME. Why? becuase it had no class restrictions. Hell, there were no classes, only skills.

Vanguard is the daughter of Everquest and WoW. What does this mean? It means:

1. Very Restricted character custimization. You choose this class, this race, thats it. Thats your job when playing that character. Nothing else. If your a tank, you sit there and take hits all day. If your a healer, you click on people and press the heal button. Fun right? What if you want to switch? Well then you go and log onto a DIFFERENT character, and spend another 5000000 hours grinding with them. Fun.

2. A High tedious grind. This game is meant to be "challenging" which to the devs mean that its a challenging expierience to click on a monster and press the attack button. Actually, its challenging when you want to resist from geting up and walking out becuase your about to fall asleep from boredom.

3. Limited PvP, low death penalty. Meaning the pvp will be WoW -ish. You die, you dont lose anything, PvP will be in small areas. Fun and exciting? Not really.

Sadly I fear that many players will flock to Vanguard becuase it is backed by rich companies and therefore they feel "safer" that way and its the offspring of EQ-WoW. I think half of them will stay, the other half sick of the constant grinding.

I am personally waiting for Darkfall. I support Freedom, thankyouverymuch.

Sincerely,

Dr. Steelarm

Vexin · May 2006

That's a friggin' great image in your sig, Steelarm.

anarchyart · May 2006

I'm glad only certain races can be certain professions for the sole reason that it promotes diversity and uniqueness of appearance. And it all comes down to the devs vision and the final product. I'm sure it will be well rounded, either way, I'll be playing it for a long time.

angerr · May 2006

i understand both sides, i like the rpg aspect and always hated that "good" races were necromancers....it makes sense to me to have the class restrictions be consistent with the lore.

but at the same time i understand that people want to be a certain race/class combo, and it can be frustrating when the class you want to be isn't allowed to also be the race you want to be, it has happened to me many times in eq1.

its not really a game breaker to me either way, with or without class restrictions it doesn't make a huge difference to me.

angerr · May 2006

Originally posted by Steelarm011
YES!
YES YES YES.
Finally someone else who really sees the light. This is one of the major reasons I dont like MMO's currently in general atm, becuase of character restrictions. SWG was actually good when it came out (besides the unholy grind) because it was a total sandbox. Class restrictions not only make the game boring and repetivive but it muffles the player in what they really want to become. Another example of the beauty of custimization is Asheron's Call. Even though its old, almost every player I talked to LOVED THE GAME. Why? becuase it had no class restrictions. Hell, there were no classes, only skills.
Vanguard is the daughter of Everquest and WoW. What does this mean? It means:
1. Very Restricted character custimization. You choose this class, this race, thats it. Thats your job when playing that character. Nothing else. If your a tank, you sit there and take hits all day. If your a healer, you click on people and press the heal button. Fun right? What if you want to switch? Well then you go and log onto a DIFFERENT character, and spend another 5000000 hours grinding with them. Fun.
2. A High tedious grind. This game is meant to be "challenging" which to the devs mean that its a challenging expierience to click on a monster and press the attack button. Actually, its challenging when you want to resist from geting up and walking out becuase your about to fall asleep from boredom.
3. Limited PvP, low death penalty. Meaning the pvp will be WoW -ish. You die, you dont lose anything, PvP will be in small areas. Fun and exciting? Not really.
Sadly I fear that many players will flock to Vanguard becuase it is backed by rich companies and therefore they feel "safer" that way and its the offspring of EQ-WoW. I think half of them will stay, the other half sick of the constant grinding.
I am personally waiting for Darkfall. I support Freedom, thankyouverymuch.
Sincerely,
Dr. Steelarm

i don't think they have said anything about the pvp yet, as far as ruleset....have they? BTW good luck with darkfall its not looking to good for that game ATM ::::21::

zipit · May 2006

Originally posted by angerr

i understand both sides, i like the rpg aspect and always hated that "good" races were necromancers....it makes sense to me to have the class restrictions be consistent with the lore.
but at the same time i understand that people want to be a certain race/class combo, and it can be frustrating when the class you want to be isn't allowed to also be the race you want to be, it has happened to me many times in eq1.
its not really a game breaker to me either way, with or without class restrictions it doesn't make a huge difference to me.

ditto

GrimSkunk2 · May 2006

Originally posted by Steelarm011

3. Limited PvP, low death penalty. Meaning the pvp will be WoW -ish. You die, you dont lose anything, PvP will be in small areas. Fun and exciting? Not really.

According to their FAQ, there will be different unique servers to accomidate play style. If you like PvP style, there will be, at launch, a PvP only server where you can kill players anywhere, at any time. I have no idea if there is any consequence other than the death, however.

SpiritofGame · May 2006

Cannot agree with the OP.

Having seven of twenty-one races to choose from to make a Ranger seems fine.

If every race could be every class and do everything, what would be the point of having any races at all since they apparently would have little or no affect on your class?

Zippy · May 2006

I don't agree witht the OP for the most part. I like the idea of race class restrictions as long as there are still a good amount of choices for each race. I generally like to play short races. I am not particularily fond of the choices for the short races (Halfling, Goblin, Gnome and Dwarf) in Vanguard. It may force me to play a semi-tall race. Looking at the class/race combo it seems some races don't get much as deverisiy as others. I am sure they will balance this more as the game gets closer to release. While I like the race restrictions I would like to see them a few more classes for each race.

ghoul31 · May 2006

Originally posted by SpiritofGame

Cannot agree with the OP.
Having seven of twenty-one races to choose from to make a Ranger seems fine.
If every race could be every class and do everything, what would be the point of having any races at all since they apparently would have little or no affect on your class?

Each race has racial abilities so it does have an effect on your character.

It limits your choice when you can only choose from 7 racial abilities instead of 21.

And being a goblin is a lot cooler than being an elf.

Wartorn[SC] · May 2006

Ditto - can't really agree with the OP.

I like diversity - some races should not become a certain class. I mean a Ork Paladin?
C'mon that just doesn't fit.

Racial diversity combined with a good balancing strategy should be the way to go.

But we will have to see how they get all this together - I really hope they don't screw this up or we will just see another game with all uber-dark elven rangers...

zethcarn · May 2006

Originally posted by Wartorn[SC]

Ditto - can't really agree with the OP.
I like diversity - some races should not become a certain class. I mean a Ork Paladin?
C'mon that just doesn't fit.
Racial diversity combined with a good balancing strategy should be the way to go.
But we will have to see how they get all this together - I really hope they don't screw this up or we will just see another game with all uber-dark elven rangers...

Exactly, it really kills the role-play value to have any race be any class. A half giant rogue would be stupid cause half giants aren't sneaky by nature. (for example)

Vexin · May 2006

Originally posted by zethcarn
Exactly, it really kills the role-play value to have any race be any class. A half giant rogue would be stupid cause half giants aren't sneaky by nature. (for example)

Ok, in that respect, I can see your point, and I guess I would actually agree with it. In a "fantasy" format, where races are vastly diverse (Orcs, Elves, Gnomes, Giants, etc.), it does indeed make no role-playing sense to have some races able to employ some professions. Your example paints the picture well.

I suppose the difference with pre-NGE Galaxies was that there were no classes, and weren't any real differences between races. Players were all humanoid, in a non-magical universe. So, in that respect, allowing any player to engage in any profession worked.

Steelarm011 · May 2006

Yes unfortunatly Darkfall isnt doing good atm....in that case I'll have to back Age of Conan or maybe even WAR.

As to the correction on the PvP, my bad, I havent read the FAQ in awhile and it was more for the general games coming out not just Vanguard.

Im kind of surprised and not surprised at the replies the OP is getting.

People are posting saying that this will promote uniqueness and diversity...okay, so having 90% of all rangers running around being elf is diverse? what?

As for the "roleplaying" aspect, I am a bit unsure about how much rp'ing will be going on (and I mean "true" rping) in this game. Roleplaying is almost a lost art....the last time I have ever roleplayed was back on DAOC like 4 years ago. I havent seen anything since. WoW has no real rp'ing on it at all. Some guilds do it, but thats really it. As for staying true to the "lore" of the game...please. I can see if a dwarf isnt allowed to be a mage and an elf cant be a heavy tank character - thats reasonable. But this is going to the extreme....7 out of 19 races? Is that what you really want? For you to be elf ranger # 452081?

Wow people, just wow.

Wartorn[SC] · May 2006

Originally posted by Steelarm011

Yes unfortunatly Darkfall isnt doing good atm....in that case I'll have to back Age of Conan or maybe even WAR.
As to the correction on the PvP, my bad, I havent read the FAQ in awhile and it was more for the general games coming out not just Vanguard.
Im kind of surprised and not surprised at the replies the OP is getting.
People are posting saying that this will promote uniqueness and diversity...okay, so having 90% of all rangers running around being elf is diverse? what?
As for the "roleplaying" aspect, I am a bit unsure about how much rp'ing will be going on (and I mean "true" rping) in this game. Roleplaying is almost a lost art....the last time I have ever roleplayed was back on DAOC like 4 years ago. I havent seen anything since. WoW has no real rp'ing on it at all. Some guilds do it, but thats really it. As for staying true to the "lore" of the game...please. I can see if a dwarf isnt allowed to be a mage and an elf cant be a heavy tank character - thats reasonable. But this is going to the extreme....7 out of 19 races? Is that what you really want? For you to be elf ranger # 452081?
Wow people, just wow.

Well - I can see were this is headed.

What I would like to maybe "some" rangers not like 100K of em and all elf rangers. Every race has its dominent sides so I personally hope that people will use them. I know this wishfull thinking but it will hopefully promote diversity in the races AND classes. There are what - 4 defensive and 4 offensive type of player characters and I hope to see them them all. Maybe not evenly spread but surely some diversity....

Just my 2 cents.

Morneblade · May 2006

Originally posted by SpiritofGame

Cannot agree with the OP.
Having seven of twenty-one races to choose from to make a Ranger seems fine.
If every race could be every class and do everything, what would be the point of having any races at all since they apparently would have little or no affect on your class?

Of course it would.

Diffrent races have differnt stats. There are certain race/class combos that are inherently better suited and that is what many people will go with anyway. Min/maxers and powergames, ect. However, some people prefer to actually "roleplay" and do something out of the norm. And of course, there is the fact that not every human is "good", so why should every Orc be "evil". It actually cuts down on deversity, and realism.

Andemon · May 2006

I've never been a big fan of class restrictions. It has been tried and tested in tabletop RPGs, and the conclusion has always been that class restrictions have negative effect on roleplaying. It's always possible to come up with a reasonable explanation for creating a character that "shouldn't exist" - such as Troll Illusionist, for example.

...but if they have to have class restrictions, then at least I'm glad to see that the human races have limitations, too. Vanguard won't be one of those humanocentric games where humans are good at everything - ie. can be of any class - and all the rest of the races are inferior because they're only capable of doing small part of what humans can do.

Morneblade · May 2006

Originally posted by Wartorn[SC]

Ditto - can't really agree with the OP.
I like diversity - some races should not become a certain class. I mean a Ork Paladin?
C'mon that just doesn't fit.

By definition, a Paladin is a "Holy Warrior". If a race has a culture, religion, and gods why can't they have a Warrior that get some power from the god he/she worships? Wouldn't have to be good, and certainly wouldn't have to be human. An Orc that serves his/her god as a combatant would be akin to a Human Paladin And on the flip side, maybe a paticualr Orc sees things differently than his kinfolk do. Decides he doesn't like pillaging and plundering. Like flowers instead. Decides he like to do "good" things. Packs up, leaves town and heads on off to Beverly...

Hills that is..

Fights the good fight. It could happen, ya'know. It's not like we dont have any "bad" humans.

Howdy, Stranger!

I don't like class restrictions

Comments

~ Ancient Membership ~

Howdy, Stranger!

Quick Links

I don't like class restrictions

Comments

~ Ancient Membership ~