Curse

quickmonty · Feb 29, 2008, 02:26 AM // 02:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buddhaofwar

If they removed a profession, would that not just bone someone who added to their Hall of Monuments with that profession? Or did I misinterpret the function of HoM?

I think people are over anticipating HoM benefits. As far as I have read any HoM bennies will just be cosmetic. No in-game bennies.

draxynnic · Feb 29, 2008, 02:35 AM // 02:35

Okay...

One of the important elements in Guild Wars lore is the separation of magic into the four schools through the Bloodstones - signified by the monk, mesmer, necromancer and elementalist. So they're all probably safe, unless sometime in those two centuries the way magic worked got a major rearrangement.

I can see why people have suggested melding the Mesmer and Necromancer - the line between them is a little fuzzy in GW1. However, I at least hope that in GW2 they go the other way - solidifying that line and giving each a definite style to their hexes rather than constantly wandering into each other's territories - than blending them entirely.

Warriors and rangers are also iconic enough to be safe.

Of the other classes: I agree with the people who say there's likely to be a lot of melding:

Dervishes are probably the prime suspect for being broken up, with non-scythe skills being divvied up by the Monk and the Elementalist - giving the Monk an effective offense for soloing, and the Elementalist some more options for PBAOE-style builds.

Regarding ritualists, I personally have a theory that they're tapping into the keystone in order to gain magic that manipulates the Mists. If this is what ANet is going with as well, it may be safe. If not... I wouldn't be surprised if the Necromancer led the Ritualist down a dark alley, beat it up, and took its stuff, possibly with a little help from the Monk and Ranger.

Paragons, I suspect could largely fold into the Warrior, with maybe a little going into the Monk and the spear going to the Ranger (alternatively, it might be left as a ranged option for the Warrior). Bard-ifying the Mesmer by folding some of the Paragon skills into the Mesmer may be an option - I'm not sure how well it would actually work, but it does seem reasonable that a Mesmer might be able to use mental manipulation effects to benefit their friends as well as spread confusion among their enemies. If it doesn't get split up, it will need to be rebuilt pretty much from the ground up - a profession that relies as much on having allies probably wouldn't fare too well in GW2 where you may be down to a single sidekick.

Assassins are probably the noncore profession most likely to make its way to GW2, in order to fill the 'light fighter' archetype. If it doesn't survive, it will likely be divvied up by the Ranger, Mesmer and Necromancer.

EDIT: On the HoM benefits: Cosmetic only is what I've heard as well. It might be like preorder weapons in GW1 and that they also give you guaranteed decent weapons/armour off the bat - although in the latter case especially, there'd need to be something to stop low-level characters grabbing them. Maybe your new character has to REACH the Hall first?

Furthermore, do keep in mind that in its original incarnation that the Hall only tracked where the armour had come from, not what was actually being worn. It may turn out that you can have, for instance, a Warrior inherit from a Dervish and get Warrior Ancient rather than Dervish Ancient.

englitdaudelin · Feb 29, 2008, 02:38 AM // 02:38

The one thing I would hate to lose: The distinctive LOOK of these classes. Sure, the Paragon and Derv are variants of warriors, and the rit / necro and rit /monk are close in "archetype," depending on how you look at it--
--But the very unusual look of the rit (nicely tatted up in that Seitung armor with the skull on it), or the semi-monastic appearance of the Dervish in the robes--tough to match. Even the Rangers in the long coats, or the Druids armor--pretty sweet looking.
Should one (or more) class get axed, will we be taking a BACKWARDS step in the look of our characters? Characters that we've gotten really attached to, characters that we've DEVELOPED, to use A-Net's word about EotN, way past level 20? ANet's said that they recognize the importance of our character names, but what about our character armor, appearance, the roles we like to play on teams? Will there be a backwards step in the stories we've developed?

RedNova88 · Feb 29, 2008, 02:44 AM // 02:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by fenix

lol ur dum. Mesmers are one of the best classes, you're just bad.

QFT. I think it's because they require more skill than other classes so people that have the nerve to say they're bad most likely don't know how to use one and since they fail with one they assume it's the class rather than themselves.

If Mesmers are oh so bad and worthless why oh WHY are they always a major priority on someone's "who to attack" list? Monk/Ritualist -> Mesmer -> Elementalist/Necromancer -> Assassin/Ranger/Dervish -> Paragon/Warrior. That's generally how it's worked in all of my PvP experiences. If you ignore that Mesmer they can potentially shutdown you or whatever their build is designed to counter.

Also Draxy, what you said is quite well put and I'd have to agree with much of it, and that bit about the Hall is quite interesting. Only time will tell unfortunately.

Sword · Feb 29, 2008, 02:44 AM // 02:44

I hope paras dervs sins and rts are all gone in GW2

every profession added after the core group created so many skill imbalances .. ruined the game

Sleeper Service · Feb 29, 2008, 02:54 AM // 02:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by englitdaudelin

The one thing I would hate to lose: The distinctive LOOK of these classes. Sure, the Paragon and Derv are variants of warriors, and the rit / necro and rit /monk are close in "archetype," depending on how you look at it--
--But the very unusual look of the rit (nicely tatted up in that Seitung armor with the skull on it), or the semi-monastic appearance of the Dervish in the robes--tough to match. Even the Rangers in the long coats, or the Druids armor--pretty sweet looking.
Should one (or more) class get axed, will we be taking a BACKWARDS step in the look of our characters? Characters that we've gotten really attached to, characters that we've DEVELOPED, to use A-Net's word about EotN, way past level 20? ANet's said that they recognize the importance of our character names, but what about our character armor, appearance, the roles we like to play on teams? Will there be a backwards step in the stories we've developed?

should they fuse classes it would not affect GW1 anyways.

moreover its only armour, tying particular armour types to a particular class is just boring imo. What i would like to see is things like(for example) Necro wearing a great coat, tormentor leather pants and boots, tattooed arms and hands, and some classy sunglasses.

Ie: we can buy/use any class armour and equip any class rune (if they even keep that).
on top of that there will be new races so...

Chthon · Feb 29, 2008, 02:58 AM // 02:58

Honestly, I would most strongly favor a no-class system with some other mechanic enforcing a limitation on skill breadth.

But, if we're going to keep classes, then I anticipate:

1. Mesmer = gone. Overpowered in PvP and constantly nerfed for it, always second fiddle to something better in PvE no matter what you do. This class needs to go.
2. Rit = gone. They were never a unique class to begin with. They're basically a mionk line + an ele line + a necro line crammed into one character.
3. Paragon = gone. Too imba.
4. Dervish = gone. Also imba. Melee-grade armor + caster-grade energy regen + auto-AoE threatens to make both warriors and casters who don't rely on huge attribute specs obsolete.
5. Assassin = not gone, but should be. A poor-man's warrior in PvE and a totally overpowered insta-gank class in PvP. Really, really needs to go if there's going to be any hope of balanced PvP. That said, I think there's just too much love for the idea of a "rogue" class for them to be axed.
6. Necro, soul reaping will be totally reworked or replaced with another concept entirely.
7. Monk = gone? I don't know. Monks as we know them are very nearly a defining feature of GW. I think I would like to see more self-sufficient characters, but I'm not sure how that can be done without leading back to a D2-style invincible-or-dead-and-not-much-in-between feel to the encounters.

draxynnic · Feb 29, 2008, 03:04 AM // 03:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sleeper Service

should they fuse classes it would not affect GW1 anyways.

moreover its only armour, tying particular armour types to a particular class is just boring imo. What i would like to see is things like(for example) Necro wearing a great coat, tormentor leather pants and boots, tattooed arms and hands, and some classy sunglasses.

Ie: we can buy/use any class armour and equip any class rune (if they even keep that).
on top of that there will be new races so...

Certainly it would have been nice to have seen a little more variety in the later professions. Would it have killed ANet to introduce just one female Paragon set that doesn't have a bare midriff, for instance?

I'm not sure about 'any armour for any profession' - there are advantages to professions having distinctive appearances - but it would be nice to have choices rather than minor variations on the same theme.

6am3 Fana71c · Feb 29, 2008, 03:10 AM // 03:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gift3d

If any i'd hope the EVER SO GLORIOUS mesmer, so pompous kids could stop trying to sound edgy when they say "Ya i play mezmer" like it takes a truly ingenious intellect to play one, and if you like to play this class in this video game, you are of absolute royalty. Please, stop glorifying pixels. It's a video game for Christ's sake.

As much as I like this statement, I won't agree with it simply because, if I do, I'll probably get Shan and her DVDF mesmer squad knocking on my door with serious look on their face

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malice Black

Poor kitties....

QFT

THINK OF THE KITTEHS PEOPLE!

No more GW2 threads untill officiall news or screenshots, please!

kerpall · Feb 29, 2008, 03:12 AM // 03:12

Healers, Damage dealing spell casters, Warriors, and Bow-wielders are always the 4 main classes in games.
So Monks, Rangers, Elementalists, and Warriors look safe.
I could imagine dervish and warrior combining, or paragon and warrior combining.
Way i look at it is, in GW2 you can become a Norn. They are essentially Warrior/derv with their Avatar of "Bear" lol. So that almost takes care of dervs.

Asura's will have "Golemancer" , thats seems like an Adaption of Necromancer MM (or a race-specific class).

Give a warrior a spear, and you already have shouts and what not. Theres a possibility they will be combined with paragons..

They may also just keep the 4 basic (warrior, healer, bow wielder, and mage) style classes, and make some new ones up.
http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Iron_Legion
This saves the Assasin's butt lol:
http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Ash_Legion

lol idk, use your imaginations, put yourself in Anet's shoes...

They are maknig a completely new game, because they have too much they wanted to add to GW1. You got to remember some races may have race-specific skills or classes (i doubt i will see Sylvari making G.o.l.e.m.'s, or asuran's commanding seige devourers.)

arsie · Feb 29, 2008, 03:33 AM // 03:33

If Anet was to cut the 4 new professions, it would mean that they have to admit that a lot of things that they have introduced since 2004 is wrong or bad for the game. In the eyes of a lot of purists, that might well be the case, but to Anet, I do not see them viewing it in the same light.

If all 10 professions were preserved, it would give them an opportunity to balance all of them from the start, and avoid power creep. If some of those professions are removed from the start, they might make an appearance in a later expansion, and with it, comes the same problems of imbalance.

moriz · Feb 29, 2008, 03:34 AM // 03:34

mesmers will stay simply because they are the halmark of GW gvg.

the core professions will likely stay. whether any of the other four professions make it... i really don't care too much tbh.

MMSDome · Feb 29, 2008, 04:08 AM // 04:08

Id be a little pissed if they chopped off the paragon considering it is my main character and I have been filling out my hall with it -_-

Master Knightfall · Feb 29, 2008, 04:29 AM // 04:29

I'm betting it will be the assassin for sure. They just don't fit into the dnd world. I never liked it when they introduced the fight kung fu monk to the dnd game. They don't fit either. Theifs, yeah they are ok, need them to unlock doors and chests and to annoy people in towns pickpocketing them. lol

kerpall · Feb 29, 2008, 04:38 AM // 04:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Master Knightfall

I'm betting it will be the assassin for sure. They just don't fit into the dnd world. I never liked it when they introduced the fight kung fu monk to the dnd game. They don't fit either. Theifs, yeah they are ok, need them to unlock doors and chests and to annoy people in towns pickpocketing them. lol

As useless as i find assasins, you didnt read my post (just a few above yours) did you?
http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Ash_Legion
It sounds like they are already going to be in GW2. Maybe just for charr? If so, you could probably just avoid that race if you dislike that profession.

Wild Karrde · Feb 29, 2008, 04:44 AM // 04:44

Its too early to say still, but lets hope that anet learned from their mistakes from GW1 and is now applying their knowledge to GW2.

Warriors. one of the most balanced classes in GW dont see much changind in GW2

Monks. Too much complaining about "red bars go up" I see prot being more prominent with healing slipping away.

Elementalists. Not sure with eles. This too strong that too weak. They will be alive and well in GW2.

Rangers. Alot of complaing "behind the scenes" arguing about rangers drowned out by the complaining about other classes. Some dont like the damage and think it needs to be buffed; others say versatility makes up for it. Depending on what Anet does with mesmers the ranger could have reduced or strengthened interuption ability.

Mesmers. A much needed class despite the controversy. no body worries about their day being Efed up too much unless a mesmer has your number. Hopefully Anet will use the feed back to come up with a good way to keep them a pain in the arse without them being overpowered. so they can be used in pve as well

Necromancers. Their role in PvE is evident. I think it will stay. Soul Reaping will be rethought, and necros will most likely be made more useful in PvP without making rediculously cheap hexes overpowered. The undead masses will most likely be back.

Paragons. I think the partygon will be smashed into the dirt or at least I hope so. and it will play a different role in GW2 if the Paragon exists a big overhaul

Assassins. overhauled. rethought from the ground up. Shadowsteps may be back but completely overhauled. this class will play very different if its in GW2.

Dervishes. Good Idea bad implemation. I think the god forms will be tweaked and the whole enchantment stacker will be rethought as well.

Rits. Spirit pooping will be gone or drastically changed, weapon spells stay but tweaked. and have a more defined role other than a monecroele.

kerpall · Feb 29, 2008, 04:51 AM // 04:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wild Karrde

Its too early to say still, but lets hope that anet learned from their mistakes from GW1 and is now applying their knowledge to GW2.

Warriors. one of the most balanced classes in GW dont see much changind in GW2

Monks. Too much complaining about "red bars go up" I see prot being more prominent with healing slipping away.

Elementalists. Not sure with eles. This too strong that too weak. They will be alive and well in GW2.

Rangers. Alot of complaing "behind the scenes" arguing about rangers drowned out by the complaining about other classes. Some dont like the damage and think it needs to be buffed; others say versatility makes up for it. Depending on what Anet does with mesmers the ranger could have reduced or strengthened interuption ability.

Mesmers. A much needed class despite the controversy. no body worries about their day being Efed up too much unless a mesmer has your number. Hopefully Anet will use the feed back to come up with a good way to keep them a pain in the arse without them being overpowered. so they can be used in pve as well

Necromancers. Their role in PvE is evident. I think it will stay. Soul Reaping will be rethought, and necros will most likely be made more useful in PvP without making rediculously cheap hexes overpowered. The undead masses will most likely be back.

Paragons. I think the partygon will be smashed into the dirt or at least I hope so. and it will play a different role in GW2 if the Paragon exists a big overhaul

Assassins. overhauled. rethought from the ground up. Shadowsteps may be back but completely overhauled. this class will play very different if its in GW2.

Dervishes. Good Idea bad implemation. I think the god forms will be tweaked and the whole enchantment stacker will be rethought as well.

Rits. Spirit pooping will be gone or drastically changed, weapon spells stay but tweaked. and have a more defined role other than a monecroele.

agreed with tweaking, and fixing of the current state of these proffessions.

However, the idea of Each race having their own "unique" version of each professions isn't out of the picture either. It is said in GW:en, that Gadd (vekks dad) is a necromancer. However he is responsible for making Golems. It could very well be possible that the human MM's would remain the same, but Charr MM's could be responsible for summoning soem sort of "burning effigy" type of creature. And sylvari possibly summoning Plant-based creatures?

draxynnic · Feb 29, 2008, 05:01 AM // 05:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Master Knightfall

I'm betting it will be the assassin for sure. They just don't fit into the dnd world. I never liked it when they introduced the fight kung fu monk to the dnd game. They don't fit either. Theifs, yeah they are ok, need them to unlock doors and chests and to annoy people in towns pickpocketing them. lol

Guild Wars != D&D

D&D != Good

(In laymans terms, an equal sign with an extra bar means 'is equivalent to'. Thus, assuming I've got my logical signs correct, != in this context means that D&D is not always good without ruling out the possibility that D&D could be good. In short, just because something is or isn't D&D, doesn't mean it's good or bad respectively.)

Besides, what do you mean by D&D world? The D&D campaigns I've played in are often rife with assassins, be they actual members of a prestige class or just people who stealthily kill people. Classical fantasy is, likewise, full of assassins. Historical medieval Europe wasn't exactly assassin-free, either.

Besides, Kryta, especially a Kryta filled with Canthan and Elonian refugees, != classical fantasy, nor does it resemble more than loosely the medieval Europe of most D&D campaigns.

If anything, it could be Greek. Where, admittedly, assassins weren't a significant part of their culture... but I'm willing to bet it happened anyway.

Looking at it from another perspective - the Assassin is basically a rebalancing for combat of the concept. Being along just to open things and perform other out-of-combat duties isn't the most fun way to spend your time in a combat-oriented game.

And as for pickpocketing other players: NO!

creelie · Feb 29, 2008, 05:24 AM // 05:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by draxynnic

I wouldn't be surprised if the Necromancer led the Ritualist down a dark alley, beat it up, and took its stuff, possibly with a little help from the Monk and Ranger.

Because Necromancers are jerks like that.

In all seriousness, a Necromancer/Ritualist fusion - maybe with a new name entirely - could be pretty sweet. "These are the ashes of my Uncle Ted . . . and these are the howling horrors I made from the ashes of my Uncle Ted."

Similarly, I do like the idea of the Mesmer inheriting all the nastiness of the Assassin and dressing it up with lace and fabulous hairstyles. Can we say ultimate PvP class?

Lady Lozza · Feb 29, 2008, 05:32 AM // 05:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by creelie

"These are the ashes of my Uncle Ted . . . and these are the howling horrors I made from the ashes of my Uncle Ted."

Made me laugh

Quote:

Originally Posted by creelie

Similarly, I do like the idea of the Mesmer inheriting all the nastiness of the Assassin and dressing it up with lace and fabulous hairstyles. Can we say ultimate PvP class?

I rather like this idea too. Mesmers and Assassins are basically 1v1 classes, I can see them rolled up into one.