Curse

Fitz Rinley · Oct 30, 2005, 01:47 AM // 01:47

I like certain ideas for character class combinations. I like a great many of them in fact, many more than I can play. There are a few things restricting my play and enjoyment of the game tremendously. I really don't want someone to feel put down by this, because I do recognize the wonderful time consuming work that has gone into creating this labor of art and computer science. Still these are difficulties I am having:

1. The secondary class seems like it is something added at the end of a list of work experiences one never expects an employer to actually call upon.

There is no way of reflecting in the character that they are indeed a Necromantic Monk, or what that means culturally. (Are these specially gifted in guiding and reasserting authroity over the dead, maybe even skilled in taking control of another's ghouls?) At least in this case one can use the scarring and pretend it is like a monks tattooing. A warrior has no similar options, and no power points to benefit from the monk skills. The Warrior Monk might as well never have had a secondary profession. There certainly aren't enough attribute points to distribute along the available areas and be competant enough to live thru a battle.

2. The body types and appearences at initial creation are very well done, but controlling for some of us. I am one. I simply cannot bring myself to play a Necromancer because they look like they are broken down methamphetamine abuse. While many of the Undead we face are heavily muscled upreight warriors players are all expected to reflect a sub-culture to which they do not belong by age or law abiding status. I feel the same way about the male Elementalist whose appearence is much like those preppies who used to steal mommy or daddies credit card to go to the local punk store (when punk was really punk) and try to do something outlandish for attention.
Yes, these are my feelings from a specific life association. But that every body type and hair style in both classes, for the male gender, fails to have something that I can look at and accept as a persona I can see in myself, means I cannot play these aspects of the game.

3. I attempted to start a Monk, but have no control over what beliefs that monk represents. I really thought it would be cool to develop a monk that never used Smiting Skills. One that would practice specifically according the the path of Dwayna. There is no way to effect such a feeling in the game. One must have a guaranteed partner to play with on line for all of Pre-Searing Ascalon, as there are no henchies. Further, one does not have the ability to choose faction. A monk is simply assigned to Balthazar and forced to be a Smiting Monk.

4. All of the above may be mute. The lack of level controls/caps forcing players to distribute attribute points more evently throughout their classes and develop them has lead to power formed characters. To play I have been forced to do the same thing rather than develop a well rounded character. I have had to rely on more experienced characters to provide me assistance (weapons) I should not have to need. I have had to hunt for money to obtain armor I am not sure I want. (I have in fact had to do so much hunting I am 19th level and still at D'Allesio.)
Unfortunately, I fear a general lack of human maturity would mean having a story driven, more level point system, limit profitability. The number of persons who I suspect are too eager to compare "the measure of their swords" is higher than those trying to role play a game. I am not sure I have an answer for this.
I am Fitz Rinley, an illegitimate child born in the valley of Rin and raised by the monks of Balthazar. I am a warrior and a monk. But I find in the gaming scenarios in which I am placed having the secondary class, or making any attempt to use it means instant death in any venture. The healer, Alesia, is well known for lacking any ability to stay alive, heal efficiently, keep the party alive (resurrect), and typically runs around flailing her arms to draw the attention of more monsters (when not attempting to be the first Warrior on the front line), any outing is done effectively without a healer. In the current system, I can't even be a Paladin (title from PvP) effectively, I certainly can't do her job, warrior, and smiting monk with no energy or attribute points to be effective. How can any other class combination possibly survive?

Fitz Rinley, 19th Level
Frustrated

PS. Some way of configuring party formation for line patrol, bounding overwatch, etc. with castor henchies (Alesia) kept away from bad guys would be helpful.

pyrohex · Oct 30, 2005, 02:41 AM // 02:41

1) You'll find that later on, when more skills are available, you'll be able draw more upon your secondary. Or, you can take a look at the skills list available here on GWG to create a build you would eventually like to use.

People generally stick to three attribute lines (rarely, four), points distributed as such (this is assuming 200 points)

10/11/11 - 12/10/8 - 12/10(or 8)/6/6 - 12/12/3

That is, at least, what I use. I haven't the imagination to come up with more.

2) ANet has already given a great deal of flexibility in character creation. I agree - if all body/face/hair styles were available to a given profession, it would allow much more variety in what you see around town. However, the game was not designed in that fashion. Making a big warrior fit into the sometimes skin-tight armors of a necromancer would be pretty ugly, and not worth the effort of the devs.

If you can't find a suitable style for you in the males, go to the females. That's what I did - I mean, a girl ele is far nicer to look at than the guy one.

3) An "all-around" character is not the basis of GW. A soloing, high damage, high hp, high energy, high healing character is simply not how GW plays. (Protective Spirit monks are the exception) You need teamwork, variety, organization - you play one part, a piece of a whole. GW is not a game like Lineage, or Everquest, or whatever the hell is out there now - one character is simply not powerful enough for, well, anything.

GW is a free to play game - expect idiots. Learn to ignore them.

Take character descriptions with a bowl of salt. A Paladin can't act as a monk. Primary professions are the determining factor; your secondary profession is generally used as a buff to your primary attribute of choice.

For advice on a personal level, I would like to tell you that a Warrior who heals and smites will not work. You are simply, as you said, too spread out. I would recommend focusing on one weapon type, one monk attribute line, and spare points in strength.

Quote:

How can any other class combination possibly survive?

By playing their specific role in a party. :P

I noticed that you like to RP - GW is far from a role player's paradise. You'd be best off trying to find a guild specifically made for that purpose; you might be able to locate one on these forums or on the forums at www.guild-hall.net. A good guild to spend time RPing with could make your time more enjoyable.

Morganas · Oct 30, 2005, 05:46 AM // 05:46

Your demand for character personalization isn't met in any computer game I can think of short of city of heroes (which I would not recommend).

Your viewpoint on the game is very strange, you seem to be looking at the secondary class entirely from a "character background" perspective and not the "strategic options" perspective most of us look at it from, and it seems this is how you're treating the whole game. There's no mechanism arenanet could possibly implement to convey to people easily that you do not worship balthasar but dwayna instead.

I'm not saying this is wrong, but I really doubt you should be playing computer games over pen and paper rpgs if this sort of thing is central to your enjoyment of the game, especially when that computer game is guild wars, which is centered around tactical/strategic depth and competition.

Ever try a neverwinter nights rp enforced persistant world btw?

Fitz Rinley · Oct 30, 2005, 01:30 PM // 13:30

Pyrohex and Morganas,

Thank you for your replies. I will respond in order, if that is ok.

1. I have already done the math on the attributes from observing the number of poits available to a friends 20th level character. I realized immediately that this meant only two skill areas could be of any value at a time, and a third short changed into virtual non-consideration for use in slots. Perhaps in the PvP side of the game this has some value where overly powerful characters are started with. (I can't find out as by the time any area loads the combat has started and my team is already down. I have no business attempting to play PvP and ruining other people's game.)

I n every historical context I know of, the combination of warrior and monastic was expected to be capable in combat with a weapon, strong, tactical/strategic, and able to manifest mystical powers. The game does not meet what our entire species has esteamed the normal value of such a persona. I have played NwN and would not find it unreasonable to say the secondary class skills cannot be ranked more than half or two-thirds the highest ranked primary skill. (Two thirds would be nice given the lack of effectiveness of henchmen, half would atleast be workable.)

I also find it unreasonable to assume I will be able to draw more upon skills to be made available later when I will never have the skill points avaialble to manifest them. There will be no point in slotting them to begin with.

2. I am not necessarily saying we have to make all body styles available, etc. I would like to see something available I would actually play. There are children from the ages of 07 to 57 or maybe higher playing this game. (In the former it is more fun.) There are also those of us that are more serious and will never be a part of the Brat Pack, or go back to the Punk days of the late 70's (when I was a kid). Not one Necromancer structure offers the idea that a person of a distinguished, military, or other background might have found a reason to seak that form of power.

I am not a woman. I should not have to appologise for being a male and be forced to play a woman in order to get something I want or do something I want to do.

2. A person that cannot take care of themselves cannot take care of others. This is the case in the majority of the excursions I have been on. It is almost always the case of dealing with henchies. Party function and interaction is enhanced by self-sufficientcy in one's professions. Yes, they ahve their place. But since the monk provided to heal in the game does not, healing is the requirement of the characters themselves. In the last three days I have repeatedly tried two different missions with a 18th-19th level characer both with others and with henchies. I did far better with henchies. In all cases we were unable to reach and perform the missions. This is in Lion's Arch area. In one case, my entire party was dead without ever having engaged in combat. In most cases I have to merely hope they can hold off the bulk while I take out the Necrid Horsemen, but I am not able to keep them alive and do my job of fighting as well. I am a W/Mo. I see no plausible way for any other class structure to work.

Further, an all around character is a fully developed persona as much as anything else. A true Necromancer would not have a Resurrection Signet, but would have something the compells permanent service of the former henchie into an undead form. The primary ranger skill ought to reduce the size of the agro ring. Rangers might even have a skill allowing them to camoflauge, like so many of the beasties do in the game. Things that would be in character.

Morganas,

The secondary class did not happen in a vacuum. It had a reason for coming into existence. The virtual persona is a reflection of the individual making the persona, even if they do not recognize it. Using the Myers/Briggs Personality Profiling SPectrum I am a eNTp. As a T(hinker) I do highly consider and analyze strategic capacity. I am also concerned with expression and theme.

I see virtually nothing in the pictures available for capes that repreents the animals we encounter in Tyria itself. Instead I see the traditional ideagrams of Earth. Where are the griffons, the singed oaks, the prize winning hogs, etc.?

I remember the arrival of Chainmail, Engarde, and Pong. We have come a tremendously long way in the marriage of the two. Yes, I have tried NwN, and am interested to see how Obsidians 3.5 compliant release will turn out. I am pleased with much in Guild Wars. But I have a response for the "Like or leave it."

A great Jewish Philosopher, being herded up during the Inquisition and shipped to the Netherlands presented to his people the idea of like it or leave it as a means of attempting to affect their attitudes about their homes at that time in order to save their lives. His name was Spinoza. Under those conditions, of attempting to survive Tocamata, I can understand this response. In all other things I ammend his philosophy, "Like it and make it better." What does not strive for perfection - dies in complacency.

Fitz Rinley

Human1 · Oct 30, 2005, 02:54 PM // 14:54

I think he did. I see a couple of ideas in here that I like, too. First, what if, by combining different classes, you gained access to a certain set of skills unavailable to those classes separately? The skill set wouldn't have to be huge, but it would be cool. A monk and secondary necro char could have a couple of spells that heal minions or something like that.
The other point I think that is being made is that your secondary class has no effect on your chars physical appearance. Wouldn't it be nice if you could distinguish yourself a little more than just by the color of your armor? I mean, there are six major proffesions and only 1 or 2 really viable armor sets for each prof which means other than a few facial details your have only about 20 character models running around. That's great, except that there are thousands of people playing guild wars. It sucks that no matter how much I work and play, my char will always have 2 or 3 doubles running around Lion's Arch.
People role play becuase they want to feel special. You know what game did a great job of that? Diablo II. It was much like GW in that there wasn't much role playing, but there were hundreds of armors available, hundred of helms, hundreds or weapons. How often did you meet someone who looked just like you in that game? It was rare enough to get commented on. "Lol, look were twins, lol".

Bord · Oct 30, 2005, 03:45 PM // 15:45

Perhaps I can express things differently. I can 'feel' with Fitz Rinley a long way. You can equip your character with skills. You can even hustle with attributes, so you can change, rebuild. This has advantages; you can change and adapt easely, but it also means that your character, your virtual alter-ego, or at least your creation is more a tool, a piece of equipment, than a virtual person. I once made the comparison with a combat aircraft, which you can equip for a mission, f.i. ground-attack or air-combat.
My characters are in fact 'pure', one-profession, builds. This has two reason. First, a strategical reason, I believe that your first profesion is your best. I put a lot of points in my class-own attribute, ranger - expertise, monk - divine, etc. This helps your second and third attribute-choice the best. You should restrict yourself to three attribute-choices. This leads to my idea that a combo-build has a low optimum. A ranger/mesmer is less than a pure ranger and certainly less than a mesmer. The game is for team-play. Why not specialize in one profession; let other specialists handle their things. Ever been in a team with only secondary monks? Did that work?
A lot of people will disagree with me on the above. My second argument concerns the looks. Suppose you make a combo. It will always look like a character of the thirst profession. When we only concern about image, there are only one-profesion characters.
More tunics would be an improvement. Also some customization in bodies. A big warrior make sense, but a small agile warrior/mesmer does too. Fitz Rinley is right about the male necro. This one looks like shit. I have a female necro. A necro is fun to play and it rocks. I would never make a female elementalist, just because of the stupid cloths. My monk and necro are never going to wear the tattoo or scar pattern. I just don't like it; perhaps it's just virtual vanity.

Fitz Rinley · Oct 30, 2005, 06:33 PM // 18:33

Bord is doing a better job than I am of summing things up. I agree. The Primary skill, which has no impact on the secondary profession areas, means pumping attribute points into Strength, (Weapon), and Smiting is useless. To be effective a W/Mo needs Strength, Weapon, and Tactics. Especially since the healer cannot be counted upon to stay alive or heal (in short a player must perform Alesia's job for her or it doesn't get done) Endure Pain and Signet of Healing are mandatory. It is the only way I last long enough to resurrect Alesia so she can start resurecting the rest of the party with me. (Sometimes I resurrect her last out of spite.)

I don't mind the female elementalist to look at, much. I've been in 'adult entertainment centers' where the women wore about that much as waitresses. And I suppose that is sort of equal to defacing the male necromancer of his health while leaving the female in good health. Afterall, she is not a bent over osteoparetic gravity bag dragging decomposing crank freak. If women were depicted that way, and the male were not, there might be complaints of sexism.

Fitz Rinley

pyrohex · Oct 30, 2005, 08:43 PM // 20:43

I'm replying out of order - reading upwards from the posting area is much easier.

Quote:

Further, an all around character is a fully developed persona as much as anything else. A true Necromancer would not have a Resurrection Signet, but would have something the compells permanent service of the former henchie into an undead form. The primary ranger skill ought to reduce the size of the agro ring. Rangers might even have a skill allowing them to camoflauge, like so many of the beasties do in the game. Things that would be in character.

I'm sure ANet has already considered many of these ideas, and rejected them. Your perception of what might be "in character" is not necessarily what the developers had in mind. Most people don't fill their skill bar with skills that are true to their profession; rather, they use what is most needed for the task at hand.

Quote:

I am a W/Mo. I see no plausible way for any other class structure to work.

And yet, every combination of professions has somehow beat the game. As you play further into the game, you will realize that a specialized role is far more efficient. A Warrior cannot be a Monk, and vice versa. The secondary does not determine playstyle, the first does.

If you would read some of the Thunderhead Keep topics or Biggest Jerk You've Seen in GW topics, you'll see what I mean. Monk/Ele's using firestorm are laughed at, healing Warriors are mocked, non-Earth, tanking Elementalists are laughed at because they die in a second. Being inflexible, trying to stay "in character" will get you killed.

The concept of giving a second profession is to allow synergy. Creativity with builds and skills is the focus of GW - why do you think they limit you to eight skills in a scenario?

From what I can tell, the root of the problem is that the concepts that make Guild Wars what it is do not match your own expectations. For example, ANet's definition of a ranger seems to be different from yours. You're looking at everything with the wrong perspective: how things should be (how you expect it to be), as opposed to what things can be. Don't limit your horizons...there is far more to this game than characterization.

Loviatar · Oct 30, 2005, 09:07 PM // 21:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fitz Rinley

. In all cases we were unable to reach and perform the missions. This is in Lion's Arch area. In one case, my entire party was dead without ever having engaged in combat. In most cases I have to merely hope they can hold off the bulk while I take out the Necrid Horsemen, but I am not able to keep them alive and do my job of fighting as well. I am a W/Mo. I see no plausible way for any other class structure to work.

Fitz Rinley

simply put this game does not have what you want.period...

i suggest (with honest best wishes) that you find some other game which will give you the option of creating just the character that is you.

i am looking forward to OBLIVION myself as the Elder Scrolls series has had me hooked since Arena in 1994.

also my ELE/MONK got to Sanctum Cay earlier than that level with no problems with henchies (and i am to be honest a bumbling amateur player)

Nightwish · Oct 30, 2005, 10:09 PM // 22:09

Very interesting thoughts indeed, especially on the aggro circle of rangers that logically should've been smaller compared to other classes

I think we all know that GW isnt as much as character building/role playing as playing chess.

To me, GW is like playing chess, where the chess pieces are the skills, which the combination is dictated by your playstyle.

Hence, character feel is rather underfocus compared to strategy involved. You cant really role play with chess pieces, can you? :P

Anyone has any games in mind that can fit the bill of serious character building or role playing perhaps?

Fitz Rinley · Oct 31, 2005, 05:43 AM // 05:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by pyrohex

From what I can tell, the root of the problem is that the concepts that make Guild Wars what it is do not match your own expectations. For example, ANet's definition of a ranger seems to be different from yours. You're looking at everything with the wrong perspective: how things should be (how you expect it to be), as opposed to what things can be. Don't limit your horizons...there is far more to this game than characterization.

From what has been said, I am not the one who has limited my horizons. Those horizons have been limited by those who would decide for my life how I should feel, how I should be artistically expressed, and that human representations are drones whose brains are sucked out and reloaded according to the "program" needed at the moment. While this may be the Machine Shintoists utopia it is not human, humane, representative of anything flexible and dynamic, or ethical. Howevermuch programmers may wish humans were something that could be deprogrammed and reprogrammed in an instants notice for use in the next business venture, changing people (or human images) at a whim is ill suited training for how one should expect others to around them to function. Nothing that is done in the mind is ever removed from that mind. It is instead all continuously cross-correlated forever. In somecases this produces genius for good, in others it produces nightmares.

Fitz Rinley

Fitz Rinley · Oct 31, 2005, 06:11 AM // 06:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nightwish

Very interesting thoughts indeed, especially on the aggro circle of rangers that logically should've been smaller compared to other classes

I think we all know that GW isnt as much as character building/role playing as playing chess.

To me, GW is like playing chess, where the chess pieces are the skills, which the combination is dictated by your playstyle.

Hence, character feel is rather underfocus compared to strategy involved. You cant really role play with chess pieces, can you? :P

Anyone has any games in mind that can fit the bill of serious character building or role playing perhaps?

If we are merely going to play chess with the skill counters then there is no reason to have maps, developed plot lines, the story of the Searing of Ascalon, etc. If it is only a strategy game, then dump the rest as garbage and stick with PvP. We can call it Tekken or something. Even Robotech and Mechwarrior was able to pull off effective character conception for both screen play and P-n-P. Why should Guild Wars strive to attain A's in so many categories and then settle for a C- or D+ in this one?

It is like the appearances issue. Of the four persons I know that play in my 350 person town, none are minors. Only one is under 35. Not one of them is a gothic head-banging or pseudo-preppy rebel as the male Necromancers and Elementalists are presented. Many players of games like this are indeed younger than 30 but many are over 30. How much was this taken into account before one class had the entire male side debased while the female side was left hale and full of life and energy? (This is a sexist based decision btw.) Why should one wish to look like a strung out ready to die crank freak? This assumes there is no dignity for the things dealing with death. Though I do recognize there are many sides to flawed heroes the game offers no sides to heros at all, except for secondary skills for which there are insufficient attribute points to use even at 20th level.

Kafka has said, "It is ours to establish the negative, the positive is already given." No one may like rainy weather, but without it your gardens won't feed you. Just because I have critticisms doesn't mean I don't like the game. A couple of friends are having trouble with him being jealous right now, but at least she knows he cares.

Fitz Rinley

P.S. And actually, I believe the first role playing was done with circle, triangles, and squares as a form of psychoanalitical analysis. They client used shape, color, and relation to represent themselves and their power in regard to other shapes and colors and then it was sorted out. Later die were added to incrase randomization of variables. I could be wrong in this. I see no reason why chess could not be used in the same manner. I am even aware of how the chess board can be used to represent the Mercury Table and the pieces celestial relations for astrological purposes. The world had much more meaning before the Hlenes demythicized it.