Curse

KelvinC · Jul 21, 2005, 02:40 PM // 14:40

One thing that I don't understand is why do we need class?

I think it would be far better to remove the class system. Instead, everyone have access to all skills and attributes. Everyone can freely choose what attributes points they want to put it and what skills to use.

It is balanced because there is a 200 attributes point limit so they cannot have everything. Also since skills is a function of attributes so they can't have any skills at the single time.

There are a lot of advantages, for examples:
1. Risk of choosing wrong class. when you choose a class, you have to accept it or start another character. I think it is very bad. There is a high risk the class they had chosen is not balanced or does not suit their playing style.
If a player can change the attributes without recreating a character it will be very good

2. Flexibility. Class will only constrant what a player can do and what they can't do. Why not just let a player choose what he can do? It actually promote more new interesting builds and possibilities.

3. Balance. If everyone has access to all attributes, everone has the same rights. For example if something is powerful, everyone can use it.

4. Appearance Diversity. If there are no class, everyone can wear any types of armors. They can mix and match.
However all armors does have some properities. For example the mage robes will have higher mana regeneration while worriors armor will have more AR but low mana. So there is no one set of 'best' armor.

BurningPants · Jul 21, 2005, 02:55 PM // 14:55

I think you think that there are still some unbalanced classes in GW. If there are, they most likely will be fixed over time, and if not, there is always some way around a certain character build. No skill is better than another in a sense they cannot be compared because each has a different affect and can be used in its own respective situation. Some skills are used more frequently in others, however that doesn't make one better than another.

The armor sharing would be useless seeing as how an ele with 50 mana with a warriors armor will probably last longer than an ele with 83 mana (but I haven't tested it cause you probably can't). And each piece of armor defends are respective part of the body, that means that a 70 armor foot wear is does not provide the same protection as a 70 armor plate mail.

By having anything more than a triple class character you will probably seem some very intresting builds...but i guarntee you will also see tons of unbeatable cheap builds as well (axe warrior with a mesmer keystone signet and necro conditions maybe).

And if for some reason a certain player has prejudice directed towards a certain class, too bad for them, they won't be able to harness that class's particular advantage.

This idea would probably be more suited for a game on its own, but I don't think that the creators of GW would attempt to make such a huge change.

Epinephrine · Jul 21, 2005, 02:55 PM // 14:55

I really enjoy classless RPGs; GURPS and Champions are examples of point based RPGs, in which all the characters are given points to spend on attributes, skills, spells etc...

The class system is needed at present to account for the special attributes and such - a point based system could be used in an RPG, but it would require balancing the whole system around it; as it stands you cannot simply allow any class to use any skills because the classes are balanced for use with their own primary skill and prmary attribute in combination with their armours, and some primary abilities would be too powerful in other builds.

While I like point based systems they are very tough to balance because of the even greater flexibility of a point based system; the dual class system is easier to achieve a balance in and still spans the common archetypes nicely. It would be impossible to redo GW without classes, but a new game based on point spending without classes (like GURPS) would be an interesting idea.

monkeyink · Jul 21, 2005, 03:02 PM // 15:02

There are also a lot of disatvantages, not to mention parts of the game that would need to be completely rebalanced. For example:

Right now attributes like Divine Favor, Energy Storage, Soul Reaping, etc. are all based on your primary class. Every healer in the game would be dumping points into Energy Storage and Divine Favor if they could have both. At least now you are forced to "make a choice"

Armor falls under this topic as well in that it too is class based. If a character put on the strongest armor in the game, pumped Energy Storage, Smiting and Tactics they would be unstoppable and that's only one possibility off the top of my head. There are problaby worse.

I can't imagine a game where the casters can wear the same armor as the tanks yet still have the power to rain death upon their enemies via an nearly endless stream of energy. Balance? That sounds more like chaos to me.

theclam · Jul 21, 2005, 03:15 PM // 15:15

Some attribute combinations would be very unbalanced. An 11/10/10 Divine Favor/(Healing or Protection)/Energy Storage, with Divine Boon and Ether Renewal would be extremely powerful. There are just so many more potentially abusive combos that could appear.

Weezer_Blue · Jul 21, 2005, 03:17 PM // 15:17

This would unbalance the game tremondously. I'd love to run that Elementalist, Monk, Mesmer, but thankfully, Guild Wars prevents me from being completely "über".

Dravic Badmoon · Jul 21, 2005, 06:55 PM // 18:55

The basic idea behind classes is to make a game feel slightly realistic. Role-Playing Games means you assume the role of something that is unique. Some examples are as follows:

I play a character that can raise minions from my dead enemies, while showering my foes with meteors from the sky.

I play a character that is a mixture between a necromancer and a pyromancer. I have the ability to raise minions from my dead enemies, while showering my foes with meteors from the sky.

The first example lacks the sense of how that has the ability character to cast those things, while the second example gives you the sense that the character has the ability because its is part of what he is able to do. We can give a character more sense of actuality or existence in a made up world by adding even more descriptions as follows:

I play a male character that is a mixture between a necromancer and a pyromancer. He spends most of his time learning how to master fire, while dabbing in the dark arts of necromancy. His physical appearance follows the dark and mysterious look associated with necromancers. He is about average height of six foot and size of 150 pounds, with a moderate muscular build. Though he may appear to look weak and feeble, he is extremely nimble and quick, and he can easily slay a towering orcish berserker with a quick snap of his fingers. He has the ability to raise minions from his dead enemies, while showering his foes with meteors from the sky.

This paragraph always you to begin visually conceptualize mentally, how this character appears to others and the destructive power he is able to release. While a classless RPG may give you more freedom in developing your character, it lacks overall the ability to give you a true sense of uniqueness of existence that a class system gives. Try looking at class-based Role-Playing Games in that light, instead of it as a restriction.

As for the attribute issue, if you find that a undead necromancer/dominating Mesmer is not working out, then you can reallocate or refund attributes into another spec line such as blood magic. Once you have reach ascension you have the ability to change your secondary class to something else, such as an undead necromancer/pyromancer. I look at Guild Wars and see no actually character balance issues that some claim. This game was designed around the idea that as a player, how well your character does in the game is based off your skills to play your character effectively. It was not designed to be based off having the best equipment available at the time and how high up your level is. This game is easy to play if you experiment around with different class build, spec lines, attribution allocation, and lastly, your ability to interact with other players of the world. Going solo is going to be tough, but if you group yourself with other players, an area can become quiet easy if you bring in the right mix of classes and skills.

The problem that does arrive is the demographical diversity of actual players in the world. Occasionally, you run into the childish person that wants to screw a group running a mission, just for their own self-amusement. The next problem that arises in any game is the fact gamers have emotions. Some people are offended by the language some other players use in game, or even by what they say such as gender remarks, racial remarks, sexuality remarks, religious beliefs, and so on. The other thing is every game requires patience and thought. You cannot win a game of chess without thinking about your next move, or you cannot expect to complete a mission if you blindly rush into the enemy. Even if you do stop and think, it does not always mean you will succeed, failure at something is to be expected. When it does happen just say “All well it was a good effort, let us try that mission again, but with a different plan.” Sometimes you just need to stop and take a break from something, and comeback and try it again later.

This brings me to the issue of players out there crying about some of the missions being too hard, I know I spent at least two weeks trying to get the three required missions before ascension done. I got frustrated and cussed a few times to myself about how close I was, the idiot who pulled the agro, and so on. I eventually got through it with patience, and did not bitch on a forum or to ArenaNet that such and such mission is too hard and needs to be redesigned. For those who want to bitch about equipment, I have one thing to say, I made it 70% of the way through the game with henchmen and Pre-Searing armor. I was at the desert before I started to replace my armor with the desert collectors’ armor.

It makes me sick and disgusted, that certain players who do not truly gasps the Role-Playing Concept are the ones complaining. I use to do chat room RPG in Yahoo! A&E. For those who were some of the few original RPGERS and knew of the kingdom of Atlanticia, I played the character who was the personal guard of the queen, Diamond. The downfall of A&E RPG was the people who try to have ubber characters, and refused to play by the accepted rules for A&E RPG. It appears to be the same people, who would rather cry for change, then accept and play the game on how it was conceptually designed.

I could go on and continue complaining about those who complain, but I am not. I am merely just trying to changes people’s opinion about the game. This game is almost perfect, ArenaNet fixed majority of the economy issues that did exist at the launch of the game. The game is balanced at this time; it just now falls back to the thing of how effective a person can play their character. Please stop crying wolf at things that just take a bit of thought and time to get through. This is not McDonalds or some other fast-food restaurant; you cannot always get it your way. Lastly, Guild Wars is a game, have fun while playing it damn it!

Side note: Yes, I know I did slightly diverge of the topic at hand, but it has some relevancy in the basic idea of a Role-Playing Game.

Digitalblast · Jul 21, 2005, 07:02 PM // 19:02

thats like brining every "Magic: The Gathering" play card you own to a game. I think it would eventualy lead to certain too well rounded builds. Split my attr three ways, healer, air spker and mesmer.

Although I wouldnt mind to see how this actualy plays.

JoDiamonds · Jul 21, 2005, 09:35 PM // 21:35

In Magic, the disadvantage of playing more colors (i.e.: Guild Wars classes) is that your deck becomes less consistent (due to mana requirements). There would be no such penalty in Guild Wars.

Right now, balance is achieved through the class system. In particular, class primary attributes are all fairly powerful, and having access to multiple would be "broken".

There are certainly some benefits to a classless system, but it would require relatively serious design changes for Guild Wars to move to it successfully. Personally, I'd prefer they not spend the time on it.

Cymmina · Jul 21, 2005, 09:47 PM // 21:47

Read the fiction that comes with the manual. The gods realized that having all magic available to everyone was too powerful, so they restricted everyone to 2 "schools" of magic of the 6 that are available.

There is no "wrong" choice in GW. Take a survey of 20 different N/Me's (or any other combination) and see how many of them have the same exact skills in their skill bar or same attribute allocation. Each combination has advantages and disadvantages, not "right" or "wrong". Sure, if you want to nuke nuke nuke as a W/E, it just isn't going to happen. But, anyone who has had any experience with any RP game should know that tanks rarely make good mages (in the traditional sense). There are, however, some excellent defensive buffs available to W/E that make it a worthwhile choice.

I never feel restricted by class. If I think a R/W is better suited for a particular mission than a R/Me or R/E, I go switch my secondary. The only time I feel restricted is by attribute refunds. I switch around skills from domination and inspiration, but never touch anything from illusion because it isn't worth the hassle worrying about attribute refunds.

I'd give up my elite skill slot to get a skill from a profession that's not my current primary/secondary, but even that is almost too powerful (some "no attribute" skills are *that* good: R/N with Epidemic).

quanzong · Jul 22, 2005, 09:54 PM // 21:54

RPGs are made with different classes, I think the 1st RPG ever was Gauntlet for Nintendo, you just had archer, warrior, mage. No class is like maybe 1st person game, where everyone is same.

Willow · Jul 22, 2005, 10:51 PM // 22:51

Actually quanzong, there are a great number of RPGs with no classes:

In the field of pencil and paper RPGs, the d20 (D&D) system is essentially the only major-class based system.

Here are some popular systems that are not class based:

The World of Darkness Line (Vampire, Werewolf)
Exalted
Deadlands
Shadowrun
GURPS
HERO

Here's a few computer and console games with no classes:
Final Fantasy 6,7,8,9,10 (many earlier ones DID have classes)
Fallout & Fallout 2
Xenosaga
Arcanum

Neeedless to say, people are not all the same in classless games. There is more freedom in general to make a character without restrictions.

HOWEVER- that does not mean that GW needs to be classless. As is, I don't think going classless would be a good balance change- both for reasons already listed above.
I think it would be rather unbalanced for everyone to have access to skills that don't require attribute levels (like Plague Touch). You could max out two or three attributes, and fill up the rest of your bar with the greatest hits of nonattribute skills.

Talesin Darkbriar · Jul 22, 2005, 10:59 PM // 22:59

The OP's post indicates very little playing experience in Guild Wars.

quanzong · Jul 22, 2005, 11:12 PM // 23:12

Those PS2 games final fantasy, xenosaga, etc they have class, they just dont say MAGE, over there head, or HEALER. Dunno about those other games, but there not popular enough, just few odd balls playing them I guess.

theclam · Jul 22, 2005, 11:25 PM // 23:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by Willow

Final Fantasy 6,7,8,9,10 (many earlier ones DID have classes)

FFIX did have classes. FFX has a psuedo-classless system. Theoretically, any character could be any class, depending on how you do the Sphere Grid. In actuality, it is very time consuming to have a character do something besides their intended class and no matter what you do, their ultimate weapon will still be geared towards their intended class.

quanzong · Jul 23, 2005, 12:06 AM // 00:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by theclam

FFIX did have classes. FFX has a psuedo-classless system. Theoretically, any character could be any class, depending on how you do the Sphere Grid. In actuality, it is very time consuming to have a character do something besides their intended class and no matter what you do, their ultimate weapon will still be geared towards their intended class.

So you give Lulu, Wakka sphere grid then Lulu change to range type player instead of Elementalist?

Perishiko ReLLiK · Jul 23, 2005, 12:32 AM // 00:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by KelvinC

One thing that I don't understand is why do we need class?

I think it would be far better to remove the class system. Instead, everyone have access to all skills and attributes. Everyone can freely choose what attributes points they want to put it and what skills to use.

It is balanced because there is a 200 attributes point limit so they cannot have everything. Also since skills is a function of attributes so they can't have any skills at the single time.

There are a lot of advantages, for examples:
1. Risk of choosing wrong class. when you choose a class, you have to accept it or start another character. I think it is very bad. There is a high risk the class they had chosen is not balanced or does not suit their playing style.
If a player can change the attributes without recreating a character it will be very good

2. Flexibility. Class will only constrant what a player can do and what they can't do. Why not just let a player choose what he can do? It actually promote more new interesting builds and possibilities.

3. Balance. If everyone has access to all attributes, everone has the same rights. For example if something is powerful, everyone can use it.

4. Appearance Diversity. If there are no class, everyone can wear any types of armors. They can mix and match.
However all armors does have some properities. For example the mage robes will have higher mana regeneration while worriors armor will have more AR but low mana. So there is no one set of 'best' armor.

1. No, there is no wrong class... if you like melee tankage style, you choose a warrior, if you like bows, you choose a ranger... if you like magic, ect... If you chose the wrong class based on your "play style", then i'm sorry to say, but you're a jackass.

2. Because then you have what... all skills open to everyone? Wow, how retarded... then all those "non attribute" skills are open to all, and that's just stupid...

3. It does effect the balance... ya... it Un-balances it... and what about runes...? All open to all characters... no, it's still a stupid idea.

4. Not really, the way the damage is proportioned in this game... most goes to the chest... i really dont want to see a warrior monk using damage reduction... how gay, and exploitable...

So, bottom line is, this suggestion needs to be re-thought of, cause at the moment... It blows.

But, on another note... this did get me to thinking.

I want classes to not show up as a part of the character in any player verse player map (adds to mystery and more of a "do you know this team"? feeling... which is just fun)... i would like to see Any class look like Any character... but, unlike you... i want armor restrictions to stay, and the same class system...