Curse

Funki · Oct 02, 2005, 10:15 PM // 22:15

some voodoo magician or smth? just came in my mind after reading all 5 pages and feeling obliged to post

smurfhunter · Oct 02, 2005, 10:24 PM // 22:24

what about... uh... the Angry Man class

special ability: able to access your vent and start yelling at everyone to stfu and then rage quitting

any votes for that?

KaPe · Oct 02, 2005, 10:25 PM // 22:25

What about Spammer class? I think lots of people here would enjoy it a lot

smurfhunter · Oct 02, 2005, 10:29 PM // 22:29

ooo then why doesnt anet make two classes, the spammer class and teh anti-spam class. then increase the size of all groups to 10 so that everyone can have a spammer and an anti spammer on their team.

perfect

Funki · Oct 02, 2005, 10:41 PM // 22:41

any kind of class that is really vulnerable, but can deal really high damage if given enough preparation time.

and a stonemonster type of class (like the guy from fantastic four) to counter it?

dont hate me, i'm just typing right away what i'm thinking

Seron Dalar · Oct 02, 2005, 11:49 PM // 23:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by KvanCetre

You lost all credibility in the first statement. Thus, I didn't read your post. Grow up, kid.

Please die. Let's go over what happened.

1) I say something perfectly valid.
2) You respond with some stupid acronym.
3) I vent a bit (for exactly two words) and then go on to write a detailed, reasonable post with several suggestions.
4) You uh, tell me to grow up over doing something that's basically the same as what you did. And assume that I'm immature for it... even though you did the same thing. Good job, kid. Then you tell me you couldn't be bothered to read my post. I'm guessing the length scared you off. (zomg!!!1 more than four sentences)

...don't bother responding to this, I really don't care enough to start a flame war. If you want to respond to something, look at the rest of my first post and reply to that.

^We have those. They're called elementalists.

Also, I'd say a spearman/hoplite class would be a good idea. However, you'd have to try and make length a huge part of melee combat (so that a spearman would have the advantage over a warrior head-on, but maybe not from the side or rear), which would involve a lot of work. Still... good thought.

Teh Azman · Oct 02, 2005, 11:53 PM // 23:53

Seron if you want people to care, you might want to put those two words AFTER your post so we read it. Responding with "please die" didn't make you look too great either.

Seron Dalar · Oct 02, 2005, 11:55 PM // 23:55

That's probably true. I guess that's just how I write. (Make the reader interested! Good old English class.) Sorry to everyone that's not him.

Oh... I thought about it and realized that gb2wow probably means Go back to World of Warcraft. That's pretty funny, because I have never played World of Warcraft.

As they say... pwned.

Sagius Truthbarron · Oct 02, 2005, 11:59 PM // 23:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by TwinRaven

Why not a druid type character specializing in non-bladed weapons (quarter staffs and the like), and/or hand-to-handbut with some spell-casting abilities....druids controlling foliage the way rangers control pets...Imagine having vines come up from the ground and forming a defensive sheild/wall or grabbing and slowing an opponent. Maybe a shape-shifting talent...sort of becomes "totem" animal for 60 sec or so.

A bard might be kinda cool....inspiring the group with spells wrapped in music, but handy with a crossbow.

A "lasher" character with short range weapons like flails, whips and the like...not as tough as a fighter, but harder to get close to.

If a "martial arts" character is added, it should NOT be a ninja, but something unique to the game...adding something obvious like that seems just non-creative and stupid (imho)...can't imagine a character doing martial arts in a game where you aren't able to jump (beyond emote).

a paladin-type holy warrior might swing an axe and do holy damage while doing it...

hmmmm.....

theif/assassin just doesn't seem likely given the up-front combat...not alot of stealth here...I hear some games allow temporary invisability, but I can't see this working with the balance of GW.

Cleric? maybe...very monk-like though...possibility, maybe?

Berzerker, Lycanthrope....I'm sure I'll think of more, but I really like the idea of a druid...turning the trees into alies, shelter, pets, weapons, etc...controlling a life pod or oakheart or thorn-stalker-thingamabob...has a certain appeal to the tree hugger in me...my inner lumberjack wants to be an axe-weilding warrior now....

These are very good suggestions.

smurfhunter · Oct 03, 2005, 12:29 AM // 00:29

people keep suggesting a beserker.. maybe a drunk? how about something like an Alcoholic. with the special ability of er.. puke on foe. idk

i feel so creative right now

KvanCetre · Oct 03, 2005, 02:10 AM // 02:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seron Dalar

Please die.

One day you'll learn how to make a post I'll actually read.

Since you seem to hate acronyms...

Go Back To World Of Warcraft.

Seron Dalar · Oct 03, 2005, 02:15 AM // 02:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seron Dalar

That's probably true. I guess that's just how I write. (Make the reader interested! Good old English class.) Sorry to everyone that's not him.

Oh... I thought about it and realized that gb2wow probably means Go back to World of Warcraft. That's pretty funny, because I have never played World of Warcraft.

As they say... pwned.

Do we understand now?

Also, good job letting on that you read my post anyway, despite your claims to the contrary.

KvanCetre · Oct 03, 2005, 02:19 AM // 02:19

I was told by someone I should read your post due to its funny content... I dare say they were right.

Quote:

Originally Posted by you

Please die. Let's go over what happened.

1) I say something perfectly valid.

Quote:

Originally Posted by you

If there are not rogues, I will stab someone.

Are we done now?

Seron Dalar · Oct 03, 2005, 03:12 AM // 03:12

Yes. I meant that, word for word. I literally meant that if rogues weren't included in Chapter 2 of Guild Wars, I was going to take a knife and stab someone. Darn. You got me.

...

Now, if we can get past that, I was just using exaggeration to say simply that I thought rogues should be included. That's the "perfectly valid" thing I was talking about. Again... it's how I write. Deal with it.

Is this little flame war over? I really don't care any more.

KvanCetre · Oct 03, 2005, 03:22 AM // 03:22

Flame war? It seems you're the only one getting worked up about this

.

Red Engine Go!

Seron Dalar · Oct 03, 2005, 03:25 AM // 03:25

K then. Now... anyone wanna talk about rogues, or...?

KvanCetre · Oct 03, 2005, 03:34 AM // 03:34

Rogues have been discussed to death. They're uninspired... not to say that current classes(aside from mesmer) aren't, but Rogue will just bring us closer to WoW's annoyingly high Rogue population...

First off, I disagree with your points about random arena. The only teams that win are the teams that work together.

Second, a class that works(as you said) like a mesmer would serve no purpose... because we have one that does things like that...from a distance.

I'm not saying Rogues are overpowered, they're just not really providing anything new.

Seron Dalar · Oct 03, 2005, 03:52 AM // 03:52

Alright. But still, at least when I go into Random Arena, I take some skills that will keep me alive. I always pack Aura of Restoration, for instance, which I might not take on a HoH team if I knew my monks could handle the extra healing. I like to use Water Trident and snares over, say, Ward Against Harm, which I take into the FoW.

As for them being uninspired... well, only mesmers (and arguably necromancers) are truly original. Wizards, fighters, clerics, and archers are all pretty standard stock. As I've said, mesmers are sort of illusionists, a subdivision of wizards, and necro's are, well, necromancers, another subdivision of wizards. I'd be hesitant about rejecting a class purely based on originality, although of course that always does add to a class's merit. But then, you do have to be careful that something doesn't seem outright ridiculous in context.

I'd say that rogues would be closest to mesmers in function, but different enough that there wouldn't be much overlap. If we're saying (although this is still oversimplifying) that warriors are for taking damage, ele's for dealing damage, necro's for debuffing, monks for healing/buffing, and rangers are all-around... I guess you could say mesmers are for preventing damage, but it's hard to come up with a standard niche for them. Still, almost all the classes overlap into the others' niches... even monks can debuff (Pacifism, say), deal damage (Smiting), and take damage (Shielding Hands, Mark of Protection, etc.). I mean, I could link to that old topic I made with a bunch of Rogue skill suggestions, but I don't feel like it. It's buried in the Sanitarium, if anyone cares.

Basically what I'm saying is, yes, there'd be overlap, but there's already overlap-- which is good, because it means versatility-- and hopefully the overlap would be minimized, because even though the end result might be the same, the method would be quite different. (After all, necro's and ele's, even warriors, end up dealing damage, but they have very different ways of accomplishing it. It'd be similar for mesmers and rogues.)

KvanCetre · Oct 03, 2005, 04:00 AM // 04:00

While I hate making the game more like WoW, they could also use two-weapon fighting.

Seron Dalar · Oct 03, 2005, 04:04 AM // 04:04

I'll agree with you there.