Curse

Bohya · Mar 11, 2008, 02:16 AM // 02:16

This is my first CC! (my first forum actualy) so please tell me if I have missed out on something and any ideas to improve it.

Knight

The Knight is the ultimate heavyweight tank. It is a physical class that can take more of a beating than any other class using various stances and blocking skills although with the drawback of being slow. But when it hits, it hits hard!

Stats

100 Al +20 Al vs pysical dmg
Health 500
Energy 20 +3 energy regen
Weapon Sword (15-22, 1.33), Shield (20 Al), 2h sword (18-28, 2.00) (Yay! GWs first 2h sword)

Attributes

Endurance
For every rank of endurance you gain +5 health and for every 2 ranks of endurance you gain +5 Al.

Sword Mastery
Sword Mastery increases the damage you do with swords and your chance to inflict a critical hit when using a sword. Many skills, especially sword attack skills, become more effective with higher Swordsmanship.

Shield Mastery
Shield Mastery increases the chance to block with your shield. Many shield skills relating to blocking and reducing damage become more effective with higher shield mastery.

Resiliance/Courage
No inherent effect. Many knight skills, especially stances and shouts which protect you or your allies, or intimiade foes become more effective with higher Resiliance.

Skills

Bulk Up 10 nrg, 1/4 cast, 25 rchrg (suggest)
For 4-12 seconds you have +30-200 health and do not suffer extra damage from a critical hit. (Endurance)

Vicious Swing 5 fury, 6 rchrg (Sword Attack)
Attack target foe for +6-25 damage. This attack cannot be blocked. (Sword Mastery)

Taunt 2 fury (Skill)
Taunt target foe to make it more likely to focus attacks on you. (Resiliance/Courage)

Shield Counter 5 nrg, 20 rchrg (Shield)
The next melee skill used against you is blocked and your enemy is knocked down. The skill used against you is disabled for an additional 20 seconds.(Shield Mastery)

'Hold Fast' 10 nrg, 15 rchrg (Shout)
For 2-7 seconds, all party members within earshot can't be knocked down and have a 15% chance to block incomming attacks. (Resiliance/Courage)

Kamikazi 7 fury, 1 cast, 45 rchrg (Stance)
For 3-9 seconds you move 33% faster. This stance ends when you become adjecent to a foe. When this stance ends, all adjecent foes are knocked down and suffer 22-45 damage. (Resiliance/Courage)

Painless Thought 5 nrg, 2 cast, 30 rchrg (suggest)
For 4-8 seconds you move 33% slower and take no damage. When this skill ends, you take 3 damage for every point of damage you endured. (Endurance)

(E)'I Cannot Die!' 10 Fury, 30 rchrg (Shout)
For 2-6 seconds you cannot lose health and you cannot be interrupted. (Resiliance/Courage)

Raise Shield 15 nrg, 1 cast, 30 recharge (Shield)
For 3-8 seconds you take 33% less damage. When this skill ends, you suffer from weakness for 5 seconds. (Shield Mastery)

Intimidate 10 fury (Lose all fury) 10 rchrg (Skill)
Intimidate all nearby foes so that they are more than likely to focus their attention on you. 50% chance to fail with under 4 ranks in Resiliance/Corage(Resiliance/Courage)

Please give me any ideas for improvements and changes.

Oh and btw...
You gain one 1 point of fury each time you take damage. For every 10 points of fury you have, you gain one fury. (Much like adrenaline but you can only aquire it when you take damage)

freaky naughty · Mar 11, 2008, 02:23 AM // 02:23

Tanking is epic phail in GW this class would be completely useless unless you're using tank 'n spank which is also epic phail. This is pretty much just a wammo with no damage capabilities. Imbagon > mending wammos

Taking a look at those skills seriously makes me wonder what game you're playing. Most of those skills will be very imba, and btw fury? Stick with adrenaline, the only downside to adrenaline is that the Paragon will make good use of these. Although many skills are imba, painless thought is rather stupid. If you're taking a lot of damage you kite and try to get out of there, not tank it and then take 3 times the dmg. Fury is very flawed, with 100 AL what kind of monster AI will pick you out as a target? You might as well give all the "Knight's" skills an energy cost of 100.

Tanking in GW is a bad concept, which in most cases can be done faster, more fun, and more efficiently with other builds not requiring tanking. Sorry if I got a little flame-tastic but an "uber tank" is not something you need to give to the newbs in the GW community. That's a good way to convince them that wammos are the way to go.

the kurzick eater · Mar 11, 2008, 03:59 AM // 03:59

theres this thing called ursanway, its pretty lame but its eerily similar

i <3 u for your efforts, but a tank isnt a very interesting class to play.. sounds like someone would make it solely for the purpose of farming (which is laem).

Lykan · Mar 11, 2008, 05:09 AM // 05:09

Tanking sucks idk why anyone would want to do it.

farmerfez · Mar 11, 2008, 05:28 AM // 05:28

too much like warrior imo

Bohya · Mar 11, 2008, 12:10 PM // 12:10

Hmmm....Kinda negitive feedback here. I'll scrap this idea.

What does anybody think about a 'Spellsword'?

adam of phyrexia · Mar 11, 2008, 12:11 PM // 12:11

It's a one-dimensional warrior, nough said

Chilos · Mar 11, 2008, 12:13 PM // 12:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bohya

Hmmm....Kinda negitive feedback here. I'll scrap this idea.

What does anybody think about a 'Spellsword'?

*cough Conjure Flame/Frost/Lightning cough*

Bohya · Mar 11, 2008, 12:16 PM // 12:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chilos

*cough Conjure Flame/Frost/Lightning cough*

My idea is something completely different...Ok well maybay not too different.

adam of phyrexia · Mar 11, 2008, 12:52 PM // 12:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bohya

.

What does anybody think about a 'Spellsword'?

Melee+spells = millions of possibilities, go for it

N1ghtstalker · Mar 11, 2008, 01:01 PM // 13:01

this is a buffed warrior to me
but a two handed sword sounds nice tho
one you can carry over your shoulder and when you attack you take your two hands and WHAM
but for the rest it doesn't say anything much

[M]agna_[C]arta · Mar 11, 2008, 02:36 PM // 14:36

Melee+Spells just leads to Meleemancers
If you go with Elemental, Ele-Meleemancers
Psionic, Mes-Meleemancers
Vampire, Necro-Meleemancers
Spirit Fghter, Rit-Meleemancer

Sins and Dervs are already Battlemages.
Mes were mistaken for a Melee Fighter before, cause of the Mes wielding Rapier.
Still it's possible for a Mes go Melee, Illusionary Weaponry^^.

Phoenix Tears · Mar 11, 2008, 02:44 PM // 14:44

Knights don't fight with 2 H weapons like Swords, that do barbarians, btw. Berserkers...

Knight fight either with Sword& Shield, or with Lances/Halberds+ Shield( mounted) / 2H Battle Spears (unmounted)

Knights are only a possible evolution form from a Soldier, you can't compare Warriors with Soldiers, they have both 2 different fighting styles ...

The Warriors tend much more to the aggressive fight style. A fight style which relies on pure destructive power to dominate your foes, real Warriors tend to fight more and better with 2H Weapons like Great Swords and Great Axes (Way of the Berserker)

While Soldiers are the defensive side of the medal. Knights protect thigns or persons with their lifes, they have sworn to protect and honour.
Their protective defensive nature lets them fight ever with Shields, so that they can protect them self better and can endure long battles much longer.
(Way of the Paladin)

adam of phyrexia · Mar 11, 2008, 04:17 PM // 16:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by [M]agna_[C]arta

Melee+Spells just leads to Meleemancers

You say that like it's a bad thing, spells and weapons are the defining characteristics of the fantasy genre's gameplay.

Quote:

Originally Posted by phoenix tears

Knights don't fight with 2 H weapons like Swords, that do barbarians, btw. Berserkers...

Knight fight either with Sword& Shield, or with Lances/Halberds+ Shield( mounted) / 2H Battle Spears (unmounted)

Knights are only a possible evolution form from a Soldier, you can't compare Warriors with Soldiers, they have both 2 different fighting styles ...

The Warriors tend much more to the aggressive fight style. A fight style which relies on pure destructive power to dominate your foes, real Warriors tend to fight more and better with 2H Weapons like Great Swords and Great Axes (Way of the Berserker)

While Soldiers are the defensive side of the medal. Knights protect thigns or persons with their lifes, they have sworn to protect and honour.
Their protective defensive nature lets them fight ever with Shields, so that they can protect them self better and can endure long battles much longer.
(Way of the Paladin)

A:Real knights favored the two handed claymore when going up against infantry because they were the only ones that could afford plated or chainmail armor and could thus afford to favor range and power over a shield.
Lances would only be used against other mounted knights.
You seem to be thinking of a cliché paladin and I'm not one for preserving clichés.
B: Would you drop the friggin evolution system! It will never be implemented and the majority will be better of for it, the only reason you like it anyway is because it always has to be about boxed ideas with you: a paladin is this, a berserker is that, a chanting supporter needs a lilt! WELL THEY DON'T, learn to think in shades for once.

System_Crush · Mar 11, 2008, 04:49 PM // 16:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by adam of phyrexia

A:Real knights favored the two handed claymore when going up against infantry because they were the only ones that could afford plated or chainmail armor and could thus afford to favor range and power over a shield.
Lances would only be used against other mounted knights.

QFT, though I do have a notch with a 2 handed weapon melee mancer.
They would gain a high damage weapon as well as spells to improve their damage or just that deal deal more damage, it will either be dervish like or be overpowered.

Quote:

Originally Posted by adam of phyrexia

You seem to be thinking of a cliché paladin and I'm not one for preserving clichés.

Maybe I'm doing something wrong, but I have a recollection paladins swinging greatswords and using divine grace and divine shield to still have more defense than fighters.

Quote:

Kamikazi 7 fury, 1 cast, 45 rchrg (Stance)
For 3-9 seconds you move 33% faster. This stance ends when you become adjecent to a foe. When this stance ends, all adjecent foes are knocked down and suffer 22-45 damage. (Resiliance/Courage)

I find this knight severely lacking in chivelry and honor though.

Might want to change some things around a little to make them more knights in shiny armor instead of battle hardened brutes.

also

Quote:

Stats

1 Al +20 Al vs pysical dmg
Health 500

OMG WTF BBQ!!

Phoenix Tears · Mar 11, 2008, 04:54 PM // 16:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by adam of phyrexia

You say that like it's a bad thing, spells and weapons are the defining characteristics of the fantasy genre's gameplay.

A:Real knights favored the two handed claymore when going up against infantry because they were the only ones that could afford plated or chainmail armor and could thus afford to favor range and power over a shield.
Lances would only be used against other mounted knights.
You seem to be thinking of a cliché paladin and I'm not one for preserving clichés.
B: Would you drop the friggin evolution system! It will never be implemented and the majority will be better of for it, the only reason you like it anyway is because it always has to be about boxed ideas with you: a paladin is this, a berserker is that, a chanting supporter needs a lilt! WELL THEY DON'T, learn to think in shades for once.

i think not about cliche, i think around traditions. I like it the old school way... and ? what is so friggin about it ?
You can't know, if an evo system will be implemented, or not, nobody cann tell this, other than Anet itself. But to hope for something you, nor nobody else can forbid others

My ideas aren't boxed, otherwise I would sure not come up with CC idea's like Dragoon, Exorcist, Harlequin or the Occultist and other stuff, that disappeared in the meantime long ago into the archives.
Those CC idea's are surely no "boxed ideas" out of any traditional ideas, which are based on cliche.
Would they be so, then you would see those professions nearly in every fantasy game

About Knights: maybe the Claymore was prefered to use against a certain type of enemy, but the average typical knight fights with Sword and Shield.

About lances, thats why I wrote also something into (...), you must have overseen. 2H Battle Spears are not so heavy, like Lances, such Spears were often used also by simple guards ...
I didn't have written, that they use Lances for unmounted fighting

Learn to read completly first, before giving too quick a comment.

Traditions have also their sense, otherwise you would see in games like GW only professions like the Paragon, which are total garbage - pure Wannabe professions which are either not X nor Y, but only act like a clone of the existing Z >.>

A Berserker is simple not a paladin, because both have 2 totally different fight styles, gameplay styles and armor styles, it would look totally weird to create a paladin, which should act like a Berserker, because it would simple fit not to the traditional image of the Paladin, that this profession has of being holy knights and not great weapon wielding bloodthirsty barbarians, which feel no pain nor fear and are all about pure destruction, like Berserkers.

Everything i said in my postign before was, that Warriors are normally not the kind of melee profession, which should play the role of the tank, because a Warriors fighting style is agressive.

Knights fight more defensive, the protect their lands they live in with everythign they've got, until death. Knights are nothign else, than like Soldiers, which protect their Kingdom. their fighting style is defensive, so fits the role of beign tanks much better to them.
The Warrior is a Core profession, which as 2 different sides to show, the defensive side is the Soldier. Nothign more have I said with my previous posting, btw wanted to try to say...

Warriors are Light Fighters, while Soldiers are Heavy Fighters...so simple...

This difference is totally missing in GW ... in GW yet are Warriors all only heavy fighters...

System_Crush · Mar 11, 2008, 05:32 PM // 17:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phoenix Tears

You can't know, if an evo system will be implemented, or not, nobody cann tell this, other than Anet itself.

Anet stated in a interview they where keeping the 2 proff system.

A link to the interview is somewhere on GW2wiki.
Apparently I was the 10thlike person asking about that in the GW2 suggestion thread.

I'm glad they are keeping it, how can you beat 1 prof having access to all skills in the game, just a set amount of skills each prof has just feels limiting for GW, its so great because it's so diverse.

adam of phyrexia · Mar 11, 2008, 05:33 PM // 17:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phoenix Tears

i think not about cliche, i think around traditions

And my sister's not fat, just well rounded.
Besides, common sense would dictate that creators aren't likely to implement new game mechanics if they conflict with popular existing ones.

Quote:

Originally Posted by system_crush

Maybe I'm doing something wrong, but I have a recollection paladins swinging greatswords and using divine grace and divine shield to still have more defense than fighters.

Obviously, but it's A tradition for the good knight to wear a shield.
Shieldless hero knights exist, but tend to be characterized by more anger.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phoenix Tears

My ideas aren't boxed, otherwise I would sure not come up with CC idea's like Dragoon, Exorcist, Harlequin or the Occultist and other stuff, that disappeared in the meantime long ago into the archives.
Those CC idea's are surely no "boxed ideas" out of any traditional ideas, which are based on cliche.
Would they be so, then you would see those professions nearly in every fantasy game

I wouldn't say you reinvented the wheel there, but you can in fact differ from the norm..thk god. But you do have a habit of bitching about technicalities in other people's CCs when they're are in fact trying to distance themselves from the preset idea.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phoenix Tears

bout lances, thats why I wrote also something into (...), you must have overseen. 2H Battle Spears are not so heavy, like Lances, such Spears were often used also by simple guards ...
I didn't have written, that they use Lances for unmounted fighting
Learn to read completly first, before giving too quick a comment.

I did read it, I just figured while I was stating some hard facts to contradicts 2Hers I might as well throw some in about the lance. Srry if you read that as 'knight infantry can't use lances'.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phoenix Tears

Traditions have also their sense, otherwise you would see in games like GW only professions like the Paragon, which are total garbage - pure Wannabe professions which are either not X nor Y, but only act like a clone of the existing Z >.>

A Berserker is simple not a paladin, because both have 2 totally different fight styles, gameplay styles and armor styles, it would look totally weird to create a paladin, which should act like a Berserker, because it would simple fit not to the traditional image of the Paladin, that this profession has of being holy knights and not great weapon wielding bloodthirsty barbarians, which feel no pain nor fear and are all about pure destruction, like Berserkers.

Everything i said in my postign before was, that Warriors are normally not the kind of melee profession, which should play the role of the tank, because a Warriors fighting style is agressive.

Knights fight more defensive, the protect their lands they live in with everythign they've got, until death. Knights are nothign else, than like Soldiers, which protect their Kingdom. their fighting style is defensive, so fits the role of beign tanks much better to them.
The Warrior is a Core profession, which as 2 different sides to show, the defensive side is the Soldier. Nothign more have I said with my previous posting, btw wanted to try to say...

Warriors are Light Fighters, while Soldiers are Heavy Fighters...so simple...

This difference is totally missing in GW ... in GW yet are Warriors all only heavy fighters...

Everything I said in point B of the previous post

Bohya · Mar 11, 2008, 06:27 PM // 18:27

Fixed the 1 Al for yah.

Your right that I shouldn't of put 'Kamakazi' in lol. But this is just a rough guideline for Anet to use (if they ever read it).

System_Crush · Mar 11, 2008, 06:54 PM // 18:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bohya

Fixed the 1 Al for yah.

Your right that I shouldn't of put 'Kamakazi' in lol. But this is just a rough guideline for Anet to use (if they ever read it).

OMG 100AL a 20AL shield and 3 energy regeneration O.o
Also the primary can boost it by another 40AL...
Even if they where completely immobile because of the weight of their armor that would be overpowered.

For every 10 AL above 60 you sacrifice 1 pip of regen, for a special effect on the armor you sacrifice 5 max energy(like sins you are allowed to get an additional pip of energy as a special effect on the armor) for the ability to use adrenaline you sacrifice another 5 max energy.

Also I wasn't referring to Kamikaze specifically, it was an example, the bravery skills in general are too brutish and thuggish.
Which is ok for 1 atribute, but it requires an opposite atribute to be present was well, giving a White Knight/Black Knight effect which is pretty cool to have as a conflict within a class, opens up a lot of story arches and RP oppertuneties.

Personally I like it when games/classes offer me a good or evil choice, just so I can chose to take a gray path and have the freedom of nonalignment.