I would like to see a necromancer able to summon minions and a sorcerer who uses lightning and darkness magic and wears light or medium armor

I would like to see a necromancer able to summon minions and a sorcerer who uses lightning and darkness magic and wears light or medium armor

I would love something like this; a bit like the Warlock in 3.5e/NWN2, but with a broader range of options, such as summoning and more... general magic-y utility/use.

Demigod of AWSOMENESS! yes...that is a class.

 

 

EDIT: Capital D for Demigod! BOW PUNY MORTALS AND DESPAIR!

Edited September 28, 201213 yr by Tauron

I'd also add a Skald class - a warrior poet; a bard who can fight well.

 

Various songs - of course, summoning mythical creatures, using war horns and greatswords. At least that's how I'd picture them.

I want to see a obnoxiously overpowered SPEHHS MEHREEN class.

Which can only be unlocked if you did a perfect 100% playtrough

I want to play someone who's able to enslave entire nations with necromancy.

I really hope their design of class will contain some kind of conflict. What I mean is classes like mages and templars who are against each other in DAO, evil clerics who can turn dead paladins in BG, or the opposite sides of technology and magic in Arcanum. This really makes the world deeper and leads to more complexed tactic and strategy in combats. For example, using your templar to kill the enemy's mage quickly or your team will be in huge danger and something like that.

Inquisitor/Witchhunter

Crusader knights

Archers

Gunners

War dog masters (or some other type of animal) that unleash and command a small pack of attack beast.

 

Also some kind of mobile artillery class could be cool. Imagine taking out a giant or dragon with something like that.

Edited September 29, 201213 yr by Thulean

Bards, Psionists(mindmage) and hunters(can tame animals)

 

edit: ohh how could i forget barbarians(wild berserkers)

Edited September 29, 201213 yr by betongborr

I think I'd like to see just a few basic classes, but allow them to quickly branch out into various specialities. Thus:

• Hunter (Barbarian/Ranger/Scout/Trapper)
  
• Warrior (Fighter/Paladin/Knight/Archer/Thug)
  
• Adept (Wizard/Sorcerer/Warlock/Necromancer/Elementalist/Alchemist)
  
• Mystic (Druid/Cleric/Monk/Shaman/Diviner)
  
• Trader (Thief/Bandit/Pirate/Sage/Merchant/Artisan/Smuggler)
  

Everybody gets a major and a minor class; the minor can be the same as the major for increased specialization.

I like psyonics, paladins, not-cookie-cutter-fighters, archers, inquisitor types, priests.

 

This only matters in pvp. In single player I don't see why a warrior/mage class shouldn't be just as awesome as a purely warrior class. It may turn out that being a mage/warrior will be the most awesome experience but as long as you make the other classes also very enjoyable it doesn't really matter.

 

There's a thought...I haven't heard if there was going to be some sort of multiplayer tacked on or not. If there is and it involves pvp, then personally I'd rather they made certain classes unavailable rather than not include them at all.

 

I don't get why people say you don't need balance for a SP game. I would agree that you don't need as much balance as a MP game but classes definitely need to be more or less balanced. Otherwise theres no good way to set game difficulty. If a warrior/mage is just as good as a warrior bur also has spells to cast they would need to make enemies very difficult to offer a challenge to this character but then a regular warrior would without a doubt struggle the whole game. Similarily if you balance enemies to the warrior then the game becomes a cake walk for mage/warrior.

 

Secondly it doesn't make logical sense that a mage/warrior is as proficient a warrior as a plain warrior of the same level. How can someone who focuses on two skills be as good at one of them as someone who focuses just on the one?

I tend to prefer a classless system.

classless systems can work. but we know that's not what this will be.

I tend to prefer a classless system.

 

Well, it DOES give you the most freedom with roleplaying. No skill or items restrictions. No attribute penalties...

This only matters in pvp. In single player I don't see why a warrior/mage class shouldn't be just as awesome as a purely warrior class. It may turn out that being a mage/warrior will be the most awesome experience but as long as you make the other classes also very enjoyable it doesn't really matter.

 

There's a thought...I haven't heard if there was going to be some sort of multiplayer tacked on or not. If there is and it involves pvp, then personally I'd rather they made certain classes unavailable rather than not include them at all.

 

I don't get why people say you don't need balance for a SP game. I would agree that you don't need as much balance as a MP game but classes definitely need to be more or less balanced. Otherwise theres no good way to set game difficulty. If a warrior/mage is just as good as a warrior bur also has spells to cast they would need to make enemies very difficult to offer a challenge to this character but then a regular warrior would without a doubt struggle the whole game. Similarily if you balance enemies to the warrior then the game becomes a cake walk for mage/warrior.

 

Secondly it doesn't make logical sense that a mage/warrior is as proficient a warrior as a plain warrior of the same level. How can someone who focuses on two skills be as good at one of them as someone who focuses just on the one?

agreed. You can't let them be just as good as a mage with magic, and you can't let them be just as good at direct combat as a fighter. They don't have the peak performance of either pure class. What they get in return are less drastic drawbacks. They are never useless.

Edited September 29, 201213 yr by ogrezilla

I like the distinction that class systems offer.

Classes I would not like to see -

 

Ninja

Monk(at least not a martial arts using one)

Samurai