What classes would you like to see?

[Theomen712]

I'd like to see an Archer specialisation somewhere in the fighter classes, then depending on the nature of mage classes, a class specialising in each element(fire, water, etc.), then in the thief department, perhaps something like a Spy class, dedicated to avoiding combat completely.

 

Maybe for the Archer Class it could be more of a beast master class. the biggest problem of being an Archer is when the enemy gets near you right? then you incur the -4 to hit penalty and such. How about you start off with an animal companion or maybe you have to find one and pass the checks to train it to be yours, but either way it will go out and attack the enemy. It would make the effectiveness of your character much stronger and make it so that you could actually solo the game if you wanted (Its impossible to solo most old CRPGs as an archer)

[Milten]

Since souls are core element of game setting I expect and would like to see class which is focused on working with them. Destabilize them, suck energy from them, on higher level separate soul from body or hold them together, and so on.

Because such things would be sacred, priests should be the only ones who can do it (aka divine teaching), or vice versa - they should burn anyone who tries (aka 'diabolic' art).

[Gromnir]

No classes required.

 

They're just a holdover from D&D, and along with random character generation, levels, alignments and hitpoint bloat, they're something which RPGs should have left behind in the dark ages.

Some of us, including me, enjoy the borders and definitions classes endow us with, as a focus for our characters. I wouldn't call it a holdover from DnD either; there are many, many systems with classes & careers.

 

so, playing a spellcaster that you build using customization features, a spellcaster that can hurl fireballs whilst wearing inexplicable dressing gowns/bath robes, is less enjoyable than playing one that is crafted by the developers? am baffled. am believing you, 'cause many people seem to be big fans o' classes, but am still baffled.

 

opportunities to customize your character is a good thing, no? everybody likes customization ops, right? so why not maximize? if through customization features you can get your ideal spellcatser, how is that less satisfying to play than the hard-coded mage?

 

am hopeful this is one feature that the obsinaties choose to ignore the fans regarding.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[guiskj]

I would like if they implemented a warlock class akin the one in NwN2

[agewisdom]

You know what I want? I want to make sure for EXOTIC specialization/class, there's a proper gameplay and lore to backup how the PC managed to gain his/her specialization. Of course, this should not been done for the run-of-the mill classes. I would like this to be implemented for those specialization that are rare, difficult to attain or secretive...

 

A great example of this was:

 

Dragon Age: Origins - Arcane Warrior specialization

This was a lost specialization where the elven warriors specialized in both martial arts and combat magic. The PC couldn't learn this from anybody since these specialization was lost since the fall of the Elven Kingdoms. During the course of his adventures, the PC could learn this from a memory/soul gem, if he performed the proper actions.

 

What I hate about certain cRPGs is that once you reach, say a certain level (e.g. level , suddenly you are given a choice to specialize without any explanation or background of this class in-game. For example, in Dragon Age: Awakenings, once you reach a certain level, you could specialize by choosing a battlemage. But there's no lore, exposition or background to this. It just breaks immersion.

 

It would be better if you meet certain NPCs who are masters of these class. You could for example challenge them to a duel, and see how they fare against your non-specialized PC. If you are impressed, you could pay them to teach you, for a fee... Of course you must meet the basic pre-requisites in order to specialize.

Edited September 26, 2012 by agewisdom

[Dorateen]

Didn't the concept art recently posted label the character as a human fighter? So a warrior class is in.

 

I expect mages and priests to be tweaked based on the setting.

 

And of course you gotta have a thief. There are thieves everywhere.

 

Harumph!

[ogrezilla]

No classes required.

 

They're just a holdover from D&D, and along with random character generation, levels, alignments and hitpoint bloat, they're something which RPGs should have left behind in the dark ages.

Some of us, including me, enjoy the borders and definitions classes endow us with, as a focus for our characters. I wouldn't call it a holdover from DnD either; there are many, many systems with classes & careers.

 

so, playing a spellcaster that you build using customization features, a spellcaster that can hurl fireballs whilst wearing inexplicable dressing gowns/bath robes, is less enjoyable than playing one that is crafted by the developers? am baffled. am believing you, 'cause many people seem to be big fans o' classes, but am still baffled.

 

opportunities to customize your character is a good thing, no? everybody likes customization ops, right? so why not maximize? if through customization features you can get your ideal spellcatser, how is that less satisfying to play than the hard-coded mage?

 

am hopeful this is one feature that the obsinaties choose to ignore the fans regarding.

 

HA! Good Fun!

classes are already confirmed aren't they?

[Tale]

No classes required.

 

They're just a holdover from D&D, and along with random character generation, levels, alignments and hitpoint bloat, they're something which RPGs should have left behind in the dark ages.

I like classes because they allow for for more exceptions. But it costs more works. A classless system is fairly unified, which means that your stats tend to mean X, and rarely Y. A class system allows your stat to mean whatever they want it to. Though, again, the work may be disproportionate to the reward.

 

D&D is the example I'll pull from here. We've got intelligence based Vancian casters, charisma based spells-per day casters, wisdom based vancian casters, charisma based whenever-the-heck-they-want casters. And they learn their spells differently too. Wizards get their spells from scrolls, Clerics get their spells as gifts from god during morning prayer, Sorcerers just know how to cast the spell, and Warlocks have it as power granted by a patron (and in 4th ed, this patron may grant some powers better than others).

 

I don't see how you can do all of this with classless, these kind of distinctions define a class system. The best I can see is if you do a build-a-class system at character creation. What do you want to be your casting stat? How do you want to learn new powers?

[Hmm-Hmm.]

Those which make most sense within the universe/area of the game as written. No more, no less. I'd rather they'd come up with cool new stuff or find logical reasons for the existence of known classes than forcibly interjecting 'my class of choice'.

 

More freedom to the writers and game designers will probably end up getting a better game to us. Or that is what I believe.

Edited September 26, 2012 by Hmm-Hmm.

[Bos_hybrid]

I would like if they implemented a warlock class akin the one in NwN2

 

Yes that was my favourite class from NWN2.

[FlintlockJazz]

I feel the same way about classes as I do about races: while some new ones might be good deliberately trying to get away from the traditional classes is often detrimental and self-defeating. Quite often you still end up with the same classes just with different names (warriors being called Doommolesters and mages called Wangmerchants) or very constrained classes that are not actually fun to play. Instead you should just look at the setting and create classes based on what fits, if that means warrior and mage classes then so be it. There is a reason why those classes are used so much: they are quite wide in just what can fit into them while still fitting to their role. I mean, take one of the 'new' classes being proposed here, the knight: it's nothing more than a warrior with some social skills wearing plate! A lot of the suggestions being presented here are, to be blunt, specialisations in my mind more than actual standalone classes.

 

Really, the only way you're going to get away from the archetypes is if the setting changes how they work at a fundamental level, which can be done: Earth Dawn was a tabletop game in which all classes, whether they were a mage type or rogue or a swordmaster, utilised magic in some degree due to the way the world worked, and then you still had the same type of classes just with special powers.

 

Just the random ramblings of a crazed rabbit, nothing more.

[Mamoulian War]

Onion Knight

[Theomen712]

I would like the Kensai, or Sword Saint subclass to appear in the game. Its not its own class since its just a fighter who has massive bonuses to a single weapon, but can't wear any armor. Its a nice change from every class except the mage, wearing potentially bunky armor and helmets and shields. the Kensai (normally specialized in Katanas) cannot even wear light armor or he loses his bonuses but in exchange for such a huge survivablilty staple, he gains AC per level on a much higher scale then any other class, a HUGE bonus to hitting to his weapon of choice which also goes up with every level, and access to KI abilities which function as monk abilities more than magic (Buffs, Debuffs, Healing capabilities, etc) This was just one class (Sub) i fell in love with in BG2 and in actual table top D&D that i'd love to see implemented.

[Uncanny Danny]

Paladins need to be in the game for me to have a significant level of interest in it. Please don't neglect conventional roles and classes in designing this game.

[LucyZephyr]

I also enjoyed the Skyrim build-your-own technique. I really, strongly dislike games that tell me flat out that I cannot use any form of magic if I'm a thief, for instance. That is the only reason I am wary of classes: the exclusion of options.

 

But really, as long as there is a stealth-debuffer build option, I will be happy enough.

[Wintersong]

I like classes because they allow for for more exceptions. But it costs more works. A classless system is fairly unified, which means that your stats tend to mean X, and rarely Y. A class system allows your stat to mean whatever they want it to. Though, again, the work may be disproportionate to the reward.

 

D&D is the example I'll pull from here. We've got intelligence based Vancian casters, charisma based spells-per day casters, wisdom based vancian casters, charisma based whenever-the-heck-they-want casters. And they learn their spells differently too. Wizards get their spells from scrolls, Clerics get their spells as gifts from god during morning prayer, Sorcerers just know how to cast the spell, and Warlocks have it as power granted by a patron (and in 4th ed, this patron may grant some powers better than others).

 

I don't see how you can do all of this with classless, these kind of distinctions define a class system. The best I can see is if you do a build-a-class system at character creation. What do you want to be your casting stat? How do you want to learn new powers?

With R&D? Bad example incoming...

 

We have a complete list of skills and anyone can buy points in them no matter what "class" you are by paying the associated cost. Each class is actually an archtype which defines a training. That training has associated some skills, allowing you to buy ranks in them cheaper than without the training of an archtype. The archtype also unlocks for purchase archtype-specific traits/talents (powers and stuff) based on the level of certain skills. Non archtype-specific traits/talents are unlocked for everybody that meets the skills requirements. New archtypes can be gained by proper training in them (may require monies, contacts, questing...). A Divine archtype would unlock (more easily) divine traits/talents by investing in the asociated skills. Similar for an Arcane archtype or a Martial one.

 

In the end, it's about the skills and the ranks you buy in them. And allows "multiclassing" even if the character only has one archtype.

 

As I said, not a good example but I hope it's not too bad either.

 

For the record: I'm fine with a class system. As long as I can get some kind of "swashbuckler" going on (or figher/rogue), I'll be pleased. Or just let me dual wield.

[Mattku]

I think it would be pretty funny to have a garbage/challenge class. They would be bad at pretty much everything and would only really be chosen by Major League Gamers as a test of their abilities after they have beaten the game a couple of times.

[trulez]

I'd prefer classless system.

[Tauron]

Something that embodies Varys the Spider / Littlefinger style of play would be cool too.

 

Ah, nice...an a s shole class. Get them all killed without using your most powerfull weapon of mass distraction...farts. I like how you think.

 

 

 

A mage class if I didnt said it before. An adventurer class, no reall advantages, but neither disandvantages...although people seem to like idea of subclasses or specialisations, so have those in.

 

A fighter, heavy armor type. I really liked Witcher "class". It was like medieval jedi. So something like that would be cool. Or armored juggernaut with two handed. Hedge knight in search of fame, battle for title, position at some court, carving a anem for himself and such. Or Blackguard sort of class, antiPaladin. But all these fall in subclass category.

[greenmonster]

I don't have particularly strong feeling about class types as long as they are somewhat balanced.

 

One thing I have always disliked is rage/beserker effects that give a temp increase in hit points that wears off right after a fight and then you die. I'd much rather see damage reduction than a temp increase. Or, if a a temp increase is given then make it drop you to 1 HP instead of death.

[Stiler]

I would like to see a magic based melee fighter who can wear plate armor.

 

I'm not talking about a "paladin" like character who's usually a healer/buffbot for the party but a combat focused magic using warrior. Who has magic abilities to use while not being crap at melee fighting with armor on.

 

Most rpgs don't offer that, you either have to choose "mage with pointy hat/robes" or "non-magic using generic warrior."

 

I want a type of class that has all sorts of neat "magic" abilities but also is good at melee fighting. Like say maybe he can imbue his weapon with flame/frost dmg, and he can "shift" through enemies to dodge an attack or get around them for a surprise or cast a quick spell to steal life from his enemy or cast an aoe frost spell to coause enemies to freeze/trip on it.

[light487]

I don't want stupid classes.. vampires and werewolves and soul eaters.. I actually want generic classes that I can use to build my own character with.

 

Basically this post from eimatshya sums up the degree to which I would want the game to "impose" specialisation and even this is starting to get a bit into the "stupid" classes..

 

Divine Divinity did this very well.. they basically gave you the choice of 6 classes, which gave you "starting skills" and "starting conditions" but then left it up to you to decide what skills from each of the class trees you wanted.

 

There was a thread about classes a while back:

 

http://forums.obsidi...ge__hl__classes

 

Anyway, here's a modified version of what I proposed (I'm not sure if this system would be too detailed for the scope of P:E, but here it is anyway):

 

Warrior - Relies on martial techniques. The Warrior subclasses/specializations would be:

Wizard - Relies on magic in combat; the Wizard specializations are:

Rogue - relies on stealth and trickery to debilitate or incapacitate foes; the Rogue specialties are:

Templar - A character who mixes martial and magical techniques in combat

Alchemist - A character who uses a mix of magic and technology (e.g. bombs, guns, potions, mutagens)

Anyway, I also think it would be interesting to get some unconventional classes, as well.

Edited September 27, 2012 by light487

[ogrezilla]

I would like to see a magic based melee fighter who can wear plate armor.

 

I'm not talking about a "paladin" like character who's usually a healer/buffbot for the party but a combat focused magic using warrior. Who has magic abilities to use while not being crap at melee fighting with armor on.

 

Most rpgs don't offer that, you either have to choose "mage with pointy hat/robes" or "non-magic using generic warrior."

 

I want a type of class that has all sorts of neat "magic" abilities but also is good at melee fighting. Like say maybe he can imbue his weapon with flame/frost dmg, and he can "shift" through enemies to dodge an attack or get around them for a surprise or cast a quick spell to steal life from his enemy or cast an aoe frost spell to coause enemies to freeze/trip on it.

as long as its balanced in a way that its not just better than the normal warriors, I would like something like that. Give up a little bit of base damage and/or tankiness for the added utility.

Edited September 27, 2012 by ogrezilla

[zlarm]

There's quite a few 'semi-unique' classes that I've enjoyed over the years (assassin, mage hunter, monk type, archer) that it would be nice to see implemented in Project eternity, but my one main wish would be for a properly implemented shifter class. By this I don't mean some druid type class that can also shift to some (generally useless) animal form once all of their spells are gone... but a class that can shift into a variety of interesting shapes (animals sure, but maybe also slimes, assassins, goblin archers, golems, variety of undead, and at high enough levels spellcating demons etc...). I think it was the Shadows of Undertide expansion for NWN that had the best shifter implementation I've seen and that was still somewhat mediocre (don't get me started on the shapeshift spell in NWN, or any of the shifting in NWN2 and especially DA:O). The main mistake I commonly see with shifting in games is that they don't give you any of the special abilities of the new form (i.e. you shift into a dragon but can't cast dragon breath, or a basilisk with no stone gaze) which pretty much kills the fun of it.

[Methuseleh]

Here's the thing about classes: If Obsidian is creating an independent framework for non-combat skills, then a lot of character depth can be gained from that framework. A party doesn't *need* a ranger, they can get scouting-type skills even if they happen to cast spells. They might not even *need* a healer if the non-combat skills are high enough or potions can be crafted etc. They might prefer to have someone who has lockpick skills, but why can't that be a blademaster?

 

What we are looking at here could be a brilliant new approach where one is more concerned about a combat "style" than a package of pre-determined skills. Consider - how many times have you wished your wizard could do a fade then dual-dagger attack someone in the back row? Is there really any reason why they shouldn't be able to do that? Suppose you wanted a spellcaster to use a staff and Glamdring? Why not? What about an unarmed thief? The limiting factor would be armor and weapons. You aren't going to be able to tuck-and-roll wearing plate as you might in padded and you aren't going to be doing fancy evasions with both fists full of staff and blade. The operative elements here are speed, encumbrance and strength. One's fighting style must be adjusted accordingly, perhaps some open and some close depending on how you're equipped (and trained, of course).

 

Fast weapons with quick evasions are one style with particular animations. Medium-distance weapons such as swords and maces (or two-handed) are another ("sword-and-board"). Heavy mauling hammers and zweihanders are a third. Ranged attackers are the fourth. That's it. Four animation sets usable by anyone with the training and a sufficiently low encumbrance. I guess you'd want a fifth for magic animations. Okay, a sixth for unarmed, but again, there's no reason why every character wouldn't be able to use that. They might lean more toward particular types of combat, but a "class" per se isn't really necessary. What is important is how the player wants to fight when they must fight and how much training and effort they want to put into fighting versus other pursuits.

 

I know what I have said is akin to heresy and it will probably be easier for people to latch on to "Fighter SMASH" and "thief backstab!" but that's also sailing perilously close to lawsuit territory for infringement of other gaming systems. Eternity needs to be its' own IP, so the notion that one could learn and use different styles of combat ("I see your Eagle Claw Style, but it is no match for the DIVINE FIST!!!") is important. Perhaps one might grow more accomplished at certain styles and test to obtain higher rings of mastery ("You perceive that I have but two rings of mastery on Eagle Claw... now see my TRUE MASTERY OF THE IRON BLADE!!!" or "Perhaps, but my Eagle Claw is augmented by the POWER OF ZUUL!!!"). Could be a lot of fun!