Paladins and Bards

[curryinahurry]

A Templar type of Paladin can be a subset of the cleric class

 

A Cavalier type of knight can be a subset of the fighter class

 

Bards can be a subset of the rogue class

 

There really is no need for an entirely new class

[Sistergoldring]

@curryinahurry - yeah I think everyone gets that I think we're really just pushing for them to be a 'supported 'subclass in game and so have some sort of in-game reactivity to the choice to play as one. At least that's been my interpretation of the comments, I don't think there would be too much complaining if this was how Obsidian chose to implement them.

[DCParry]

I am almost positive from the description of the rogue class, bard will be available as an option. Skills like diplomacy and persuasion (courtesan and diplomat) are already mentioned in the description.

[AlphaShard]

Police don't have a problem being Lawful Good why would a Paladin not make sense? Just because we don't have alignment doesn't mean there isn't good/evil. There was plenty of characters spouting about both in Skyrim.

[Gorth]

@curryinahurry - yeah I think everyone gets that I think we're really just pushing for them to be a 'supported 'subclass in game and so have some sort of in-game reactivity to the choice to play as one. At least that's been my interpretation of the comments, I don't think there would be too much complaining if this was how Obsidian chose to implement them.

Do they really need to have a "title" of their own? What if you can pick skills and feats/traits/whatever that can make your fighter do what a paladin does in traditional D&D?

 

I'm probably hoping for more character build customization options than a larger number of traditional classes.

 

[Merin]

Bottom line: Paladin good and evil is a child's good and evil. [...] Paladins just don't make sense in PE.

 

Quote of the day: "I don't like a class, so they must be childish" ^^

 

But seriously, if you don't like Paladins, then that is okay. I don't really like Monks either, but I know that many people enjoy this class and that is why I think they should be in the game. It is as simple as that.

 

Are we just voting on classes, and are limited to certain ones?

 

If we're playing that game, I'm spending all my votes on getting rid of rogues. And I'll buy some votes, too.

 

....

 

or, we could just let Obsidian see how many people want them and decide if the next (increasingly unlikely to be reached) stretch goal would make sense to include Bards & Paladins.

 

I think that's better. Let us pay for it, and the "resources needed" will be the stretch goal.

[Ieo]

Answer about paladins from Feargus, today's Kickstarter Q&A brought to you by Ink Blot:

 

Question: Will the classes be extremely close to the old DnD style or are they going to have their own unique flavor?

 

Feargus: They will have the DnD feeling but with some fun twists. In other words, not that there will be Paladins, , but if there were to be Paladins - they will feel like them but be tied into how magic and the gods work in the world of PE.

 

I much prefer this approach with "paladin"--the word is just way too loaded with underlying expectation of alignment and everything else.

Edited October 5, 2012 by Ieo

[Sistergoldring]

@curryinahurry - yeah I think everyone gets that I think we're really just pushing for them to be a 'supported 'subclass in game and so have some sort of in-game reactivity to the choice to play as one. At least that's been my interpretation of the comments, I don't think there would be too much complaining if this was how Obsidian chose to implement them.

Do they really need to have a "title" of their own? What if you can pick skills and feats/traits/whatever that can make your fighter do what a paladin does in traditional D&D?

 

I'm probably hoping for more character build customization options than a larger number of traditional classes.

 

I don't think this is mutually exclusive. I think you can have a flexible system and still include traditional subclasses without it being a huge drain on resources. Where the titles have importance is that when people choose these I guess iconic roles to play they want to have who they are reflected in the game. So for someone playing as a Paladin it would be frustrating for them if in-game they were reacted to as a standard healer cleric. The same would go for a bard, you want to be treated as a wandering minstrel rather than as a catburgler - does that make sense? Also in a text based game I can't see why this would be a problematic feature for them to include. After all it's largely a matter of typing 'Hello Lord-Knight' instead of 'Hello Holy Father' I imagine.

[Amentep]

The problem is how is the game going to recognize that you have fallen if it doesn't log some kind of "morality points"?

Paladin would belong to an order, so having to maintain a high (very high) faction rating?

[Lady Evenstar]

I think that classes should be rooted in the lore of the universe and fill a distinct role in the combat/skill systems of the game. If paladins and bards satisfy those criteria, then sure. If they don't, then no.

[NOK222]

People need to stop underestimating the power of metal.

[Gorth]

@curryinahurry - yeah I think everyone gets that I think we're really just pushing for them to be a 'supported 'subclass in game and so have some sort of in-game reactivity to the choice to play as one. At least that's been my interpretation of the comments, I don't think there would be too much complaining if this was how Obsidian chose to implement them.

Do they really need to have a "title" of their own? What if you can pick skills and feats/traits/whatever that can make your fighter do what a paladin does in traditional D&D?

 

I'm probably hoping for more character build customization options than a larger number of traditional classes.

 

I don't think this is mutually exclusive. I think you can have a flexible system and still include traditional subclasses without it being a huge drain on resources. Where the titles have importance is that when people choose these I guess iconic roles to play they want to have who they are reflected in the game. So for someone playing as a Paladin it would be frustrating for them if in-game they were reacted to as a standard healer cleric. The same would go for a bard, you want to be treated as a wandering minstrel rather than as a catburgler - does that make sense? Also in a text based game I can't see why this would be a problematic feature for them to include. After all it's largely a matter of typing 'Hello Lord-Knight' instead of 'Hello Holy Father' I imagine.

Makes sense. I guess are preferences are just different

 

Not sure if I can explain mine eloquently, but I prefer to be acknowledged for my actions (i.e. the faction reputation) rather than a preset class. If I show my ugly face and the villagers flee screaming away from me, I want to be because I've killed a larger number of "villager class" and so they have come to fear me, not because I picked "Barbarian" as my starting preset. I know it's not going to happen to that level of detail, but one could always hope.

 

[curryinahurry]

@curryinahurry - yeah I think everyone gets that I think we're really just pushing for them to be a 'supported 'subclass in game and so have some sort of in-game reactivity to the choice to play as one. At least that's been my interpretation of the comments, I don't think there would be too much complaining if this was how Obsidian chose to implement them.

Do they really need to have a "title" of their own? What if you can pick skills and feats/traits/whatever that can make your fighter do what a paladin does in traditional D&D?

 

I'm probably hoping for more character build customization options than a larger number of traditional classes.

 

This is what I was getting at with my post, agreed. I think that if people want honorifics, then Obsidian can possibly include them with factions (quests for a religious order re paladin type, or guild membership for bard type). But I wouldn't want Obsidian to waste a lot of time on these features.

[Sistergoldring]

 

Not sure if I can explain mine eloquently, but I prefer to be acknowledged for my actions (i.e. the faction reputation) rather than a preset class. If I show my ugly face and the villagers flee screaming away from me, I want to be because I've killed a larger number of "villager class" and so they have come to fear me, not because I picked "Barbarian" as my starting preset. I know it's not going to happen to that level of detail, but one could always hope.

 

You know I 100% agree with you. I think where it gets interesting for people who do choose to play as a 'defined' subclass like Paladin is that in addition to being treated poorly for their choices they want the villagers to react with a ' (horrified) I thought you were here to save us!' response and hopefully get kicked out of their order if they accumulate enough evil deeds (or just piss off the wrong faction). People who like playing this way want expectations on their behaviour even if they are going all out to disappoint those expectations because of what they are supposed to represent.

[Osvir]

Couldn't a Rogue be a Bard though? Seems to fit in the spectrum of it.

Fighter/Priest = Paladin?

[Sistergoldring]

Couldn't a Rogue be a Bard though? Seems to fit in the spectrum of it.

Fighter/Priest = Paladin?

 

Yes they could but without recognition the choice is meaningless.

[Tamerlane]

Couldn't a barbarian be a fighter?

[NOK222]

Couldn't a barbarian be a fighter?

 

Couldn't and elf be a human?

[jivex5k]

Yeah I'd love to see a bard in this game!

Different instruments would be tight.

Ultima Online had the coolest bard skills, but it was still very limited.

The songs could be treated as spells.

[Hiro Protagonist II]

Couldn't a Rogue be a Bard though? Seems to fit in the spectrum of it.

 

I don't see how. A Rogue is more Fighter oriented with stealth and sneak attacks, whereas the Bard is more on the Mage side of things with spells and songs. Bards have an arcane source similar to Mages.

[Hypevosa]

Couldn't a Rogue be a Bard though? Seems to fit in the spectrum of it.

 

I don't see how. A Rogue is more Fighter oriented with stealth and sneak attacks, whereas the Bard is more on the Mage side of things with spells and songs. Bards have an arcane source similar to Mages.

 

except here where everyone can take power from souls for certain things. In this universe a bard could easily be a rogue who has learned to channel soul into music and spell instead of focusing on stealth powers.

[Osvir]

Couldn't a barbarian be a fighter?

 

Couldn't and elf be a human?

 

Couldn't a human be a dwarf?

 

EDIT:

 

http://en.wikipedia..../Rogue_(vagrant)

A rogue is a vagrant person who wanders from place to place. Like a drifter, a rogue is an independent person who rejects conventional rules of society in favor of following their own personal goals and values.

 

Reading this Wikipedia makes me feel more like a Bard is a Rogue, specially after reading con artist in there somewhere xD

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bard

Edited October 5, 2012 by Osvir

[Hypevosa]

Couldn't a barbarian be a fighter?

 

Couldn't and elf be a human?

 

Couldn't a human be a dwarf?

 

that raises an interesting question.

[ImNotCreative]

Couldn't a barbarian be a fighter?

 

Couldn't and elf be a human?

 

Couldn't a human be a dwarf?

 

Yes, yes and yes. Have you never role played an elf who is actually a human (race reassignment surgery) but thinks that he is dwarf?

Edited October 5, 2012 by ImNotCreative

[Hiro Protagonist II]

 

Couldn't a human be a dwarf?

 

They already are.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dwarfism

 

How many dwarfs in real life do you know that aren't human?