If you wanted another class...

[bronzepoem]

Now we have Ziets join, they should give us two new companions! not classes!

8 companions is too less than BG2!

[general_azure]

Steam power and clockworks is probably pushing it way too far, but I wouldn't mind some crazy guy with a freaking big siege crossbow and a bag of bombs. Call it a sapper if engineer sounds too techy.

 

Actually, I'd prefer more races instead of yet more classes though. 11 is quite enough, especially if multiclassing makes it into the game.

[norolim]

Other: witcher

[Ieo]

Now we have Ziets join, they should give us two new companions! not classes!

8 companions is too less than BG2!

 

Nah-- Feargus on Kickstarter Q&A just today:

Question: Please make sure, that we've got additional companions on 2,9M+ stretch goals...

 

Feargus: I don't know if we are going to talk about any more companions at this point. To reinforce what Crosmando said, the ones we are doing will be very indpeth - so they take a lot of time. However, during development we will be constantly evaluating if we can add more to the game - like another companion or two.

 

So.... Yeah, I think we're good on companions and classes for PE right now. World content and quests (chains even!), more of that.

 

A companion or two for the expansion would be interesting.

Edited October 10, 2012 by Ieo

[Lady Evenstar]

I'd already prefer that they eliminate have the classes already announced and make them achievable as variants of the base classes.

[Osvir]

Other: Dragoon or Dragon Knight.... hmm... would be interesting to see a completely new take on it "Kragoon"!!

 

However, like Ieo and others say, I think we've got enough classes for now. Additional classes either in expansions, further down development (if there's an idea, time and money for it) or future installments (sequels, prequels, next IP etc. etc.).

[Monte Carlo]

None of the above, there are almost too many already.

[Demsale]

I want something like a Lich.

[Monte Carlo]

^ I am a lich. Please feel free to ask me about it, I won't spare the blushes.

 

* nose drops off. Again *

[IchigoRXC]

I think having a game play element that transforms a party member or yourself into a Lich is interesting, removing the soul and putting it elsewhere (like the phylactery) however makes me feel you would only get weaker rather than stronger. It would have to have its own lore and twist which makes it different to the standard Lich I reckon.

 

Dragon knight/dragoon/Kragoon/whatever could be done similarly, a dragon becomes your patron.

Demonologist could be the same but swap dragon for demon (or whatever this world holds for us)

[BasaltineBadger]

No more classes. Definitely not anything with "shadow" in the name; how overdone and boring.

 

11 classes is already a bit too much, I was pretty happy with 3 classes. I really hate classes like Barbarian or Priest. Because that mean that for example every priest have to wear heavy armors in battles, cast divine spells and use blunt weapons. Because warrior or a wizard cannnot be priest, even if they warship god of war, goodness of magic or something. Not to mention normal people. Class should describe your skills/fighting style, not your goddamn lifestyle.

 

Wrong game. This isn't D&D.

 

There is still a class called priest which implies that priests possess unique form of combat abilities and I don't like that. Priests should be a profession like smiths or mercenaries, not classes. If you don't have "priest class" every priest you encounter can be a warrior, a mage or just guy without any abilities, with that class you can be sure that he'll poses some form of combat abilities. The same goes for other professions. If they added "nobleman" as a class you could be sure that almost every nobleman would be a member of that class while now member of every class can be a nobleman.

[MiCkO]

The main classes seems good, 11 is alot. I'm allready having a hard time picking my protagonist class for my first playthrough.

Some subclasses to add diversity, but I'm allready satisfied. I want to know about lore/story now

[Ieo]

No more classes. Definitely not anything with "shadow" in the name; how overdone and boring.

 

11 classes is already a bit too much, I was pretty happy with 3 classes. I really hate classes like Barbarian or Priest. Because that mean that for example every priest have to wear heavy armors in battles, cast divine spells and use blunt weapons. Because warrior or a wizard cannnot be priest, even if they warship god of war, goodness of magic or something. Not to mention normal people. Class should describe your skills/fighting style, not your goddamn lifestyle.

 

Wrong game. This isn't D&D.

 

There is still a class called priest which implies that priests possess unique form of combat abilities and I don't like that. Priests should be a profession like smiths or mercenaries, not classes. If you don't have "priest class" every priest you encounter can be a warrior, a mage or just guy without any abilities, with that class you can be sure that he'll poses some form of combat abilities. The same goes for other professions. If they added "nobleman" as a class you could be sure that almost every nobleman would be a member of that class while now member of every class can be a nobleman.

 

Which is all well and good; I was just pointing out your dislike per "that mean that for example every priest have to wear heavy armors in battles, cast divine spells and use blunt weapons" <---Those are D&D limitations.

 

About classes and profession differences, that's a hard one to split apart in the gaming class tradition, it seems. Is being a druid a way of life or a class? Monk? Or even ranger? Really, the only classes that make any sense by your definition would be only fighter and wizard. Possibly. I get what you're saying, but it seems to be a long tradition in fantasy RPGs that these things are mixed together.

[Erollisi Marr]

Nuff classes already. I still voted for the necromancer/demonologist thing however because thats of the mages domain. As far as anyones concerned, its potentially already in.

 

And thats a good thing.

[Moonlight Butterfly]

I'd like a witch doctor. Can't get enough of turning people into frogs or at least making them think they are frogs, which is probably more amusing.

 

That said I really like the Enchantress from DOTA 2 (bear with me) She can convert enemies, when enemies attack they gets slowed attack speed because she enchants them and enemies take more damage the further she is away. She can also slow enemies and heal over time. http://www.dota2wiki.com/wiki/Enchantress

 

I really like those skills, it seems like something different. I play her a lot.

[Darth Trethon]

I'd like a witch doctor. Can't get enough of turning people into frogs or at least making them think they are frogs, which is probably more amusing.

 

That said I really like the Enchantress from DOTA 2 (bear with me) She can convert enemies, when enemies attack they gets slowed attack speed because she enchants them and enemies take more damage the further she is away. She can also slow enemies and heal over time. http://www.dota2wiki...iki/Enchantress

 

I really like those skills, it seems like something different. I play her a lot.

 

Sounds like fun.....but that's pretty much the kinds of powers a Cipher would have....

[Osvir]

I think having a game play element that transforms a party member or yourself into a Lich is interesting, removing the soul and putting it elsewhere (like the phylactery) however makes me feel you would only get weaker rather than stronger. It would have to have its own lore and twist which makes it different to the standard Lich I reckon.

 

Dragon knight/dragoon/Kragoon/whatever could be done similarly, a dragon becomes your patron.

Demonologist could be the same but swap dragon for demon (or whatever this world holds for us)

 

A bit off-topic:

Oooh... that is something I personally always have wanted in an RPG... "To tame a Dragon", I can see it as a tedious difficult task of course and if you fail you fail (You need to bring it down to 1-10 HP, give it a couple of status effects and be ready with a poké ba... net~ or whatever else you need to capture a Dragon). Now Dragon's are crazy wise and all that... I would love to be able to make a Dragon submit after either a long and hard struggle or a long chain of quests getting some Dragon kryptonite then forcing it to obey your command.

[Bill Gates' Son]

Would love to see a form of a shaman in this game. Just a class that deals with hexing, the spirits, totems the primal elementals, etc.

 

And Druids are not Shamans; Shamans are neither tree hugers nor shapeshifters

Edited October 10, 2012 by Bill Gates' Son

[vv221]

Necromancer could be a wizard kit, shaman and shapeshifter druid ones.

Black Night could be a specific way to play an evil priest.

 

Anyway, technomancer is a great idea !

[FlintlockJazz]

I'm with the ones saying enough classes already, I think we need more actual companions. However, if they were to add another class, I would like to suggest some form of fighter-mage. I know that's a multiclass, but I think it works better as an actual class of it's own. The reason being, as much as I love playing them before being a multiclass often means you are either over-powered as you are able to do roles as well as others or you are too weak as you are not really good at either one, becoming a jack of trades master of one in a party where having specialists is better. And when it does work the powers still often don't mesh that well together, sure you can sometimes get buffing spells to help with your fighting or the extra hit points help your survivability, but the former is often just compensating for being reduced in martial capability anyway.

 

In short, the reason why I propose it should be a class instead of a multiclass is because the latter usually ends up with a split focus. By making it a single class you can apply one focus to it and build the abilities around it like normal, for instance let me propose the following two classes:

 

Spellsword: This would be a martial class that works like a fighter who uses spells to aid in his fighting. Not only does he cast a limited selection of spells but he can cast them through his weapon, perhaps attuning his sword to different elements at will or stunning those he hits. Consider the Witcher with his signs, spells that aid his swordplay, but also with the ability to cast through his sword and do nifty stuff. This class could also perhaps be called swordmaster and is often some sort of weapon master in other systems who uses chi or something to achieve the same things but it's the lore that's different (personally I think it also works like the monk, who could be said to be a spellsword too who uses his fists instead, in fact I would prefer that they gave the monk the option to use weapons and strip the name monk from him instead, giving us a spellsword who does the same thing but without the associated monk-baggage like they did with the bard by making it the chanter).

 

Battlemage: A more martial version of the mage, this guy still acts like a mage with some combat training and wears armour. Since PE already has mages in armour and the devs have stated that they view their mages as being tougher and combat ready as it is so this class might be redundant anyway as the PC mage class at least seems to be pretty much a battlemage.

 

Just random splurgings of a rabbit, I love talking **** it seems.

 

Would love to see a form of a shaman in this game. Just a class that deals with hexing, the spirits, totems the primal elementals, etc.

 

And Druids are not Shamans; Shamans are neither tree hugers nor shapeshifters

 

Proper druids were not tree huggers either. Proper druids were more like Herne the Hunter from Robin of Sherwood TV series. Oh and Wicker Man stuff, pile your 'offering' in and set fire to him...

Edited October 10, 2012 by FlintlockJazz

[BasaltineBadger]

No more classes. Definitely not anything with "shadow" in the name; how overdone and boring.

 

11 classes is already a bit too much, I was pretty happy with 3 classes. I really hate classes like Barbarian or Priest. Because that mean that for example every priest have to wear heavy armors in battles, cast divine spells and use blunt weapons. Because warrior or a wizard cannnot be priest, even if they warship god of war, goodness of magic or something. Not to mention normal people. Class should describe your skills/fighting style, not your goddamn lifestyle.

 

Wrong game. This isn't D&D.

 

There is still a class called priest which implies that priests possess unique form of combat abilities and I don't like that. Priests should be a profession like smiths or mercenaries, not classes. If you don't have "priest class" every priest you encounter can be a warrior, a mage or just guy without any abilities, with that class you can be sure that he'll poses some form of combat abilities. The same goes for other professions. If they added "nobleman" as a class you could be sure that almost every nobleman would be a member of that class while now member of every class can be a nobleman.

 

Which is all well and good; I was just pointing out your dislike per "that mean that for example every priest have to wear heavy armors in battles, cast divine spells and use blunt weapons" <---Those are D&D limitations.

 

About classes and profession differences, that's a hard one to split apart in the gaming class tradition, it seems. Is being a druid a way of life or a class? Monk? Or even ranger? Really, the only classes that make any sense by your definition would be only fighter and wizard. Possibly. I get what you're saying, but it seems to be a long tradition in fantasy RPGs that these things are mixed together.

 

I wasn't meant that priest will behave like dnd one, just that every priest will behave like a member of priest class (which could mean using blunt weapons if that's the limitation) which means that other classes won't be able to do his job which I don't like. I also dislike other classes you mention. Priest can just be a magic-user who specializes in healing magic (you can call him white necromancer), Paladin a magic-warrior, Druid a nature-mage, thief a stealth expert etc. This would allow players to make druids who are stealthy warriors hen they are adventuring.

[Gyor]

3.5 Binder from Tome of Magic.

[Kilroy_Was_Here]

I'm conflicted. I'd like to see something really unique that we've never seen before. But at the same time I can't think of any examples, because everything I can come up with comes to mind because I have already been it somewhere before...

[Gyor]

The Necromancer/summoner maybe taken by either the Cleric or the Wizard. The Cleric has "Divine summons" and the Wizard "Conjure Nightmares".

[Nixl]

I voted for necromancer, but allowing for subspecializations certainly strikes a compromise.