No news about a new class or race in the Mod 9 Patch notes.
Alas, it's been known for a couple months now that there would not be a new race or class in Mod 9. It's been stated so in several live streams and mentioned here and there on the forums.
But when can we expect new classes? I was kinda hoping that it would be a more of priority than introducing new modules, since then D&D basics are not even in there.
If we are considering business models, sure, you gotta build a business up slowly. But when it comes to games and expansions, you put in the basics first and then put in the expansions (new modules in this case). At the moment, we are still missing the basics (basic classes in this case: figther, wizard, rogue, bard, druid, cleric, monk, paladin etc.) but the expansions (module updates and new features) are already in. This policy will create a lot more headache to the Devs in the long run.
Understanding that there are several other matter that people are concerned with (queue issues, coalescent wards, etc.), I believe that this game, which is heavily based on D&D, is missing one of the more interesting classes of the classic: The Bard. A class that normally does little damage on the battle field, but fills fellow adventurers' hearts with courage and enemies with fear. This unlikely warrior has been tasked with keeping the spirits of the downhearted uplifted with spirituous songs of valor and the occasional cup of spirits for generations; Yet, there is not a sight of one anywhere in this world - a world full of bandits, ferocious beasts, undead, dragons, evil cultists, and demons streaming from the abyss with their lords. I propose that it is in these times that we could all use a little more uplifting.
they can simply add a transmute to gwf's which makes them fight barehanded imo. would not differ from a monk class Hell they can sell it as a pack in the zen store too pack of the monk - transmute your fireaxe into ....nothing and your chain armor into a funny robe (maybe reuse peasant's tunic as a transmute).
Please fix Zhentarim Warlock companion's skill "Arcane Warping" to the originally intended "Arcane Boost" zhentarim-warlock-companion
I'd love a Bard myself, but we need to focus on class balance before adding a new one in.
Call me Andy (or Strum, or Spider-Man)! Follow Neverwinter on Twitter: NeverwinterGame Like Neverwinter on Facebook: Neverwinter Follow me on Twitter: StrumSlinger
i have playing in my head for awhile for "theme" module/chapters for druids when they become avialable.
"Watchers of Chauntea", "Nature's Gaurdians", or maybe "The Return of Dark Pool"
and for the Bards when if they get released in chapters of.... "Songs of Saurals", "Whisper of Azure Bond", or "Master Harper's Lost Songs", perfect for reintroduction of saurals, the dinosuar folks as new playable race as seen in Azure Bond series.
and the monks, and we know few pun names for chapters. The Fists of Fury", but can change to "Fists of Monkey", and "Wraith of poo flinger" oops, not that chapter, let go back up with better theme name, what about "Master of Shaolins", perfect for part of Kara-Tur module adventures when the "wandering monks" settled in sword coast looking for students to train.
they all need perfect storyline when these new class get released in future modules.
i got few cool names for these assocaited class lockboxes. Greenman's Trove Lockbox Harper's Puzzle Lockbox Shaolin Legacy Lockbox
I'd love a Bard myself, but we need to focus on class balance before adding a new one in.
Yeah...but this is why you should have created every base class at the beginning, (bard, druid, monk) included. Instead you added warlock which is barely a base class.
The problem with druids: many of their nature themed spells are already made with the HR. They are healers and spell casters which we already have: DC and OP. Summon animal? SW already have the 'pet' mechanic. Not sure where their niche could be.
The problem with bards: a class based purely on support won't be viable because there are already classes who can fill that role with their feats. Groups were designed to be 3 dps, 1 healer and 1 tank. Add in a support class and basically you have 1 class who will have to buff 2 dps'ers to down epic bosses? I've played bards in other MMO's: they attack with musical notes ... really? Bards sound cool, but many of their DnD spells are not meant for video games; this video game any way. "Dancing Lights: Creates torches or other lights." "Detect Magic: Detects spells and magic items within 60 ft." "Prestidigitation: Performs minor tricks." See what I mean?
The problem with bards: a class based purely on support won't be viable because there are already classes who can fill that role with their feats. [...]
The introduction of a new classes is not based on if there are existing classes which can fill that role, but because players want it or because other reasons.
Take bard for example, of course we know DC can fill that role, but some players might have no desire to play a divine leader and would like to try out a arcane leader instead.
Barbarian - GWF Bard - unnecessary class Druid - palladin healdin or DC Monk - Palladin tank Sorcerer - CW/SW actually we have in game DC's buffers/debuffers, GWF's tanks or DPS, GF DPS or BUFF, CW controller or DPS, SW DPS or unnecessary heal, TR/HR DPS, palladin healer or protector.. You want nerf Palladin to be a rag in game.. Yes, my main is OP and i like protect ppl in my pt, if you really need nerf, dont nerf 99% skills for prot to 30-40%, so if bubble now have 20s you want 6s, get only 12-15s..
After seeing the changes about paladin and how paladins raged about those changes,I have a suspicion that it is time to announce next class.Also it is perfect chance to make people create another overpowered,abused class.I hope I am wrong and there is not some hidden agenda behind this Paladin balance(massacre)
0
ghoulz66Member, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 3,748Arc User
The problem with bards: a class based purely on support won't be viable because there are already classes who can fill that role with their feats. [...]
The introduction of a new classes is not based on if there are existing classes which can fill that role, but because players want it or because other reasons.
Take bard for example, of course we know DC can fill that role, but some players might have no desire to play a divine leader and would like to try out a arcane leader instead.
True, but if you have a class that can heal and support vs a class that can only support, which are you going to take with you into dungeons? Therefor bards will get the short end of the stick unless they can fill some kind of niche that the other classes can't.
The problem with bards: a class based purely on support won't be viable because there are already classes who can fill that role with their feats. [...]
The introduction of a new classes is not based on if there are existing classes which can fill that role, but because players want it or because other reasons.
Take bard for example, of course we know DC can fill that role, but some players might have no desire to play a divine leader and would like to try out a arcane leader instead.
True, but if you have a class that can heal and support vs a class that can only support, which are you going to take with you into dungeons? Therefor bards will get the short end of the stick unless they can fill some kind of niche that the other classes can't.
Bard is a leader class, it can heal. In fact, if we get bard, it will be only the 2nd leader class in the game. So options, in this case, are a good thing. Or should we remove 3 of the 4 striker classes we currently have, because one might be better then the others?
I'm just saying, be careful with your with this line of argument, monk, after all, is another striker. The one class type we already have an abundance of. Do we really honestly need a 5th striker?
The problem with bards: a class based purely on support won't be viable because there are already classes who can fill that role with their feats. [...]
The introduction of a new classes is not based on if there are existing classes which can fill that role, but because players want it or because other reasons.
Take bard for example, of course we know DC can fill that role, but some players might have no desire to play a divine leader and would like to try out a arcane leader instead.
True, but if you have a class that can heal and support vs a class that can only support, which are you going to take with you into dungeons? Therefor bards will get the short end of the stick unless they can fill some kind of niche that the other classes can't.
Bard is a leader class, it can heal. In fact, if we get bard, it will be only the 2nd leader class in the game. So options, in this case, are a good thing. Or should we remove 3 of the 4 striker classes we currently have, because one might be better then the others?
I'm just saying, be careful with your with this line of argument, monk, after all, is another striker. The one class type we already have an abundance of. Do we really honestly need a 5th striker?
A healing bard who can support is basically another DC. Unless they make him excel at something, maybe single target heals. They would really need to make something unique about the class to make it viable.
The strikers on the other hand are all unique in their own way. A TR is supposed to be good at single target bosses, GWF is good at off-tanking, HR is good at range. SW is more of a ranged TR with good sustained dps vs burst. It was also Cryptic's attempt at the 'summon pet' mechanic which kind of turned out to be just another dot. A CW is control.
Considering the new classes were, range, caster, tank/healer, another striker would be nice.
You cant have it both ways. You cant say all strikers can be different. Yet all other class types are useless because the will duplicate themselves. Id like to think that WotC has done this long enough that leader classes can do similar jobs yet still remain unique. After all Paladin didn't kill DC or GF. Ranger or Warlock didn't kill CW, despite all the doom before hand. There is no reason at all to believe Bard wont have a place as well. Or Druid as an optional controller.
Both, have more unique skills to offer, and far more diversity then another striker. After all, where would monk fit? Another single target boss killer like TR? Another off-tank like GWF? We even got a duel wielding melee striker with HR.
Not that it really matters, Polls have indicated monk is popular, but it has in each and every single poll always come in behind some other class. Perhaps after a few more classes come up, monk might finally get reach the top. But I don't expect it to happen before either bard or druid.
The problem with bards: a class based purely on support won't be viable because there are already classes who can fill that role with their feats. [...]
The introduction of a new classes is not based on if there are existing classes which can fill that role, but because players want it or because other reasons.
Take bard for example, of course we know DC can fill that role, but some players might have no desire to play a divine leader and would like to try out a arcane leader instead.
True, but if you have a class that can heal and support vs a class that can only support, which are you going to take with you into dungeons? Therefor bards will get the short end of the stick unless they can fill some kind of niche that the other classes can't.
Bard is a leader class, it can heal. In fact, if we get bard, it will be only the 2nd leader class in the game. So options, in this case, are a good thing. Or should we remove 3 of the 4 striker classes we currently have, because one might be better then the others?
I'm just saying, be careful with your with this line of argument, monk, after all, is another striker. The one class type we already have an abundance of. Do we really honestly need a 5th striker?
A healing bard who can support is basically another DC. Unless they make him excel at something, maybe single target heals. They would really need to make something unique about the class to make it viable.
The strikers on the other hand are all unique in their own way. A TR is supposed to be good at single target bosses, GWF is good at off-tanking, HR is good at range. SW is more of a ranged TR with good sustained dps vs burst. It was also Cryptic's attempt at the 'summon pet' mechanic which kind of turned out to be just another dot. A CW is control.
Considering the new classes were, range, caster, tank/healer, another striker would be nice.
Bard is a leader class so it can heal, as sockmunkey said. Yet bard is noticeably different from cleric. From what I have learned from 4e rulebooks, bard does not have as many healing powers as cleric has, but it has a large amount of powers which can buff/debuff. At least 80% of bard powers not only deal damage, but also buff allies or debuff foes. That makes bard a superior buffer/debuffer. I really was impressed when I read that. That apparently is where bard excels at.
I reckon druid'll be next, and i favor it. At the moment, we have ONE controller (Wizard) and ONE class with the Nature skill. Plus, druid in DnD is more than pop out pet(s), heal and support. You could (in 4e) make a bug-themed druid that could transform into a swarm. Druids can use spears in DnD, and other such things. Of course, i'm a sucker for most of the other classes as well. That said, Cryptic will need to be cautious not to over-represent one particular theme. If you put the bard and the sorcerer in, you'll have four arcane classes. There are also a few classes that aren't listed (as mentioned before in the form of Warlord) that could still be considered, both from fourth edition as well as Next.
0
romotheoneMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 729Arc User
@ianthewizard2012 The current state of the game cannot handle more buffers/debuffers. Content is extremely easy because of these effects. Everyone has to stop thinking in terms of "Dnd this, Dnd that...", this is an MMO with the name DnD in it to appeal for a larger audience and to milk the cash-cow, but you guys have to understand that each and every problem this game has is an MMO issue, which cannot be solved by a 1:1 implementation of the DnD rules. I feel like Cryptic is trying too hard to remain true to these rules and it's a big part of the issue. They chose a limiting environment, DnD players want a class to work a certain way because they got used to it from a certain ruleset. I know this problem too well, this isn't the first game that had to suffer under this.
Comments
[ Support Center • Rules & Policies and Guidelines • ARC ToS • Guild Recruitment Guidelines | FR DM Since 1993 ]
If we are considering business models, sure, you gotta build a business up slowly. But when it comes to games and expansions, you put in the basics first and then put in the expansions (new modules in this case). At the moment, we are still missing the basics (basic classes in this case: figther, wizard, rogue, bard, druid, cleric, monk, paladin etc.) but the expansions (module updates and new features) are already in. This policy will create a lot more headache to the Devs in the long run.
And - personally - I dont need more classes if the current ones are not balanced.
druids are late, and they are not ready, and many want monks, but still up in the discussions.
Hell they can sell it as a pack in the zen store too
zhentarim-warlock-companion
Pure -> Transcendent Plague Fire weapon enchantment giving 80damge/20 seconds for 500k+ AD is a joke.
plague-fire-weapon-enchant-r11-vs-r12
Call me Andy (or Strum, or Spider-Man)!
Follow Neverwinter on Twitter: NeverwinterGame
Like Neverwinter on Facebook: Neverwinter
Follow me on Twitter: StrumSlinger
When they will be released and what they are are pure player speculation.
Players have suspected that Druids will be the next class for a long time but there has never been any such claim by Cryptic or PWE.
i have playing in my head for awhile for "theme" module/chapters for druids when they become avialable.
"Watchers of Chauntea", "Nature's Gaurdians", or maybe "The Return of Dark Pool"
and for the Bards when if they get released in chapters of....
"Songs of Saurals", "Whisper of Azure Bond", or "Master Harper's Lost Songs", perfect for reintroduction of saurals, the dinosuar folks as new playable race as seen in Azure Bond series.
and the monks, and we know few pun names for chapters.
The Fists of Fury", but can change to "Fists of Monkey", and "Wraith of poo flinger" oops, not that chapter, let go back up with better theme name, what about "Master of Shaolins", perfect for part of Kara-Tur module adventures when the "wandering monks" settled in sword coast looking for students to train.
they all need perfect storyline when these new class get released in future modules.
i got few cool names for these assocaited class lockboxes.
Greenman's Trove Lockbox
Harper's Puzzle Lockbox
Shaolin Legacy Lockbox
arcgames.com/en/forums/neverwinter#/discussion/1214492/new-class-suggestion-mystic-monk-dont-worry-its-not-a-panda
The problem with bards: a class based purely on support won't be viable because there are already classes who can fill that role with their feats. Groups were designed to be 3 dps, 1 healer and 1 tank. Add in a support class and basically you have 1 class who will have to buff 2 dps'ers to down epic bosses? I've played bards in other MMO's: they attack with musical notes ... really? Bards sound cool, but many of their DnD spells are not meant for video games; this video game any way.
"Dancing Lights: Creates torches or other lights."
"Detect Magic: Detects spells and magic items within 60 ft."
"Prestidigitation: Performs minor tricks."
See what I mean?
That leaves the best option: the monk
Take bard for example, of course we know DC can fill that role, but some players might have no desire to play a divine leader and would like to try out a arcane leader instead.
Bard - unnecessary class
Druid - palladin healdin or DC
Monk - Palladin tank
Sorcerer - CW/SW
actually we have in game DC's buffers/debuffers, GWF's tanks or DPS, GF DPS or BUFF, CW controller or DPS, SW DPS or unnecessary heal, TR/HR DPS, palladin healer or protector..
You want nerf Palladin to be a rag in game.. Yes, my main is OP and i like protect ppl in my pt, if you really need nerf, dont nerf 99% skills for prot to 30-40%, so if bubble now have 20s you want 6s, get only 12-15s..
I'm just saying, be careful with your with this line of argument, monk, after all, is another striker. The one class type we already have an abundance of. Do we really honestly need a 5th striker?
The strikers on the other hand are all unique in their own way. A TR is supposed to be good at single target bosses, GWF is good at off-tanking, HR is good at range. SW is more of a ranged TR with good sustained dps vs burst. It was also Cryptic's attempt at the 'summon pet' mechanic which kind of turned out to be just another dot. A CW is control.
Considering the new classes were, range, caster, tank/healer, another striker would be nice.
Both, have more unique skills to offer, and far more diversity then another striker. After all, where would monk fit? Another single target boss killer like TR? Another off-tank like GWF? We even got a duel wielding melee striker with HR.
Not that it really matters, Polls have indicated monk is popular, but it has in each and every single poll always come in behind some other class. Perhaps after a few more classes come up, monk might finally get reach the top. But I don't expect it to happen before either bard or druid.
That said, Cryptic will need to be cautious not to over-represent one particular theme. If you put the bard and the sorcerer in, you'll have four arcane classes. There are also a few classes that aren't listed (as mentioned before in the form of Warlord) that could still be considered, both from fourth edition as well as Next.