test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Vote for new race/class on Neverwinter
candinho2
Member Posts: 550 Arc User
i'n starting this thread to maybe crypt listen to players wishes and we all get new races/classes to play, let's us the players choose what we want, the mostly voted race/class get in xD it'll be nice and fair.
I vote on Dragonborn race and warlock or sorcerrer class
I vote on Dragonborn race and warlock or sorcerrer class
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Roland Mac Sheonin GF | Tarron Direheart SW |
As new classes/races == more income from returning players or current players who decide to roll another alt, I doubt there will be a hiatus until the balancing is fixed.
I'm sure you are right. Doesn't change my view/vote on it though.
Roland Mac Sheonin GF | Tarron Direheart SW |
for a class, i would love to play a Monk
Class: Scourge Warlock, Psion,archer/melee Warlord , Blackguard/Original Paladin, and maybe Draconic Sorcerer to go along with the Dragonborn. Maybe Vampire and Swordmage or Bladesinger.
Anything after those three I wouldn't have a clue.
And there is the concept as mentioned above: rather than a whole new class, there could simply be new Paragon paths, for example isn;t a Warlock basically just another Wizard by a different name (and circumstances) in general? I can easily see the Wizard class having a "Scourge Warlock" paragon path - and that (I guess) would be much easier to implement than an completely new stand-alone class (which I'd be okay with).
Cryptic Studios is being cryptic about it, tho'
I know, just saying I'd be okay with it if that were the case.
A Psion is different enough to be another class. I hadn't thought of that one.
Druids, Paladins, Illusionists...etc are hybrids and I think would be better off as paragon paths. Some classes have limited utility in this game and new classes have a high potential to diminish the utility of some existing classes. Groups, dungeons, and skirmishes are limited to 5 people. If a druid, for example, can replace a DC, what will DCs do? If a Paladin can effectively tank as well as a GF, with healing, who will want a GF in the group?
Both Sorcerers and Warlocks, however, are strikers. Sorcerers in 3.5 were always better blasters, because they had the ability to pick and choose from their spell list however they wanted, choosing the right spell for the right time, as long as they knew it. in 4e, they're blasters, plain and simple, doing massive damage to a single target and a small area around him. that's the purpose of a striker, after all. On top of this, the whole "Bloodline powers" thing manifests in a lot of ways that are very different from book magic. Learning the arcane secrets of the multiverse is cool and all, but without the background of study and contemplation over obtuse lore and obscure tomes, a sorcerer is just much more likely to breathe fire on things as toss a lightning bolt. It's completely different.
Warlocks, even as far back as 3.5 when they were first introduced, have always had a thing with doing incredible damage to a single target. in 4e, that focus is on DoT effects while maintaining mobility and a large level of tankiness for a ranged class. They have a mix of control abilities, damage, and self-preservation in the form of Temporary HP and short range teleports and concealment that simply doesn't exist among other classes. The fluff is entirely different from the above as well - you said it yurself, where a wizard enters cheat codes into the universe and a sorcerer uses their innate powers (usually dragon-blooded powers), a Warlock is directly channeling the hells, the feywild, the shadowfel, or the power of eldritch beings from beyond the stars. Why, for all that's holy, would that act the same way as wizard magic than a cleric's magic would work the same way. It's the same concept; conduit for energy from a stronger being or plane, but it's on a whole different level.
Druids are their own class too. Rangers and Rogues are different while accomplishing the same thing - striker class. A ranger and druid aren't even similar though, because a druid is another conduit, but this time for natural energies, the essence of the world at large. you have a guy that could very possibly shapeshift into some kind of animal, and likely wields a staff when he's not in direct combat so to be able to better cast his spells. He's not shooting a bow or dual-wielding daggers. He's a controller, a spellcaster, not a striker.
Paladin is the same way. Yes, they're a defender class, but they are not the guardian fighter, and because of the parallels I doubt they'd ever use both, leaning more in favor of a warlord, which would bring a melee leader class into the game, which would be absolutely wonderful. It's different from the fighters in that the fighters run up and start bashing things. Warlords give tactical planning on positioning, encouragement to heal their allies, increase damage, and similar. They're not just another run-up-and-hit-it class.
As for illusionists, conjurers, necromancers, and other specialists in a form of magic, yes, those are appropriate as paragon paths, but that's because they're already sub-classes of wizard. I've even been mulling around a conjurer paragon path in my head for a while now that I'm thinking I might pitch to the community at large.
As for Psions, we're unlikely to see them. besides mind flayers, which are an iconic DnD monster from all the way back in 1st edition, psionics is a largely niche thing that doesn't apply to a wider audience.
[ Support Center • Rules & Policies and Guidelines • ARC ToS • Guild Recruitment Guidelines | FR DM Since 1993 ]