Once I got a Cleric Companion to heal my Guardian Fighter, I never needed potions again. So I love'em. I did have to send her away for training every once in a while, and it started to take a pretty long time (30 minutes to train from level 12 to 13) so it's a good thing I had my trusty Hawk to fill in.
I think they're great and it's very D&D. Two thumbs up.
I used training opportunities to go take care of maintenance; praying, auctioning, vendoring, etc. However, if you're ever stuck with "I need this pet upgrade right now, and I don't want to wait", you can pay for the convenience, and with a currency that can be obtained in several different ways, including real money if you're REALLY in a hurry.
0
Options
doctorcomicsMember, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Guardian Users, Silverstars, Neverwinter Knight of the Feywild UsersPosts: 0Arc User
edited February 2013
Right. I saw that. But I figure, that's why I have multiple companions. Heck, I even got a second cleric as a quest reward at level 27, so I could bounce between them if I really wanted.
Once I got a Cleric Companion to heal my Guardian Fighter, I never needed potions again. So I love'em. I did have to send her away for training every once in a while, and it started to take a pretty long time (30 minutes to train from level 12 to 13) so it's a good thing I had my trusty Hawk to fill in.
So you can have one "pet" out at a time, right?
How many "pets" can you own at one time?
I say "pet" because I personally don't like the idea of having another 'person' following around that is my "pet".
I prefer "devoted Follower". :cool:
Once I got a Cleric Companion to heal my Guardian Fighter, I never needed potions again. So I love'em. I did have to send her away for training every once in a while, and it started to take a pretty long time (30 minutes to train from level 12 to 13) so it's a good thing I had my trusty Hawk to fill in.
I think they're great and it's very D&D. Two thumbs up.
I dont see how does it have any D&D feel , players never rolled with npc's attached to themselfs all the time. Expect pet classes. Ye from time to time some npc's joined the party to guide them or fight by their side, but they did it for poruse and after that was served they left off to live their own life. On pen/paper D&D Pc-s never/raerly had this, its not dnd at all. They shold be allowed while soloing (soloing = youre on youre own, but whatever) or missing pary slots thats all , or some feat instead of pets, dunno. Its killing the DnD feel of it for sure.
0
Options
doctorcomicsMember, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Guardian Users, Silverstars, Neverwinter Knight of the Feywild UsersPosts: 0Arc User
edited February 2013
Daytona, we have three companion slots at present, only one of which can be summoned. I don't refer to my Cleric as a pet either! Now, Hawky, he's a pet.
Velzebur, there's along tradition in DnD of players hiring henchmen and attracting followers, especially to fill out gaps in your party. Don't have a cleric? Hire one. Need a tracker to lead you to the goblin cave? Hire one. And that's exactly what we're doing here. My Fighter needs healing, so I get a cleric NPC to come with me. Players in my games are always asking to buy a dog or a falcon or whatever, to bring into the dungeon. So it looks totally DnD to me.
I dont see how does it have any D&D feel , players never rolled with npc's attached to themselfs all the time. Expect pet classes. Ye from time to time some npc's joined the party to guide them or fight by their side, but they did it for poruse and after that was served they left off to live their own life. On pen/paper D&D Pc-s never/raerly had this, its not dnd at all. They shold be allowed while soloing (soloing = youre on youre own, but whatever) or missing pary slots thats all , or some feat instead of pets, dunno. Its killing the DnD feel of it for sure.
You used (older editions for sure) to be able to have Henchmen in PnP. The number of was guided by your Charisma. Even a Charisma of 2 could have 1 Henchmen. I'm not sure where you get this "never/rarely" from, except that maybe that was an issue between you and your DM. If DM says they don't want to manage Henchmen and bars them from his game, then that's his right as DM.
Although Henchmen have appeared in some editions of the PnP rules and not in others, I doubt there are many DMs in the world that would respond to a player saying "I'm going to walk into that bar and hire some guys with all this gold we have" with "you can't do that!"
Henchmen have always been possible in D&D, to players who merely had the vision to ask.
You used (older editions for sure) to be able to have Henchmen in PnP. The number of was guided by your Charisma. Even a Charisma of 2 could have 1 Henchmen. I'm not sure where you get this "never/rarely" from, except that maybe that was an issue between you and your DM. If DM says they don't want to manage Henchmen and bars them from his game, then that's his right as DM.
We played 3.5 in the Forgotten realms with darkfantasy flavour. But it realy doesnt matter because , this is not real D&D or any kind of roleplay this is an mmorpg (action combat). But sure i can understand owning a pet , if the player realy feels the connection between the animal and him/herself. Devote time , patience and effort to train it and realy bring it to life, its cool.(pet classes :P) And it realy doenst matter if there is +1-2 npc with the party the DM can make any encounter as challenging as it wants. In pen/papper it is quite irrevelant, if pet's make youre game better or some of youre players will feel more connection to the game, why not.
But in a mmorgp its all about numbers (mostly) and pets give unfair advantage, or ye you just have to use one!
Also remember that a Druid would most likely have a Companion and a summoned Pet(s) at his disposal and most of his powers would be pet buff based...
Regardless of people having companions Beastmaster/Druids would still be unique in gameplay mechanics...
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
0
Options
aavariusMember, Neverwinter Beta Users, SilverstarsPosts: 0Arc User
edited February 2013
I have NO IDEA what Cryptic's working on in the office right now, but I think people should be open to the idea that the word "druid" may not have any pets related to it if/when it ever comes out as a class. I can see lots of ways where a D&D druid class could be totally pet free. In fact, there's just as much tradition for rangers to have pets. Personally, I'd rather see a pet-based wizard, but that's just me.
lanessar13Member, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Guardian Users, SilverstarsPosts: 8Arc User
edited February 2013
Honestly, you don't NEED a companion. I could solo most of the content without a companion (in fact, I did on several occasions when my companion was training).
You're not forced.
About the only time you'd NEED a companion is the final area quest (the bosses for these are difficult), or in instanced combat (where most groups will just tell you to get out your companion). And even those aren't required. You can group up with another player and complete the content just as easily.
You don't have to use them. I was about 23rd level, in the Swordcoast area, and my cleric had to go off for 33 minutes to train. I was shocked at how effective I was without my pocket healer. I plan to use my cleric, but I am happy I don't need her all the time.
You give em a pet they complain, you dont they complain...:P
Personally i like em, if i dont want it out...dismiss
This^
Pets are great - don't like 'em don't use 'em.
THIS IS CLERIC AGGRO IN BW3
0
Options
krediosMember, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Guardian UsersPosts: 2Arc User
edited February 2013
Don't mean to necro the thread, but I have to throw my two cents in, especially after some long-winded discussion about Companions in the game with a good friend of mine.
It seems like a lot of the information I've been getting about companion effectiveness relates to people actually playing by themselves or questing. People saying once they got their Cleric companion that it made healing potions a moot point as they no longer needed them. Which brings me to my first question, how exactly effective are the companions? Another post mentioning that rock golems were able to hold threat. Now, that's nice and all for questing and leveling by yourself, but how does this translate to doing dungeons with friends? From what videos I've seen, specifically Force's videos, 5 people going into a dungeon all with their companions out seems like a bit of a cluster****. Just an overload of information on screen that really doesn't need to be there.
How effective are companions in these dungeons? Can the cleric companions heal enough in the dungeons? Can the rock golems effectively hold threat in dungeons? If they can, then why even bring a group? Why have a companion replace another human player in a social game such as an MMO? If they can't, then why even allow them to come into the picture in the first place? Why not limit companions from being summonable in party groups? Why have that overload of information get in the way of playing in a dungeon with your friends?
I understand that if I don't like the companions, I can just dismiss them. I'm not refuting that.
But, at what point do the companions eclipse the effort put forth through players? As an example, imagine a guardian fighter and four rogues go into a dungeon. Not a single cleric player. Can they all just whip out their cleric companions and go forward without a hitch? Where is the line drawn?
But, at what point do the companions eclipse the effort put forth through players? As an example, imagine a guardian fighter and four rogues go into a dungeon. Not a single cleric player. Can they all just whip out their cleric companions and go forward without a hitch? Where is the line drawn?
Well, on my Guardian Fighter, I found that the Cleric companion was not even able to effectively heal me when I did solo instances, assuming I played sloppily enough to need healing or did not heal myself. By this I mean that without the Cleric companion I did just fine playing carefully, blocking, using Fighter's Recovery and, when necessary, using a potion or two. If I stopped playing carefully in the hopes that the Cleric companion would be able to keep me standing, I would die. In short, the Cleric did not help me out too much; it was noticeable, but fairly minor. Granted, my Cleric companion was something like level 6, so it is entirely possible that it was underleveled and undergeared.
In groups, I found the companions to be barely noticeable, save for them crowding the area.
I cannot specifically answer your question regarding whether five Cleric companions could keep a group of five alive without a real Cleric from actual experience, but from what I saw, no. Unless that group can survive on just skill and potions alone, they will likely need a real Cleric.
0
Options
bruddajokkaMember, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Hero Users, Neverwinter Knight of the Feywild UsersPosts: 447Bounty Hunter
edited February 2013
Good god cry some more...don't like them don't use them. I like them. It's a nice throwback to NWN1, and 2.
0
Options
krediosMember, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Guardian UsersPosts: 2Arc User
edited February 2013
No, henchman and companions in NWN1 and 2 served the same function as they did in BG and BG2. As party members. When you were tactically moving your party members into position and queueing up abilities in a paused game.
This game is not an infinity engine game, nor is it a top-down, party-controlling RPG. It's an MMO.
Further, The only characters who had companions were Rangers and Druids with their animal companions and Wizards with their Familiars. Not every single class.
I'm not crying about them and I'll use them as I see fit, not as you deign.
Well, on my Guardian Fighter, I found that the Cleric companion was not even able to effectively heal me when I did solo instances, assuming I played sloppily enough to need healing or did not heal myself. By this I mean that without the Cleric companion I did just fine playing carefully, blocking, using Fighter's Recovery and, when necessary, using a potion or two. If I stopped playing carefully in the hopes that the Cleric companion would be able to keep me standing, I would die. In short, the Cleric did not help me out too much; it was noticeable, but fairly minor. Granted, my Cleric companion was something like level 6, so it is entirely possible that it was underleveled and undergeared.
In groups, I found the companions to be barely noticeable, save for them crowding the area.
I cannot specifically answer your question regarding whether five Cleric companions could keep a group of five alive without a real Cleric from actual experience, but from what I saw, no. Unless that group can survive on just skill and potions alone, they will likely need a real Cleric.
I tested out companions/pets extensively in the last beta. I tried the wolf, the cleric and the mage over a large range of levels.
I also did the same content without them.
In most cases I found the pets made a very small difference over all, and were even a detriment in certain situations (dragging more enemies into the combat then I would have by myself).
As you level them up, and equip them with better bonuses, they do become more useful. The wolf was quite able to take down multiple enemies himself. The mage....killed from range, but much slower. The cleric was mostly good for healing out of combat, allowing you to save potions for in combat.
None of them to the mid 20's were a major advantage in combat, and none at all were "MANDATORY" to complete content...by yourself, let alone in a party.
They do give a little splash of flavor though. A mage adds a bit of CC and ranged damage...which is quite nice if your character is melee only. It also stays back so is less likely to get swarmed or start combat on you with enemies your not ready to fight.
The wolf does fairly decent damage...not incredible (not even 1/2 as much as the rogue..but a decent amount compared to the cleric). I can see the wolf making a fairly decent DPS difference at higher levels.
The priest can make a guardian who is already hard to kill...that much harder to kill solo, although I bet it will be the best with rogues/GWF's who are in melee without alot of defense.
Each companion/pet has it's own advantages and that enables characters to customize how they play a bit more. There are not a ton of customization options right now for each class...most players are going to be fairly similar to each other. The companion system is one way to differentiate yourself from other players, and I think it's done quite well currently.
Nobody is ever forced to use a pet/companion though. You can finish all content without one that we have seen so far (and it would have to get MUCH harder before that wasn't true...at which point I doubt the companion would help you much anyway).
Even if you DID eventually find content you could not solo without a pet/companion, you could just party with someone else instead.
I will say all the pet/companions in the 5 man dungeons was a bit annoying. I think over time people will naturally just put them away since they are totally not needed and it makes it harder for the real player clerics to target people that need healing etc.
If you don't have a cleric in your 5 man party...then having a few companion clerics out might be nice (saving on potions a bit), otherwise.....I think putting em away might be a good idea. Thats personal preference though and who knows if the community will come up with something like that eventually.
0
Options
walkerMember, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Hero UsersPosts: 0Arc User
edited February 2013
you know I was thinking they could do a similar thing to SWTOR
in that you have a party of 5.... so people can bring companions to match that.... aka if I have 2 people both can have a companion making the group 4.... if I have 3 two people (the party leader and 1st to join party) 4 only party leader will.... and 5 nope no one
UNTILL they add a pet based class.... if the class uses pets they are allowed to use an animal based companion even when the party is otherwise full.... I think this helps balance dungeon groups from being an outright zerg fest (its hard to feel outmatched when theres bloody 10 of you)
thats just the first thought on my mind anyway
0
Options
ganiriesMember, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Guardian UsersPosts: 0Arc User
edited February 2013
it makes it harder for the real player clerics to target people that need healing
Definitely this. During the more challenging group events in the first CBT, healing was much more difficult with everyone's companions out. The direct healing anyway. I ended up relying on aoe and reactive type healing instead. If the mechanics of targeting and/or locking are kept in, I can easily see people not using some companions.
Certain companions did stay at ranged distance, so they were less of a problem. But the wolf and man-at-arms were all mixed in with the guardian fighters and trickster rogues. I believe the wizard and cleric companions stayed away from mobs (at least when first aggro'ed).
I'm fine with companions overall. The only thing that seems a little silly, is that with the slots for them, I could see a group all summoning the cleric for extra heals or something like that. Especially as months go by and more companions are released, I could see them being used in ways the developers hadn't really intended. Maybe, I don't know.
0
Options
zurjekMember, Neverwinter Beta UsersPosts: 14Arc User
edited February 2013
Companions that are slotted (not including idle companions), but are not summoned should give a small passive bonus. If you summon the companion, the passive bonus is lost.
The companions passive bonus could either be random, or maybe opposite of what the companions role is since you're not likely to use a companion that mimics the role you already fill.
This way you could use a pet and benefit, or not use a pet and benefit. Even if you do use a pet, your extra companion slots that are not in use would still benefit you as well.
0
Options
ofkathriaMember, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Hero Users, Neverwinter Guardian Users, Silverstars, Neverwinter Knight of the Feywild UsersPosts: 0Arc User
edited February 2013
I really don't understand the whole "if it gives you an advantage, you are forced to use it" mentality. In all the MMOs I've played, I've probably made hundreds of decisions about my characters' build or equipment for the sake of flavor where another choice would have made them functionally more optimal. And not once have I ever been kicked out of a group because of those choices.
And yet, even on those many occasions upon which I decided not to use my Longsword of Awesomesauce +5 because my Longsword of Awesomesauce +4 looked so much cooler, I still managed to be an effective and valued member of the team in spite of my "disadvantage."
Will some group leaders boot players for not using their pets? Yeah, probably. But there will also be group leaders booting players because they look too much like an ex-girlfriend* of theirs, or because they think elves are stupid. There are plenty of jackasses to be found anywhere on the internet. But there are a great many more decent, tolerant, friendly human beings who have no problem whatsoever if you decide to forgo that extra .001 DPS.
So why are people complaining about not getting to team up with the jackasses?
*I initially typed "girlfiend" here. I'm not sure what that says about me.
The companions do very little, really. They don't begin to compare to another actual player group member. They're much weaker than companions/pets in other games that I can think of.
You definitely do not need to use them, and in fact I think groups would be better off unsummoning them when they run the five-person dungeon delves.
I was personally hoping for an STO style game play as far as companions go. Bridge officers were awesome over there. If you wanted to solo, which I always do unless I am with close friends (I do not PUG, no matter how desperate) then bringing your bridge crew was the way to go. And they took up party slots. And if I wanted to do the endgame content, such as STFs, which did not allow companions, THEN I grabbed friends and acknowledged that I actually thought they were my friends (just kidding, friends LOL).
The way the descriptions a while back sounded, I was expecting the same here, but never saw such a setup happen in Neverwinter. I am hoping that may change in the future. I love having bridge officers and if we get that ability in Neverwinter it would be awesome.
A lot of you may have been seeing me defend this game to the teeth against criticism and such, but on this post I definitely have to agree with the OP. I VERY heavily believe that ONLY Ranger classes in these types of MMO games should be able to have companion pets. Even a Founder with the cat or dire wolf - enable it for their Ranger classes, but not others. Other classes are not one with Nature, as is emphasized in the D&D series and other fantasy genre lores.
If the Devs read this then, yes . . .
Pets only to Rangers please.
Non-pet (humanoid) companions as extra AI like your BOFFs in STO, please.
Thanks.
EDIT: Adding: @ ganiries I absolutely LOVE your graphics . . . sweet job. And as a healer I agree on your issues with the mechanics as well. Targeting as a healer here in NW is hard enough without a bunch of companions in the way (whether my party likes it or not I do NOT waste heals on AI . . . ever . . . only players get heals when in battle when lives are on the line).
zebularMember, Neverwinter Moderator, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 15,270Community Moderator
edited March 2013
Just wanted to say, I played a few times in the last Beta Weekend with no companion and never felt like I needed to use one. When I did use one though, it was a welcome addition.
I want to be able to play the game the way I want to. Not the way another player want or think that I should. If I want to use a pet/companion, then I want to make that decision. I really dont like the "Pets are wrong, Nobody should have them" attitude. Just seems kind of selfish (IMO).
I've said this in similar threads. It is an OPTION. OPTIONS are good. This means you have a choice. So I really hope the DEV's do not take away this option from everyone because a few dont like them.
If I'm in a dungeon and the Healer says "Can everyone stow their pets? I may have a hard time healing if they are out". Then guess what..I'll stow my pet. It has been my experience that Healers and Tanks can run a party. So if pets/companions are getting in your way, LEAVE. In a short amount of time people will learn to listen.
Just remember MMOs are social games so learn how to communicate. Yes, it may be a pain and people may not always do what you want. But if ASKED the decent ones will or tell you why not. Those who do otherwise I wouldn't want to group with them anyways.
0
Options
zebularMember, Neverwinter Moderator, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 15,270Community Moderator
I want to be able to play the game the way I want to. Not the way another player want or think that I should. If I want to use a pet/companion, then I want to make that decision. I really dont like the "Pets are wrong, Nobody should have them" attitude. Just seems kind of selfish (IMO).
I've said this in similar threads. It is an OPTION. OPTIONS are good. This means you have a choice. So I really hope the DEV's do not take away this option from everyone because a few dont like them.
If I'm in a dungeon and the Healer says "Can everyone stow their pets? I may have a hard time healing if they are out". Then guess what..I'll stow my pet. It has been my experience that Healers and Tanks can run a party. So if pets/companions are getting in your way, LEAVE. In a short amount of time people will learn to listen.
Just remember MMOs are social games so learn how to communicate. Yes, it may be a pain and people may not always do what you want. But if ASKED the decent ones will or tell you why not. Those who do otherwise I wouldn't want to group with them anyways.
Well said. Communication is the key to having a great party. Indeed. I know I would happily stow a pet if asked.
I enjoy companions, if only because it adds an additional mechanic to explore and have fun with. Companions can be collected, leveled, and equipped. They can shore up a weakness you may have, or augment a strength further. Plus, it is pretty cool to have a virtual slave following you around, doing your bidding and keeping you company. Ultimately, it adds a lot of extra content, and it is completely optional. I have not yet seen a single instance where a companion was necessary to do anything.
As for whether only a Druid or Ranger should have an animal companion, well, I can understand the lore reasoning against it. To be honest, I would not mind if only Druids or Rangers could use animal companions; I would hope that the Hero of the North and Guardian of Neverwinter packages got changed so the companion was usable to more than classes that do not presently exist, though!
However, this is one of those cases where gameplay and what the average player wants will trump the source material. Players like their hawks, wolves, and other animals, and most do not care whether a Guardian Fighter, for example, should have one. Also, is this a case where not following the source material is a grave sin? To some, perhaps, but I do not feel it is a large problem.
Comments
I used training opportunities to go take care of maintenance; praying, auctioning, vendoring, etc. However, if you're ever stuck with "I need this pet upgrade right now, and I don't want to wait", you can pay for the convenience, and with a currency that can be obtained in several different ways, including real money if you're REALLY in a hurry.
Seven Against Thay: An RP-Focused Guild for all Races and Classes
So you can have one "pet" out at a time, right?
How many "pets" can you own at one time?
I say "pet" because I personally don't like the idea of having another 'person' following around that is my "pet".
I prefer "devoted Follower". :cool:
Neverwinter Wiki
I dont see how does it have any D&D feel , players never rolled with npc's attached to themselfs all the time. Expect pet classes. Ye from time to time some npc's joined the party to guide them or fight by their side, but they did it for poruse and after that was served they left off to live their own life. On pen/paper D&D Pc-s never/raerly had this, its not dnd at all. They shold be allowed while soloing (soloing = youre on youre own, but whatever) or missing pary slots thats all , or some feat instead of pets, dunno. Its killing the DnD feel of it for sure.
Velzebur, there's along tradition in DnD of players hiring henchmen and attracting followers, especially to fill out gaps in your party. Don't have a cleric? Hire one. Need a tracker to lead you to the goblin cave? Hire one. And that's exactly what we're doing here. My Fighter needs healing, so I get a cleric NPC to come with me. Players in my games are always asking to buy a dog or a falcon or whatever, to bring into the dungeon. So it looks totally DnD to me.
Seven Against Thay: An RP-Focused Guild for all Races and Classes
You used (older editions for sure) to be able to have Henchmen in PnP. The number of was guided by your Charisma. Even a Charisma of 2 could have 1 Henchmen. I'm not sure where you get this "never/rarely" from, except that maybe that was an issue between you and your DM. If DM says they don't want to manage Henchmen and bars them from his game, then that's his right as DM.
Neverwinter Wiki
Henchmen have always been possible in D&D, to players who merely had the vision to ask.
We played 3.5 in the Forgotten realms with darkfantasy flavour. But it realy doesnt matter because , this is not real D&D or any kind of roleplay this is an mmorpg (action combat). But sure i can understand owning a pet , if the player realy feels the connection between the animal and him/herself. Devote time , patience and effort to train it and realy bring it to life, its cool.(pet classes :P) And it realy doenst matter if there is +1-2 npc with the party the DM can make any encounter as challenging as it wants. In pen/papper it is quite irrevelant, if pet's make youre game better or some of youre players will feel more connection to the game, why not.
But in a mmorgp its all about numbers (mostly) and pets give unfair advantage, or ye you just have to use one!
Regardless of people having companions Beastmaster/Druids would still be unique in gameplay mechanics...
You're not forced.
About the only time you'd NEED a companion is the final area quest (the bosses for these are difficult), or in instanced combat (where most groups will just tell you to get out your companion). And even those aren't required. You can group up with another player and complete the content just as easily.
This^
Pets are great - don't like 'em don't use 'em.
It seems like a lot of the information I've been getting about companion effectiveness relates to people actually playing by themselves or questing. People saying once they got their Cleric companion that it made healing potions a moot point as they no longer needed them. Which brings me to my first question, how exactly effective are the companions? Another post mentioning that rock golems were able to hold threat. Now, that's nice and all for questing and leveling by yourself, but how does this translate to doing dungeons with friends? From what videos I've seen, specifically Force's videos, 5 people going into a dungeon all with their companions out seems like a bit of a cluster****. Just an overload of information on screen that really doesn't need to be there.
How effective are companions in these dungeons? Can the cleric companions heal enough in the dungeons? Can the rock golems effectively hold threat in dungeons? If they can, then why even bring a group? Why have a companion replace another human player in a social game such as an MMO? If they can't, then why even allow them to come into the picture in the first place? Why not limit companions from being summonable in party groups? Why have that overload of information get in the way of playing in a dungeon with your friends?
I understand that if I don't like the companions, I can just dismiss them. I'm not refuting that.
But, at what point do the companions eclipse the effort put forth through players? As an example, imagine a guardian fighter and four rogues go into a dungeon. Not a single cleric player. Can they all just whip out their cleric companions and go forward without a hitch? Where is the line drawn?
Well, on my Guardian Fighter, I found that the Cleric companion was not even able to effectively heal me when I did solo instances, assuming I played sloppily enough to need healing or did not heal myself. By this I mean that without the Cleric companion I did just fine playing carefully, blocking, using Fighter's Recovery and, when necessary, using a potion or two. If I stopped playing carefully in the hopes that the Cleric companion would be able to keep me standing, I would die. In short, the Cleric did not help me out too much; it was noticeable, but fairly minor. Granted, my Cleric companion was something like level 6, so it is entirely possible that it was underleveled and undergeared.
In groups, I found the companions to be barely noticeable, save for them crowding the area.
I cannot specifically answer your question regarding whether five Cleric companions could keep a group of five alive without a real Cleric from actual experience, but from what I saw, no. Unless that group can survive on just skill and potions alone, they will likely need a real Cleric.
This game is not an infinity engine game, nor is it a top-down, party-controlling RPG. It's an MMO.
Further, The only characters who had companions were Rangers and Druids with their animal companions and Wizards with their Familiars. Not every single class.
I'm not crying about them and I'll use them as I see fit, not as you deign.
Thanks so much for this, I appreciate it.
I also did the same content without them.
In most cases I found the pets made a very small difference over all, and were even a detriment in certain situations (dragging more enemies into the combat then I would have by myself).
As you level them up, and equip them with better bonuses, they do become more useful. The wolf was quite able to take down multiple enemies himself. The mage....killed from range, but much slower. The cleric was mostly good for healing out of combat, allowing you to save potions for in combat.
None of them to the mid 20's were a major advantage in combat, and none at all were "MANDATORY" to complete content...by yourself, let alone in a party.
They do give a little splash of flavor though. A mage adds a bit of CC and ranged damage...which is quite nice if your character is melee only. It also stays back so is less likely to get swarmed or start combat on you with enemies your not ready to fight.
The wolf does fairly decent damage...not incredible (not even 1/2 as much as the rogue..but a decent amount compared to the cleric). I can see the wolf making a fairly decent DPS difference at higher levels.
The priest can make a guardian who is already hard to kill...that much harder to kill solo, although I bet it will be the best with rogues/GWF's who are in melee without alot of defense.
Each companion/pet has it's own advantages and that enables characters to customize how they play a bit more. There are not a ton of customization options right now for each class...most players are going to be fairly similar to each other. The companion system is one way to differentiate yourself from other players, and I think it's done quite well currently.
Nobody is ever forced to use a pet/companion though. You can finish all content without one that we have seen so far (and it would have to get MUCH harder before that wasn't true...at which point I doubt the companion would help you much anyway).
Even if you DID eventually find content you could not solo without a pet/companion, you could just party with someone else instead.
I will say all the pet/companions in the 5 man dungeons was a bit annoying. I think over time people will naturally just put them away since they are totally not needed and it makes it harder for the real player clerics to target people that need healing etc.
If you don't have a cleric in your 5 man party...then having a few companion clerics out might be nice (saving on potions a bit), otherwise.....I think putting em away might be a good idea. Thats personal preference though and who knows if the community will come up with something like that eventually.
in that you have a party of 5.... so people can bring companions to match that.... aka if I have 2 people both can have a companion making the group 4.... if I have 3 two people (the party leader and 1st to join party) 4 only party leader will.... and 5 nope no one
UNTILL they add a pet based class.... if the class uses pets they are allowed to use an animal based companion even when the party is otherwise full.... I think this helps balance dungeon groups from being an outright zerg fest (its hard to feel outmatched when theres bloody 10 of you)
thats just the first thought on my mind anyway
Definitely this. During the more challenging group events in the first CBT, healing was much more difficult with everyone's companions out. The direct healing anyway. I ended up relying on aoe and reactive type healing instead. If the mechanics of targeting and/or locking are kept in, I can easily see people not using some companions.
Certain companions did stay at ranged distance, so they were less of a problem. But the wolf and man-at-arms were all mixed in with the guardian fighters and trickster rogues. I believe the wizard and cleric companions stayed away from mobs (at least when first aggro'ed).
I'm fine with companions overall. The only thing that seems a little silly, is that with the slots for them, I could see a group all summoning the cleric for extra heals or something like that. Especially as months go by and more companions are released, I could see them being used in ways the developers hadn't really intended. Maybe, I don't know.
The companions passive bonus could either be random, or maybe opposite of what the companions role is since you're not likely to use a companion that mimics the role you already fill.
This way you could use a pet and benefit, or not use a pet and benefit. Even if you do use a pet, your extra companion slots that are not in use would still benefit you as well.
And yet, even on those many occasions upon which I decided not to use my Longsword of Awesomesauce +5 because my Longsword of Awesomesauce +4 looked so much cooler, I still managed to be an effective and valued member of the team in spite of my "disadvantage."
Will some group leaders boot players for not using their pets? Yeah, probably. But there will also be group leaders booting players because they look too much like an ex-girlfriend* of theirs, or because they think elves are stupid. There are plenty of jackasses to be found anywhere on the internet. But there are a great many more decent, tolerant, friendly human beings who have no problem whatsoever if you decide to forgo that extra .001 DPS.
So why are people complaining about not getting to team up with the jackasses?
*I initially typed "girlfiend" here. I'm not sure what that says about me.
The Wood Lord's Curse
Part I: Wild Man of the Wood
Part II: The Warlord's Tomb
You definitely do not need to use them, and in fact I think groups would be better off unsummoning them when they run the five-person dungeon delves.
The way the descriptions a while back sounded, I was expecting the same here, but never saw such a setup happen in Neverwinter. I am hoping that may change in the future. I love having bridge officers and if we get that ability in Neverwinter it would be awesome.
A lot of you may have been seeing me defend this game to the teeth against criticism and such, but on this post I definitely have to agree with the OP. I VERY heavily believe that ONLY Ranger classes in these types of MMO games should be able to have companion pets. Even a Founder with the cat or dire wolf - enable it for their Ranger classes, but not others. Other classes are not one with Nature, as is emphasized in the D&D series and other fantasy genre lores.
If the Devs read this then, yes . . .
Thanks.
EDIT: Adding: @ ganiries I absolutely LOVE your graphics . . . sweet job. And as a healer I agree on your issues with the mechanics as well. Targeting as a healer here in NW is hard enough without a bunch of companions in the way (whether my party likes it or not I do NOT waste heals on AI . . . ever . . . only players get heals when in battle when lives are on the line).
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
[ Support Center • Rules & Policies and Guidelines • ARC ToS • Guild Recruitment Guidelines | FR DM Since 1993 ]
I've said this in similar threads. It is an OPTION. OPTIONS are good. This means you have a choice. So I really hope the DEV's do not take away this option from everyone because a few dont like them.
If I'm in a dungeon and the Healer says "Can everyone stow their pets? I may have a hard time healing if they are out". Then guess what..I'll stow my pet. It has been my experience that Healers and Tanks can run a party. So if pets/companions are getting in your way, LEAVE. In a short amount of time people will learn to listen.
Just remember MMOs are social games so learn how to communicate. Yes, it may be a pain and people may not always do what you want. But if ASKED the decent ones will or tell you why not. Those who do otherwise I wouldn't want to group with them anyways.
[ Support Center • Rules & Policies and Guidelines • ARC ToS • Guild Recruitment Guidelines | FR DM Since 1993 ]
As for whether only a Druid or Ranger should have an animal companion, well, I can understand the lore reasoning against it. To be honest, I would not mind if only Druids or Rangers could use animal companions; I would hope that the Hero of the North and Guardian of Neverwinter packages got changed so the companion was usable to more than classes that do not presently exist, though!
However, this is one of those cases where gameplay and what the average player wants will trump the source material. Players like their hawks, wolves, and other animals, and most do not care whether a Guardian Fighter, for example, should have one. Also, is this a case where not following the source material is a grave sin? To some, perhaps, but I do not feel it is a large problem.