Where's my dual greatsword wielding wizard?

werealchemist · July 2013

Don't worry ill take two levels in fighter, weapon focus ,two weapon fighting, monkey grip, and channel touch

yeah I know this games not based off 3.5 but it's not D&D either.

xhrit · July 2013

3.5 was pure garbage, built for the kind of munchkins and twinks who only know how to roll play, not know how to role play.

psychicslug · July 2013

for those who want full story read this for short attention spans and those who just don't want to hear my ramblings skip to bottom for short version

I have played all versions of D&D from the basic box sets to 1st edition AD&d to 2end edition D&D to the hybrid system with the books between that and the 3.0 system the 3.5 which was the patched version of 3.0 but still was prone to metagaming and all that stated above, 4th which is a book version of an mmo as you could get to D&D and now the 5th edition which is a combination of all the basic system is 3.5 ish with add on options to make it simple or as complex as you want which I like the 5th version so far more so than all the others due to I like options.
This game is an mmo and does a poor job of giving the variety that the D&D game is known for as of late, now I understand it is just starting out and is free to play. This does not excuse the fact that everything in game to add any level of variety or complexness to the game cost real money. Unless you do the whole conversion thing with the diamonds which is a tactic to make it easy to just buy the stuff out right. I for one fell prey to this and after some research on the matter will not do it any more, I will play the game with what I have and will not spend money on anything else in the game ever again. As for the choice of race and classes you should have started with at minimum the basic ones, and if diving them the way you are give enough paths and choices to let us make what the basic heroes we want.
I thought hey this is awesome I wanted to play a bow ranger wait cant do that no ranger, ok how about a fighter with a bow no can not do that as well. Ok how about the Iconic dwarven warrior with an ax no ax and have only found one That I had to buy to just to change the sword to look like an ax. even then the animations are still the same as if you had a sword and some just look odd, which make me wonder with the small closed maps the limited class and choice options and races, animations, weapon selection, being locked into a single weapon style and in some cases type. I wonder how long it took to make as the graphics are not top notch and game play is bugged at times ( but this affects most games anyway), I ask when will I see improvement if this is it and we have a single quest with very small variation with other races on this main quest line, then the game will just tapper off.
I myself have played Wow and never got more than a few levels I hated the look of the game and the way the classes worked, guild wars 2 looks very pretty and loved the alternative quest lines and the amount of content but the reason why I am not here is well due to races, everything else in the game was great but the races were too odd and I hated it. Now going back to a game That to this day I still have an account on and do check on is vangard (if you don't know about it check it out it is old but the amount of stuff it started with dwarfs this and most others aside from wow as of now that is. This game had everything but was buggy as hell and the graphic is very dated now. but started with so much variety that it was a bit overwhelming 3 big massive islands each race had unique abilities and 3 starting areas I think there was like 8 or more races and classes and each character could be a diplomat, adventure, crafter and think there was a 4th not sure. there was shipbuilding, player houses city options later on mounts pets the list goes on.
My point being this game is to survive it needs to get its stuff together quick stop just taking in the money start to do give back something to the people who have been here. This is a call to you cryptic give us variety, give us our D&D like you stated you would, the classes, the abilities, the options to make the type of heroes we want and do it soon.

Short version for those who don't want to read the wall of text

(cryptic give us variety, give us our D&D like you stated you would, the classes, the abilities, the options to make the type of heroes we want and do it soon)

aepervius1972 · July 2013

xhrit wrote: »

3.5 was pure garbage, built for the kind of munchkins and twinks who only know how to roll play, not know how to role play.

LOL. No. 3.5 Offers the most possibility to munchkin, but whether your DM do it or not is up to the 3-5 people you play with. I played a lot of 3.0 and 3.5 and did have a lot of "roleplay" type chars. But 4.0 from what I can see is the worst for "roll" play indeed. You can role play with a bad or good system. Heck you can roleplay with a system WITHOUT dice (Amber). But you can never have bouts of munchkin funs with a bad system. And let us be honest, between big campaign, some of us like to let go for 1 adventure or two. 4.0 is such a bad system. 3.5 is very good.

Summary TL;DR : you can roleplay with both 3.5 and 4.0 but 4.0 offers much less posibility and feels constrained.

kamaliicious · July 2013

werealchemist wrote: »

Don't worry ill take two levels in fighter, weapon focus ,two weapon fighting, monkey grip, and channel touch

yeah I know this games not based off 3.5 but it's not D&D either.

With the two weapon fighting to hit penalty, plus the monkey grip to hit penalty, plus the terrible bab of wizards, you'd be lucky to hit a combat dummy.

werealchemist · July 2013

kamaliicious wrote: »

With the two weapon fighting to hit penalty, plus the monkey grip to hit penalty, plus the terrible bab of wizards, you'd be lucky to hit a combat dummy.

Obviously not the point. the point is that i want to be able to make whatever character i want and not be limited to a single archetype using a single weapon[type] and only able to use one type of armor. I don't care if i get 50% spell failure chance, if i want to carry around a tower shield for whatever purpose i should be able to.

tinkerstorm · July 2013

aepervius1972 wrote: »

LOL. No. 3.5 Offers the most possibility to munchkin, but whether your DM do it or not is up to the 3-5 people you play with. I played a lot of 3.0 and 3.5 and did have a lot of "roleplay" type chars. But 4.0 from what I can see is the worst for "roll" play indeed. You can role play with a bad or good system. Heck you can roleplay with a system WITHOUT dice (Amber). But you can never have bouts of munchkin funs with a bad system. And let us be honest, between big campaign, some of us like to let go for 1 adventure or two. 4.0 is such a bad system. 3.5 is very good.

Summary TL;DR : you can roleplay with both 3.5 and 4.0 but 4.0 offers much less posibility and feels constrained.

A rule set that forces you to use miniatures to play a combat scenario (purely out of greed so the company can sell miniatures to you) effectively eliminates role-play and forces everyone to roll play. I'm sorry you've never actually played a role-playing game. 3.5 sucks as much as 4.0. In fact, everything WoTC has ever done is pure suckage.

zahinder · July 2013

Third edition allowed a lot of flexibility, but it's VERY hard to offer a lot of flexibility without opening up the opportunity for massive abuse.

Most point systems, for example, lay out the need for a GM to exercise a lot of judgement in making characters, because it's often trivial to do abusive stuff in those very flexible systems. And chasing after 'control' in a system to try to keep people from breaking the system is often not worth it.

Third edition took some very large steps away from the kind of design you had in earlier editions. I wouldn't say it's more or less open for abuse -- anyone remember some of the horribly overpowered 2e kits? And earlier, fewer rules left a lot more up to 'can you bamboozle the GM into letting you break the game.'

While 4e isn't my thing, the ACTUAL GAME offers a huge amount of customization and flexibility... that NW didn't use.

It's not 4e, it's NW.

I mean, I can see why they did it this way and there's some merit to it... but a lot of folks feel the lack of flexibility is painful (including myself).

zahinder · July 2013

tinkerstorm wrote: »

A rule set that forces you to use miniatures to play a combat scenario (purely out of greed so the company can sell miniatures to you) effectively eliminates role-play and forces everyone to roll play. I'm sorry you've never actually played a role-playing game. 3.5 sucks as much as 4.0. In fact, everything WoTC has ever done is pure suckage.

I've never used a miniature in the years I spent playing 3rd edition. We use dice, coins, or paper chits for markers. Cost is almost 0. I've also played a number of 3e games (generally online) with either virtual tools or purely descriptively.

My impression is that it's harder to do 4e mapless, but people have done it and said it wasn't a problem.

halavaster · July 2013

Anyone every played D&D Online? 3rd 3.5 edition based, thats kinda what I was hopeing this game would be, but with a more open world feel, it felt very cramped in there. This is just star wars TOR with a D&D logo on it, I still enjoy it, and I'm still going to play it. As far as everyone complaining about how 3.0 or whatever edition sucks, you all do realize YOU CAN DO WHAT YOU WANT in the game, nothing is set in stone, it was designed to be customizable and changed as the player see's fit, use you imagination people.

wuhsin · July 2013

zahinder wrote: »

While 4e isn't my thing, the ACTUAL GAME offers a huge amount of customization and flexibility... that NW didn't use.

It's not 4e, it's NW.

Agreed. This is why I recently berated a certain community mod for defending the game's lack of customization on the basis that it's based on 4e, and not 3.5.. I'm tired of the devs blaming their short-comings on the system they failed miserably at replicating.

sangrine · July 2013

werealchemist wrote: »

Obviously not the point. the point is that i want to be able to make whatever character i want and not be limited to a single archetype using a single weapon[type] and only able to use one type of armor. I don't care if i get 50% spell failure chance, if i want to carry around a tower shield for whatever purpose i should be able to.

Play a mmo without classes. Neverwinter, D&D, and similar games have classes and, in general, do put restrictions on each class.
Should a person who is not trained in magic be able to pick up a spell book and start using magic? They could try but the result could be disaster. Should a wizard be able to pick up and use a large two-handed sword? Wizard could try but maybe he will drop the sword in combat because he has little strength and little sword training.

Edit: my wizard can carry large shields in her inventory.

zahinder · July 2013

There's a big gulf between classless and Neverwinter.

For example, as others pointed out... DDO. In DDO you can be a fighter/wizard and all sorts of fun combos (rogue/fighter works nicely). You have LOADS of flexibility in weapons, armor... heck, if you want to be a wizard in plate mail, go for it. It'll suck, but it's YOUR CHOICE.

Now, mind you, restricting choice creates a game with a different focus. The advantage is that there are less 'gotchas' where you realize your months of play have lead you to a really horrible build, or exploit builds that emerge. It's easier to create content and assets when you KNOW every GWF is going to have certain sets of abilities and gear.

But I, for one, am really really REALLY sick of 'you can't use THAT sword, your guardian training didn't cover large swords' or 'oooh, that's a _rogue_ shirt. Your wizard can't possibly figure out how to use it... so many holes! And straps! What is this???'

I mean, really? Class-limited _shirts_???

And ANOTHER thing that infuriates me... in 4e, one of the things I actually liked was the ability for classes to pick up flexibility with backgrounds and spending feats on extra backgrounds. So you want to be a fighter who trained to be a cleric but it just didn't work out? Pick a religious background and use Religion skills.

The devs could have added something like that, like 'each class has a skill, and you can then select one extra skill of your choice.' It would have had next to 0 impact on the actual game (I mean, fine, you'd save a trivial amount of gold on kits).

But even that degree of flexibility is apparently too much.

Hopefully, down the road, the game will have dozens of classes to cover different builds and this won't feel so... limited. I mean, if I can choose between great weapon, archer, guardian, dual weapon fighters, then the flexibility becomes a bit front-loaded. Though I really wonder how they'll pull that off, given how class-tied gear is.

sockmunkey · July 2013

sangrine wrote: »

Play a mmo without classes. Neverwinter, D&D, and similar games have classes and, in general, do put restrictions on each class.
Should a person who is not trained in magic be able to pick up a spell book and start using magic? They could try but the result could be disaster. Should a wizard be able to pick up and use a large two-handed sword? Wizard could try but maybe he will drop the sword in combat because he has little strength and little sword training.

Edit: my wizard can carry large shields in her inventory.

To be fair, Cryptic actually tried to go classless in Champions with its freeform system. The power and flexibility is simply awesome. The down side is, because of that power and flexibility there is absolutely zero challenge and no balance.

While im a huge advocate of free form games. I personally resent being locked into a class or archetype. I also understand the absolute nightmare it can be for developers to tune, tweek, and balance, in an MMO setting. A setting much different from a table top where you might only have 4 to 6 players and one DM carefully balancing it all.

I personally believe that Cryptic felt free form was a huge boondoggle. They have all but stopped supporting CO and have made no effort to try to incorporate more freedom in their other games. In fact, each newer game has gotten more restrictive. and I honestly dont expect this trend to change anytime soon.

epiccrit · July 2013

I believe the expansion potential for this game is huge. Although this game is released, It is far from finished. Not in that "it compiled, ship it" sort of way, but in such a way that it is obvious to anyone that options are on the horizon. Even most classes say, alternate paragon path coming soon. I anticipate that your choices will be exploded by the end of next year. yeah, you probably won't have a great sword wielding wizard, but that's not about what 4th edition was all about anyway.

trequel · July 2013

In DDO a wizard with a shield can be a viable tank.

khatzhas · July 2013

trequel wrote: »

In DDO a wizard with a shield can be a viable tank.

And a Wizard with anything is generally regarded as more viable than almost any sort of Fighter.

werealchemist · July 2013

sangrine wrote: »

my wizard can carry large shields in her inventory.

okay i must need to be more specific if i want to equip a tower shield for whatever purpose i should be able to.

In all honesty I prefer what has been done in another perfect world game RaiderZ any class can pick up and wield any weapon but class abilities can only be used with a weapon that class is proficient with (I.E. berzerker can swing a staff but cant use berzerker abilities).

i like the class/weapon mechanics of the other game but the combat is so much smoother in this game
as a matter of fact RaiderZ is closer to D&D than this game is but its just so...blargh

bioshrike · July 2013

We see various "fighters" from enemy factions using magical scrolls, so there is some potential to do something similar. Along the same lines, weren't there magical items that would do things like allow X castings of magic missile or something per day?

I also miss being able to, for instance, have my fighter pick up and throw a spear or use a sling, in case the enemy is far away.

wholyhandgrenade · July 2013

halavaster wrote: »

Anyone every played D&D Online? 3rd 3.5 edition based, thats kinda what I was hopeing this game would be, but with a more open world feel, it felt very cramped in there. This is just star wars TOR with a D&D logo on it, I still enjoy it, and I'm still going to play it. As far as everyone complaining about how 3.0 or whatever edition sucks, you all do realize YOU CAN DO WHAT YOU WANT in the game, nothing is set in stone, it was designed to be customizable and changed as the player see's fit, use you imagination people.

the difference in feel between DDO and NWO couldn't be further apart. In DDO you needed the skills to locate secret doors and traps and then you needed the skill to disarm them, you needed limberness to move about, you needed skills to do this or that and if you didn't have them then you couldn't do stuff or you needed to bring in those that could. Every character felt like you were playing as what you were supposed to be and every dungeon felt like it was crafted with lots of thought from finish to end. You had various different tasks, there weren't any adds, everything you fought against played as what they were supposed to be. In short DDO felt like you were playing D&D, NWO feels like you are playing hack and slash with most everything broken and out of balance and without hope of being fixed or even looked at. When a game comes out of beta with as much broken things as NWO did and has a small amount of classes to choose from and those classes have a ton of broken things within them to select from and are supposed to have 3 paths each but only have 1 you already know as a player that nothing is going to ever really change.

wholyhandgrenade · July 2013

khatzhas wrote: »

And a Wizard with anything is generally regarded as more viable than almost any sort of Fighter.

cleric, a class that always has had shields aren't even allowed to use shields in this game, nor are they allowed to use their traditional fighter grade armor, nor are they allowed to self-heal very well unless uber geared

ungood · July 2013

werealchemist wrote: »

Don't worry ill take two levels in fighter, weapon focus ,two weapon fighting, monkey grip, and channel touch

yeah I know this games not based off 3.5 but it's not D&D either.

Greetings. Great question. While many Mods have pointed out that NW is really only based on D&D LORE not game mechanics, I will admit that this does leave a hole in my regard to play this game further. The limited weapon choices and armor restrictions seem to come straight out of games like TERA, or AION. As far as D&D goes with NW, it's really just skin deep, (pun intended), the D&D setting is just ambiance and lore not actual game play.

Yes, there are teh D&D races and classes that have been rehashed in almost every other MMO ever made by anyone (Yes exaggeration on my part) however, that does not change the fact that at it's core NW is a very, very, generic MMO palate, with nothing innovative or new here.

People tell me the combat is attractive, but after playing DDO and GW2, I am simply not impressed, I mean, it's good for a contemporary game, but it's imho simply not noteworthy.

Anyway, if you came here looking for a D&D feel in the sense of game rules and mechanics, yes, you will be very let down, if you came here looking for the lore and story and ambiance of the D&D world, then NW might be the MMO for you.

I am well aware that D&D at it's foundation and it's onset was the rules by which players could interact within an imaginary world crated by a GM, but it has grown beyond that for some, for some people D&D is a Story World, a setting, a place, where the rules are not as important as the people. I guess to each they seek something different from a game, and since it is a matter of personal tastes, it's not a matter of being right or wrong but a matter of if this game is your taste or not.

epiccrit · July 2013

Well, on that note, there are fundamental differences between 3.5 and 4th as well. Although weapon selection feels very limited, in 4th, weapon selection is very build dependant. Considering our classes are "control" wizard, "great weapon" fighter, and "trickster" rogue, it's obvious that your build is somewhat pre planned. Like or dislike this system, it should have been apparent from the get go. I'm sad that I don't yet see a 4 ed battle wizard, an AOE DPS Machine. Really, this feels like a 4th edition game should, and is as different from DDO as third is from 4th.

pilf3r · July 2013

This isn't 4E, its very loosely based on it and that is a fact, even the devs/spokespeople for cryptic/pwe went from from saying this follows 4e closely to "loosely based on 4e". Anyone that followed this game since beta and before knows this to be true.

I am not a big fan of 4E but you people like the poster above me are seriously giving 4e a bad name. This is a shackled and mangled 4E and imo doesn't deserve the DnD logo.

Hopefully the pathfinder mmo will do better. Till then DDO still kicks this games <font color="orange">HAMSTER</font> hands down in everything except graphics.

xhrit · July 2013

halavaster wrote: »

This is just star wars TOR with a D&D logo on it

So it seems we have come full circle then.

Knights of The Old Republic was just D&D with a Star Wars Logo on it.

It literally used the exact same game engine as Neverwinter Nights.

xhrit · July 2013

double post?

redneckronin · July 2013

xhrit wrote: »

So it seems we have come full circle then.

Knights of The Old Republic was just D&D with a Star Wars Logo on it.

It literally used the exact same game engine as Neverwinter Nights.

Well, the general consensus seems to be that KotOR was far a better game than TOR, and that Neverwinter Nights was superior to this.

Can't speak for NN, never played it.

But KotOR was indeed a much better game than TOR.

Like I've always said, what most people consider "progress" isn't always an improvement.

All The Best

khatzhas · July 2013

wholyhandgrenade wrote: »

cleric, a class that always has had shields aren't even allowed to use shields in this game, nor are they allowed to use their traditional fighter grade armor, nor are they allowed to self-heal very well unless uber geared

They have almost exactly the same issue in DDO, with the added advantage of not having to pick their race as carefully.

rictras · July 2013

aepervius1972 wrote: »

Summary TL;DR : you can roleplay with both 3.5 and 4.0 but 4.0 offers much less posibility and feels constrained.

I feel the opposite.

epiccrit · July 2013

pilf3r wrote: »

This isn't 4E, its very loosely based on it and that is a fact, even the devs/spokespeople for cryptic/pwe went from from saying this follows 4e closely to "loosely based on 4e". Anyone that followed this game since beta and before knows this to be true.

I am not a big fan of 4E but you people like the poster above me are seriously giving 4e a bad name. This is a shackled and mangled 4E and imo doesn't deserve the DnD logo.

Hopefully the pathfinder mmo will do better. Till then DDO still kicks this games <font color="orange">HAMSTER</font> hands down in everything except graphics.

And DDO is based directly on 3.5 with the Vatian magic system and 10-16 HP for fighters at level 1 based on stamina and toughness feat. Right.

I do like this better than NW and DDO, I would just like to see this game get bigger, particularly on more class choices, espeically since they decided to split classes into specific builds as well.

choranth · July 2013

wholyhandgrenade wrote: »

cleric, a class that always has had shields aren't even allowed to use shields in this game, nor are they allowed to use their traditional fighter grade armor, nor are they allowed to self-heal very well unless uber geared

One of the less satisfying aspects of 3.5 was how some classes could win the game alone. Clerics had high armor, high relevant saves (reflexes can damage you but once you fly it does not stop you like failing other saves could), high attack bith buffs, really good damage dealers, even better than fighters and barbarians.

4e said no. 4e said "the armored tank is the paladin, not the cleric". And they removed his automatic heavy armor proficiency. The cleric is the divine -healer-, which was what clerics always were supposed to be.
In 4e tanks can really tank, so the cleric does not need to avoid being hit like in 3.5 where he was sort of an hospitaler knight.

Also, 4e tried to keep all the characters from being able to live on a single stat or to need three or more to be effective. Apart from some build like the baladin (balanced paladin) that uses three high stats as prerequisites for feats, they succeeded in that.
The cleric has two variants, a melee cleric and a ranged cleric uing wisdom and a sacred symbol to hit and damage enemies. The Devoted Cleric.

NWO just selected a niche of what the cleric can be and went with that.

I would also have liked to see different weapons for my GWF, like halberds if the item has high power attack penetration and evasion, falchions for critical and so on, mind you.

Shields, yeah, they should be able to use those but I guess they used icons (that do not exist in 4e) to differentiate them from guardian fighters (a GF uses his shield to parry, a cleric would only get more AC from it... and PWE decided to balance AC with armors only, doable since there's not "mail shirt" but "cleric armor" as a category.

Self healing, reduced self-healing is baaaaaad.

Where's my dual greatsword wielding wizard?

Comments