test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Options

Impressed

vorathianvorathian Member Posts: 0 Arc User
edited October 2013 in General Discussion (PC)
Typically I'm very critical of this game claiming to be dnd while following an arcade game route. So a very pleasant and impressive surprise it was to see a ranger who wasn't locked to just 1 weapon. The importance of this is in the fact that a ranger strictly using 1 weapon type is not a ranger at all. For example a ranger that uses just bows or just melee it a glorified archer or rogue. No a ranger is a stealthy fighter of the forest using both melee as well as ranged attacks to strike down his foes! hats off to the never winter team for doing the right thing.... If there are more moves like this I believe more people will resonate with the game much better. The next thing should be paladins imo :) Also a more in depth worship/god system would be perfect.
Post edited by vorathian on
«1

Comments

  • Options
    knightfalzknightfalz Member Posts: 1,261 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    They are hinting at Druids as being next. This would make sense from the point of view of having one nature related weapon based character along with a nature related spell based character.

    Hopefully Paladins will be out in the not too distant future, as a melee faith related character.
  • Options
    vasdamasvasdamas Member Posts: 2,461 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    Nope, monk please.
  • Options
    tinukedatinukeda Member Posts: 499 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    knightfalz wrote: »
    They are hinting at Druids as being next.

    That isn't quite what was said in that interview article. "I can imagine the Druid will probably be, if not the next one that we start next, it will probably be soon"

    Based on the statements before that, they've already gotten most of the "next" one (after Ranger) built (40-60% they said), so they're talking Druid will be, if not after that one, then the one after that. Ie: Ranger is 1, "next" is 2, Druid would be 3 or 4.
  • Options
    melodywhrmelodywhr Member Posts: 4,220 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    if i'm not mistaken, the warlock will be the next class after ranger. then possibly the druid although it didn't sound like a definite answer.
  • Options
    knightfalzknightfalz Member Posts: 1,261 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    tinukeda wrote: »
    That isn't quite what was said in that interview article. "I can imagine the Druid will probably be, if not the next one that we start next, it will probably be soon"

    Based on the statements before that, they've already gotten most of the "next" one (after Ranger) built (40-60% they said), so they're talking Druid will be, if not after that one, then the one after that. Ie: Ranger is 1, "next" is 2, Druid would be 3 or 4.

    Ahhh, well, at the very least fans of the Druid know with some certainty that is on the way before terribly long. Perhaps then the next will be the Warlock that is often favoured in speculation.
  • Options
    reiwulfreiwulf Member Posts: 2,687 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    I hope they can get the 2 weapons thing working correctly for the ranger, I think they put themselves into a very complicated position by doing it, it was much easier to have them as archers, but if they can manage to do it right, it'll be awesome :)
    2e2qwj6.jpg
  • Options
    bioshrikebioshrike Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 4,729 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    What I'm curious about is that TRs use 2 separate daggers currently, each in its own slot. Do you think that a new weapon type "pair of daggers" will be implemented just for Rangers, which is its own category of weapon? If so, do you think that applying a weapon enchantment would carry over to both of them as well?

    I suppose they could call them "pair of short swords" or something to differentiate them further.
    <::::::::::::::)xxxo <::::::::::::::)xxxo <::::::::::::)xxxxxxxx(:::::::::::> oxxx(::::::::::::::> oxxx(::::::::::::::>
    "Is it better to be feared or respected? I say, is it too much to ask for both?" -Tony Stark
    Official NW_Legit_Community Forums
  • Options
    knightfalzknightfalz Member Posts: 1,261 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    It could be that the melee weapons go in one slot of the main and off hand, and the ranged weapon goes in the other slot. I'm going to guess that the weapon enchant applies to all of them, unless they want to limit the enchant benefit to one of the weapon types.

    For all we know, they may even have it so that you can pick which slot the pair of daggers go in, main or off, and the other weapon goes in the other slot, and the weapon type chosen for the main slot gains some sort of damage bonus, allowing Rangers to choose if they wish to focus on melee or ranged weapons.

    It will be interesting to see how they go about it, for sure.
  • Options
    lobo0084lobo0084 Member, Neverwinter Beta Users Posts: 663 Bounty Hunter
    edited October 2013
    bioshrike wrote: »
    What I'm curious about is that TRs use 2 separate daggers currently, each in its own slot. Do you think that a new weapon type "pair of daggers" will be implemented just for Rangers, which is its own category of weapon? If so, do you think that applying a weapon enchantment would carry over to both of them as well?

    I suppose they could call them "pair of short swords" or something to differentiate them further.

    It's either that, or they have to enchant three weapons.
    "Every adventurer has two things in common: they don't like dying, and they love getting paid. The rest is just semantics." Brecken, famed mercenary of Baldur's Gate

    "D*mn wizards," said Morik the Rogue.

    Learn what a GWF and GF really are: The History of Fighters
  • Options
    colonelwingcolonelwing Member Posts: 1,448 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    NW clearly needs a Barbarian class... with dual axes, next. ^^

  • Options
    bioshrikebioshrike Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 4,729 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    lobo0084 wrote: »
    It's either that, or they have to enchant three weapons.

    Another alternative would be that Rangers use a "Ranger weapon kit" as their primary weapon, which consists of the bow and primary dagger, and then just use a rogue's off-hand weapon for the secondary. The "kit" in the main hand would take a weapon enchant which would affect both the bow and main dagger. The only problem with this implementation would be that you wouldn't be able to separate bow and main dagger looks. Doing a bow and pair of daggers as separate items would cause an issue since they'd need 2 weapon enchants. A final option would be to have the bow as the main weapon, have its enchant carry over to the daggers, and just have the dagger pair as both in a single slot (with no enchant).
    <::::::::::::::)xxxo <::::::::::::::)xxxo <::::::::::::)xxxxxxxx(:::::::::::> oxxx(::::::::::::::> oxxx(::::::::::::::>
    "Is it better to be feared or respected? I say, is it too much to ask for both?" -Tony Stark
    Official NW_Legit_Community Forums
  • Options
    sockmunkeysockmunkey Member Posts: 4,622 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    bioshrike wrote: »
    Another alternative would be that Rangers use a "Ranger weapon kit" as their primary weapon, which consists of the bow and primary dagger, and then just use a rogue's off-hand weapon for the secondary. The "kit" in the main hand would take a weapon enchant which would affect both the bow and main dagger. The only problem with this implementation would be that you wouldn't be able to separate bow and main dagger looks. Doing a bow and pair of daggers as separate items would cause an issue since they'd need 2 weapon enchants. A final option would be to have the bow as the main weapon, have its enchant carry over to the daggers, and just have the dagger pair as both in a single slot (with no enchant).

    Naw, I suspect it will be similar to the GF or TR, as the only classes with a visible off hand item. Main hand will most likely be a Ranger specific set of daggers. Unique to the Ranger class, and separate from Rogue items, and with a weapon enhancement slot. Off hand will be the bow, no enhancement, but its own own stats and visible appearance. This could easily go either way, with the bow primary and the blades secondary depending on what mode is considered default.

    The other possibility is simply just bow primary with an abstract secondary. Perhaps something like a quiver. And the melee weapons simply function like rogues throwing daggers. Not a physical item, but an animation attached to the power. However, I think this is less likely simply because I see having both the bow and weapons being a visible and customizable as an important option.

    The one think I can bet for sure on is the Ranger will have its own unique drops and gear not associated with anything else currently in game.
  • Options
    bioshrikebioshrike Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 4,729 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    Hmm.. I wonder if they'll just do a "Ranger kit" which consists of both the daggers and the bow, and some sort of invisible quarrel/quiver item.
    <::::::::::::::)xxxo <::::::::::::::)xxxo <::::::::::::)xxxxxxxx(:::::::::::> oxxx(::::::::::::::> oxxx(::::::::::::::>
    "Is it better to be feared or respected? I say, is it too much to ask for both?" -Tony Stark
    Official NW_Legit_Community Forums
  • Options
    khimera906khimera906 Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 898 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    bioshrike wrote: »
    Hmm.. I wonder if they'll just do a "Ranger kit" which consists of both the daggers and the bow, and some sort of invisible quarrel/quiver item.
    I hope not. That would meat that the looks of the melee weapons are tied to the looks of the bow... and that would just suck. I hope the main hand is the bow and the off hand are the blades or vice versa. You get the stats from both of the weapons in both melee and ranged mode, only the powers change and, of course, the visuals on the character.
    I hate dancing with Lady Luck. She always steps on my toes.
  • Options
    ravenlock99ravenlock99 Member Posts: 68 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    Druids are always boring, please don't make a druid next!
  • Options
    lobo0084lobo0084 Member, Neverwinter Beta Users Posts: 663 Bounty Hunter
    edited October 2013
    Personally, I see no problem with them running four weapons. Yes, it means double enchants, but also means more utility. Or possibly, you need four different weapons (bow/quiver, sword/sword), but only one set of enchants for each hand, giving your ranged and melee weapons the same attachment.
    "Every adventurer has two things in common: they don't like dying, and they love getting paid. The rest is just semantics." Brecken, famed mercenary of Baldur's Gate

    "D*mn wizards," said Morik the Rogue.

    Learn what a GWF and GF really are: The History of Fighters
  • Options
    sockmunkeysockmunkey Member Posts: 4,622 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    lobo0084 wrote: »
    Personally, I see no problem with them running four weapons. Yes, it means double enchants, but also means more utility. Or possibly, you need four different weapons (bow/quiver, sword/sword), but only one set of enchants for each hand, giving your ranged and melee weapons the same attachment.

    Anything is possible. But I honestly don't see them breaking the template that they set up. I mean they had to seriously work hard to come up with off-hand items for every class, when it would of been easier to just skip it and make the main hand more powerful. When you have to come up with an off hand item for a two-handed weapon fighter. Its pretty clear you are making stuff up to hold to a template.

    In the same vein they had to make up a special case rule for rogues who up till epic level could use any dagger in any slot. But so as to not be over powered. They had to make one dagger primary only, with a weapon slot, and a universal one without. The one class without a true off hand item, ended up with a special primary only item instead.

    Lets not even try to imagine how broken things would be if you could slot more then one weapon enchantment. Can you say 2 perfect vorpals? Or a perfect vorpal and anything else, just to make sure that one shot kill is more humbling.

    I just cant honestly see them changing things all that much. All the classes function on a set template for a reason. I cant see them reinventing the wheel at this point.
  • Options
    abell39abell39 Member Posts: 1,175 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    This is why I always figured the ranger would equip bow as main-hand and a single short sword as offhand. Boy was I wrong. :eek:
    Kerensa Loreweaver, level 60 DC | Rilla Turtledove, level 60 CW | Calvin Meriwether, level 60 TR
    Kaylee Krankenwagen, level 60 GF | Tavandruil Wayfinder, level 49 GWF | Aldith Langley, level 51 HR
  • Options
    knightfalzknightfalz Member Posts: 1,261 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    sockmunkey wrote: »
    I just cant honestly see them changing things all that much. All the classes function on a set template for a reason. I cant see them reinventing the wheel at this point.

    They aren't going to reinvent it. It is more a matter of how they will reinterpret it for the Hunter Ranger to accommodate both melee weapons and the bow.

    They may do something like the GWF thing, such as having the whole bundle of the melee weapons and bow go in the weapon slot, and invent some extra item akin to the GWF knot for the other slot. This would give the HR access to his weapon enchant regardless of whether he was using his bow or dual weapons.
  • Options
    lobo0084lobo0084 Member, Neverwinter Beta Users Posts: 663 Bounty Hunter
    edited October 2013
    I'm still seeing four weapons, but only two sets. Main hand will be a Bow, or a Sword. Off hand will be a quiver, or another sword/dagger. Probably it will allow you to enchant the main-hand slot with enchant and attachment, with the same attachment working for both the bow and the main sword. The off hand will probably include one enchant slot.

    A simple switch button on the interface would allow you to select and alter each set with unique looks and whatnot, but the enchants and attachments would be handled normally.



    The other options, of course, is to package the look of the bow and quiver into the mainhand slot, and the swords into the offhand, not giving players the option to customize the bow and quiver separately, or the two swords always being identical.

    And I agree with another poster: we probably wont' see them allowing rangers to use TR weapons, though I don't understand why not. There will probably be a whole new set of ranger-specific gear.
    "Every adventurer has two things in common: they don't like dying, and they love getting paid. The rest is just semantics." Brecken, famed mercenary of Baldur's Gate

    "D*mn wizards," said Morik the Rogue.

    Learn what a GWF and GF really are: The History of Fighters
  • Options
    kshoksho Member, Neverwinter Beta Users Posts: 85
    edited October 2013
    Maybe some other healing class or tank??......But no, community qq dps and here we go another dps class....silly like all this child never community.
  • Options
    ausdoerrtausdoerrt Member, Neverwinter Beta Users Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    bioshrike wrote: »
    What I'm curious about is that TRs use 2 separate daggers currently, each in its own slot. Do you think that a new weapon type "pair of daggers" will be implemented just for Rangers, which is its own category of weapon? If so, do you think that applying a weapon enchantment would carry over to both of them as well?

    I suppose they could call them "pair of short swords" or something to differentiate them further.
    Or it could be scimitars rather than daggers or SSs.

    I also think GWF longswords are a more likely option than TR short swords.
    reiwulf wrote: »
    I hope they can get the 2 weapons thing working correctly for the ranger, I think they put themselves into a very complicated position by doing it, it was much easier to have them as archers, but if they can manage to do it right, it'll be awesome :)
    I'm guessing the basic switching mechanic will be similar/identical to Divinity mode for DCs.
    lobo0084 wrote: »
    And I agree with another poster: we probably wont' see them allowing rangers to use TR weapons, though I don't understand why not. There will probably be a whole new set of ranger-specific gear.
    Probably a separate set. According to a friend of mine, ranger gear occasionally dropped in the early previews of the game.
  • Options
    iergoiergo Member, Neverwinter Beta Users Posts: 107 Bounty Hunter
    edited October 2013
    Impressed? I could of told you that it would be a hunter ranger a long time ago, just as I figured by looking at the 4e book, etc and also got the Wizards paragon path right. If none of the Paragon path leaks changed then Daggermaster etc should be the new paragon paths, with the GF and GWF the only real surprise unless they are really swapping paths or the leak was wrong.

    I'm keeping an eye on this second module, it might pull me and others back in, but that shift ability from the sound of it is not impressing me right now. However, I would rather test it out my self first before deciding.

    Warlock next!?
  • Options
    stormdrag0nstormdrag0n Member Posts: 3,222 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    iergo wrote: »
    Impressed? I could of told you that it would be a hunter ranger a long time ago, just as I figured by looking at the 4e book, etc and also got the Wizards paragon path right. If none of the Paragon path leaks changed then Daggermaster etc should be the new paragon paths, with the GF and GWF the only real surprise unless they are really swapping paths or the leak was wrong.

    I'm keeping an eye on this second module, it might pull me and others back in, but that shift ability from the sound of it is not impressing me right now. However, I would rather test it out my self first before deciding.

    Warlock next!?

    Yeah I have to laugh when certain forum darling say "Called it two months ago!!" when most of us knew about it back in Alpha.

    But I agree Warlock probably next.
    Always Looking for mature laidback players/rpers for Dungeon Delves!
  • Options
    khimera906khimera906 Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 898 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    But I agree Warlock probably next.
    Yes. The Warlock is the class that was most talked about next to the Ranger. Though I would love to have the Druid first, way more people want the Warlock and I think that's the class they're gonna give us. I don't understand where some people get this idea about the Druid being the next class they introduce.
    I hate dancing with Lady Luck. She always steps on my toes.
  • Options
    draugotdraugot Member Posts: 57 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    My biggest question is that the weapon switch is tied to the tab feature which becomes available to all the classes at level 10 so will this hold true for the ranger also? And by the look of the switch in the video preview the duel wield is the tab over feature so the ranger would start with the Bow which would probably make it the main hand weapon.
  • Options
    rabbinicusrabbinicus Member Posts: 1,822 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    draugot wrote: »
    My biggest question is that the weapon switch is tied to the tab feature which becomes available to all the classes at level 10 so will this hold true for the ranger also? And by the look of the switch in the video preview the duel wield is the tab over feature so the ranger would start with the Bow which would probably make it the main hand weapon.

    That would make a great deal of sense since the archery is the newest bit. It also means that the weapon switch may be the kind of game changing move that stealth is. At least, one can hope so. :)
    The right to command is earned through duty, the privilege of rank is service.


  • Options
    lobo0084lobo0084 Member, Neverwinter Beta Users Posts: 663 Bounty Hunter
    edited October 2013
    HR does seem to have a stealth daily, at least. From the video.
    "Every adventurer has two things in common: they don't like dying, and they love getting paid. The rest is just semantics." Brecken, famed mercenary of Baldur's Gate

    "D*mn wizards," said Morik the Rogue.

    Learn what a GWF and GF really are: The History of Fighters
  • Options
    altyrealtyre Member, Neverwinter Beta Users Posts: 106 Bounty Hunter
    edited October 2013
    tinukeda wrote: »
    That isn't quite what was said in that interview article. "I can imagine the Druid will probably be, if not the next one that we start next, it will probably be soon"

    Based on the statements before that, they've already gotten most of the "next" one (after Ranger) built (40-60% they said), so they're talking Druid will be, if not after that one, then the one after that. Ie: Ranger is 1, "next" is 2, Druid would be 3 or 4.

    It's likely that the Warlock will be next - they had Scourge Warlock assets ingame during CB.

    EDIT:so... Apparently people already said that. Note to self:L2read the whole thread.

    But, as for the topic at hand, yes, the weapon-switching of Rangers looks fantastic - hopefully, since every class is getting a second paragon path, they'll have a ranged path and a melee path.
  • Options
    sockmunkeysockmunkey Member Posts: 4,622 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    Judging from feedback from the preview shard. It looks like its going to operate as predicted. Bow is the primary weapon and default mode. Off hand will be the blades.

    Hide armor instead of leather.


    And I gota say, the two initial at-wills are pretty dang awesome :D
Sign In or Register to comment.