To those complaining about GF and GWF sharing Paragon Paths.

mistriosu · November 2013

This game is based off of Dungeons and Dragons 4e. In 4e there are several base classes. Each base class has several builds or "sub classes" as I like to call them.
A "Guardian Fighter" is a sub-class of Fighter. Same with Great Weapon Fighter. They're both in the Fighter class. Therefore they share paragon paths. It makes perfect sense to anyone who knows anything about the source material.

I personally LOVE 4e and the entire class system therein. It works, and it allows for a lot of customization and versatility in character design. I can also say it would have been nice to add Kensei or Pitfighter paragon paths on top of letting the two Fighter sub-classes share them (which is how it should have been from the start).

TLDR; They're sub-classes of the same class, it's obvious they share Paragon Paths.

krisst0f · November 2013

Unless they allow for rerolling ability scores from scratch, these 2 classes should maintain their own respective skills and purposes.

There will be though questions about overlap between GF and GWF; in particular, if both have ability scores in STR and CON, then yes, there will be complete overlap between them, with both having a dps role... but if GF focused on DEX, typically combined with the block ability of a GF, then a GWF wouldn't be able to compete with that kind of agro/deflect...

I am not sure this was the best way to go about... I'd rather have seen independent, additional paragon paths for each class... but that probably required more work... too bad they didn't feel that was something they could do (maybe in time before a chrismas release, hence $$$)

mistriosu · November 2013

krisst0f wrote: »

Unless they allow for rerolling ability scores from scratch, these 2 classes should maintain their own respective skills and purposes.

There will be though questions about overlap between GF and GWF; in particular, if both have ability scores in STR and CON, then yes, there will be complete overlap between them, with both having a dps role... but if GF focused on DEX, typically combined with the block ability of a GF, then a GWF wouldn't be able to compete with that kind of agro/deflect...

I am not sure this was the best way to go about... I'd rather have seen independent, additional paragon paths for each class... but that probably required more work... too bad they didn't feel that was something they could do (maybe in time before a chrismas release, hence $$$)

Did you not read my post? They're sub-classes of the same class. Fighter. Fighter has a set list of Paragon Paths. Giving one sub-class access to some and not others would be arbitrary and untrue to the source material. It's not a matter of work or effort, it's a matter of Cryptic wanting to stay as close to the source material as possible.

GWF focuses on DPS while having some CC.
GF focuses on control/cc/survivability while having some DPS.

They're not homogenized, they're versatile.

melodywhr · November 2013

i'm not sure what the initial ability scores would have to do with both fighter classes choosing a paragon path at level 30. but it sounds like another min/maxing argument. also considering that the paragon path only consists of one at-will, one encounter, one daily, three class features and three feats... to d&d enthusiasts, it's obvious that they were sticking pretty close to d&d rules.

however whether initial ability scores is a big enough issue to warrant that change in the future remains to be seen.

mistriosu · November 2013

I'm just trying to point out to people that this is true to the D&D core rules. Allowing for versatility in character build and purpose. Staying true to the D&D rules is a GOOD thing. People just need to see where the rules are coming from and their purpose.

tang56 · November 2013

Unless I can respec my GF into a GWF and vice versa the point is kinda moot.

silvikk · November 2013

mistriosu wrote: »

I'm just trying to point out to people that this is true to the D&D core rules. Allowing for versatility in character build and purpose. Staying true to the D&D rules is a GOOD thing. People just need to see where the rules are coming from and their purpose.

One class of fighter randomly not having access to the other's skills isn't true to D&D. The only way Swordmaster could possibly be useful to a GF tank is if we could use Come and Get It and thus not need Threatening Rush quite as much.

mistriosu · November 2013

silvikk wrote: »

One class of fighter randomly not having access to the other's skills isn't true to D&D. The only way Swordmaster could possibly be useful to a GF tank is if we could use Come and Get It and thus not need Threatening Rush quite as much.

I'm the one saying it makes sense to have them all access Paragon Paths available to Fighter. That it's because they're ALL "Fighters". If you look at 4e, once you've taken a power you can't take another.

For instance if you choose your two at-will powers for level one, you can't go back and change your level 1 at-will powers.

I think the purpose of them not letting GF and GWF take from the entire Fighter power list is to maintain the "Sub-class as a class" system. You pick a build/sub-class and stick to it. If they allowed GF and GWF to just take powers from either build simultaneously, they might as well just take one out and just put in "Fighter". Which is contrary to how Cryptic wants to do the class system for the game.
With the way Cryptic is currently doing the class system, we could be looking at 60+ classes before the game reaches the end of its life. If they go to the "Pick a base class, pick powers per level, pick a sub-class, etc" model we'd be looking at only 10-15 classes, with MASSIVE variation in each.

With that system, Non-D&D players would drown in the options. With how it is now, everybody can understand their role, powers, etc.

silvikk · November 2013

Yes you can, when you level up you can change any one power or feat that your character has taken to another one that they could have taken at that level. Retraining, page 28 of the Player's Handbook.

More importantly, people primarily invested in both fighter classes have felt pretty hard done by what with getting nerfed hard quite a lot despite being the two classes most often excluded from T2 parties, and every other class got a new interesting paragon path while we... got each other's. Considering I already have a GWF, I'm not even seeing anything I haven't tried before (though, were I to play the GWF seriously, I would probably make him an iron vanguard).

It doesn't matter whether it fits with the rules, or the lore, or whatever, what matters is that new paragon paths were promised, and what we got are not new. They didn't even bother giving the powers new animations, from what testing I did on the preview shard.

Edit: and equally important is that the new paragon paths subvert the established roles for both types of fighter, rather than expanding on them like new paragon paths would. Imagine GWFs getting a Kensai powerset that focuses on fast, light attacks rather than their slow, heavy ones. Instead they can be slightly less horrible tanks and GFs can deal a little bit more damage, but even then only in PVP.

mistriosu · November 2013

silvikk wrote: »

Yes you can, when you level up you can change any one power or feat that your character has taken to another one that they could have taken at that level. Retraining, page 28 of the Player's Handbook.

More importantly, people primarily invested in both fighter classes have felt pretty hard done by what with getting nerfed hard quite a lot despite being the two classes most often excluded from T2 parties, and every other class got a new interesting paragon path while we... got each other's. Considering I already have a GWF, I'm not even seeing anything I haven't tried before (though, were I to play the GWF seriously, I would probably make him an iron vanguard).

It doesn't matter whether it fits with the rules, or the lore, or whatever, what matters is that new paragon paths were promised, and what we got are not new. They didn't even bother giving the powers new animations, from what testing I did on the preview shard.

I apologize for the mistake on re-training. I just started playing D&D a couple months ago and haven't mastered everything.
Above I DID say that GF and GWF should have had access to each other's paragon paths from the start, and that we should've gotten Kensei or Pit Fighter (Pit Fighter would've fit amazingly well with the new CTA, sad Cryptic missed this) with this update.
I can agree the fighters should've gotten NEW Paragon Paths, but I'm also trying to point out that it makes sense for them to both have access to the same PPs.

xetmk24 · November 2013

Wait. Who complains that it doesn't make sense? I thought we are complaining because we got recycled content? However it doesn’t make sense.
In this game GF and GWF are two different classes with different mechanic and abilities. They are using different weapons. So from gaming point of view it doesn't make any sense. There are plenty of paragon path for Fighters to choose from that would fit better with this classes. I can't find any excuse that could justified what they did. I do love the fact that my CW will finally cast fire spells and have new fire mechanic. Compare that with GF and GWF and it feels like those classes were cheated.

banaanc · November 2013

other classes got something new, we didnt, so u can shove those 4e rules where sun dont shine

wouldnt mind if it was like that from start or that was adition to something new, but not like this

and compared to cw all other classes were cheated from start

knightfalz · November 2013

banaanc wrote: »

other classes got something new, we didnt, so u can shove those 4e rules where sun dont shine

wouldnt mind if it was like that from start or that was adition to something new, but not like this

and compared to cw all other classes were cheated from start

GF and GWF both got something new, the ability to select the path of the other. These options were unavailable in the game previously, making it a new one for both of the classes.

unclesalty1 · November 2013

Well I agree with the OP.

If this was a tabletop or some kind of paper/text rpg, sure!

But this isn't. It's like arguing with a charismatic when even though you don't subscribe to his/her religion, he keeps pummeling you with excerpts from his holy text which to you mean squat.

Your rulebook means squat.

Your rulebook didn't say anything about a zen store. We should take THAT out. hur dur.

I play both a GWF and a GF. Tried both on preview, but not the newer dungeons. What I can say is one class going to be sidelined without a doubt whilst the other's only use would be for kiting because of its unrivaled ability to... mark...even so.. easily replaceable with the former.

But this is all fine... if you're roleplaying and a subscriber of '4e'. Nevermind the rest of the gaming population right?

krisst0f · November 2013

melodywhr wrote: »

i'm not sure what the initial ability scores would have to do with both fighter classes choosing a paragon path at level 30. but it sounds like another min/maxing argument. also considering that the paragon path only consists of one at-will, one encounter, one daily, three class features and three feats... to d&d enthusiasts, it's obvious that they were sticking pretty close to d&d rules.

however whether initial ability scores is a big enough issue to warrant that change in the future remains to be seen.

I wish they would seriously consider this... My initial build was focusing on CON & DEX (still with some STR of course), but making me in essence a deflect GF.

As I wanted to try to respec to make a more dps-oriented GF (as I got my stone which could then provide "some" deflect boost), not having the ability to remap to mostly STR/CON effectively prevented me from becoming a good dps GF...

I cross my fingers that it will come in a future patch... It should be no big deal really... there is a way to change your character looks so the only missing thing is rerolling dices...

silvikk · November 2013

Dexterity gives you armor penetration, which is the most important stat to having high DPS, so you're actually good there.

xcessiveforce40 · November 2013

How about making threat a priority in this game and make the GF class useful rather than try to give it 32 pieces of flair. Nobody cares if your wearing 32 pieces of flair. They care that they put time and effort into a class that's a non-necessity in a lot of content. Sure you can solo content that's made to be solo'd. Dungeons? Yeah whatever. I see this as a Cris Angel "wave the hands and voila! Your not worried about being important, look at this new shiny thing I pulled from my sleeve".

omegadrake · November 2013

I love this game but the only thing that bothers me is that they pretty much locked weapons with sub classes sure a couple were in the books but not the way they have it in this game I wonder why they decided that when they started making this game?

xushin7 · November 2013

I dont mind all that much that the GWF and GF paragon paths are interchangable.

but the GF's swordmaster abilities are not very well scaled to the GF.
Its still taking the damage as if the GF has a greatsword. Which they dont. so its drastically lower for a GF.

colonelwing · November 2013

I wish we GWF could get rid of indomitable battle strike and replace it with anvil of doom. (maybe let the fighters choose between them two skills, to make everybody happy, equally much?)

Other than that, the update is going to be sweet like chocolate.

railak · November 2013

I dont have a gf and gwf toons. As I understand the new paragon paths of a gf and gwf are the same from the first paragon paths made available to the public. Is this true?

mctankypants · November 2013

If they were the same class then there should be only one fighter class and then have them offshoot to their respective roles as they level.
Using 4e rules in your argument doesn't change the feeling for GF's that they're the one class getting hosed in this scenario. I'd much rather have a warrior/fighter that had the option of going sword and board or 2 handed. They are too unique as individual classes to lump them together.
Everyone is excited about the changes each of their classes is getting (well maybe not cw's either) besides GF's. The skills we'll be getting are useless to our roles and I doubt ANY Gf will even bother speccing into it. Doesn't that smell of failure in design to you?

yyrkoonstyphoon · November 2013

I think it would have been nice to get brand new paragon paths, however, I see this as forshadowing of things to come and the setting of expectations. Currently, fighter is the only class that has 2 offerings, so the sharing of the paragon paths is possible. With the introduction of the Hunter ranger, do you think they are considered a 'Fighter' or a 'rogue'? so if they are a fighter, then the possibility of the sharing of their paragon path becomes possible, and I assume when they roll out worlock, sorcerer, druid, ect, then the future paragon paths will be shared among the future classes as well. So they role out a new class, some new paths and open up some existing paths to existing classes, i do not see how this hurts anything, but only adds diversity. So, thinkling along these lines, maybe when druid is released, the fighters will get a new paragon path (or access to ranger assuming they are fighter and not rogue)

I still think we need to wait until the release of mod 3 or 4 before we get the 'real picture' to judge the game. If what i understood from some early interviews, if mod 2 is on preview, then that means mod 3 is beginning development...

mctankypants · November 2013

While I applaud your optimism on the subject it doesn't change how GF's in particular are feeling right now. Asking them to wait 2-3 more expansions might be a bit excessive.

hinageshi79 · November 2013

this game is based on d&d but it is NOT d&d and i would like it works well as a videogame. I'm tired of people who speak about d&d to try to justify this or that thing. NW is NOT d&d: it is a videogame. I also like d&d but if i want to ply d&d i call my friends, pizzas and roll dices. Eant to play d&d? go to ply d&d, not neverwinter.

Sharing path ruin GF. It is not the only problem (unjust nerfs, bugs, slow animations...), but for sure it is a big one. Because of this, they nerfed frontline surge that was correctly balanced for GF and as intended, but because of gwf... ooops it wasn't as intended anymore"!!!

Module two is: let's donate to gwf some of the best skills of GF and nerf them otherwise gwf will become too strong. Don't care about GF , it is trash!

yaminabo · November 2013

GF Swordmaster get: Crescendo, Flourish, steel blitz, steel grace, steel whatever it is, and weapon master strike. Ok.
GWF Iron Vanguard get: Threatening rush (infinite dashes, add this to a class that can actually run) Frontline surge (GWF's pops out a shield out of nowhere; Our best skill). Trample the fallen, and indomitable strength (lots of damage)

Conclussion: GWF: OP (even more tanky), GF's: obsolete.

Thanks have fun.

mctankypants · November 2013

I completely agree with Yaminabo's assessment. Strictly from a pvp standpoint where GF's are puntmeisters this feels like working for a company and then being told they're downsizing or outsourcing making you expendable.

shadow5930 · November 2013

... except GF isn't losing access to iron vanguard. So if you want to play that style, they can.

My GF isn't a punt master. He's an in your face beat you down. lunging strike > WMS > flourish > crescendo

While I do have a concern about the scaling of the moves as I don't have a 2h weapon, I'm sure that'll be sorted out on the test server. I'm looking forward to the new potential as to be honest, I don't really like threatening rush.

mctankypants · November 2013

Nobody said they're losing Iron Vanguard. The point that is being made is that GWF's are getting Iron Vanguard in combination with Unstoppable. I'm not asking for them to be nerfed, I'd just like a distinct GF path that is actually worthwhile to even consider. I agree that Threatening Rush is <font color="orange">HAMSTER</font>. It's glitchy as all get out and constantly just feels like it is always out of range.
If you're GF isn't punting opponents off points you've got a different method of securing a point than the majority of GF's.

undeadcrabb · November 2013

GF, GWF are not subclasses, they are different builds of one class. There are many ways to build a fighter, heck, you can make him fight with a bow or two daggers, if you want.
Saying, that guys who love playing GWF or GF got the recycled stuff because of 4e rules, is basically taking a dump in those 4e rules, that allowed us to build any type of character. And I mean any type, If I want my wizard to run around wielding a two handed sword and wearing a pate armor, I should be able make it so.
If devs decided to make this one class in two separate classes(and I hope we will see a third one soon *wink*), they should treat them as such.

To those complaining about GF and GWF sharing Paragon Paths.

Comments