test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Options
Psion Class
dongargon
Member Posts: 23 Arc User
I would like to play a psion class in this game base on the combat gameplay. I like how the Mesmer Class in Guildwars 2 as an unique gameplay of using deception to confuse the opponents with its clone and phantasm.
Post edited by dongargon on
0
Comments
Join Essence of Aggression: PVP-ing Hard Since Beta!
While it is a relatively new class for D&D and/or very off the beaten path psionics have always been a rather commonish and feared enemy in D&D. Illithids, Aboleths, Beholders, Maenads, Thought Eaters...
From a player standpoint it would be cool to have barbarians, bards, paladins, monks...
But from a development standpoint making psions would open whole new interesting range of monster abilities and mechanics which could later be used to create the Psion Class.
In software development re-usability is a huge consideration. So while you might think Psion would be a long way off it could come much sooner than you think because it would kill two birds with one stone much better than a lot of other classes.
Plus I hate seeing more melee illithids than psionic and arcane illithids.
On a serious note, did you ever played Vanguard: Saga of Heroes? While I thought the psion-class there was just a different type of mage, it did have an awesome feature I'd love to see here: You could send out your thougths to other psionists, which basically created a psion-only public chat. Rather silly, but awesome.
On a side note I think Cryptic missed the mark by not making GWF a Barbarian instead.
Charononus is spot on with the GWF/Barbarian debacle, Cryptic needs to revamp the way they are handling the Fighter Class.
Ok, I'm not up on 4e, but ..., a barbarian is a (usually) 2H weapon killing machine that shrugs off damage with innate damage reduction, and boosts their damage with Rage a short time buff that increases their strength and constitution. They are usually illiterate with high str and con scores.
Druids, even melee ones don't wear metal armor, and only get proficiency with simple weapons and scimitars. Their main damage in melee comes from shapeshifting coupled with the ability to cast spells for both healing and damage.
I don't see any real simularities between druids and barbarians.
To be honest they are easier to handle in a computer game, but at the same time they are one of those things that are very optional, and might actually rub some people the wrong way just by their inclusion.
To be frank it seems the Scourge Warlock will be the next in the game, since they were already itemized since Beta. Druid also seems likely from what a lot of people are saying. To be honest neither would be my first choice.
Really what I think Cryptic needs to do most of all is start working on their current characters and balancing them out better. The game had way too much of a DPS focus and there seems to be an overpopulation of Trickster Rogues and Hunter Rangers as it is, and the HR in particular seems like a problem child, which is why I think it took so long to be put into the game. I'll also say that the "Wizard" which is one of the most iconic characters in the game seems to be something of a joke, I wound up more or less abandoning my CW due to hating the way it plays, especially seeing as I do not grasp what Cryptic is thinking when it considers slows and stuff to be effective crowd control, not that it matters since most stuff dies so quick that it's not needed. In doing dungeons my "crowd control" was usually repelling <font color="orange">HAMSTER</font> off ledges or lifting them up in the air and then repelling them over ledges (albeit this was a while ago). I've played CC characters like Enchanters in EQ and this wasn't anything like that, I mean heck I don't even have a "Hold Monster" spell. For DPS it seems to largely come down to stacking debuffs and synergies and firing out tons of AoE, and really I think the HR has better "group" attacks with split shot in solo play seeing as a charged splitshot can wipe out entire groups of minions instantly with one shot a lot easier than a CW can (though they can set up similar things, just less directly than a "one button, kill group instantly" attack). In PVP they have been pretty much totally replaced for range damage by the HR... and really I think the Rogue has better "control" with stunlocks than the CW does. Personally I'd like a good old fashioned "battle mage" that plays similarly to the Hunter Ranger, give me magic missile or shocking grasp on one button, and a chargable fireball that works similar to split shot on the other, and stuff like that, then I'd feel more like a video-game converted D&D caster. I mean cripes, mages can't even throw a proper fireball and that's iconic D&D... so yeah, they need to work on stuff like this IMO before introducing entirely new types of classes. I mean let's get a basic, stereotypical, "blast and trash" mage like you expect before we worry about guys drawing on demonic power and alternative definitions of magic, or introducing a tree hugging variant of the cleric, but it's not my game. Maybe we'll get a "real" wizard once they complete those other projects.... and find a way to balance out the classes, having been messing with "The Foundry" recently the massive imbalance in this game has become readily apparent given how the difficulty of the same pre-defined encounter can vary greatly from class to class, more so than it should in a balanced game. I mean I've gotten comments about some things being "waay too easy" for HR players, but pretty much impossible for DC players for example. Things like CW, GWF, and TR seem to be more of a mixed bag, GF seems to be able to solo almost everything (I now play GF as my primary) but can be very slow and methodical, it's not the most exciting or flashy class, and as a guy calling himself "Therumancer" you can guess what kinds of PCs I tend to prefer.