Iksar said:Dire Mark - Mark a member of your group or raid. Whenever that player takes damage, 25% of the damage will be redirected to you. (10 second duration)
Now depending on how masteries or higher level scrolls of this work it could go as far as to intercept much more if not all incoming damage for that member.
That is an interesting idea. If it was possible to have a version - maybe at Mastery Level 3 like you suggest - that would redirect 100% (or close) to me for a short period, that could well be a suitable replacement for a standard Rescue.
I like it.
philo said:
It seems like the warriors damage potential is pretty low.
I'm thinking that this may not be the case. I'm betting that once the warrior has their whole kit that they will deal just as much damage as the DL (if not tanking) - we know they can provide haste, which to me hints that they may have innate haste abilities too. But more importantly I also feel that their offense and defense skills will be higher than the PAL and DL too because they do not have spells... that (combined with double, triple and quad attack skills) made a significant difference in EQ, and I'm making this assumption based on some of the warrior abilities that increase hit chance and ignore enemy defenses; those mechanics will likely be determined by RNG and seriously adjusteb by player proficiencies/attributes vs target's skills/attributes.
Summary of my opinion: If you hit more often and have no chance for spells to be resisted, you will deal more damage. But we will see. :)
I highly doubt Warrior will be equal to DL for DPS. If they follow the same "flex" style they have talked about for rogue with all roles/classes then I would imagine tank roles play out like this:
Warrior - Tank / Flex Support
Paladin - Tank / Flex Healing
DL - Tank / Flex DPS
The warrior page looks to be heavily leaning support with the banners and battle formations basically being like EQ bard songs.
@darch
It's mostly speculation how it ends up. As far as tank damage output I agree with iksar that DL seems to be, by design, the higher damage output tank while warriors, with banner buffs etc being less damage focused. If we are taking into account undead specifically, I expect pally to be top? (though i don't think substantial flex roles will end up being viable across the board like we have seen with rogue CC).
We have never been told that classes will be balanced around secondary roles in comparison to each other. We know tanks are being balanced around tanking/defense compared to other tanks. Similar with the 3 healing classes being balanced for healing/survivability capabilities etc. It was always intended for tank class damage output to vary afaik.
Iksar said:I highly doubt Warrior will be equal to DL for DPS. If they follow the same "flex" style they have talked about for rogue with all roles/classes then I would imagine tank roles play out like this:
Warrior - Tank / Flex Support
Paladin - Tank / Flex Healing
DL - Tank / Flex DPS
The warrior page looks to be heavily leaning support with the banners and battle formations basically being like EQ bard songs.
This kinda lends to my point... It is highly unlikely that the warrior will be able to flex support (and even less likely to flex healing). We will have to wait and see, but I'd still bet money that the warrior will be able to dish out significant DPS (compared to other non-DPS classes). Don't underestimate the raw effectiveness of skill proficiency... in EQ, the dual weild and double/triple attack proficiencies made an incredible difference. I'm willing to bet money because the warriors are going to be the masters of martial combat, "defying the limits of physical strength", which says to me, they will have higher skill caps like in EQ.
We will see...
Darch said:This kinda lends to my point... It is highly unlikely that the warrior will be able to flex support (and even less likely to flex healing). We will have to wait and see, but I'd still bet money that the warrior will be able to dish out significant DPS (compared to other non-DPS classes). Don't underestimate the raw effectiveness of skill proficiency... in EQ, the dual weild and double/triple attack proficiencies made an incredible difference. I'm willing to bet money because the warriors are going to be the masters of martial combat, "defying the limits of physical strength", which says to me, they will have higher skill caps like in EQ.
We will see...
I'd argue that full blurb about the warrior lends itself far more toward them being flex support based.
"Much more than a soldier or mercenary, the Warrior seems to defy limits of physical strength, ability and resilience. However, she is not content with fortitude alone, but refines her mind as well, becoming a master strategist amidst the mayhem of battle."
In other words tanky (fortitude) but also with support/strategist offerings to help those on their team, which we have a glimpse of already with the banners and formations.
@Iksar - I think we have different opinions on "flexing support." To me, flexing into a support role translates into being able to utilize hard CC, and I don't see the warrior having crowd control... at all. Being primary support role (like ENC and BRD) brings more than just CC, but flexing into support requires CC (like we know the rogue will have). Planting a banner that simply provides a buff (which almost all classes will provide to a group) does not fulfill the "role" of support imo.
Darch said:@Iksar - I think we have different opinions on "flexing support." To me, flexing into a support role translates into being able to utilize hard CC, and I don't see the warrior having crowd control... at all. Being primary support role (like ENC and BRD) brings more than just CC, but flexing into support requires CC (like we know the rogue will have). Planting a banner that simply provides a buff (which almost all classes will provide to a group) does not fulfill the "role" of support imo.
Banner (flexible buff to match needs), formation (reaction to combat flow), shouts (buffs), strike of breaking(-15% armor), shield slam (interrupt), Pity the weak (aggro transfert).
While all theses wiki-ed abilities are prone to change, the warrior's design is far above most classes in terms of group contribution. Beeing majorly effective with melee groups (hit bonus & dodge reduction banner / Hit & riposte reduction banner), some banners may even help using a single rogue as a CCers due to Control duration increase (at the cost of something else of course) instead of relying on a control class that has little cost to it's mez.
Now the thing is : We all see the apples we wants in a basket, and what is to you "insufficient" might be gold for some other. 20 years ago no one cared about tank damage as long as they had a high rate of survival and kept decent threat. Raids were even managed around following the tank threat in bunker gear. Now people care little about survival as long as people aren't one shotted and focus solely on threat/damage as a whole, the more the merryer.
To me the current design of tanks seems interesting enough to create intricate play, and most tanks can contribute in making another tank even more sturdy while not actively tanking which does open a place in 6 man groups for an offtanking role. The warrior will buff & debuff ennemies so they are less of a burden and die faster, the direlord can sponge damage with Dire mark and sustain these peaks with self heals and life steals, and the paladin will directly contribue to heals and stuns while allowing for an emergency resurrection which is far more valuable if he isn't tanking due to a heavy health cost.
All theses still have to be polished and refined into working together, but I feel it's a bold move to try something else than current meta trends where all is gear and what pieces you put on : Making LAS relevant and usefull at different scales of play.
Providing utility to a group is not "flexing" as another role @Raidil, Mauv, Iksar. EVERY class can provide "utility" to a group, that does not mean they are "flexing support". To "flex" a role means to temporarily replace another class' role. There is no class that solely provides small amounts of utility - the Bard's "support role" comes in the form of Crowd Control, as well as the Enchanter and, as far as we know so far, the Necro. The Warrior will not be able to mez or charm or sap NPCs (like the rogue can when "flexing support").
If using your definitiion of flexing, everyoe could flex tank just because they can take threat or survive a hit or two... having a buff does not mean a class is "flexing support". All of the healers have buffs, does that automatically mean they flex support... and when they deal damage, now they are flexing DPS?
Add:
"THROUGH A SINGLE WORD, THE ENCHANTER CAN TURN THE INTENT OF AN ENEMY AND BREAK EVEN THE STRONGEST OF WILLS INTO SUBMISSION.
Like the current of a raging river is the pull of an Enchanter on the mind of their adversaries. Through a single word, the Enchanter can turn the intent of an enemy and break even the strongest of wills into submission. Whether through trickery or coercion, the Enchanter is adept at controlling the battlefield and forming order out of chaos.
Group Role: Support"
Add 2: If you've ever ran a damage parser in EQ, you would see that (even though the SHD abilities all look really evil, and actually deal damage over time, or even nuke) the warrior's raw skills/abilities vastly outperform the SHD. The way the math behind the scenes work when combining skill levels with additional abilities (like getting double and triple attack earlier and having a higher cap) makes a huge difference... and we already know that the warrior will have higher skill rating with some skills and access to all weapons and armor... likely not becaue they're going to flex support.
Add 3: You allow role flexing in a game like this for situations when you either can't find a specific class that is designed for a primary role, or you have multiples of the same class and only need one of a role at a time... like if you have two warriors, one would likely tank, while the other.... wait for it... dealt damage (not crowd control aka "support").
One other thing to think about... As far as I can remember there has never been any promise that all classes will have a 'Flex' ability.
So while one Tank might do slightly more damage as the other tanks, I do not think that this will be a 'Flex' role for them.
Darch said: "Add 3: You allow role flexing in a game like this for situations when you either can't find a specific class that is designed for a primary role, or you have multiples of the same class and only need one of a role at a time... like if you have two warriors, one would likely tank, while the other.... wait for it... dealt damage (not crowd control aka "support")."
Joppa has many times refuted this exact idea. He uses this term 'Flexing' to mean it's like really pushing beyond your normal ability. It's also not meant to be something you can keep doing indefinately.
If a Monk starts Tanking, it's meant to have a time limit. Once his Tank abilities are on cooldown he's just as squishy as everyone else again. You won't pick a Monk to be the Tank for your group unless you are doing trivial content or you are prepared to sit and wait on his cooldowns after every pull.
This whole 'Flex' idea is really a 'Just in case...' type thing. As Joppa has said many times, Flexing is never meant to act as a replacement for that Role. Rogues can CC, but they are never meant to replace an Enchanter as the CC'er for the group. It's meant to be 'In case the Enchanter dies...' or 'If the Enchanter is in the kitchen getting a drink and the group gets respawns'. The Rogue can CC or Monk can offtank to fill in during the emergency, but that does not mean they are meant to ever main CC or Tank for your group.
If you ever found a class being able to perform their 'Flex' well enough to take that role in a normal group VR will likely step in to nerf them down to prevent this. After the Stream where Minus was main CC for his group while playing a Rogue, Joppa clearly stated that this was an issue and they would need to tune this better to prevent it from being a valid strategy.
'Flexing' is being designed as a way for classes to temporarily help out in an emergency.
So since this 'Flex' thing is more of an 'In case...' type of thing, I think that you will likely only ever see 'Flex' ability to one of the non-dps roles. Classes that can Flex CC, or Flex Tank, or Flex Heal.
I predict we won't see much 'Flex' dps. I don't see very many emergencies where you would need a non-dps to quickly 'Flex' into a dps role. The only exception might be Enchanters who might be able to 'Flex' dps for content that might have 'burn' phases, or fights where there is no CC at all. This would likely be very mana inefficient and burn him through his resources very quickly.
We are also likely to mostly see DPS classes having these 'Flex' muscles. You normally won't want your Tank to be the one trying to 'Flex' CC since for balance reasons VR would need to make him lose Tankiness while he's 'Flexing'. You also won't want your Healer to 'Flex' to help out since this would hinder their ability to heal while 'Flexing'. And this is seperate from those classes built in utility, since obviously Healers will have things like Buffs and/or Debuffs and stuff that's part of their primary role, and Tanks will have inturrupts and hamstrings or some such in their main role. I just mean we won't see them building in many 'Flex' things into these classes. Of course just my prediction.
GoofyWarriorGuy said:One other thing to think about... As far as I can remember there has never been any promise that all classes will have a 'Flex' ability.
So while one Tank might do slightly more damage as the other tanks, I do not think that this will be a 'Flex' role for them.
Darch said: "Add 3: You allow role flexing in a game like this for situations when you either can't find a specific class that is designed for a primary role, or you have multiples of the same class and only need one of a role at a time... like if you have two warriors, one would likely tank, while the other.... wait for it... dealt damage (not crowd control aka "support")."Joppa has many times refuted this exact idea. He uses this term 'Flexing' to mean it's like really pushing beyond your normal ability. It's also not meant to be something you can keep doing indefinately.
Joppa never refuted that statement, he in fact said that they didn't want a group to have to choose a specific class in order to be successful. If you have two tanks in a group, only one will be tanking, and the other will either be AFK or dealing damage... they will never be flexing support (and even if they could, it would be even less likely to flex support if there is only 1 in a group). I think you misread the entirety of my statement and just focused on a single sentence. If you read the rest of the conversation between Iksar and I, you are making the same point I am. The Warrior will not be "flex" support just because they have banners - the "support" provided from the banners are in fact the mechanic of the class - "Flexing" means temporarily taking over another class' role.
Iksar, Raidil and Mauv seem to think the warrior will be flexing support because their banners provide utility.
I partially agree with you on this:
GoofyWarriorGuy said:I predict we won't see much 'Flex' dps. I don't see very many emergencies where you would need a non-dps to quickly 'Flex' into a dps role. The only exception might be Enchanters who might be able to 'Flex' dps for content that might have 'burn' phases, or fights where there is no CC at all. This would likely be very mana inefficient and burn him through his resources very quickly.
The part I agree on is that we won't see it identified as "flex dps" because the ability to deal damage is innate to EVERY class as it is in every other MMO. When a class stops performing their primary role, and focuses solely on DPS. They will never match the DPS of an actual DPS class... but a class "flexing" into another role is not meant to replace that role.
But again.. to my original statement, the warrior will not "flex support"
Yes... I was not meaning to invalidate the rest of your points.
I just think that too many people in this thread are assuming that all classes will have a 'Flex' role and are trying to guess which 'Flex' role each of the Tanks will have. It's quite possible (and my personal guess) that None of the Tank classes will be able to 'Flex' in any way outside their Tank role.
Even Paladin's having some Heal abilities, I don't predict they will be able to Flex into an actual Healing role even temporarily. I predict their healing is complimentary and not meant to be a Primary healing source to keep a different Tank alive. Their Healing ability is more like a Tanking 'Forte' as Joppa likes to call it, where Paladin Tanks make the Healers job easier since they can have spill over group healing.
Darch said:"Joppa never refuted that statement, he in fact said that they didn't want a group to have to choose a specific class in order to be successful. If you have two tanks in a group, only one will be tanking, and the other will either be AFK or dealing damage... they will never be flexing support"
The statement I was saying Joppa refuted was (Paraphrasing): "'Flexing' is meant to allow groups to use a class from 1 role to fill a different role when you can't find a class that's primary role is that Role"
But you are right that he DID say that you didn't have to choose a specific class in order to be successful. Sub-optimal groups will happen, and sometimes players will need to 'Flex' more often. But a group with no Enchanter is not going to constantly pull multiple enemies and then just expect the Rogue to be the CCer full time or the Monk to just Offtank constantly. They will adapt their gameplay to make sure they get Solo pulls most of the time.
And like you said... if you have multiple Tanks or multiple Healers they will likely just use more of their Damage abilities rather than 'Flexing' into anything.
What Joppa wants (from how I understand what he's said); Players shouldn't be joining groups to fill a role that they only 'Flex' into. If a group is looking for a Crowd Control for their group, you shouldn't have Rogues signing up to fill that spot. If a group is seeking a Tank, a Monk shouldn't be chosen to come be their main Tank.
As I said... if this starts happening, VR will likely start pushing the Nerf buttons to make sure this isn't a valid strategy.
GoofyWarriorGuy said:Yes... I was not meaning to invalidate the rest of your points.
I just think that too many people in this thread are assuming that all classes will have a 'Flex' role and are trying to guess which 'Flex' role each of the Tanks will have. It's quite possible (and my personal guess) that None of the Tank classes will be able to 'Flex' in any way outside their Tank role.
Even Paladin's having some Heal abilities, I don't predict they will be able to Flex into an actual Healing role even temporarily. I predict their healing is complimentary and not meant to be a Primary healing source to keep a different Tank alive. Their Healing ability is more like a Tanking 'Forte' as Joppa likes to call it, where Paladin Tanks make the Healers job easier since they can have spill over group healing.
Yes. That is also a very good point; not every class will be able to Flex into any other role, and you also mentioned that flexing at all will likely be something that DPS roles can do so that they can be more useful to groups other than just performing damage.
You can play any way that you want. A DPS tank could be fine if you have a group of people that you normally play with or a guild that will take you along as DPS. The real problem you're going to find is that if you're just looking for a group as DPS you're going to run into problems. If you're yelling in chat "32 Warrior LFG" then the group inviting you is going to be looking for a tank, not DPS.
zassik said:You can play any way that you want. A DPS tank could be fine if you have a group of people that you normally play with or a guild that will take you along as DPS. The real problem you're going to find is that if you're just looking for a group as DPS you're going to run into problems. If you're yelling in chat "32 Warrior LFG" then the group inviting you is going to be looking for a tank, not DPS.
yep this is just it. but as for flex whats been said i still see as it is that a paly will flex heal to help group in trouble for what ever reason war will be utiity and dire will have burst dps if not tanking joppa has said that the direlord will have the highest burst dps of the tanks and they will have a slite higher dps over the other tanks that dose not mean they will be a bid time dps person nope. my guess is they will do maybe 10% more dps simular geard to a paly and war do to them tanking an living means to kill fast get crits and heal from them. and if not tanking the brust dps will help maybe burn down a mob about to run but will add just a touch more thin there tanking dps not even close to a dps rank.