What do you all think of non-healers having an in-combat resurrection spell/skill? I know all the healers plus the paladin are already set to have some type of resurrect. I'm more thinking about a DPS class getting the ability.
I specifically mention in-combat because I'd like to see how it affects actual battles and encounters. It's a different dynamic if a class with something like feign death gets one that's out-of-combat only, and groups use it as a get out of jail free card. Maybe some of you would prefer the latter version over the former infringing into healer territory?
Is this something you would like to see in one of the DPS classes at release, or even in a class reveal of a future expansion? I personally think this could lead to more diverse group compositions while exploring, and potentially allow the devs to create more difficult boss/disposition mechanics for us to overcome.
I think that it would take away from an important class identity ability and is one step closer to making too many dps classes ideal for soloing, which I'm strongly against. There will be more than enough other abilities and group synergy opening up to overcome whatever obstacles folks perceive will happen in Pantheon. I think the boss mechanics already planned will be suffcient. Especially since we have very little information on what those mechanics will be. I want to see what VR has planned in action, before I start thinking it's not enough. Nothing I've seen suggest that any of this is even nescessary.
I like the idea of keeping rez spells to a small amount of classes similar to EQ or VG. But I do hope they consider something like the rez stones in VG. For those that do not know in VG all healers could rez and on top of that they could hand out stones to their group members that could only be used to rez them if they fell. I really like this mechanic.
Oh and if they make a paladin suck then make sure they can rez but if they are amazing then skipping the rez could be ok.
dorotea said:I agree with Lafael (and almost everything that came after for that matter but I do think paladins should get it).
If Paladins were to get a resurrect, there should be a few things about it: 1. Paladins should not get a rez as early as the true priest classes; 2. It should not be as powerful in term of returning XP as true priest rezzes; 3. It should have a much greater cooldown than true priest rezzes (think once-per-day Lay-On-Hands type thing.
Using a Paladin as resurrector should only be as a last resort and should not be in any way as convenient as having a cleric with you.
What if a Paladin resurrect was only powerful because of WHO he was resurrecting? Put whatever lore or story or reasoning you want behind it, but maybe they're only powerful enough to reserrect other players who are powerful enough to resurrect anyone. (Paladins can only res priest classes).
Ranarius said:What if a Paladin resurrect was only powerful because of WHO he was resurrecting? Put whatever lore or story or reasoning you want behind it, but maybe they're only powerful enough to reserrect other players who are powerful enough to resurrect anyone. (Paladins can only res priest classes).
Sure, I like that.
I like class limitations. It's part of my opinion on class dependency which goes hand in hand with class imbalance. That doesnt mean you cant do anything if you dont have a healer, you just cant do the thing you had in mind. But you can still do something challenging without a healer if you are careful with a non-standard group you just have to figure out how. Fight in the gnomish way maybe or fight in the ogreish way.
PvP is a different story as far as class imbalance but I think it will still hold true as the social dynamic will be much stronger in a PvP environment as certain classes will need to be protected, a hierarchy established in a social group. Classes will know in what order the targets are on their backs when they see others.
I don't see why not as long is it doesn't mess up balance, which is up to the devs.
People get very precious about what they think their favourite class 'should be', but high fantasy contains a lot of sensible options across it's many worlds and Terminus is new ground.
There are some fundamentals to the game like life and death and travel that don't have any good reason to be restricted to any particular class.
Why should only druids and wizards teleport? Why shouldn't clerics be able to use an angelic power to transport their group to safety or a nearby shrine. Rogues in Everquest could 'evac'. Perhaps rangers could, but only outdoors or in forest? Why couldn't summoners move people through the holes in reality through which they summon? Dire Lords use magic just as real as wizards - why can't they perform a blood rite that takes a group to safety?
As for resurrection, why can't rogues use a stimulant (poison type) to resuscitate? Why can't enchanters use mind control to have characters keep fighting beyond when they would normally have collapsed? Why can't a shaman return a spirit to a body or even bend time for an in-combat res?
That's all off the top of my head in 5 minutes, so I'm pretty sure VR could come up with great lore for whatever they want a class to do.
TL;DR: There is plenty of potential for healthy lore to back up other classes doing things like reviving (and teleporting). As long as balance isn't ruined, there's no reason why not.
I'm a firm believer in class destinctiveness and classes with a specific role primarily only being able to fill that role. As soon as each class starts to be able to do everything, regardless of the mechanic, it takes away from the uniqueness of each class and the interdependancy of classes. We could certianly come of up all sorts of reasons why everyone should be able to do everything, but ultimately I think it undermines what Pantheon is striving to achieve. We already see classes being able to "flex" into other areas. So far, it seems to be on a very limited basis. I hope it remains that way. Rez is a primary feature of the healing classes and should stay within thier perview.
disposalist said:TL;DR: There is plenty of potential for healthy lore to back up other classes doing things like reviving (and teleporting). As long as balance isn't ruined, there's no reason why not.
I don't think anyone is concerned with rez affecting the Lore, as you are correct that Lore can be easily adjusted. What I and others are saying is that it does mess up balance. Rezzing is almost as basic a foundation of Healer Class as Healing itself. It is core to their identity in the minds of most of us who play one.
As a practical matter, the structure of Classes is already to the point that adding Rez to another Class - or worse, several - would not just affect that particular Class, but would unbalance Healers relative to all the other Classes.
As a main healer and tank, I've been playing one of the popular MMO's which currently has 2 out of the 12 DPS classes with an in-combat resurrect. It's been a huge boon when healers are learning fights with an experienced DPS that can rez. Takes a huge weight off the newer healers' shoulders, which I think is a positive for encouraging more people into one of the least played roles.
We've already seen mechanics in Pantheon that specifically target or shut down healers. I'm incredibly excited for that new challenge. However, that is even more pressure for healers to not mess up, or the party is guaranteed to wipe without any way to recover. Especially with the harsher death penalities, which I'm also looking forward to experiencing.
I, personally, am yet to those classes required in runs or affecting healers in any negative way. Healers are still expected to heal and rez, while the DPS is expected to focus on damage.
@Lafael - I agree paladins should get their resurrect at a higher level than the other healers. As for potentially druids, I believe any healer not having a proper resurrect creates an imbalance in their ability to perform their expected jobs.
@Dikenzu - Soloing should not be affected by a class having a resurrect unless they have a self-resurrect similar to the soulstones Warlocks had in WoW.
@Jothany - I'm ambivalent about the paladin having one since it'll be hard to cast a rez while tanking making it more limited in use during an encounter. As a healer main, I definitely get that class jealousy aspect, but boy does it go away when a DPS saves my derriere after I've messed up, haha.
@Ranarius - I figured that might be one of the more popular sentiments in this community, haha. Thank you for the input!
@Susurrus - I'm with you there. It should be a small number of classes. If VR does decide to give resurrect to a DPS class, it should be only one for now.
@Aanwenae - Heft side effects for any non-healer resurrect I hope would be implemented as well. Maybe something like double mana usage than a normal one? For a resource intensive game, that should make it impactful.
@Vandraad - Is there anything inherent about druids or even mages that makes teleports exclusive to them besides precedence? As someone who never played DnD or original EQ, I'm genuinely curious.
@Manouk - What other class limitations would you like to see? I guess it would also depend on how strict the limitations you want to see. We already know Pantheon will have flex roles, and a rez could be part of that.
@disposalist - I wasn't even thinking about the lore behind it. VR has created a new world with no pre-established IP. They can justify whatever they wish in any way they want through the lore they're creating. What if part of the ancient monk teachings is a high level heart reset? I do agree that the most important thing is keeping balance.
As a DND player as long as it fits the class lore I am fine with it. I don't see it as a class defining feature. If Paladins, Necromancers, and even Bards potentially all have a revive I wouldn't even bat an eye. I would expect the paladin to only get theirs mid to end game but it is fine by me.
Mechanically from an MMO point of view a revive should be a revive nomatter what class casts it. Don't punish healers with taking some crap paladin revive. If VR wants pallies to have a crappier ability have it cost gold or give it a super long cool down or give it a limited revive window or hell limit it to healers only because their souls can somehow find their way back more easily due to their knowledge of bringing others back. One revive every 4 hours is a flex ability. Saving everyone time by reviving the cleric can be worth a hefty gold sink of an expensive reagent the group is willing to fork over to get set up faster. Perhaps the necromancer can only revive the recently dead so anyone dead longer than 1 minute cannot get revived. There are plenty of options to limit abilities.
dorotea said:I agree that if a paladin gets a resurrection it should be more limited than those given to the healing classes.
Last we saw it was.
You sacrifice half of your health to resurrect a fallen ally. If you are below half health when you use this ability, you will be brought to 1 point of health and left in an Overzealous state, obstructing healing effects on you for X seconds. (Uses 2 Reckoning Points)
Jothany said:disposalist said:TL;DR: There is plenty of potential for healthy lore to back up other classes doing things like reviving (and teleporting). As long as balance isn't ruined, there's no reason why not.
I don't think anyone is concerned with rez affecting the Lore, as you are correct that Lore can be easily adjusted. What I and others are saying is that it does mess up balance. Rezzing is almost as basic a foundation of Healer Class as Healing itself. It is core to their identity in the minds of most of us who play one.
As a practical matter, the structure of Classes is already to the point that adding Rez to another Class - or worse, several - would not just affect that particular Class, but would unbalance Healers relative to all the other Classes.
I wasn't suggesting several classes should get a resurrect-equivalent ability, necessarily, but definitely am saying not only clerics should have domain over player life-and-death. They might not get exactly the same ability as a cleric, but if a Paladin or Necromancer or whatever had something similar, but limited or situational, I would think that fine. Certainly, other 'healers' in Pantheon - druids and shaman - have good justification to have resurrection type abilities.
Of course if it proved to be unbalancing, then no, but I can't see why "no cleric = no res" is particularly 'balanced'. Also, we have little idea what class balance will look like yet, really...
disposalist said:Jothany said:I wasn't suggesting several classes should get a resurrect-equivalent ability, necessarily, but definitely am saying not only clerics should have domain over player life-and-death. . . but I can't see why "no cleric = no res" is particularly 'balanced'.disposalist said:TL;DR: There is plenty of potential for healthy lore to back up other classes doing things like reviving (and teleporting). As long as balance isn't ruined, there's no reason why not.
I don't think anyone is concerned with rez affecting the Lore, as you are correct that Lore can be easily adjusted. What I and others are saying is that it does mess up balance. Rezzing is almost as basic a foundation of Healer Class as Healing itself. It is core to their identity in the minds of most of us who play one.
As a practical matter, the structure of Classes is already to the point that adding Rez to another Class - or worse, several - would not just affect that particular Class, but would unbalance Healers relative to all the other Classes.
Are you aware that VR had already said that Shaman and Druid can rez, and all 3 Healers will return the same % of lost XP?
The Class page says that Paladin can rez, but I have no info on how limited that may be compared to the Healers. So that is 4 rez Classes already. That is where my perspective on this issue comes from.
