Forums » The Shaman

Anyone else thinks Shaman should to be a class that can res?

    • 2257 posts
    November 24, 2016 3:11 PM PST

    Bazgrim said:[/]

    While your point is fair, it seems like you're completely basing it off of how EQ1 worked. I was considering my experience from a more broad variety of games. I've realized that a strong argument cannot really be made either way until we learn what the death penalty will be like in Pantheon.

    EQ1 wasn't my first and only rodeo.  In any game I've played, the better the players the more creative they can be in group composition.  There is nothing even hinted at so far in Pantheon that would indicate we won't see more of the same.  Healers heal, tanks tank, dps dps.  Those who are better at their own class, understand the strengths and weakness of other classes and have a strong grasp of game mechanics will have more options. 


    This post was edited by Vandraad at November 24, 2016 3:11 PM PST
    • 3 posts
    December 6, 2016 12:56 PM PST

    I always enjoyed the EQ1 shaman because of it's utility and versatility. Having the ability to heal has always been a nice additional tool, but never my key role when playing a shaman. I dearly hope that the shaman will play a similar role in pantheon, and i will leave superior heal and rezzing power to clerics without hesitation.

    Sometimes you would still end up as the only healer, and having the ability to rezz would be nice, especially when hunting in a less crowded area. What i would like to see would be some kind of temporary rezz which summons your fallen comrade to his corpse and gives him a preserved soul in a talisman or voodoo doll, shrunken skull, whatever. The shm rezz won't give back xp, just summon the dead one back and extend his rezz timer to several more hours. Later a cleric can restore the xp trapped in the talisman/doll/skull. This would keep a group going also without clerics around, and still leave the need for clerics and also for the social interaction untouched.

    Another thought that occured to me was a specialized spell for battlerezzes. It restores full hp/mana, has no rezz effect, but it costs the rezzed one 50% of permanent xp loss, and has a long cooldown to avoid zerging. This would be a utility for special situations, but then again, such a spell would better suit a cleric than a shaman.

    • 532 posts
    January 25, 2017 3:18 PM PST

    Vandraad said:

    Sarim said:

    It's not neccessary for priests to get healing spells with the same power at the same levels. As you said, a shaman for example should be able to mitigate a lot of damage through slows and other debuffs, and so would not need to have a healing spell with the power of a cleric. A druid might not mitigate damage, but help kill a mob faster through DS and DoT spells (but these must be cheap enough that the druid can still keep enough mana for healing). I think EQ had a good approach in this regard (though not perfect).

    Read back through all the threads on priest healing abilities and you'll find you and I see it the same way.  The cleric gets the big heals because it does not have any means by which (other than say an AC buff) to mitigate incoming DPS or increase outgoing DPS. The Druids can alter outgoing DPS through a strong DS so its heals are near in strength to the Cleric. The Shaman can mitigate incoming DPS and increase outgoing DPS so the strength of it's individual healing spells is lower.  But in the end if you have take 3 identical tanks each fighting an exactly identical NPC with one tank healed by a Cleric, one by a Druid and one by a Shaman, all 3 will keep the tank alive.

    Many people, however, disagree with this concept and want the same individual spell healing power for all 3 classes.  toss in equal rezzing for each and you get 3 cookie cutter priests only having the name as a difference.  Boring.

     

    Exactly...

    • 186 posts
    February 9, 2017 1:54 PM PST

    I personally hope they don't have resurrection unless it's going to be a swap with Clerics because of lore reasons (like you mentioned).

    Shamans actually had a lot more going for them than Clerics.  They had the best slow spells, best debuffs, better damage spells, better utility spells, the best buffs, a pet, and even could wear chainmail armor.  I'd rather that not all classes in a category have the same abilities.  Having resurrection and great heals as a must just makes things very bland.  You might as well just stick to having one healing class in that case.  I feel the same way about the Druid vs the Cleric. 

    • 2257 posts
    February 9, 2017 6:18 PM PST

    UnknownQuantity said:

    I personally hope they don't have resurrection unless it's going to be a swap with Clerics because of lore reasons (like you mentioned).

    Shamans actually had a lot more going for them than Clerics.  They had the best slow spells, best debuffs, better damage spells, better utility spells, the best buffs, a pet, and even could wear chainmail armor.  I'd rather that not all classes in a category have the same abilities.  Having resurrection and great heals as a must just makes things very bland.  You might as well just stick to having one healing class in that case.  I feel the same way about the Druid vs the Cleric. 

    We already know the three priest classes WILL be able to resurrect.  What we don't know is if 'resurrection' will just be an ability or if it will be a spell line like in EQ1 where you got better versions of it over time.  If it is a spell line, the next question will be if the 3 priest classes get the spells at the same time and interval.

    • 4528 posts
    February 10, 2017 10:58 AM PST

    Vandraad said:

    We already know the three priest classes WILL be able to resurrect.

    Can you provide a source for this, please?

    • 1986 posts
    February 10, 2017 2:24 PM PST

    I hope it to be the case. It would make sense from the aspect of all classes of a role being adequate for that role. Afterall, you could say a shaman is just as good for a raid as a cleric, but I dont think that statement would have much teeth if the shaman cant also raid. (i.e. Cleric required). 

     

    I also wouldnt mind seeing some other non-healer support classes get an out-of-combat only rez (Bard, Enchanter). But that wouldnt make or break it for me. 

     

    But not sure Ive ever read anything about all healers can rez either.

    • 532 posts
    February 17, 2017 12:47 PM PST

    Amsai said:

    I hope it to be the case. It would make sense from the aspect of all classes of a role being adequate for that role. Afterall, you could say a shaman is just as good for a raid as a cleric, but I dont think that statement would have much teeth if the shaman cant also raid. (i.e. Cleric required). 

     

    I also wouldnt mind seeing some other non-healer support classes get an out-of-combat only rez (Bard, Enchanter). But that wouldnt make or break it for me. 

     

    But not sure Ive ever read anything about all healers can rez either.

     

    If you give each class a class defining ability (or maybe even a few) and make it such that a shaman IS needed in a raid (due to haste debuff, resists, etc) then why would a shaman not be required for a raid? Make a shaman a decent healer but the best debuffer in the game, and he/she is guaranteed a spot on the raid. Just my opinion, but I think it makes little sense to have X number of priest classes that basically all do the same thing, just in a different package.

    I, too, have not seen any mention that this will be the case...just questions about it and a dev or two asking about how we feel about it.


    This post was edited by Anistosoles at February 17, 2017 12:48 PM PST
    • 1986 posts
    February 17, 2017 2:31 PM PST
    @Anistosoles
    That wasnt really my point. But it is an important point. I too think that each class among similar roles should bring something unique to the table. Because one of my biggest pet peeves is useless or unwanted classes.

    But in this case I wasnt speaking of each class performing a unique and needed functions. Im talking about more broadly adequtely filling the role. And VR has said though some classes may be more ideal in some situations than others. Each class for a given role should be viable. And in my opinion a healer should do 3 things well enough to make them relevant. Thats to heal to cure and to rez. Whatever else they do is what can set them apart. But see in the situation in which for instance Shaman and Druid cant rez well now you are basically required to have at least one Cleric for major encounters or raids.

    See the difference? While I dont want any class to be so useless its never called upon. I also dont want any class of a specific role to be required when any class of that role should do. So according to the devs stance I should be able to raid with only Druids and Shamans if thats the only healers in my guild. That really wouldnt ring true to me if only Cleric had rez. Because I consider rez an essential function of any main healer (but not off healers). Unless no healers get a rez and they either decide to not have that mechanic for the game or otherwise assign that duty to another role such as support classes. But then Id expect every class in that kind of major support role to be able to rez. If Chanter then Bard and any other major support role class as well.
    • 251 posts
    March 2, 2017 6:36 PM PST

    All healers should be able to Res.

    All healers should have different ways/types of Res.***

    A healer without a Res is no healer at all, imo.  This is partly a practical argument (*) and party a lore argument (**).

    *Practical: SOMEONE in a given party needs to be able to revive party members so you don't have to stop in the middle of a run and spend half an hour "LFCleric for Res", go hunt down the Cleric, bring him to the site (how you'll do this with all party spots full...) and then have them revive the downed party members.  That's not fun gameplay or interesting interactions, that's simply stupid.  Why the healer?  Because every party needs SOMEONE that can heal, and you're guaranteed a tank and a healer in all groups doing dungeons or the like.  You'll also have DPS as well, and possibly a Support/Control. 

    **However, in lore terms, any of the healers resing people makes sense.  Not all of the DPSers, tanks, or support/control having a res makes sense.  (I should note here that having some classes with an out of combat weak res, like the Paladin for example having a weaker version of Cleric res that can only be used out of combat and uses a lot of mana so it actually takes some time to revive several party members, makes sense as well.)

    ***What I mean by this is something like (this is just one example):

    Cleric: Res is a cast spell, long cast (10-20 seconds), moderate mana cost to the Cleric, revives the person with XP restoration and 20-40% health and mana.

    Druid: Res is a cast spell, may require some nature-y reagent, moderate cast (5-10 seconds), high mana cost, revives the person with some XP restoration and 50% health and mana, but also has a debuf for an hour that reduces all their stats by 10% for that hour.

    Shaman: Res is a cast spell, may require some spirit-y reagent, long cast (20-40 seconds), high mana cost, revives the person with XP restoration and 10% health and mana, but also has a debuff for two hours that reduces all their stats by 30%.

    ...stuff can be tweaked, but they each have a different way they heal and revive in lore (Clerics from divine/holy power, Druids from nature power with natural healing, and Shamen with spiritual power).  Since Druids are healing the body/natural form, it is a strong heal, but without the divine power, there's still a shock to the body (the debuff), and because the focus of the ressurection is the body not the mind, they regain the least XP.  Shaman, on the other hand, are reviving the spirit, so the person has the most XP restored, but not the body, so they come out of it very weak.  Clerics are healing with divine power, so this effects the mind and the body, and because of the divine nature, also doesn't cause shock to the body the way the other two healers (Druids reenergizing the body so the soul is restored to it, Shaman leading the soul back and pushing it into the body, Cleric's is basically a divine hand-holding the soul back to the body).

    In this way, all the healers (and for whatever else Shaman will be, they are one of the three "healer" classes) will have this important ability, but they will have ones that work differently.  The Cleric will still be the best Reser while Druids will be the better in-combat reser (if a tank goes down and you need them up and with decent health NOW, for example) and Shaman will be a functional reser for small groups or if you have a Druid and Shaman and need a person up after the fight is over and want to minimize XP lost.

    .

    Any system like this will work, but again, either all healers or all tanks or all X (that will be in a part spot) need to have a Res spell.

    Healers make the most sense in lore, and it's what MMO players expect from games at this point, so it stands to reason that's the way to go.

    But, this can be done with variations among them.

    • 5 posts
    March 7, 2017 4:03 PM PST

    Let's go hardcore and remove rez spell altogether.  I want to see a completely different mechanic.  Maybe something on the order of making XP more of a commodity; whereby, you go to an NPC in town and purchase stones that you charge with XP.  So when you die, you use a stone that anyone can have or use.  This means that people can farm XP and sell stones.  People raiding can buy those stones, die a lot, and still get the raid done quickly.  This not only helps the player based economy, it slows down leveling, and gives the XP grind a whole new meaning.  

     

    Quick Off topic - I would love to also see attunement type stones that are like clickies that use these stones.  If we can get more items/spells that use XP as charges, you would essentially have an upkeep system, requiring you to either grind or buy stones to maintain epic gear and spells. It's AA's but not AA's...

    • 2257 posts
    March 7, 2017 7:28 PM PST

    Nordicwolf said:

    Let's go hardcore and remove rez spell altogether.  I want to see a completely different mechanic.  Maybe something on the order of making XP more of a commodity; whereby, you go to an NPC in town and purchase stones that you charge with XP.  So when you die, you use a stone that anyone can have or use.  This means that people can farm XP and sell stones.  People raiding can buy those stones, die a lot, and still get the raid done quickly.  This not only helps the player based economy, it slows down leveling, and gives the XP grind a whole new meaning.  

     

    Quick Off topic - I would love to also see attunement type stones that are like clickies that use these stones.  If we can get more items/spells that use XP as charges, you would essentially have an upkeep system, requiring you to either grind or buy stones to maintain epic gear and spells. It's AA's but not AA's...

    People complain enough that content gets monopolized by farmers and you want to introduce a mechanic that would massively encourage farming?  The selling of XP for coin would be a massive market and ripe for RMT activities.  Even if you have to infuse your own XP into the stones, thus losing levels, you could still farm XP at an incredible clip once at max level, constantly pouring XP into those stones of yours.  Not a good idea.

    • 71 posts
    March 13, 2017 1:07 PM PDT

    Greetings,

    While I am not opposed to Shamans being able to resurrect a player, I don't believe we should be able to restore as much lost experience as a true cleric. We are a utility class and as such not ment to be restoring people back to pre-death experience. Our ability to solo easier like a druid should leave the cleric as the defacto best resurrector in the game. Being able to combat resurrect a player should be something all three healer classes can do, but a challenge to do it while crap is hitting the fan.

     

    Sincerely,

    Robert A. Frederick jr.

    • 2257 posts
    March 13, 2017 7:02 PM PDT

    The reason why I keep saying that all 3 Priest classes will have the same resurrection abilities/spells is because Brad has insisted all along that all 3 priest classes should perform their primary function equally.  Resurrection and Healing are the primary function.

    Imagine you are the average player.  You're going to be rather risk averse.  You have limited playtime and you like that extra safety measure having a cleric that can rez in your group.  If you shortchange the other priests with lower quality rezzes, people will choose the cleric over the other priests. By having all 3 priests classes healing equally and rezzing equally, you actually make forming groups far easier for everyone.  You won't need to hold out for that cleric if you can only find a druid or shaman like in previous games. 

    • 2973 posts
    March 13, 2017 10:44 PM PDT

    Yeah all three healers should have equal rez capability. It's good for the game. Raid wipes are easier to deal with as are later game deaths as no one wants a crap rez when they can get the best xp rez. Too much burden on clerics for those kinds of things.

    • 1986 posts
    March 14, 2017 1:41 PM PDT

    I certainly hope this to be the case as well.

    • 98 posts
    March 20, 2017 7:31 AM PDT
    I have had similar discussions about tank classes, and I will put my bias up front: I broke my teeth on EQ and never played Vanguard.

    My Opinion is: No, I don't think shaman should get rez.

    I am not super attached to that opinion though. I can understand them getting it if Pantheon follows the Vanguard route of making all the healers equally effective at healing.

    My preference is that the Cleric functions as a "pure" healer, while the Shaman and Druid function as hybrid classes. I prefer having flexibility in being able to heal for a group that lacks a cleric, or slipping into a support role as needed.

    I feel like giving the Shaman parity in healing (adding a rez) means that you either have to take from their flexibility, or you make your Cleric class pointless.

    I have similar feelings on the tank classes/hybrids. I am open to being wrong, and I look forward to seeing what Pantheon ends up doing here.
    • 137 posts
    March 22, 2017 9:03 AM PDT

    I would have to agree with Vandraad on everything, if shaman get a rez., keep it less, simple, and separated.  Give the cleric best xp return, and less % return for the others.


    This post was edited by msk12 at March 22, 2017 9:05 AM PDT
    • 532 posts
    March 22, 2017 2:42 PM PDT

    Vandraad said:

    The reason why I keep saying that all 3 Priest classes will have the same resurrection abilities/spells is because Brad has insisted all along that all 3 priest classes should perform their primary function equally.  Resurrection and Healing are the primary function.

    Imagine you are the average player.  You're going to be rather risk averse.  You have limited playtime and you like that extra safety measure having a cleric that can rez in your group.  If you shortchange the other priests with lower quality rezzes, people will choose the cleric over the other priests. By having all 3 priests classes healing equally and rezzing equally, you actually make forming groups far easier for everyone.  You won't need to hold out for that cleric if you can only find a druid or shaman like in previous games. 

    First of all, I respect your opinions on this forum very much, Vandraad. However, I must disagree with making rezzes the same for every healing class. There has to be trade-offs. If every healing class ends up being numerically the same in the end, why not just have ONE healing class? Don't let shamans and druids (or necros, for that matter) heal at ALL. If shamans can outdamage clerics, but they can heal just as effectively and res as well as clerics...why bring a cleric??? A shaman that can mitigate damage better then a cleric, can out-dps a cleric, AND can rez as well as a cleric?

    A no brainer.

    However, if you are advocating for the healing classes to end up being equally effective in terms to healing and rezzes...then why have more than one healing class at all? Why should I pick a shaman over a druid or cleric if we end up being the same class in the end, dependent only upon the name of the skills we click on our hotbar?

    Again, not meaning to sound argumentative. I just want my main class--the shaman--to be something totally different than a typical healer class.


    This post was edited by Anistosoles at March 22, 2017 2:43 PM PDT
    • 71 posts
    March 22, 2017 4:57 PM PDT

    Anistosoles said:

    First of all, I respect your opinions on this forum very much, Vandraad. However, I must disagree with making rezzes the same for every healing class. There has to be trade-offs. If every healing class ends up being numerically the same in the end, why not just have ONE healing class? Don't let shamans and druids (or necros, for that matter) heal at ALL. If shamans can outdamage clerics, but they can heal just as effectively and res as well as clerics...why bring a cleric??? A shaman that can mitigate damage better then a cleric, can out-dps a cleric, AND can rez as well as a cleric?

    A no brainer.

    However, if you are advocating for the healing classes to end up being equally effective in terms to healing and rezzes...then why have more than one healing class at all? Why should I pick a shaman over a druid or cleric if we end up being the same class in the end, dependent only upon the name of the skills we click on our hotbar?

    Again, not meaning to sound argumentative. I just want my main class--the shaman--to be something totally different than a typical healer class.

     

    All three healers should be seperate when it comes to how they heal. As to druids and shamans having the ability to resurrect, I'm on the fence leaning towards a no. If all three healers have the same abilitys to heal and resurrect then why take a cleric at all let alone have more then one healing class. Since I mostly play shaman in games except for my last game only had clerics and we didnt get resurrections spells anyways, so its a moot point. Druids and shaman spells always tended to be slightly weaker at max level then a cleric to make up for their ability to solo over a cleric. On top of that at the time only clerics could resurrect. This is how it should be to keep a balance between the classes of healers. You might then say hey why take a druid or shaman then for a group and thats entirely up to that group but just because we can't resurrect or have superior heals doesn't mean we can out preform a cleric.

    • 2257 posts
    March 22, 2017 6:21 PM PDT

    Anistosoles said:

    Vandraad said:

    The reason why I keep saying that all 3 Priest classes will have the same resurrection abilities/spells is because Brad has insisted all along that all 3 priest classes should perform their primary function equally.  Resurrection and Healing are the primary function.

    Imagine you are the average player.  You're going to be rather risk averse.  You have limited playtime and you like that extra safety measure having a cleric that can rez in your group.  If you shortchange the other priests with lower quality rezzes, people will choose the cleric over the other priests. By having all 3 priests classes healing equally and rezzing equally, you actually make forming groups far easier for everyone.  You won't need to hold out for that cleric if you can only find a druid or shaman like in previous games. 

    First of all, I respect your opinions on this forum very much, Vandraad. However, I must disagree with making rezzes the same for every healing class. There has to be trade-offs. If every healing class ends up being numerically the same in the end, why not just have ONE healing class? Don't let shamans and druids (or necros, for that matter) heal at ALL. If shamans can outdamage clerics, but they can heal just as effectively and res as well as clerics...why bring a cleric??? A shaman that can mitigate damage better then a cleric, can out-dps a cleric, AND can rez as well as a cleric?

    A no brainer.

    However, if you are advocating for the healing classes to end up being equally effective in terms to healing and rezzes...then why have more than one healing class at all? Why should I pick a shaman over a druid or cleric if we end up being the same class in the end, dependent only upon the name of the skills we click on our hotbar?

    Again, not meaning to sound argumentative. I just want my main class--the shaman--to be something totally different than a typical healer class.

    Thank you for the sentiment Anistosoles!  I'm just going to add that I really and truly hope that my interpretation of what I believe I've been told or have been said is incorrect.  While I can see why VR would give all priests the rez ability while also making how those priests heal different (yet still equal in overall strength) but, like you, would prefer even greater differences between the classes, akin to EQ1 for lack of a better comparison.

    • 4528 posts
    March 23, 2017 10:42 AM PDT

    Zohkar said:

    Anistosoles said:

    First of all, I respect your opinions on this forum very much, Vandraad. However, I must disagree with making rezzes the same for every healing class. There has to be trade-offs. If every healing class ends up being numerically the same in the end, why not just have ONE healing class? Don't let shamans and druids (or necros, for that matter) heal at ALL. If shamans can outdamage clerics, but they can heal just as effectively and res as well as clerics...why bring a cleric??? A shaman that can mitigate damage better then a cleric, can out-dps a cleric, AND can rez as well as a cleric?

    A no brainer.

    However, if you are advocating for the healing classes to end up being equally effective in terms to healing and rezzes...then why have more than one healing class at all? Why should I pick a shaman over a druid or cleric if we end up being the same class in the end, dependent only upon the name of the skills we click on our hotbar?

    Again, not meaning to sound argumentative. I just want my main class--the shaman--to be something totally different than a typical healer class.

     

    All three healers should be seperate when it comes to how they heal. As to druids and shamans having the ability to resurrect, I'm on the fence leaning towards a no. If all three healers have the same abilitys to heal and resurrect then why take a cleric at all let alone have more then one healing class. Since I mostly play shaman in games except for my last game only had clerics and we didnt get resurrections spells anyways, so its a moot point. Druids and shaman spells always tended to be slightly weaker at max level then a cleric to make up for their ability to solo over a cleric. On top of that at the time only clerics could resurrect. This is how it should be to keep a balance between the classes of healers. You might then say hey why take a druid or shaman then for a group and thats entirely up to that group but just because we can't resurrect or have superior heals doesn't mean we can out preform a cleric.

    From Brad: "There are four core roles -- DPS, tanking, healing and CC. It is important that each of the classes is good at one of these roles, and also as good as another class which shares a role. The difference will be that one class will express that role through abilities and spells very differently than the other."

    • 5 posts
    April 28, 2017 4:56 AM PDT

    I want to see many differences in the healing styles as much as anyone but I feel they should all have some form of rez.  I think it's important for getting groups and keeping them together.  My opinion could change depending on death penalties, but just knowing that there will be death penalties your average group is going to pick a healer with rez over one without if the content is difficult.


    This post was edited by Xaest at April 28, 2017 4:56 AM PDT
    • 262 posts
    April 28, 2017 7:16 PM PDT

    From Joppa on MMORPG(dot)com

     

    To clarify, Shaman will have the ability to revive a fallen ally, as will a few other classes. The Shaman-specific revive ability is not implemented yet - what we showed in stream was a prototype of the non-class specific revive mechanic. My comment in-stream was not very clear :)

     

    In this thread

    http://forums.mmorpg.com/discussion/463764/new-pantheon-stream-reminder-today-at-11am-pacific-time#latest

    • 1986 posts
    April 30, 2017 10:11 PM PDT

    I saw that to Xil. Good news I say. And looks like some hope for more support role type classes to get them as well from the wording. Because with Cleric and Shaman being confirmed as having rez, the "other" classes implies at least more than 1. Druid is almost definite. But that leaves room for at least 1 more if not more. I would hope support based roled like Enchanter or Bard? Possibly Necro seein how they are sort of masters of death magic?