Forums » The Cleric

Clerics and Ressurrect

    • 6 posts
    May 7, 2016 1:56 PM PDT

    Hm so I love my clerics. And I believe only clerics and crusader should get rez spells. Necro could via lore also get a rez spell.

     

    I do not want to see druids and shamans rezzing on top of what else their class brings to the table.

     

    Agree?

    • 162 posts
    May 8, 2016 7:21 AM PDT

    I agree with a part of what you say.

    I think druids should be allowed to revive... Druids should be allowed to revive people because of their nature magic, Lore speaking they use the nature magic to infuse life into their target.

    • 718 posts
    May 10, 2016 6:17 PM PDT

    Gracefulhealer said:

    Hm so I love my clerics. And I believe only clerics and crusader should get rez spells. Necro could via lore also get a rez spell.

     

    I do not want to see druids and shamans rezzing on top of what else their class brings to the table.

     

    Agree?

    I would agree if we're simply speaking about EQ classes.  The fact is we just don't have any idea what each class brings to the table in Pantheon, we only have assumptions (most of which are based on EQ classes).  I look forward to when we have some definitive class descriptions so we can actually have this discussion.  As it stands, it's hard when we only know a little about two classes and next to nothing about the rest.  

    Once we get solid class info we will be able to judge each class on their own merits and compare them with others accordingly.  Then statements like “I do not want to see druid and shaman rezzing on top of what else their class brings to the table” will carry some actual weight.  I might even tend to agree with you, it's just a little early for me to take that stance.

    That said, man I’m looking forward to having all the class info!

    • 645 posts
    May 10, 2016 11:26 PM PDT

    The topic was discussed in the shaman forum already: https://www.pantheonmmo.com/content/forums/topic/2443/anyone-else-thinks-shaman-should-to-be-a-class-that-can-res

    It seems to be quite a controversial topic. IMO the VG approach (with archetype roles like healer, tank, and each class belonging to one of these archetypes) worked quite well. While in EQ shamans and druids were often being considered "second class" healers, since they could not rez. That's something I'd rather not see in Pantheon.

    I think a better question might be "What do we give the cleric (beyond the best heals, hp buffs, ...)?" to make it attractive vs. shamans and druids.


    This post was edited by Sarim at May 10, 2016 11:27 PM PDT
    • 6 posts
    May 12, 2016 12:56 PM PDT

    I understand where everyone comes from but druids and shammies in EQ had other utility thus did not need rez. What in earth will clerics get that anyone needs other than "best heals" Sure give me all he sam,e buffs as shaman and call me a shleric. HAR HAR.

     

    I want each class to have something no one else can bring. HOLY LIGHT = REZ Nature Magic = no rez.

     

    Druids and shamans get rez and other utility =  bad idea, bad, bad.

     

    If classes have no identity then they are not relly classes.

    • 645 posts
    May 12, 2016 11:13 PM PDT

    It has been said already, but I think the best counter example is: Vanguards Bloodmage vs. Disciple. Two totally different approaches to healing, yet both were competent healers, and both could rez. Class identity for healers IMO has NOTHING to do with if the class can rez*. You really need to look beyond EQ :)

    * By that I mean: The rez spell shouldn't be a class defining attribute. I very much want every healing class to be able to rez.


    This post was edited by Sarim at May 12, 2016 11:16 PM PDT
    • 35 posts
    May 13, 2016 4:40 AM PDT

    I would give druids and shamans a rez, but it should be seriously inferior to what the cleric can offer. Like maximum 50% xp, 5 minutes cooldown, component needed... something like that. So a cleric would still be very superior (the same as in healing), but druids and shamans could get the work done.

    • 118 posts
    May 13, 2016 7:38 AM PDT

    I would like to see rez shift from being an XP recovery means and to just a healer's tool to bring back that one party member that fell in battle. It saves that player from walking back to the group alone but won't remove the sting from a complete party wipe. It also adds weight to death. 96% XP recovery means the effective XP loss on death isn't as big of a deal as it should.

     

    Edit: and in case it isn't clear, I think every class that is expected to heal a party should be able to rez.


    This post was edited by Mekada at May 13, 2016 7:39 AM PDT
    • 718 posts
    May 13, 2016 6:13 PM PDT

    Gracefulhealer said:

    I understand where everyone comes from but druids and shammies in EQ had other utility thus did not need rez. What in earth will clerics get that anyone needs other than "best heals" Sure give me all he sam,e buffs as shaman and call me a shleric. HAR HAR.

    This is exactly what I was referring to with my first response.  I appreciate the brevity, but I think we really need to start separating Pantheon classes from EQ classes.  Otherwise why even have a discussion?  Drop EQ classes in a new skin and there's your game; Pantheon: Rise of Everquest.

    • 320 posts
    May 17, 2016 12:19 PM PDT

    You can see a bunch from the thread we made on the shammy forums. But my main point still goes back to if a shaman or druid is the group's only healer (yes I think in a normal group setting they should be able to heal a group) and more than one person dies deep in a dungeon and it's a 5min recast that's a bit much. Shaman/druid rez should definitely lack the strength of a cleric's rez to the point where depending on what the death penalty is you'd still see people waiting for a cleric to rez them instead of a shaman/druid unless it can't wait or is impractical to wait. I can't remember if EQ had in-combat rezzing, but that's an example of something that's powerful for a cleric to have and stand apart from druid/shaman rezzes.

    I'll ignore the whole exp loss/return discussion since it has some complexities such as losing max level from deaths and only having max level gear but the druid/shaman rez not being able to get the level back.

    • 157 posts
    May 18, 2016 1:57 AM PDT

    Humperding said:

    I would give druids and shamans a rez, but it should be seriously inferior to what the cleric can offer. Like maximum 50% xp, 5 minutes cooldown, component needed... something like that. So a cleric would still be very superior (the same as in healing), but druids and shamans could get the work done.

    Why would you want one healing class be ‘very superior‘ too one another? So far we don‘t even know which class will be set up as a dedicated healer besides cleric nor what that class will have to offer besides heals. What if all healers are capable of healing, shining in some regards and lackng in others? With the many classes Pantheon has, I seriously hope there won`t be one sole class registered as "the" tank or "the" healer or "the" dps. Diversity in tanking or healing mechanics by all means! That this can be done without making one big pabulum is possible.

    • 707 posts
    June 7, 2016 10:25 PM PDT

    I've actually proposed a system where the healing classes could NOT rez. Reason being is it creates more depth and strategy. In EVERY group you need a healer. It is the one class that you really can not exclude. Some areas you can get away with a ghetto tank and use a monk or a bard and actually get some stuff accomplished without a true tank but having no healer in your group proves quite difficult to get anywhere at all.

    So knowing this, and if all healers can rez, it means you ALWAYS have a rez in group. IF you removed rez from healers you would then have to consider on whether or not you want rez in your group as leader. Sort of just like will you find a puller, or a CC'er, etc etc. Rezzing isn't a neccessity for your group to function well, some groups and players can get by without rezzing much at all. It is a nice commodity to have just in case you die and/or wipe though. But if every healer has rez then you never have to make this decision because you have it no matter what.

    I'd like to see the traditional healing classes be removed of their rezzing duties and then have classes like the crusader, necro, druid, etc have the ability to rez.

    edit. this would also add to the challenge and complexity of the 'death penalty'.


    This post was edited by NoobieDoo at June 7, 2016 10:27 PM PDT
    • 707 posts
    June 7, 2016 10:34 PM PDT

    Sarim said:

    The topic was discussed in the shaman forum already: https://www.pantheonmmo.com/content/forums/topic/2443/anyone-else-thinks-shaman-should-to-be-a-class-that-can-res

    It seems to be quite a controversial topic. IMO the VG approach (with archetype roles like healer, tank, and each class belonging to one of these archetypes) worked quite well. While in EQ shamans and druids were often being considered "second class" healers, since they could not rez. That's something I'd rather not see in Pantheon.

    I think a better question might be "What do we give the cleric (beyond the best heals, hp buffs, ...)?" to make it attractive vs. shamans and druids.



    You could start with giving them melee abilities. Not as strong as a crusader of course but there is no reason a plate wearing class would not have a decent array of melee skill. Undead ability of course. Some great heals, great HP and armor buffs. Holy magic.

    • 320 posts
    June 8, 2016 9:12 AM PDT

    NoobieDoo said:

     

    You could start with giving them melee abilities. Not as strong as a crusader of course but there is no reason a plate wearing class would not have a decent array of melee skill. Undead ability of course. Some great heals, great HP and armor buffs. Holy magic.

    I can't see them giving clerics much in terms of melee capabilities tbh. I agree on having high damage undead damaging spells though. You ask why give them plate but no melee skills? Armor type has nothing to do with combat abilities. If plate == melee then monks would wear plate. The plate armor is generally there so that the cleric can take a beating, the same logic goes to a healer using a shield (maybe they'll give tomes AC too, who knows). Since the cleric's abilities are so limited in diversity (typically) they need something to balance if they pull agro on a [big] heal which can be common when CC breaks or on pull sometimes.

    NoobieDoo said:

    I've actually proposed a system where the healing classes could NOT rez. Reason being is it creates more depth and strategy. In EVERY group you need a healer. It is the one class that you really can not exclude. Some areas you can get away with a ghetto tank and use a monk or a bard and actually get some stuff accomplished without a true tank but having no healer in your group proves quite difficult to get anywhere at all.

    ...

    I'd like to see the traditional healing classes be removed of their rezzing duties and then have classes like the crusader, necro, druid, etc have the ability to rez.

    As I've stated in the shaman forums and maybe in this one, didn't look at my previous reply, if you're deep in a dungeon it could be horrible to lose a tank or CC (if you need it) due and the whole has to go back to the entrance to get them. The worse case for that would be that the group can't get there w/o the tank and has to die too. As for other classes getting the rez, you then make unfair advantages there too. If the crusader is the only tank who can rez then at higher levels you'd most likely see them being picked over the other tanks for standard groups. Druids can't get it unless shamans and clerics get it too since druids will most likely be capable of being a healer for a group. Necros... if they add them to the game I'd be ok with them rezzing due to the lore behind a necro. Though I don't think their rez should be able to affect the death penalty (if it's a penalty that a rez can fix).

    • 353 posts
    June 8, 2016 2:25 PM PDT

    I do not mind if clerics get a better rez than other healers, maybe not having any rez effects or a higher % of returned xp, But by no means should cleric be the  only healer able to rezz.

     

    also even in eq clerics not only had the best heals but also the best hp/ac buff. effectively making them the only 1st string healer in the game. even as a cleric i much preferred the VG system where healers were balanced and everyone could perform the role equally.

    • 6 posts
    June 8, 2016 5:25 PM PDT

    Sarim said:

    The topic was discussed in the shaman forum already: https://www.pantheonmmo.com/content/forums/topic/2443/anyone-else-thinks-shaman-should-to-be-a-class-that-can-res

    It seems to be quite a controversial topic. IMO the VG approach (with archetype roles like healer, tank, and each class belonging to one of these archetypes) worked quite well. While in EQ shamans and druids were often being considered "second class" healers, since they could not rez. That's something I'd rather not see in Pantheon.

    I think a better question might be "What do we give the cleric (beyond the best heals, hp buffs, ...)?" to make it attractive vs. shamans and druids.

     

     

    Yes if you need all the healers to be a full healer sure. In EQ the shaman and druid had abilities that made them unique. There isnt anything super unique enough to give clerics that fits with lore other than rezzes. Shamans and druids both had utility that was more useful than a cleric in many situations.

    No idea what vanguard was like but having all the healers be equal in everything was how that game di things. And that is very similar to what wow did with healers, eww.

     

    Cleric = largest selection of heals + rez + some buffs. Obviosuly the most main healer.

    Druid = Hots, dots utility, some healing, obvious jack of all trades. 

    Shaman = Dots, hots, utility, slows/snares/cc, some healing, another hybrid healer. Obviosuly.

     

    We dont need three classes with heals, rez, buffs and some extra melee or unique trait, that will make them all the same class. Utility = ports, strong buffs, overly powerful class specific abilities,  etc.

     

    Bottom line is rez is in this game at launch and every healer ends up wioth it. The clerics rez will be the best.

    If we have rez at launch and only cleric has it, expect the other healers to have something gamebreaking to bring as well.

    If every healer AND hybrid healer has a rez spell in the game at launch expect the game to be very difficult.

     

    EXPECT clerics to have the best rez, just as I may have to except others getting rez.

     

    I won't deny that I will be upset iof the Cleric and Crusader do not have the best rez. 

     

    Sidenote if they can fit into lore necros(allowed), druids and shamans could have some self rez or a very long cool down garbage rez in times when the crusader or cleric in group is dead and cannot do so.

     

    With love, Gracefulhealer

     

    If Shamans and Druids get rez I will be fine as long as my "light caster" has the best or the only rez. Just makes sense. 

     

    LOVE YOU DRUIDS AND SHAMANS. Don't take my post the wrong way. <3<3<3

    • 707 posts
    June 9, 2016 11:39 AM PDT

    tanwedar said:

     

    I can't see them giving clerics much in terms of melee capabilities tbh. I agree on having high damage undead damaging spells though. You ask why give them plate but no melee skills? Armor type has nothing to do with combat abilities. If plate == melee then monks would wear plate. The plate armor is generally there so that the cleric can take a beating, the same logic goes to a healer using a shield (maybe they'll give tomes AC too, who knows). Since the cleric's abilities are so limited in diversity (typically) they need something to balance if they pull agro on a [big] heal which can be common when CC breaks or on pull sometimes.



    Why not? Clerics in VG were great at melee combat. Clerics in EQ were made good with melee combat around LoY.

    And actually armor type has a lot to do with combat abilities. You can almost guess what type of abilities a class will have based on their armor alone. What you should say is combat abilities have nothing to do with armor type.

    A monk doesn't wear plate because their damage relies on fluid movement. Being able to move the body easily to kick and strike is how monks do their damage so of course they wouldn't wear bulky armor that restricted their movement. But a class who wears plate armor expects to get hit with physical melee combat so why wouldn't they be equipped with melee abilities? It seems logical to me.

    • 2039 posts
    June 12, 2016 8:51 AM PDT

    Gracefulhealer said:

    If every healer AND hybrid healer has a rez spell in the game at launch expect the game to be very difficult.

    EXPECT clerics to have the best rez, just as I may have to except others getting rez.

    I won't deny that I will be upset iof the Cleric and Crusader do not have the best rez. 

    Sidenote if they can fit into lore necros(allowed), druids and shamans could have some self rez or a very long cool down garbage rez in times when the crusader or cleric in group is dead and cannot do so.

    With love, Gracefulhealer

    If Shamans and Druids get rez I will be fine as long as my "light caster" has the best or the only rez. Just makes sense. 

    LOVE YOU DRUIDS AND SHAMANS. Don't take my post the wrong way. <3<3<3

    As a very long time Shaman player, I too am concerned about the resurrection question and on the Shaman board below we've been having this discussion ourselves.

    What we can be absolutely sure of is that all priests will have resurrection capabilities. Because Pantheon is being designed around 4 archetypes, all who perform their primary function equally, the question then is what is the primary function of the priest class?  To heal or to resurrect?

    Clearly the priests classes will all have resurrection.  It is my understanding that all priests will have the same resurrection abilities.  The question is how is that presented?  Does it stand to reason that the priests classes must have the same resurrectin spell at the same level?  For me, it does not.

    Think back to EQ1 and what you saw on spells which were shared by multiple classes.  You'd see Class/Number, Class/Number showing which class got the spell at which level.  The same, I hope, would be the method used in Pantheon.

    Taking the EQ1 resurrect spell progression we had this:

    ReconstitutionCLR/18 PAL/30 : Resurrect and restore 10% experience

    ReparationCLR/22 PAL/31 : Resurrect and restore 20% experience

    ReviveCLR/27 PAL/39 : Resurrect and restore 35% experience

    RenewalCLR/32 PAL/49 : Resurrect and restore 50% experience

    ResuscitateCLR/37 : Resurrect and restore 60% experience

    RestorationCLR/42 PAL/55 : Resurrect and restore 75% experience

    ResurrectionCLR/47 PAL/59 : Resurrect and restore 90% experience

    ReviviscenceCLR/56 : Resurrect and restore 96% experience

    As you can see cleric and paladin, both could resurrect (had the ability) yet not quite perfectly equally.  Whereas the Paladin capped out at 90% returned XP the Cleric had 96% returned XP.  Again, both had the ability to resurrection but one was a small bit better. The key takeaway here is that the best resurrection spell did not appear until the 2nd expansion. That is critical as I'll discuss later.

    In Pantheon (with a suspected level cap at release of 40) we could see something like this perhaps:

    ReconstitutionCLR/9 DRU/SHM/15 : Resurrect and restore 5% experience

    ReparationCLR/15 DRU/SHM/21 : Resurrect and restore 10% experience

    ReviveCLR/23 DRU/SHM/30 : Resurrect and restore 15% experience

    RenewalCLR/32 DRU/SHM/40 : Resurrect and restore 20% experience

    Here we have all 4 priest classes having the same ability but at different times but then coming together equally at the level cap at release.  You'll note that the returned experience is not 95% or even close to what EQ1 gave us. This is because I believe the returned XP percentages in EQ1 were not designed with the the long-game in mind.  17 expension in EQ1 and the best resurrection returned XP came at the release of the 2nd expansion. If you're smart and designing a game for long-term viability and want classes to enjoy upgrades as time goes by, handing out the best resurrection spell the game will ever see at the 2nd expansion really goes against that.  You do not need at 96% rez that early in the game. Yes, I know Pantheon will have a more horizontal progression than vertical but the premise still stands:  Don't give out the best of something too early.


    This post was edited by Vandraad at June 12, 2016 8:52 AM PDT
    • 6 posts
    June 12, 2016 12:34 PM PDT

    Vandraad I must say that is very DISHEARTENING to hear. I I wanted four healers with basicvally the same abilities I'd play any other generic mmo. 

     

    If my cleric has nothing special compared to the otehr healers and we all get rez I amy not be interested. Boring when all the classes are so similar, and too easy too. 

    • 645 posts
    June 12, 2016 11:35 PM PDT

    Just out of curiosity: Have you played Vanguard, Gracefulhealer?

    If you had, you would know that healers can be totally different and still have comparable heal power and res capabilities. I've tried to say that above already, but you either missed it or mis-understood. Honestly, if you haven't played Vanguard, you should take the time and google for the class abilities (there's still wiki pages that list them).


    This post was edited by Sarim at June 12, 2016 11:36 PM PDT
    • 113 posts
    June 14, 2016 7:35 AM PDT

    What Sarim said. Clerics and shammies were similar, except with different buffs and shammies a bit better group healers and clerics a bit better single target healers. disciples and bloodmages very different. Druids were dps with 1 heal. (and necros pretty much buff bots.)

     

    Also, if clerics are the only healer to rez, why wouldn't they end up the only healer?


    It seems to me groups would always want a cleric because of the rez. If your group already had a cleric, why would you want another healer? Seems to me, outside of raids, non-rez healers would be forced to DPS/support specs.

    • 157 posts
    June 15, 2016 11:19 AM PDT

    Gracefulhealer said:

    Vandraad I must say that is very DISHEARTENING to hear. I I wanted four healers with basicvally the same abilities I'd play any other generic mmo. 

     

    If my cleric has nothing special compared to the otehr healers and we all get rez I amy not be interested. Boring when all the classes are so similar, and too easy too. 

    Lorewise I wouldn't see any difficulties in giving the shaman the best rezz with his connection to the dream land and all. But you wouldn't want that, because it must be the cleric who is reagarded "main" healer, it must be the cleric with the best rez? Would you have a problem with clerics as second rate healer? Yes? But you would shove this inferiority without any problems to another class and say 'there must be a difference'? I asked that some threads ago, but is this holier than thou class envy? 

    As some pointed out, Vanguard had 4 healing classes with absolute different gameplay. They were so extremely diverse that literally no one said, oh god they have the same rezz, how boring is this healer class concept! They were on par with each other and let people chose their favorite healing style freely without being worried about inferiority to another dedicated healing class. And that was a great thing.

    • 13 posts
    July 12, 2016 5:40 PM PDT

    not that anyone is still reading this, but Shaman and Druid were second class healers in EQ because of their potency not because of lack of rez ability.  In the Shaman's case, their second class healing was matched by their second class DoT-ing to make them amazing to have even if you already had a cleric.

    Druids by contrast were just useless...especially after PoP.

    I mained a cleric, and I always voted against adding druids to party....weak heals and weak dps...

    • 277 posts
    August 3, 2016 4:07 PM PDT

    That is all too true Gren, I played a Druid and was never in a group outside of friends or guild members that I can really remember, it may have happened but not often.  Druids in particular weren't worth much in terms of heals.  My cleric however got groups immediately, and honestly I consider them to be the main healing class to this day. My opinion isn't worth much I'm sure, but I see the cleric as being able to solo heal a group whereas it would take a shaman and Druid together in group to replace them.  In terms of rez, I think it is a cleric trait, again no offense intended to anyone else, just my opinion.

    • 363 posts
    August 24, 2016 4:07 PM PDT
    I like Vandraads take on the red aspect:

    "Pantheon (with a suspected level cap at release of 40) we could see something like this perhaps:

    ReconstitutionCLR/9 DRU/SHM/15 : Resurrect and restore 5% experience

    ReparationCLR/15 DRU/SHM/21 : Resurrect and restore 10% experience

    ReviveCLR/23 DRU/SHM/30 : Resurrect and restore 15% experience

    RenewalCLR/32 DRU/SHM/40 : Resurrect and restore 20% experience"

    I also likes the way VG handled healers.