The short description of the warrior has always left me scratching my head. Specifically, "However, not content with fortitude alone, he also refines his mind, becoming a master strategist in battle."
Now, do you think they are being decorative with their language or are they hinting at a new strategy oriented spell type? After reading the Ogre lore, we know that the 7 tribes of the ancient Ogres distributed their incredible combat power by dividing up into 7 magical tomes, one per tribe. Maybe these tomes contain strategy based spells?
Think about it, most spell activation events consist of organizing something. An incantation is the organization of words, the drawing of a ritualistic symbol is an organization of graphics (shapes, lines, patterns, ect), and the act of casting something usually includes the organization of hand gestures. If the principle of accessing mana to cast magic at its core relates to organization, why not include the organization of characters in a group? Here's what I'm getting at: What if there existed a magic which was only castable upon properly organizing a group of people? We already know that Pantheon is taking into account positioning by giving the cleric's castable walls and hints of barriers in the description of the summoner. Why not incorporate positioning as a fundamental means of casting a spell?
Tactics: Position-based Battle Magic
Warriors and their related hybrids can cast position based group spells called tactics. Once a spell, or tactic, is initiated position indicators, like magical rings on the ground, become visible to the group. Depending on the tactic, each ring could be occupied by either a particular class or just any class. For example, image a warrior casts "Ambush" which creates two rings one in front of a mob and one behind the mob. The front mob could be occupied by any class, but the back ring must be occupied by a rogue. Once the rings are both occupied, the spell is finished casting and a spell effect is cast. The effect should always be combat related. Here are a couple of examples:
Offensive Tactics:
Tactic: Ambush (Single Target) - Two positions open up, one in front and the mod and one behind. The front position can be occupied by any class and the back position must be occupied by a rogue. Players in position receive a temporary bonus to melee damage and the mob receives a debuff (-AC, - attack speed.) and the cooldown of the Rogue's ability Backstab is reset, allowing the Rogue to use backstab immediately after the Ambush tactic is cast.
Tactic: Frontal Assault (AoE) - Once cast, three positions open up in front of the group of mobs. These positions can only be occupied by non-caster classes. Players in position will receive a bonus to attack speed, and damage.
Defensive Tactics:
Tactic: Phalanx (Single Target) - 4 positions open up around the target ally creating 4 corners of a square. Each position can be occupied by shield bearing classes. Once all 4 positions are occupied the tactic is cast and the player in the center of the phalanx receives Bonus AC proportional to the sum of AC of each player occupying the phalanx positions.
Tactic: Echelon (AoE) - Open up 3 positions on the ground in an echelon pattern which can be occupied by any class. Once occupied, players within the echelon receive a bonus to health and stamina.
I think I've laid out the gist of the idea. What do you guys think about giving warrior-types access to these position-based strategic spells? I think it would be really cool to hear my groups warrior shout out "Phalanx!" and 4 of my group must run to create the phalanx pattern around a player who needs immediate protection.
Always fresh ideas Syntro :)
Warrior is so classic, it's hard to find a new way to play it but i guess you found something original.
Tactical abilities seem to be a logical gameplay to me, after all warriors have seen many fights in their carreers and they should use this experience in combat as well.
I understand the purpose of the original post, but it is a bit redundant because any rogue worth his dagger will always be positioned behind the mob and the tank will always be in front. The job of the warrior is to ensure proper positioning of the mob while ensuring that it keeps aggro so that all the other classes in the group can do their jobs. Good warriors know this and can move an NPC around at will. The rogue, in the proper spot, using their skills and abilities, will probably put those debuffs on the mob. A warrior just clicking a button that puts some shiny circles on the ground really isn't necessary. It doesn't fix anything.
@Anistosoles @catharsis thanks guys, glad you liked it. :)
@Vandraad. The role of the warrior could be expanded to proper positioning of his groupmates, not just the mob. The specific spells weren't fleshed out with great detail, they were there to help lay the foundation for the idea by giving some scotch-taped examples. The "shitty circles" could make a group encounter more interesting by introducing spell-guided motion, where groups could avoid the standard [casters in the back/melee in the front] static positioning and give the tanks a new assistive role rather than just standing like a rock mashing taunt over and over again. To me, positioning allies is a far more interesting way to "just click buttons" than the standard of kick/taunt/slam cycle.
Syntro said:The short description of the warrior has always left me scratching my head. Specifically, "However, not content with fortitude alone, he also refines his mind, becoming a master strategist in battle."
Now, do you think they are being decorative with their language or are they hinting at a new strategy oriented spell type? After reading the Ogre lore, we know that the 7 tribes of the ancient Ogres distributed their incredible combat power by dividing up into 7 magical tomes, one per tribe. Maybe these tomes contain strategy based spells?
Think about it, most spell activation events consist of organizing something. An incantation is the organization of words, the drawing of a ritualistic symbol is an organization of graphics (shapes, lines, patterns, ect), and the act of casting something usually includes the organization of hand gestures. If the principle of accessing mana to cast magic at its core relates to organization, why not include the organization of characters in a group? Here's what I'm getting at: What if there existed a magic which was only castable upon properly organizing a group of people? We already know that Pantheon is taking into account positioning by giving the cleric's castable walls and hints of barriers in the description of the summoner. Why not incorporate positioning as a fundamental means of casting a spell?
Tactics: Position-based Battle Magic
Warriors and their related hybrids can cast position based group spells called tactics. Once a spell, or tactic, is initiated position indicators, like magical rings on the ground, become visible to the group. Depending on the tactic, each ring could be occupied by either a particular class or just any class. For example, image a warrior casts "Ambush" which creates two rings one in front of a mob and one behind the mob. The front mob could be occupied by any class, but the back ring must be occupied by a rogue. Once the rings are both occupied, the spell is finished casting and a spell effect is cast. The effect should always be combat related. Here are a couple of examples:
Offensive Tactics:
Tactic: Ambush (Single Target) - Two positions open up, one in front and the mod and one behind. The front position can be occupied by any class and the back position must be occupied by a rogue. Players in position receive a temporary bonus to melee damage and the mob receives a debuff (-AC, - attack speed.) and the cooldown of the Rogue's ability Backstab is reset, allowing the Rogue to use backstab immediately after the Ambush tactic is cast.Tactic: Frontal Assault (AoE) - Once cast, three positions open up in front of the group of mobs. These positions can only be occupied by non-caster classes. Players in position will receive a bonus to attack speed, and damage.
Defensive Tactics:
Tactic: Phalanx (Single Target) - 4 positions open up around the target ally creating 4 corners of a square. Each position can be occupied by shield bearing classes. Once all 4 positions are occupied the tactic is cast and the player in the center of the phalanx receives Bonus AC proportional to the sum of AC of each player occupying the phalanx positions.
Tactic: Echelon (AoE) - Open up 3 positions on the ground in an echelon pattern which can be occupied by any class. Once occupied, players within the echelon receive a bonus to health and stamina.
I think I've laid out the gist of the idea. What do you guys think about giving warrior-types access to these position-based strategic spells? I think it would be really cool to hear my groups warrior shout out "Phalanx!" and 4 of my group must run to create the phalanx pattern around a player who needs immediate protection.
I can say i like these ideas, Hopefully something like this can be put in place to a point, only thing i would change is maybe instead of certain places to stand to gain these effect is to make it if it is a grp buff if you are within i say 10 feet of him you get it, simple becuase a lot of these are valuable to almost every melee class, just make it to where it can hit only grp only so they cant buff an entire raid, or something to this effect, i can see them having ability to where they can take a portion of incoming damage that someone else is taking if they are close enough to them for a certain period of time.
I recall a similar mechanic was tried in another mmo, but I can't recall which game it was (too many years, and far too many games played). The point is that it wasn't very successful. It was cumbersome, and players just ignored the rings on the ground in the heat of battle. It might be doable with a well disciplined group, but I think it would be a hard sell unless it gave some massive bonus. Just my 2cp.
Syntro said:The short description of the warrior has always left me scratching my head. Specifically, "However, not content with fortitude alone, he also refines his mind, becoming a master strategist in battle."
Now, do you think they are being decorative with their language or are they hinting at a new strategy oriented spell type? After reading the Ogre lore, we know that the 7 tribes of the ancient Ogres distributed their incredible combat power by dividing up into 7 magical tomes, one per tribe. Maybe these tomes contain strategy based spells?
Think about it, most spell activation events consist of organizing something. An incantation is the organization of words, the drawing of a ritualistic symbol is an organization of graphics (shapes, lines, patterns, ect), and the act of casting something usually includes the organization of hand gestures. If the principle of accessing mana to cast magic at its core relates to organization, why not include the organization of characters in a group? Here's what I'm getting at: What if there existed a magic which was only castable upon properly organizing a group of people? We already know that Pantheon is taking into account positioning by giving the cleric's castable walls and hints of barriers in the description of the summoner. Why not incorporate positioning as a fundamental means of casting a spell?
Tactics: Position-based Battle Magic
Warriors and their related hybrids can cast position based group spells called tactics. Once a spell, or tactic, is initiated position indicators, like magical rings on the ground, become visible to the group. Depending on the tactic, each ring could be occupied by either a particular class or just any class. For example, image a warrior casts "Ambush" which creates two rings one in front of a mob and one behind the mob. The front mob could be occupied by any class, but the back ring must be occupied by a rogue. Once the rings are both occupied, the spell is finished casting and a spell effect is cast. The effect should always be combat related. Here are a couple of examples:
Offensive Tactics:
Tactic: Ambush (Single Target) - Two positions open up, one in front and the mod and one behind. The front position can be occupied by any class and the back position must be occupied by a rogue. Players in position receive a temporary bonus to melee damage and the mob receives a debuff (-AC, - attack speed.) and the cooldown of the Rogue's ability Backstab is reset, allowing the Rogue to use backstab immediately after the Ambush tactic is cast.Tactic: Frontal Assault (AoE) - Once cast, three positions open up in front of the group of mobs. These positions can only be occupied by non-caster classes. Players in position will receive a bonus to attack speed, and damage.
Defensive Tactics:
Tactic: Phalanx (Single Target) - 4 positions open up around the target ally creating 4 corners of a square. Each position can be occupied by shield bearing classes. Once all 4 positions are occupied the tactic is cast and the player in the center of the phalanx receives Bonus AC proportional to the sum of AC of each player occupying the phalanx positions.
Tactic: Echelon (AoE) - Open up 3 positions on the ground in an echelon pattern which can be occupied by any class. Once occupied, players within the echelon receive a bonus to health and stamina.
I think I've laid out the gist of the idea. What do you guys think about giving warrior-types access to these position-based strategic spells? I think it would be really cool to hear my groups warrior shout out "Phalanx!" and 4 of my group must run to create the phalanx pattern around a player who needs immediate protection.
Love the idea. It would be a system that could definitely be added onto as time went on. Good thinking. It could also be a way to separate those who are disciplined and could fight while maintaining their position to receive the proper bonus from those who just stand and click a couple buttons, so the bonuses for following the mechanics need to be noticeable.
If you could raid in Rift there's no reason you couldn't handle mechanics like these.
Really good thinking.
Syn, thats an intersting idea! I liek the thought into it...it would be nice to see something different added to the warriors so they can do something other than smash/bash/taunt/slice/dice etc. Only issue I can see is if in small areas like corridors...not sure if getting in the tactic zone would work if the dps is all in aggro range in the small areas.
There was a thing I recall.. can't remember where now, but there was a similar skill in a game I played.Might have been EQ 2...I cant recall now :) Anyway, the warrior (or was it a rogue) would have a skill that would send a group wide message saying that an area was vulnerable, or showed an opening. When that message came up, certain spells or skills of the group would become more powerful or effective for a short period of time.
Perhaps something like that might work as well for a warrior skill... since they are the masters of tactics...they would be able to see openings and chances for others to do more damage, no?
Syntro said:@Anistosoles @catharsis thanks guys, glad you liked it. :)
@Vandraad. The role of the warrior could be expanded to proper positioning of his groupmates, not just the mob. The specific spells weren't fleshed out with great detail, they were there to help lay the foundation for the idea by giving some scotch-taped examples. The "shitty circles" could make a group encounter more interesting by introducing spell-guided motion, where groups could avoid the standard [casters in the back/melee in the front] static positioning and give the tanks a new assistive role rather than just standing like a rock mashing taunt over and over again. To me, positioning allies is a far more interesting way to "just click buttons" than the standard of kick/taunt/slam cycle.
Syntro, I fully understood the point of your original post. My response is basically say that a smart player, a player who pays attention, understands game mechanics not only of his/her own class but of all classes should know where they should stand to maximize their contribution to the group. They should not need pretty circles on the ground. When players rely upon someone else to constantly tell them where to go, what to do, when to do something, they become lazy.
Vandraad said:Syntro, I fully understood the point of your original post. My response is basically say that a smart player, a player who pays attention, understands game mechanics not only of his/her own class but of all classes should know where they should stand to maximize their contribution to the group. They should not need pretty circles on the ground. When players rely upon someone else to constantly tell them where to go, what to do, when to do something, they become lazy.
I agree with Vandraad. For years now overambitious developers have tried to do too much of the wrong thing - putting shiny objects into games to satisfy ADHD gamers. Sparkling circles on the ground may sound good in theory, but in practice they detract severely from the game. There are 100's of step in the good shiny circle - don't step in the bad shiny circle type MMO's (e.g. WoW), I desperately hope Pantheon does not become one of them. The game should be challenging because of things like positioning, mana management, gear choices, smart pulls, etc., not super mario bro's type mechanics.
Like a caster reviewing their spells in down time, and picking the optimal spell set for the encounter ( hmm, I think this is a good group to try AoE's, or NO AOE's!).
The warrior could likewise have class specific skill sets or tomes, that show various suggestions for tactics. Not a giveaway but maybe subdivided into terrain, close quarters, domestic or fortified. Maybe the devs can get awesome and include like Sun-Tzu, or Patton/Rommel ideas and make it a hidden educational thing. That could be shared in a group so all know what is going on. - and it could be a simple diagram like etched on a piece of parchment in the same manner of a primitive cartography skill. If you group with a warrior the warrior can then share his tactics knowledge briefly- as say, grouping with a Myr gives the group underwater breathing. Like a flash on the screen of a diagram, that skill like a spell, improves duration of screen flash of tactic over time- ramping up to more spohisticated diagrams and maybe can be so complex as to allow specialization. Ruzuk the SK is better in dungeond or close fighting, and Zeegor is better at fortified embattlements.
I can just hear the warrior now: " ok, druid? go over there in that dessert and put on tree illusion and stand there."
* few minutes later*
"look, all the goblins are heading toward the Druid tree!. I am going to run in, wait until I reach them then you all come in"
The combination of skills could then be used in larger events where there are more front-line fighters: Phalanx- where warriors form a box that the horse/chariot runs into, or a flank of running bards in line of fire with rogues aside them to appear as sappers.
I wish I had the money to spend for a coder to sit back and think about it for a few weeks and make it their lifes work to implement- lol. HA! a job for history majors! or even Military that are out of service- Job in the private sector? sure I'm working for a gaming company...whut? ( Napoleon, Alexander, Shaka Zulu, Crazy Horse, heh)
Anything that improves how engauging and fun combat can be is probably a good thing. This kind of ties into the combo thread too a bit. Might want to look at suggestions from it as well. Main thing people seem worried about is things that break immersion and "required" tactics.
I remember many Enchanters that became crazy because no one cared about their crowd control. While it is an idea to improve gameplay for warriors, I think it will never work. Most people will ignore the positioning demanded by the warrior and the spell effect will never happen. In the end, no warrior will even bother, because only one in twenty groups will have the skill to make use of the tactics spells.
I agree that melee need more spice, I don't think this is the way for reason already expressed.
Instead of having the warrior direct a group on where to go and what to do, instead give them more reactional abilities that will (using the perception system) display vulnerabilities to the group that the warrior and the rest of the group can exploit. Maybe instead of the rogue always standing behind the mob smashing backstab like in EQ, this would make a seam in their armor show as vulnerable so the rogue can slide around to flank the target and gain a critical bonus for a melee round (remember flanking attacks in D&D?). The warrior would gain a bonus to some skill or something when he performs this tactic or reactionary which gives him incientive to use it, regardless of his group's willingness to take advantage of the bonus. This would acheive the same result (the repositioning of the group tactically) without being some shiny circle that requires people to move around just to activate the bonus. The skill should activate the bonus for the warrior and then give the others in the group the option to exploit the weakness.
This could be extended to other pure melee classes as well. Giving those without some exciting meaningful way to impact the groups performance via spells a way to make their gameplay a bit more exciting.
This all sounds like something that would be cool to implement on a raid or dungeon boss but would be incredibly cumbersome for every-day group play. I personally love the idea of having complex boss mobs that require things like positioning and coordination but asking this out of your group for regular targets just sounds like a hassle to me.
Syntro, I think you're on to something. I've always liked the idea of the dichotomy of having pure caster classes (wizard, etc.) that would never think of tanking or meleeing and the tank classes that aren't able to cast spells. But I like the idea of a warrior somehow being able to focus energy into something like a spell without it being magic. I think too often we get in a rut of thinking, "it's not like that in D&D" or "it's not like that in EQ."
I remember having a debate with another player on the Sword Coast Legends board. The other person was adamant that characters that wore armor "couldn't make the intricate hand movements to cast an arcane spell." My response was that this is all make-believe, and the writers could do anything they wanted. (It was a hard conversation to have because the guy was arguing the fact like this was an actual scientific fact in the real world, and not a feature of a fantasy world.) Granted, D&D's world is based on the fact that armor wearers can't cast spells as affectively (or at all) like arcane casters, but when it gets down to brass tacks, someone imagined that to be the case and wrote a fictional reason around it. If the Pantheon guys want warriors to be able to cast spells -- or not cast spells, for that matter -- they can weave the reasons for it in their lore.
kellindil said:Instead of having the warrior direct a group on where to go and what to do, instead give them more reactional abilities that will (using the perception system) display vulnerabilities to the group that the warrior and the rest of the group can exploit.
This could be extended to other pure melee classes as well. Giving those without some exciting meaningful way to impact the groups performance via spells a way to make their gameplay a bit more exciting.
As example of an existing mechanic: as a ranger has tracking, so a Warrior can have something that shows 1st target "weak knees", then second one down " getting angry", third one down and is main target "enraged" in red maybe, or such multiple targets to be added as part of skill, detail also maybe as skill in certain weapons. Or like - but not identical to- the V.A.T.S display in Fallout games.
ranger *tracking* (existing feedback skill-target) "there's a lion nearby"
warrior *assisting* (feedback skill -defensive-) "wait, it may be guarding cubs"
ranger *tracking* (existing feedback skill-target) "there is a lion nearby"
warrior *assisting* (feedback skill -placid-) "the lion has not seen us yet, we can suprise it"
Ranger *tracking* (existing feedback skill- target) "there is a large rat nearby"
warrior *assisting* (feedback skill- crazy-) "is there an outhouse nearby? if so, we need to run"
I also agree with Vandraad, no magic or shiny objects on the ground fopr warrior there are more and better creative ways.
I do acknowledge this in eq1 there was a time that warriors were broken, who can remeber the warrior Nexus strik?
So what I have observed that has worked from playing tank classes in other games:
1) Lazo tool from Tera, then copied by ESO. A tool to drag the mob(s) using a lazo like a cowboy in the event that taunting is not enough and is dashing towards the casters
2) Stances from Shards of Dalaya. At the cost of stamina being drained the warrior can activate/deactivate stances to get them temporarely damage reduction, lifetap like abilities, AoE agro, huge single agro etc.
Neonseraphim said:I also agree with Vandraad, no magic or shiny objects on the ground fopr warrior there are more and better creative ways.
I do acknowledge this in eq1 there was a time that warriors were broken, who can remeber the warrior Nexus strik?
So what I have observed that has worked from playing tank classes in other games:
1) Lazo tool from Tera, then copied by ESO. A tool to drag the mob(s) using a lazo like a cowboy in the event that taunting is not enough and is dashing towards the casters
2) Stances from Shards of Dalaya. At the cost of stamina being drained the warrior can activate/deactivate stances to get them temporarely damage reduction, lifetap like abilities, AoE agro, huge single agro etc.
The Lasso is a bad idea. It is at best gimicky in Tera and ESO, but more over its just silly. Warriors do not use magic. They are intended to be the fighters who forgo magic in favor of brute strength and training. Knights are Warriors with magic. Thats why they are called hybrid. This is the VR stance on Warriors. They are purists in martial combat.
Now the stance idea I think could swing for our Warriors in this game. It isn't so much as an aura or magic they enable as a change in fighting style. A defensive posture that allows a reduction in incoming damage through mitigation as the Warrior focuses on Parrying, but will sacrifice damage output as they are so focused on defensive fighting they cannot go on the offensive. Offensive stance that will increase damage output through critical strikes as they focus on scoring those mortal blows, but at the cost of defensive abilities. They become reckless as they take on a berserker style of fighting. During each stance there may be different skills that can be used. Maybe an ability that allows you to shield an ally from damage or a massive frontal kick that would put you at a severe defensive disadvantage but would disorient the target if it landed.
Instead of bastardizing the Warrior into a magic wielder lets try to stay true to the martial purist the class is intended to be in this game as stated by VR. We should be thinking on more "realistic" skill and ability based options rather than some magical ability that doesn't fit the class.
Vandraad said:Syntro said:@Anistosoles @catharsis thanks guys, glad you liked it. :)
@Vandraad. The role of the warrior could be expanded to proper positioning of his groupmates, not just the mob. The specific spells weren't fleshed out with great detail, they were there to help lay the foundation for the idea by giving some scotch-taped examples. The "shitty circles" could make a group encounter more interesting by introducing spell-guided motion, where groups could avoid the standard [casters in the back/melee in the front] static positioning and give the tanks a new assistive role rather than just standing like a rock mashing taunt over and over again. To me, positioning allies is a far more interesting way to "just click buttons" than the standard of kick/taunt/slam cycle.Syntro, I fully understood the point of your original post. My response is basically say that a smart player, a player who pays attention, understands game mechanics not only of his/her own class but of all classes should know where they should stand to maximize their contribution to the group. They should not need pretty circles on the ground. When players rely upon someone else to constantly tell them where to go, what to do, when to do something, they become lazy.
The fact is very named mob shouldn't be fought the same way so positioning will always be different depending on the encounter if if they can make a named mob always have a different skill set would also make it funner for the warrior and the group to figure out together, nowdays for the most part if you have paid attention to any mmo, about everyone is a smart player when it comes to video games we need to have it to where we have to be reactive players, not saying some dance dance revoltution playing just something like you can fight a named mob that one time could have knock back and the next time he could have a AoE DoT PB effect. But back to the geenral disscussion, there should have to be a particaular spot on where to stand like ever, becuase if you do this and making a mechanic on any kind of fight will be limited with it, it should be if anything AoE PB for warrior with i'd say a 10-15ft Radius, this way most of your melee DPS can grab the buff. and also if your fighting a whole mob ie a dragon no one should be in front of him but the tank i could care less if the warrior has something that can midigate the damage or not if i'm a rogue the one and only spot you should ever be is behind him or a away from him, but never in front of him and that goes for all classes except if it's another tank about to to a tank switch or something of that nature.
Fatty said:I agree with Vandraad. For years now overambitious developers have tried to do too much of the wrong thing - putting shiny objects into games to satisfy ADHD gamers. Sparkling circles on the ground may sound good in theory, but in practice they detract severely from the game. There are 100's of step in the good shiny circle - don't step in the bad shiny circle type MMO's (e.g. WoW), I desperately hope Pantheon does not become one of them. The game should be challenging because of things like positioning, mana management, gear choices, smart pulls, etc., not super mario bro's type mechanics.
I was diagnosed with ADHD in 1977, and I don't need shiny objects in my games. (Don't worry ... not offended, honest!. I'm not the type to see words on a page and go off the deep end.) But perhaps more accurately, you're describing gamers who didn't grow up in a world where you had to earn things through hard work insead of getting instant gratification from a dumbed-down environment.