Hello all.
One of the pet classes I loved was from Dark Age of Camelot called the Animist. They summoned pets that did not move. They were more powerful than pets that were mobile, but made pulling a requirement.
I don't know how Pantheon is going with class variety, but if there are options to specialize, I would like to offer an idea in case there are three types of specialization.
I like your ideas. I think it would be especially cool if the Summoner can have multiple pets up at once. I can imagine it would be fun to set up your own little base with several stationary pets in area and you could just keep pulling mobs into your trap and letting the pets shred them up haha.
I definitely like the idea of variety in their summoned pets. It seems like if they code in mobile pets, then everything else should just be variations on that code, so variety shouldn't be too costly from a design point (good ole conclusions reached about coding time based on 0 personal experience).
I would like to offer a suggestion for a 4th category that I had mentioned in a general discussion thread. The idea is a bit weird, but I think it would work out well mechanically.
4. User controlled pet with pet controlled user
The user casts a "swap minds" spell and takes control of the pet (like what you mentioned in your channeled pet section, where the avatar sits idle), but the player avatar then becomes the "pet". So if you have summoned an elemental and cast swap minds on it, then you play from the perspective of the elemental, but are able to control your summoner avatar as if it were a pet. The elemental's mind is now inside your summoner's body.
As I said, it's a bit wonky, but I think it would be fun.
Ainadak said:I definitely like the idea of variety in their summoned pets. It seems like if they code in mobile pets, then everything else should just be variations on that code, so variety shouldn't be too costly from a design point (good ole conclusions reached about coding time based on 0 personal experience).
Lol pretty sure it doesn't work that way, but at least you admit it :P It doesn't really matter though. They're gonna do what they think is best, even if it takes a lot of work.
Ainadak said:I would like to offer a suggestion for a 4th category that I had mentioned in a general discussion thread. The idea is a bit weird, but I think it would work out well mechanically.
4. User controlled pet with pet controlled user
The user casts a "swap minds" spell and takes control of the pet (like what you mentioned in your channeled pet section, where the avatar sits idle), but the player avatar then becomes the "pet". So if you have summoned an elemental and cast swap minds on it, then you play from the perspective of the elemental, but are able to control your summoner avatar as if it were a pet. The elemental's mind is now inside your summoner's body.
I like it in theory. I can kinda? see something like this for the Enchanter, but I think it would actually work better with the Symbiote class proposed in this thread: https://www.pantheonmmo.com/content/forums/topic/5163/symbiote
But still, I can't really figure out in what situations this ability would actually be useful haha.
Ainadak said:4. User controlled pet with pet controlled user
The user casts a "swap minds" spell and takes control of the pet (like what you mentioned in your channeled pet section, where the avatar sits idle), but the player avatar then becomes the "pet". So if you have summoned an elemental and cast swap minds on it, then you play from the perspective of the elemental, but are able to control your summoner avatar as if it were a pet. The elemental's mind is now inside your summoner's body.
As I said, it's a bit wonky, but I think it would be fun.
Nah, then most people would stay in this mode and let the game play their toon for them, since the game will play the toons better than most Summoners.
Beefcake said:Ainadak said:4. User controlled pet with pet controlled user
The user casts a "swap minds" spell and takes control of the pet (like what you mentioned in your channeled pet section, where the avatar sits idle), but the player avatar then becomes the "pet". So if you have summoned an elemental and cast swap minds on it, then you play from the perspective of the elemental, but are able to control your summoner avatar as if it were a pet. The elemental's mind is now inside your summoner's body.
As I said, it's a bit wonky, but I think it would be fun.
Nah, then most people would stay in this mode and let the game play their toon for them, since the game will play the toons better than most Summoners.
That's a pretty big assumption. It's not autopilot though anyway. You're still playing the game - the only difference is the perspective.
I still can't think of a situation where this would be tactically beneficial though.
@Beefcake
I find it a little sad that you took a 3 sentence idea, assumed the worst case scenario for the details+implementation, and then dismissed it as overpowered. If you controlled the player avatar with an advanced AI given access to a full suite of abilities, then there is indeed a strong chance that it would be overpowered. However, that is not what I had envisioned and is only one of numerous ways it could be implemented.
My vision for the implementation was something more along the lines of - follow, attack, passive, defensive, and maybe a bit more. The mind controlling your avatar would be that of an elemental or other summoned creature, which are likely not necessarily of spells. In general pets are given a very limited set of abilities to use through the pet command window (if any at all). I would think an interesting implementation would be to give you a small subset of your summoner avatar's abilities based on the mind of what is controlling the avatar. So if you swap with a water elemental, then you have access to 2-3 water based spells from your summoner.
I was actively trying to avoid fleshing out the idea, given that the subject of the thread is top-level concepts for how pets might function.
@Bazgrim
The main application that I had intended would be as a different version of the channeled pet type. Channeling pets where your avatar remains stationary leaves you with a dead weight sitting around defenseless, but if you could control your avatar like a pet (with simple commands), then you could get them out of the way of patrols and the like, allowing you to more deeply immerse yourself in the perspective of the pet. Depending on how it all turns out you could even use this to take part in raids that require movement. You probably couldn't use a channeled pet in a raid that required movement from aoe mechanics, since your summoner avatar would eat all the aoe, but you could use a mind swap pet and keep your avatar on follow.
As with the channeled pet concept, this type of system would require that the pet involved be comparable (probably situationally advantageous) in strength to a summoner with a regular pet.
Ainadak said:@Beefcake
I find it a little sad that you took a 3 sentence idea, assumed the worst case scenario for the details+implementation, and then dismissed it as overpowered. If you controlled the player avatar with an advanced AI given access to a full suite of abilities, then there is indeed a strong chance that it would be overpowered. However, that is not what I had envisioned and is only one of numerous ways it could be implemented.
My vision for the implementation was something more along the lines of - follow, attack, passive, defensive, and maybe a bit more. The mind controlling your avatar would be that of an elemental or other summoned creature, which are likely not necessarily of spells. In general pets are given a very limited set of abilities to use through the pet command window (if any at all). I would think an interesting implementation would be to give you a small subset of your summoner avatar's abilities based on the mind of what is controlling the avatar. So if you swap with a water elemental, then you have access to 2-3 water based spells from your summoner.
I was actively trying to avoid fleshing out the idea, given that the subject of the thread is top-level concepts for how pets might function.
I apologize for my brevity. Next time, I will take longer to spell out my disagreement. Maybe that will make you happier.
Bazgrim said:Beefcake said:Ainadak said:4. User controlled pet with pet controlled user
The user casts a "swap minds" spell and takes control of the pet (like what you mentioned in your channeled pet section, where the avatar sits idle), but the player avatar then becomes the "pet". So if you have summoned an elemental and cast swap minds on it, then you play from the perspective of the elemental, but are able to control your summoner avatar as if it were a pet. The elemental's mind is now inside your summoner's body.
As I said, it's a bit wonky, but I think it would be fun.
Nah, then most people would stay in this mode and let the game play their toon for them, since the game will play the toons better than most Summoners.
That's a pretty big assumption. It's not autopilot though anyway. You're still playing the game - the only difference is the perspective.
I still can't think of a situation where this would be tactically beneficial though.
Being able to play with a pet instead of yourself is very powerful. I can see many interests, like : fighting without taking risks (especially hard fights where you expect to die doing it the normal way), triggering traps, pulling without being hit, exploring a hard area, etc. Lots of possibilities if the mob can interact environment too, like fetching a reward in a tough zone. It would be pretty powerful and most people would use it for sure.
The more restrictions apply to a pet, the more powerful it gets. Sounds pretty fine. I personnally would always choose technical channeled-like tough pets above vanilla invoke-and-forget powerless pets.
You could also invoke static item-like goodies, like traps, turrets, etc. There is no absolute need to summon living things only.
If you think AI-controlled toon is too powerful, there is no necessity for both pets and character to be active at the same time. You can say the summoner is powerless while controlling the pet. And that's already powerful enough.
Cheers
@Gideon
You could have both characters die if the player-controlled pet dies, I mean the mind/soul/whatever is within the pet's body when it is dispatched, there's nothing to say that the spell inherently reverts you back. Regardless, I don't think that solves your issue entirely. That would definitely require some work if any player-controlled pet system were to be adopted, channeled or otherwise.
Also, I agree with you that the stationary pet class does not have to be living and there are many awesome possible uses for it. You could have stationary summons that impact the environment or maybe synergize with certain spell types.
I believe perspective change functions well as a puller, specifically in dungeons and places full of obstacles. In EQ1 I liked sending the pet a long distance to get a mob, but quickly realized that it only worked in outdoor zones. Having full control of the pet would allow me to pull it off, and give me headroom in case I pull too much (the mobs are relentless in this game). I mentioned a long time ago that the pet could be the one constructing walls, traps, etc. rather than "summoning" it all with spells...playing the pet would help in this.
There would need to be something warning me that I'm getting attacked though, which will probably just be a break in concentration back to my summoner.
I never liked the dumbfire pet ideas in other games, but I would like it if it's something ala Magic the Gathering's "Ball Lightning", a really strong pet that dies fast, killing anything small in its path. If it survives it returns a bit of mana or something. Maybe our nukes will just be Ball Lightnings or some sort of unstable creation with the damage potential being either bad or impressive depending on when and how we cast it. Maybe it will follow a set path like our bolt spells in EQ1 and do AOE damage that way, or perhaps it can't get hit, but it dies after a set amount of attacks it lets out on mobs around it. Maybe it sounds too Wizard-y, so I guess having HP on it is a better idea, not like EQ1 didn't toy with the idea of a pet that does massive damage and then just dies.
Stationary pets sound Druid-ish...I explained in the Druid sub-forum that Druids could make trees from rare seeds in the world that help anyone under it until people stop feeding it or a mob kills it (which could be days).
Channeled pets are useful as an emergency pet after my normal pet dies, but I do not see why it needs to drain my mana overtime unless its really powerful and I can completely control it. If I can't cast or move or control anything then it feels more like a gimmick. I'd rather keep making walls and keeping my main pet strong than do something like that.
Having spells that just give a few situational buffs are no fun if that's all they are. Everyone will want that "buff pet" out and will feel forced to stay by it due to the amount of mana it should take to summon these things. Our attention is already spent on our main pet and the environment due to our lack of personal defenses, and it would be disturbing to take care of even more pets (trust me, I used to take care of 5 dogs and 1 cat at once). Summoner should not be a "beneficial" buff class like the Priests, but then again they shouldn't be an Enchanter either with their forms of controlling the battle.
Turret-like pets have been done in shooter games like Tribes...and way too many other games to be honest. There is no purpose to them in this game unless they have unique abilities that no other class can compete with. Maybe this summoned object can be the one that helps the summoner create barriers, etc. If it needs to be summoned then other people should be able to use it. To be frank, players should be able to "use" anything we summon, including our main pet if we allow it! The main problem is not how much we can summon, but how useful it is to other people and the environment. If we summon a stationary pet that can aoe snare, then other classes will have less worth to us...even our main pet will start becoming more like a DoT. Our main pet is our first priority, and our main pet should be given these special abilities, and we should be able to command our pet to use them when needed.
Necromancer however...they probably would do better having a tower of bones drain life or weaken the mobs around it seeing that pets are not their main, main focus.
