17 replies to this topic

[Zheng]

As I understand it from reading all the available literature, there will be two factions (Asheroth & Kujix), each with their own continent. There will be eight races(and nine classes) at release.

Q. Will there be a World of Warcraft-like restriction of race/class/faction?
i.e. Alliance could only be human/dwarf/gnome/elf and horde could only be tauren/orc/troll/undead

I would like to see full versitility (within reason) between the races and factions if possible (if it fits with the lore).

I understand this post was half question, half opinion. Forgive me.

[Magus]

umm i dont understand this thread enough to even guess. but i do think that there will only be 6 classes and races when the game is released.

[Swift]

From reading the same things you all have: They will have restrictions. Human and Talrok are counterparts one good (Asheroth) one evil (Kujix). I don't think you will see them changing sides and becoming classes of the other group.

Looking at classes: In the Classes & Races page, those are not all six classes already listed, I hope. As it states that both human and Talrok can be all classes but only have three each listed. So, Guardians and Warlords are likely the same class but a name, and maybe other minor, change for the two groups.

The short of my ramble. What's up to read now does suggest class/race restrictions.

[Athos]

i dont want classes at all =) ( might be apperent from my other topics but still )


one last thing screw WoW!!!

[Requnix]

One of the core goals of Crusade is to present a world where the side you choose really does make a difference. While the Kujix has the melee

[Magus]

that soudns kind of complicated.

[Zheng]

[quote=Requnix]One of the core goals of Crusade is to present a world where the side you choose really does make a difference. While the Kujix has the melee

[Retina]

Hrm, I'd describe it more like an old-school D&D style race/class system. But that's just because I'm old.

[Zheng]

Hrm, I'd describe it more like an old-school D&D style race/class system. But that's just because I'm old.

Did Pen and Paper since D&D First Ed. here so don't talk to me about old. I played in a 9 man group with Gary Gygax once when I was young(He GM'd). I would disagree with the comparison though, D&D was much more open to choice than WoW was. If you're a Druid, you were a Tauren or an Elf, no exceptions. Somehow human NPCs could be Rangers (Hunters basically), but a PC Human could not be. I always felt cheated that there were NPC examples of line-crossings of their own rule-set. It made me feel that NPC's were special enough to do that but I wasn't. Like all of the PC's were background to the special NPC's out there that drove the story. The exactly opposite of what I think an MMO should be.

Needless to say I didn't last in WoW that long. The gameplay had it's points and soloing was nice, but there were just choiceless points in the game that ruined it for myself. It's a roleplaying game, but ONLY the role they chose for you... reminds me of Final Fantasy games, but I won't get started there.

[dice]

Some interesting discussion..

Firstly, I would like to point out that the best open-ended games placed no limit on which skills you could improve at all (but rather, placed limits on the speed or ease with which you could improve those skills).

If I choose to be a Druid, then what I am actually saying as a player is that I want my character to enjoy learning about plants and animals, about healing stuff and traispsing through the woods. It makes _no_ sense for me to choose my class as a druid and then refuse to learn any skills in those areas...

Basically, there are (as I see it) two ways to do it:

1) The ease with which a character gains certain skills is determined by their statistics/attribute and their race (also, perhaps some other player chosen variables at the start of game etc). Their "Class" is a label automatically assigned to them by the game based upon the skills that they learn. Their "Level" is a number automatically assigned to them by the game based upon their proficiency in certain skills.
As such, a person with "80 in healing, 60 alchemy and 95 in traipsing through the woods" is classed as a "Druid, Level 19" or something. Perhaps some form of subclassing (extra automatically generated description) could be included, a la "Single Minded Druid" or "Jack Of All Trades Druid" which suggests that this level 19 druid could be useless at anything non-druidy, or that this character has reasonable proficiency in a number of skills, but the closest approximation we can find to this character would be to say "level 19 jack of all trades druid".

If you catch my drift. This is my preferred solution, but... yeah, anyway.

2) The player chooses a class for their character. This (along with their race/stats etc) defines how easily they can increase certain skills. They are forever labelled as (for example, a druid) even if they never smell a herb, or set toe in the woods. They cannot gain experience or levels, or however you want to rate this druid, unless they do some woods traipsing or beard growing. A supposed "druid" spends all his time swinging his mace, and is the world's best mace fighter; he can kill any creature/person in the game with a single swing of his legendary chunk of steel; but since he can't traipse correctly, he is only considered to be level 1.

Or, even worse, the "gaining of a level" by killing ten monsters allows you to buy proficiency in a range of skills. UGH. Nasty. And unoriginal.

As you can see, I don't hold much regard for this form. Sure, it makes it easy for players: "Hmm, I'd like to be good at swinging a sword. I'll choose Warrior and that way I can!" but it also reduces the open-endedness of the game...

---------------

It should be just like real life. We are not limited by anything except our genetics (no human can jump 100 metres in the air unaided... it's just not possible in a Standard Earth Gravitational Field, no matter how often you practice jumping) and the amount of time we spend practicing.


Yeah, but we all need pipe dreams....

[Iago]

Personally, I get a little bored with characters based on class, these days. I really pine for lot of customization, and no games really satisy that adequately. WoW has its talent trees, but that never felt like enough to me. That game has some pretty vicious pigeonholing as far as class roles are concerned, and it's one of the reasons I quit.

If the classes in Crusade are really just shells for a broad variety of skill customization, I'll be happy. If they are very narrow in their scope.. I won't be happy.

[Retina]

I agree with Iago. I'm an old-school Hero System player so I've always had an issue with class based systems, including D&D (at least D&D makes multiclassing easier now, but there's major drawbacks). The pigeon-hole effect is drastic. From what's been said so far, there is some hope for Crusade.

I understand why class based systems exist. It's just easier to comprehend. It's just easier to say "I'm a cleric" and people know exactly what you are. It's just easier on the poor humans little minds. It's just easier or to use a common buzzword: accessible.

So how do you show people the magic of open-ended systems? Actually, it's really simple: templates. So you want to play a druid? Ok, here's the druid template with all your skills and stats all spec'd out for you. You can still customize it, but all the basic skills, spells, abilities and stats are preconfigured for what you'd expect for a druid. As you advance, you can talk to people (PCs or NPCs) that can guide you further on skill and ability choices depending on the path you're on.

To put it simply, I see systems like D&D as cookie-cutter and training wheels type systems. Systems like Hero are for people who want to play what they want and not have the system tell them what they can and can't do. Class systems are for people who don't want to think, open systems are for people who like to think and have imagination.

Yeah I'm spouting off a bit, but I'm old and picky now.

[Dyster]

That is why we are making a class/skill hybrid system. We really like the openness and flexibility of a skill based system. But there is also something to be said about the accessability and ease of use of a class system. Our goal is to find a middle ground where you can say "I'm a druid" and people have an automatic idea of what your capabilities are. But we also don't want to force druids down a very narrow path of what they are able to make their character into.

So the bottom line is we also prefer skill systems and their flexibility, but we need to balance that with making the game accessible enough to the public so the game is financially viable. Because face it. If we make a game only a very small number of people can understand, it won't last long in this market. We are making the game we want to play, and I want to be able to play it for years to come!

[dice]

A fair bit of discussion on this one (rightly so - it's an important topic) but not much answering of the original question (one that I am very interested in as well):

Can the races from Alganon choose to side with the Kujix (and can the races from Harraja choose to side with the Asheroth)?

Can my elf secretly covet the powers available to the Kujix sorcerers, switch sides, and become a warlock? Or, is my elf limited to Guardian, Wizard, Ranger?

Can my orc secretly despise the barbarity of his culture, and seek to become a Guardian of all that is right and true in the world?

If it were up to me, then I would say "Please, let the player decide what their character chooses!" If I _had_ to be a Warlock, Shade or Sorceror purely because I chose to be an orc... well, I would be a bit glum :-)

Cheers,
me.

[Iago]

Based on the way the information is displayed on the web site, I'd say that we're probably looking at race-constrained classes. It is a little limiting, but I guess that doesn't bother me too much if we're dealing with a big skill-based customization of the character.

As far as particular races swapping sides in the conflict, I can't hazard an opinion without more lore on hand, but my gut feeling is that it wouldn't happen, from the design standpoint. You'd imagine that such a thing would be rare in the context of the game world, but left to the whims of the playerbase, the distribution could turn out to be downright strange.

[dice]

"left to the playerbase, the distribution could turn out to be downright strange."

Ack, very true, and something that I did not consider.
I guess that this could be counteracted somewhat by making it much easier for races "sticking to their side" to gain something (for example, karma - a deity of Asheroth may be much more willing to trust an elf than an orc, etc) of at least moderate usefulness... that way, most of the players will seek the easier/more powerful route, while the roleplayers in the game might go the other way.

Still, this does not solve the abovementioned problem... Well, I hope that QOL have some awesome ideas, because I'd _really_ like to be able to play a Dwarven Warlock...

Cheers,
me.

[Syndic]

I would hope the system was more like EQ2's without the betrayal part.

So any race can go any class within their alignment. So if Rangers, Guardians and Wizards are the Asheroth Classes then any race from the Asheroth can go that class and the same for the Kujix and Warlords, Shadows and Sorcerers.

Although I would still be fine with a system like WoW where only certain races can go certain classes.

[Retina]

With the flexibility of the skill system, it's looking like you can almost play any "class" as any race or side. You can't start as that class, but you will most likely be able to learn it's skills. We'll see though.