Theyve made it clear they are breaking some of the molds traditionally tied to races and classes, much like the elves and dwarves. Same goes for classes. They’ve decided that to be a paladin, not only vengeance but specifically undead vengeance is required. You can be a myr and decide you are mad at the red myr for killing Saronai but they does not make you a paladin, it simply makes you an enchanter, cleric, wizard, bard (all myr classes) etc fighting for vengeance. there is a difference to them, as paladins specifically developed their skills for the undead etc.
Zuljan said:You know it’s an rpg, but you seem to keep trying to turn the rpg racial/class/lore elements that have been set it place in this world to cater to your desire/argument or past iterations of game’s matrices, which contradicts the rpg nature you continually recognize this game to be.
If you read back on my previous posts you will see how I try to separate "standard video game RPG" from "open world MMORPG." I specifically touch on the difference of roleplaying a pre-made character through a linear storyline and creating your own character and playing them in a virtual world. While I certainly appreciate those oldschool RPGs, having played many of them, I disagree that they are of the same "RPG Nature" that Pantheon is supposed to be. Pantheon is an open-world MMORPG. We create our own characters and forge our own paths rather than having them prescribed to us.
Let's check Wikipedia to see what open-world gameplay means:
"The main appeal of open-world gameplay is that they provide a simulated reality and allow players to develop their character and its behavior in the direction of their choosing. In these cases, there is often no concrete goal or end to the game."
Another excerpt from that page:
"Generally, open-world games still enforce many restrictions in the game environment, either because of absolute technical limitations or in-game limitations imposed by a game's linearity."
As such, restrictions are usually imposed as a result of absolute technical limitations (clearly not the case with race/class restrictions) or due to a game's linearity. I am arguing that imposing these restrictions at character select screen is an arbitrary form of imposed linearity that is contradictive to the spirit of open world gaming, and more importantly, the spirit of roleplaying in an open, virtual world.
Zuljan said:Theyve made it clear they are breaking some of the molds traditionally tied to races and classes, much like the elves and dwarves. Same goes for classes. They’ve decided that to be a paladin, not only vengeance but specifically undead vengeance is required. You can be a myr and decide you are mad at the red myr for killing Saronai but they does not make you a paladin, it simply makes you an enchanter, cleric, wizard, bard (all myr classes) etc fighting for vengeance. there is a difference to them, as paladins specifically developed their skills for the undead etc.
i think there is a mixup in definition.
by traditional standards a paladin is someone who use to be a cleric or priest and decided that i want to lay the smack down. i could say evil paladin then it's the exact opposite :D
this is how vr defines paladins sooooooo... yup. gotta be a ghostbuster.
oneADseven said:Zuljan said:You know it’s an rpg, but you seem to keep trying to turn the rpg racial/class/lore elements that have been set it place in this world to cater to your desire/argument or past iterations of game’s matrices, which contradicts the rpg nature you continually recognize this game to be. And again, this is obviously why VR made it clear if it doesn’t change at launch, history and current events in world could likely prompt classes to open up to other races. Maybe I interpreted something wrong there. No hard feelings either way
If you read back on my previous posts you will see how I try to separate "standard video game RPG" from "open world MMORPG." I specifically touch on the difference of roleplaying a pre-made character through a linear storyline and creating your own character and playing them in a virtual world. While I certainly appreciate those oldschool RPGs, having played many of them, I disagree that they are of the same "RPG Nature" that Pantheon is supposed to be. Pantheon is an open-world MMO.
Let's check Wikipedia real quick on what that means:
"The main appeal of open-world gameplay is that they provide a simulated reality and allow players to develop their character and its behavior in the direction of their choosing. In these cases, there is often no concrete goal or end to the game."
I feel you chose to responsd to perhaps the most underwhelming detail of my response to you, as it doesn't address the main examples you were passionate about, but again this is another example of through the looking glass, reading, interpretation, and how different people will process the information. When I read your definition of open world gameplay, to me there is nothing pantheon does by means of race/class matrices and lore that prevents the definition of open world from happening. I interpret my "development and behavior in the direction of my choosing" as being I can choose whatever race I want class I want, choose the weapons tradeskils armor proficiencies, unknown languages, explore areas of my choosing, behave/roleplay the way I choose, raid and guild and group with who I choose, and as in this mmo like EQ or the others, there won't be an official "end" either. But, your interpretation, is something along the lines of "because I cannot make a certain race play a class that the lore does not support, then it is destroying the very threads that make it an open world mmo," but even in the definiton youve given, there are no details or examples of "well if a game does not allow you to place any class as any race, then it cannot be open world." You are choosing to read into and interpret it in your own way, which isn't incorrect, but by definition of open world, you can see you are also not correct either. They have not gone against the definition of an open world mmorpg.
Please see my edited post Zuljan. It seems pretty obvious that these restrictions directly interfere with one's ability to "develop their character and its behavior in the direction of their choosing." Seeing that being able to do such is considered the "main appeal" of open-world gameplay, these restrictions run counter to the spirit of an open world MMORPG. If these restrictions were imposed because of technical limitations, or limitations due to linearity, it would be different. An example of a restriction due to linearity would be instancing certain storyline content. VR has already suggested that they will be instancing certain storyline content and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that.
oneADseven said:Please see my edited post Zuljan. It seems pretty obvious that these restrictions directly interfere with one's ability to "develop their character and its behavior in the direction of their choosing." Seeing that being able to do such is considered the "main appeal" of open-world gameplay, these restrictions run counter to the spirit of an open world MMORPG. If these restrictions were imposed because of technical limitations, or limitations due to linearity, it would be different. An example of a restriction due to linearity would be instancing certain storyline content. VR has already suggested that they will be instancing certain storyline content and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that.
i can't agree that it restricts character development. having a solid foundation to build a story from makes it so much easier. i dig that its a whole bunch of races thrown on a planet and now they are sorting differences out.
here i got a meme for this thread it might get removed but it supports my reasoning:
I think the challenge we all have with paladin to some extent is that we are used to thinking of them as "lawful good holy warrior". The reality for Pantheon is that they're far more morally ambiguous. The words "Purifier", "Avenger", and "Inquisitor" come to mind.
So, we shouldn't think of paladins as innately "good".
At the same time for races like Dark Myr and Ogres, we have this tendency to want to think of them as "evil" races, when that isn't really the case. The Dark Myr aren't any more evil than anyone else. What they are, however, is prideful, imperialistic, and militaristic.
Likewise, ogres aren't "evil" either. They're not maliciously motivated or out to cause pain and suffereing. The ogres of Terminus believe in a very strict power hierarchy and that society becomes stronger through struggle and conflict. Strength and control are vastly important to them, but so is tradition and to some extent, honor. To the other races of Terminus they may seem primitive or even barbaric, but not necessarily evil.
The only race on Terminus that might truly be called "evil" is the Skar.
@adseven
Semantically, the argument remains the same to me: "character and its behavior in the direction of their choosing" is still satisfied. By your definition, youre saying if you cannot do any class/race combination you want, it is negating the definition of "behavior and direction;" however, you do have the freedom to make a choice among THOSE AVAILABLE. Something not being available for choice, does not disprove the premise for "open world" otherwise, everything by definition would negate open world game play (eg I can't dual wield 2H axes with my ogre wizard, so this is not open world, I cannot speak to alliance players as a horde player, so this isn't open world, I can't have impmroved night vision like elvles as a skar but i really want that so it isn't open world); but these conclusions are not cogent or provable by premise, for freedom of creation of choices not available is not a part of the definition of open world. You have many options available to "develop and behave" in your choosing, which is satisified. The definition itself is broad, because imho, people do not usually dissect or apply the definition with the breadth you do.
Concerning the "Generally, open-world games still enforce many restrictions in the game environment, either because of absolute technical limitations or in-game limitations imposed by a game's linearity," again, that is to me the exact same analogy/argument just in a different color. That is such a broad, open parameter definition, one could not hope to be able to prove that the lore race class matrix in any way negates that definition, because obviously depending on how you interpret that quote, I feel this completely satisfies that 100%, via the "in game limitations imposed by a games linearity." Not sure if you're taking linearity as a negative connotation, but linearity is definitely not always a negative, and I feel applies to what they did here to make aforementioned limitations.
Nephele said:I think the challenge we all have with paladin to some extent is that we are used to thinking of them as "lawful good holy warrior". The reality for Pantheon is that they're far more morally ambiguous. The words "Purifier", "Avenger", and "Inquisitor" come to mind.
So, we shouldn't think of paladins as innately "good".
At the same time for races like Dark Myr and Ogres, we have this tendency to want to think of them as "evil" races, when that isn't really the case. The Dark Myr aren't any more evil than anyone else. What they are, however, is prideful, imperialistic, and militaristic.
Likewise, ogres aren't "evil" either. They're not maliciously motivated or out to cause pain and suffereing. The ogres of Terminus believe in a very strict power hierarchy and that society becomes stronger through struggle and conflict. Strength and control are vastly important to them, but so is tradition and to some extent, honor. To the other races of Terminus they may seem primitive or even barbaric, but not necessarily evil.
The only race on Terminus that might truly be called "evil" is the Skar.
yes yes. this is it. our individual predefinition is slightly altering our race/class distinctions. we'd have to agree on a definition, however, some classes have already be defined by vr. in the case of paladins they only exists because they were once clerics gone full ghostbusters mode.
stellarmind said:oneADseven said:Please see my edited post Zuljan. It seems pretty obvious that these restrictions directly interfere with one's ability to "develop their character and its behavior in the direction of their choosing." Seeing that being able to do such is considered the "main appeal" of open-world gameplay, these restrictions run counter to the spirit of an open world MMORPG. If these restrictions were imposed because of technical limitations, or limitations due to linearity, it would be different. An example of a restriction due to linearity would be instancing certain storyline content. VR has already suggested that they will be instancing certain storyline content and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that.
i can't agree that it restricts character development. having a solid foundation to build a story from makes it so much easier. i dig that its a whole bunch of races thrown on a planet and now they are sorting differences out.
here i got a meme for this thread it might get removed but it supports my reasoning:
finally made it home so i can quote posts. man this meme was great hahahahaha wowww that takes the cake lmaooo
We can try to argue "interpretation" back and forth but Wikipedia usually spells things out pretty clearly. You're absolutely right that it's up to VR to figure things out and I'm not saying that they are right or wrong. I have pointed out that using lore to rationalize race/class restrictions doesn't make sense unless we agree in principle that "using lore to restrict X" is done completely arbitrarily and without consistency. I have pointed out what the "main appeal" to open-world gaming is, and why this style of game is especially attractive to roleplayers who enjoy being part of the creative process of storytelling and character development. VR can do whatever they please but that doesn't make it right or mean that I have to agree with it. You'll find me at the center of many debates that challenge the social norms or cultural expectations linked to EQ.
oneADseven said:We can try to argue "interpretation" back and forth but Wikipedia usually spells things out pretty clearly. You're absolutely right that it's up to VR to figure things out and I'm not saying that they are right or wrong. I have pointed out that using lore to rationalize race/class restrictions doesn't make sense unless we agree in principle that "using lore to restrict X" is done completely arbitrarily and without consistency. I have pointed out what the "main appeal" to open-world gaming is, and why this style of game is especially attractive to roleplayers who enjoy being part of the creative process of storytelling and character development. VR can do whatever they please but that doesn't make it right or mean that I have to agree with it. You'll find me at the center of many debates that challenge the social norms or cultural expectations linked to EQ.
It is a broad definition (open world). Because of that, it's clear to me neither of us are right or wrong, for it really is open to interpretation (like many things in life) based off of the terse, broad definition given. I respect it. Had trouble following some of your thoguhts at first but they make sense.
oneADseven said:We can try to argue "interpretation" back and forth but Wikipedia usually spells things out pretty clearly. You're absolutely right that it's up to VR to figure things out and I'm not saying that they are right or wrong. I have pointed out that using lore to rationalize race/class restrictions doesn't make sense unless we agree in principle that "using lore to restrict X" is done completely arbitrarily and without consistency. I have pointed out what the "main appeal" to open-world gaming is, and why this style of game is especially attractive to roleplayers who enjoy being part of the creative process of storytelling and character development. VR can do whatever they please but that doesn't make it right or mean that I have to agree with it. You'll find me at the center of many debates that challenge the social norms or cultural expectations linked to EQ.
but the reason we even have a class/race matrix is because vr wants these distinctions? the mo heavily suggests so otherwise gnomes would be able to be warriors... i would also add that it isn't done arbitrarily. specific combat occupations will sprout out from specific enviroments.
stellarmind said:oneADseven said:We can try to argue "interpretation" back and forth but Wikipedia usually spells things out pretty clearly. You're absolutely right that it's up to VR to figure things out and I'm not saying that they are right or wrong. I have pointed out that using lore to rationalize race/class restrictions doesn't make sense unless we agree in principle that "using lore to restrict X" is done completely arbitrarily and without consistency. I have pointed out what the "main appeal" to open-world gaming is, and why this style of game is especially attractive to roleplayers who enjoy being part of the creative process of storytelling and character development. VR can do whatever they please but that doesn't make it right or mean that I have to agree with it. You'll find me at the center of many debates that challenge the social norms or cultural expectations linked to EQ.
but the reason we even have a class/race matrix is because vr wants these distinctions? the mo heavily suggests so otherwise gnomes would be able to be warriors... i would also add that it isn't done arbitrarily. specific combat occupations will sprout out from specific enviroments.
not to beat a dead horse, but to give credit to VR; thats a really good point too. not only environmentally as in atmospheres etc, but as in mobs themselves, for I know humans dwarves and paladins are on the other continent (kingsreach), where the undead mobs are historically located in terminus, so it would be impossible for a myr pally to excel or even be able to use certain abilities at all with the mobs on that continent unless they reworked some dungeons and lore completely (but again no undead on that content in its history so it would feel really weird/misplaced). So a lot goes into what people may perceive as "unnecessary limitations" negating the open world experience. Lot of balancing to be done in terms of class and race dispersal per region and keeping it in line with terminus' history like kilsin addressed today, which will become more evident with more stressful testing. My starting city will be somewhere in kingsreach but I just know reignfall is going to be the cooler/badass continent. the possibilities of dark underwater fights/tunnels like plane of water near syronais rest (PoP was hit or miss to most of us I know, but I had fun because of my competitive guild) and of course there will be some crazy fire/hell zone near skargol...raids are going to be so epic..
I think a lot of the race/class matrix issues would be alleviated if Humans weren't allowed to be EVERY class. Somewhere in the back of my MMO subconcious it just rubs me wrong to use lore to justify that haha. So many restrictions on all of these other races that come from other worlds, but "hey, this species that has only been around for 5-6 generations (and needed help from the elves just to survive) was able to learn all of these other jobs from other worlds" (or it is just a crazy coincdence that these jobs were identical on other worlds) because they're "so resilient".
Darch said:I think a lot of the race/class matrix issues would be alleviated if Humans weren't allowed to be EVERY class. Somewhere in the back of my MMO subconcious it just rubs me wrong to use lore to justify that haha. So many restrictions on all of these other races that come from other worlds, but "hey, this species that has only been around for 5-6 generations (and needed help from the elves just to survive) was able to learn all of these other jobs from other worlds" (or it is just a crazy coincdence that these jobs were identical on other worlds) because they're "so resilient".
yup i'd gut that out the lore, remove dire lord, druid, shaman and summoner. majority of humanity doesn't really subjugate and we sure as hell don't live in harmony with nature.
Brad said he is interested in making worlds instead of games. I personally do not think that Terminus should be a world where 8/9 races are subjected to insurmountable stereotyping. We can cite lore and history all we want but when it comes time to actually having a home in this virtual world, we'll be constantly reminded that it's reasonable to look at each race (except human) and truly believe that they are incapable of independent thought as it relates to how they adventure. The notion that an Ogre might want to lay down his sword and shield and instead focus on building morale through the beating of their notorious war drums would be an impossibility. They aren't allowed to think about that scenario because doing so would instantly "break the matrix."
Darch said:I think a lot of the race/class matrix issues would be alleviated if Humans weren't allowed to be EVERY class. Somewhere in the back of my MMO subconcious it just rubs me wrong to use lore to justify that haha. So many restrictions on all of these other races that come from other worlds, but "hey, this species that has only been around for 5-6 generations (and needed help from the elves just to survive) was able to learn all of these other jobs from other worlds" (or it is just a crazy coincdence that these jobs were identical on other worlds) because they're "so resilient".
Technically humans have been on Terminus for 20+ generations. Other races (depending on lifespan) might still even be within their first few generations or at least have members of them alive and well (elves/dwarves?). The fast turnover of human lives leads to far more rapid change/adaptation in accepted ideas.
Bad or incomplete lore doesn't mean certain race/class combos shouldn't exist, just like the absence of lore for one combo, or the prevalence of lore for another, shouldn't preclude other combinations. As 1AD7 said, they wrote the lore to back up their design decisions, which makes sense, but let's not pretend it's much more than that. Using "it's the lore" is a paper thin shield to defend the restrictions. The restrictions exist in large part because they don't have the resources to animate/model/etc 126 diferent combos, which frankly is fine. They need to cut some things out to get the game made in a timely fashion. They painted the combos into the game with the lore, which is great, but let's not pretend it's the end all be all of why a combo should or shouldn't exist.
Zuljan said: People really want that myr pally! they all but literary say they are pure evil, with no desire for vengeance on or for syronai and on the contrary the original dark myr did not disagree or show any sign of discomfort when the red did kill syronai. to me it’s clear through context that her actions were always out of survival at any cost, to the point where she would deform and change the very existence and physical vessels of her people as opposed to allowing the warriors to die honorably in battle, being a “warrior race.” She always wanted more, but for selfish reasons. And like you said the pally in terminus (as per lore) is specific to fighting undead which the myr don’t even have any knowledge of, having come to terminus similar to the elves and then retreating underground for years etc. In m opinion with all of the good arguments for both sides to me the only one I see changing is the addition of a paladin class.
I'm not sure where you're getting this information from, but it's almost 100% wrong.
1) The Dark Mry aren't pure evil. I wouldn't even say they are mostly evil. They're just very bitter.
2) The lore section for Mry specifically mentions their cries of anguish and the agony the Mry felt at Syronai's death. Where you're getting that they were ambivalent about it is beyond me.
3) Syronai gave up her immortality to transform the Mry because she couldn't bear seeing them all die. How the hell are you getting that she was acting out of selfish reasons? What?
Now, you're technically correct that VR has stated that paladins are clerics that decided to become fighters to go after the undead. However, I don't see any reason why you wouldn't be able to substitue another enemy/cause into the backstory for paladins. If a cleric who worshipped Syronai sees her get murdered, feels guilty about not being able to protect her, and decides to take up arms to seek vengeance and better defend the myr and the other gods of Issul, I don't see why you couldn't call that a paladin.
@187 oh dear. it's fine to think that terminus shouldn't be subjected to a sterotype, but that's a very idealistic approach.
in reality, the world is very sterotypical. people think asians are good at math. i can tell you right now i suck at it. people also think asians in general aren't big criminals, but that's far from the truth. asians are more subtle in the crimes they commit.
it's not about independent thought or choice. i'm saying that enviroment is going to dictate combat effective styles. why would you train for jungle warfare (a ranger) if you are an underwater race fighting giant leviathans? these races, relatively speaking, have just been plopped on a diverse biosphere for survival. they are going to stick to what they know and are likely to settle in a habitat that they are familar with.
you can't build a world if your going to break it with unnatural fundimental laws.
My point is that stereotyping is very far from "natural" or "fundamental" law. People can "think" about stereotypes all they want but there is no imaginary control mechanism being operated from above that wills them into truthful existence. Imagine if the stereotypes we see here on Earth were actually bound by law. This race can only do that. That race can only do this. That race can do everything! Imagine that actually being true, and not being able to question it. There is nothing wrong with citizens of Terminus thinking "Ogres don't really have a lot of intelligence so they probably make awful casters." That would be a stereotype, and one that would be disproven by vigilant gamers who purposely play an Ogre Wizard and excel at doing it despite the odds being stacked against them.
oneADseven said:My point is that stereotyping is very far from "natural" or "fundamental" law. People can "think" about stereotypes all they want but there is no imaginary control mechanism being operated from above that wills them into truthful existence. Imagine if the stereotypes we see here on Earth were actually bound by law. This race can only do that. That race can only do this. That race can do everything! Imagine that actually being true, and not being able to question it. There is nothing wrong with citizens of Terminus thinking "Ogres don't really have a lot of intelligence so they probably make awful casters." That would be a stereotype, and one that would be disproven by vigilant gamers who purposely play an Ogre Wizard and excel at doing it despite the odds being stacked against them.
by your logic, you are basically saying cows can hunt even though they are efficient for grazing?
stellarmind said:oneADseven said:My point is that stereotyping is very far from "natural" or "fundamental" law. People can "think" about stereotypes all they want but there is no imaginary control mechanism being operated from above that wills them into truthful existence. Imagine if the stereotypes we see here on Earth were actually bound by law. This race can only do that. That race can only do this. That race can do everything! Imagine that actually being true, and not being able to question it. There is nothing wrong with citizens of Terminus thinking "Ogres don't really have a lot of intelligence so they probably make awful casters." That would be a stereotype, and one that would be disproven by vigilant gamers who purposely play an Ogre Wizard and excel at doing it despite the odds being stacked against them.
by your logic, you are basically saying cows can hunt even though they are efficient for grazing?
That is just an awful, awful analogy. For shame.