Forums » The Summoner

Will it be like EQ's magician?

    • 4 posts
    April 14, 2017 2:31 PM PDT

    Will the Summoner be similar to EQ's magician?

     

    I nevered played magician in EQ, I played shaman but I always wanted to play a pet class that was on par with EQ's pet classes. Where the whole class revoles around their pet. However, in all the newer MMOs, I have been drifting through, pets are really just more like DoTs wtih legs. So I am really intrested in the Summoner class and finally filling that desire to play a true pet class. I just hope it does not trun out to be another sub mage class that is followed around by a walking DoT.  


    This post was edited by Jeremiahcp at April 14, 2017 2:34 PM PDT
    • 152 posts
    April 14, 2017 3:33 PM PDT

    I hope so. I hope that Mages and Necromancers are pet classes and maybe enchanters get something too. Wizards with familiars. Vanity pets for everyone...

     

    I would think that some classes could/would get temporary pets like...Summonable for 50 seconds or something either for combat or buffs. Like maybe bards could summon a puppet that taunts for 4 seconds heavily like a string puppet or something. 

     

    I dont know just thinking out loud! Haha!

    • 596 posts
    April 16, 2017 6:17 PM PDT

    I'm sure the summoner could possible be like the magician in EQ and maybe even more so since they are called "Summoners" as in they will obviously be summoning pets to aid them in battle and possibly even have certain spells that summon something for a limited time that does damage to a target like how the rain spells that had 3 waves to them, who knows but it would be interesting, but if they did i would say these certain spells probably had them around for maybe like 2-4 attacks or easily killable and caused a lot of aggro so the target would kill them off before they were like a 2nd pet.

    • 84 posts
    April 22, 2017 3:50 PM PDT

    Saddly we just dont know enough yet to be able to say for sure. I have hope we will see the Summoner in action on a Live stream soon. Brad spelled it wrong in the lastest video I hvae no idea why he thinks it is spelled M-O-N-K but what can I do. I also hope it is similar yet updated to the Magician from EQ as i loved that class.

    • 430 posts
    May 20, 2017 8:09 AM PDT

    Interesting thread today on the EQ1 official forums regarding magicians/wizards, purely providing opinions about how they're perceived in 'classic' EQ.

    • 10 posts
    June 1, 2017 10:08 PM PDT

    I certainly hope the Summoners would be something like the magician from EQ as that was my kind of playstyle.. maybe a mix og Beastlord and magician so we add more to the table than just mod rod summoning and weak nukes :))

     

    Cheers all

    • 10 posts
    June 2, 2017 5:29 AM PDT

    @raimotion

     

    Weak nukes..? Although I agree that it took a while before we got some of the better ones. But the bolt spell was always pretty powerful, you just had to be careful with your placement/aiming.

     

    Anyway, we had the best Damageshield in game, our pet was second to none and heaps of useful summons :) There are few things I would change from the EQ magician if asked. Never fancied the Beastlord. So a mix of the two isn't something I would fancy :)

    • 27 posts
    June 2, 2017 11:11 AM PDT

    It'll probably seem rather similar. Honestly, MMOs are not the best way to play a pet class weirdly enough...an ARPG like Grim Dawn allowed you to make a really powerful pet if you wanted to sacrifice your own stats and be as far away as possible. I had mixed success in GW2 with Ranger/Druid in WvW (somehow) with my constant buffing of the pet (way too much actually)...it just didn't do enough AOE damage compared to what I could do.

    I am hoping that the Summoner helps the pet (and others) rather than him/herself, which was pretty much what the EQ1 Magician was. I actually prefered the increased HP regen/AC over Wizard's personal root/snare, and nothing beats being able to off-tank one mob while destroying another mob. Summoner will most likely be the master of doing multiple things at one time due to the physical nature of their spells. Magician's were good at never needing to leave a dungeon due to always having food/drink/ammo/bandages/no-cost levitate and waterbreathing clickies and I guess bags too if the loot is too heavy before needing to gate.

    I guess that's what Magician literally was, a more grounded Wizard. Using more mana to make something that will stay around and do more things over-time rather than using bursts of mana to have immediate results. Necro mana-gain felt cheap to me, and I would like it if Summoner is more about saving and using mana intelligently compared to its necro counterpart. Maybe Summoner could use/feed physical items to what they summon. A fire elemental would have a hard time existing in a cold place, but with the right items it will and it will do more damage to the cold-based enemies...obviously the EQ1 Magician is more like a base than anything to work for.

    I wouldn't be surprised if the Summoner is the last class we get to know of due to our expectations. The Shaman pet looks far too simple, and as we know, we don't want another DoT pet that can tank. That and with all the physical things we are supposed to summon into the actual world, I highly doubt the crew won't have a myriad of problems finally getting it all to work. Many more problems if what we summon reacts to the world like the turrets in other games, or if they open menus and have their own AI. Other classes are self-contained at most and don't need AI, pathing, and other things. The additional pet models and animations too need to be created (possibly from scratch), although there may be a placeholder "earth elemental"...I don't want a human-looking fire elemental or a flying shark water elemental in the game proper. Most likely the pets will be similar to the enemy elementals or whatever else if they are not elementals, which is a sound decision at this stage.

    • 40 posts
    June 21, 2017 4:42 PM PDT

    Jeremiahcp said:

    Will the Summoner be similar to EQ's magician?

     

    I nevered played magician in EQ, I played shaman but I always wanted to play a pet class that was on par with EQ's pet classes. Where the whole class revoles around their pet. However, in all the newer MMOs, I have been drifting through, pets are really just more like DoTs wtih legs. So I am really intrested in the Summoner class and finally filling that desire to play a true pet class. I just hope it does not trun out to be another sub mage class that is followed around by a walking DoT.  

    God I hope not, Summoners need to be more like Green Lantern then a gimp wizard with a pet. 

    Give them their own magic school and leave elemental magic to wizards. Make Conjuration its own type of magic. Summon attack spells not just things to equip a pet. 

    • 4 posts
    June 22, 2017 3:53 AM PDT

    Summon attack spells?

    That is what your typical wizard does. A summoner should summon gear, clickies, pets, and the like and not just be another wizard but with a gimmick. 

    • 1 posts
    August 20, 2017 3:41 PM PDT

    As long as they don't become what they were in the raid scene. Sitting back summoning mod rods for hours was stupid and made me hate my mage.

    • 458 posts
    September 3, 2017 7:52 AM PDT

    LivingCorpse said:

    As long as they don't become what they were in the raid scene. Sitting back summoning mod rods for hours was stupid and made me hate my mage.

    Seems rather odd, when Mages where top dps for a long time. Mass mod rods are great feature but i hardly had to spam them, when you have 4-5 doing the same.

    Where you the only mage? or just pointed out to raid differently.

    • 37 posts
    September 17, 2017 6:36 PM PDT

    Crazzie said:

    LivingCorpse said:

    As long as they don't become what they were in the raid scene. Sitting back summoning mod rods for hours was stupid and made me hate my mage.

    Seems rather odd, when Mages where top dps for a long time. Mass mod rods are great feature but i hardly had to spam them, when you have 4-5 doing the same.

    Where you the only mage? or just pointed out to raid differently.

     

    Mass Mystical Transvergence didn't enter the game until Luclin (and even then it took a long time for all to get it), so for a long time Mages were summoning individual modrods and dropping them for the other casters and clerics to use.

    Mages weren't top DPS until well into EQs lifecycle. Prior to Raid Group functionality it was almost always going to be Rogues and Wizzies in the kill group.

    Then when Raid Groups did come in, Mages were, for a relatively long period, marginalised when the limitation on raid numbers came in, as a result of being primarily out-of-combat utility more relevant to early game and small groups, and limited situational DPS compared to the pure damage classes. That said, eventually things shifted around, class balance went all over the show over the years, and many classes had their ups and downs.

    To me, the Summoners role (and this largely applies to all classes) needs to be diverse enough to be desireable in all game situations, from early-game through end-game raid. There needs to be a benefit to incorporating a range of classes into a group or raid - stacking with The Best Tank, The Best Healer, The Best DPS class shouldn't be the most effective approach. It can be a very difficult balancing act from a design perspective, and there are so many variations to consider, especially once you start designing raid encounters and events that can be relatively complex. Add in any game mechanics that impact a classes' capability - such as resistances etc - and the task only gets worse.

    Ultimately, a class needs to provide sufficient benefit while engaged in combat to have players want them there. In many MMOs, at many times, classes (frequently pet classes) have not been as viable as most other classes, typically as a way to offset their improved soloing capabilities that have been present - but there's a huge difference in balance between being better able to solo at 20, and being able to maximise raid contribution at 50 (or whatever your level cap is).

    Class balance is a perennially difficult juggling act, and the more classes you have and the more complex the game mechanics the harder it becomes. I just hope that the devs here take not only their own past experiences and ideas in to account, but those of the players who fill those classes also. 

     

     

    • 251 posts
    September 17, 2017 8:52 PM PDT

    Personally I would be fine with them just ripping off Naruto, or something equally as ridiculous, and making a Summoning Ninja Class.  Does it really matter?  Summoner could just summon temporary equipment, and beer for the celebration after, and still have a meaningful role.  Imagining restrictions that don't exist, and trying to apply them to another fictional situation, doesn't serve much purpose.  Imagine a Summoner that could summon a suit of Ghost Armor for the entire Raid, and uses melee damage skills while in that suit of armor, rather than spells.  Or imagine that Summoner can summon a spring of mana that feeds a tank that fires nukes.  It could literally be anything.

    There is no reason to assume prior limitations in other games will apply to anything moving forward with Pantheon.  None whatsoever.


    This post was edited by ZennExile at September 17, 2017 8:55 PM PDT
    • 14 posts
    October 23, 2017 6:55 PM PDT

    Agree with ZennExile - I’d rather see Summoners more as manipulating the environment like Naruto ‘jutsu’ than a ‘pure’ pet class - the pets should be more like shamans, with a little variety coming from elemental creature types to tailor - its a way to augment, not the primary purpose.  I played a Magician almost exclusively from original EQ1 to Gates of Discord.  Pathing, command issues, and the inability really tailor pets always bugged me.  For the longest time many raids didn’t allow pets, which crippled the class in that type of content.  Summoning barriers that worked like root or block/deflected spells, buffs that make armor have more AC, add procs to weapons (not summoning pet only weapons), summoning water to turn the ground under NPCs to mud, like a druid snare, and combinations that work with the weather and atmospheric system to debuff, make other casters’ spells more powerful, and then add the utility of summoning items to help with corpse runs, mana regen, etc.  I’d like to see the class act more like an amplifier, and let the wizards run arcane dps.  

    • 4 posts
    October 23, 2017 7:56 PM PDT

    There is no reason to limit yourself from archetypes simply because they are archetypes. They become archetypes for good reasons.

    So many MMOs these days steer clear of the challenge of providing a true pet class, that current pets have been reduced to nothing but a DoT your opponent can kill. However, AI pathing techniques are so much more advanced since the day of EQ, and I would like pets to be pulled out of the trivial state the gaming industry has reduced them too. Players have so many caster options in this game already, that I don't see why one class can't be a dedicated pet class.




    This post was edited by Jeremiahcp at October 23, 2017 7:57 PM PDT
    • 4 posts
    October 23, 2017 8:00 PM PDT

    If Pantheon is really about recapturing the feel of those pioneering MMOs it would be incomplete without a dedicated pet class.



    • 14 posts
    October 24, 2017 1:23 PM PDT

    Jeremiahcp said:

    There is no reason to limit yourself from archetypes simply because they are archetypes. They become archetypes for good reasons.

    So many MMOs these days steer clear of the challenge of providing a true pet class, that current pets have been reduced to nothing but a DoT your opponent can kill. However, AI pathing techniques are so much more advanced since the day of EQ, and I would like pets to be pulled out of the trivial state the gaming industry has reduced them too. Players have so many caster options in this game already, that I don't see why one class can't be a dedicated pet class.



    I'm being wordy and descriptive for the benefit of the developers looking at classes and balance, as they do read this stuff -

    It's opinon, and everyone has their own, but I believe part of the reason that pure pet classes have diluted is because in order for the pet to be meaningful, the caster is de-emphasized - example, EQ mage pets, in order to be effective and survivable and to balance, the owners' spells were limited, slow to cast, had huge mana costs and were frequently resisted.  Combat and utility was largely restricted to damage shields, which provided supplemental DPS, about the same as one or maybe two decent nukes.  Magicians were excellent at camps and soloing; despite actually having great DPS, grouping was often difficult because other DPS classes were more consistent and less problematic than working with pets.  Sure, water pets could backstab and do great damage, but they had to be positioned by the mage, who was then not casting nukes while doing so.  Other pet types also had issues.  Grouping with magicians was often more trouble than it was worth - which created stigmas and led to further 'soloist' issues.  Later on, many of these issues ended up being mitigated and magicians really came into their own.  What I'm saying is I don't want a pure pet class in the archetypical sense. /pet attack and then cast 2 or 3 nukes and a horrible and inefficient pet heal isn't engaging or compelling content. I would rather cast 2 or 3 different summons and apply 3 or 4 effects to those summons and maybe change their archetype 1 or 2 times each and every fight.  Use up both mana and endurance.  Hence the comment about more Naruto-style "jutsu" effects.  Pet caster sure, but non-persistent pets with more dynamic roles and a more versatile group capability.  

    Don't really want to be the arcane DPS leader.  Don't really want to have a bunch of hot keys for umpteen and sometimes irrelevant pet commands.  Not looking to be emotionally attached to Gobober (that's more of a 'beastlord' thing).  Summoning and weaving elements not just as creatures, but also effects, creating synergies, amplifying the group and then doing some decent damage.  Clerics, Shamans and Druids can have the enduring buffs.  As an example: if the party warrior drops and the healer is next on the hate list, I let the air elemental I have been sustaining with endurance and its buff effects I have been holding up go, pull up an instant cast immobile rock pet and activate warrior archetype, make him an aggro machine using the last of my endurance to activate his taunt, then burn mana to summon a water sprite and air sprite, apply a synergy to them and cast a combat revive on the healer, put a pet only HoT on the rock pet, call an earth sprite and fire sprite, apply a synergy to rapidly accellerate the healers' mana regen, do a water summon to increase party regen and dismiss the rock pet (and his aggro) once the healer revives the warrior and he is ready to go again (all of which would happen in about 10-12 seconds or less).  That's 8 different abilities and 1 pet command that uses endurance.  Once the recovery is complete and I have some endurance back, call up an air imp to provide light DPS and stuns to the regular fight, emit an aura of cold to enemies, amplify fire-based spells and increase their chance to crit, and also a non-combantant water sprite Gobober to help my own mana regen.  Maybe I can have a Gobober and a Gabaner, but if I have 2 up, I only have enough endurance to maintain 1 aura, and the sprite acts like my familiar.  Maybe my familiar is what alters the effect of the pet - water sprites and air elementals create a 'fog-like' effect that provides a buff to group and debuffs enemies in certain ways. Nothing I have done replaces the power of a Shaman HoT, a Cleric heal or AC buff, a warriors' ability to persist in a long fight, or a wizards' ability to blast things out of existence. Everything I have done amplifies the group in some way or provides a benefit/utility, through the use of pets/creatures and elemental control.

    The point is that if the Summoner is a "pet centric" class, it should be symbiotic and dynamic, and the choices of pet type, etc., should be meaningful without creating unintended side effects, like EQ earth pet root that suddenly made proximity aggro a huge number, gets the pet killed and then since the mage and pet are linked, the mob takes off and kills the mage, and because the mage is standing over by the healers, they get pulverized before the warrior can get close enough to regain aggro.  That type of mechanic is what made magicians undesirable in groups (and made earth pets basically solo only).  Summoners should be phenomenally busy in combat through not just summoning elemental creatures, but by leveraging, blending, and manipulating either the properties of the elements or those of the representative creatures (for group benefit or mob detriment).  It shouldn't be about the pet, it should be about how the caster leverages that pet, and it should be interesting and creative ways, not just DPS.  Like having a fire-based pet up provides bonuses to atmospheric resistance (group) or providing the effects of an infusion (Summoner).

    The comments about Naruto "jutsu" are a generalization for rapidly summoning and combining abilities - in the anime they were oftentimes elemental based effects, and could certainly be represented through a pet, which gets to more of the point.  Pets as killable DoTs isn't compelling. Neither is a class that is reliant on a blob that only knows how to do 8 things, 5 of which aren't useful.  Summoner shouldn't be about the pet, nor should it really be about the summoner... it should be a case of "it's not about you, it's never been about you." (you being the summoner and/or their pet).  That's the necromancers' thing.

     

     

     

    • 321 posts
    October 29, 2017 9:48 PM PDT

    Akherat said:

    Jeremiahcp said:

    There is no reason to limit yourself from archetypes simply because they are archetypes. They become archetypes for good reasons.

    So many MMOs these days steer clear of the challenge of providing a true pet class, that current pets have been reduced to nothing but a DoT your opponent can kill. However, AI pathing techniques are so much more advanced since the day of EQ, and I would like pets to be pulled out of the trivial state the gaming industry has reduced them too. Players have so many caster options in this game already, that I don't see why one class can't be a dedicated pet class.



    I'm being wordy and descriptive for the benefit of the developers looking at classes and balance, as they do read this stuff -

    It's opinon, and everyone has their own, but I believe part of the reason that pure pet classes have diluted is because in order for the pet to be meaningful, the caster is de-emphasized - example, EQ mage pets, in order to be effective and survivable and to balance, the owners' spells were limited, slow to cast, had huge mana costs and were frequently resisted.  Combat and utility was largely restricted to damage shields, which provided supplemental DPS, about the same as one or maybe two decent nukes.  Magicians were excellent at camps and soloing; despite actually having great DPS, grouping was often difficult because other DPS classes were more consistent and less problematic than working with pets.  Sure, water pets could backstab and do great damage, but they had to be positioned by the mage, who was then not casting nukes while doing so.  Other pet types also had issues.  Grouping with magicians was often more trouble than it was worth - which created stigmas and led to further 'soloist' issues.  Later on, many of these issues ended up being mitigated and magicians really came into their own.  What I'm saying is I don't want a pure pet class in the archetypical sense. /pet attack and then cast 2 or 3 nukes and a horrible and inefficient pet heal isn't engaging or compelling content. I would rather cast 2 or 3 different summons and apply 3 or 4 effects to those summons and maybe change their archetype 1 or 2 times each and every fight.  Use up both mana and endurance.  Hence the comment about more Naruto-style "jutsu" effects.  Pet caster sure, but non-persistent pets with more dynamic roles and a more versatile group capability.  

    Don't really want to be the arcane DPS leader.  Don't really want to have a bunch of hot keys for umpteen and sometimes irrelevant pet commands.  Not looking to be emotionally attached to Gobober (that's more of a 'beastlord' thing).  Summoning and weaving elements not just as creatures, but also effects, creating synergies, amplifying the group and then doing some decent damage.  Clerics, Shamans and Druids can have the enduring buffs.  As an example: if the party warrior drops and the healer is next on the hate list, I let the air elemental I have been sustaining with endurance and its buff effects I have been holding up go, pull up an instant cast immobile rock pet and activate warrior archetype, make him an aggro machine using the last of my endurance to activate his taunt, then burn mana to summon a water sprite and air sprite, apply a synergy to them and cast a combat revive on the healer, put a pet only HoT on the rock pet, call an earth sprite and fire sprite, apply a synergy to rapidly accellerate the healers' mana regen, do a water summon to increase party regen and dismiss the rock pet (and his aggro) once the healer revives the warrior and he is ready to go again (all of which would happen in about 10-12 seconds or less).  That's 8 different abilities and 1 pet command that uses endurance.  Once the recovery is complete and I have some endurance back, call up an air imp to provide light DPS and stuns to the regular fight, emit an aura of cold to enemies, amplify fire-based spells and increase their chance to crit, and also a non-combantant water sprite Gobober to help my own mana regen.  Maybe I can have a Gobober and a Gabaner, but if I have 2 up, I only have enough endurance to maintain 1 aura, and the sprite acts like my familiar.  Maybe my familiar is what alters the effect of the pet - water sprites and air elementals create a 'fog-like' effect that provides a buff to group and debuffs enemies in certain ways. Nothing I have done replaces the power of a Shaman HoT, a Cleric heal or AC buff, a warriors' ability to persist in a long fight, or a wizards' ability to blast things out of existence. Everything I have done amplifies the group in some way or provides a benefit/utility, through the use of pets/creatures and elemental control.

    The point is that if the Summoner is a "pet centric" class, it should be symbiotic and dynamic, and the choices of pet type, etc., should be meaningful without creating unintended side effects, like EQ earth pet root that suddenly made proximity aggro a huge number, gets the pet killed and then since the mage and pet are linked, the mob takes off and kills the mage, and because the mage is standing over by the healers, they get pulverized before the warrior can get close enough to regain aggro.  That type of mechanic is what made magicians undesirable in groups (and made earth pets basically solo only).  Summoners should be phenomenally busy in combat through not just summoning elemental creatures, but by leveraging, blending, and manipulating either the properties of the elements or those of the representative creatures (for group benefit or mob detriment).  It shouldn't be about the pet, it should be about how the caster leverages that pet, and it should be interesting and creative ways, not just DPS.  Like having a fire-based pet up provides bonuses to atmospheric resistance (group) or providing the effects of an infusion (Summoner).

    The comments about Naruto "jutsu" are a generalization for rapidly summoning and combining abilities - in the anime they were oftentimes elemental based effects, and could certainly be represented through a pet, which gets to more of the point.  Pets as killable DoTs isn't compelling. Neither is a class that is reliant on a blob that only knows how to do 8 things, 5 of which aren't useful.  Summoner shouldn't be about the pet, nor should it really be about the summoner... it should be a case of "it's not about you, it's never been about you." (you being the summoner and/or their pet).  That's the necromancers' thing.

     

     

     

    Very good argument I like it all. I definately agree that we should replace knockoff wizard spells with pets, so roots could be an underground earth pet, for example.

    One thing though-I do like the idea of loving my gobober, and you can probably accomplish all of this while having just one gobober with you at all times.

    Rather than desummoning,summoning, repeat, you could have an entire line of spells which change the properties of, split the properties of, or buff, your pet.

    Change your earth pet into air, split him up so one half casts air nukes and the other turns into water so it provides mana to your healer. Add in interesting art for each of the various ways you can make your pet look.

    Temporary effects and synergy would work here too, like giving your earth pet 2 exploding fire boulder arm attachments to toss at his foes. He could then use the updraft from the exploding fire to do a slightly more effective air/jump attack, or use the fire to more quickly change into an earth/fire pet. 

    Everything you can do with 2 pets you can do with one particularly exciting pet.

     

    Or, if you really like having multiple pets you could still have the perma pet described above and just add a few interesting temporary pets who you summon on the side; The explosive suiciders or large masses of lightning bees, that sort of thing.


    This post was edited by BeaverBiscuit at October 29, 2017 9:55 PM PDT
    • 14 posts
    October 30, 2017 7:59 AM PDT

    an interesting look at it BeaverBiscuit!  The description I used was based more on Brad's pet/Summoner discussion thread from a while back.  The issue I have with a single Gobober is traditionally, bringing them up was an ardouous process, and if it dies, you're essentially SOL.  Also, if what you provide to the group is channeled through it, when it dies it really impacts the group - if your pet has an aura that provides resistances to the group in an atmosphere (i.e. a fire elemental who radiates heat to offset a frigid environment), the pet dying could easily end up wiping the group - creating a situation where pets are unreliable, and therefore undesirable.  An earth pet that shoots fireballs that explode and have an interesting side effect like a jump buff is exactly the kind of thing I'm hoping to see.  At the end of the day what I'm getting at is a single enduring pet creates indirect dependencies - those are, in pretty much every case, undesirable.  They are also incredibly difficult to balance from the developers' standpoint.  While I expect there will be an enduring pet of some type for the summoner, and it may very well be the target of other effects, it won't create a dependency such that the Summoner is crippled without it.  I believe we all agree on intent, but have slightly different views on how it is managed.  It's also very possible that a Summoner may have 2 or 3 pets that act as targets for effects, 1 pet that has melee effects, one that has ranged effects, and one that has auras or buff effects and can't be damaged (but can be dispelled).  That also would be a really interesting mechanic that gets after pretty much everyones' concerns.

    All good discussion.  Excited to see how it plays out (literally) :D

     

    Akherat

     

     

     

     

    • 321 posts
    November 2, 2017 11:45 PM PDT

    Akherat said:

    an interesting look at it BeaverBiscuit!  The description I used was based more on Brad's pet/Summoner discussion thread from a while back.  The issue I have with a single Gobober is traditionally, bringing them up was an ardouous process, and if it dies, you're essentially SOL.  Also, if what you provide to the group is channeled through it, when it dies it really impacts the group - if your pet has an aura that provides resistances to the group in an atmosphere (i.e. a fire elemental who radiates heat to offset a frigid environment), the pet dying could easily end up wiping the group - creating a situation where pets are unreliable, and therefore undesirable.  An earth pet that shoots fireballs that explode and have an interesting side effect like a jump buff is exactly the kind of thing I'm hoping to see.  At the end of the day what I'm getting at is a single enduring pet creates indirect dependencies - those are, in pretty much every case, undesirable.  They are also incredibly difficult to balance from the developers' standpoint.  While I expect there will be an enduring pet of some type for the summoner, and it may very well be the target of other effects, it won't create a dependency such that the Summoner is crippled without it.  I believe we all agree on intent, but have slightly different views on how it is managed.  It's also very possible that a Summoner may have 2 or 3 pets that act as targets for effects, 1 pet that has melee effects, one that has ranged effects, and one that has auras or buff effects and can't be damaged (but can be dispelled).  That also would be a really interesting mechanic that gets after pretty much everyones' concerns.

    All good discussion.  Excited to see how it plays out (literally) :D

     

    Akherat

     

     

     

     

     

    Good stuff as usual,

    My only worry for having temporary pets is that the pet dependancy is the only real thing that separates a pet class from a regular caster class.

    If you have a temp pet with an aura that regens mana, and an aura that regens mana, and both are equally dispellable, they are exactly the same.

     

    Let's get to the point where you say that multiple temporary pets are different from spells because they can die. How does VR make you want to keep temp pets alive if you are replacing them all the time to combo different effects? How does a pet which will be quickly replaced generate so much threat that it dying is even an issue?

    Not to mention leaving a pet to die (and therefore soak up dispells, dmg, etc) before you replace it, instead of just replacing it, might be beneficial to the group. While I'd love to see one or two summons which are actually designed to work like this, ALL of your summons doing this seems a little silly, imo. It would force you to time resummons right with when a pet dies tens of times per minute of battle.

     

    A Permanent pet means you will actually want to stop it from dying, for as long as possible, since you won't, theoretically, just be replacing it anyways. (Assuming we move beyond a particular EQ1 mage solo strategy, which I hope we do)

    Long term pets could definately be given extremely good AI in this day and age, so that there are no unintentional ease-of-use issues. The pet dying could thus be highly comparable to you dying, which results in the proper punishment of you being useless. Sure, it does suck if you are relying on the pet and it dies, but at least the pet can probably be replaced much more easily than you can.

    Also, summoners could be given some spells that work outside of their permanent pet, like extra temporary pets, that allow them to still function a little bit if  they aren't immediately using their permanent pet.

     

    It is certainly difficult, but I do beleive VR could find a balance between how easy it is to replace a perma pet and how easy it is to keep that pet alive.


    This post was edited by BeaverBiscuit at November 2, 2017 11:58 PM PDT
    • 14 posts
    November 3, 2017 12:20 PM PDT

    BeaverBiscuit said:

     

    Good stuff as usual,

    My only worry for having temporary pets is that the pet dependancy is the only real thing that separates a pet class from a regular caster class.

    I disagree - if we consider the pet class as DPS (as in EQ1), no other DPS class carried a dependency on a killable DoT in order to maintain equality with the other DPS classes.  The dependency was a detractor, not a benefit.  It was the ability of the pet to off tank and provide some level of single target cc in group content that was supposed to make up for it, however this really didn't occur until many years into the game (post Omens of War).  If there is going to be an enduring pet, then the utility of that pet must make up for the limitations placed on the pet owner, or the class won't work.  It has to be effectively balanced for the role(s) it is expected to play.  

    In EQ1 there were 4 different kinds of pet; one was broken and never properly fixed (fire), one had an ability that was a hinderance in groups 99% of the time (earth), one was dependent on position for maximum benefit (water)- which required either a tank that knew how to work with pets, or a mage that quit casting nukes to get the pet in position, or a pet that provided consistent performance but whose ability was only limited in effectiveness (air).

    Had they been more effective or desirable, magicians would have been a lot more group friendly - however doing so would likely have overpowered the class, thus requiring other handicaps or limitations on the pets to balance it.  It becomes a neverending tradeoff between utility and balance.  Not to say there isn't a solution - I rather like the idea of an enduring pet that I can modify through spells to serve a particular role, but I don't want it to define all I can do, and I'd want to be able to function in a reasonable capacity without it.

    If you have a temp pet with an aura that regens mana, and an aura that regens mana, and both are equally dispellable, they are exactly the same.

    Not necessarily - you can make pets immune to things like dispel, just like you can spell effects.  The benefit of the pet is that it can be targeted for other effects or purposes.  There is no reason I shouldn't be able to summon a mana regen pet and target it at the cleric - I give up say, 30% of my endurance pool, and the pet acts like a persistent mana regen buff.  If I need to dismiss it to use that endurance for something else, I can - but it's the situation that dictates the duration of the buff, it's never "fire and forget".  What you're saying is "temp" and what I'm saying is "temp" aren't exactly the same thing.  I don't mean that the pet is on a timer (although we both agree there is a value in this type of pet for specific functions), I mean that it's tied to something like endurance; it requires something from the summoner to maintain, and that is a resource the summoner must manage (to include dismissing the pet). 

    Let's get to the point where you say that multiple temporary pets are different from spells because they can die. How does VR make you want to keep temp pets alive if you are replacing them all the time to combo different effects? How does a pet which will be quickly replaced generate so much threat that it dying is even an issue?

    You make my point - I *don't* want to keep the pet alive.  I want to summon it, use it, and dismiss it. No interest in keeping it alive any longer than necessary to serve its purpose.   I want my focus to be on my group, not my pet.  If that purpose is to generate threat and keep me (or others) from harm, then do that, and when the hostility is over, go away.  Pets are things, tools.  Not summoning it to be my friend. That's what grouping is for :D

    Not to mention leaving a pet to die (and therefore soak up dispells, dmg, etc) before you replace it, instead of just replacing it, might be beneficial to the group. While I'd love to see one or two summons which are actually designed to work like this, ALL of your summons doing this seems a little silly, imo. It would force you to time resummons right with when a pet dies tens of times per minute of battle.

    If I need a pet that will soak up damage, etc., then that is just it - a pet for that purpose, and when it's done, the pet goes away.  This isn't to say you couldn't have a pet that you kept up at all times to do this, but it is TIED to endurance, not mana (outside the initial casting).  That's the thing, I *want* to be busy in battle.  I want to be casting a wide variety of spells, combining effects, directing attacks, summoning lots of pets with features focused on supporting the group (including DPS).  /pet attack and then nuke 1, nuke 2, pet only heal 1, nuke 1, nuke 2, pet heal 1 is simply not compelling gameplay.  If the tank is in trouble, I want to be able to DO something to help, and I don't mean /pet attack.  If I have to sacrifice my pet so that he gets an AC buff, bye bye Gobober - pets don't suffer death penalties.  The dependency should not be on the pet (and whether or not I have a pet active in the first place), the dependency should be on the summoner.  Persistent pets that are sufficiently capable and versatile mean that without the pet, the summoner might just as well not be there at all (EQ mercenary system, anyone?).  The reason for being in the group isn't the summoner, it's the pet.  That is what I want to avoid.

    I'm not saying summoners can't or shouldn't have a pet of some type up all the time.  I'm saying that pets, in and of themselves, shouldn't create a dependency that both defines and limits the class.  summoning (and using) lots of different things should be.

    A Permanent pet means you will actually want to stop it from dying, for as long as possible, since you won't, theoretically, just be replacing it anyways. (Assuming we move beyond a particular EQ1 mage solo strategy, which I hope we do)

    Exactly.  I don't want a permanent pet, and I don't care if it dies because I can just replace it.

    Long term pets could definately be given extremely good AI in this day and age, so that there are no unintentional ease-of-use issues. The pet dying could thus be highly comparable to you dying, which results in the proper punishment of you being useless. Sure, it does suck if you are relying on the pet and it dies, but at least the pet can probably be replaced much more easily than you can.

    Okay... um so if pets have really good AI, and the pet dying is then comparable to me dying and I'm therefore useless without the pet... who wants to group with me?  My ability to play the game is then tied to the pet AI?  This is my point, exactly.  A capable, versatile pet with a good AI distances the player from the equation.  The AI is making decisions, not the player.  Not compelling gameplay.  If the pet is dumbed down to increase the importance of the player, then persistent pets become an indirect dependency, and bring more liability than benefit.  So to offset that, make pets consumables that are used and combined to do things.  Make the player central, versatile and compelling.

    Also, summoners could be given some spells that work outside of their permanent pet, like extra temporary pets, that allow them to still function a little bit if  they aren't immediately using their permanent pet.

    No real desire for 'filler' spells.  'Function a little bit' in Terminus is just saying take a couple more ticks to die.

     

    It is certainly difficult, but I do beleive VR could find a balance between how easy it is to replace a perma pet and how easy it is to keep that pet alive.

    Agreed, which is why in another post I suggested that if they do decide to do class specializations, that the summoner have one version that is entirely centric to the pet (or as I called it, a golem) 100%.  All spells, functions and abilities flow through the pet. Literally almost everything (the channeler specialization).  The other specialization is conjurer, in which it's 'summon for use', more along the lines of what I have been advocating.

    Either direction allows for a more compelling solution than the mechanics of the EQ1 style magician.  And I may be hypocritical here, as I played a magician for a total of about 10 years.  I soloed a LOT in the early days, and the class was great for that.  Once I started grouping, joining guilds and raiding, the class was frustrating and depressing early on (as many times pets weren't allowed on raids. It wasn't until pet mastery AA's entered that they were generally accepted again).  Sure, on a good day I could keep up with wizards and rogues in DPS, but I had none of their versatility in other areas.  CoH and Group CoH were great in specific situations, but that one thing was about the only benefit that magicians brought that couldn't be replicated by a wizard or rogue (or necro).  It was more expedient than corpse drag.  Mod Rods could just have easily been crafted or potions, and again were situational use, and extremely limited in value at high level.

    All that said-

    There is a way to do both styles of 'pet class' with specialization - and the two specialists would likely be at odds over the nature and purpose of their magic, which leads to great stories, quests and gameplay.  It also means having 2 of the same base class but different specialties creates more diversity in grouping and tactics.

    This is what I mean when I say 'indirect dependency' - the limitations created in order to make a pet viable devalues the player (which your arguments supported) unless it's absolutely 100% everything pet centric. Unless the summoner has to do things to make the pet do things (and I don't mean commands), it's not compelling gameplay.  They are a tool, or they are the purpose.  Left side of road, okay.  Right side of road, okay. Middle of road, "squish, just like grape."  I do not want to see the Summoner class in the middle of the road.  If so, at launch I'll probably play a wizard.

     


    This post was edited by Akherat at November 3, 2017 12:28 PM PDT
    • 321 posts
    November 4, 2017 1:04 AM PDT

    Akherat said:

    snip

    Alas, you feel that summoners should not depend on their pet, I feel that them depending on the pet is what would define them as a unique class, instead of just glorified wizards with weird, dying dots=p.

    Having permanent pets who aren't meant to be replaced, but instead are changed around by spells, helps to increase pet dependency.

    Also when i said we have good ai, I meant that VR can balance it just right so your pet dies enough to be balanced. It would probably rely on both you and the ai in order to happen. If you had spells like I mentioned, which change the properties of your pet, and had to cast them often in order to be effective, then there would be no issue with the mage relying entirely on the AI to do his job. There would be plenty of immersive gameplay, and reliance on the mage, because the mage is what determines the effectiveness of the pet on a constant basis.

    I should mention that I do like the endurance idea where you have so much endurance and each pet requires some. It keeps pets perament.


    This post was edited by BeaverBiscuit at November 4, 2017 1:16 AM PDT
    • 321 posts
    November 4, 2017 1:12 AM PDT

    ugh i suck at posting


    This post was edited by BeaverBiscuit at November 4, 2017 1:12 AM PDT
    • 14 posts
    November 4, 2017 7:02 AM PDT

    BeaverBiscuit said:

    Akherat said:

    snip

    Alas, you feel that summoners should not depend on their pet, I feel that them depending on the pet is what would define them as a unique class, instead of just glorified wizards with weird, dying dots=p.

    Having permanent pets who aren't meant to be replaced, but instead are changed around by spells, helps to increase pet dependency.

    Also when i said we have good ai, I meant that VR can balance it just right so your pet dies enough to be balanced. It would probably rely on both you and the ai in order to happen. If you had spells like I mentioned, which change the properties of your pet, and had to cast them often in order to be effective, then there would be no issue with the mage relying entirely on the AI to do his job. There would be plenty of immersive gameplay, and reliance on the mage, because the mage is what determines the effectiveness of the pet on a constant basis.

    I should mention that I do like the endurance idea where you have so much endurance and each pet requires some. It keeps pets perament.

    Not opposed to the idea of a "permanent" or external target pet for spell effects - my position is if that is the case, it must be about 98% of everything the summoner does MUST come through the pet.  You don't buff yourself, you cast on your pet, and your pet buffs you.  You don't cast fireball, your pet does.  Lots of varieties of effects, lots of auras, buffs, enchantments, effects.  The AI is barely existant.  It would be interesting.

    An AI that is smart enough to not die just enough is exactly what I'm saying is a bad idea.  You have to tone down the pet so that it doesn't compete with players, and you have to tone down the summoner so that the combination of pet and summoner isn't overpowered.  That equates to lame pets and a gimped caster = soloing, not grouping.  No thank you.

    I agree that having spells to change the properties of a pet is a good idea, having to weave effects together, etc., through the pet is fine.  But the pet needs to be literally dumb as a rock, the summoner should be telling it what to do all the time, or, as an alternate, have the ability to use spells to change the AI routine the pet is using.  That could also provide some interesting options.  The summoner could quest for scrolls or knowledge to unlock pet abilities - and then build "AI" routines with those abilities, which are treated like spells - so you are level 1 and you have a pet that knows /attack and /back off - you quest and find a scroll of /backstab.  So now you open your pet UI and you have a 'skill tree' for your pet.  you drag /attack and /backstab into the blocks for 'melee', /back off is in control.  Then you find a scroll of /AC Buff.  Open the UI and drag that into the column for buffs.  Now the pet casts the AC buff on itself (and or you and your party)  As long as that routine is active, the pet will keep that buff running.  Your level determines how many blocks a routine has, and you can potentially quest to unlock additional slots or types of routines/effects.  You could find things like /leap attack, /stun, /move behind, /block, /riposte, etc.

    Your spell book contains various routines, and you can only have a certain number of routines available at any given time.

    That could end up being pretty cool, and I would join you on persistent pet if it worked like that.

    The concept behind using endurance is that you have a resource pool you must manage - and that pool is consumed or replenished based on what the summoner is doing with a variety of different types of pets or summoned creatures.  The summoner decides which effects and synergies to have available at any given time - I think we both agree on the idea of a variety of effects and blending.  There are a lot of different ways the class can go, but what I really hope we do not see is a repeat of the EQ Magician.

     

    -Akhy