disposalist said:Thanks for the feedback.
It's interesting those suggesting warriors have a hard time recovering when solo or in a small group. Uh huh. You're describing what casters have *all the time*. Not so much fun is it?
It does make me think about the whole tenet of the game being balanced around a full group.
I guess perhaps the caster medding is 'balanced' there too, as suggested by another above: if you have an enchanter type speeding mana regen and a healer speeding health regen (the only traditional restriction for a warrior), though I have to say it's an awful lot more common, even in a full group, to see casters medding rather than warriors resting, waiting for natural health regen. In fact, that just never happened in EQ.
As for soloing, some classes just can't really do it - this also seems to be an 'accepted' tenet and I suppose it would be impossible to fix unless you make classes self-sufficient which really ruins the whole point of games like EQ (and Pantheon of course!) to be group-based.
So are we saying casters have to have the medding restriction for an MMORPG to be group-based? Hmm. Seems an over-simplified and disappointing conclusion. Feels like lazy design, but I admit the alternatives may well be too complex or unworkable - they are too complex for me to quickly see anyway. I wonder if VR have thought about it? I'd love to hear their thoughts, of course!
As I said, though: I appreciate that altering the warrior to have abilities working like caster classes do may be a huge change now, but having caster classes that are more like warriors, with default combat abilities they can use even when 'recovering' and recovery methods that aren't as uninteresting as plopping down on your arse in mid-combat? That should be pretty easy, no?
I think it was really dependent on your normal group make up from night to night. I was in a group that always had an enchanter the only time we had down time was when the healer was low on mana. Which happened rarely and usually when i chain pulled for some time keeping the group busy.
Our usual group make up most nights was shaman, enchanter, rogue, warrior, necromancer and my ranger. We used to have a wizard but he left the game at some point and the necro a guild mate became a regular in our group. If i had a day off during the week on off hours a group was rarely ideal and i noted how long it too a tank to heal when no proper healer around. It took way longer then mana regen when the enchanter wasn't around.
Lol, I don't have an agenda. As a said, I tend to play all classes and most recently I played a Monk in EQ.
But, part of the reason for playing that Monk was because the casters often had so much downtime and lots of pressure to only do things that were mana efficient so as to not slow down the group.
As it turns out, Monk can be the absolute opposite - you *never* get any downtime and often would be desperate for a break in running and pulling while the group members chat and moan that you are pulling too slowly...
People seem to be taking my comments as some kind of attack on warriors - perhaps my subject sounds that way? I thought my post made it clear that wasn't my intention.
Let me try again: -
The way I've seen Pantheon do combat so far seems to be very similar to EQ.
I see casters meditating and it made me think: this will be just like EQ. Now, I loved EQ, but some things, like meditating, had lots of unfun aspects. Meditating is not a fun activity - why can't casters work more like warriors? Yeah, not everything you do has to be hectic fun and I wouldn't want that, but sitting on your arse is the opposite.
If it's a balance thing, then I'd be happy to have casters do less damage and have less downtime, because that pressure to be mana efficient at all times oftens stifles your range of activities in a group. For example, for EQ clerics it often resulted in you standing, pressing a button and sitting again for 30 seconds until you could stand, press that one button and sit down again. If you pressed a different button that was less mana efficient you simply ended up sitting for longer and having your group grumble at you.
Pantheon is not EQ. There is opportunity to balance combat in a different way. I wouldn't expect a change to be made in a vacuum - of course if warriors had to rest for power, there would be other changes to balance that - you wouldn't just take away and not give. Of course if casters were given in-combat regen methods then there would be other changes to balance that, too.
What I am saying is, the traditional caster way - burst of power then relatively long periods of total inactivity - isn't ideal.
Can we discuss an alternative to casters sitting twiddling their thumbs while warriors hop from one foot to the other muttering "come on, come on, hurry up!" without people getting defensive?
disposalist said:Let me try again: -
The way I've seen Pantheon do combat so far seems to be very similar to EQ.
I see casters meditating and it made me think: this will be just like EQ. Now, I loved EQ, but some things, like meditating, had lots of unfun aspects. Meditating is not a fun activity - why can't casters work more like warriors? Yeah, not everything you do has to be hectic fun and I wouldn't want that, but sitting on your arse is the opposite.
If it's a balance thing, then I'd be happy to have casters do less damage and have less downtime, because that pressure to be mana efficient at all times oftens stifles your range of activities in a group. For example, for EQ clerics it often resulted in you standing, pressing a button and sitting again for 30 seconds until you could stand, press that one button and sit down again. If you pressed a different button that was less mana efficient you simply ended up sitting for longer and having your group grumble at you.
Pantheon is not EQ. There is opportunity to balance combat in a different way. I wouldn't expect a change to be made in a vacuum - of course if warriors had to rest for power, there would be other changes to balance that - you wouldn't just take away and not give. Of course if casters were given in-combat regen methods then there would be other changes to balance that, too.
What I am saying is, the traditional caster way - burst of power then relatively long periods of total inactivity - isn't ideal.
Can we discuss an alternative to casters sitting twiddling their thumbs while warriors hop from one foot to the other muttering "come on, come on, hurry up!" without people getting defensive?
I'd be very disappointed if they made casters more like warriors, double if they toned down their damage so they could be more ability spam-y like melee classes tend to be with fast regenerating mana. Personally I enjoy the traditional caster way of bursts of power with long cast times and it's a playstyle I hope they don't gut to cater toward those who enjoy more button presses.
It's possible that players could have it both ways if the living codex is robust enough to customize spells in such a way that a player who loves pressing buttons can mash their face across the keyboard throwing out fireballs while other players change their fireball to have a long cast time and higher damage.
Iksar said:I'd be very disappointed if they made casters more like warriors, double if they toned down their damage so they could be more ability spam-y like melee classes tend to be with fast regenerating mana. Personally I enjoy the traditional caster way of bursts of power with long cast times and it's a playstyle I hope they don't gut to cater toward those who enjoy more button presses.It's possible that players could have it both ways if the living codex is robust enough to customize spells in such a way that a player who loves pressing buttons can mash their face across the keyboard throwing out fireballs while other players change their fireball to have a long cast time and higher damage.
Dude, it doesn't have to be either a) huge damage then huge nothing or b) button-spamming and face-rolling.
You're being rather reductive to suggest that someone who doesn't like meditating for half their gaming life must want to mash the keyboard with their fists constantly.
I simply would like an alternative activity to... nothing... when mana runs dry.
Even the ability to move at a slow walk and re-position would be better than just plonking down on my butt.
Just something that means I don't feel guilty for using something other than the 2 out of 20 in my spellbook that are most mana efficient.
Also, not all casters (in EQ anyway) were high damage and long regen types...
Your living codex idea is interested and related, but no, I wouldn't really want to simply change a fireball into two small ones so I get to press the button twice for half the damage.
Making it optional would be good, too, though, if you kept medding and made it more efficient, there would again be pressure to med the same as there is pressure to only cast efficient spells. I can easily see people kicking you from groups if you're a caster who prefers to be more active and doesn't use the super efficient meditation technique.
I appreciate it's a tricky mechanic and a touchy subject... just interested in a discussion...
It'd be flavorful to see rogues running in to backstab and then running away, but I believe giving melees auto attack and short cd abilities is useful for keeping them in melee for an entire fight. This allows them to use their hardier traits, and also feel useful/have fun if they get locked into the fight because the mob is attacking them.
Casters aren't built to be comfortable in melee. They don't have an inherent need to ever BE in melee; hence why they don't usually get auto attacks and short cd, free or mostly free, abilities.
So I wouldn't really say it's fast paced playstyles vs slow paced playstyles. Rather, this is an inherent game balance desire to keep the hardier classes using that hardiness within melee range.
After that it's just emergent stuff.
_____________________
Personally, I wouldn't like the idea of giving casters auto attacks/free/nearly free abilities. Simply put, they have no logical need to be kept in the fight at all times. Casters have one universal cooldown in the limits of their mana bar, and managing that can be a very fun thing for many players.
Having only one or 2 efficient abilities, and no need to use the others, is more of a game balance thing IMO. Pantheon will hopefully have enough unforseen situations, and enough time poured into designing every spell, that this isn't as much of an issue.
To further note, things like ranged ranger/pet classes will likely be able to provide the exact experience our OP seems to desire; something to add into the fight at all times from range.
_____________________
I do, however, agree with OP regarding the logic of warriors needing to rest inbetween fights. Why not give them their own mana/stamina bar that they need to regen inbetween fights? You could even have the very occasional flavorful battle where the melees need to rest in the middle of the fight for some reason.
I remember my friend who was a mage in WoW. Rather than blowing all of his mana and sitting down, certain spells could be cast nonstop throughout the whole fight. He would even come ahead in DPS this way.
I would love to see that very same sort of battle mechanic applied to all of the most useful abilities of our physical classes (besides a weak, free taunt). You would add in a newer and potentially fun mechanic where melees need to manage their slow regen resources, such as a stamina bar, efficiently. However, keep mechanics like the auto attack/tanking/short CDs so that melees are most efficient when they stay in the battle. You likely wouldn't even alienate the guys who appreciate a faster paced battle!
Done right, giving physical classes "mana bars" satisfies us logically. It also adheres to VR's policies regarding downtime and the Pantheon social experience. After all, we'd have our monks, warriors, rogues, etc. resting inbetween fights now and chatting with the casters=).
I guess one way they could try to balance out medding for resources between classes could be something like:
(made up numbers per tick)
Meele class:
resting stam regen: 15
stam regen w/auto attack on: 5
stam cost for auto attack: 7
colored mana resting regen: 5
colored mana regen when using any action(includes movement): 1
Caster class:
resting stam regen: 5
stam regen w/auto attack on: 0
stam cost for auto attack: 9
resting mana regen: 15
mana regen when using any action(includes movement): 3
By setting up a base line such as this can open up huge potential for a staggingering array of different combinations of things to affect how classes regen their resources.
Different races can affect the base line numbers such as dwarves/skar/ogres regen stam faster,but mana slower while gnomes/halflings/eleves are the reverse.
Different classes can affect the base line numbers as well such as the monk/warrior/rogue regen stam faster and mana slower while the wizard/enchanter/summoner regen stam slower, but mana faster.
Then of course are the multitude of different ways abilities could affect regen rates as well.
By using a combination of the above list can open up a lot of ways to vary how to manage your resources during combat. Pehaps the warrior has a high up front stam cost ability where he holds the attention of the mob and since he is now low on stam decides to turn off auto attack to regen stam faster during the 3 ticks the taunt lasts. Or a summoner forgoes mana regen while he attempts a channel spell to summon a minion from the ether to help in the battle.
The game is in pre alpha VR has a long way to go to work out the kinks on how to properly manage resources management between classes.
Interesting thoughts, @BeaverBiscuit
I wouldn't suggest putting caster in melee - thier default abilities would much more likely be wand or staff effects that would act from range. For me it's less wanting casters re-balanced, just wanting something other than stationery and prone.
Also I do appreciate the whole resource management being a skill and an addition to the tactics. The reason I even suggested that warriors might have the same system (though given the reaction, I maybe shouldn't have dared to suggest it!) was more from the point of view that if both types had the same core mechanic, both types might get the best of both, not both types would have the restrictions of both. Both types would have an understanding and appreciation for the need for downtime and tactics and a considered pace of play.
I also appreciate that some players *like* that casters require downtime and enjoy the pace and combat style they have. I imagine if some kind of in-combat regen and default attack were used for casters, you could eschew that and do the full meditate thing. As I've said above, I think it would be tricky for that not to be the more efficient and, thus, the only desired or even tolerated practice, but maybe it could be balanced so it's not.
I'm not suggesting I know best - just wondering if an alternative to caster=med, warrior=action, monk=constant-action-until-a-mental-breakdown, etc, way that EQ did it, and, it seems from videos so far, Pantheon intends.
EDIT: I'm absolutely certain there will be something for me in Pantheon whether my idea inspires a design change (highly unlikely, of course) or not. I still enjoy casters and I doubt it will be quite like the EQ cleric trap I describe. I still enjoy warriors and I doubt it will be as restrictive as the EQ keep-the-right-distance-and-face-the-right-way meta. I imagine if it's very similar to EQ that I might enjoy something like the EQ necro or shaman most, though: You get to keep being productive, even while you med, even if that is just directing your pet and keeping an eye on DoTs and debuffs.
I have been gaming for a long time and I don't recall a single occassion where I kicked a caster (or even questioned them) for going OOM. To be honest, I think it's a bit of a reach to assume that other players will be worried about the spell rotation or mana efficiency of another player. Maybe on the most hardcore raid where every droplet of mana needs to be managed to perfection ... okay, sure. But for regular grouping? If I see an OOM caster, it means they were doing their job and now they need a rest. Big deal. If the group leader is worried about mana regen, they should have a bard/enchanter in the group ... that's on them to figure out.
disposalist said:I simply would like an alternative activity to... nothing... when mana runs dry.
Even the ability to move at a slow walk and re-position would be better than just plonking down on my butt.
Just something that means I don't feel guilty for using something other than the 2 out of 20 in my spellbook that are most mana efficient.
Making it optional would be good, too, though, if you kept medding and made it more efficient, there would again be pressure to med the same as there is pressure to only cast efficient spells. I can easily see people kicking you from groups if you're a caster who prefers to be more active and doesn't use the super efficient meditation technique.
I appreciate it's a tricky mechanic and a touchy subject... just interested in a discussion...
I just don't see any way around it if meditating is an option during combat and in the absence of abilities that restore mana (which I hope they don't really have so mana management isn't trivial outside of raids/dungeon bosses). Maybe they can have some kind of mini game while meditating in combat? /shrug
If your group is pushing the limits of pulling then you will end up meditating during combat for efficiency's sake, otherwise you meditate during downtime/while waiting for respawns. Groups will always adjust to the mana of the casters and pull faster or slower based on what they find they can scrap by with. Unless Pantheon is different and requires tons of mana for each engagement I forsee people trying to hover somewhere around 20 to 40% mana while chain pulling for efficient exp, which again means the most efficient exp groups will be meditating in combat.
If base mana regen is 40-50% faster than EQ (more with a Clarity spell) then battle med would be less of an issue as you would get where you need to be between fights to have a generous handful of spells per battle without guilt. But those pushing the limits or roaming groups would still be employing it a lot.
Generally IMO these games essentially boil down to the base holy trinity + CC which also ultimately boils down to how big the Tank HP pool is (including mitigation) + The Healers Mana Pool (converted to HP).. the rest is just efficiency of this (mainly DPS+CC+Mana Regen and Debuffs etc). So simplistically its Tank HP (+Healer mana as HP) is the base stat.
Casters can normally break the trinity by totally removing the requirement to heal/tank as when the MOBs dps is removed from the triangle via (Root/Snare/Self Run speed+/Fear etc) it is then simply maintaining the MOB unable to hit you state.. then it's your Mana Vs MOB HP. Rapid mana regen ultimately results in it being significantly more efficient to solo a caster. Hence if the mana pool is low in relation to mob HP and solo downtime is high via slow solo mana regen then its more efficient to group. Overall you already have control over downtime via the healers mana pool adding the tank into the equation sounds a little pointless... whats it doing additionally they already have an ultimate control variable?
Overall I think group play should be encouraged by significanly improved group efficiency in both gaining XP that dwarfs original EQ but also significantly reduce rare drops if your solo. Ya know make it actually more rewarding to group XP and loot wise at the core, phat loot is why many people play these games so make that the control for grouping :). With all players wanting to group then obviously it will be easier to actually find a group.
Simple stuff like each class has a group "Trait", e.g just having an enchanter in the Group increases mana regen above and beyond any cast buff, a Wizard increases all spell power, A rogue increase rare drop chance, A tank reduces aggro generation, a monk mitigation, A cleric inc HP, a necro mob HP or something more inventive and usefull like group FD etc etc. Also stuff like drastically reducing rare drop rates for solo kills encourages grouping so general improved drop rates for full groups. Combining all this would IMO make people want to actually group without trying to balance out soloing as being a preferred option.. so WANT to group rather than forced to group. Ultimately if you get less XP/Time and less than 6X (or a full group number) chance of rare drops if your solo...
Personally I think VR already have this all nailed down (I certainly hope so at this stage) and too much meddling from us could in fact degrade the game experience. I'm pretty certain the intention is if you kill a mob in a group of 6 its XP/6 per person but solo you get it all to yourself including the drops which IMO promotes solo play too much... still let them get on with it as they are the pros.
rocketmagnet said:
Simple stuff like each class has a group "Trait", e.g just having an enchanter in the Group increases mana regen above and beyond any cast buff, a Wizard increases all spell power, A rogue increase rare drop chance, A tank reduces aggro generation, a monk mitigation, A cleric inc HP, a necro mob HP or something more inventive and usefull like group FD etc etc.
Wow, this idea is fascinating to me and one I've never considered. One can obviously find some potential issues if scrutinizing it heavily, but I really like this at face value.
Hyperium said: scrutinizing speculation is ignorant, sorry.
zzzzzzz. Thanks for joining the conversation.
dorotea said:Many MMOs have some special pool of power (whatever the name) that melee fighters need to use special abilities. Much the same as magic users have power or mana.
I agree in theory with your point that even routine fighting leads to exhaustion but since autocombat type fighting tends not to do large amounts of damage or, for a tank, be very effective at holding enemies' attention, I am not sure that a more sophisticated system for melee combat would really make a difference.
In general I find frequent periods of resting between fights much the same as I find the need to micromanage food to avoid starving or arrows or bolts for an archer - a realistic but undesirable annoyance.
My first roleplaying games were dungeons and dragons and then advanced dungeons and dragons. Magic users at low level had as few as one or two spells they could cast in a day - other than that they had little to contribute to a group. The great bulk of the time they spent doing nothing. The decades since the 1970s have not persuaded me that doing nothing is one of the fun parts of a game.
As someone who considers themselves "a caster ingame"...the medding and feeling useless is somewhat annoying. Fizzles, resists, interrupts and misses all contribute to not feeling like a contributing member of the team. In EQ ..if you sat to med..you were an immediate aggro target, because you sat down.
Which made it difficult to regain mana and contribute to wearing down the hps of the mob or mobs brought back to group by the puller.
"Some" pullers always brought many mobs back, which in the end, if the mana types were o.o.m meant a possible wipe, if the rest of the team couldn't kill what was brought.
I think the ratio of mana and mana bar should be considered carefully when burdening casters with fizzles that eat part of the mana pool. Two or three large fizzles pretty much put you out of commission.
If casters have drawbacks like that, then for balancing, melee should also have something that perhaps eats at their stamina, or other things that interfere with their auto attack play. Don't we want all members of a group to feel that they are contributing to the "win" instead of only some? VR wants some "downtime" ..shouldn't that be necessary for ALL group members, not just the casters?
Cana
rocketmagnet said:Overall you already have control over downtime via the healers mana pool adding the tank into the equation sounds a little pointless... whats it doing additionally they already have an ultimate control variable?
Lots of great comments - I'm just picking this bit because it's germaine to the crux of my point, I think.
I know that the downtime of casters is balanced, but doing it another way could still be balanced.
The whole caster (expecially healer) medding dictating the progress of the group is exactly the problem. When you are that caster there's a constant pressure (from your own desire to progress, not just from others) to only do that which is super mana efficient. You end up using one or two spells from a compliment of 20 for 99% of encounters.
Finding another way might well be complex at this stage, so at least making the medding mechanic less restrictive (allowing limited movement or combat activity) would be excellent.
CanadinaXegony said:As someone who considers themselves "a caster ingame"...the medding and feeling useless is somewhat annoying. Fizzles, resists, interrupts and misses all contribute to not feeling like a contributing member of the team. In EQ ..if you sat to med..you were an immediate aggro target, because you sat down.Which made it difficult to regain mana and contribute to wearing down the hps of the mob or mobs brought back to group by the puller.
"Some" pullers always brought many mobs back, which in the end, if the mana types were o.o.m meant a possible wipe, if the rest of the team couldn't kill what was brought.
I think the ratio of mana and mana bar should be considered carefully when burdening casters with fizzles that eat part of the mana pool. Two or three large fizzles pretty much put you out of commission.
If casters have drawbacks like that, then for balancing, melee should also have something that perhaps eats at their stamina, or other things that interfere with their auto attack play. Don't we want all members of a group to feel that they are contributing to the "win" instead of only some? VR wants some "downtime" ..shouldn't that be necessary for ALL group members, not just the casters?
Good points.
I should say I appreciate that a lot of those mechanics are 'good' balance though. The sitting drawing aggro, the fizzles, resists and interrupts.
But, yes, why shouldn't warriors have those things? Of course, not applied simply in addition to what a 'current' EQ or Pantheon warrior looks like - it would require balance, but, if it's 'fun' (balance, challenge, tactical, depth, immersive) for casters to med, sit in combat, fizzle, get resisted, etc wouldn't it be fun for warriors too?
Do we want: Warrior tab targets, warrior auto-attacks, warrior shouts war cry, taunts and stuns and watches for cool-downs and repeats.
Or: Warrior targets, warrior auto-attacks, warrior starts war cry (buff), but fly shoots into his mouth (fizzle), warrior starts taunt, but monster is in frenzy (resists), warrior attempts shield bash, but stamina is exhausted from the previous fizzle, rest of party has to cope with a 'difficult encounter start', warrior has to fend off monster with shield while he has a bit of a breather (combat-med), warrior lets the off-tank take a turn while he slowly walks off a stitch (full med), etc...
Some will read that as "warrior has been ruined!". Others as "warrior sounds exciting and challenging!".
What I actually suggest myself is (as I have above) casters and warriors should *share* these combat mechanics, yes, but they would be balanced and toned accordingly. Warriors would get more abilities (that work like spells) and a power pool (that works like mana) etc. Sharing the mechanics doesn't mean being the same class or even having the same pace or feel any more than all casters feel alike.
Cleric: Targets, auto-attacks (swing that mace!), prays for protection (buff) but doesn't sound contrite enough (fizzle), calls for his foe to be smited but the foe is unholy (resists), attempts to intimidate with a tongue-lashing (stun) but is out of mana, finally draws the anger of the enemy (aggros), begins chanting a battle prayer while backing off and flanking (shed aggro, combat med and reposition), continues slowly shuffling away to safety while entering a religeous trance - glows visibly (still walking, but full med could draw aggro), squirts the warrior with a refreshing spritz of holy water (heal).
I simply think that casters (and warriors) could be more *interesting* (not more/less powerful or balanced and not having to change their class flavour, just having more to think about) if they shared some combat mechincs.
This
"Or: Warrior targets, warrior auto-attacks, warrior starts war cry (buff), but fly shoots into his mouth (fizzle), warrior starts taunt, but monster is in frenzy (resists), warrior attempts shield bash, but stamina is exhausted from the previous fizzle, rest of party has to cope with a 'difficult encounter start', warrior has to fend off monster with shield while he has a bit of a breather (combat-med), warrior lets the off-tank take a turn while he slowly walks off a stitch (full med), etc..."
Made me laugh, but yes I am not saying anything overly punishing ..but making combat more interesting for all parties involved, would be something innovative...new and contribute to a learning curve. Would make Pantheon "different" ...classes more interesting as you say. :) And certainly noone would be watching tv as they were supposed to be contributing to the fight. :P (or falling asleep)
Also wanted to add, that I learned over time to "manage" my mana, as opposed to the dps race we see today in modern games where everyone is watching their meters to crow about how much dps they put out. No strategy or thinking required for that...line up all your macros and fire away.
I was taught to count ..say to five before letting loose on the mob, this was to give the tank time to gain aggro from the mob and keep its attention mainly on the tank. Managing your mana meant tempering your nukes..so that perhaps you might still have a half bar of mana left before you had to sit to med. And sitting to med was something I hated to do...because as was stated, you became the focus target of the mob...and jumping up stopped mana regain.
I'm also not the type to run around in circles screaming.."get it off me" because I stole aggro. Keeping the aggro on the tank, also meant that the cleric could focus mainly on tank healing...which means the cleric would have a little more mana to spare instead of having to save everyone's behind at the same time. Of course the occasional group h.o.t would help here, just to top up. Yes I am probably describing old school, but that's the way I learned it back in the day. :)
Cana
FFS, this narrative that melee needs "balancing" because the RIDICULOUSLY POWERFUL casters don't like having to fizzle or sit to regain mana is beyond absurd. Did warriors/monks/rogues in EQ snare? SoW? Heal? Nuke? Root? Stun? Teleport? Buff regen? Invis(okay rogues could) Fear kite? DoT? Gate? Bind? Buff? Rez? Levitate? Damage shield? Charm? Summon awesome pets?
Yet casters are the ones "burdened"? Good freaking grief.
disposalist said:Good points.
I should say I appreciate that a lot of those mechanics are 'good' balance though. The sitting drawing aggro, the fizzles, resists and interrupts.
But, yes, why shouldn't warriors have those things? Of course, not applied simply in addition to what a 'current' EQ or Pantheon warrior looks like - it would require balance, but, if it's 'fun' (balance, challenge, tactical, depth, immersive) for casters to med, sit in combat, fizzle, get resisted, etc wouldn't it be fun for warriors too?
Do we want: Warrior tab targets, warrior auto-attacks, warrior shouts war cry, taunts and stuns and watches for cool-downs and repeats.
Or: Warrior targets, warrior auto-attacks, warrior starts war cry (buff), but fly shoots into his mouth (fizzle), warrior starts taunt, but monster is in frenzy (resists), warrior attempts shield bash, but stamina is exhausted from the previous fizzle, rest of party has to cope with a 'difficult encounter start', warrior has to fend off monster with shield while he has a bit of a breather (combat-med), warrior lets the off-tank take a turn while he slowly walks off a stitch (full med), etc...
Melee already have a lot of these mechanics... They don't fizzle or (generally) get resists, but instead they have misses or their attacks dodged, blocked, parried. Yes they don't have a comparable mechanic to meditate but they don't need one, they are a different playstyle entirely and shouldn't really mirror one another in this area, a fast regenerating endurance bar is as close as they should really get.
Krixus said:FFS, this narrative that melee needs "balancing" because the RIDICULOUSLY POWERFUL casters don't like having to fizzle or sit to regain mana is beyond absurd. Did warriors/monks/rogues in EQ snare? SoW? Heal? Nuke? Root? Stun? Teleport? Buff regen? Invis(okay rogues could) Fear kite? DoT? Gate? Bind? Buff? Rez? Levitate? Damage shield? Charm? Summon awesome pets?
Yet casters are the ones "burdened"? Good freaking grief.
It would be interesting if ALL casters could do what you describe..NOT something I wish for or expect, however. Each class has their abilities, but casters have to sit and med and hold up the rest of the group...and from what I have witnessed over the years of playing a wizard, the melee types DO get impatient when one of their mana reliant team mates have to sit down...and stay still to regain their power/mana..which is their weapon. VR expects there to be downtime....auto attacking melee types don't have any downtime and usually have to be reminded..that certain group members require that. So instead, why not a time out to regain some stamina...briefly.
Wizards can snare, but they don't have access to sow (not a wish) Wizards can't heal, wizards CAN nuke, root, stun (if that spell will exist in Pantheon?) can't buff regen, can't fear kite, possible dot if Pantheon allows it...gating I won't gate in the middle of a fight to save my own @ss, bind can be applied on all that wish it, can't rez, can levitate (shareable with others)..possible damage shield, can't charm..and in old EQ the only pet we had lasted a few minutes and died after the last mob dies..if it wasn't killed in battle first. Enchanters can charm, mez..and make pets out of surrounding mobs, they can also supply mana buffs if we're lucky enough to have one in group. Necromancers can do the fear kite, dots, pets..dead man floating, summon corpses, mana battery (in EQ) they were pretty much a jack of all trades class.
It's not constructive to lump them all together. Rogues have backstab, hide, access to stuns and poisons. Warriors have more hps than casters, and usually better armor, casters usually have armor that is the consistancy of toilet paper, so best to fight at range, no tanking ..wizards can't rez. Paladins can lay on hands, and tank..
I think its a good question to ask after all these years as to why melee don't have any downtime put upon them..if they miss, they can whack it again, but it never affects them to the point they have to sit down...well unless they die or the cleric couldn't heal them because they were o.o.m.
:P
Cana
I played a warrior in both EQOA and EQ2 and we had mana costs the same as every other class in the game. I don't see an issue with attaching a mana cost to taunt or defensive abilities or even all abilities if that's how you want to balance your game -- this was the case in both EQOA/EQ2. There are other options such as the warrior from WoW where you use a different resource but it essentially served the same purpose. Resource management is an important layer of strategy but there definitely shouldn't be a rule that melee classes should suffer from some of the cons of caster classes "just because." I'm with Krixus on this -- casters can do things that no warrior could ever dream of. The argument for "realism" goes right out the window ... I would say all fantasy heroes have some degree of magic. If someone can wiggle their fingers to summon a lightning storm, turn invisible, or resurrect the dead ... it is not farfetched at all, in my mind, that a trained warrior can endure long battles without getting tired.
This comes down to a matter of flavor. Again, there is nothing wrong with instilling a sense of resource management because it's important for strategy. That said, just because casters have to focus more on managing their mana than melees do, I don't think it's grounds for calling for balance. I have been playing MMO's for a very long time and have enjoyed many a session ... I don't think we need to reinvent the wheel here. In most games, group members can see the mana of other players. If someone is low on resources, the group should adapt. If they can continue to kill (for the sake of better XP, staying ahead of respawns, etc) then have at it. I am the kind of tank that will keep going, even at reduced efficiency, while a healer or caster is low on mana ... as long as the risk isn't too high. That's a judgment call that any tank should be able to make on the fly. Besides ... warriors are always managing their health as their primary resource and it just so happens to be an extension of the healers mana pool and effective cooldowns.
Grinding hard has earned me a good reputation over the years (particularly from casters) because they know they will still benefit from being in the group while they regen. I could just as easily decide to take a few and wait for everybody to get to full ... but no, why do that? Why not continue to push the pace and play my role as the warrior/tank and group leader that is trying to accomplish something meaningful with my group for our session? I guess it comes down to expectations. I personally find my sessions to be more fulfilling when I continue to push the pace and thread the needle until the last possible moment when a break is necessary due to risk. If I can squeeze out a few more kills by staying attentive and using the resources available, these little things start to add up at the end of the day and feel like small victories. That is a primary draw, to me, for playing the warrior class.
Forcing extra downtime onto the warrior class for the sake of balance is a weak argument. It holds as much water, in my opinion, as forcing casters to traverse the world without invis, teleport, summons, levitate, water-breathing, etc. The way I see things, this discussion is a slippery slope. It will be a cold day in hell when warriors have to sit down because they are "tired" -- if it's to regen their HP/Mana with food/drink after combat, sure. I think what ended up happening is many developers decided it would be a horrible idea to implement a mechanic where warriors have to sit, so instead, for the sake of "balance" -- you see these hybrid classes where warriors do get to heal, they do get to resurrect, and do get to wiggle their fingers to summon pets or noxious disease clouds.
While I have always mained a warrior, I have plenty of experience playing other classes. I have played summoners, necros, wizards, warlocks, enchanters, bards, and healers of every kind. Based on my experience, there are some major trade offs for choosing to play a warrior. Sure, you don't have to focus as much on managing your mana ... but you have to deal with a huge swathe of other "problems" that traditional casters get to avoid by virtue of their kit. As far as I'm concerned, this extra layer of resource management for casters is the balance that is required because if they could just infinitely spam their abilities, they would be demi-gods amongst men. When casters solo, it's usually a matter of mana management because they chain some form of CC while they nuke from range. They can't afford to take a bunch of hits so the utilize their kit and their mana essentially becomes an extension of their health. If they can maintain that root/fear/nuke rotation, they can kill things without taking damage. I enjoy being more group reliant than other classes because it allows me to excel at what I enjoy most ... playing a critical role in a group setting.
I really shouldn't have stated my subject in the way I did, huh? You warriors are being kinda prickly. If you've read the thread, surely you can see the suggestion isn't so much that warriors should be equally 'hindered' by 'meditating' but more that casters could perhaps be balanced in a way that makes them more dynamic, like warriors (and any other non mana-restricted class).
As much as I ask "why don't warriors have to med?" the point really is "why does the med mechanic have to be so dull?" or even "why do some classes have built in down time and others don't?"
Why, 20 years after EQ did it, is Pantheon thinking that casters still need to be balanced by forcing periods of total inactivity? Especially when other games have managed not to? I accept that downtime is a good thing for the social side of the game, but why are we still relying on the tired old blunt/dull tool of forced meditation to provide it?
Now, I accept that some other games have managed it, but have also damaged other aspects, like distinct class roles and interdependency. Does that mean it's just out-of-the-question?
As I say above, I'd be happy with some (less effective than warriors) auto-attack and some limited movement and activity while regaining mana, but there may be lots of ways to remove traditional meditation without ruining the balance, feel, etc of claster classes.