Sorcerer - Lack of stamina morphs

Glurin

Nutronic wrote: »

Glurin wrote: »

Then you have lightning form. A 15-23 second Armor and spell resistance boost and a short range AoE centered on yourself. Pretty clearly a melee range ability. But it's relatively pricey for the damage it does when you're talking about stamina builds. In theory it could be a good way to trigger Disintegrate, but Disintegrate currently only comes into play when the target's health is already low and then only has a 6% chance to actually do anything.

I have mixed feelings about this skill. As a Tank, it would be horrible if this costs stamina. I already have a hard enough time allocating my stamina just for blocking, taunting, and other things. I don't want a spell that I have to recast every 30 seconds to pull from my primary resource. I just don't like being that reliant upon Templar shards.

That being said, it works very well as a melee ability because it gives armor, and a bit of elemental damage. If they lowered the cost or made it a % cost (like 5/7.5%) of one's max magicka, it would keep it's overall cost for high magicka builds but be more accessible to low ( High stamina) magicka builds.

Disintegrate is a non-issue. It's more or less just colorful flare that even with a master staff can't add enough single target DPS to be more appealing than a fire staff. I think this should be reserved for a thread that is discussing passives, as those are a whole other can of worms.

Well I wasn't suggesting lightning form be given a stamina morph. Far from it. I was just pointing out that as a stamina build it's a bit pricy for what you get out of it.

As far as disintegrate is concerned, you can't discuss balancing for stamina classes and not include passives in the discussion. They work together with active skills to create the desired effect, like disintegrate, which triggers on lighting damage, and lightning form, which hits a bunch of targets for lightning damage over and over for a relatively long period of time. Doing something to one will have an effect on the other.

It's the same idea with fixing Encase. Even if all that's done to it is to make it hit more reliably, that gives the skill more potential value to stamina builds. Same thing with Dark Exchange or pets. Solve their practical issues and they become more appealing for other builds.

Glurin wrote: »

Passives could also have some adjustments made to benefit stamina more than they do currently. Just off the top of my head, Exploitation could maybe have weapon critical added to it in addition to spell critical.

Seems a bit OP to cram all of that into 1 passive (even if that is on another class somewhere, it's kinda ridiculous as a group buff), but I wouldn't complain lol.

Well you get the general idea though, right? Some passives can have more stamina based effects added to them if need be.

Varicite

Stamina Sorcerer (or a Sorc using Sorc skills that cost stamina) fits the traditional TES archetype much better than the light armor wearing full Magicka Sorc.

The archetype is a frontline combatant; melee weapon wielding caster. Light armor Sorc fulfills only the last part: caster.

Stam Sorc is a frontline combatant, using melee weapons, and would be using some form of lightning from Sorc skill line.

Hits all 3 points of the traditional TES archetype.

Glurin

What is it with you people and clothes? "Magicka means light armor. Wearing heavy armor makes you stamina. Sorcerers are described in past games as wearing heavy armor, therefore they aren't mages."

You act like I could take some hairy 600lb guy and put him in a bikini and suddenly he's a 90lb girl ready for the cover of Sports Illustrated.

Yeah, you get some benefits to certain stats when you wear certain things. That means diddly squat as far as what the class skills should be like or what someone of that class should be wearing.

FFS, there's even a commercial about this sort of thing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Afufjv_6-t4

Varicite

Yeah, the VAST majority of Sorcerers who specialize in Magicka in this game are in light armor. It has nothing to do w/ anything that you just posted.

It's an extremely accurate generalization...

Glurin

You know what's funny? People that cry out for variety but can't see past the stereotypes.

Mage != robe.

Metal suit != not mage.

( != means "does not equal", just in case you were unaware.)

serenity_painted

The melee mage is such a TES staple it bums me out that you can't really pull it off in ESO. Especially since it's my favorite archtype.

What i'd really want is an ability or maby a weapon trait that allows weapons skills to scale with magicka. Maby at like a 75% rate.
This is one thing i love about my favorite RPG system. Dark Souls. Thereyou can spec full caster but with the right weapon(one that scales with magic, i.e intelligence) you're fully capable to fight in melee.

Failing that stamina morphs would be a nice alternative but would much rather have the above option. It would allow some interesting combinations dw/destro staff or whatever and a greater mix of skills.

While Sorcs beeing the spellswords of the game would be cool it dosen't even haveto be a sorc skill, it might aswell be a weapon trait or a skill in the Mages Guild line.

CP5

Glurin wrote: »

You know what's funny? People that cry out for variety but can't see past the stereotypes.

Mage != robe.

Metal suit != not mage.

( != means "does not equal", just in case you were unaware.)

I feel I should clarify my opinion on the sorcerer class since my last comment was written with a hit of my frustration toward those who see the class as a pure mage and nothing more. I understand the philosophy of the game and that classes are tool kits with which we create different builds, with the class providing the unique aspects and traits.

I bring up the elder scrolls version of sorcerers (the heavy armored tank casters) as a counterargument to people who say that the class is only a robe wearing mage and I don't intend it to be anything more than that. My stance (as someone with both a caster and stamina sorcerer) is that this class should be as viable as the others in all roles and hopefully that clears up my previous point.

Varicite

Glurin wrote: »

You know what's funny? People that cry out for variety but can't see past the stereotypes.

Mage != robe.

Metal suit != not mage.

( != means "does not equal", just in case you were unaware.)

And by the same token, melee weapons and medium armor != not sorcerer.

Glurin

Varicite wrote: »

Glurin wrote: »

You know what's funny? People that cry out for variety but can't see past the stereotypes.

Mage != robe.

Metal suit != not mage.

( != means "does not equal", just in case you were unaware.)

And by the same token, melee weapons and medium armor != not sorcerer.

Oh I'm sorry. I guess I wasn't clear enough when I said clothing and weapons have no bearing whatsoever on whether or not a character is a sorcerer or a mage or a warrior or a plumber and is irrelevant to the fundamental mechanics of how abilities operate within the context of the Elder Scrolls universe.

Varicite

Glurin wrote: »

Varicite wrote: »

Glurin wrote: »

You know what's funny? People that cry out for variety but can't see past the stereotypes.

Mage != robe.

Metal suit != not mage.

( != means "does not equal", just in case you were unaware.)

And by the same token, melee weapons and medium armor != not sorcerer.

Oh I'm sorry. I guess I wasn't clear enough when I said clothing and weapons have no bearing whatsoever on whether or not a character is a sorcerer or a mage or a warrior or a plumber and is irrelevant to the fundamental mechanics of how abilities operate within the context of the Elder Scrolls universe.

You were pretty clear when you were continually saying the exact opposite earlier, which is that Sorcerers are mages, and thus shouldn't have stamina-based damaging abilities.

/shrug

But you're right, it doesn't have any bearing on the fundamental mechanics of how abilities operate in ESO, which is the game we are currently playing.

And in this game, class abilities used to operate solely from magicka, regardless of which class you chose. They don't anymore, because ZOS believes that every class should have around the same opportunity to excel at their given role no matter which weapon they chose to use.

Sorcerers specializing in melee dps are behind the normal curve of what other classes are able to accomplish, which is a situation that needs to be rectified, given the current design intent of the classes.

It's not a question of "how many people want this?", it's a clear-cut case of an outlier not following the intended design for the classes, which ZOS has set forth quite openly.

While I think that all classes having more flexibility in the choice of their morphs through the usage of skills scaling based on highest resource, or the passive suggestions that others have put forward would be a more elegant solution, I'm still quite adamant in my disbelief that ZOS will adopt such tactics at any time in the near future.

Varicite

Bah, double. ><

Glurin

Varicite wrote: »

Glurin wrote: »

Varicite wrote: »

Glurin wrote: »

You know what's funny? People that cry out for variety but can't see past the stereotypes.

Mage != robe.

Metal suit != not mage.

( != means "does not equal", just in case you were unaware.)

And by the same token, melee weapons and medium armor != not sorcerer.

Oh I'm sorry. I guess I wasn't clear enough when I said clothing and weapons have no bearing whatsoever on whether or not a character is a sorcerer or a mage or a warrior or a plumber and is irrelevant to the fundamental mechanics of how abilities operate within the context of the Elder Scrolls universe.

You were pretty clear when you were continually saying the exact opposite earlier, which is that Sorcerers are mages, and thus shouldn't have stamina-based damaging abilities.

Your statement doesn't even make any sense. Sorcerers are mages and they should not have stamina based damaging abilities. THIS HAS NOTHING AT ALL TO DO WITH WHAT KIND OF CLOTHING THEY WEAR!!! Nothing. Nada. Zero. Zip. Neither for nor against. Not before or after. Not above and not below.

Clothing type is irrelevant data.

Clothing type is not relevant.

Clothing type does not matter.

Clothing type is a moot point.

Clothing type is a red herring.

Clothing type has no effect on the subject.

Do I have to say it in twelve different languages?

The problem that sorcerers are having with melee DPS has nothing to do with clothing and converting magicka abilities to stamina is a bad solution.

Varicite

Glurin wrote: »

The problem that sorcerers are having with melee DPS has nothing to do with clothing and converting magicka abilities to stamina is a bad solution.

You seem to be the one focused on clothing type.

I'm talking about archetypes, and the "light armor wearing magicka based sorc" is the defacto archetype that you seem to be talking about when saying that mages can wear whatever and wield whatever weapons they like, but as long as they are casting magic, they are mages. And that if any version of those spells cost stamina, they can no longer be mages.

Even if their playstyle formerly consisted mainly of frontline melee fighting w/ a few spells sparingly cast due to resource concerns, which is what the TES Sorcerer has been in the past.

After all, these steel-clad melee fighting machines bolstered w/ magic can't possibly be mages if even one of their damaging spells costs stamina, because mechanics...

Even though those mechanics have clearly changed, so this cannot be really be used as a valid reason anymore. Sorc in ESO does not equal mage, just as Templar != healer and Nightblade != rogue. Those are the common archetypes for the classes, but they are supposed to do well as any of the other archetypes, including as stamina dps.

That's the design intent for this game, which is really the only game relevant to the discussion.

All of the classes were recently changed to further follow this vision for ESO, but the changes left stamina Sorcs behind the curve.

Converting magicka-based abilities to stamina is ZOS' solution, and the one most likely to be implemented (and indeed, they have said they would take a look at this very issue).

So really, arguing about whether this should or shouldn't be the case is purely academic. I'd rather they take a look at the issue more mechanically when deciding what's missing from the stam sorc equation.

I firmly believe that 1-2 stamina-based damaging abilities that provide some form of utility, either in the way of armor reduction or stamina management (not channeled, thanks..) would go a long way toward bringing Sorcs in line w/ other classes' stamina dps despite Sorcs poorly-aligned passives.

Of course, a couple additions to existing passives to help out w/ stam builds would also be welcome.

For stamina management, one could even go so far as to remove the channel from Dark Exchange, and functionally turn it into an Equilibrium-style ability for both magicka and stamina builds.

Glurin

Varicite wrote: »

Glurin wrote: »

The problem that sorcerers are having with melee DPS has nothing to do with clothing and converting magicka abilities to stamina is a bad solution.

You seem to be the one focused on clothing type.

And yet, here you are:

"I'm talking about archetypes, and the "light armor wearing magicka based sorc" is the defacto archetype that you seem to be talking about when saying that mages can wear whatever and wield whatever weapons they like, but as long as they are casting magic, they are mages. And that if any version of those spells cost stamina, they can no longer be mages."

You still can't even see past the *** robe despite the fact that I have told you numerous times that it doesn't matter! You have no idea what defines "mage" or "warrior" or "thief". You have no understanding of why changing abilities to a different resource might be a bad idea. Not in the context of balance, mechanics, or lore. And you have no respect for the integrity of what has already been built and established over the last two decades.

You go monkeying around with the very foundations of what is magic in the Elder Scrolls universe and you may as well just get rid of the entire system altogether. No more magicka. No more stamina. No more attribute points. No more skill points. Just have one big generic resource pool that you spam all your abilities out of and just get handed those abilities because you leveled rather than choosing which ones you want or what you want them to do or how you want them to do it.

There is a reason magicka and stamina exist. They are representative of something more than just being numbers on a screen. All I'm asking is for people to show it some respect and not be so quick to rewrite the laws of physics.

There are better solutions to a flat tire than changing the engine.

byrom101b16_ESO

It is utterly pointless and close to hysterics to focus a ridiculous couunterpoint argument about the state of classes from an old TES single player game.

The fact is, there have always been MAGES in TES, and always been magicka as the fuel for spells...

Many people want to play Mages and whilst the stamina crowd navel gaze on the other 'class' from an old game with few related mechanics that was called 'Sorcerer' as a primary reason they should get what they want - the many MAGE players only have the Sorcerer class in ESO to play the way they want to play.

Fact is - MAGES have ALWAYS been more mainstream in TES that Sorcerers - any TES, any time.

The fact Zenimax in their 'wisdom' called a class so obviously MAGE-like Sorcerers is as wrong footed as forcing classes into an IP that hasn't had them (especially for players) for a long time, and one which never had some of the 'classes' they have created.

Dragon Knights anyone?

This design choice is not an excuse for beating each other over the head with TES definitions of what things mean - the fact is SORCERERS the world over are essentially Wizards - and the corner-case old TES game definition means diddly squat to most people, who, shock horror, are not TES purists.

Hell - TES purists left this game in drones ages ago...

Add to that the fact wearing robes and using a staff is the most common way they are played (by a sizeable margin) and synergises better than any other play-style better than the alternatives and it is clear Zenimax originally designed them as the 'Wizard' class.

Yes, 'spellblades' need their place, and a decent place at that - but stop waffling about the old and irrelevant definitions of what Sorcerers were in a game that is functionally almost irrelevant to ESO.

You might as well use the same logic to claim DK's should not exist at all, and Crystal Frags shouldn't either as they never appeared before.

Give it up already!

Drago Belsazar

Maybe I can help.

Sorcerers using Magic -> Magicka is the Ressource for Magic -> Sorcerers(independently of his armor) are Archetype for Magicka and have the greatest magical potential. (Lore)
A Sorcerer can casts in Heavy Armor aswell. A Sorcerer can wield Weapons in melee aswell, while his focus is using Magic. Magical Swords scaling with Magicka would of course nice.

exiledtyrant

Drago Belsazar wrote: »

Maybe I can help.

Sorcerers using Magic -> Magicka is the Ressource for Magic -> Sorcerers(independently of his armor) are Archetype for Magicka and have the greatest magical potential. (Lore)
A Sorcerer can casts in Heavy Armor aswell. A Sorcerer can wield Weapons in melee aswell, while his focus is using Magic. Magical Swords scaling with Magicka would of course nice.

There is already enough trouble with wards being made stronger than actual health while also allowing a decent offensive spike from stacking magicka. You do not want to add weapon scaling into the mix. The skills need to be stamina so that they scale off of weapon power, weapon crit and weapon penetration. Whether or not the damage type is physical or magical is not such a big deal due to cp being flexible enough to add onto either type and in fact within the same melee mage constellation.

Varicite

Glurin wrote: »

Varicite wrote: »

Glurin wrote: »

The problem that sorcerers are having with melee DPS has nothing to do with clothing and converting magicka abilities to stamina is a bad solution.

You seem to be the one focused on clothing type.

And yet, here you are:

"I'm talking about archetypes, and the "light armor wearing magicka based sorc" is the defacto archetype that you seem to be talking about when saying that mages can wear whatever and wield whatever weapons they like, but as long as they are casting magic, they are mages. And that if any version of those spells cost stamina, they can no longer be mages."

You still can't even see past the *** robe despite the fact that I have told you numerous times that it doesn't matter!

Again, I am talking about archetypes. You are the one who is focused on the particular type of clothing the archetype I mentioned is wearing. It doesn't matter to anybody but you.

I could have just as easily said "magicka based sorc" and it would have been the exact same thing.

Glurin wrote: »

You have no idea what defines "mage" or "warrior" or "thief".

I know that your class choice has absolutely nothing to do w/ this definition, which you keep trying to make it about. It's been well established that classes do not define this choice in ESO, the game we are currently playing.

I know that in ESO, you can be a magicka-based NB rogue OR a stamina-based one, OR a NB healer, OR a NB heavy armor tank, OR a medium armor NB barbarian, and the entire time you are always a NB.

I also know that this is fully intended for ALL classes, including Sorcerers.

Glurin wrote: »

You have no understanding of why changing abilities to a different resource might be a bad idea. Not in the context of balance, mechanics, or lore. And you have no respect for the integrity of what has already been built and established over the last two decades.

Nothing over the last 2 decades from other games and other game universes has any bearing on this conversation whatsoever. In ESO, classes used to use magicka to use abilities, as a mechanic. This was changed recently.

ESO is the game we are playing, not Oblivion, not Daggerfall, not D&D or WoW or whatever else you keep trying to pull from. In ESO, your class is supposed to be flexible, and yes, that even means Sorcerer stamina DPS roles.

That is all that matters. It has nothing to do w/ your class choice that you use magicka for abilities. It's not because you are a Sorcerer, just like a NB is not relegated to using stealth and a Templar does not have to be a Paladin-type character. Those are simply the main archetypes.

Glurin wrote: »

You go monkeying around with the very foundations of what is magic in the Elder Scrolls universe and you may as well just get rid of the entire system altogether.

This has already been monkeyed around w/. The "foundations" that you keep talking about no longer exist, and haven't since 1.6 when those mechanics were changed.

You can use shadow magic using stamina now, you can wield blinding light using stamina, you can summon bound daedric armor w/ stamina, you can sear your enemies w/ magical flames using stamina, you can heal your allies using stamina. The list goes on.

Glurin wrote: »

No more magicka. No more stamina. No more attribute points. No more skill points. Just have one big generic resource pool that you spam all your abilities out of and just get handed those abilities because you leveled rather than choosing which ones you want or what you want them to do or how you want them to do it.

More ridiculous hyperbole trying to deflect from the actual argument, which is that this is the way ZOS has decided to handle the situation already, for their game, and this is the most likely way that they are going to fix the stamina dps Sorc issue.

CP5

byrom101b16_ESO wrote: »

It is utterly pointless and close to hysterics to focus a ridiculous couunterpoint argument about the state of classes from an old TES single player game.

The fact is, there have always been MAGES in TES, and always been magicka as the fuel for spells...

Many people want to play Mages and whilst the stamina crowd navel gaze on the other 'class' from an old game with few related mechanics that was called 'Sorcerer' as a primary reason they should get what they want - the many MAGE players only have the Sorcerer class in ESO to play the way they want to play.

Fact is - MAGES have ALWAYS been more mainstream in TES that Sorcerers - any TES, any time.

The fact Zenimax in their 'wisdom' called a class so obviously MAGE-like Sorcerers is as wrong footed as forcing classes into an IP that hasn't had them (especially for players) for a long time, and one which never had some of the 'classes' they have created.

Dragon Knights anyone?

This design choice is not an excuse for beating each other over the head with TES definitions of what things mean - the fact is SORCERERS the world over are essentially Wizards - and the corner-case old TES game definition means diddly squat to most people, who, shock horror, are not TES purists.

Hell - TES purists left this game in drones ages ago...

Add to that the fact wearing robes and using a staff is the most common way they are played (by a sizeable margin) and synergises better than any other play-style better than the alternatives and it is clear Zenimax originally designed them as the 'Wizard' class.

Yes, 'spellblades' need their place, and a decent place at that - but stop waffling about the old and irrelevant definitions of what Sorcerers were in a game that is functionally almost irrelevant to ESO.

You might as well use the same logic to claim DK's should not exist at all, and Crystal Frags shouldn't either as they never appeared before.

Give it up already!

byrom, you make good points but then seem to have a way of forcing them to support your ideas. Yes, the sorcerer in eso is not tied heavily to the ones in the past, classes in eso are tool kits, nothing more. The fact is in eso all class tool kits are supposed to support all play-styles in a unique way, and the fact that most sorcerer's in game use a similar light armor/staff combo says that the tool kit is not balanced properly for this games design as it fails to support all play-styles evenly.

Each class can be played as a mage, want to be a pyromancer? Dk. How about a blood mage? NB. Want to be a priest using holy magic? Hard to do it without a templar. So please, explain to me why it is so impossible for the sorcerer to be usable beyond a caster, the only thing they are good at as of now? Is it because you don't believe zos will balance it properly or is it since you feel you have pure ownership of the class? I would be interested in knowing.

eventide03b14a_ESO

Glurin wrote: »

Erock25 wrote: »

This thread has devolved into people who intentionally take weaker builds because of reasons (want to be different? think powerful spells are unfair? they only do solo PVE so literally any ability will work? I dunno) discussing the future of a class that is severely lacking build options. It's like the blind petitioning Crayola to change the name of a color of crayon because they don't like it.

And here we go again. "Every build but the one that I deem worthy is useless and should be completely sacrificed to create one more exclusive build that I deem worthy. Anyone that disagrees is (*insert insult*)"

Sacrificing five flexible builds to create one inflexible one is a net loss. You didn't create more build options. You just forced everyone to pick the green pill or the blue pill.

I don't think that's what people are saying. But you can't ask the majority of sorcs to give up abilities that they have been using to make a small group of people happy for a niche build. I find it hypocritical to ask for fairness while demanding unfair sacrifices from people who chose the class because it's magicka focused.

eventide03b14a_ESO

Glurin wrote: »

Nutronic wrote: »

Glurin wrote: »

Then you have lightning form. A 15-23 second Armor and spell resistance boost and a short range AoE centered on yourself. Pretty clearly a melee range ability. But it's relatively pricey for the damage it does when you're talking about stamina builds. In theory it could be a good way to trigger Disintegrate, but Disintegrate currently only comes into play when the target's health is already low and then only has a 6% chance to actually do anything.

I have mixed feelings about this skill. As a Tank, it would be horrible if this costs stamina. I already have a hard enough time allocating my stamina just for blocking, taunting, and other things. I don't want a spell that I have to recast every 30 seconds to pull from my primary resource. I just don't like being that reliant upon Templar shards.

That being said, it works very well as a melee ability because it gives armor, and a bit of elemental damage. If they lowered the cost or made it a % cost (like 5/7.5%) of one's max magicka, it would keep it's overall cost for high magicka builds but be more accessible to low ( High stamina) magicka builds.

Disintegrate is a non-issue. It's more or less just colorful flare that even with a master staff can't add enough single target DPS to be more appealing than a fire staff. I think this should be reserved for a thread that is discussing passives, as those are a whole other can of worms.

Well I wasn't suggesting lightning form be given a stamina morph. Far from it. I was just pointing out that as a stamina build it's a bit pricy for what you get out of it.

As far as disintegrate is concerned, you can't discuss balancing for stamina classes and not include passives in the discussion. They work together with active skills to create the desired effect, like disintegrate, which triggers on lighting damage, and lightning form, which hits a bunch of targets for lightning damage over and over for a relatively long period of time. Doing something to one will have an effect on the other.

It's the same idea with fixing Encase. Even if all that's done to it is to make it hit more reliably, that gives the skill more potential value to stamina builds. Same thing with Dark Exchange or pets. Solve their practical issues and they become more appealing for other builds.

Glurin wrote: »

Passives could also have some adjustments made to benefit stamina more than they do currently. Just off the top of my head, Exploitation could maybe have weapon critical added to it in addition to spell critical.

Seems a bit OP to cram all of that into 1 passive (even if that is on another class somewhere, it's kinda ridiculous as a group buff), but I wouldn't complain lol.

Well you get the general idea though, right? Some passives can have more stamina based effects added to them if need be.

There is no reason disintegrate couldn't work with a lighting enchantment.

exiledtyrant

Disintegrate does work on lightning weapon enchantments. It's why I always make my main hand enchantment lightning.

byrom101b16_ESO

CP5 wrote: »

byrom101b16_ESO wrote: »

It is utterly pointless and close to hysterics to focus a ridiculous couunterpoint argument about the state of classes from an old TES single player game.

The fact is, there have always been MAGES in TES, and always been magicka as the fuel for spells...

Many people want to play Mages and whilst the stamina crowd navel gaze on the other 'class' from an old game with few related mechanics that was called 'Sorcerer' as a primary reason they should get what they want - the many MAGE players only have the Sorcerer class in ESO to play the way they want to play.

Fact is - MAGES have ALWAYS been more mainstream in TES that Sorcerers - any TES, any time.

The fact Zenimax in their 'wisdom' called a class so obviously MAGE-like Sorcerers is as wrong footed as forcing classes into an IP that hasn't had them (especially for players) for a long time, and one which never had some of the 'classes' they have created.

Dragon Knights anyone?

This design choice is not an excuse for beating each other over the head with TES definitions of what things mean - the fact is SORCERERS the world over are essentially Wizards - and the corner-case old TES game definition means diddly squat to most people, who, shock horror, are not TES purists.

Hell - TES purists left this game in drones ages ago...

Add to that the fact wearing robes and using a staff is the most common way they are played (by a sizeable margin) and synergises better than any other play-style better than the alternatives and it is clear Zenimax originally designed them as the 'Wizard' class.

Yes, 'spellblades' need their place, and a decent place at that - but stop waffling about the old and irrelevant definitions of what Sorcerers were in a game that is functionally almost irrelevant to ESO.

You might as well use the same logic to claim DK's should not exist at all, and Crystal Frags shouldn't either as they never appeared before.

Give it up already!

byrom, you make good points but then seem to have a way of forcing them to support your ideas. Yes, the sorcerer in eso is not tied heavily to the ones in the past, classes in eso are tool kits, nothing more. The fact is in eso all class tool kits are supposed to support all play-styles in a unique way, and the fact that most sorcerer's in game use a similar light armor/staff combo says that the tool kit is not balanced properly for this games design as it fails to support all play-styles evenly.

Each class can be played as a mage, want to be a pyromancer? Dk. How about a blood mage? NB. Want to be a priest using holy magic? Hard to do it without a templar. So please, explain to me why it is so impossible for the sorcerer to be usable beyond a caster, the only thing they are good at as of now? Is it because you don't believe zos will balance it properly or is it since you feel you have pure ownership of the class? I would be interested in knowing.

You missed the point of my post. Allow me to clarify.

I was saying using old definitions of class types from TES games at the start of the franchise (to either say they should be so again, or they should not be so) is irrelevant.

I then make clear that many people play Sorcerers as wizards because that what Sorcerer means in the English language - and is understood to mean the world over.

People see Sorcerer, they think cloth wearing wizard - because of D&D, because of MMO tropes, because of mythology, fantasy novels etc.

So getting riled up about a single aberrant variation in an old version of the IP that didn't even survive into the most recent iterations of the IP is, frankly, ridiculous on many levels.

I also didn't say it's 'impossible' for Sorcerers be play beyond a caster role, or that the other classes can't play a caster role. I didn't tackle the mechanics - I keep coming back to the player expectations of classes based on their names - and how being *** about TES lore to the extent that has occurred on this thread means nothing of value, at all...

Walking quite deliberately into a classes single player franchise, Zenimax created a class-based MMO. They made all class skills from the outset as magicka based, and weapon skills as mainly stamina based.

They meant variations on the themes of magicka to be facilitated by stamina skills from other non-class skill lines.

Let me say that again - Stamina builds were meant to be facilitated by non-class skill use.

This is about as obvious as it gets, and it is self-serving doubletalk for anyone to pretend otherwise

Come 1.6 however, Zenimax change direction and you get a lot of blowhards coming onto the forums telling us that stamina hybridisation of class skills was what Zenimax meant to do... it was 'always intended'...

... this a steaming pile of revisionist bull!

Zenimax have since the game launched, significantly CHANGED DIRECTION, regardless of what face-saving PR 'newspeak' they are spouting now...

Some people don't like this change, and some people do - and the people that don't like it don't deserve to be trolled by those that do like it using the 'fairness' card.

Period...

There was no 'policy' ANYWHERE where Zenimax had said that all classes had to be stamina hybridised until very recently indeed. In fact, they didn't hybridise the Sorcerer in 1.6!!!!!

Now they say that 'was a mistake and they always meant to do it'. This is on the face of it a bare faced lie to pander to a vocal lobby group of indeterminate numbers they weren't bothered about before, or it is to cover up being massively incompetent - forgetting about an entire class out of a mere 4 whilst hybridising!!??

Take your pick on which one you believe - there simply aren't any other credible or logical explanations.

As for the proposed future hybridisation, they haven't ask their players whether they wanted it, they have no idea how many want it for the Sorcerer class, and yet they are going to do it anyway some time into the medium term future, apparently.

The contention that those who didn't have a say in it, never wanted it and don't want it are not allowed to complain about it is outrageously bias.

The fact that Zenimax haven't engaged with those who don't want it - only with those who do - however many of them there may be (nobody knows) is just plain bias - and indicative of their 'it's our train set and you can only play the way we want you to' approach to customer service.

So you will perhaps forgive those of us who don't want it for being pissed at the dismissive silence from Zenimax and the self-congratulatory egocentricity of those who do.

Erock25

Did I just read that the outside of TES lore is more important than the inside TES lore for Byrom because it supports his argument better?

I am still shaking my head at the length people will go to because they are terrified of one or two more stamina morphs being introduced to a class.

Varicite

byrom101b16_ESO wrote: »

Come 1.6 however, Zenimax change direction and you get a lot of blowhards coming onto the forums telling us that stamina hybridisation of class skills was what Zenimax meant to do... it was 'always intended'...

... this a steaming pile of revisionist bull!

Zenimax have since the game launched, significantly CHANGED DIRECTION, regardless of what face-saving PR 'newspeak' they are spouting now...

Some people don't like this change, and some people do - and the people that don't like it don't deserve to be trolled by those that do like it using the 'fairness' card.

Period...

There was no 'policy' ANYWHERE where Zenimax had said that all classes had to be stamina hybridised until very recently indeed. In fact, they didn't hybridise the Sorcerer in 1.6!!!!!

Now they say that 'was a mistake and they always meant to do it'. This is on the face of it a bare faced lie to pander to a vocal lobby group of indeterminate numbers they weren't bothered about before, or it is to cover up being massively incompetent - forgetting about an entire class out of a mere 4 whilst hybridising!!??

Take your pick on which one you believe - there simply aren't any other credible or logical explanations.

While mechanically, class skill morphs switching from magicka to stamina may not have been the dev's intent for resources over a year ago at launch, the ability for every class to pick up any weapon and have the potential to excel w/ it more or less as well as the next class, but w/ different flavor has always been a very clear design goal for ESO.

You seem to be confusing the overall goal (equal opportunity to choose most main playstyles and do well) w/ the method that they choose to reach that goal, which in 1.6 was to try to give stamina dps roles more diversity through class skill morphs.

Now that some time has passed, Sorcerer still seems to be underperforming in this role as compared to other classes. Many of us believe that this is due to the disparity in the quality of the morphs chosen to become available for the stamina dps role.

Jar_Ek

@byrom101b16_ESO The thing is that class skills always used to support stamina builds far better than now because of the soft caps. It meant that you could not effectively stack one resource to gain additional damage / effectiveness. Which in turn meant that everyone was, to some extent, a hybrid. However, with 1.6 changes, the baseline meta changed and made hybrids uncompetitive as they lacked the high stats and hence high damage. This was not a problem for magicka sorcerer builds because they stack magicka and use magicka weapons and class abilities - thus using a single stat. Unfortunately all stamina builds got hit with the option of going hybrid to be able to even use their class skills due to the costs (and the loss of a key passive to a vocal magicka lobby) - and be weak at them and at stamina skills, or go stamina and essentially give up on trying to use class skills... especially damaging ones due to the scaling.

Now zos stated they had noted the oversight with regards to the viability of stamina builds and alternative role builds... and that they would look at it. However their lack of response on the forums is neither a dismissive attitude or an endorsement, it is just the way that they are... generally silent.

Oh and for the record, I think most stamina sorcerers would probably be really happy with 3 morph, or world passive, or alternative passive solutions - but if zos are going to change something, better they change the less useful morphs.

So on that note I have a request for zos, assuming that they are going to add stamina morphs.

Consider reducing non attack (utility) magicka costs before considering converting them to stamina .
Consider providing one or two damaging stamina abilities at most.
Consider making pets scale off either stat.

Cathexis

@Jar_Ek I agree with your perspectives in your suggestions at the end but I think I'd add that they really need to look at a sorc from a stamina using perspective; what exactly do the current builds look like and where do they fall short? These are the things I think they will notice:

Resource management is shaky at best
Mobility (the sorcs key aspect) is highly constrained
Most class skills needed for close range combat are too high mana cost
Self healing is based on random variables like crit procs making them very unpredictable
Sorc skills represent 1/6th (guesstimate) of used abilities on skill bars
Dodge roll dodge roll dodge roll

Glurin

Varicite wrote: »

Glurin wrote: »

Varicite wrote: »

Glurin wrote: »

The problem that sorcerers are having with melee DPS has nothing to do with clothing and converting magicka abilities to stamina is a bad solution.

You seem to be the one focused on clothing type.

And yet, here you are:

"I'm talking about archetypes, and the "light armor wearing magicka based sorc" is the defacto archetype that you seem to be talking about when saying that mages can wear whatever and wield whatever weapons they like, but as long as they are casting magic, they are mages. And that if any version of those spells cost stamina, they can no longer be mages."

You still can't even see past the *** robe despite the fact that I have told you numerous times that it doesn't matter!

Again, I am talking about archetypes. You are the one who is focused on the particular type of clothing the archetype I mentioned is wearing. It doesn't matter to anybody but you.

Wrong again. You're talking about stereotypes, not archetypes. Every time I've mentioned "mage" or "magicka", you've concluded "light armor". EVERY TIME!

I'm not talking about light armor!

I'm talking about why magicka exists in the first place.

Glurin wrote: »

You have no idea what defines "mage" or "warrior" or "thief".

I know that your class choice has absolutely nothing to do w/ this definition, which you keep trying to make it about. It's been well established that classes do not define this choice in ESO, the game we are currently playing.

I know that in ESO, you can be a magicka-based NB rogue OR a stamina-based one, OR a NB healer, OR a NB heavy armor tank, OR a medium armor NB barbarian, and the entire time you are always a NB.

I also know that this is fully intended for ALL classes, including Sorcerers.

But apparently you don't understand the how or why, because otherwise you wouldn't be trying to rewrite physics.

Glurin wrote: »

You have no understanding of why changing abilities to a different resource might be a bad idea. Not in the context of balance, mechanics, or lore. And you have no respect for the integrity of what has already been built and established over the last two decades.

Nothing over the last 2 decades from other games and other game universes has any bearing on this conversation whatsoever. In ESO, classes used to use magicka to use abilities, as a mechanic. This was changed recently.

Very, VERY recently and it was a mistake. The entire game universe that ESO takes place in was built over the last two decades, so it damn well does matter. You can't just arbitrarily unravel the fabric of the universe. Doing so would mean ESO is no longer Elder Scrolls.

ESO is the game we are playing, not Oblivion, not Daggerfall, not D&D or WoW or whatever else you keep trying to pull from. In ESO, your class is supposed to be flexible, and yes, that even means Sorcerer stamina DPS roles.

NOBODY IS SAYING THEY SHOULDN'T BE!

That is all that matters. It has nothing to do w/ your class choice that you use magicka for abilities. It's not because you are a Sorcerer, just like a NB is not relegated to using stealth and a Templar does not have to be a Paladin-type character. Those are simply the main archetypes.

If you didn't want to be a mage, pick something other than the mage. How hard is that to understand?

You don't get to rewrite the basic principles of the class just because you want to be something other than what the class is. If you're a nightblade, your skills are going to have a stealthy and agile theme. If you're a dragonknight, your skills are going to be up close and personal fiery damage sponge. If you're a templar, your skills are going to be holy and healing. And if you're a sorcerer, you're going to be a damage dealing mage. NOBODY IS SAYING THIS MEANS YOU HAVE TO PUT ON A DRESS AND GROW A BEARD EXCEPT YOU!

Arbitrarily changing skills to stamina is the opposite of flexibility. When you do that, you remove the buffet and just give people a choice between beef or chicken. That is NOT what the Elder Scrolls is about.

Glurin wrote: »

No more magicka. No more stamina. No more attribute points. No more skill points. Just have one big generic resource pool that you spam all your abilities out of and just get handed those abilities because you leveled rather than choosing which ones you want or what you want them to do or how you want them to do it.

More ridiculous hyperbole trying to deflect from the actual argument, which is that this is the way ZOS has decided to handle the situation already, for their game, and this is the most likely way that they are going to fix the stamina dps Sorc issue.

You're outright ignoring the reasons behind having these resources in the first place. How else am I supposed to see it? What reason is there to even have two separate resources if you're going to make the choice between them meaningless anyway?

CP5

Glurin wrote: »

...
You don't get to rewrite the basic principles of the class just because you want to be something other than what the class is. If you're a nightblade, your skills are going to have a stealthy and agile theme. If you're a dragonknight, your skills are going to be up close and personal fiery damage sponge. If you're a templar, your skills are going to be holy and healing. And if you're a sorcerer, you're going to be a damage dealing mage. NOBODY IS SAYING THIS MEANS YOU HAVE TO PUT ON A DRESS AND GROW A BEARD EXCEPT YOU!
...

I just wanted to outline this argument here for clarification. You start by saying how nb's are innately stealthy and agile (and I would like to add in the fact their form of healing from siphons also defines the class heavily), and how dk's innately have more durability at the cost of range and templars have the healing and holy magic (elaborating on "holy magic" as more focused on utility over damage). That is exactly my personal point as each of these are general tool kits that define how you play and how the class acts in different roles. A dk can tank sure with their class built durability, but a nb can tank just as well in a different way, utilizing what makes the class unique.

You then say that sorcerer's are only damage dealing mages (what I got out of you saying "you're going to be"), but that doesn't fit the rest of your statement. Sorcerer's have stormcalling, which is damage (overload, fury, splash) mobility (be, boundless storm) and utility (surge), not to mention the unique passives that allow all sorc's to use magic more efficiently. Then you have dark magic, a skill line not particularly heavy on damage but far more on cc and utility, with some damage (shards, mines) cc (negate, shards, encase, rune prison, mines) and utility (dark exchange, negate, mines, passives). And daedric summoning, aside from volatile curse focusing on the summons and utility.

That is not a damage dealing mage, that is a class with a vast amount of utility that could potentially go far in any build, if it weren't for how restricted and sometimes flawed the individual skills are. You do say that you don't need to "put on a dress and grow a beard" but in the current meta, if you don't focus heavily on one resource and build for it you won't have the ability to use those skills to any real effect. That is the primary point I believe most sorcerer's such as myself are aiming for, we want to be able to utilize our classes unique abilities and with how the meta changed and how zos shifted the other classes it is likely that the sorcerer will follow a similar balance path, when they get around to it. The question on the table should be what, as a community, would work best. And I can say this endless circle of infighting is not going to help and I would like to ask everyone to pause the next time they reply and think about what the other person is asking for.

Cathexis

@glurin hold up! The choice between morphs doesn't become meaningless just because one is stamina. You have to choose between a mana build or stam build. BOOM! MEANING! All over your face.