Subclassing Is a Huge Step Forward — Let’s Go Even Further

QB1

ForumBully wrote: »

QB1 wrote: »

ForumBully wrote: »

Have I always wanted beam on a sorc? Yes. Have I always wanted hardened ward on just about every attempted non sorc ranged build? Yes. Have I wanted DK Shalks? Yes. Can I keep asking myself questions and then answering them? Yes I can.

Still, it's fun to come back to a game you left years back and see the same complaints about broken sets and the same worries about disrupting a "balance" that has never ever ever existed in the game ever.

Right?? Sorc with the arc beam sounds wild, but honestly, I think the key thing people are missing is that just having a strong skill doesn’t guarantee a strong build. If you throw in the beam but don’t have the right passives, synergies, or set bonuses to support it, you might just end up with a flashy dud. That’s what excites me the most about all of this, the potential for wild combos with real tradeoffs. Way more interesting than being locked into one rigid class kit.

I haven't played at all in a long long time because it was nothing but broken sets in PVP...in a weird way, broken subclass combos sound so refreshing, and I'm sure we won't know them all until we run into them.
I kind of hope this change is coming just ahead of some kind of Vengeance PvP standard campaign (which I didn't hear about til it was over) and all the class combos can be experienced outside of the usual set imbalance that has plagued PvP since the dawn of Vicious Death.

Totally feel that. It’s kind of ironic — PvP has been dominated by busted sets and predictable meta builds for so long that the possibility of off-meta “broken” subclass combos actually sounds refreshing. At least it’s new, and it gives creative players some room to experiment and surprise people again.

I also hope we get something like a Vengeance-style campaign or even a separate ruleset that lets this system breathe a little — imagine the chaos of people testing out weird builds in an environment without all the typical CP and gear bloat.

QB1

Pixiepumpkin wrote: »

Imagine an RPG where there are no chefs, bards, warriors, barbarians, mages, wizards, thieves, necromancers, rangers, engineers...

naaa, not having it. Classes make these games what they are.

Tolkein wrote Lord of the Rings
Dungeons and Dragons made their pen and paper table top game with classes inspired from Tolkien.
Video game RPG's classes were inspired from Dungeons & Dragons
MMORPG's classes were inspired from probably any of the above.

Classes make these games cool.
Classes offer nonverbal communication to a party of people who have never met before. Each person knows the others persons role based on their class/spec.

The players in a classless game would have no identity. No soul. Classes do more than just offer a way to play, they help paint the picture of the landscape, the environment in which that universe rests in. They tie to lore.

I am all for expressing different ideas and things to make the game more fun, but honestly the "no class" idea is just a bad one, and I don't mean to say that in a disparaging way or as an attack on your abilty to think and reason. It would be bad because so much would be lost in the process and very little gained.


THAT being said.

If we had blank templates and built a class from scratch AND a class spec was applied to it by the game "your choices make you a warrior mage", then I might be for it.

I don’t think subclassing or a classless system necessarily erases that, it just lets players build toward an identity rather than being locked into one from level 1.

Instead of starting as a ranger or a battle-mage, you become one through the skills you choose, the passives you lean into, and the way you theme your character. Kinda like how Elder Scrolls single player games have always worked. No one told you you were a spellsword, you just leaned into that playstyle over time.

But I do love your point at the end. If the game recognized and responded to your build with a spec label like “Shadow Knight” or “Warrior Mage,” that would be cool. That’s the kind of identity-building that could preserve the fantasy while still letting us explore the flexibility this system offers.

Stx

There will still be classes…. Just now you have more freedom to make your own class instead of being locked in to a set of skill lines. It’s like how classes were in older elder scrolls games. They had a bunch of pre set classes but all those classes used a select amount of skills from a larger pool.

QB1

LadyGP wrote: »

I might be in the minority here but I miss class identity. Maybe it's cause I'm an older gamer (a lot of new games/systems have this sub class concept) but there is just something about a new class coming out and having to learn it that I enjoy.

Now to the point that they brought up during the stream about having your OG toon you made in 2014 and wanting to play it with other skills and stuff... I can see that.

My OG DK is by far my favorite toon. When I have to get on warden for group it just doesn't feel the same. So I can respect the change from this perspective.

I do have a fear of power creep and what not - especially in PVP. PVP is going to be absolutley brutal for people that don't min/man for a while until new builds and what not come out. The groups that theory craft are going to wipe the floor clean for a while.

I agree that it's always fun when a new class comes out and there's that learning curve, new animations, new vibe, etc. But going to a classless system I think allows ZOS to more easily add in individual skill lines instead of worrying about creating an entire class. I think that sense of discovery can absolutely still be there.

And I'm a PvP main, so I'm already buckled up and ready to go. I know it's going to be chaos for a bit. But the sweaty min/max players and groups already wipe the floor with everyone else lol subclassing/going classless isn't going to change that.

QB1

Stx wrote: »

There will still be classes…. Just now you have more freedom to make your own class instead of being locked in to a set of skill lines. It’s like how classes were in older elder scrolls games. They had a bunch of pre set classes but all those classes used a select amount of skills from a larger pool.

Exactly, that's a good way to look at it. This feels more like a return to form than a total reinvention. In Morrowind and Oblivion, your “class” was really just a mix of major and minor skills you chose from a big pool, and that flexibility is what made character building so fun. And then in Skyrim, there was no class system at all. You started with the same potential as everyone else and your "build" was defined entirely by what you chose to level up. This update feels like ESO finally catching up to that legacy, where you’re not boxed in by a label but empowered to create a build that fits your exact vision. Still structured, still meaningful, just way more open.

tomofhyrule

QB1 wrote: »

Kinda like how Elder Scrolls single player games have always worked.

This is I think the main thing right here. "This is great because it's like how Elder Scrolls single player games have always !" Keyword: single-player

However, in single-player games, you never needed to worry about your gameplay affecting others. Who cares if you used Morrowind's busted alchemy/enchant system so you could drink 15 gallons of booze and literally oneshot God so hard that your weapon explodes in your hand? Who cares if you just don't sleep ever in Oblivion so you can walk up with 100 in almost every skill except the dump skills you labelled as your class and take out a literal Daedric Prince with an iron dagger because the world's techincally at level 1? Who cares if you can exploit the intricacies of Skyrim's mechanics to get a literally immortal projectile-vomiting Bosmer to fight everything for you? Alternatively, who cares if you take every self-nerf possible in those games because you want the challenge of going up against fire-breathing dragons with a literal wooden sword?

But in an MMO, other players do exist. Having busted builds will make things unfun to play against, or to see those busted builds get chosen over yours in cooperative content. Sure, infinite possibilities sound great as long as you don't intend to play with others, but this interplay will cause a balancing problem.
And yes, the argument can be made that "oh, but the balance is already so bad so who cares if we make it worse." Which is... really? You honestly believe that's a solution? "Oh, my house is already on fire, so it shouldn't matter if I just throw gasoline on it because it's not like that's gonna fix anything anyway, right?"

Besides, I think people are overestimating the degrees of freedom this will bring. Of course some people are going to be creative. Of course people will like to experiment. But let's face it: we're all pretending that Skyrim was this vast open-ended experience where everyone could build however they wanted and do whatever... and so many people chose "stealth archer" that it became a meme as the only way most people ended up playing. "I promise I'm not going to make a stealth archer this time! Ooops!" Why? It was OP.

If I said "hey, let's just have a quick race and you can choose your vehicle" and I offerred you a bicycle, a skateboard, a moped, a pair of high-heeled stilettos, and a formula 1 racing car, which do you think most people would pick? Sure, I could take one of the other options, but why would I?

I'm expecting that people will gravitate to one setup with various OP skills. I'm also then expecting that said skills will get the sledgehammer nerf (which will really screw the people who chose not to subclass) and we'll be at a point where we were when the U35 nerfs were announced. The population, specifically the endgame population, has never recovered from that, and it'll happen again.

So sure, "who cares about the endgamers! They're only a small percentage of the population!" But they do tend to be the most active (aka spending lots of $$$$) population, and is "we can afford to lose our whales" really a sound business strategy in the long run?

QB1

tomofhyrule wrote: »

QB1 wrote: »

Kinda like how Elder Scrolls single player games have always worked.

This is I think the main thing right here. "This is great because it's like how Elder Scrolls single player games have always !" Keyword: single-player

However, in single-player games, you never needed to worry about your gameplay affecting others. Who cares if you used Morrowind's busted alchemy/enchant system so you could drink 15 gallons of booze and literally oneshot God so hard that your weapon explodes in your hand? Who cares if you just don't sleep ever in Oblivion so you can walk up with 100 in almost every skill except the dump skills you labelled as your class and take out a literal Daedric Prince with an iron dagger because the world's techincally at level 1? Who cares if you can exploit the intricacies of Skyrim's mechanics to get a literally immortal projectile-vomiting Bosmer to fight everything for you? Alternatively, who cares if you take every self-nerf possible in those games because you want the challenge of going up against fire-breathing dragons with a literal wooden sword?

But in an MMO, other players do exist. Having busted builds will make things unfun to play against, or to see those busted builds get chosen over yours in cooperative content. Sure, infinite possibilities sound great as long as you don't intend to play with others, but this interplay will cause a balancing problem.
And yes, the argument can be made that "oh, but the balance is already so bad so who cares if we make it worse." Which is... really? You honestly believe that's a solution? "Oh, my house is already on fire, so it shouldn't matter if I just throw gasoline on it because it's not like that's gonna fix anything anyway, right?"

Besides, I think people are overestimating the degrees of freedom this will bring. Of course some people are going to be creative. Of course people will like to experiment. But let's face it: we're all pretending that Skyrim was this vast open-ended experience where everyone could build however they wanted and do whatever... and so many people chose "stealth archer" that it became a meme as the only way most people ended up playing. "I promise I'm not going to make a stealth archer this time! Ooops!" Why? It was OP.

If I said "hey, let's just have a quick race and you can choose your vehicle" and I offerred you a bicycle, a skateboard, a moped, a pair of high-heeled stilettos, and a formula 1 racing car, which do you think most people would pick? Sure, I could take one of the other options, but why would I?

I'm expecting that people will gravitate to one setup with various OP skills. I'm also then expecting that said skills will get the sledgehammer nerf (which will really screw the people who chose not to subclass) and we'll be at a point where we were when the U35 nerfs were announced. The population, specifically the endgame population, has never recovered from that, and it'll happen again.

So sure, "who cares about the endgamers! They're only a small percentage of the population!" But they do tend to be the most active (aka spending lots of $$$$) population, and is "we can afford to lose our whales" really a sound business strategy in the long run?

I don’t think freedom and balance are mutually exclusive, and I definitely don’t think “this is more like the Elder Scrolls single-player games” means it can’t work in an MMO setting. The core design idea behind those games was player-driven identity—you become what you do. That concept can translate to an MMO, it just requires more nuance in how skills, roles, and progression are handled.

I don't view this as getting rid of identity or specialization. To me it feels like we're just breaking down the rigid walls between the current classes to let people build their identity instead of being told what it is upfront.

Balance-wise, I don’t think subclassing/going classless is going to magically fix things. But I also don’t think it will break things worse than they already are. Even in the current system, metas form and classes get left behind. Min maxers will always use the best skill combos, sets, etc. They already do that now lol. But the new system might actually give devs more knobs to tweak, they can nerf individual synergies instead of gutting entire classes.

You're right, though, I'm sure we're going to see busted combos early on. But idk, doesn't really bother me. There are already busted combos and sets that people gravitate to. My hope is that long term, this system encourages more diversity, not less.

MMOs don’t have to cling to old design norms just because they’ve always done things one way. If any franchise is positioned to try something bolder, it’s the one that made "play how you want" part of its DNA.

Vrienda

Pixiepumpkin wrote: »

Imagine an RPG where there are no chefs, bards, warriors, barbarians, mages, wizards, thieves, necromancers, rangers, engineers...

So... Skyrim? Oblivion? Morrowind? Like yeah those classes 'technically' exist in the latter two but that's just an early increase in skills.

Idk I just find the fantasy of trading in my lava whip for a book of eldritch horrors in one hand and a holy spear in the other more appealing than being told "You HAVE to use Dragon Abilities because of a choice you made 10 years ago+ before the miriad of changes, buffs, nerfs and gameplay redesigns that made it be unfun".

QB1

Vrienda wrote: »

Pixiepumpkin wrote: »

Imagine an RPG where there are no chefs, bards, warriors, barbarians, mages, wizards, thieves, necromancers, rangers, engineers...

So... Skyrim? Oblivion? Morrowind? Like yeah those classes 'technically' exist in the latter two but that's just an early increase in skills.

Idk I just find the fantasy of trading in my lava whip for a book of eldritch horrors in one hand and a holy spear in the other more appealing than being told "You HAVE to use Dragon Abilities because of a choice you made 10 years ago+ before the miriad of changes, buffs, nerfs and gameplay redesigns that made it be unfun".

Yup. I barely play my DK. He's supposed to be a fire mage and to a certain extent, he is, thanks to scribing, destro skills, and guild and world skills. But I don't want to HAVE to use Earthen Heart or Dragon abilities.

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO

I completely agree, the game is still too restrictive even with the new change.
I want to be able to completely choose exactly what my ability does, how much it costs and what buffs / debuffs it applies.

Unless I get this the game is just too restrictive to play.

Actually why stop there, I should be able to write my own gear sets too!

shadyjane62

Is there minimum char level to subclassing

tomofhyrule

QB1 wrote: »

You're right, though, I'm sure we're going to see busted combos early on. But idk, doesn't really bother me. There are already busted combos and sets that people gravitate to. My hope is that long term, this system encourages more diversity, not less.

Once again, though,

tomofhyrule wrote: »

And yes, the argument can be made that "oh, but the balance is already so bad so who cares if we make it worse." Which is... really? You honestly believe that's a solution? "Oh, my house is already on fire, so it shouldn't matter if I just throw gasoline on it because it's not like that's gonna fix anything anyway, right?"

I do have a few characters I'm totally gonna have fun with subclassing - my NB has some Daedric in him and I wanted more literal firepower, so he needs to be able to cast Flames of Oblivion. My Necro is a shadowscale so he'll get some NB stuff. My Sorc is kind of an elemental druid-y Maormer, so I could play around with the Green Balance line to give him some 'earth' themed stuff. My Arcanist is a Skaal shaman, so I'll totally give him a Warden line as soon as I figure out what Arc line to sacrifice and which Warden line to take.

What I don't want though is what did happen to Hybridization: where if you choose not to build that way (free choice, right!), that you won't end up completely underpowered from someone who did. Since Hybridization, a pure mag/pure stam build has nothing on a hybrid build because your sustain is just gone. And I can totally see that if everyone starts using the same skills (like everyone's going to be salivating over 500% execute power while wearing Deadly), that those skills will get a massive nerfhammer. Now imagine being the person who plays Templar and doesn't want to multiclass, and then they get their primary skill nerfed into Oblivion, and the only way they can get back to the level they were is by signing a pact with Hermaeus Mora.
(hmm... Templars getting mad because their class-defining skill got decimated in a huge nerf patch that caused a lot of endgamers to leave ESO? I'm sure that's never happened before)

ForumBully

I literally can't remember a time when there wasn't a horrible imbalance in PVP. At least one. The only time there was only one horrible imbalance was pre-Vicious Death, and that singular imbalance was that "numbers always win".

El_Borracho

I am completely with you @tomofhyrule. This is going to result in massive nerfs to sets and class skills. And it will not be simply from PVP. This isn't power creep, its power overflow.

xXCJsniperXx7

I like subclassing especially since playing DnD, but here, it needs some polishing. Since all the years prior, everything was designed on a class basis. So just letting you mix and match makes the character feel kinda generic. In my idea, though it probably won't happen, subclassing should give you the option to "merge" the skill lines. In a sense, extend your original class by letting you convert the damage types of the subclass to your original. E.g. DK/W, Warden skills could be swapped to fire or poison. Opposite, DK skills to frost or bleed. Or, if you want keep the default skills, main idea is it gives you more creative power.

Estin

The only way I can see subclassing working without breaking the game is to have at the very least a 50% penalty on the skills and passives. Lore wise, you're not that class. You shouldn't be able to be just as strong as someone who is naturally that class. It's the only way to open variety but keep balance in line. The skills costing 2 skill points is not enough to be considered a penalty since skill points are so easy to obtain.

QB1

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

I completely agree, the game is still too restrictive even with the new change.
I want to be able to completely choose exactly what my ability does, how much it costs and what buffs / debuffs it applies.

Unless I get this the game is just too restrictive to play.

Actually why stop there, I should be able to write my own gear sets too!

By the end there I thought we were about to code the game ourselves too

QB1

shadyjane62 wrote: »

Is there minimum char level to subclassing

Sounds like you have to at least have one character at level 50

QB1

tomofhyrule wrote: »

QB1 wrote: »

You're right, though, I'm sure we're going to see busted combos early on. But idk, doesn't really bother me. There are already busted combos and sets that people gravitate to. My hope is that long term, this system encourages more diversity, not less.

Once again, though,

tomofhyrule wrote: »

And yes, the argument can be made that "oh, but the balance is already so bad so who cares if we make it worse." Which is... really? You honestly believe that's a solution? "Oh, my house is already on fire, so it shouldn't matter if I just throw gasoline on it because it's not like that's gonna fix anything anyway, right?"

I do have a few characters I'm totally gonna have fun with subclassing - my NB has some Daedric in him and I wanted more literal firepower, so he needs to be able to cast Flames of Oblivion. My Necro is a shadowscale so he'll get some NB stuff. My Sorc is kind of an elemental druid-y Maormer, so I could play around with the Green Balance line to give him some 'earth' themed stuff. My Arcanist is a Skaal shaman, so I'll totally give him a Warden line as soon as I figure out what Arc line to sacrifice and which Warden line to take.

What I don't want though is what did happen to Hybridization: where if you choose not to build that way (free choice, right!), that you won't end up completely underpowered from someone who did. Since Hybridization, a pure mag/pure stam build has nothing on a hybrid build because your sustain is just gone. And I can totally see that if everyone starts using the same skills (like everyone's going to be salivating over 500% execute power while wearing Deadly), that those skills will get a massive nerfhammer. Now imagine being the person who plays Templar and doesn't want to multiclass, and then they get their primary skill nerfed into Oblivion, and the only way they can get back to the level they were is by signing a pact with Hermaeus Mora.
(hmm... Templars getting mad because their class-defining skill got decimated in a huge nerf patch that caused a lot of endgamers to leave ESO? I'm sure that's never happened before)

I agree that the last thing anyone wants is to have diversity of choice marketed as a feature, only to get punished for not picking the “right” meta.

Btw your character concepts sound incredible. I love how you're using subclassing for roleplay flavor. That’s exactly the kind of creativity this system should encourage. And while I hope ZOS doesn’t snuff that out with a sledgehammer nerf cycle like we’ve seen before, I do want to see consistent tuning.

tomofhyrule

Estin wrote: »

The only way I can see subclassing working without breaking the game is to have at the very least a 50% penalty on the skills and passives. Lore wise, you're not that class. You shouldn't be able to be just as strong as someone who is naturally that class. It's the only way to open variety but keep balance in line. The skills costing 2 skill points is not enough to be considered a penalty since skill points are so easy to obtain.

I was thinking that a percentage reduction to subclasses skills would help - that would at least force people into a choice. Do you want the versatility of being able to pull buffs or skills from other classes, or the raw power of perfecting into your own?

Even in games like D&D, it's not like you can have a pure class and a multiclassed character with the same abilities. The tradeoff the multiclassed character took was to sacrifice power at the top end to give themselves a wider range of ability. For example in BG3, a pure Paladin gets their level 3 spell slots at level 9. But if a Paladin levels to 8 and then multiclasses into Barbarian for the rest of it, they'll never have access to their top level Paladin spells.

As it is here, the skills costing double skill points is not a drawback, it's an opportunity cost. That's like saying that we can use Oakensoul ring without taking up a gear slot and without locking us to one bar, but the drawback is that we have to dig up all the leads first. Ok, so you dig up the leads and then what? Oh, you just get all the power and no drawbacks.

QB1

ForumBully wrote: »

I literally can't remember a time when there wasn't a horrible imbalance in PVP. At least one. The only time there was only one horrible imbalance was pre-Vicious Death, and that singular imbalance was that "numbers always win".

Yup, as a PvP main, balance has always been... chaotic at best There’s always some broken combo or cheese strat floating around. If subclassing opens the floodgates even further, it could get wild. But maybe, just maybe, with more build variety, we’ll stop seeing the same broken builds/sets on every player. Or maybe we’ll just trade one broken meta for another😅

QB1

El_Borracho wrote: »

I am completely with you @tomofhyrule. This is going to result in massive nerfs to sets and class skills. And it will not be simply from PVP. This isn't power creep, its power overflow.

I mean I think you're probably right. They need to stay ahead of this with proactive and ongoing balancing and tuning. Otherwise will prob lead to massive nerfs. But again, aren't we used to massive nerfs at this point? At least now if something gets nerfed an entire class won't be useless

QB1

xXCJsniperXx7 wrote: »

I like subclassing especially since playing DnD, but here, it needs some polishing. Since all the years prior, everything was designed on a class basis. So just letting you mix and match makes the character feel kinda generic. In my idea, though it probably won't happen, subclassing should give you the option to "merge" the skill lines. In a sense, extend your original class by letting you convert the damage types of the subclass to your original. E.g. DK/W, Warden skills could be swapped to fire or poison. Opposite, DK skills to frost or bleed. Or, if you want keep the default skills, main idea is it gives you more creative power.

That's a really cool idea! Especially the concept of converting damage types to fit your original class theme. That’d add so much flavor and make characters feel unique.

wolfie1.0.

MJallday wrote: »

Sorcs or plars with the arc beam?

Sign me up

Best way to defeat beam... altitude. You can't aim the book up or down. Jesus beam can let you do

QB1 wrote: »

wolfie1.0. wrote: »

Honestly, I would have preferred that subclasses be branches of existing classes rather than using skills from other classes.

Using class lines from other classes seems like a shortcut approach and it's going to likely be a mess. And disappointment as skills and passives get nuked and mashed into being the exact same for each class.

It also devalues having multiple characters.

Totally get where you're coming from and I don't think your concerns are misplaced. I’ve started looking at it less as "classes borrowing from each other" and more like shifting toward schools of magic or disciplines of combat. Like, instead of asking “why can this class use that skill,” maybe the better question is “who trained them?” In that light, it’s not that everyone becomes the same, it’s that we get to mix our training paths in new ways.

And yeah, there’s definitely risk of skill/passive homogenization, but if ZOS can balance it with meaningful tradeoffs and synergy limitations, we might end up with more diversity, not less.

There's a lot of IFs in there. But hopefully it works out.

So in an effort of trying to remain positive, one nice thing is that there shouldn't be a Zos favored class this time around.

Also, it opens up the possibility of adding in new subclass skill lines instead of whole new classes.

I guess we will see.

But I am looking forward to an all pet build, an elemental build among others. But I guess we will see what happens.

QB1

Estin wrote: »

The only way I can see subclassing working without breaking the game is to have at the very least a 50% penalty on the skills and passives. Lore wise, you're not that class. You shouldn't be able to be just as strong as someone who is naturally that class. It's the only way to open variety but keep balance in line. The skills costing 2 skill points is not enough to be considered a penalty since skill points are so easy to obtain.

A flat 50% penalty seems a bit extreme, but a toned-down version, or reduced scaling on passives or ultimates, could help strike a better balance. But honestly, I don't care about classes or class identity. Like I said in an earlier comment, I don't look at it as "classes borrowing from each other." I see it more like shifting toward schools of magic or disciplines of combat. So I don't think there should be a penalty at all. Just my opinion, and I appreciate you commenting yours!

Aggrovious

I don't think a classless system will work since the player base has been introduced to alliance bundle/race, race tokens, and 20 maximum character slots.

A classless system will make the 19 character slots almost useless. I would rather see the continuing of classes, but I love the subclass idea. Most players run dawnbreaker on their front bar so I am not sure why players complain everyone will have an arcanist beam when they use meta.

I also understand nerfing a skill will punish purist class players (not name calling but not sure what else to call it).

Hearing ZOS state that they want there to be fun as the bottom line is encouraging. Some things will be op and honestly, unleash it! If its a bad experience in pvp, either buff a skill to counter or create a counter for players to have access too. Look at Lord of the Rings Conquest. It might be unbalanced with constantly being knocked over (was rushed to complete), but its also extremely fun.

Most players play games to have fun. If subclasses provide more fun, than I am all for it. I've felt Necromancers were unfairly treated in this game, but now I have the means to makes DOT's hurt with subclass to DK (rapid rot passive was nerfed long ago). We also lost our blue boy. We now can have an actual army if we subclass warden or sorcerer. To me, this will be fun.

QB1

wolfie1.0. wrote: »

MJallday wrote: »

Sorcs or plars with the arc beam?

Sign me up

Best way to defeat beam... altitude. You can't aim the book up or down. Jesus beam can let you do

QB1 wrote: »

wolfie1.0. wrote: »

Honestly, I would have preferred that subclasses be branches of existing classes rather than using skills from other classes.

Using class lines from other classes seems like a shortcut approach and it's going to likely be a mess. And disappointment as skills and passives get nuked and mashed into being the exact same for each class.

It also devalues having multiple characters.

Totally get where you're coming from and I don't think your concerns are misplaced. I’ve started looking at it less as "classes borrowing from each other" and more like shifting toward schools of magic or disciplines of combat. Like, instead of asking “why can this class use that skill,” maybe the better question is “who trained them?” In that light, it’s not that everyone becomes the same, it’s that we get to mix our training paths in new ways.

And yeah, there’s definitely risk of skill/passive homogenization, but if ZOS can balance it with meaningful tradeoffs and synergy limitations, we might end up with more diversity, not less.

There's a lot of IFs in there. But hopefully it works out.

So in an effort of trying to remain positive, one nice thing is that there shouldn't be a Zos favored class this time around.

Also, it opens up the possibility of adding in new subclass skill lines instead of whole new classes.

I guess we will see.

But I am looking forward to an all pet build, an elemental build among others. But I guess we will see what happens.

You're right about the what ifs but it's still promising to think about the diversity this system could unlock *if* they get the balance right. And I agree, I'd love to see them start adding new individual skill lines into the mix.

Not a pet guy myself, but an elementalist is definitely high up on my list to build.

QB1

Aggrovious wrote: »

I don't think a classless system will work since the player base has been introduced to alliance bundle/race, race tokens, and 20 maximum character slots.

A classless system will make the 19 character slots almost useless. I would rather see the continuing of classes, but I love the subclass idea. Most players run dawnbreaker on their front bar so I am not sure why players complain everyone will have an arcanist beam when they use meta.

I also understand nerfing a skill will punish purist class players (not name calling but not sure what else to call it).

Hearing ZOS state that they want there to be fun as the bottom line is encouraging. Some things will be op and honestly, unleash it! If its a bad experience in pvp, either buff a skill to counter or create a counter for players to have access too. Look at Lord of the Rings Conquest. It might be unbalanced with constantly being knocked over (was rushed to complete), but its also extremely fun.

Most players play games to have fun. If subclasses provide more fun, than I am all for it. I've felt Necromancers were unfairly treated in this game, but now I have the means to makes DOT's hurt with subclass to DK (rapid rot passive was nerfed long ago). We also lost our blue boy. We now can have an actual army if we subclass warden or sorcerer. To me, this will be fun.

You make a solid point about the current system and how the player base has invested in things like alliance bundles and race tokens. However, I think a classless system could actually open up more possibilities without complicating things as much as it might seem.

I personally don't believe that it would completely negate the value of race, alliance, or even character slots. Maybe that's just me, idk. These aspects would still play a crucial role for my builds, but in a more flexible, meaningful way.

Overall, I agree, most players just want fun, and if subclassing opens up more fun opportunities, it’s a win. There will always be overpowered skills, but like you said, if it creates frustration in PvP, they can always buff other skills to create more counterplay.

Estin

tomofhyrule wrote: »

Estin wrote: »

The only way I can see subclassing working without breaking the game is to have at the very least a 50% penalty on the skills and passives. Lore wise, you're not that class. You shouldn't be able to be just as strong as someone who is naturally that class. It's the only way to open variety but keep balance in line. The skills costing 2 skill points is not enough to be considered a penalty since skill points are so easy to obtain.

I was thinking that a percentage reduction to subclasses skills would help - that would at least force people into a choice. Do you want the versatility of being able to pull buffs or skills from other classes, or the raw power of perfecting into your own?

Even in games like D&D, it's not like you can have a pure class and a multiclassed character with the same abilities. The tradeoff the multiclassed character took was to sacrifice power at the top end to give themselves a wider range of ability. For example in BG3, a pure Paladin gets their level 3 spell slots at level 9. But if a Paladin levels to 8 and then multiclasses into Barbarian for the rest of it, they'll never have access to their top level Paladin spells.

As it is here, the skills costing double skill points is not a drawback, it's an opportunity cost. That's like saying that we can use Oakensoul ring without taking up a gear slot and without locking us to one bar, but the drawback is that we have to dig up all the leads first. Ok, so you dig up the leads and then what? Oh, you just get all the power and no drawbacks.

Others may consider it too much, but I would say on top of the percentage pentalty, skills shouldn't be able to morph. I'm still going to stand by my lore wise reasoning here. Someone who isn't naturally of a class shouldn't have full access to someone who is. As it stands, there's 0 draw backs to subclassing. It shouldn't be that way. At most you should be able to decide if the skill costs stamina or magicka since non morphed skills are almost always magicka. At that point it'll become scribing 2.0 except at the cost of losing a skill line for a new one. It'll still do enough to add variety to how you play the game.

A 50% reduction to damage/healing/passive bonues/etc + no morphs isn't going to matter much outside of vet or pvp, but it can still open up some meta or near meta routes for some classes in those same areas. A necro can still find benefit in ditching bone tyrant for dawn's wrath to have access to a 240% execute, but that doesn't mean they'll become stronger than a templar. There are issues for some toggleable skills like cloak. How should it work? Decrease the against monster's bonus to 5%? Increase the cost per second? Or only be active for 1 second? Or a skill like molten armaments. Should it be reduced to 15 seconds or give minor brutality/sorcery for 30 seconds? Some thought will have to go into balancing for that so natural classes can still have their identity, whatever's left of it.

I really do hope that ZOS listens to the feedback of player's concerns instead of going through with it with 0 adjustments just because the character fantasy crowd that doesn't step into vet or pvp are excited for this. There has to be real limitations for subclassing.

ForumBully

Some things never change. For every idea there's some percentage of players who will say "if you're going to do it, just cripple it from the start". It's unbelievable.
Don't penalize subclass strength, You're better off just not putting the system into effect at all
If you want to blame something for homogenization, it wasn't hybridization, it was nonstop worry about "balance" that has never been achieved.