Maintenance for the week of September 29:
• PC/Mac: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – September 29, 4:00AM EDT (8:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EDT (13:00 UTC)
• Xbox: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – October 1, 8:00 UTC (4:00AM EDT) - 16:00 UTC (12:00PM EDT)
• PlayStation®: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – October 1, 8:00 UTC (4:00AM EDT) - 16:00 UTC (12:00PM EDT)
• PC/Mac: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – September 29, 4:00AM EDT (8:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EDT (13:00 UTC)
• Xbox: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – October 1, 8:00 UTC (4:00AM EDT) - 16:00 UTC (12:00PM EDT)
• PlayStation®: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – October 1, 8:00 UTC (4:00AM EDT) - 16:00 UTC (12:00PM EDT)
Pure “Class”
-
Radiate77✭✭✭✭TX12001rwb17_ESO wrote: »Classes are a combination of Subclasses.
https://www.elderscrollsonline.com/en-us/classes
A Nightblade is only a Nightblade because they use Assassination, Shadow, and Siphoning.
When you remove one of those, it becomes a different Class. You are not a Nightblade if you remove Shadow. Illusion is part of the core identity of what a Nightblade is, just as Assassination and Siphoning are.
Nightblade = Assassination, Shadow, Siphoning
Nightblade ≠ Assassination, Shadow, Siphoning
So it should change the class name then.
Agreed, they need to take some time and hammer out the kinks associated with Subclassing. There is no reason why someone running an Arcanist beam on any class, should be competing on leaderboards with those who are not.0 -
Radiate77✭✭✭✭spartaxoxo wrote: »Subclassing is literally a brand new term given to the brand new system.
Subclassing ≠ Subclasses
It is the art of moving your Subclasses around, to make entirely new Classes not present.Edited by Radiate77 on 13 July 2025 19:100 -
spartaxoxo✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭spartaxoxo wrote: »Subclassing is literally a brand new term given to the brand new system.
Subclassing ≠ Subclasses
Yes. It does. Assassination is a skill line not a subclass. It has never been referred to as such prior to the implementation of the subclassing system.Edited by spartaxoxo on 13 July 2025 19:112 -
JemadarofCaerSalis✭✭✭✭✭tomofhyrule wrote: »
It really seems like you are the only one referring to Subclassed builds as "impure." Everyone else is calling them "Subclassed builds."
Are you sure you know what the word Pure means? It means undiluted, the second you dilute it, it becomes Impure.
It means a lot of things and one of them is
(of an animal or plant) of unmixed origin or descent.
Another is
involving or containing nothing else but; sheer (used for emphasis).
Both of those can also be used to talk about classes vs subclasses.
Because 'Pure' Classes are of unmixed origin, or they involve or contain nothing else but the class.
SUB-classes of the other hand ARE mixed classes and they involve or contain parts of other classes.
The very first definition for me that came up is
not mixed or adulterated with any other substance or material.
Which means 'pure classes are not mixed with any other class'
Words can have more than one meaning.1 -
tomofhyrule✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Alright, let's play this game then. Please provide the official list of names for using combinations of Subclassing lines, so we can all make sure that we know what lines anyone is talking about when a Class name is mentioned. Because absent that official list, the only things people can talk about are the seven standard Classes and then anything else is "Subclassed build with X, Y, and Z."
You're hyperfocusing on people saying "the only way to balance this is to make the official premade classes OP," which is honestly not the most common argument. In fact, I think most people actually prefer modifying the passives instead of just giving boosts to exclusively the seven selectable classes.
As to why there seems to be favoritism for the preset Classes though, well... that makes sense. That's what people have run for a decade now. That's what is billed by ZOS as "a complete setup with everything you need." A new player should not have to read hundreds of guides to find a workable build; you should be able to be at a high level with the Class you choose out of the gate, before you worry about taking other lines or anything. Should it be the best of the best? No. But it should be something that plays better than taking any three lines at random.
Now it is reasonable that all 1330 (21 choose 3, so not 3000 like ZOS said) options would be equally powerful? No, of course not. There are some things that are designed for specific roles, like trying to use Green Balance in a damage loadout. But this is the same as being enraged that Restoration Staves or 1H/Shield weapons don't really carry any damage passives themselves - they're designed for healers and tanks respectively. Likewise, asking Living Death to magically be able to outparse Herald of the Tome is silly.
The problem is that the balance was not well done. The basegame Class lines aren't as delinated as the DLC Class lines, so the feeling of giving up something to get something else is a lot stronger. But for the DLCs, it's easy to say "I don't need my tank/heal lines so I can just take more damage!" The problem is that building to be a glass cannon like that... isn't making you into a glass cannon like it should. Seriously, if someone walks by with Herald/Assassination/Aedric Spear so they can do max deeps, they should straight up have like 20 HP and negative resists to balance the amount of damage they can output.
Now there are a lot of people suggesting several things. Yes, "just add a buff to pureclassing or a debuff to subclassing" is common, but that's because it's the easiest solution... and it defintely is not the best. I prefer a solution that looks at the passives and makes it so stacking passives requires choosing between getting more freedom for skills versus having the full weight of your passive. I like the idea of making the passives 3-step instead of two, and then only allowing you to buy the level matching how many of your Class lines match. Another fun thing I thought of wat to add a penalty to each passive - if you have a bunch of lines that work together (which would be taking all three lines of the same parent Class, but could also allow a few other lines), then the penalties negate each other, but if you stack one thing like damage, those penalties add up too. Something like "reduces armor by X%" on a damage Class line or something.
4 -
Radiate77✭✭✭✭@tomofhyrule I don’t believe anyone has that “official list” as it doesn’t exist. That’s part of the problem, this system was dropped onto us with such little thought.
I agree with all of the stuff you just wrote. This entire OP was to put a spotlight on a developing problem before it became a bigger one. Half of these people commenting don’t even realize what they insinuate when they call a class muddy or don’t even acknowledge other classes(albeit names may change) to exist.
I don’t even really blame them. ZOS has failed to come out with a strong stance, or to even implement any changes to support this massive update. They have no example, only a system that makes them feel worse in comparison.0 -
Radiate77✭✭✭✭spartaxoxo wrote: »spartaxoxo wrote: »Subclassing is literally a brand new term given to the brand new system.
Subclassing ≠ Subclasses
Yes. It does. Assassination is a skill line not a subclass. It has never been referred to as such prior to the implementation of the subclassing system.
Something doesn’t need to be explicitly stated for it to be the case. If I go into uncharted woods with my friends to go chop some trees, and we all go in different directions, would it not be safe to assume that if those friends returned with fresh lumber and a worn axe, they had chopped some trees?
If Nightblade is a class that uses the shadows to siphon and assassinate their victims, would it be a Nightblade if it no longer did those things.
You take Shadow and Siphoning away and you’ve taken the Night out of Nightblade. Whatever you want to call Subclasses, they make up the identity of the class.
You can see it in their Class design philosophy, as it clearly states what makes each of the 7 starter classes. Apply inverse logic and replicate.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverse_(logic)
Nightblade = Assassination + Shadow + Siphoning
Therefore…
Assassination - Shadow - Siphoning ≠ Nightblade.Edited by Radiate77 on 13 July 2025 21:020 -
Tariq9898✭✭✭✭spartaxoxo wrote: »spartaxoxo wrote: »Subclassing is literally a brand new term given to the brand new system.
Subclassing ≠ Subclasses
Yes. It does. Assassination is a skill line not a subclass. It has never been referred to as such prior to the implementation of the subclassing system.
Something doesn’t need to be explicitly stated for it to be the case. If I go into uncharted woods with my friends to go chop some trees, and we all go in different directions, would it not be safe to assume that if those friends returned with fresh lumber and a worn axe, they had chopped some trees?
If Nightblade is a class that uses the shadows to siphon and assassinate their victims, would it be a Nightblade if it no longer did those things.
You take Shadow and Siphoning away and you’ve taken the Night out of Nightblade. Whatever you want to call Subclasses, they make up the identity of the class.
You can see it in their Class design philosophy, as it clearly states what makes each of the 7 starter classes. Apply inverse logic and replicate.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverse_(logic)
Nightblade = Assassination + Shadow + Siphoning
Therefore…
Assassination - Shadow - Siphoning ≠ Nightblade.
Y’all are arguing two different points that doesn’t definitively have a right answer. But is down to personal preference and even play style.
Do you consider Assassination a subclass as it makes up part of a whole (Nightblade)? Some say yes because it’s part of NB, which makes it subclass.
Some say no and consider the skill lines more akin to a skill tree, or talent tree where it’s less about class and more about choosing a pool to take skills. Another words, acting more as tools rather than formal subclass.Edited by Tariq9898 on 13 July 2025 22:170 -
Tariq9898✭✭✭✭spartaxoxo wrote: »spartaxoxo wrote: »Subclassing is literally a brand new term given to the brand new system.
Subclassing ≠ Subclasses
Yes. It does. Assassination is a skill line not a subclass. It has never been referred to as such prior to the implementation of the subclassing system.
Something doesn’t need to be explicitly stated for it to be the case. If I go into uncharted woods with my friends to go chop some trees, and we all go in different directions, would it not be safe to assume that if those friends returned with fresh lumber and a worn axe, they had chopped some trees?
If Nightblade is a class that uses the shadows to siphon and assassinate their victims, would it be a Nightblade if it no longer did those things.
You take Shadow and Siphoning away and you’ve taken the Night out of Nightblade. Whatever you want to call Subclasses, they make up the identity of the class.
You can see it in their Class design philosophy, as it clearly states what makes each of the 7 starter classes. Apply inverse logic and replicate.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverse_(logic)
Nightblade = Assassination + Shadow + Siphoning
Therefore…
Assassination - Shadow - Siphoning ≠ Nightblade.
Y’all are arguing two different points that doesn’t definitively have a right answer. But is down to personal preference and even play style.
Do you consider Assassination a subclass as it makes up part of a whole (Nightblade)? Some say yes because it’s part of NB, which makes it subclass.
Some say no and consider the skill lines more akin to a skill tree, or talent tree where it’s less about class and more about choosing a pool to take skills. Another words, acting more as tools rather than formal subclass.
This may be a weird analogy. Let’s take Muay Thai.
Muay Thai - a class of martial art that utilizes hands, elbows, knees, legs, and clinching (standup grappling/wrestling).
- Muay Femur - the technical fighter, great fight IQ
- Muay Mat - heavy puncher
- Muay Khao - knee and clinching heavy
- Muay Tae - the kicker
Would these be considered subclasses of Muay Thai? I feel there’s no right or wrong here.Edited by Tariq9898 on 13 July 2025 22:430 -
Klingenlied✭✭✭✭As of now, I have yet to see what OP is talking about.
As for "pure classes" - people still play and enjoy those as far as I can see.
And for the "new" subclassing? Well, most are seemingly enjoying the system and personally, I am actually looking forward to further iterations. I hope we get more focus (in the sense of concentration on a role) on old class trees (like they did with sorc). I know some players are opposed to steamlining those things. But on the other hands, we could achieve way better balance without sacrificing anything "essential". I don't think a dps needs 3 dps lines for overworld content. So if you want to solo hard content, feel free to tag on a heal or tank line. There is no need to have "tank buffs" on your dps line.
So that's just one players thoughts on this topic.0 -
Radiate77✭✭✭✭spartaxoxo wrote: »spartaxoxo wrote: »Subclassing is literally a brand new term given to the brand new system.
Subclassing ≠ Subclasses
Yes. It does. Assassination is a skill line not a subclass. It has never been referred to as such prior to the implementation of the subclassing system.
Something doesn’t need to be explicitly stated for it to be the case. If I go into uncharted woods with my friends to go chop some trees, and we all go in different directions, would it not be safe to assume that if those friends returned with fresh lumber and a worn axe, they had chopped some trees?
If Nightblade is a class that uses the shadows to siphon and assassinate their victims, would it be a Nightblade if it no longer did those things.
You take Shadow and Siphoning away and you’ve taken the Night out of Nightblade. Whatever you want to call Subclasses, they make up the identity of the class.
You can see it in their Class design philosophy, as it clearly states what makes each of the 7 starter classes. Apply inverse logic and replicate.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverse_(logic)
Nightblade = Assassination + Shadow + Siphoning
Therefore…
Assassination - Shadow - Siphoning ≠ Nightblade.
Y’all are arguing two different points that doesn’t definitively have a right answer. But is down to personal preference and even play style.
Do you consider Assassination a subclass as it makes up part of a whole (Nightblade)? Some say yes because it’s part of NB, which makes it subclass.
Some say no and consider the skill lines more akin to a skill tree, or talent tree where it’s less about class and more about choosing a pool to take skills. Another words, acting more as tools rather than formal subclass.
This may be a weird analogy. Let’s take Muay Thai.
Muay Thai - a class of martial art that utilizes hands, elbows, knees, legs, and even clinching (standup grappling/wrestling).
- Muay Femur - the technical fighter, great fight IQ
- Muay Bok - heavy puncher
- Muay Khao - knee and clinching heavy
- Muay Tae - the kicker
Would these be considered subclasses of Muay Thai? I feel there’s no right or wrong here.
I like your example.
My take is on the underlying messages.
Subclass or skill line, it doesn’t matter. What matters is that people consider builds that utilize Subclassing as important as those that don’t, and lately this hasn’t been happening.0 -
Tariq9898✭✭✭✭spartaxoxo wrote: »spartaxoxo wrote: »Subclassing is literally a brand new term given to the brand new system.
Subclassing ≠ Subclasses
Yes. It does. Assassination is a skill line not a subclass. It has never been referred to as such prior to the implementation of the subclassing system.
Something doesn’t need to be explicitly stated for it to be the case. If I go into uncharted woods with my friends to go chop some trees, and we all go in different directions, would it not be safe to assume that if those friends returned with fresh lumber and a worn axe, they had chopped some trees?
If Nightblade is a class that uses the shadows to siphon and assassinate their victims, would it be a Nightblade if it no longer did those things.
You take Shadow and Siphoning away and you’ve taken the Night out of Nightblade. Whatever you want to call Subclasses, they make up the identity of the class.
You can see it in their Class design philosophy, as it clearly states what makes each of the 7 starter classes. Apply inverse logic and replicate.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverse_(logic)
Nightblade = Assassination + Shadow + Siphoning
Therefore…
Assassination - Shadow - Siphoning ≠ Nightblade.
Y’all are arguing two different points that doesn’t definitively have a right answer. But is down to personal preference and even play style.
Do you consider Assassination a subclass as it makes up part of a whole (Nightblade)? Some say yes because it’s part of NB, which makes it subclass.
Some say no and consider the skill lines more akin to a skill tree, or talent tree where it’s less about class and more about choosing a pool to take skills. Another words, acting more as tools rather than formal subclass.
This may be a weird analogy. Let’s take Muay Thai.
Muay Thai - a class of martial art that utilizes hands, elbows, knees, legs, and even clinching (standup grappling/wrestling).
- Muay Femur - the technical fighter, great fight IQ
- Muay Bok - heavy puncher
- Muay Khao - knee and clinching heavy
- Muay Tae - the kicker
Would these be considered subclasses of Muay Thai? I feel there’s no right or wrong here.
I like your example.
My take is on the underlying messages.
Subclass or skill line, it doesn’t matter. What matters is that people consider builds that utilize Subclassing as important as those that don’t, and lately this hasn’t been happening.
Ah okay! 👍🏼
Personally, I see more of the opposite, especially on Discord. But differences aside, I hope the community comes together in that sense. I feel this has a higher chance of happening when ZOS finds some way to balance the entire system as I feel this feature was rushed.
Edited by Tariq9898 on 13 July 2025 23:121 -
spartaxoxo✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭spartaxoxo wrote: »spartaxoxo wrote: »Subclassing is literally a brand new term given to the brand new system.
Subclassing ≠ Subclasses
Yes. It does. Assassination is a skill line not a subclass. It has never been referred to as such prior to the implementation of the subclassing system.
Something doesn’t need to be explicitly stated for it to be the case. If I go into uncharted woods with my friends to go chop some trees, and we all go in different directions, would it not be safe to assume that if those friends returned with fresh lumber and a worn axe, they had chopped some trees?
If Nightblade is a class that uses the shadows to siphon and assassinate their victims, would it be a Nightblade if it no longer did those things.
You take Shadow and Siphoning away and you’ve taken the Night out of Nightblade. Whatever you want to call Subclasses, they make up the identity of the class.
You can see it in their Class design philosophy, as it clearly states what makes each of the 7 starter classes. Apply inverse logic and replicate.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverse_(logic)
Nightblade = Assassination + Shadow + Siphoning
Therefore…
Assassination - Shadow - Siphoning ≠ Nightblade.
Y’all are arguing two different points that doesn’t definitively have a right answer. But is down to personal preference and even play style.
Do you consider Assassination a subclass as it makes up part of a whole (Nightblade)? Some say yes because it’s part of NB, which makes it subclass.
Some say no and consider the skill lines more akin to a skill tree, or talent tree where it’s less about class and more about choosing a pool to take skills. Another words, acting more as tools rather than formal subclass.
This may be a weird analogy. Let’s take Muay Thai.
Muay Thai - a class of martial art that utilizes hands, elbows, knees, legs, and even clinching (standup grappling/wrestling).
- Muay Femur - the technical fighter, great fight IQ
- Muay Bok - heavy puncher
- Muay Khao - knee and clinching heavy
- Muay Tae - the kicker
Would these be considered subclasses of Muay Thai? I feel there’s no right or wrong here.
I like your example.
My take is on the underlying messages.
Subclass or skill line, it doesn’t matter. What matters is that people consider builds that utilize Subclassing as important as those that don’t, and lately this hasn’t been happening.
Ah okay! 👍🏼
Personally, I see more of the opposite, especially on Discord. But differences aside, I hope the community comes together in that sense. I feel this has a higher chance of happening when ZOS finds some way to balance the entire system as I feel it was rushed.
OP wants pure classes to be strictly weaker than subclasses as far as I can tell. At least in the OP they said something like pure classes should have no benefits for limiting themselves.Edited by spartaxoxo on 13 July 2025 23:122 -
Radiate77✭✭✭✭spartaxoxo wrote: »spartaxoxo wrote: »Subclassing is literally a brand new term given to the brand new system.
Subclassing ≠ Subclasses
Yes. It does. Assassination is a skill line not a subclass. It has never been referred to as such prior to the implementation of the subclassing system.
Something doesn’t need to be explicitly stated for it to be the case. If I go into uncharted woods with my friends to go chop some trees, and we all go in different directions, would it not be safe to assume that if those friends returned with fresh lumber and a worn axe, they had chopped some trees?
If Nightblade is a class that uses the shadows to siphon and assassinate their victims, would it be a Nightblade if it no longer did those things.
You take Shadow and Siphoning away and you’ve taken the Night out of Nightblade. Whatever you want to call Subclasses, they make up the identity of the class.
You can see it in their Class design philosophy, as it clearly states what makes each of the 7 starter classes. Apply inverse logic and replicate.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverse_(logic)
Nightblade = Assassination + Shadow + Siphoning
Therefore…
Assassination - Shadow - Siphoning ≠ Nightblade.
Y’all are arguing two different points that doesn’t definitively have a right answer. But is down to personal preference and even play style.
Do you consider Assassination a subclass as it makes up part of a whole (Nightblade)? Some say yes because it’s part of NB, which makes it subclass.
Some say no and consider the skill lines more akin to a skill tree, or talent tree where it’s less about class and more about choosing a pool to take skills. Another words, acting more as tools rather than formal subclass.
This may be a weird analogy. Let’s take Muay Thai.
Muay Thai - a class of martial art that utilizes hands, elbows, knees, legs, and even clinching (standup grappling/wrestling).
- Muay Femur - the technical fighter, great fight IQ
- Muay Bok - heavy puncher
- Muay Khao - knee and clinching heavy
- Muay Tae - the kicker
Would these be considered subclasses of Muay Thai? I feel there’s no right or wrong here.
I like your example.
My take is on the underlying messages.
Subclass or skill line, it doesn’t matter. What matters is that people consider builds that utilize Subclassing as important as those that don’t, and lately this hasn’t been happening.
Ah okay! 👍🏼
Personally, I see more of the opposite, especially on Discord. But differences aside, I hope the community comes together in that sense. I feel this has a higher chance of happening when ZOS finds some way to balance the entire system as I feel it was rushed.
Hey, I never said I disagree.
People should be more accepting of those who don’t want to alter their character aswell. I’ve seen plenty of posts regarding that but nothing pushing back on some of the crazier ideas found in those threads, and some of the terminology used to identity those who subclass.0 -
Radiate77✭✭✭✭spartaxoxo wrote: »spartaxoxo wrote: »spartaxoxo wrote: »Subclassing is literally a brand new term given to the brand new system.
Subclassing ≠ Subclasses
Yes. It does. Assassination is a skill line not a subclass. It has never been referred to as such prior to the implementation of the subclassing system.
Something doesn’t need to be explicitly stated for it to be the case. If I go into uncharted woods with my friends to go chop some trees, and we all go in different directions, would it not be safe to assume that if those friends returned with fresh lumber and a worn axe, they had chopped some trees?
If Nightblade is a class that uses the shadows to siphon and assassinate their victims, would it be a Nightblade if it no longer did those things.
You take Shadow and Siphoning away and you’ve taken the Night out of Nightblade. Whatever you want to call Subclasses, they make up the identity of the class.
You can see it in their Class design philosophy, as it clearly states what makes each of the 7 starter classes. Apply inverse logic and replicate.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverse_(logic)
Nightblade = Assassination + Shadow + Siphoning
Therefore…
Assassination - Shadow - Siphoning ≠ Nightblade.
Y’all are arguing two different points that doesn’t definitively have a right answer. But is down to personal preference and even play style.
Do you consider Assassination a subclass as it makes up part of a whole (Nightblade)? Some say yes because it’s part of NB, which makes it subclass.
Some say no and consider the skill lines more akin to a skill tree, or talent tree where it’s less about class and more about choosing a pool to take skills. Another words, acting more as tools rather than formal subclass.
This may be a weird analogy. Let’s take Muay Thai.
Muay Thai - a class of martial art that utilizes hands, elbows, knees, legs, and even clinching (standup grappling/wrestling).
- Muay Femur - the technical fighter, great fight IQ
- Muay Bok - heavy puncher
- Muay Khao - knee and clinching heavy
- Muay Tae - the kicker
Would these be considered subclasses of Muay Thai? I feel there’s no right or wrong here.
I like your example.
My take is on the underlying messages.
Subclass or skill line, it doesn’t matter. What matters is that people consider builds that utilize Subclassing as important as those that don’t, and lately this hasn’t been happening.
Ah okay! 👍🏼
Personally, I see more of the opposite, especially on Discord. But differences aside, I hope the community comes together in that sense. I feel this has a higher chance of happening when ZOS finds some way to balance the entire system as I feel it was rushed.
OP wants pure classes to be strictly weaker than subclasses as far as I can tell. At least in the OP they said something like pure classes should have no benefits for limiting themselves.
You shouldn’t have an exclusive benefit for limiting yourself. That doesn’t mean that starter classes shouldn’t feel more similar to like-class comps.
Damage-Support-Tank should never feel worse than another Damage-Support-Tank, only different.Edited by Radiate77 on 13 July 2025 23:150 -
spartaxoxo✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭You shouldn’t have an exclusive benefit for limiting yourself. .
Subclasses are vastly superior to pure classes. And there's no way to address that without addressing pure classes in particular. Every nerf to skill lines to balance subclasses also nerfs pure classes which are already underperforming.
If you don't support changes specifically designed to bring them closer together, then you don't support them being equal because there is no other way to do it.
You can suggest things that you feel would be more fair to subclasses. But blanket refusal to accept any changes to pure classes is tacit approval of them remaining weak.Edited by spartaxoxo on 13 July 2025 23:303 -
tomofhyrule✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭spartaxoxo wrote: »spartaxoxo wrote: »spartaxoxo wrote: »Subclassing is literally a brand new term given to the brand new system.
Subclassing ≠ Subclasses
Yes. It does. Assassination is a skill line not a subclass. It has never been referred to as such prior to the implementation of the subclassing system.
Something doesn’t need to be explicitly stated for it to be the case. If I go into uncharted woods with my friends to go chop some trees, and we all go in different directions, would it not be safe to assume that if those friends returned with fresh lumber and a worn axe, they had chopped some trees?
If Nightblade is a class that uses the shadows to siphon and assassinate their victims, would it be a Nightblade if it no longer did those things.
You take Shadow and Siphoning away and you’ve taken the Night out of Nightblade. Whatever you want to call Subclasses, they make up the identity of the class.
You can see it in their Class design philosophy, as it clearly states what makes each of the 7 starter classes. Apply inverse logic and replicate.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverse_(logic)
Nightblade = Assassination + Shadow + Siphoning
Therefore…
Assassination - Shadow - Siphoning ≠ Nightblade.
Y’all are arguing two different points that doesn’t definitively have a right answer. But is down to personal preference and even play style.
Do you consider Assassination a subclass as it makes up part of a whole (Nightblade)? Some say yes because it’s part of NB, which makes it subclass.
Some say no and consider the skill lines more akin to a skill tree, or talent tree where it’s less about class and more about choosing a pool to take skills. Another words, acting more as tools rather than formal subclass.
This may be a weird analogy. Let’s take Muay Thai.
Muay Thai - a class of martial art that utilizes hands, elbows, knees, legs, and even clinching (standup grappling/wrestling).
- Muay Femur - the technical fighter, great fight IQ
- Muay Bok - heavy puncher
- Muay Khao - knee and clinching heavy
- Muay Tae - the kicker
Would these be considered subclasses of Muay Thai? I feel there’s no right or wrong here.
I like your example.
My take is on the underlying messages.
Subclass or skill line, it doesn’t matter. What matters is that people consider builds that utilize Subclassing as important as those that don’t, and lately this hasn’t been happening.
Ah okay! 👍🏼
Personally, I see more of the opposite, especially on Discord. But differences aside, I hope the community comes together in that sense. I feel this has a higher chance of happening when ZOS finds some way to balance the entire system as I feel it was rushed.
OP wants pure classes to be strictly weaker than subclasses as far as I can tell. At least in the OP they said something like pure classes should have no benefits for limiting themselves.
You shouldn’t have an exclusive benefit for limiting yourself. That doesn’t mean that starter classes shouldn’t feel more similar to like-class comps.
Damage-Support-Tank should never feel worse than another Damage-Support-Tank, only different.
One of the major problems - that even the devs are forgetting! - is that over half of the parent Classes don't have strict delineations of Damage-Support-Tank.
Sure, we can all look at Arcanist and say "Hey, the Herald of the Tome line has 5 damaging skills, a damaging ult, and 4 damaging passives, so this must be the damage line!" and the same with the other two. It's crystal clear.
But let's try Earthen Heart from the Dragonknight: 3 damaging skills, two of which can morph to a heal. One of them is a CC. One of them morphs to give a unique damage taken debuff. Two support skills, one of which has a self-damage buff. An ultimate that is clearly tank focused due to damage reduction, but can morph to do damage as well. Two passives are personal sustain, one is a group buff and also helps sustain, and the last is a passive that specifically lengthens durations for that line of skills only.
So... what role is that? It affects all three. Now most people call this the "healer" line, since Draconic Power is more of the selfish tank stuff (but has some important DPS stuff in there and isn't really that good of a tank line compared to other tank lines) and Ardent Flame is pretty clearly the most damage-focused line (despite also having important skills for other roles), but it is not even close to clear cut. After all, Earthen Heart is technically one of the meta tank lines, even if it's sorta-not-really the DK "tank" line.
That's what makes it hard to say "oh, you can drop a 'DPS' line and pick up a 'tank' line" because the basegame Classes are muddy in that way.4 -
BretonMage✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Subclass or skill line, it doesn’t matter. What matters is that people consider builds that utilize Subclassing as important as those that don’t, and lately this hasn’t been happening.
This is not true at all. Apart from players upset about the need to subclass to stay relevant, every single recommended build since U46 is a subclassed build. Players aren't saying it's not important, they're saying it's disproportionately important.
Subclassed builds (some, anyway) are so far ahead of pure classes that I've seen a post saying that one is trolling the group if one gives up this extra damage from subclassing.
And as someone who dislikes subclassing, I'll say this, I actually do not care how someone else plays, I just want to be able to play how I want (how I've played for years) without falling behind.Edited by BretonMage on 14 July 2025 00:289