Player creativity in determining our own class is awesome

Athan1

Think about it, each skill line covers one archetype and they're grouped in themes of three:

• Dragonknight [warrior]: pyromancer, earth warrior, dragon warrior
• Nightblade [rogue]: assassin, shadow mage, blood mage
• Sorcerer [mage]: storm mage, conjurer (demonic summons), dark mage
• Templar [cleric]: paladin, sun mage, priest
• Warden [druid]: cryomancer, summoner (nature summons), plant mage
• Necromancer: three skill lines of skeletons, ghosts, and corpses

Note that equipping different gear or weapons and going for stamina or magicka can change the flavour of said archetypes. We also have universal skill lines covering more generic or niche roles, adding flavour to our class themes:

• Bow: archer
• Swords/maces/daggers/axes: generic warrior
• Sword and Shield: tank
• Destruction Staff: elementalist
• Restoration Staff: healer
• Fighters Guild: mercenary
• Mages Guild: generic mage
• Psijic Order: mystic/chronomage

ESO is giving us tools to create our own classes by equipping the skills and gear we want, rather than having pre-made cookie-cutter classes. And we can swap them around at will (except for the class picked at the start of the game). We actually have pretty much every high fantasy archetype covered already so there is no necessity for new classes either. Have fun making your class!

TX12001rwb17_ESO

I just wish our class name would change depending on what skills we spec in, if I select the warden class but only spec in winter's embrace then I am really more of a Cryomancer.

If I select Nightblade but only spec into the Shadow Skill tree then I am more of a Shadowmancer.

orion_1981usub17_ESO

It would be great to see several more skill lines that are themed to better fill in class choices. Like warden plants are currently for healing, so a plant tanking/dd tree needs to be added to fill out the "druid" type class. Actually with 18 class lines, I think you need at least double that.

Athan1

Well I don't think it's super practical to create an offensive, a healer, and a tank version of each archetype, but it's close enough while still giving a good feel of the theme

Supreme_Atromancer

I disagree - the baked-in power concepts of the classes do a poor job of resembling anything like the archetypical Elder Scrolls character types, and the diversity that weapons were supposed to layer onto that system have gradually had their functionality folded further and further into the class system as ESO has moved to meet the demand of all classes/specs, all roles.

The base classes were a strange imposition that really didn't feel much like the classic Elder Scrolls archetypes. If you want to play, say, a traditional mage-type character, you go sorcerer. But then you're pretty much restricted to this arbitrary, baked-in power source theme thing they have going. So I have to be a lightning mage. If I want to be a firemage that approached something resembling viability, most people would tell you instead to go magicka DK instead. But then you're stuck with a whole heap of martial, melee-ranged mechanics and akaviri dragon flavour whether you want it or not. It doesn't really handle the classic firemage archetype at all unless you want to ignore much of the class toolkit, and then, what's the point of classes at all?

Its even worse if you want to play an ice mage. You have two choices - either go sorcerer, which has some of the "magey" stuff baked in and rely on the frost staff which the developers have decided is a tool for tanking which resulted for a long time in anyone naive enough to think they could do this would earn the rage of every pug when they unknowingly continuously stole taunt and wondered why their dps was bad. Or - the Warden class; but again, if you want a basic ice mage concept, you really have to ignore much of bizzare hodge-podge of concepts that were inexpliccably lumped in with the ice-nature-vvardenfell animals thing that it is. You're either a frost mage who fires pterodactyls at your enemies and mushrooms at your friends while a floating jellyfish pisses blue whatever at the back of your head, or you ignore two thirds of the class's baked in functionality and get laughed out of any group content ever.

How do you make a classic martial, melee warrior type - say an Orc Berserker, a Nord Barbarian, or a Redguard Swordmaster each of which eschews and hates all magic? Stamblade, Stamsorc or Stamdk get you as close as you could get, but again you really have to ignore most of the baked-in, ecclectic power identity of those classes.

The weapon system was supposed to handle a lot of the diversity, and speaking to the core trinity-mmo philosophy, were the tools that would allow any class to take on any of the 3 roles. Early on, though, certain classes did certain things better, even with their prescribed weapons, and there was a push to even the board by putting in more possibilities for role functionality into each class - and as they continue to do this, the class concept is being stretched in really conceptually silly ways that don't have anything to do with the Elder Scrolls system - stamina sorcerers use what's essentially become "green magicka" to fuel personal hurricanes and sorc tanks somehow empower their shields not with their strength in magic, but with their health without ever the risk of *** prolapse. Stamina healers are growing in popularity in PvP, to the point where they are crucial for optimised ballgroups, and the demand for stam healers in pve is being recognised and starting to be developed for. But, conceptually, wtaf even is stamina healing meant to be? How am I literally healing my allies wounds with the power of my metabolism? How is that anything like a core archetype from The Elder Scrolls?

Its fun to stuff around with mechanics and make mechanically-interesting builds, and I wont ever begrudge anyone their stam healers and stamsorcs or whatever but from the elder-scrollsey mythology side of things they are conceptually borked. Last year before all the performace stuff hit the headlines, ZOS talked about revisiting the concepts of power fantasy and promised they were in the process of an audit in this department. So they've recognised on some level that its kinda weird, but we haven't heard anything since, and the way the combat team keep pushing things into territory so conceptually abstract, but really struggle with making any of it make sense within the millieu, its hard to know if its still on the agenda at all.

Personally, I think that the class system was a mistake. The baked-in elemental themes were restrictive of creativity, were kind of alien, and didn't much resemble anything elder-scrollsey anyway. I think you could have gotten much more freedom of build without classes, and having powers and capabilities tied to weapons and guild skill lines. In such a system you can still have a dragonknight if you join the akaviiri academy and learn their skill line, but you're not locked into all the other stuff.

Just my 2c. You've gotta ask yourself. Do you feel like a character from the TES universe? Can you easily build the signature character concepts in ESO? If the system does not recognise them or can't handle them, its not doing a great job in this part of the game.

danno8

Supreme_Atromancer wrote: »

I disagree - the baked-in power concepts of the classes do a poor job of resembling anything like the archetypical Elder Scrolls character types, and the diversity that weapons were supposed to layer onto that system have gradually had their functionality folded further and further into the class system as ESO has moved to meet the demand of all classes/specs, all roles.

The base classes were a strange imposition that really didn't feel much like the classic Elder Scrolls archetypes. If you want to play, say, a traditional mage-type character, you go sorcerer. But then you're pretty much restricted to this arbitrary, baked-in power source theme thing they have going. So I have to be a lightning mage. If I want to be a firemage that approached something resembling viability, most people would tell you instead to go magicka DK instead. But then you're stuck with a whole heap of martial, melee-ranged mechanics and akaviri dragon flavour whether you want it or not. It doesn't really handle the classic firemage archetype at all unless you want to ignore much of the class toolkit, and then, what's the point of classes at all?

Its even worse if you want to play an ice mage. You have two choices - either go sorcerer, which has some of the "magey" stuff baked in and rely on the frost staff which the developers have decided is a tool for tanking which resulted for a long time in anyone naive enough to think they could do this would earn the rage of every pug when they unknowingly continuously stole taunt and wondered why their dps was bad. Or - the Warden class; but again, if you want a basic ice mage concept, you really have to ignore much of bizzare hodge-podge of concepts that were inexpliccably lumped in with the ice-nature-vvardenfell animals thing that it is. You're either a frost mage who fires pterodactyls at your enemies and mushrooms at your friends while a floating jellyfish pisses blue whatever at the back of your head, or you ignore two thirds of the class's baked in functionality and get laughed out of any group content ever.

How do you make a classic martial, melee warrior type - say an Orc Berserker, a Nord Barbarian, or a Redguard Swordmaster each of which eschews and hates all magic? Stamblade, Stamsorc or Stamdk get you as close as you could get, but again you really have to ignore most of the baked-in, ecclectic power identity of those classes.

The weapon system was supposed to handle a lot of the diversity, and speaking to the core trinity-mmo philosophy, were the tools that would allow any class to take on any of the 3 roles. Early on, though, certain classes did certain things better, even with their prescribed weapons, and there was a push to even the board by putting in more possibilities for role functionality into each class - and as they continue to do this, the class concept is being stretched in really conceptually silly ways that don't have anything to do with the Elder Scrolls system - stamina sorcerers use what's essentially become "green magicka" to fuel personal hurricanes and sorc tanks somehow empower their shields not with their strength in magic, but with their health without ever the risk of *** prolapse. Stamina healers are growing in popularity in PvP, to the point where they are crucial for optimised ballgroups, and the demand for stam healers in pve is being recognised and starting to be developed for. But, conceptually, wtaf even is stamina healing meant to be? How am I literally healing my allies wounds with the power of my metabolism? How is that anything like a core archetype from The Elder Scrolls?

Its fun to stuff around with mechanics and make mechanically-interesting builds, and I wont ever begrudge anyone their stam healers and stamsorcs or whatever but from the elder-scrollsey mythology side of things they are conceptually borked. Last year before all the performace stuff hit the headlines, ZOS talked about revisiting the concepts of power fantasy and promised they were in the process of an audit in this department. So they've recognised on some level that its kinda weird, but we haven't heard anything since, and the way the combat team keep pushing things into territory so conceptually abstract, but really struggle with making any of it make sense within the millieu, its hard to know if its still on the agenda at all.

Personally, I think that the class system was a mistake. The baked-in elemental themes were restrictive of creativity, were kind of alien, and didn't much resemble anything elder-scrollsey anyway. I think you could have gotten much more freedom of build without classes, and having powers and capabilities tied to weapons and guild skill lines. In such a system you can still have a dragonknight if you join the akaviiri academy and learn their skill line, but you're not locked into all the other stuff.

Just my 2c. You've gotta ask yourself. Do you feel like a character from the TES universe? Can you easily build the signature character concepts in ESO? If the system does not recognise them or can't handle them, its not doing a great job in this part of the game.

Thanks for writing all this so I didn't have to.

Mythreindeer

Is it really possible to continually expand content in an MMO over 5+ years and strictly maintain adherence to underlying lore? Particularly given expectations of content type by players today. I doubt it.

RupzSkooma

Nah, I am Warden because after talking with a lot of people I realised I rather talk to bear.

opaj

Mythreindeer wrote: »

Is it really possible to continually expand content in an MMO over 5+ years and strictly maintain adherence to underlying lore? Particularly given expectations of content type by players today. I doubt it.

Sure, but 2 of the 4 classes at launch didn't have a precedent as Elder Scrolls classes. Not that I'm against adding new lore--far from it!--but one of the tentpole philosophies of the Elder Scrolls franchise is the ability to make your own character. I'd argue that the class archetypes as implemented run contrary to that philosophy.

I mean, the ability to mix and match weapons, armor, and whatnot is fantastic, and I do enjoy the various class abilities. But if I could mix and match different class skill lines to make the character I really want? That'd be something else.

Supreme_Atromancer

Mythreindeer wrote: »

Is it really possible to continually expand content in an MMO over 5+ years and strictly maintain adherence to underlying lore? Particularly given expectations of content type by players today. I doubt it.

None of the ways the class system has developed over the last 7 years has been for exhaustion of underlying lore: the class system never felt very Elder-Scrollsey, and has only gotten worse. Its not a matter of running out of lore or inspiration, its missing that lore entirely in the first place.

Given that its the franchise and underlying lore that launched the game to success, and is still the major pull, I'd say ZOS has a big mandate to get it right. Be it at launch, today, or in 5 years' time. I'm not saying they have no freedom to create, but making it "an Elder Scrolls game" - which is still a big priority for ZOS - has certain innate qualities most Elder Scrolls fans would agree are pretty important to adhere to. None of those qualities should really ever be at risk of compromising long-term development.