Tessitura wrote: »

Okay so you say that not a majority of people choose vamp for that one passive, but for a long time it's been understood by the greater community that the passive was what held up the vamp skill line, and Alcast doesn't tend to suggest vamp or ww cause they tend to build introductory builds and not highend builds. Their build are templates for people to start with so they have some basic knowledge on what their class can do. And Zos agree's they believed that people had only been picking vampire for that passive too, they said as much, and wanted to take it away to create more build diversity. Believe it or not you did not need that passive sustain, it just helped. I think it's a good move to remove it.

Now, for why vampire should have a downside... Same reason you think it should not and you think it will hurt you or your build...Because what about those who don't want to be a vampire? If it''s good for all builds, then all builds will use it, there won't be any none vamps with there is no trade off, it would just be one of those must have skill lines, which feels bad for the greater feel of the world, and makes people that would rather not be a vampire choose vampire. Only the "Elite" mortals would stay mortal as you put it. Not to mentions in every fantasy Vampires had huge trade offs for being vampires. Usually its that the dun just out right kills them, or something like they can't enter a building without being invited, *** they just can't do for a mmo cause, how could they? So instead they are opting for some D&D style weaknesses. Less health recovery, weakness to elements, fire in this case, (Always a good choice for undead. ) cost increase to none natural abilities, which is the most arguable trade off since that can really give someone pause, which is why they did it, and they give vamps a tool that might make it worth it... All that sweet spell damage.

Now, you play a healer correct, and think these cost increase will ruin you gameplay? I understand, higher cost means less outgoing healing per second... But, I don't think this will ruin healers, in fact I think it will make healing far more interesting and I have a huge desire to build a vampire healer now. Why you ask? Because of the aforementioned spell damage, HOT healing might be huge with the way vamps will be working now. Sure cost more, but you throw out these hots and let your health tick down for the spell damage, then burst heal the group when needs, throw up the hots and tick down again. Not to mention you can weave a few mist forms into your rotation to maintain your own health and increase your spell damage even further. The super high heals will make the cost increase more worth it and you don't not even have to be stage four for this to work, so the punishment won't be as harsh, just sit at stage two.

You say this takes away from the fun of others, and takes functionality away from them, you say this from the perspective of a victim, a victim of change you don't want. But I am telling you, this adds a whole new way to play the game to ESO. A lot of us like this, we can't wait to test, and think its going to be a lot of fun, why is your fun worth more then theirs? Why is your immersion worth more then theirs? I know you feel cheated here, but you have only seen the idea on paper, not in practice, just wait, and test some things out before you get too upset. What looks bad on paper sometimes is great in practice. This new play style it will bring to the game might not suit you true, but I know a lot of people it will suit.

• I am not saying that I know, for certain, that a majority of people did NOT choose the skill line for one passive. I am saying that we don't have those metrics (not even ZOS, because they don't know why people have specced into a skill line unless they poll each individual person... everything else is anecdotal and potentially flawed extrapolation) so raising that point as justification for the change when folks are voicing concerns is just misdirection and not addressing the feedback. We DO know that statements asserting that SR is the ONLY reason people chose to be vampires are incorrect, because it's clear the community is actively using other vampire abilities.
• I'm also saying that even if people were becoming vampires only for one passive, I am just not sure why there is so much judgment of this. It happens all the time, in many skill lines, so people saying that this "should not be done" specifically for vampire is a bit hypocritical and close-minded.
• I want to be clear that I am not saying other people's fun should be ruined. In fact if you look through my posts you'll find that usually what I try to advocate for is BOTH sides. Which means I'm usually pointing out things that are glossed over and overlooked. I really liked the idea raised on these forums that a new line for vampire should have been introduced in Greymoor. My issue these days is that ZOS is making broad, sweeping changes without considering all angles. My theme is collateral damage. I'm super glad some folks think that the new vampire stuff looks cool. I am sure I'll even check it out. My issue is why do new things, lately, always seem to have to come at a loss to others? Why not go the extra strep and provide new content that is brand new and doesn't ruin other stuff? Another great example of this is how BG's were changed to be solo ONLY. I suspect it wouldn't have been that much effort to make a group queue at the same time, and I am glad some folks find the solo experience to be better. But why did it have to come at the expense of people who enjoyed queuing with their friends?
  
  Anyway, don't assume that I am against all of the changes or new stuff. I am pretty sure I didn't say that. I am just pointing out what was overlooked and potentially problematic in the design, and pushing back when naysayers are invalidating decent feedback with fake data such as "everyone did this" when it's not the case.
• Vampire has a downside, today, so I'm not arguing that it shouldn't have one at all. I'm just pointing out that insisting there must be extreme drawbacks so that it is be a niche play style for a specific purpose is a bit elitist.
• I think you're trotting out two different sides of an argument to make your case which is a bit contradictory. To say that the recovery isn't needed but was just helpful, and then immediately saying that there are lots of people who were vampires to get the passive when they didn't want to be... it's one or the other. Either it's not required, in which case the argument to all of those folks who "had to be vampire" is... they didn't have to be (and this problem didn't need to be "fixed"). OR, if it is important for some builds, stop trying to say it isn't and instead advocate for this passive to be placed in another tree somewhere, so builds that enjoyed the helpfulness won't be decimated, instead of trying to downplay its usefulness in order to sell the idea that it's good it has gone out of the vampire skill line.
• Either way, while I know that I can be a good healer without it, I do think the loss of Supernatural Recovery IN CONJUNCTION WITH the loss of Heavy Attack resource recovery will be a very bad experience for healing/support roles, and I think that these changes were planned together, with DPS in mind, without considering healing. This is why I care about raising this issue up and getting a spotlight on the discussion.
• Lastly, I think the vampire healer you describe could be fun but not sure it will be viable in all cases. Like you said, we'll have to see how it plays out. Healers are expected to purge, ele drain, provide Orbs for synergy, etc. Lots of spell damage won't help at all if sustain is too much of a problem and, since I don't think a lot of those items are in the toolkit of a vampire, the trade-off for non-vampire skills may not work well. There's a reason the Sanctuary set isn't favored... it's because pure raw healing isn't the best measure of a healer. So I'm not worried so much about outgoing healing per second as managing the cost of all the different abilities we should have on our bars to be effective. Again, especially (sorry to be repetitive), without heavy attacks to fall back on.

D0PAMINE wrote: »

[
The main issue is that the Vampire skill line fit a niche player base while the passives were useful to pretty much all builds. Im excited that vampire is getting love with a rework, but it's annoying that playing as one can gimp you even if you want to actually be a vampire and use the skills on whatever role you play without being a hinderance to your group. It's the drastic changes zos makes so late into the game that it throws people off.

Yes, people simply chose vampire for 10% recovery bonus because of sustain issues. The main skills were neglected and the passives were useful for so long, then it suddenly changed and now people are being bashed and criticized because they enjoyed a core part of Vampirism that was useful and very much intigrated and untouched.

Im fine with it being a gift/curse, but im annoyed that it's yet another drastic change that could result in the majority of players cureing it because hit them so hard.

ShadowHvo wrote: »

Anyone here who actually believes that the 20% increased ability cost is reasonable are frankly delusional.

There is nowhere in TES lore or game mechanics where the vampire has ever been penalized like this. It is completely and utterly nonsensical to the fantasy of the vampire.

A vampire isn't a class. It isn't a job or some sort of tool-set. It is a state of being. It's like punishing a Bosmer with -20% magicka ability cost, or a Breton with a -20% Stamina ability cost. Vampires are people who use the toolsets of other classes, and so it has always been.

I think a far better and more reasonable downside would be something akin to "-5%/-10%/-15%/-20% Healing From non-vampire abilities OR Healing from others" as that is far more fitting penalty to an undead monstrosity. That makes the vampire rely more on self-heals via Drain and Feeding.

Icky wrote: »

Deathlord92 wrote: »

Vampire magblade sounds really cool if I’m being honest 🙂

Yeah if you don't like using NB skills.

Varana wrote: »

Why is everyone assuming they will constantly stay at stage 4?
As far as we know, you have to specifically bring yourself up the stages, you don't just automatically "level" up just by passing time.

Chrlynsch wrote: »

If you are a full on Monstrous Vampire, feeding on the lifeblood of mortals, moving efficiently through the shadows, evaporating into mist, going into bloodrage, siphoning life force from your enemies, it is completely understandable that you have lost some of your mortality and doing things that used to be second nature to you (Mortal Abilities s) have become harder for you to perform, because your mortality is slipping away from you.