ManM wrote: »

The ESO vampire, at stage 4, is meant to replicate a bloodfiend, not the powerful edgelord everyone wants. A bloodfiend. That's the trash mob that runs at you to slap you in overland content, which you herd into packs because it's a waste of a rotation to just kill one at a time. That's the design paradigm.

A bloodfiend doesn't have extra resource regen. Why would they need it? Blood is everything to them. That's what they need. A bloodfiend doesn't block, or weave rotations, or anything like that. They just desperately charge you and claw at you. When scared, they run away and hide. This is the Zenimax design philosophy for what a stage 4 player vampire is to be.

Does a bloodfiend heal others? No, they don't care. Does a bloodfiend lead others into battle and take a beating? Of course not. A bloodfiend is a selfish, single-minded creature, desperately needing blood (no regen on their own), and only concerned for their own self preservation. They take what they can, and if someone turns on them to hurt them, they run away and hide.

As a vampire, you don't get stronger or more effective by drinking blood... Instead, you become more of a bloodfiend. These proposed changes don't match Zenimax's core design principle for vampires, and I suspect that's why they have been ignoring such things in the PTS forum.

You're very right but there is something bloodfiends have that we don't..... a gap closer. Bloodfiend NPCs are better bloodfiends!!!

TropicsDelight wrote: »

The vampire skills may need tweaks so that playing an actual vampire is a truly viable and effective way to play the game. It does not have to be META but it should not be a complete handicap either.

NEVER should they work to make vampires a background passive effect. The changes in Greymore may need tweaks and balancing and the sooner they stop placating the enraged masses who used vampire solely for the passive regen they can actually focus on making the vampire work for people that actually want to be a vampire and use those skills.

They should be both passive and active the reason is lorewise they are like like that.
They are known for their passives and abilties. Yes it does need to be an active play style but the passives should be decent as well. There should be a reason to use both the abilties and passives.

TropicsDelight wrote: »

Thevampirenight wrote: »

They should be both passive and active the reason is lorewise they are like like that.
They are known for their passives and abilties. Yes it does need to be an active play style but the passives should be decent as well. There should be a reason to use both the abilties and passives.

Sure, but the passives in the vampire tree should make you a better vampire. They do not need to make you a better sorc, or necro, or DK, ect... Almost all of the specific skill and passive sections of niche guilds and groups in ESO focus the passives on powering up that tree. There are few passives in the Dark Brotherhood, Mage Guild, or Fighters guild, ect.. that are not focused on powering up those specific skill trees.

People are losing it because they got really spoiled by vampires actually having huge passive buffs that had nothing to do with the actual vampire skill tree. A passive in the vampire tree can make you tank better WHEN using X vampire skill. A vampire passive can up your DPS by upping the damage of actual vampire skills, they can make you a better healer by making healing being dished out to your group by a vampire skill being increased. That is how the passives should work, they should buff the vampire skills.

Clearly you have not played with vampirism in Morrowind and Oblivion.
The passives in both games made you a better sorcerer, a Better mage, a better fighter. They augmented Class skills. Skyrim Vampires augmented Illusion. So the way you say they shouldn't is kinda ironic because they should augment class. Because that is what Vampirism is shown to do in Elder Scrolls.

The thing is true the passives should benefit the vampire play style, but both passives and abilties should benefit your class builds as well. Hence why I think they should keep the regen in. However they can still keep it out but they should give it back in some other way. Maybe Fighters guild and mages guild or they place it in Thieves and Dark Brotherhood. So they could do something like that. So one of the Dark Brotherhood passives would grant you 5/10 Magicka Recovery and then one of the passives in thieves guild 5/10 Stamina recovery. It would likely get more people to do the content for it and since Dark Brotherhood and Thieves guild are Passive only Skill lines it would help give something for pvp and pve outside of doing Dark Brotherhood and Thieves guild activities.

ManM wrote: »

The ESO vampire, at stage 4, is meant to replicate a bloodfiend, not the powerful edgelord everyone wants. A bloodfiend. That's the trash mob that runs at you to slap you in overland content, which you herd into packs because it's a waste of a rotation to just kill one at a time. That's the design paradigm.

A bloodfiend doesn't have extra resource regen. Why would they need it? Blood is everything to them. That's what they need. A bloodfiend doesn't block, or weave rotations, or anything like that. They just desperately charge you and claw at you. When scared, they run away and hide. This is the Zenimax design philosophy for what a stage 4 player vampire is to be.

Does a bloodfiend heal others? No, they don't care. Does a bloodfiend lead others into battle and take a beating? Of course not. A bloodfiend is a selfish, single-minded creature, desperately needing blood (no regen on their own), and only concerned for their own self preservation. They take what they can, and if someone turns on them to hurt them, they run away and hide.

As a vampire, you don't get stronger or more effective by drinking blood... Instead, you become more of a bloodfiend. These proposed changes don't match Zenimax's core design principle for vampires, and I suspect that's why they have been ignoring such things in the PTS forum.

No it doesn't. Nothing about the quest you get even suggests that. Nothing about how NPCs talk to you, or the player being who they are even suggests this. Blood fiends aren't even looked upon as vampires. You just pulled this out your backside just because.

Thevampirenight wrote: »

ManM wrote: »

The ESO vampire, at stage 4, is meant to replicate a bloodfiend, not the powerful edgelord everyone wants. A bloodfiend. That's the trash mob that runs at you to slap you in overland content, which you herd into packs because it's a waste of a rotation to just kill one at a time. That's the design paradigm.

A bloodfiend doesn't have extra resource regen. Why would they need it? Blood is everything to them. That's what they need. A bloodfiend doesn't block, or weave rotations, or anything like that. They just desperately charge you and claw at you. When scared, they run away and hide. This is the Zenimax design philosophy for what a stage 4 player vampire is to be.

Does a bloodfiend heal others? No, they don't care. Does a bloodfiend lead others into battle and take a beating? Of course not. A bloodfiend is a selfish, single-minded creature, desperately needing blood (no regen on their own), and only concerned for their own self preservation. They take what they can, and if someone turns on them to hurt them, they run away and hide.

As a vampire, you don't get stronger or more effective by drinking blood... Instead, you become more of a bloodfiend. These proposed changes don't match Zenimax's core design principle for vampires, and I suspect that's why they have been ignoring such things in the PTS forum.

Well Blood Fiends at least the ones I've seen seem to be more of a vampiric zombie, or even a Ghoul. Vampirism requires you to be alive for the transition to take hold. Blood Fiends are reanimated undead after being killed by a blood fiend and transforming into a zombie like blood drinking creature after. The only ones lucky enough to become Vampires in the Rivenspire Storyline are those that didn't die from a Blood Fiend but got infected by them.

A Bloodfiend is just a Vampire whose need for blood has become so great that it has lost it's rational mind, whether this comes from starvation or addiction it is all the same, the other poster is right, at stage 4 your basically feral.

ManM wrote: »

They tried to make a playstyle based on the concept of a vampire losing their former selves (significantly increased resource costs), and becoming extremely fragile (but more dangerous as they grow more desperate for health) melee combatants. The reward for drinking blood (you know, which the NPC text makes you think is something that makes you strong) is actually the ability to run away and hide. Nothing about that feels strong. The whole pattern actually mirrors the lore around a bloodfiend, who lose themselves entirely and become similar to a feral creature.

A lot of people on PTS wondered why there was any skill cost increase at all, because that makes zero sense in the actual Elder Scrolls vampire lore. But in the context of the lore around a bloodfiend, it makes perfect sense.

Its there purely as a game mechanic, they were thinking of other detriments they could fit into the game that were notable but manageable. For example, they could not include sun damage because we cant control the day/night cycle, and would be completely locked out of our characters during 75% of the game day (unless we just holed up in a house and assume that instanced content doesnt count}. They could have turned off/reduced our stamina/magicka regen like skyrim did, but that would cause an even larger outrage in the community (imagine only regening 400~500 resources every 2 seconds in this combat system...yeah.) They could have made us unable to be in towns at stage 4, which they kind of did, banks and merchants wont talk to you, but I feel like if they went full force there would again be major backlash.

Overall, it is a lore breaking system, but its one of the few things that does work as intended. Some other ideas thrown around is reduced incoming healing (which is mixed in itself due to Frenzy and battle Spirit existing) and a further increased fire damage.

Their "View" of the Vampire is a creature who is stealthy and dangerous, their forms of blood magic seem to take inspiration from games like Secret World, where Blood Magic drained your health in return for damage, except well, there was ways to get it back in that same skill line, as well as ways to heal others, but Im not an ESO dev :shrug:

Its flawed, and does go against what we know, but its what their "Vision" is. In terms of OPs actual post, I like some of the ideas, personally however, alot of the stuff about stamina/magicka morphs and the blood frenzy stuff is convoluted.

Mist form does not need a stamina morph, stamina players can dip into this perfectly fine as it is on the PTS, and actually benefits them as they arent dipping into another resource. Power of Blood in your idea seems really complicated, using a synergy to toggle off the gapcloser can get really messy fast (especially with their new synergy tiers in PTS) I say just do away with the whole toggle part, make it costs less, and make it have the gapcloser only. The ideas of your Blood Frenzy replacements seem fine except for the stamina morph (Stalagmites? what is this a rehash of Necro summoning tomb stones? we arent geomancers) I would say make it shadow magic themed to fit the tone of a Vampire.

if zos would actually put some effort in vamp and werewolf, they could have easily done several different vampire families for different playstyles instead of just one skill line where they tried to shoehorn everything they could think of into one thing.
same goes for werewolf.

Why should it be viable for every playstyle? Werewolf isn't viable for every playstyle either.
I think having them work for a specific one is the correct approach. They could widen the range of viability a bit maybe, but not to all of it.

mairwen85 wrote: »

I don't agree they should be 'viable for every kind of build'; vampirism should be a choice, a meaningful choice with benefit and sacrifice, and you should be required to invest in it to be effective. Whether the greymoor implementation achieves that is yet to be seen, but it certainly looks and feels like a discerned effort to make it so.

Yeah, I'm not 100% happy with Greymoor implementation but I'm glad that they're moving away from "be a vamp, it's free stat bonus". If vamp would be viable for every playstyle, there would be no incentive to stay mortal, simply because ESO removed the main drawback of vampirism, sun damage.
I will certainly cure most of my characters, but I don't see it as a problem. At least the remaining vamps will have some abilities to play with and not just 10% recovery.

Thevampirenight wrote: »

LadyNalcarya wrote: »

mairwen85 wrote: »

I don't agree they should be 'viable for every kind of build'; vampirism should be a choice, a meaningful choice with benefit and sacrifice, and you should be required to invest in it to be effective. Whether the greymoor implementation achieves that is yet to be seen, but it certainly looks and feels like a discerned effort to make it so.

Yeah, I'm not 100% happy with Greymoor implementation but I'm glad that they're moving away from "be a vamp, it's free stat bonus". If vamp would be viable for every playstyle, there would be no incentive to stay mortal, simply because ESO removed the main drawback of vampirism, sun damage.
I will certainly cure most of my characters, but I don't see it as a problem. At least the remaining vamps will have some abilities to play with and not just 10% recovery.

Well if they need to do another Draw back though its not been a thing since Daggerfall they could add in some holy weakness such as when going near a shrine to one of the divines that isn't a way shrine.
So go near a Shrine of Mara start taking damage go to other such shrines and take damage.
I mean its something that could supplement as a weakness.
But I do like it they can interact with temples and such but they could remove that option so we have to stay away from the Shrines of the Eight.

And how often do you visit temples of the Eight? Even if you need to respec, there's a perfectly fine shrine to Sotha Sil in Vvardefell.

LadyNalcarya wrote: »

Thevampirenight wrote: »

LadyNalcarya wrote: »

mairwen85 wrote: »

I don't agree they should be 'viable for every kind of build'; vampirism should be a choice, a meaningful choice with benefit and sacrifice, and you should be required to invest in it to be effective. Whether the greymoor implementation achieves that is yet to be seen, but it certainly looks and feels like a discerned effort to make it so.

Yeah, I'm not 100% happy with Greymoor implementation but I'm glad that they're moving away from "be a vamp, it's free stat bonus". If vamp would be viable for every playstyle, there would be no incentive to stay mortal, simply because ESO removed the main drawback of vampirism, sun damage.
I will certainly cure most of my characters, but I don't see it as a problem. At least the remaining vamps will have some abilities to play with and not just 10% recovery.

Well if they need to do another Draw back though its not been a thing since Daggerfall they could add in some holy weakness such as when going near a shrine to one of the divines that isn't a way shrine.
So go near a Shrine of Mara start taking damage go to other such shrines and take damage.
I mean its something that could supplement as a weakness.
But I do like it they can interact with temples and such but they could remove that option so we have to stay away from the Shrines of the Eight.

And how often do you visit temples of the Eight? Even if you need to respec, there's a perfectly fine shrine to Sotha Sil in Vvardefell.

They can make it so Shrines of the Three Tribunes do the same thing. Also they can add it in certain areas of the game even in dungeons and of course many of the chapels in the cities even those that don''t have a respect shrine or any useful shrine.

XomRhoK wrote: »

craybest wrote: »

Why should it be viable for every playstyle? Werewolf isn't viable for every playstyle either.
I think having them work for a specific one is the correct approach. They could widen the range of viability a bit maybe, but not to all of it.

mairwen85 wrote: »

I don't agree they should be 'viable for every kind of build'; vampirism should be a choice, a meaningful choice with benefit and sacrifice, and you should be required to invest in it to be effective. Whether the greymoor implementation achieves that is yet to be seen, but it certainly looks and feels like a discerned effort to make it so.

LadyNalcarya wrote: »

mairwen85 wrote: »

I don't agree they should be 'viable for every kind of build'; vampirism should be a choice, a meaningful choice with benefit and sacrifice, and you should be required to invest in it to be effective. Whether the greymoor implementation achieves that is yet to be seen, but it certainly looks and feels like a discerned effort to make it so.

Yeah, I'm not 100% happy with Greymoor implementation but I'm glad that they're moving away from "be a vamp, it's free stat bonus". If vamp would be viable for every playstyle, there would be no incentive to stay mortal, simply because ESO removed the main drawback of vampirism, sun damage.
I will certainly cure most of my characters, but I don't see it as a problem. At least the remaining vamps will have some abilities to play with and not just 10% recovery.

It's hard to imagine werewolf who uses magic or werewolf who act like a tank, but it's easy to imagine an agile vampire with a sword, a vampire wearing plate armor, a vampire using magic.
Viable for every playstyle and build doesn't mean making every build overpowered, it's meant give opportunity to every role to implement vampire skills, make use of them and make this build feel more vampiric. If something is overpowered it's a problem of balance or bad design of the skill in its core.

You don't need to imagine a werewolf that uses magic, Vykosa or Sister Balra of Icereach coven are some examples.
And well, the problem is that if something gives extra power with no significant drawbacks, everyone would use it. Even if it's a small bonus, like current 10% recovery. I'm not saying that Greymoor vampires are perfect, but there is some stuff that can be utilized by various builds. The most obvious build would be magicka-based, but you can be a stam vampire archer that uses Titanborn set together with vamp buff and turns invisible when it's time to run away. Just an example.

XomRhoK wrote: »

craybest wrote: »

Why should it be viable for every playstyle? Werewolf isn't viable for every playstyle either.
I think having them work for a specific one is the correct approach. They could widen the range of viability a bit maybe, but not to all of it.

mairwen85 wrote: »

I don't agree they should be 'viable for every kind of build'; vampirism should be a choice, a meaningful choice with benefit and sacrifice, and you should be required to invest in it to be effective. Whether the greymoor implementation achieves that is yet to be seen, but it certainly looks and feels like a discerned effort to make it so.

LadyNalcarya wrote: »

mairwen85 wrote: »

I don't agree they should be 'viable for every kind of build'; vampirism should be a choice, a meaningful choice with benefit and sacrifice, and you should be required to invest in it to be effective. Whether the greymoor implementation achieves that is yet to be seen, but it certainly looks and feels like a discerned effort to make it so.

Yeah, I'm not 100% happy with Greymoor implementation but I'm glad that they're moving away from "be a vamp, it's free stat bonus". If vamp would be viable for every playstyle, there would be no incentive to stay mortal, simply because ESO removed the main drawback of vampirism, sun damage.
I will certainly cure most of my characters, but I don't see it as a problem. At least the remaining vamps will have some abilities to play with and not just 10% recovery.

It's hard to imagine werewolf who uses magic or werewolf who act like a tank, but it's easy to imagine an agile vampire with a sword, a vampire wearing plate armor, a vampire using magic.
Viable for every playstyle and build doesn't mean making every build overpowered, it's meant give opportunity to every role to implement vampire skills, make use of them and make this build feel more vampiric. If something is overpowered it's a problem of balance or bad design of the skill in its core.

Actually, it's pretty easy to imagine a werewolf doing all of that, because when they're not transformed, they can be any of that, it's only after the transformation that things change. Vampirism isn't a form of lycanthropy.

Thevampirenight wrote: »

Vampiric Drain Stage 1 and above
Mist Form Stage 2 and above
Eviscerate stage 3, and above.
Hypnotic Gaze Stage 4 only unless stage five in Blood Scion Form.

Issue with this list is ZOS fully intends Eviscerate to become the new "Vampire Drain". Reason all vampiric drain experience goes to it instead of vampiric drain as you'd expect it to, but it'd be nice to have both skills active at stage 1. Also in Oblivion and Skyrim the vampire seduction spell was a stage 2 active ability so for the sake of consistency should take the #2 spot, mistform should take the #3 spot, and Blood Frenzy takes #4 since its the most bestial and rabid.

Thevampirenight wrote: »

Vevvev wrote: »

Thevampirenight wrote: »

Vampiric Drain Stage 1 and above
Mist Form Stage 2 and above
Eviscerate stage 3, and above.
Hypnotic Gaze Stage 4 only unless stage five in Blood Scion Form.

Issue with this list is ZOS fully intends Eviscerate to become the new "Vampire Drain". Reason all vampiric drain experience goes to it instead of vampiric drain as you'd expect it to, but it'd be nice to have both skills active at stage 1. Also in Oblivion and Skyrim the vampire seduction spell was a stage 2 active ability so for the sake of consistency should take the #2 spot, mistform should take the #3 spot, and Blood Frenzy takes #4 since its the most bestial and rabid.

I edited it around a bit making it stage four for Eviscerate. The idea of a very viable vampire for builds and stuff. Some players not liking my idea for vampirism seem to not like it because of this ability being mandatory or something some people chase meta way to much . If its the case then you should have to be at full vampiric power to use it fully in humanoid form or be in Blood Scion form. If its that good then it should require a higher draw back in order to use. Vampirism should be powerful but it should have trade offs that requires you to build with it and I do agree with players on that. But there does need to be viability for any Builds out there too.

The one thing I do agree with in the various posts is that there has to be a good enough draw back so everyone doesn't go for being a vampire like they do live but not everyone would drop it either and would actually play with the new vampirsm. So there has to be a balancing act.

Why does there need to be viability for any builds?

I can play the DB storyline on any character I choose. I can invest in the skill line, and have a good time with it. But, if I want to squeeze every bit of value out of it, NB is the best choice, as far as I'm concerned, because I can use Cloak to disappear, and escape if I have to, or use it to get position on an NPC for using the Blade of Woe. Is it mandatory? No, but it is ideal.