To help clarify things, the for the third option we would have a higher crit/damage ceiling than before. Minor brutality would also give spell damage and Minor sorcery would give weapon damage.

This gives optimized groups more overall damage than before but I prefer this option myself as it would keep the incentive to bring one of each of the base classes while making their unique passives not redundant in smallscale/solo play.

Any love for the original classes would be nice, they made comments about doing a passive audit after they were done with skills in 2019.. Still waiting on all of ZOS's promises to be fulfilled.. Guess we can enjoy theorycrafting for now -_-

It always made no sense that SORCERER's didn't have the minor SORCERY buff.. Kinda odd don't you think? Why do Templars provide that? Who thought that was a good idea at ZOS? I feel like that would of been a no brainer for any game developer.

These minor buffs are basically a relic of how the original classes were designed, when the classes fit more into the specific fantasy roles of traditional mmorpgs. Stam DK and Stam NB had pretty solid stamina morphs from the beginning and fit melee playstyles well thus the obvious choice to give them Weapon Minor buffs. Sorc and Templar were very much spell focussed, stam templars use to be by far the most uninteresting stamina class in the game leaning heavily on magicka healing and damage. Stam sorcs still have issues today with only recently getting bound armaments, but we had that slotted anyway, so our skill bars look the same. Only made sense for those 2 classes to get the Spell focussed minor buffs.

Now that ZOS has shown interest in supporting hybrids more often by adding Major Brutality and Sorcery to base class skills and adding many sets like Stuhn's and New Moon that include double stats, why not buff these minor buffs to be inclusive of both sides of the coin.

What could they change? Maybe:

Sorc: Spell/Weapon Crit Chance

• Only class with 2 skills that are directly influenced by having higher crit chance, Crit Surge and Power Surge. Imo the interaction between these skills and the minor buff is more thematically important than Templar/Warden's 10% crit damage passive that has no real specific synergy with their kits.

NB: Spell/Weapon Crit Damage

• Only class with higher base crit chance, serves them well to have higher crit dmg to pair with it. They can also guarantee crits via cloak so crit damage trumps crit chance in terms of the classes design.

Templar: Sustain related, maybe -5% health/stamina/magicka cost or +10% stam/hp/mag regen.

• This is the harder choice.. I originally thought Crit Healing would fit them thematically, but it's not very strong for a trial group which is half the reason for these class specifc minor buffs, to promote the idea of making diverse groups and securing spots for different classes. Sustain however is unanimously beneficial, whether your a tank, healer or dd, that sustain can be turned into dps by allowing you to avoid regular sustain investments for damage investments instead. It largely depends on the meta at hand, a sustain passive in an easy to sustain meta would kinda of hurt their unique buff, this is the same argument that I've made in the past about High Elf VS Breton. A lot of people at the time complained that Breton would 100% be BiS but it mostly depends on if their sustain is even needed in the first place. A breton will never be able to get that extra Spell Damage, but a High Elf can invest more into sustain if needed...
• Maybe ULT gen could be cool instead.

DK: Weapon/Spell Damage.

• DK's still seem like the class most thematically attached to brute force and standing their own ground. Raw damage highlights that.

Thats my take, I'd rather see unique minor buffs that ACTUALLY fit how the classes play, instead of your poll option 3 which just duplicates (and nerfs probably) what we already have. Lets be real, ZOS can think outside the box here. Duplicating the buffs is the lame route imo.

MashmalloMan wrote: »

Any love for the original classes would be nice, they made comments about doing a passive audit after they were done with skills in 2019.. Still waiting on all of ZOS's promises to be fulfilled.. Guess we can enjoy theorycrafting for now -_-

It always made no sense that SORCERER's didn't have the minor SORCERY buff.. Kinda odd don't you think? Why do Templars provide that? Who thought that was a good idea at ZOS? I feel like that would of been a no brainer for any game developer.

These minor buffs are basically a relic of how the original classes were designed, when the classes fit more into the specific fantasy roles of traditional mmorpgs. Stam DK and Stam NB had pretty solid stamina morphs from the beginning and fit melee playstyles well thus the obvious choice to give them Weapon Minor buffs. Sorc and Templar were very much spell focussed, stam templars use to be by far the most uninteresting stamina class in the game leaning heavily on magicka healing and damage. Stam sorcs still have issues today with only recently getting bound armaments, but we had that slotted anyway, so our skill bars look the same. Only made sense for those 2 classes to get the Spell focussed minor buffs.

Now that ZOS has shown interest in supporting hybrids more often by adding Major Brutality and Sorcery to base class skills and adding many sets like Stuhn's and New Moon that include double stats, why not buff these minor buffs to be inclusive of both sides of the coin.

What could they change? Maybe:

Sorc: Spell/Weapon Crit Chance

• Only class with 2 skills that are directly influenced by having higher crit chance, Crit Surge and Power Surge. Imo the interaction between these skills and the minor buff is more thematically important than Templar/Warden's 10% crit damage passive that has no real specific synergy with their kits.

NB: Spell/Weapon Crit Damage

• Only class with higher base crit chance, serves them well to have higher crit dmg to pair with it. They can also guarantee crits via cloak so crit damage trumps crit chance in terms of the classes design.

Templar: Sustain related, maybe -5% health/stamina/magicka cost or +10% stam/hp/mag regen.

• This is the harder choice.. I originally thought Crit Healing would fit them thematically, but it's not very strong for a trial group which is half the reason for these class specifc minor buffs, to promote the idea of making diverse groups and securing spots for different classes. Sustain however is unanimously beneficial, whether your a tank, healer or dd, that sustain can be turned into dps by allowing you to avoid regular sustain investments for damage investments instead. It largely depends on the meta at hand, a sustain passive in an easy to sustain meta would kinda of hurt their unique buff, this is the same argument that I've made in the past about High Elf VS Breton. A lot of people at the time complained that Breton would 100% be BiS but it mostly depends on if their sustain is even needed in the first place. A breton will never be able to get that extra Spell Damage, but a High Elf can invest more into sustain if needed...
• Maybe ULT gen could be cool instead.

DK: Weapon/Spell Damage.

• DK's still seem like the class most thematically attached to brute force and standing their own ground. Raw damage highlights that.

Thats my take, I'd rather see unique minor buffs that ACTUALLY fit how the classes play, instead of your poll option 3 which just duplicates (and nerfs probably) what we already have. Lets be real, ZOS can think outside the box here. Duplicating the buffs is the lame route imo.

I love this idea! It really accomplishes the same goal as I was thinking with making buffs that benefit both magicka and stamina. Awesome stuff!

I like it the way it is. It ensures that each class has a unique buff to provide the group, allowing for higher class diversity.