Ratzkifal wrote: »

<Snipped the quotes>

Okay, since you are not catching my drift, let me make it more obvious. This game, at its very core, is just a bunch of numbers running through a computer. The visuals and the story telling is just added on to give our brains something to translate those numbers into, and make them real. That's why there is a little dopamine hit when the big explosion happens if the number on the screen is large as well. Something that looks like a big explosion but deals pitiful damage isn't giving players the same satisfaction. So far so good, yes? In a similar vein, dealing incredible damage with an ability that looks quite harmless also feels weird, correct? So we can conclude from that that the flavor that's added from animations and the broader context of theme and lore are what turn boring numbers into fun gameplay.
So what happens if the master of the arcane arts now has to vomit poison everywhere because their main damage skills got nerfed?

Then I assume he is quite capable at casting the spell that does so? It's not like vomiting poison ISN'T an arcane art - unless it's alchemy or something.

Ratzkifal wrote: »

You are losing the identity of what you were playing, because you didn't set out to play the poison vomiting wizard, you set out to play a regular wizard. Remember, the identity is part of what makes all of this fun.

With you so far - I certainly couldn't see all of my characters vomiting poison, it's just not in their blood (lol). So it is a very fortunate thing ESO is giving me access to the entire gameplay repertoire to build to my theme, rather than shoehorning me into a class like this was some other universe.

Ratzkifal wrote: »

Maybe if ZOS redid classes from the ground up to be more compatible with mixing and matching this could work. This is what I would expect from an Elder Scrolls MMO launching with a feature like this. But we are 11 years too late for that change and ZOS won't be able to change all that in just 5 weeks either. So now we have the rugpull situation where ZOS told us for 11 years that we are playing this class and this class is about XYZ and now they come in and are taking our toys away because they changed their minds.

Actually I think it's because the architecture of the game was very difficult to shift into a modern, more flexible system; I can't imagine the accrued tech-debt and what they had to solve to make this possible. Plus, remember the pre-launch promises, ESO was supposed to launch with Spellcrafting, which hardly preserves class identity; and I think the reason it wasn't was either technical or balance related, not some dedication to "MMO-ness" that is vague and ill-defined.

Ratzkifal wrote: »

Does that make sense? Nobody is really concerned about the 170k dps parse, because that will get nerfed (although it might mess with all time score records and will make it so that difficult achievements don't reflect skill anymore if it sees the live server). What people are concerned about is that ZOS will stop caring about supporting playstyles that are struggling right now because "you can just slot a different skill line" will be their go to answer. They already gave nonpet Sorcs this answer in the patch notes. They already pretend that 90% of sets in this game don't exist. Before Elsweyr they pretended 80% of skills in the game didn't exist, and it looks like they want to return to that kind of attitude.

Do you actually have an example of a playstyle that is *hindered* rather than *helped* by this change? Like a genuine playstyle, not just "I want to keep playing my sorc the way I always have" (that's not a playstyle). I would equate playstyles to character themes, and I think this helps, rather than hurts, them.

Ratzkifal wrote: »

Why do I think the game should not be brought in line with the TES universe? Because there is no "in line". This is a multiplayer game and 11 years ago the developers decided to add classes to the game. If they regret their decision now they should get rid of classes completely. But they are not getting rid of them completely, they are adding multiclassing. How is that in line with the singleplayer games? In the singleplayer games you had access to all skills at the same time but multiclassing is still keeping artificial restrictions. If those restrictions serve a purpose, by strengthening identity - like some sort of class or something - then those restrictions become justified. But if there is no clear identity in there and it serves no balance purpose either (since 2 Necro 1 Sorc is allowed for Necros, it would be fine to allow for Sorcs), then these restrictions are pointless and bad.

ESO's sub/multiclassing system is very similar to Oblivion's levelling system, in which the core skills of the class ("Major Skills") level fastest (requiring only one skill point), while Minor Skills level more slowly and skills outside of your class level even more slowly (i.e. require more skill points, in ESO systems terminology). In Oblivion, this led to Bethesda-levels of game shenanigans, like your best skills actually being from OUTSIDE your class, in order to prevent you from leveling up and the world becoming to difficult just while going about your business.

Ratzkifal wrote: »

If ZOS would take this feature further and overhaul the entire combat system to make it truly classless, then I could respect the attempt. But they are not doing that and I don't think they are planning on doing that later down the line either. What they are doing breaks too much to be worth it and hurts a lot of people's enjoyment of the game in the process.

I feel like this paragraph is basically "they're going to break everything forever" and "people wont' enjoy it" - which just aren't convincing without evidence. There's only so many times the sky can fall.

.

Twohothardware wrote: »

Wereswan wrote: »

Twohothardware wrote: »

fizzybeef wrote: »

Dont bring this live. It is a massive mistake and will make people stop playing the game who kept it alive till here.

Nobody is going to quit playing ESO because they have access to more DPS on their character.

What about those of us whose characters get nerfed into the ground for the sake of this scheme?

What character is being nerfed into the ground?

Any character who chooses not to subclass.

Skills and passives got pretty well nerfed across the board, and especially those that everyone is salivating over putting on their godmode builds. This means that the players of those classes are losing power. How do they get it back? “Just subclass, bro!”

And if your character’s fantasy is “I want to be a pure Templar,” then your choice is to be underpowered or don’t play the way you want.

tomofhyrule wrote: »

.

Twohothardware wrote: »

Wereswan wrote: »

Twohothardware wrote: »

fizzybeef wrote: »

Dont bring this live. It is a massive mistake and will make people stop playing the game who kept it alive till here.

Nobody is going to quit playing ESO because they have access to more DPS on their character.

What about those of us whose characters get nerfed into the ground for the sake of this scheme?

What character is being nerfed into the ground?

Any character who chooses not to subclass.

Skills and passives got pretty well nerfed across the board, and especially those that everyone is salivating over putting on their godmode builds. This means that the players of those classes are losing power. How do they get it back? “Just subclass, bro!”

And if your character’s fantasy is “I want to be a pure Templar,” then your choice is to be underpowered or don’t play the way you want.

One of the fun parts about Templar and this scheme is the way our skill lines are split up:

Aedric Spear: The noteworthy one here would be Puncturing Strikes and its morphs (people are really keen to [ab]use Sweeps,) as well as Spear Shards and its morphs (Luminous Shards, in my case.)

Dawn's Wrath: Probably needs no introduction, but in addition to the infamous Radiant Destruction (or "Jesus beam" as some insist on calling it) and its morphs, also the home of several other useful skills including Sun Fire (I like the Reflective Light morph that multi-targets,) Solar Flare (Solar Barrage is great for wading into trash mobs with Jabs,) and Eclipse (specifically the Living Dark morph.)

Restoring Light: I make regular use of Channeled Focus (damage shield, resource recovery, healing,) Breath of Life (emergency heal,) and Ritual of Retribution (technically a DoT, but I slot it for the cleanse) because trusting PUGs to keep you alive is how you die.

Is it meta? Of course not, but right now I can at least manage to be about 10% of a PUG trial group's damage output.

ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »

Why do we care about class identity in an Elder Scrolls game?

PrinceShroob wrote: »

Because it's also a MMO.

ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »

Ah, yes, a perfect reply that absolutely logically explains your argument. I am now convinced!
(/s)

How is "it's an Elder Scrolls game" any better of an argument?

Tiath wrote: »

I'm not bothered about Subclassing as an idea.

I'm concerned about the massive and ongoing cycle of nerfs that's going to hit everyone because of the stupidly overpowered combinations it's going to allow.

This 1000% and for the people, and there are some who won't go hard with the subclassing, it will be worse for them. As soon as some PVPer starts crying about something being too op, that's it for PVE players. And it is going to happen. ZOS loves that nerf hammer.

ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »

MorganaLaVey wrote: »

ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »

Why do we care about class identity in an Elder Scrolls game?

PrinceShroob wrote: »

Because it's also a MMO.

ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »

Ah, yes, a perfect reply that absolutely logically explains your argument. I am now convinced!
(/s)

How is "it's an Elder Scrolls game" any better of an argument?

Because it's set in a consistent universe, and one of the consistencies (until ESO) is "most kinds of people can master most kinds of skills".
I would like to play a game set in the Elder Scrolls universe, and not, say, the Marvel Avengers universe or something new altogether.

Looks to me like you should have asked: "Why do I care about class identity in an Elder Scrolls game?"
Apparently you don't.

"Why do we care about class identity in an Elder Scrolls game?"
Because it's been in the game for all it`s 11 years and some people like it for their own personal reasons and we shouldn't just take it away from them. TES game or not.

ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »

MorganaLaVey wrote: »

ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »

Why do we care about class identity in an Elder Scrolls game?

PrinceShroob wrote: »

Because it's also a MMO.

ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »

Ah, yes, a perfect reply that absolutely logically explains your argument. I am now convinced!
(/s)

How is "it's an Elder Scrolls game" any better of an argument?

Because it's set in a consistent universe, and one of the consistencies (until ESO) is "most kinds of people can master most kinds of skills". I would like to play a game set in the Elder Scrolls universe, and not, say, the Marvel Avengers universe or something new altogether.

Similarly, if this thread were about "should F-35s be in our World War II game" I would expect "no, because it's a World War II game" to be a better argument than "yes, it's an online war game".

TES is set in a consistent Single Player universe. ESO is a multiplayer game/universe. Single player game mechanics do not translate well into multiplayer/group focused games.

[edit] In fact, IIRC there was quite the discussion and forwarning about this within the gaming community before ESO even released into beta.

Ratzkifal wrote: »

ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »

Then I assume he is quite capable at casting the spell that does so? It's not like vomiting poison ISN'T an arcane art - unless it's alchemy or something.
[...]
With you so far - I certainly couldn't see all of my characters vomiting poison, it's just not in their blood (lol). So it is a very fortunate thing ESO is giving me access to the entire gameplay repertoire to build to my theme, rather than shoehorning me into a class like this was some other universe.

Therein lies the issue. With subclassing, the best build, meaning the build you'll want to be running in a trial, will be the same as the best build of the other two classes you are borrowing skills from. If that is not the case, then you picked the wrong class and need to use another class to utilize subclassing with, unless it is a sidegrade or there is some group utility you can provide somehow - which subclassing just made a lot less likely to be the case.

The "best build" isn't what I'm interested in, because I don't feel the need to be the best. I empathize with someone who is in an endgame trifecta guild, but their builds are so constrained anyways it's hard to even think they care about theme/playstyle. Certainly none of them cared about the theme/playstyle I wanted to run, and that made me get bored of endgame content.

Ratzkifal wrote: »

ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »

[...]
Actually I think it's because the architecture of the game was very difficult to shift into a modern, more flexible system; I can't imagine the accrued tech-debt and what they had to solve to make this possible. Plus, remember the pre-launch promises, ESO was supposed to launch with Spellcrafting, which hardly preserves class identity; and I think the reason it wasn't was either technical or balance related, not some dedication to "MMO-ness" that is vague and ill-defined.

If that's the case then this feature simply still isn't ready yet and should be delayed until the "tech debt" is gone. Also Spellcrafting would not touch class identity as it doesn't even function within that same system. The only real threat such a system poses to classes is if it provides the group buffs that get every class invited to the trial - like Scribing almost did, but then didn't after enough people complained. That wouldn't touch the class identities for PvP though. Unless you intentionally made Spellcrafting/Scribing skills deliver a certain fantasy better than the class that was originally meant to serve that fantasy (say Nightblade and stealthy rogue assassin type character), then we'd have an identity crisis for that one class, yes. But not for classes as a whole. That was never on the table.

"Tech debt" is never (well, extremely rarely) gone, as someone who works with technology. Best you can do is find a good team and grind through the work, haha. And I still don't really get where the "identity crisis" thing comes from. It's not like they're banning electromancy from the game. Just allowing players who want to do something ELSE do that.

They're not removing identity altogether. They're removing enforced identity. Players are actually *more* empowered to grant their characters identities in this system.

Ratzkifal wrote: »

ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »

[...]
Do you actually have an example of a playstyle that is *hindered* rather than *helped* by this change? Like a genuine playstyle, not just "I want to keep playing my sorc the way I always have" (that's not a playstyle). I would equate playstyles to character themes, and I think this helps, rather than hurts, them.

No current example other than nonpet Sorcs because ZOS hasn't actually nerfed anything yet. It's all hypothetical until the nerfs hit, which might not even happen in this update, but the one that comes after.

Okay, no examples, but the sky might fall in the future. Got it. (and again, I would say nonpet sorcs are enabled, rather than hindered, by the removal of the sorc's pet skill-line).

Ratzkifal wrote: »

Closest would probably be the Necromancer, because the way it's looking right now, there is no good reason to use the Necromancer skills other than Sacrifical Bones to get your passives to boost your new Arcanist beams to infinity, so you won't be playing much of a Necromancer anymore. Remember, if you intentionally choose to deal less damage without providing something to the group, you'll get kicked. Trial runs are not a charity, everyone must pull their own weight.

IDK, as a necro tank, I couldn't be more excited to continue to wear the Nobility in Decay set, but also slot in an Arcanist skill line for the really good taunt and the like. I don't at all feel like I have to stable my necromancer. She's my main and I can't wait for subclassing to come soon enough.

Ratzkifal wrote: »

Another would be magicka based Sorcerers in PvP, because their execute had to be nerfed, because other classes can make use of it better than they can and anything they could pick up from other classes to compensate (Nightblade skills) introduces blades and bows to what was previously a pure caster. Thematically they don't benefit from this. Nightblade benefit a lot from this match btw, so arguably, thematically, the Nightblade identity will completely overshadow that of Sorcerer in PvP next patch.

Remains to be seen; I haven't seen how the Sorc's execute was getting nerfed (I read the patch notes but I don't remember this, so it wasn't significant to me.

Ratzkifal wrote: »

ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »

[...]
I feel like this paragraph is basically "they're going to break everything forever" and "people wont' enjoy it" - which just aren't convincing without evidence. There's only so many times the sky can fall.

Look at the poll again. Around 40% of the people are worried or already know they won't enjoy it. Does this reflect the playerbase as a whole? No, probably not. The forum people generally care more about the harder content in the game than your average player, so it might not be 40%. But it's a good indicator what a major subsection of the playerbase thinks. If you want to drum up excitement for the game by adding a new feature, you'd better pick one that's more agreeable. There is my evidence. Not sure what other evidence you want for a subjective question of "enjoyment". That's nothing anyone could objectively proof to anyone.

*shrug* I think TESO devs could offer to double everyone's bank account for free and 40% of people would think it's a horrible change because "we can't balance our budget under these conditions and the Devs would find a way to *** it up."

I think it'll be fun but it'll also morph itself into the "best" combinations at lightning speed, which will see a narrowing very quickly I think, which is sad. It'll do disastrous things to balance, such as it is, and yeah it'll delete class identity but like, so do the weapon skills and the guild skills.

Kinda getting off topic, so I'll keep my reply short(ish).

PrinceShroob wrote: »

I dedicated several years of my life to maintaining the Unofficial Oblivion Patch. I've played Morrowind, Oblivion, and Skyrim to death. And, frankly, their class systems are badly flawed. By letting the player use any skill regardless of their class, eventually you just end up with the same character who can do everything. And that was terrible in Morrowind's case, because Tribunal and Bloodmoon's difficulty was balanced around this hypothetical min-maxer, making most of their combat content exceedingly tedious.

I can't speak for morrowwind, but for Oblivion, I found that the end point being a character who can do everything was actually the best part of the character building system, and got me to do two seperate completionist runs spanning hundreds of hours over several years.

Why?
Because the journey was more important than the end point.

First toon was built for max power at one specific skillset right from the beginning, then used that to carry them through the later gameplay while developing the skills and stats they'd initially ignored.
Second toon was much more flexible, and thus had it easier during later gameplay, but HAD to use every tool in the toolbox to survive during early game because they were mediocre at everything.

Both playthroughs were fun for me because it was a single player game with no deadline to get a maxed out toon.

Back on topic:
ESO ain't a single player game.
Getting a toon up to a standard that'll let you pull your weight in a group matters.
It's focus is on the end point, not the journey.

That makes comparisons between ESO's character building and that of single player ES games flawed.
The need to pull ones own weight in group content pushes powergaming over fun/silly/oddball stuff in a way the other games don't.

gc0018 wrote: »

If ZOS want to weaken the concept of class, they should have done it at the very beginning. Not after so many years with so many features to emphasize the class. A quick example, in some cases, using a different class, you sometimes can trigger different specific dialog with NPC.
After players adapt to their class, now, ZOS begin to tell us forget about classes? That's why lots of people are asking for saving pure class, because it is not just a game play stuff but also the way how people establish their identify in the game world.

Agreed. If ZOS wanted to get rid of classes, then this game should’ve never had classes to begin with. But ZOS didn’t know that at the time. And so now we’re in the gray area where we have classes but we can also take skill lines from others. It’s not fully classless because certain abilities are tied to certain skill lines and passives. And you still have to keep one skill lines from your class. Plus it’s dividing the community even more.

I think the solution is to save pure class whilst keeping subclasses. Making sure pure classes are just as good and relevant.

So many broken useless sets, Scribing is pretty much useless.. what next.

MorganaLaVey wrote: »

Because it's been in the game for all it`s 11 years and some people like it for their own personal reasons and we shouldn't just take it away from them. TES game or not.

I guess I just want to know the reasons, so I can empathize, because right now I don't get it.

Ratzkifal wrote: »

Not everything that works in a singleplayer game can work in a multiplayer game. Take vampirism as an example. The vampire stages and how sunlight affects vampires are clearly described by the singleplayer games. But in a singleplayer game you could also skip a couple of hours until nighttime to continue playing. That obviously doesn't work in a world that is shared between many players, so ESO's vampirism takes liberties.

Worlds should be consistent and one of the sorest spots I have with ESO is that vampirism is fine in the daylight and doesn't have any real drawbacks. I actually would celebrate vampirism being much stronger at night and much weaker in the day, to make it actually a boon/curse instead of a boon with some VFX that some may not like. And I don't see why that mechanic couldn't work in TESO either, other than people don't like change. Another case of "if this had been there from the beginning, it probably would be more acceptable".

Can you illustrate to me why it isn't workable from a game design/narrative fantasy reason?

Ratzkifal wrote: »

In the singleplayer games you could be the best at blocking, the best at swinging heavy weapons, the best at shooting a bow, a master of healing, illusion and alteration magic, while also having the deadliest destruction spells at your disposal - all at the same time. But even with subclassing that's not how it will be, because you have to have tradeoffs for your power to keep it all balanced. The balance doesn't matter as much in singleplayer games, but here it does.
Is there an argument to be made that we shouldn't be restricted to the theme of just a singular class? Sure there is. But it would make more sense if we could respec into a different class without remixing the individual parts of those classes. I wouldn't mind class change tokens. I would love it more if I could visit a shrine, pay some coin and start playing as DK on the same character. That would be cool and it would break nothing!

I am not really advocating for *a character being the best at all things* - rather, I am advocating for *any character can max out any skill line they choose*. Maxing out may just be an "on par with others who have maxed it out" rather than "the best" because balance, but I am very confused about what balance means players can't learn spells across other class lines.

And I am even more confused why a necromancer who knows a flame breath spell has to pay gold and forget their necromancy to cast it. I would be as against your change as you are against subclassing.

Ratzkifal wrote: »

But the classes' skill lines were designed to work in unison, and breaking them apart requires rebalancing and that translates to nerfs and the removal of fun interactions (like the Mages Wrath duration going down to 2seconds, which makes it horrible to use in PvP). Don't believe me? Then read the patchnotes again and pay attention to the part where they were talking about "outliers" and "rulebreakers", because those are the fun abilities that they now need to bring more in line.

I believe you. I don't really know why you think this is such a bad thing. If we value both game world fidelity and game balance, then this seems like it is necessary.

Of course we could just throw game world fidelity into the trash becaue "it's an MMO" and seemingly that means "who cares how faithful it is to the source material" which makes me wonder why pick TESO out of all of them.

Wereswan wrote: »

What is "consistent" even supposed to mean here? Are we talking lore-wise? It's a running gag in the series that Cyrodiil is sometimes described as a tropical jungle, and other times as a temperate forest. Are we talking system-wise? here's a basic overview of how things have changed through various iterations in the series (in particular, I remember having to deliberately pick slow-levelling skills as "class skills" in Morrowind in order to cheese all the others up to 100.) It's worth noting in particular that Skyrim was the first to drop the concept of "character class"—and then only for the player character. Skyrim NPCs do in fact have defined classes.

Dunno where you're getting this idea that character classes are some weird ESO aberration.

Yes, if you read my posts, I admit the prior games had classes, and that things changed between them. I don't know where you got this idea that I am an idiot - I can only assume you haven't read my posts.

I accepted classes in TES as a necessity for technical reasons, and now that they are designing their way out of those technical reasons, I think they should be cheered on.

If instead classes were adopted because of design reasons, and the design aim has changed, then if that aim is "to be more faithful to the TES universe", I also applaud it.

Other games had classes. But a Nightblade could summon a skeleton without paying gold (unless they wanted to buy the spell rather than learn it from a time in the wild or gain it at character creation).

Again, I empathize with the people playing pure casters - just like I empathize with the no-magic melee-only players in Skyrim. Indeed, I admire their dedication to theme and applaud them, while hoping they can make it work. I also hope for themes to be balanced, while also recognizing that it is impossible to *expect* them to be so.

tomofhyrule wrote: »

Any character who chooses not to subclass.

Skills and passives got pretty well nerfed across the board, and especially those that everyone is salivating over putting on their godmode builds. This means that the players of those classes are losing power. How do they get it back? “Just subclass, bro!”

And if your character’s fantasy is “I want to be a pure Templar,” then your choice is to be underpowered or don’t play the way you want.

This is exactly the same as what we have now, just with class skills instead of guild skills, sets, passives, etc.

Like, I have been playing an underpowered character to fit a theme for YEARS. And now it's weird to see people being like "but people who stick to a theme will be underpowered!"

Yes, yes they will be. So it has ever been, because balance can never be perfect. Only by coincidence will any given person's chosen theme coincide with the most powerful options, unless their chosen theme is "be the most powerful".

tomofhyrule wrote: »

That one's very easy.

Main question: what's "night" in an MMO? Is it the time of day in-universe (which goes through a 24 hour cycle in about 5.5h)? Is it the local time for the player? Is it the local time for the server?

Night time is when it is night time on Nirn, whatever time-step the devs are using (in this case I think it's 6x faster than real life, so every 4 hours is 24 hours, but what you've said is slightly less than 4x faster, whatever; I definitely do not fully understand the timesteps the devs use so you're probably right in this case).

tomofhyrule wrote: »

We can't all schedule our playtime around what is most convenient. Some people do this weird thing called "day jobs," which means they'll never get to see their character at its most powerful... or underpowered. After all, can you imagine: "Hey, raid needs to be cancelled today since it's daytime in game and therefore I'm underpowered. But theoretically our raid time will be night in mid-November, so let's go then!"

Wait, wait, you mean being a vampire makes it hard to collaborate with normal mortals, and severely constrains your behavior - but if you come out only at night, you can be a true terror of the ... well, night?
Say it ain't so! (/s)

More genuinely, that sounds like an accurate representation of the TES universe to me - just as "real" as light armor taking more physical damage than heavy armor or spells costing magicka.

That sort of emergent behavior - people choosing not to be vampires because dealing with the curse and its effects is hard, actually - is exactly what I like from MMOs that accurately reflect their world (as much as they can, of course). In fact, because of ESO's poor implementation of vampirism, we've seen it go through rework after rework, oscillating wildly across "this is useless" - "if you're doing PVP, you must be a vamp" - "feeding makes you MORE vampiric, not less, because no one had reason to feed since it literally never mattered" - "vampires have been nerfed" - "vampire passives have been reworked" etc.

You could rename the vampire in ESO to "albinoid superhumanitis" and it would make about as much sense as calling it vampirism.

ragnarok6644b14_ESO wrote: »

[snip]

Wereswan wrote: »

What is "consistent" even supposed to mean here? Are we talking lore-wise? It's a running gag in the series that Cyrodiil is sometimes described as a tropical jungle, and other times as a temperate forest. Are we talking system-wise? here's a basic overview of how things have changed through various iterations in the series (in particular, I remember having to deliberately pick slow-levelling skills as "class skills" in Morrowind in order to cheese all the others up to 100.) It's worth noting in particular that Skyrim was the first to drop the concept of "character class"—and then only for the player character. Skyrim NPCs do in fact have defined classes.

Dunno where you're getting this idea that character classes are some weird ESO aberration.

Yes, if you read my posts, I admit the prior games had classes, and that things changed between them. I don't know where you got this idea that I am an idiot - I can only assume you haven't read my posts.

I accepted classes in TES as a necessity for technical reasons, and now that they are designing their way out of those technical reasons, I think they should be cheered on.

If instead classes were adopted because of design reasons, and the design aim has changed, then if that aim is "to be more faithful to the TES universe", I also applaud it.

Other games had classes. But a Nightblade could summon a skeleton without paying gold (unless they wanted to buy the spell rather than learn it from a time in the wild or gain it at character creation).

Again, I empathize with the people playing pure casters - just like I empathize with the no-magic melee-only players in Skyrim. Indeed, I admire their dedication to theme and applaud them, while hoping they can make it work. I also hope for themes to be balanced, while also recognizing that it is impossible to *expect* them to be so.

Do you remember how, in Morrowind, it was possible to get right off the boat in Seyda Neen and make increasingly powerful Fortify Intelligence potions until you hit game-breaking levels?