I did a lot of research before choosing my class combination in Runes of Magic. How is it then that I’m now thinking that I made the wrong choice and am contemplating a re-roll? It’s simple really, the more choices there are the harder it is to pin-point the right answer. And since the game is still in BETA, the information you’re finding on the forums isn’t the whole picture.
I tried several classes before choosing the Priest/Warrior combination that can be played as a Monk archetype. The combination itself is damn amazing. I’m waiting for the nerf bat once the game goes live. I’m not sure they really intend for a class that is in cloth to take on 3 to 4 mobs of equal level to +2 levels and consistently to come out on top. I've gone into areas with social mob aggro and seen player headstones, yet I go there and never even come close to dying.
I’ve had lapses in judgment or lack of attention that resulted in pulling 5 to 6 mobs, all my level or higher. I’m expecting to die at any moment while they are all pounding on me, interrupting heals and blocking hits. Yet I kept on fighting anyway and survived thinking, “WTF! How on earth did I just survive that??” That’s rather unheard of in my experiences for a healing class that is wearing cloth. My reasons for wanting to change have nothing to do with any deficit in either class combination which when it comes to soloing is fantastic. My change in heart has to do with the end game roles.
I’ve never been interested in tanking even though I played a Paladin and Druid in WOW to max levels. I’ve never been interested in end-game healing even though I had a Priest, Paladin and Druid at max levels. Why on earth do I roll these classes if I don’t want to be the tank or healer part of the trinity? Hybrids and healers with DPS specs make great solo leveling classes and I enjoy soloing. In WOW, I started as a Warlock, reached max level and raided on that character. Once I decided to stop the 2nd job known as raiding, I rolled these other classes.
It’s not that I mind healing. I enjoy healing in PVP which tends to be chaotic, come as you are and people are grateful for any sort of healing. However, I don’t enjoy being pegged into a healing spec for end-game content, when you still have to make it through the never-ending farming/grinding for other aspects of character progression that continue after max level. I don’t subscribe to the multiple gear-set grind when I barely tolerate the single set grind. I found myself rolling characters to revisit what I enjoyed about the game, leaving for a while then coming back to roll another.
In comes Runes of Magic (ROM) and dual class specs. I try the classes that interest me. I check out the combinations, special combo elite skills and individual class forums. I make a choice and until this weekend, I was happy with that choice. That was until I hit my first raid-level instance and was invited as a healer.
Forsaken Abby is the first raid-level instance you encounter in ROM. It requires forming a large group (30 players I think) with specific role assignments and participants at the correct level (25+). I never raided in EQ2 so I can’t make a comparison there. It’s not like anything you encounter in WOW that’s raid level. It’s like Scholomance where there are swarms of mobs in some of the pulls, poisons being applied all over the place and bosses surrounded by multiple defenders. There wasn’t a single one-pull encounter for as far as I survived the massacre. I’m not finding fault with the instance or the group. It’s BETA and will take time for people to learn how these dungeons work. It’s also not easy to field 25+ players of the right level and classes at this stage. For instance, I’m only level 20. Abbey groups routinely make level exceptions for healers since as always, they are in short supply.
The whole experience was VERY MUCH like raids (Master Vaults) in AC2. Large amounts of mobs, chaos reigning down from above, large groups of players trying to keep it together long enough to kill shit. People were dropping like flies. No time to resurrect during the combat just keep fighting and do your best not to die. I didn’t have the mana pool to keep my own team up, much less help out others. I don’t even know what the inside of the place looked like for starring at health bars. It was exciting and interesting as a first peak at large group content but not sure I could say I had fun. I was ready to GTFO before it was all over. :-)
While I was standing there trying to re-group after I’d died for the second time, I realized that I’d come into the raid as Priest/Warrior. It was then that I started wondering. What does the “warrior” part of my build bring to an encounter when I’m healing? The answer is not much if I’m actually healing. If there are encounters that require off-tanking or DPS + off-healing then it would have some benefits. I don’t know if the other instances or more like this – more like how all of it was in AC2 or more of an orchestrated event like in WOW. Either way, there are combinations better suited to off-tank and DPS + off-healing, namely Knight + anything than my combo. That being the case from what I can tell, do I want a combination that doesn’t bring value for the end-game but is a great solo ride to max level? If at the end, I’m going to have to tank OR heal, then wouldn’t it be better to have a combo that supports one of those roles versus having selected a combination where you only show up as one or the other for a raid?
I’m seriously wondering if I should have just stayed with the Knight/Priest and Priest/Knight combination. It was the combination that I wanted most. Having played the Priest now for myself, I know that there are ways to increase the DPS very well for that class which would have offset the low DPS and slow leveling of the Knight. I liked how the Knight played just not its mana consumption and low DPS – watching paint dry killing speed. Only now I’d know how to fix that with the Priest’s skills. More importantly, for healing, the Priest/Knight combination is strong and brings something to the table for end-game. You’d always go in as the combo instead of just a Priest. Even Knight/Priest could be off-tank or off-healer, where as Warrior/Priest could be but not as good as K/P.
In a more choreographed encounter, the Monk (Priest/Warrior) can bring something of value including + DPS buffs when placed in offensive parties. Not so much though in the mayhem version of instances. If the instances are like Public Quests in WAR – multiple simultaneous encounters, each group has to be really tight in its roles or people will die and death matters in this game. There is a death penalty (XP & TP debt) so you don’t want to be off dying just ‘cuz. Decisions – decisions, now is the time to make the change if I’m going to do it.
There’s no way to make a perfect class choice in a game. The choice is heavily predicated on your playing style and end-game objectives. This is compounded by the game being in BETA where things change and two classes are still missing. However, if you’re trying to choose what you believe to be your main here is some advice:
- Research each class separately via the forums
- Review the skill lists for each class
- Review the elite skills for BOTH SIDES of the combination here and here – you can get them both sets
- Create and play each class of the combination separately to level 5 or so, to see if you even like how it moves, works, its basic mechanics, etc.
- Consider if you value the end-game role more, the ride to the end-game or both equally, as your choice needs to take that into account.
- Consider your end-game goals
- At a minimum, is one version of the combo synergistic to your goals?
- If not, are you okay with being asked or needing to play just one of your chosen classes?
For me at least, ROM is like Wizard101. I enjoyed the quests and leveling very much. I’m having a good time with all the character/class customization and tweaks available to me in ROM. However, the journey does take time and forethought. It requires a plan and strategy if you want to be effective. I’m not for playing completely by the seat of my pants. As such, it’s an intense ride and I’m not going to be creating alts with abandon. That’s not my style anyway. I had alts in WOW because I played the game so damned long and what was there to do once I opted to stop raiding, except to roll alts. If you’re like me and not an altaholic all these choices in ROM means you need to put more thought into your class selections up front.
Over the next couple of days I have a very important question to answer for myself. Is my role at the end more important to me or the ride to the end? If it’s the latter than I’ve selected a great combination. If it’s the former then it might be time to re-roll. And we still don’t know anything about that Druid that’s coming in the game. I’ve selected a druid twice (WOW and AOC) so I can’t discount that as being a class I’d enjoy.
I'm still trying to find the right r/x combo. Tried both R/S (too squishy) and R/P (too hard to level the /P) and am now trying R/K.
Posted by: Maess | February 16, 2009 at 02:51 PM
I took each class to level 5-8 before really deciding which one I like. So far, I am enjoying the Knight/Priest and Rogue/Scout. Also have a Warrior/Priest and Mage/Priest. However, I like the first two combos the most and will pretty much stick with them when I get the opportunity to play. As you said, what else you gonna do after you stop raiding? I did not raid much in WOW as real life isn't really conducive to that type of gaming, so I rolled a lot of alts to see different content. I can't see that happening as much in ROM, because you are leveling two toons anyway.
Posted by: RomaGoth | February 16, 2009 at 03:03 PM
@Maess - /P has windchill which basically kills things before they do much to me IF you're willing to pump that many TP into it. I had it maxed and loved it but had to respec because I need to buff my healing side more.
@Roma - I think the end-game will be a softer side of raiding. More PUG-like than original WOW and TBC. Guilds will be doing wars (PVP) so I think there's going to be some aspect of Warhammer Online's sieges or Keep defense.
For pure solo the Priest/Warrior is very nice. I can wear 3 pcs of the chain mail I'd been saving and Warrior/Priest is nice too for leveling. But it's the what will I do at the end that has me thinking now about a change.
Posted by: Alysianah aka Saylah | February 16, 2009 at 03:31 PM
@Saylah and @Maess: I think you mean Bone Chill as the DoT for Priest. Also, for the P/R combo the elite lvl 15 skill Snake Curse is an excellent offensive DoT to combine with Bone Chill. It starts off small, but cost to upgrade is low for the added damage.
When playing my P/R I start with Rising Tide, put a Snake Curse on them, followed by a Bone Chill. Depending on when the mob reaches me I put in a Blind Spot to decrease their hit rate.
For a lower to equal level mob that is pretty much all I have to do, the DoT:s will kill it in a couple of seconds. I can stay a bit and hit them with my staff, or try to move away some. For some mobs I might have to throw in an extra Rising Tide.
But if the P/ side is troublesome or less enjoyable, just use that to turn in quests instead and focus more of the fighting on the other side.
----
As for choosing classes I have traditionally been an altoholic, although tend to settle for some choice after a while.
Nowadays I do a bit more alt:ing between games than between characters in a game though. For me it is the journey that is important. End-game is a non-issue for me for the most part until I reach it, if I reach it at all. The most important part for me is to enjoy the journey. If that turns out that does not work for end-game, so be it. Then it is time for another character or another game, or do something that is not "end-game:ish". Just as long as it is enjoyable.
Posted by: Sente | February 16, 2009 at 04:31 PM
This divide between the "leveling" game and the "endgame" is something that really needs to be solved by MMO designers. Forcing someone to grind through the leveling content if all they want to do is raid isn't good PR, even though a devoted soloer can have fun without ever touching the endgame.
I'm not saying that the two "gears" of the game need to run at the same rate, just that they need to mesh better, and that players need to be able to rejigger their characters easily to make playing either with the same character a viable option.
To answer the question, though, I'm not interested in raiding at all, so I look for soloable classes/builds and enjoy the content. I'm sympathetic to those who would rather just jump to raiding... even though it's mind bogglingly dull to me.
Posted by: Tesh | February 16, 2009 at 05:17 PM
This is indicative of one of the major design flaws in many MMORPG's - the levelling is done solo, and the end-game is done in large groups.
Games should be designed to play consistently all the way through, so that choices you make at the start of the game won't screw you over at the end of the game (without foresight from reading the forums, which only allows you to replace the time at which one must screw oneself over, anyway).
Posted by: Melf_Himself | February 16, 2009 at 07:31 PM
I love to raid though I dislike raiding, if you get my drift. I don't know specifically that "leveling solo but end-game is grouping" is the problem. If it is, what's the solution? Go back to an EQ/DDO/FFXI situation of forced grouping? That will dramatically limit your population from the start these days, the majority of modern players simply will not accept that. And I don't think even solo players want to have raids scale down to being soloable.
The "problem" in many players' eyes is the focus of the game changes... or at least, in WoW or raid-centric games. There's WAR which is allegedly RvR focused the entire time and you can PvE/craft on the side. End-game is what? A more intense, meaningful, whatever version of RvR. LOTRO seems to suit a lot of players in that you've been leveling from the start by questing. Some quests are group content, you can choose to skip them if you wish but they're by far the best for the story aspect. At level cap there are still so many quests (solo, small group, full group) that the only real "change" is that you're no longer earning character XP.
Which brings me back to levels. I've lost count how many times I've asked this on blogs and forums and have NEVER gotten an answer. I think I'll just revert to Psych 101 where we're taught that silence or a non-answer is an affirmative answer and just assume that YES it's all the fault of Levels (Eff You, EQ) that we have this idea of "end game" at all. I don't remember hearing that term in the original SWG, I've never read a UO player talking about end game nor have I ever read EVE players talking about end game. The common thread? None of those games had levels, so there was no defined "end" to that XP bar and advancement.
Posted by: Scott | February 16, 2009 at 08:56 PM
I typically am a player that focuses on the journey which is why my blog is full of pictures and little stories. But I like ROM and don't want it to be a journey just to max then time to hit the road. The end-game is a bit vague but there are certainly high level instances with legendary items to be farmed, so I'm assuming it's an end-game much like EQ2/WOW where raiding is a focus. There will also be organized PVP but who knows how that will turn out.
As most have mentioned this disconnect of how you progressed versus having to make a wholesale change at the end is jarring. Based on my experiences, WOW had the most profound difference in how you leveled versus the end game. Games that clone WOW's basic model are cloning in that same problem.
@Scott - While I understand your arguments against levels, I don't think EVE is a fair comparison. EVE is a sandbox game and very circular in nature. Besides which, everyone can learn every skill so you're never forced into a specific role that can't be altered without creating a new character. You can have levels and have the same thing - all skills trainable over time but you'd have to have the breadth and complexity of skills like you have in EVE for that to be effective.
Also end-game is just a synonym for raiding. If raiding happened at the beginning of the game you'd have the same problem only earlier. Organized, scripted content is designed for specific roles. Deviation is possible but most choose to adhere to the min/max method which is what forces cookie-cutter templates on each other. I don't think problem has anything to do with levels, it has everything to do with scripted encounters. This is why the problem is less of an issue in WAR - there are fewer scripted encounters which makes spec pretty much a free-for-all.
So I still can't agree that no levels being a silver bullet. I have no issues with levels and the content you encounter in sandbox games versus scripted is what causes the character spec issues not the fact that there are levels.
Posted by: Alysianah aka Saylah | February 16, 2009 at 09:38 PM
I have long believed that an MMO should have "endgame" content for solo players. Perhaps a long quest chain that provides fantastic rewards at the end (or even along the way), and a soloable boss or something. As I tend to solo quite a bit, I feel a little left out when I reach the level cap and am unable to see the remaining content because I don't have 40 hours a week to farm consumables and raid the same dungeons repeatedly. If people want to spend their time doing that, it is fine with me. However, I feel as a solo player that I am being forced to do things (battlegrounds, anyone?) that I may not necessarily want to do because I cannot participate in "endgame" content. As for levels, I don't see a problem with that model, although it would be nice to see something different, not sure what that would be though.
Posted by: RomaGoth | February 17, 2009 at 12:48 AM
I can see both sides of the coin. It would take more development work to implement. I think Blizzard is the closest to getting there. With the dungeon scaling mechanic they are adding, I can see them more readily being able to scale it down to duo-enabled encounters. If I were still playing I'd enjoy that and would be fine if it didn't drop epics. Just for farming crafting materials getting blues and greens would be good. Instead of people at max level farming SM, we could have been running through content for our correct level and gotten some variety too.
One of the huge sugar rushes in W101 is soloing group encounters. Lots of adults are doing and soloing them intentionally. Some for convenience and others for the achievement and thrill of soloing group bosses. It's a feeling you don't soon forget. So yes, it would be nice to have a few quality solo scripted encounters (dungeons).
Posted by: Alysianah aka Saylah | February 17, 2009 at 09:11 AM
Think I remember some solo dungeons in EQ2, and duoing the others (with the exception of some bosses). Was fun.
As the MMO customer base continues to grow and age we should be seeing more variety. I've come to love Eve Online and the sandbox type of game. Others still love raiding, PvP, solo, etc. Incorporating all into one game is possible, but the more they try to add the more each piece could suffer. (I still remember when PvP was being expanded in WoW and skills/classes were being changed to fit in with it... and the whines on both sides of the PvE/PvP fence)
As for levels/no levels -- leveling is just a sign of character growth. It could be done with equipment (and is, WoW is a prime example, once you've finished leveling and start raiding), skills, even appearance (one I've always liked, I want to see my fighter-type get beefier, my mage shimmer with power...). In the end it's all just numbers.
Posted by: Nef | February 17, 2009 at 02:19 PM
@Nef - I believe that there are some solo and duo instances in EQ2 if you have the appropriate expansion packs. There's a whole thread in the forums for solo instances and I used it when I played.
Posted by: Alysianah aka Saylah | February 17, 2009 at 03:09 PM
Levels as such are not bad. It is rather how they are used together with advancement, fencing of content and player cooperation.
Aattaching leveling systems to advancement of player characters is a design element that works well in single player games and with PnP games, where there usually is a regular group of player playing together.
It becomes more challenging to get it to work well in MMOs. IMHO two games that have leveling system and actually had it work reasonably well in different ways are Guild Wars and City of Heroes/Villains.
Posted by: Sente | February 17, 2009 at 03:52 PM
@Sente - Agreed, its more how levels are used within content and where or not if fosters or divides players. In W101 I rarely knew my level. It wasn't displayed anywhere and mobs didn't have levels at all. All that mattered to me was when I could get new spells and that was tied to levels but in between getting new spell cards it didn't matter.
To follow your line of thought about how levels separate players, it doesn't in W101. I may not have personally unlocked an area myself but if someone needs help, I can port to them anyway. Helping someone even 10 levels above me is viable because it's the combat design where every little bit helps. It's more strategy than rapid fire combat and how much max health do I have available.
I know that EQ2 has mentoring system but never involved in its use. I've heard of the side-kick feature in COH/COV often given as a very good example of breaking thru the levels/grouping barrier.
Posted by: Alysianah aka Saylah | February 17, 2009 at 04:32 PM
The mentoring system in EQ2 is pretty nice. From what I remember the mentored character gets an experience boost, and the mentor will still gain XP/AA from the lower level content. (not as much as the real low level I think)
Never got to try it out in CoH/V but this should help: http://cityofheroes.wikia.com/wiki/Sidekick
Posted by: Nef | February 17, 2009 at 06:31 PM
I think it would be interesting to implement a leveling system where the level affected what skills a player could use but not their power relative to the world. A fireball from a level 1 mage and a fireball from a level 15 mage would be just as powerful. The difference is that the level 15 mage would have a bunch more skills than the level 1 mage.
Theoretically then, as soon as they enter the world, a level 1 character could make contributions to a group filled by any other levels. They'd have fewer skills at their disposal, but they could help out. A group of level 1s couldn't take down a raid boss (not enough requisite skills), but having a level 1 friend on a raid wouldn't necessarily be bad.
Levels would still be a means to indicate progression, but would mean less in deciding who players could play with.
Posted by: Khan | February 18, 2009 at 11:51 AM
@Kahn - hadn't thought about it that way but this is why it works in W101. I have more spells available to me but the spell itself hasn't changed since level 1. If I'm in better gear then my spells are enhanced by +damage modifiers and I have more powerful spells. however, the spells I received at level one remain exactly as they were at level one. So yes, I'd like to see other games take a shot at that model.
Posted by: Alysianah aka Saylah | February 18, 2009 at 12:19 PM