Genos2007-05-16 22:10:19
Honestly I wish some of the songs that only affect other stuff would help Bards in some way. Maybe have it so using Demonsong with no Demons present would slightly slow down Angels? Just ideas like that to make the songs not so useless to a Bard.
Shorlen2007-05-16 22:13:43
QUOTE(Genos @ May 16 2007, 06:10 PM) 408773
Honestly I wish some of the songs that only affect other stuff would help Bards in some way. Maybe have it so using Demonsong with no Demons present would slightly slow down Angels? Just ideas like that to make the songs not so useless to a Bard.
I like this idea. The slowdown should be such though that one bard on each side singing angel/demon song cancel each other out, if you ask me.
Genos2007-05-16 22:36:03
QUOTE(Shorlen @ May 16 2007, 06:13 PM) 408776
I like this idea. The slowdown should be such though that one bard on each side singing angel/demon song cancel each other out, if you ask me.
Yeah that's what I was thinking but forgot to mention it. Also, this applies to the Commune Bard songs as well.
EDIT: If possible it would be cool if it could work on Angel/Demon NPCs, which would provide a reason to bring Bards along on raids.
Yrael2007-05-16 23:48:01
QUOTE(Lendren @ May 16 2007, 10:48 PM) 408556
I think focusing on boosting bard offense is the wrong approach.
I know that we've never gotten a clear statement about whether bards are or are not intended to be a "support class", but let me say that I think they should be. It would be good for bards to be good at that for a number of reasons. First, it'd provide a guild for people who want to help in combat without the feeling of being on the front line. It would make the cities and communes need bards since they'd be able to do something that other guilds aren't as good as. Both these things would make bard guilds grow. And it would make bards interestingly different from the other guilds.
Bards are already designed in a way to lend itself to that. Songs as portable demesnes with both ally-buffs and enemy-hindrances are right in line to be a support class. Acrobatics allows bards to come along in a big fight and survive long enough to be useful. Their offense is a bit weak, but that's fine if they are good at other things -- it's balanced.
The missing part is that the support class stuff, the ally-buff and enemy-hinder parts, are so weak that most of the time your allies aren't even sure if they're happening. They're so weak that it's never worth it to give up truehearing for them. They're so weak that it's not even worth waiting around a moment to get captivated.
Bards shouldn't be buffed into being a reckoning force offensively in combat. Instead, we need to make captivate easier to set up and last longer, make buffs potent enough that citymates/communemates consider them important or even essential (say, at least on the same order as how valuable it is to have someone set up a demesne), and make sure they can get their buffs in to their allies without requiring them to sacrifice a vital defense.
I know that we've never gotten a clear statement about whether bards are or are not intended to be a "support class", but let me say that I think they should be. It would be good for bards to be good at that for a number of reasons. First, it'd provide a guild for people who want to help in combat without the feeling of being on the front line. It would make the cities and communes need bards since they'd be able to do something that other guilds aren't as good as. Both these things would make bard guilds grow. And it would make bards interestingly different from the other guilds.
Bards are already designed in a way to lend itself to that. Songs as portable demesnes with both ally-buffs and enemy-hindrances are right in line to be a support class. Acrobatics allows bards to come along in a big fight and survive long enough to be useful. Their offense is a bit weak, but that's fine if they are good at other things -- it's balanced.
The missing part is that the support class stuff, the ally-buff and enemy-hinder parts, are so weak that most of the time your allies aren't even sure if they're happening. They're so weak that it's never worth it to give up truehearing for them. They're so weak that it's not even worth waiting around a moment to get captivated.
Bards shouldn't be buffed into being a reckoning force offensively in combat. Instead, we need to make captivate easier to set up and last longer, make buffs potent enough that citymates/communemates consider them important or even essential (say, at least on the same order as how valuable it is to have someone set up a demesne), and make sure they can get their buffs in to their allies without requiring them to sacrifice a vital defense.
I'm curious why they should be relegated to support class. I'm fairly sure noone wants to play Lusterniaquest, where you need a group to do anything at all. I know it'd be different, but it's still a fairly horrible state of affairs if you have to go grab two or more people to go and pvp.
Sylphas2007-05-16 23:55:08
QUOTE(Lendren @ May 16 2007, 07:48 AM) 408556
It would be good for bards to be good at that for a number of reasons. First, it'd provide a guild for people who want to help in combat without the feeling of being on the front line.
The way IRE games are designed, everyone is on the front line. Making Bards buff-only just means they're on the front lines with no way to hit back. I see this time and again, and it strikes me every time as people liking an idea so much that they don't look at it realisticly.
The only ranges in IRE are same-room, line-of-sight, area-wide, continent-wide. The vast multitude of skills are same-room. The other ranges are either very powerful, or next to worthless. At range, there is really no way to get around shieldwhoring. At the same time, they can't hit back. Due to this, very few skills work on these longer ranges. This leads to design that forces mages to be able to stand toe-to-toe with a warrior; in most fantasy games, spell casters will get rolled if they try that. We can't have a 'glass cannon' class, for example, because it would either be insanely overpowered or incredibly worthless. For support classes, they can't hide behind other players; they're able to be targeted and killed the same as anyone else. Not giving them a way to stand by themselves requires that they have a ridiculously good defensive skillset, and if they ever want to kill anyone, to have a group of friends with them. Having to always run with people, even in a multiplayer game, is not fun for most people.
Verithrax2007-05-17 02:24:31
People who think bards are a "support class" and should be relegated to some nonexistant "support role" should just leave the debate about bard skills, as they obviously have no idea what's going on or how combat actually works.
Lendren2007-05-17 02:44:46
QUOTE(Sylphas @ May 16 2007, 07:55 PM) 408803
Not giving them a way to stand by themselves requires that they have a ridiculously good defensive skillset,
Which bards do have in Lusternia. The whole point of almost all of Acrobatics is to make bards all-but-immune to whole classes of attacks like entanglement, knockdown, pit traps, and more, and able to withstand many other kinds of attacks (though of course not all) better than others of comparable level and skill.
QUOTE(Sylphas @ May 16 2007, 07:55 PM) 408803
and if they ever want to kill anyone, to have a group of friends with them. Having to always run with people, even in a multiplayer game, is not fun for most people.
And this again is precisely my point. There are already four other classes for the "most people" that have to be able to solo-kill reliably. I think a fair assessment cannot help but conclude that there's a lot more people left after you take out those "most people" than you give credit for. The obstacle to these people being bards is not that they can't do the same solo kill that they can do in the other 16 guilds; it's that they can't do the support-class stuff well enough to be worth doing it.
Yrael2007-05-17 03:01:13
Ah. So the bards should have a disclaimer - Warning. If you like combat on your own, we STRONGLY suggest you pick another class, this is for that small subset who won't stop whinging about pacifism and roleplay or those who wish to play a support class - ?
That's basically what seems to be popping up from the defenders of the current bard skills.
That's basically what seems to be popping up from the defenders of the current bard skills.
Unknown2007-05-17 05:04:47
You know, for this all defense skillset, it really doesn't do that good at keeping you alive, all it is good for is getting you away from trouble. If your ganked your dead unless you tripleflash, and hope for the best. Dodging isn't really that good, woo, 1 in 4 attacks miss, contortion, writhe all in like 2 seconds or so, 250 mana, fun times.
The disclaimer should more be. - Warning, you are choosing a class which is designed solely for running away, if you like combat, don't pick this class, ever!
The disclaimer should more be. - Warning, you are choosing a class which is designed solely for running away, if you like combat, don't pick this class, ever!
Sylphas2007-05-21 05:23:53
If we're going to have a support only class, where are our tanks and our healers? I want warriors who can take the beating of an entire group, but couldn't kill something by themselves to save their lives. It's ok, right, because they can just run with their friends? Or how about we take curing away from common skills and abilities and make Healers the only people who can do it. This is silly, since Lusternia isn't a game with well-defined class roles.
Why should the opportunities afforded by an archetype be restricted to one subset of players? Once again, I don't play much anymore, but I like being a bard. I -also- like fighting and sparring, when I get a chance. If Bards are to be support only, it basically means I'm going to switch Moondancer again at some point even though I love Illusions and the idea behind Acrobatics.
Why should the opportunities afforded by an archetype be restricted to one subset of players? Once again, I don't play much anymore, but I like being a bard. I -also- like fighting and sparring, when I get a chance. If Bards are to be support only, it basically means I'm going to switch Moondancer again at some point even though I love Illusions and the idea behind Acrobatics.
Verithrax2007-05-21 05:56:27
The notion that bards are meant to be support only at all is a myth which I am getting increasingly tired of hearing.
It has been stated repeatedly that bards are meant to be on par with other classes one-on-one, including by Estarra.
So please stop it with the "Oh but I want to be worthless on my own" crap; that simply has no place in the way Lusternia works, and for that I'm thankful. It would be impossible to balance, make no sense, and lead to even smaller and more gimped bard guilds.
It has been stated repeatedly that bards are meant to be on par with other classes one-on-one, including by Estarra.
So please stop it with the "Oh but I want to be worthless on my own" crap; that simply has no place in the way Lusternia works, and for that I'm thankful. It would be impossible to balance, make no sense, and lead to even smaller and more gimped bard guilds.
Lendren2007-05-25 02:39:11
Well, at least that's an argument this time, just not a relevant one:
See?
Seems the only real argument being made against the support class idea is "no one wants that" and the defense of that assertion is "I wouldn't want that". I talk to plenty of people who want that. I'm not saying that these people who want something different aren't a minority. I'm just saying the majority is already well-served by 16 guilds, so maybe we can spare 4 guilds for the sizable but quiet minority who would like something different, and who are otherwise left with few or no options.
Frankly, I would think you folks would be happy to have those people out of your guilds where they don't really fit in, and just drag against the current, and off in their own guild where they do fit in.
But then I think a lot of the arguments are not really "there isn't a need for this" -- they're just "I personally don't want to be this and I want to be a bard," (or even "I invested credits in being a bard"), dressed up pretty. That's not the kind of reasons that will fly with Estarra; Estarra has to worry about the game, not just you personally.
I wish Estarra would come down one way or the other about this, if only so Verithrax could stop missing the point.
QUOTE(Lendren @ May 16 2007, 08:48 AM) 408556
I know that we've never gotten a clear statement about whether bards are or are not intended to be a "support class", but let me say that I think they should be.
See?
Seems the only real argument being made against the support class idea is "no one wants that" and the defense of that assertion is "I wouldn't want that". I talk to plenty of people who want that. I'm not saying that these people who want something different aren't a minority. I'm just saying the majority is already well-served by 16 guilds, so maybe we can spare 4 guilds for the sizable but quiet minority who would like something different, and who are otherwise left with few or no options.
Frankly, I would think you folks would be happy to have those people out of your guilds where they don't really fit in, and just drag against the current, and off in their own guild where they do fit in.
But then I think a lot of the arguments are not really "there isn't a need for this" -- they're just "I personally don't want to be this and I want to be a bard," (or even "I invested credits in being a bard"), dressed up pretty. That's not the kind of reasons that will fly with Estarra; Estarra has to worry about the game, not just you personally.
I wish Estarra would come down one way or the other about this, if only so Verithrax could stop missing the point.
Arix2007-05-25 02:43:01
I say we give up on bards and focus on monks
Yrael2007-05-25 02:50:14
You mean they haven't already?
Sylphas2007-05-25 05:10:09
Lendren, you're telling me you're not saying, "This is what I want for bards, and I'm going to prove it by saying that lots of other people who never say anything want it too?" How is that different?
You're saying that people who want to be bards are wrong, because they want to be bards for the wrong reason. Pretty damn arrogant, I think. If you like PK -and- the RP of bards, what do you do? If I like the RP of the Serenguard, but don't like to fight, I could manage that, usually. But the opposite is the LOT harder for most people. Most people can't take a low tier class and pull wins out of their ass, and that can get disheartening.
Instead of making a class that can be balanced between these, you'd prefer one that's only for non-combatants and pacifists?
You're saying that people who want to be bards are wrong, because they want to be bards for the wrong reason. Pretty damn arrogant, I think. If you like PK -and- the RP of bards, what do you do? If I like the RP of the Serenguard, but don't like to fight, I could manage that, usually. But the opposite is the LOT harder for most people. Most people can't take a low tier class and pull wins out of their ass, and that can get disheartening.
Instead of making a class that can be balanced between these, you'd prefer one that's only for non-combatants and pacifists?
Arel2007-05-25 05:57:26
Yanno, for a class a lot of people (read: nearly any combatant that uses the forums) says sucks at combat, it is amazing that all the Harbinger music spec abilities are only useful in PvP and not at all while bashing, unless you like stopping to refrain out of your enormous fear of being jumped.
I feel stupid for transing a spec that I very rarely use.
I feel stupid for transing a spec that I very rarely use.
Verithrax2007-05-25 09:32:33
Virtually every primary spec skill is 100% PvP with a single higher-damage bashing skill thrown in, or an overall improvement to the damage you cause simply by increasing the skill.
Unknown2007-05-25 17:59:03
Wonder if the Glamours will have an effect on the Bard's skills.
Lendren2007-05-25 18:23:38
QUOTE(Sylphas @ May 25 2007, 01:10 AM) 411713
Lendren, you're telling me you're not saying, "This is what I want for bards, and I'm going to prove it by saying that lots of other people who never say anything want it too?" How is that different?
Because the existence of people who want to be front-line fighters, and the 12-soon-16 guilds who provide them what they want, is not in dispute, never was. Thus the asymmetry of the burden of proof.
But it's a moot point. We just got our answer, unambiguously.
Sylphas2007-05-26 07:28:56
Much as I like the combat aspects of Glamours, Conceal is by far my favorite of them.
