Worshipping Gods - Do we still need alignments?

[Magich]

<p>I was pondering this question earlier, but is there any need to have specific dieties only available for good and evil characters? With the racial trait changes now live, Im beginning to wonder if it really is necessary to restrict classes from worshipping a diety they want but cant have. For lore sakes I can almost understand a goodie halfling not normally going to kneel at bertox's altar and mutter some evil words. But for game-sake, is it not an easy change to allow this? I wouldnt personally call it a major game-change as the miracles and/or blessings that come with the respective diety are long reuses etc.</p><p>My wizard is good-aligned, following Solusek Ro. I was interested in changing my alliegance to Anashti Sul, who evidently is evil - yet I cant, because I live in a specific city. I am aware I can do a betrayal, move to Freeport or Neriak and retain my wizard class, but all for the sake of kneeling at an altar for a god? I highly doubt they're sat on their thrones up above going "Dang, that wizard is from Qeynos, I dont want him to worship me now!"What are your thoughts on this? Is it something that could, or should, be changed?</p>

[erin]

<p><cite>Magichao wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>I was pondering this question earlier, but is there any need to have specific dieties only available for good and evil characters? With the racial trait changes now live, Im beginning to wonder if it really is necessary to restrict classes from worshipping a diety they want but cant have. For lore sakes I can almost understand a goodie halfling not normally going to kneel at bertox's altar and mutter some evil words. But for game-sake, is it not an easy change to allow this? I wouldnt personally call it a major game-change as the miracles and/or blessings that come with the respective diety are long reuses etc.</p><p>My wizard is good-aligned, following Solusek Ro. I was interested in changing my alliegance to Anashti Sul, who evidently is evil - yet I cant, because I live in a specific city. I am aware I can do a betrayal, move to Freeport or Neriak and retain my wizard class, but all for the sake of kneeling at an altar for a god? I highly doubt they're sat on their thrones up above going "Dang, that wizard is from Qeynos, I dont want him to worship me now!"What are your thoughts on this? Is it something that could, or should, be changed?</p></blockquote><p>It gives the game a little bit of flavor.  Its great for RPing.  Not a big deal to me personally but I imagine that true RPers and lore guru's probably won't like the idea of changing this.  Its kind of nice to have a few differentiators.</p>

[t.j.]

<p>yes, alignment is part of the game, as with life sometimes you have to play the hand your delt. Don't get me wrong, Im a Wizard and Anasti would be nice to have as a diety, but I'm good aligned. As you pointed out, the mechanism is in place allready. Betray to the evvviiilll side. Yep you will need to replace all those masters, move to a new city, sell your soul (evil remember) and there you go Evil diety available for worship.  Part of what makes fanasy based games what they are is the Lore, sure there is really nothing mechanics wise that prevents it (just remove the good / evil flag) but it is the feel of the game that makes it EQ and not MMO#45. (not sure if that is making any sence).</p>

[Magich]

<p>Yeah I understand the roleplaying aspect of things, I guess I wondered how other people felt in general. Its all good, I'll stick with the burning prince I guess =p</p>

[Yimway]

<p><cite>Magichao wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>Yeah I understand the roleplaying aspect of things, I guess I wondered how other people felt in general. Its all good, I'll stick with the burning prince I guess =p</p></blockquote><p>Alignment in this game only matters for dieties and RP.  I fully advocate changing it to only RP.</p><p>If the game had remained as alignment driven as it was in orriginal beta, I would have a different opinion, but all significant penalties based upon alignment have been removed, its time for this one to go as well.</p>

[AziBam]

<p><cite>Atan@Unrest wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>Magichao wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>Yeah I understand the roleplaying aspect of things, I guess I wondered how other people felt in general. Its all good, I'll stick with the burning prince I guess =p</p></blockquote><p>Alignment in this game only matters for dieties and RP.  I fully advocate changing it to only RP.</p><p>If the game had remained as alignment driven as it was in orriginal beta, I would have a different opinion, but all significant penalties based upon alignment have been removed, its time for this one to go as well.</p></blockquote><p>Totally agree.  The lines between good and evil alignment are pretty blurry these days.  No real reason to keep this requirment.</p>

[Xanrn]

<p>The problem isn't that you can't worship certain Gods.</p><p>The problem is the r-tarded nonsense Aeralik had about Good being Defensive and Evil being Offensive, which left a complete imbalance of the gods.</p><p>Rallos Zek is a better DPS god than anything the Good get and Anashti Sul makes him look tame.</p><p>I and others had this conversation with Aeralik during TSO beta, when the Good got yet another [Removed for Content] healer god and Evil got Sul.</p><p>Instead of taking of the limits which should be there, they need to rework pretty much the entire God System.</p><p>All the DPS want Anashti Sul because she is simply better than any of the other Gods for DPS, its the standard SoE power creep.</p><p>So no they shouldn't remove the restrictions, they should fix the mess Aeralik left.</p>

[Aull]

<p><cite>Azian@Everfrost wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>Atan@Unrest wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>Magichao wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>Yeah I understand the roleplaying aspect of things, I guess I wondered how other people felt in general. Its all good, I'll stick with the burning prince I guess =p</p></blockquote><p>Alignment in this game only matters for dieties and RP.  I fully advocate changing it to only RP.</p><p>If the game had remained as alignment driven as it was in orriginal beta, I would have a different opinion, but all significant penalties based upon alignment have been removed, its time for this one to go as well.</p></blockquote><p>Totally agree.  <span style="color: #00ff00; font-size: small;">The lines between good and evil alignment are pretty blurry these days</span>.  No real reason to keep this requirment.</p></blockquote><p>I would entertain some better distictions between evil alignment and good alignment. EQII is blurry with many things right now. I also like the fact that there should be advantages/disadvantages for a chosen alignment. As the game currently is evil/good means nothing other than the starting city and deity choices. I think it should go deeper than that.</p><p>Edited for typos. Sorry</p>

[Aull]

<p><cite>Ummudien@Guk wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>The problem isn't that you can't worship certain Gods.</p><p>The problem is the r-tarded nonsense Aeralik had about Good being Defensive and Evil being Offensive, which left a complete imbalance of the gods.</p><p>Rallos Zek is a better DPS god than anything the Good get and Anashti Sul makes him look tame.</p><p>I and others had this conversation with Aeralik during TSO beta, when the Good got yet another [Removed for Content] healer god and Evil got Sul.</p><p>Instead of taking of the limits which should be there, they need to rework pretty much the entire God System.</p><p>All the DPS want Anashti Sul because she is simply better than any of the other Gods for DPS, its the standard SoE power creep.</p><p>So no they shouldn't remove the restrictions, they should fix the mess Aeralik left.</p></blockquote><p>I think that with it this way it allows some type of distinction. I am sure there are many evil toons that want benefits of a good deity for their toons but can't have them. The door swings both ways.</p><p>I believe most of it is based on lore.</p><p>Edited for typos. Sorry.</p>

[Davngr1]

<p>yea i rember when playing an evil class ment that the game would be more difficult(hard mode).  it's why all my characters are evil but now the lines are gone thre is no difference between the two factions.    why should dietys have restrictions?</p>

[erin]

<p>Lets not have an entire thread of misspelling the word deity please.  Call em gods if you aren't sure <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></p><p>Sorry but about the third time it gets to me.  I'm no spelling guru, but this one word seems to get misspelled 99% of the time!</p><p>I personally like that there is a distinction, that who you worship matters a tiny bit, and yes, restrictions are ok, but again, like everything else in the game, balance is critical.</p>

[feldon30]

<p>The issue as raised many times is that there aren't useful deities appropriate for all 24 classes. Somewhere along the way, developers took lore and alignment VERY seriously, and so all good deities are about healing and protection, and all evil deities are about killing and disabling.</p><p><span style="color: #ff6600;"><strong>99% of people who are in Exile aren't there because it's a swell time.</strong></span></p><p>There is no useful deity for a ranger who may simply want to kill quickly, out of mercy. (hey, it sounds good, right? <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" /> )</p><p>You know there's something strange going on when the #1 deity for coercers is Anashti Sul.</p><p>I'm afraid to suggest any kind of deity "revamp" after the racial traits "revamp" made race pointless and removed all "color" or unique, fun, non-overpowered abilities. I'm not pushing harder for a deity revamp, because I think it would probably turn out as a case of "be careful what you wish for."</p>

[Aull]

<p><cite>feldon30 wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>The issue as raised many times is that there aren't useful deities appropriate for all 24 classes. Somewhere along the way, developers took lore and alignment VERY seriously, and so all good deities are about healing and protection, and all evil deities are about killing and disabling.</p><p><span style="color: #ff6600;"><strong>99% of people who are in Exile aren't there because it's a swell time.</strong></span></p><p>There is no useful deity for a ranger who may simply want to kill quickly, out of mercy. (hey, it sounds good, right? <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" /> )</p><p>You know there's something strange going on when the #1 deity for coercers is Anashti Sul.</p><p>I'm afraid to suggest any kind of deity "revamp" after the racial traits "revamp" made race pointless and removed all "color" or unique, fun, non-overpowered abilities. I'm not pushing harder for a deity revamp, because I think it would probably turn out as a case of "<span style="color: #00ff00; font-size: small;">be careful what you wish for</span>."</p></blockquote><p>I am a very big believer in "be careful what you wish for".</p><p>When I first started playing this game I enjoyed that not all classes were equal for the sake of balance. Its about choice and learning to accept the limitations to that decision. A paladin using Zek as their deity and an sk using Marr goes against the lore.</p><p>Racial revamp is a great example of every class loosing for the sake of balance and it still did not improve those in need of improvement.</p>