Noticed the class changes on test. Please make all classes neutral and let us RP. [Archive]

Paddyo

07-27-2010, 06:17 PM

Don't lose sight of what this post is referencing: all classes are neutral as of this test update EXCEPT rogues, shaman, crusaders, and summoners. So, this isn't about whether or not assassins will be in qeynos, because right now on test you can roll a high elf assassin.This post is saying, and I agree one hundred percent, if you are going to change it this much, change it all the way. Racially you are still going to be bound to cities, I presume...I.e. as a halfling I can't start off in Freeport as an assassin, but i can start off in Qeynos as one. The only real change here is the development team realizing that for the Queen to effectively rule in this messed up world that continues to unravel with the likes of the Theer and The Order of Rime, it might be necessary to hire a halfling rogue and ask them to do the work of an assassin. It really never made any sense, no matter how "good" The Queen and her subjects were, that there weren't some of these assassins running around protecting the interests of Qeynos.As for the classes that remain designated good or evil...why? I could make a VERY strong case that Captain Hook was an evil swashbuckler. One of the above posters mentioned "good" necros in Paineel. No reason at all to make the partial changes.And of course the reasons for this change PROBABLY tie into the new free to play model. Even so, making all classes able to be chosen from good or evil races should not impact that negatively, only positively.

Vesai

07-27-2010, 06:52 PM

So looks like the reason the 8 classes is F2P as a scout I was only able to make a brig or swash for free. All the rest of the scout who are now neutral required an upgrade.

Cusashorn

07-27-2010, 07:16 PM

THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO WAY THE LORE IN THIS GAME WOULD EVER ALLOW FOR A GOOD ASSASSIN, INQUISITOR, BRUISER, OR COERCER!THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO WAY THE LORE IN THIS GAME WOULD EVER ALLOW FOR AN EVIL MONK, TEMPLAR, ILLUSIONIST, OR RANGER EITHER!Why are you doing this? What possible reason do you have to break 5 years worth of lore and tradition and allow for this? The PVE servers are fine as they are. Sure, you allowed this for PVP servers because you quickly realized that it was a necessity to have some evil classes for raid requirements, but that restriction isn't on PVE servers, and there should be absolutely no reason why this should be put in.I swear, you guys are just changing the game because you want to see how much you can ruin it. I think you want this game to fail, which is why you constantly [Removed for Content] off the players by making these stupid and unnecissary changes. I'm [Removed for Content] off right now, and I'm doing my best to hold back from swearing at you. This is almost as bad as removing Qeynos and Freeport from the game as starting cities.Oh, but wait. You're just trying to appeal to new players better by letting them play as any race and class they want. NEWS FLASH! THEY ALREADY CAN! IT'S CALLED THE BETRAYAL QUESTLINE! So what if they have to work to play as the class they want. You put it into the game for a [Removed for Content] good reason! MAKE SURE YOU STICK WITH IT!

Iskandar

07-27-2010, 07:35 PM

Purr

07-27-2010, 08:13 PM

Well, there are pros and cons for both sides. But you went there half way already, SoE. So why not go full circle? I don't have a problem with a Paladin living in Neriak in order to do his good deeds savely leading little old Ladies over bridges to the other side. I have no problem with a SK living in Kelethin and pushing hot young Ladies of the hanging bridges to see them go splat, either. Or vice versa. At least not more of a problem then I have seeing an Assassin living in Qeynos.What i have a problem with is going half way. If you allow an Assassin or a Coercer to live in a good city, why not a Brigand or SK? So please think it over and either return our old good/evil classes to what they where before you threw this change on us, or go all the way and make all classes neutral. Don't single out a few classes that continue to be restricted just because you feel you need to keep some kind of Balance.My vote is for going back to what it was before the change. I can understand people wanting all classes neutral. But don't do this half-pasteriored change.

Katz

07-27-2010, 09:35 PM

I agree with the OP. Honestly, make all classes neutral and be done with it. I can't imagine that an Inquisitor or Coercer is more neutral than a Mystic or defiler.CHARACTER CREATION<ul><li>More classes are now neutral.</li><li>Neutral: Troubador, Dirge, Ranger, Assassin, Templar, Inquisitor, Fury, Warden, Coercer, Illusionist, Wizard, Warlock, Bruiser, Monk, Guardian, and Berserker</li><li>Good: Swashbuckler, Mystic, Conjurer, and Paladin</li><li>Evil: Brigand, Defiler, Necromancer, and Shadowknight</li></ul>

ShadowMunkie

07-27-2010, 09:58 PM

I honestly don't understand why you all are so upset. There is lore in game to allow assassins/coercers/illusionists, to be Good or Evil. Rangers is kinda well "unique".Assassin Lore: Even good aligned cities have assassins whether or not you know about them. Reason being is without assassins you have no true line of protection. Sure you have your guards and your "military" but, the true glory goto the unspoken assassins that go threw the thick and thin to do whatever they can to keep peace.Coercer Lore: Who says I can't use my powers to force people to do my bidding for the Queen herself? Why do they have to drop that training to become something they truely aren't?Illusionist Lore: Illsuionists' use their power to construct shadows to do their bidding, why do they have to drop that training to become something they truely aren't?Ranger Lore: This is a little harder to tell you how they can become evil but, um yeah I got nothing.Just because "lore" states I must change my way of life to become part of a new citizenship doesn't mean I am going to, finally the rulers of the cities have figured that out and are willing to accept other classes as citizens of their city. The Queen might one day need Coercers, Assassins, Bruisers, and Inquisitors. Luclin might one day need Illusionists, Rangers, Monks, and Templars.I agree they need to make all classes neutrual because this would make even more LORE and allow them to expand the quests and everything! Not just have it based on a set of changes people made hundred of years ago. Things change over the years of life. People work together to find peace and happiness. Maybe the disappearance of Luclin has changed the way people think about who they can truely accept and who they truely need and are willing to accept that. Changing their ways to do so. This is what I truely believe the developers meant when they made this change.

Caethre

07-27-2010, 10:20 PM

(( In general I love EQII, as I loved EQ1 before it, which is why I have been playing the two games now as a subscriber for the last ten years.But lorewise, the EQ franchise has been weakening continuously over the years, and this is another step to removing lore-based restrictions from the game.Norrath is not the real world. Everyone is not "liberal" and "likes eachother" in a world like Norrath, no more than it is any fantasy setting, game or book. It is a fantasy world at war with itself, and the gods (and the races that they created) are wholly opposed to eachother.Good vs Evil, the eternal battle.Look at Tolkein, the grandfather of all such fantasy lore worlds. You don't see 50% of elves joining the evil sides, and half of the orcs actually being rather nice guys really if you get to know them. Elves are good, Orcs are evil - yes there are some (very very few) exceptions amongst the strongly aligned races, and there are some very neutral races (like humans, who fight on both sides and even change sides sometimes).But fantasy is not meant to be entirely shades of grey, it is meant to have some entirely black and white parts to it; that is part of the allure, part of the charm. This beauty, this charm, is slowly removed by every change like this.If it were my decision, I would do the opposite, I would make a new server, without the class alignments being changed. But I would also delete the betrayal quest from existence entirely. Every player would have a choice what to play, but "stupid" choices that didn't fit the lore would not be permitted by game mechanics. Teir'Dal characters would be evil and that would be that, and so on. There would never ever be necromancers or shadowknights that were not deepest evil, or paladins which were not good.Sadly (for me) it is not my decision. And I suppose, in the end, it doesnt matter if some player ignores the lore and tries to make out that their vile Innoruuk-worshipping Teir'Dal Necromancer is actually "a good guy really", no matter how stupid that is, no matter how badly it fits into the lore. The reason that does not matter, is such players can just be ignored by other players who want a more lore-based game.However, as soon as the game-producer, SOE in this case, starts watering down the lore themselves, to accomodate such silliness (whether deliberately or as an aside to the real purpose), another part of the pure charm of Norrath is lost, and lost forever.It is not that I especially care that Monks and Bruisers as classes will now be neutral, for example. In fact, some of the old lore of Norrath might even suggest that might have been sensible to start with. Some of the other changes are rather more dubious, however.But the real problem is the erosion of the race-based alignments. And the last straw would be accomodating the (in my view) ridiculous suggestion in the opening post of this thread, because some classes (like some races) should always be evil in Norrath, as they are evil as part of the lore going back 10 years now.SOE, don't keep on this road. You will lose more of us if you do. That charm is what keeps people in fantasy worlds.Sigh. ))

DragonGem

07-27-2010, 10:25 PM

le sigh...all the time it took me to betray so I could have a dark elf ranger and now people will just be able to create one.Why is there so much neutrality happening with EQ2 lately? I love the division between good and evil. I hate that good people can walk around in Gorowyn and evil people can walk around New Halas. Give me more division!!!!

Zaldor

07-27-2010, 10:48 PM

<cite>Dasein wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Hirofortis@Everfrost wrote:</cite><blockquote>lol, there are already assassins in qeynos. Just because it is a good aligned city, don't make the mistake that they don't have the means to carry out things as needed. From a RP standpoint there is no reason to separate the classes. An assassin could be evil and doing it for money, or could be working for hte greater good by removing a dangerous force. either way, their is no reason to separate classes.</blockquote>My paladin has been hired to kill just as many people as any assassin.</blockquote>+1

ShadowMunkie

07-27-2010, 11:01 PM

<cite>DragonGem wrote:</cite><blockquote>le sigh...all the time it took me to betray so I could have a dark elf ranger and now people will just be able to create one.Why is there so much neutrality happening with EQ2 lately? I love the division between good and evil. I hate that good people can walk around in Gorowyn and evil people can walk around New Halas. Give me more division!!!!</blockquote>If division actually meant something on PvE servers. Right now Division between the two cities means nothing. You can freely go and come from any starting/housing city.

kartikeya

07-27-2010, 11:47 PM

I love the class changes for entirely selfish reasons, and freely admit that.But hey, if SOE is going to refuse to fix my class, being able to be an assassin OOCly and still stay in Halas is the next best thing.

StormQueen

07-28-2010, 12:10 AM

I haven't seen this addressed yet: Now that they are making several classes (including Inquisitor) neutral, what does this mean for me, a (very reluctant) resident of Freeport?Will I still have to betray to get to be a citizen of a "good" city, thus losing all my Tier 9 masters (and I have nearly all), or is there going to be another mechanic to the changes to circumvent this? And geez, Cusa, take a chill pill. You may style yourself lore-keeper but you are NOT in charge of any aspect of the game. SOE owns it. And of course there is a way around your "conventional" interpretation of LORE. Leeroy proves it. SOE knows, as do you, that hardcore RPers are a very small part of the population. Why would they keep in place a mechanic that may be limiting their income from paying customers, just to suit a small slice of the players? I'm not defending loss of lore here. Rather, I'm pointing out that this is a business, first and foremost. If SOE employees can't grow the business (increase profits), they get replaced by new hires that can, and do. Grow and survive, or stagnate and die.

Lera

07-28-2010, 12:35 AM

<cite>Felishanna@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>If it were my decision, I would do the opposite, I would make a new server, without the class alignments being changed. But I would also delete the betrayal quest from existence entirely. Every player would have a choice what to play, but "stupid" choices that didn't fit the lore would not be permitted by game mechanics. Teir'Dal characters would be evil and that would be that, and so on. There would never ever be necromancers or shadowknights that were not deepest evil, or paladins which were not good.Sadly (for me) it is not my decision. And I suppose, in the end, it doesnt matter if some player ignores the lore and tries to make out that their vile Innoruuk-worshipping Teir'Dal Necromancer is actually "a good guy really", no matter how stupid that is, no matter how badly it fits into the lore. The reason that does not matter, is such players can just be ignored by other players who want a more lore-based game.However, as soon as the game-producer, SOE in this case, starts watering down the lore themselves, to accomodate such silliness (whether deliberately or as an aside to the real purpose), another part of the pure charm of Norrath is lost, and lost forever.It is not that I especially care that Monks and Bruisers as classes will now be neutral, for example. In fact, some of the old lore of Norrath might even suggest that might have been sensible to start with. Some of the other changes are rather more dubious, however.But the real problem is the erosion of the race-based alignments. And the last straw would be accomodating the (in my view) ridiculous suggestion in the opening post of this thread, because some classes (like some races) should always be evil in Norrath, as they are evil as part of the lore going back 10 years now.</blockquote>Nice to hear that character concepts you disagree with are "stupid" and "silly". *rolleyes* Personally, I like the betrayal quest, and while I agree most fantasy has its good and evil races and EQ2 needs to stay that way, there's always room in the lore for individuals of those races to switch sides - and especially when it limits players into an overly-strict interpretation of the lore. Clearly, since the betrayal system has always been in EQ2, it's as much a part of the lore as Teir'Dal generally being evil. True, it's not in EQ1 (which is a big reason I don't play EQ1), but EQ2's always been a separate timeline.That said, I do agree that they've been eroding the good/evil dynamic for quite a while now, and it's not a good thing. I liked not being able to buy from Freeport on the broker. And I like the epic guards in Neriak - it makes sense that the Teir'Dal aren't going to just let you wander around their city easily. But this is just another change appealing to the MMO part of the game rather than the RPG, and I hope they don't do it. To the devs: BAD IDEA! Of course, past experience shows that this will happen, no matter how much complaining there is (see disabling of Qeynos and Freeport as starting cities).

FearDiadh

07-28-2010, 12:42 AM

<cite>Cusashorn wrote:</cite><blockquote>THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO WAY THE LORE IN THIS GAME WOULD EVER ALLOW FOR A GOOD ASSASSIN, INQUISITOR, BRUISER, OR COERCER!THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO WAY THE LORE IN THIS GAME WOULD EVER ALLOW FOR AN EVIL MONK, TEMPLAR, ILLUSIONIST, OR RANGER EITHER!Why are you doing this? What possible reason do you have to break 5 years worth of lore and tradition and allow for this? The PVE servers are fine as they are. Sure, you allowed this for PVP servers because you quickly realized that it was a necessity to have some evil classes for raid requirements, but that restriction isn't on PVE servers, and there should be absolutely no reason why this should be put in.I swear, you guys are just changing the game because you want to see how much you can ruin it. I think you want this game to fail, which is why you constantly [Removed for Content] off the players by making these stupid and unnecissary changes. I'm [Removed for Content] off right now, and I'm doing my best to hold back from swearing at you. This is almost as bad as removing Qeynos and Freeport from the game as starting cities.Oh, but wait. You're just trying to appeal to new players better by letting them play as any race and class they want. NEWS FLASH! THEY ALREADY CAN! IT'S CALLED THE BETRAYAL QUESTLINE! So what if they have to work to play as the class they want. You put it into the game for a [Removed for Content] good reason! MAKE SURE YOU STICK WITH IT!</blockquote>What would a poacher be if not an evil ranger? I always though rangers should be neutral.

Writer Cal

07-28-2010, 12:55 AM

I'd just picture "good" aligned assassins as the Norrathian equivalent of all those who've followed through with government sanctioned actions of hunting down and eliminating high threat enemies who they've deemed not feasible for capture. We have had and still have it in our own world. From our own country.

Anestacia

07-28-2010, 01:17 AM

Conjurer's are this games version of a Magician. In Original EQ a mage could be good or evil. I know thats a moot point since they havent changed that mechanic but it just further justifies the OP's point.I personally like the idea of two seperate factions but who's to say one is good or evil? I mean, Qeynosian's kill just as many mortals and animals alike as Freeportian's do. Plus, it is silly to assume just because you are of one particular alignment, that you have to agree with everything about it. Sure, some things that the darker races do might seem evil, but in their minds they are doing what is right. I'm okay with it either way but I can defitantly see the other side of the coin.

Mermut

07-28-2010, 02:13 AM

Making the alignment changes they've made and not going all the way is bizaare. I'm not sure how a brigand is 'more evil' then an assassin. My vote is to go all the way and make them all neutral or put it back. It makes no sense to leave just one 'pair' of each archtype restricted.

Gomora_Toad

07-28-2010, 02:16 AM

I've always hated games telling me that my characters are good or evil, so I support the neutrality change, but please extend it to all classes. Why is someone who kills things with fireballs and enslaves sentient elemental creatures considered good, while someone who uses a mindless, unfeeling corpse as a bodyguard is evil? Why have sorcerers always been able to choose their alignment even though their class flavors are very similar to summoners, minus the permanent pets? IIRC the class descriptions even call both warlocks and necros "masters of death and decay." Why are brigands so different from swashbucklers and assassins that a good one is unfathomable? They're all sneaky and deceptive and kill things by stabbing and poisoning them. Swashies and assassins even transfer some of their hate to other people, that seems like a pretty mean thing to do.The vast character customization options are some of the best things about this game, and allowing for more flexibility is always a good thing, in my opinion. Please consider making all classes neutral and letting players decide if their characters are good or evil. Then if someone wants to study necromancy so they can reanimate an orphan's parents and make them dance in front of him while cackling madly they can. But if they want to use their power to send zombies out to fight in place of living Qeynosian soldiers, they have that option as well.

Cusashorn

07-28-2010, 02:46 AM

There NEED TO BE LIMITATIONS! You can't make a good game if you just let everyone be whatever they want without working for it first.If they're going to make the betrayal system mostly pointless, then while we're at it, why not just start all characters at level 90 with 250 achievement points, fill Frostfang Sea and Timorous Deep with nothing but 80 Triple Down solo versions of Roehn Theer in all his forms and let the players just harvest the most powerful weapons in the game and be done with it!?"Donate to the Twink a Noob Foundation. Without your stuff, these poor S.O.Bs might actually have to PLAY THE GAME."

kartikeya

07-28-2010, 03:23 AM

For the record, since I forgot to mention it, I'm both a roleplayer and a raider. The reason I'm in favor of test changes, as stated before, is for an entirely selfish purpose, in that I've been absolutely miserable trying to raid on a ranger for the entirety of the expansion, and TSO wasn't much fun either. And SOE seems determined not to fix my class. I love the concept of a ranger, and my character, ICly, will always BE a ranger...but the ability to finally break down and play her as a functional raid class until SOE finally gets it into their noggin that rangers need help is a relief.Of course, I could have simply betrayed her and pretended to still live in Halas (I was planning on doing this), but this does make things much, much easier.As far as evil rangers go, there have been evil rangers in D&D since 3.5 (I think). I've also known at least one person who played an evil ranger in EQ2, and from what I saw of her RP, it was a solid concept. So I have no problem seeing this. EQ2 rangers are not attached to a deity like EQ1 rangers, have no divine magic like EQ1 rangers, and are, for all intents and purposes, merely a more ranged oriented version of assassin that enjoys hunting prey in the wilderness more than the city.And good aligned assassins? Someone has already pointed this out, but James Bond. And for that matter, pretty much any spy 'hero' in any media ever, unless they're being pitched as a point of view antagonist.Of course, all this talk of good and evil is a bit moot, seeing as they're being shifted to 'neutral', not good and evil, but I could see character concepts for both sides for everything except Inquisitor. Well, actually, I can see Inquisitor too, but that starts toeing the line between 'good guy' and 'well meaning fanatic'.One big problem I did see pointed out is the epic quests are a little...completely crazy in places for a character that might live in a good aligned city. The one I have personal experience with is the coercer epic. I mean, uh, you eat people in that quest. But then, that's older content, and I wouldn't want them changing that quest even if it's completely unfitting for the new alignment. That quest is fantastically insane.

Kamimura

07-28-2010, 04:22 AM

While I'm not the biggest fan of the change, if it's going to be done, there's no reason for it to not be done all the way. Swashbucklers are not more good than rangers. Defilers are not more evil than inquisitors. If you start to make a case for one class, you can make a case for any class to be neutral.

Cusashorn

07-28-2010, 04:23 AM

James Bond was a spy who killed anyone who had to, just like most of the quests in this game. That doesn't make him a professional assassin.

Paddyo

07-28-2010, 04:24 AM

Just to clarify my position as it sits IN MY HEAD: After reading the patch notes, I logged into the live servers and started berating this change to my guildies. What are they thinking? How can a templar be evil? How can a monk be evil? Many years though have taught me one thing: whether you or I think this change is correct or reasonable, this is the change they have decided upon, and it is tied, I'm certain, in some way to the mechanics of this new free to play travesty (and that is speaking as someone who spent the better part of the day on alpha extended, looking at the direction that server seems to be heading). As such, 40 some pages of posts won't change this from going live. They simply don't care what we think when they have made up their minds. In beta for TSO, pages and pages and pages of posts from players questioned making the "end line" priest ability on that AA tab a raidwide rez. Every other archetype got a useful damage/aggro or deaggro depending on archetype, and we got a raidwide rez when a large portion of the player base simply doesnt raid. It didn't matter that 60 some pages with 93% of the posts against it were in discussion, it went live and has stayed live, and I have never put a point there on any of my priests. Even when I was raiding, when TSO went live. It simply wasn't a valuable ability.Knowing all of this, my heart says leave the classes just the way they are, but my mind says "they have made their mind up, so encourage them to go ALL THE WAY."So, blank or get off the pot, so to speak. Either commit to stop destroying things about this game that make sense, or else lift the restrictions altogther and add Hunters.

Xand

07-28-2010, 09:45 AM

The betrayal quest line is in the game from the very launch of EQ2. This change is unecessary.However IF it is made it would make more sense for the "lore an feel" guys out there (I'm one of them) make it this way:-let the CLASS be evil / neutral / good just as it is now on the life servers (eg inquisitors can only start in the evil cities)-make every RACE "neutral" (every race can start everywhere)So that if you play an High Elf Assassin he was raised in Freeport, or Neriak or Gerowyn. That way it wouldn't be so absurd as the same High Elf beeing raised in Kelethin and learning his trade there.I can't think of a Templar trainer standing in the Temple of Innoruuk either.If this change is coming: please consider the "all races can start everywhere" instead of inquisitors being teached in Qeynos ...

DragonGem

07-28-2010, 12:49 PM

So now are my Dark Elf Ranger and my Gnome Monk going to be able to automatically move to an evil city just by doing the Citizenship Quest or are they going to have to betray if they now want to got to an Evil City?

Gilli

07-28-2010, 12:58 PM

Speaking of Paladins, is our Smite Evil AA going to get any love? Right now it only works on evil classes, and imo it is a big part of our DPS and fun factor as we are leveling.Just make it work on everyone now, since we're self-righteous anyway and getting a big heal nerf.

Vesai

07-28-2010, 01:18 PM

Looks like the alignment change comes down to this all the ones that have been left good/evil are the only ones that can be created on the F2P for free without upgrading their membership. So basically the ones left of us that are not in EQ2X are getting screwed for the F2P players. I stated in another post I am an exile swash which I was fine with since any good/evil character who chose a diety of the opposing city had this as their only choice but now because of F2P all those good classes can now get Anashti yay for being a rogue I guess. I have played Everquest for 10 years have been a staunch supporter of SOE and all the work they do but this is probably the end for me Rift looks pretty cool TBH.

Finora

07-28-2010, 01:40 PM

<cite>Powers wrote:</cite><blockquote>A bad, bad idea. There needs to remain some difference in the ethos between Freeport and Qeynos. Assassins in Qeynos? It destroys the whole idea of there being one "good" city and one "evil" city.RP is enhanced by having boundaries. Anything-goes RP is bad RP.Powers &8^]</blockquote>I always felt the OMG GOOD! OMG EVIL! set up of eq2 felt a bit contrived. Really, why couldn't an evil person learn to be awesome shooting a bow. In a world where an ogre born in Neriak can be a druid...people are flipping out about people being able to make a ranger there?There was a wood elf would be assassin of Lucan in Freeport before the tower crashed for those who remember the anniversary event (I think it was the anniversary). He was from Qeynos and there to take out Lucan.I'm sure the good ole rodcet folk could be entirely capable of bringing a little hurt down on non-believers as an inquisitor. I can see a mild mannered priest of Innoruuk focusing on his hate and preaching it as a templar rather than beating it into their skulls.Coercers & illusionists are both benders of the mind of their opponents. I can't see how it is oh soo good for one and ooo so evil for the other. Enchanters back in Eq1 did pretty much all the mind tricks of both and could be good or evil alligned.There used to be quests around Qeynos that alluded to the more seedy underside of the all too goody goody city.

Cusashorn

07-28-2010, 01:58 PM

<cite>Moha@Innovation wrote:</cite><blockquote>The betrayal quest line is in the game from the very launch of EQ2. This change is unecessary.However IF it is made it would make more sense for the "lore an feel" guys out there (I'm one of them) make it this way:-let the CLASS be evil / neutral / good just as it is now on the life servers (eg inquisitors can only start in the evil cities)-make every RACE "neutral" (every race can start everywhere)So that if you play an High Elf Assassin he was raised in Freeport, or Neriak or Gerowyn. That way it wouldn't be so absurd as the same High Elf beeing raised in Kelethin and learning his trade there.I can't think of a Templar trainer standing in the Temple of Innoruuk either.If this change is coming: please consider the "all races can start everywhere" instead of inquisitors being teached in Qeynos ...</blockquote>While I still think there should be certain limitations, I would have to think this would be a much more acceptable change instead. Keep all the classes by alignment, but allow races to start in any city. I'd be much happier to see this between the two.

iceriven2

07-28-2010, 03:32 PM

I am somebody that doesnt mind the changes, actually always thought a true fantasy MMO shouldn't have any racial/faction limitations on class, why? every fantasy story there is always a trator or unique indivual that goes against the cultural norm. It is what makes some the stories so great. why cant we as players do the same?Think of a game with various different factions, with different lvls of hatred/acceptance to each other. Now pretend for a sec your playing a good Elven race. But your weird and you like to play with the undead. Lets say you choose to go play in the Human Necro guild, you wear robe/hoods that hides your appearnce. There is no reason anyone in your home city/faction should ever know your a necro. As long as your not Summon zombies in front of the guards there is no real reason you shouldn't be able to do that.In a perfect MMO for me,it would be designed like that. Your class doesnt choose your faction. As a player your race starts in a racial city(inwhich you can later choose to change) Class chose and any faction related to it is "class" guild based. Old eq1 every city had a guild for the class you can be, same would apply but you have the option of switching over. So to referance eq1, it would be as if you started as a commoner, Elf in Kelethin. You want to be a necro so you head over to the catacombs of qeynos and join the underground necro guild there. Or you go the gnome city and join there necro guild, but every time you stroll back into Kelethin they still see you as a commoner. Adds variety and fun new aspect to game play.

Gungo

07-28-2010, 03:35 PM

As always cusa you fail to see beyond your own myopic view. Bottom line is every city will have both good and bad people. Just because they are a resident of freeport does not make them EVIL. Or Every resident of qeynos is good.Just because a character has learned specific abilites and traits and groomed to be a historically good class does not make them a good person. Lucan as everyone knows is an EVIL paladin. Painel shows us there are GOOD necros. You can do this for EVERY single class in game and litterally show each class can be good or evil. Most of which have specific in game examples of npcs.+1 for making all classes neutral.

Cusashorn

07-28-2010, 04:18 PM

^ Antonia does not allow for evil people to exist in her city. The Bloodsabers have to live down in the sewers because they know they'll be persecuted by the city otherwise. Antonia still knows they're down there and make efforts to remove them, so they know that she won't tolerate them being there.The worst part about this is that they're not going to bother explaining why these classes are suddenly going to be allowed to exist.Each class in this game have sufficient explanations why those classes are either good or evil.In EQlive, each race/class combo had questlines to explain why that faction exists- It makes those classes who they are. If there was one class found in races both good and evil, then those races would have lore to explain what makes their faction different from the others.They're not going to explain why assassins have been ruthless killers for the past 5 years of this game's existence and then suddenly good players can be them. If they did, I wouldn't be making a fuss about it.

Gungo

07-28-2010, 04:26 PM

<cite>Cusashorn wrote:</cite><blockquote>^ Antonia does not allow for evil people to exist in her city. The Bloodsabers have to live down in the sewers because they know they'll be persecuted by the city otherwise. Antonia still knows they're down there and make efforts to remove them, so they know that she won't tolerate them being there.The worst part about this is that they're not going to bother explaining why these classes are suddenly going to be allowed to exist.Each class in this game have sufficient explanations why those classes are either good or evil.In EQlive, each race/class combo had questlines to explain why that faction exists- It makes those classes who they are. If there was one class found in races both good and evil, then those races would have lore to explain what makes their faction different from the others.They're not going to explain why assassins have been ruthless killers for the past 5 years of this game's existence and then suddenly good players can be them. If they did, I wouldn't be making a fuss about it.</blockquote>YOU ARE WRONG.The main rogue/assassin guild in all of eq2 is located in qeynos not freeport not neriak....QEYNOSCircle of the unseen hand is the largest most influencial EVIL BASED asassin/rogue guild in norrath and its located in a good city.

skidmark

07-28-2010, 04:31 PM

There should be only three classes that are tied to an alignment, Paladin, Necro and SK.The rest of faction should be based on race. Like it or not, people judge on sight who/what you are. I don't see any reason that you couldn't have a Dark Elf Paladin. I just don't think you should be allowed to walk through the streets of Qeynos or Kelethin, no matter what you get your faction to. Your "home" would be in the Qeynos catacombs. Conversely I don't see why the lore would forbid a High Elf Necro, the only thing is you couldn't step foot in Neriak and if you went into freeport you would have to stay in the sewers.

Cusashorn

07-28-2010, 04:34 PM

<cite>Gungo wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Cusashorn wrote:</cite><blockquote>^ Antonia does not allow for evil people to exist in her city. The Bloodsabers have to live down in the sewers because they know they'll be persecuted by the city otherwise. Antonia still knows they're down there and make efforts to remove them, so they know that she won't tolerate them being there.The worst part about this is that they're not going to bother explaining why these classes are suddenly going to be allowed to exist.Each class in this game have sufficient explanations why those classes are either good or evil.In EQlive, each race/class combo had questlines to explain why that faction exists- It makes those classes who they are. If there was one class found in races both good and evil, then those races would have lore to explain what makes their faction different from the others.They're not going to explain why assassins have been ruthless killers for the past 5 years of this game's existence and then suddenly good players can be them. If they did, I wouldn't be making a fuss about it.</blockquote>YOU ARE WRONG.The main rogue/assassin guild in all of eq2 is located in qeynos not freeport not neriak....QEYNOSCircle of the unseen hand is the largest most influencial EVIL BASED asassin/rogue guild in norrath and its located in a good city.</blockquote>The Circle of Unseen Hands are more concerned with money than killing, but they only exist because they've stayed hidden well enough to not be pursued by the authorities. This game change to these classes is pretty much ACKNOWLEDGING that they exist in Qeynos or Kelethin or New Halas. You have to work for the city. Antonia wouldn't take kindly to 573 new assassins showing up looking for work.Like I said, there probably won't be any explanation for these changes. If there were, I wouldn't be making an issue about it.

Gungo

07-28-2010, 04:41 PM

<cite>Cusashorn wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Gungo wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Cusashorn wrote:</cite><blockquote>^ Antonia does not allow for evil people to exist in her city. The Bloodsabers have to live down in the sewers because they know they'll be persecuted by the city otherwise. Antonia still knows they're down there and make efforts to remove them, so they know that she won't tolerate them being there.The worst part about this is that they're not going to bother explaining why these classes are suddenly going to be allowed to exist.Each class in this game have sufficient explanations why those classes are either good or evil.In EQlive, each race/class combo had questlines to explain why that faction exists- It makes those classes who they are. If there was one class found in races both good and evil, then those races would have lore to explain what makes their faction different from the others.They're not going to explain why assassins have been ruthless killers for the past 5 years of this game's existence and then suddenly good players can be them. If they did, I wouldn't be making a fuss about it.</blockquote>YOU ARE WRONG.The main rogue/assassin guild in all of eq2 is located in qeynos not freeport not neriak....QEYNOSCircle of the unseen hand is the largest most influencial EVIL BASED asassin/rogue guild in norrath and its located in a good city.</blockquote>The Circle of Unseen Hands are more concerned with money than killing, but they only exist because they've stayed hidden well enough to not be pursued by the authorities. This game change to these classes is pretty much ACKNOWLEDGING that they exist in Qeynos or Kelethin or New Halas. You have to work for the city. Antonia wouldn't take kindly to 573 new assassins showing up looking for work.Like I said, there probably won't be any explanation for these changes. If there were, I wouldn't be making an issue about it.</blockquote>Do you even play eq2? Every quest I have been in involving the circle of unseen hand has them contracting me to KILL someone. Along with the fact FIPPY DARKPAW is the leader and a known assassin. They are an assassin guild operating from QEYNOS. Frankly your ability to ignore these glaring facts in your once again myopic view of the world doesnt surprise me.Also classes do not run around with a giant scarlet letter on their chest claiming to the world thier profession. Frankly the idea of an assassin running around announcing to the world thier profession does not jive with the idea of an assassin in the first place. They are a class shrouded in secrets and mystery hence the class specific hood that disguises thier face

Cawti

07-28-2010, 04:54 PM

This change doesn't really make sense to me. Why just those 8 left with good/evil restrictions? If you are changing that many it seems like it should be all or nothing.Even in the light of the EQ2x stuff it doesn't make sense, as rogues are a free class, but shaman, summoners and crusaders are not.The only thing I can think of (and please accept my apologies for donning the tin foil hat!) is that this is a prelude to the long-rumored class consolidations. And the plan is to condense warriors, brawlers, druids, clerics, bards, enchanters, predators and sorcerers, but not the others.I can see why they would not want to combine necros and conjy's in this scheme, likewise paly and SK are pretty flavorful opposites. But honestly, brigands and swashes could get condensed too... and the shaman are probably the closest together, mechanically, of the healers, not the furthest apart.It just doesn't make sense, unless they threw darts at the board saying, "Well we need *some* scout and healer to stay separate!"

Kordran

07-28-2010, 05:15 PM

<cite>Moha@Innovation wrote:</cite><blockquote>-make every RACE "neutral" (every race can start everywhere)</blockquote>This.My take on it would be to make all races neutral, allow classes to determine alignment (in the case of truly neutral classes like the Guardian, let the player choose alignment) and then let them pick any city to start in. If you want to be a Paladin who starts in Freeport, so be it. You'd still be good-aligned, but you'd be able to make use of the vendors, etc. (you'd just have to put up with Freep NPCs sneering at you everywhere you went, and perhaps inflate merchant NPC and broker fees for situations where you have a good class in an evil city and vice versa).It would give people the freedom to roleplay those scenarios (i.e.: an Assassin living in Qeynos) while still preserving the vestiges of alignment and the basic lore of the game. As far as trainers go, if you're in a opposite-alignment city, your trainers and some sympathetic merchants would be "hidden" (in backrooms, alleys, etc.) They could even introduce some new interesting quests to for that player who decides to be a Freeport Paladin, Qeynos Assassin and so on.Bottom line, there's more interesting ways they could open up the race/class/alignment rules than what they're proposing to do.

Cusashorn

07-28-2010, 05:40 PM

<cite>Gungo wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Cusashorn wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Gungo wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Cusashorn wrote:</cite><blockquote>^ Antonia does not allow for evil people to exist in her city. The Bloodsabers have to live down in the sewers because they know they'll be persecuted by the city otherwise. Antonia still knows they're down there and make efforts to remove them, so they know that she won't tolerate them being there.The worst part about this is that they're not going to bother explaining why these classes are suddenly going to be allowed to exist.Each class in this game have sufficient explanations why those classes are either good or evil.In EQlive, each race/class combo had questlines to explain why that faction exists- It makes those classes who they are. If there was one class found in races both good and evil, then those races would have lore to explain what makes their faction different from the others.They're not going to explain why assassins have been ruthless killers for the past 5 years of this game's existence and then suddenly good players can be them. If they did, I wouldn't be making a fuss about it.</blockquote>YOU ARE WRONG.The main rogue/assassin guild in all of eq2 is located in qeynos not freeport not neriak....QEYNOSCircle of the unseen hand is the largest most influencial EVIL BASED asassin/rogue guild in norrath and its located in a good city.</blockquote>The Circle of Unseen Hands are more concerned with money than killing, but they only exist because they've stayed hidden well enough to not be pursued by the authorities. This game change to these classes is pretty much ACKNOWLEDGING that they exist in Qeynos or Kelethin or New Halas. You have to work for the city. Antonia wouldn't take kindly to 573 new assassins showing up looking for work.Like I said, there probably won't be any explanation for these changes. If there were, I wouldn't be making an issue about it.</blockquote>Do you even play eq2? Every quest I have been in involving the circle of unseen hand has them contracting me to KILL someone. Along with the fact FIPPY DARKPAW is the leader and a known assassin. They are an assassin guild operating from QEYNOS. Frankly your ability to ignore these glaring facts in your once again myopic view of the world doesnt surprise me.Also classes do not run around with a giant scarlet letter on their chest claiming to the world thier profession. Frankly the idea of an assassin running around announcing to the world thier profession does not jive with the idea of an assassin in the first place. They are a class shrouded in secrets and mystery hence the class specific hood that disguises thier face</blockquote>You can operate from anywhere as long as you make sure nobody knows you're there. I'm well aware that Fippy Darkpaw is the leader of the Circle of Unseen Hands. I've done all the questlines involving them.Does Antonia acknowledge that Fippy is the leader of the Circle of Unseen Hands? Maybe, maybe not. Will Antonia acknowledge all these new assassins and coercers and inquisitors running around in her city? YES! When those assassins start doing the major questlines like the Qeynos Claymore, Shadow Odyssey, and Rescuing Lucan questlines, they will be more than famous enough to know that Qeynos has been watching them and acknowledges all they've contributed to the city. If you monitor something like that, then it's kinda hard to not notice what type of profession they are. The fact that the class trainers themselves will make no attempt to stay hidden in Qeynos means that the queen acknowledges who they are. As of this post, they haven't added in NPC's to any of the cities for the new classes who can start there, but if they do, then that means those cities acknowledge those classes.It still won't make any sense unless they're explained properly though.

Purr

07-28-2010, 07:01 PM

+1 for making all classes neutral while keeping the races as they areAfter seeing all the feedback and playing with the new combinations for a while I see no problem with a Paladin serving his ruler or deity (LD'L/Innorruk p.e.) and therefore by followers of other rulers/deities as being seen evil or simpler put: on the wrong side. Such is live, happens all the time: You can believe in doing the "right, good" thing - it doesn't mean everybody will see your "right, good" thing as such - they might well see it as the wrong one, depending on what that thing actually is and does to them. If that weren't the case, wars over religion and political interests would never happen.I really love how Rift tackles the faction setup.Purr~

Gungo

07-28-2010, 07:19 PM

<cite>Cusashorn wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Gungo wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Cusashorn wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Gungo wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Cusashorn wrote:</cite><blockquote>^ Antonia does not allow for evil people to exist in her city. The Bloodsabers have to live down in the sewers because they know they'll be persecuted by the city otherwise. Antonia still knows they're down there and make efforts to remove them, so they know that she won't tolerate them being there.The worst part about this is that they're not going to bother explaining why these classes are suddenly going to be allowed to exist.Each class in this game have sufficient explanations why those classes are either good or evil.In EQlive, each race/class combo had questlines to explain why that faction exists- It makes those classes who they are. If there was one class found in races both good and evil, then those races would have lore to explain what makes their faction different from the others.They're not going to explain why assassins have been ruthless killers for the past 5 years of this game's existence and then suddenly good players can be them. If they did, I wouldn't be making a fuss about it.</blockquote>YOU ARE WRONG.The main rogue/assassin guild in all of eq2 is located in qeynos not freeport not neriak....QEYNOSCircle of the unseen hand is the largest most influencial EVIL BASED asassin/rogue guild in norrath and its located in a good city.</blockquote>The Circle of Unseen Hands are more concerned with money than killing, but they only exist because they've stayed hidden well enough to not be pursued by the authorities. This game change to these classes is pretty much ACKNOWLEDGING that they exist in Qeynos or Kelethin or New Halas. You have to work for the city. Antonia wouldn't take kindly to 573 new assassins showing up looking for work.Like I said, there probably won't be any explanation for these changes. If there were, I wouldn't be making an issue about it.</blockquote>Do you even play eq2? Every quest I have been in involving the circle of unseen hand has them contracting me to KILL someone. Along with the fact FIPPY DARKPAW is the leader and a known assassin. They are an assassin guild operating from QEYNOS. Frankly your ability to ignore these glaring facts in your once again myopic view of the world doesnt surprise me.Also classes do not run around with a giant scarlet letter on their chest claiming to the world thier profession. Frankly the idea of an assassin running around announcing to the world thier profession does not jive with the idea of an assassin in the first place. They are a class shrouded in secrets and mystery hence the class specific hood that disguises thier face</blockquote>You can operate from anywhere as long as you make sure nobody knows you're there. I'm well aware that Fippy Darkpaw is the leader of the Circle of Unseen Hands. I've done all the questlines involving them.Does Antonia acknowledge that Fippy is the leader of the Circle of Unseen Hands? Maybe, maybe not. Will Antonia acknowledge all these new assassins and coercers and inquisitors running around in her city? YES! When those assassins start doing the major questlines like the Qeynos Claymore, Shadow Odyssey, and Rescuing Lucan questlines, they will be more than famous enough to know that Qeynos has been watching them and acknowledges all they've contributed to the city. If you monitor something like that, then it's kinda hard to not notice what type of profession they are. The fact that the class trainers themselves will make no attempt to stay hidden in Qeynos means that the queen acknowledges who they are. As of this post, they haven't added in NPC's to any of the cities for the new classes who can start there, but if they do, then that means those cities acknowledge those classes.It still won't make any sense unless they're explained properly though.</blockquote>So wait you did all the quests from the cricle of unseen hand that contract you to kill someone, doesnt that make you an assassin? And yet your still a citizen on qeynos... weird. It funny how you bend lore to fit your one sided view on the game and yet ignore it on all the other faults of your view. Another failing in your post is you do not need a trainer in a city to allow the class. PVP servers allow all classes in each city because they are allowed to betray citizenship yet retain thier class. I never asked for each class to START in each city. I asked for each class to be able to betray and be a citizen in either city.

Megavolt

07-28-2010, 09:16 PM

In all honesty I don't see why there is still any restrictions in by "evil/good" anymore. Freeport and Qeynos are no longer starting zones. Gorowyn is technically evil, but not so evil. Halas is techically good, but not so good. I'm saying remove the restrictions altogether if you choose to start in these 2 zones and leave them in if you start in Neriak or Kelethin. Make moving to Freeport easier for Neriak originals, and Qeynos for Kelethin originals. Make playing an "unacceptable" class from gorowyn or halas to either one harder by including a quest line that makes you prove your usefulness to them even though you might not have the same core values.Cut out the whole betrayal quests and make a new questline where you take refuge in either Halas or Gorowyn and reselect you path from there.

Cusashorn

07-29-2010, 12:27 AM

<cite>Gungo wrote:</cite><blockquote>So wait you did all the quests from the cricle of unseen hand that contract you to kill someone, doesnt that make you an assassin? And yet your still a citizen on qeynos... weird. It funny how you bend lore to fit your one sided view on the game and yet ignore it on all the other faults of your view. Another failing in your post is you do not need a trainer in a city to allow the class. PVP servers allow all classes in each city because they are allowed to betray citizenship yet retain thier class. I never asked for each class to START in each city. I asked for each class to be able to betray and be a citizen in either city. </blockquote>Ok I admit I read that wrong. I thought you were refering to one of the many other times you encounter Fippy Darkpaw. I know I've done it so many times that I can't keep track of what he's asked me to do in the past. I have completed the Darkmail Guantlets HQ and I believe he is mentioned there though.

WeatherMan

07-29-2010, 10:15 AM

<cite>Purr wrote:</cite><blockquote>I really love how Rift tackles the faction setup.Purr~</blockquote>How DOES Rift address this? I don't want to bring that topic up in this thread, so...got a link?Add me in as one who supports any race in any city, but not changing classes. There was a quest in Scale Yard, many a year back, where an Iksar slaver was talking about a 'high elf slave' that was supposedly right there, but that the game did not have a model for at the time (and thus, you could not see). This is but one excuse for having 'good' races in Freeport. Or that dark elf in Qeynos, who may have been born there just moments before his/her refugee mother's dying breath, and was raised by wood elves to become a ranger. Any roleplay scenario is possible.She won't post about it, I'm guessing, but my wife quietly let her subscription expire today (she is one of the quiet ten who quit for every one vocal person who leaves) - the decision to make her dark elf templar (which she did back in the days of 500 gnoll kills plus the three Named gnolls in Antonica) just another class that any dark elf can be, was, I think, the last straw. She had been a constant player since launch, so this is not something she did on a lark. I admit that the same effect concerning my high elf assassin is there - I am most definitely not amused. Granted, I still have a dark elf paladin, and she still has a high elf shadowknight (so the contrast is still there in those cases), but Norrath is shrinking, not physically, and not in a good way.Somehow, a starting good fae assassin or a evil dark elf monk just seem disjointed to me, without a good explanation/reason behind it. I won't go as far as Cusa and say this is an abomination, but it IS a disappointment. By itself, it is not enough to make me quit, but this PLUS the missus quitting likely will be.

Powers

07-29-2010, 10:38 AM

Look, folks, there's a big difference between being "an assassin" (someone who kills people for profit) and being "an Assassin" (someone trained as a Scout in the tradition that is, in Norrath, referred to as "Assassin training"). Yes, James Bond assassinates people. That doesn't make him "an Assassin" in Norrathian terms. He may not have an analogue in game terms at all; that's okay. He's probably closest to Swashbuckler, if you had to pick one.The problem is not that "well, Paladins could work for their evil deity" or "Paladins could work in secret in Freeport". The problem is that Paladins are Crusaders, and the culture in Freeport and Neriak is such that the Crusaders who are trained there come out as Shadowknights. It's not "Oooh, we hate Paladins so we don't allow them here!" It's "Those Qeynos-trained Crusaders are lightweights; we know how to train them right here in Freeport." They're two sides of the same coin.Let's look at Templars/Inquisitors. Most likely the average Norrathian citizen doesn't make a distinction -- Inquisitors and Templars are both Clerics; they just come at it from different directions. An Inquisitor is simply a Cleric who was trained in Freeport or Neriak or Gorowyn. A Templar is simply a Cleric who was trained in Qeynos or Kelethin or New Halas. They don't go looking for people of the opposite class because they don't need to. They fill the same role.There's no need for the Queen to say "Oh, we could use some Inquisitors, I guess I'll allow them now." That's like saying "Oh, maybe we should adopt some of Freeport's Cleric-training techniques, but we'll keep them totally separate from our Cleric-training techniques."It just doesn't make sense from a lore perspective, and it's more evidence that SOE doesn't care anymore about providing a coherent world with appropriate limitations. They went to all that trouble when the game was first in development, and did a great job with it, only to tear it down piece by piece by piece.Powers &8^]

Eriol

07-29-2010, 12:06 PM

To my lore eye, some classes MUST be good-only, and they are: Paladins, Templars, Monks, and Mystics. You MAY get some wiggle room on Monks due to the Iksar tradition in Kunark, but none of the others.And for the "evil-only" classes due to HOW they do their work: Shadowknights, Inquisitors, Bruisers, Defilers, Necromancers, and Coercers. There's not really much wiggle room here either.Some may ask about the Defiler/Mystic divide, and it's pretty much concrete: Mystics honor their ancestor spirits and get their willing help, Defilers twist and enslave.And beyond that, then there's the two classes to which there are (for some reason) good-only versions: conjurors and illusionists. There is NO REASON that these two could not be evil and have no "lore" reason. For conjurors it's worse, as they COULD be evil in EQ1 (Magicians), and an in-lore evil conjuror is in EQ2 (Najena).As for the class consolidation rumour, IMO it can't happen fast enough, though some classes will need to be more than merely combined (3-way between Wizard, Warlock, and Necro IMO, making Necro more DoT-focused and main-pet-only, no swarm IMO (leave to conjurors), and Wizzie being THE "blast" class for single OR group). But that's a whole other discussion.

Cusashorn

07-29-2010, 12:59 PM

<cite>Powers wrote:</cite><blockquote>The problem is not that "well, Paladins could work for their evil deity" or "Paladins could work in secret in Freeport". The problem is that Paladins are Crusaders, and the culture in Freeport and Neriak is such that the Crusaders who are trained there come out as Shadowknights. It's not "Oooh, we hate Paladins so we don't allow them here!" It's "Those Qeynos-trained Crusaders are lightweights; we know how to train them right here in Freeport." They're two sides of the same coin.</blockquote>Actually for Freeport and Neriak, it really is a case of "We hate Paladins". Lucan drove out the Knights of Marr and had them brutally slaughtered in Befallen, remember? Your whole post still stands though, as there's just no lore to go with these changes.

Venez

07-29-2010, 05:53 PM

I made alot of my toons certain races and then betrayed them to the class's that I wanted them so they would be quite unique. Now with this change you have taken the uniqueness out of any class/race combo that alot of people have put togather for the simple reason of being differant.I hate this change for the reason it totally wipes out any of the uniqueness of what Freeport / Qeynos have always been. Great way to just add blandness and hohum to all the races/classes. Why even have any factions for any of the cities if your just going to smear them all togather with neutrality?So much for my arasi Ranger, dwarf bruiser, halfling brigand, and a list of other toons that were all made on purpose to be unique and differant. /grats thanks for makeing the last 6+yrs useless.

Hamervelder

07-29-2010, 05:55 PM

<cite>Cusashorn wrote:</cite><blockquote>Why are you doing this? What possible reason do you have to break 5 years worth of lore and tradition and allow for this?</blockquote>The reason is simple. $$$

Gungo

07-29-2010, 06:01 PM

<cite>Venez@Permafrost wrote:</cite><blockquote>So much for my arasi Ranger, dwarf bruiser, halfling brigand, and a list of other toons that were all made on purpose to be unique and differant. /grats thanks for makeing the last 6+yrs useless.</blockquote>Do you honestly think a dwarf bruiser, halfling brigand, and arsai ranger are unqiue?I have seen more of those classes/race combination then I ever have for my troll bruiser which is both the least played race and least played class in game and it is considered a typical class.Anyway I do think all classes should be avialable to all cities. In otherwords I think all classes should be neutral and able to start in every city. Except Paladin/shadowknight, Defiler/mystic, Necromancer/Conjuror, Assassin/Ranger. I think the listed classes however should be allowed to betray cities after they start in thier respective alignments and freely live in either evil/good after they betray cities. (which should not effect thier spell quality)

Drathstar

07-29-2010, 06:30 PM

Honestly the only way I find this change acceptable is if it was made so a class could betray to any city and keep their class OR change it, it's a question of 'I know how to be an assassin but I'm moving because I don't wanna do it cuz killing is fun, I wanna do it for a greater purpose so I'm moving to qeynos/halas/kelethin' I disagree with allowing an assassin to START in a good city however. Opening it up in this way make sense to me because just because I have a change of heart doesn't mean I forgot how to 'assassinate' and have to learn 'sniper shot' but I don't think that it is appropriate to start in new halas and have someone teaching you how to stab people in the back for fun. Pally/SK is the only one I really have a problem with in this line of thought because traditionally if a crusaider strayed from the faith like a priest they lost their powers until they either devoted themself to a new god or made amends with their current diety just from a classical RPG viewpoint.

Cusashorn

07-29-2010, 06:50 PM

Cronyn just told me that there will be explanations for all these classes being able to start in the other cities. They won't be put in right away with GU 57, but they'll be in soon afterwards.

WeatherMan

07-29-2010, 07:34 PM

<cite>Venez@Permafrost wrote:</cite><blockquote>So much for my arasi Ranger, dwarf bruiser, halfling brigand, and a list of other toons that were all made on purpose to be unique and differant. /grats thanks for makeing the last 6+yrs useless.</blockquote>Actually, your halfling brigand is still just fine where he is - you still have to start out as a swashie, and then betray to brigand, so he will not lose the effort you've put into him. Your dwarf and your arasai, though, are SOL, same as my high elf assassin and halfling bruiser (and despite rumors to the contrary, I have seen many more troll bruisers than halfling ones...although good money says that isn't going to be the case for much longer).I will agree with keeping the paladin/shadowknight and mystic/defiler classes where they are. The others make less sense to me, and are obviously there only because they add scouts and mages to the warriors and priest in the 'one of each in each city, the rest are neutral' mix.I will be most interested to hear Cronyn's take on this. I am half-expecting a line of smoke up the knickers, but I will wait to see what he says.

Ryai

07-29-2010, 07:43 PM

Personally, at the rate lore is going, I expect Antonia and Lucan to get married any day now.

Enever

07-29-2010, 09:41 PM

*Watches as game lore disintegrates*

Venez

07-29-2010, 11:06 PM

<cite>Gungo wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Venez@Permafrost wrote:</cite><blockquote>So much for my arasi Ranger, dwarf bruiser, halfling brigand, and a list of other toons that were all made on purpose to be unique and differant. /grats thanks for makeing the last 6+yrs useless.</blockquote>Do you honestly think a dwarf bruiser, halfling brigand, and arsai ranger are unqiue?I have seen more of those classes/race combination then I ever have for my troll bruiser which is both the least played race and least played class in game and it is considered a typical class.Anyway I do think all classes should be avialable to all cities. In otherwords I think all classes should be neutral and able to start in every city. Except Paladin/shadowknight, Defiler/mystic, Necromancer/Conjuror, Assassin/Ranger. I think the listed classes however should be allowed to betray cities after they start in thier respective alignments and freely live in either evil/good after they betray cities. (which should not effect thier spell quality)</blockquote>Well on Permafrost I am the only 90 Arasai Ranger, and there are very few of the others at level 90 - so yes that makes them unique, unlike the 400 WE rangers, or half elf. or the 500 iksar bruisers there are a couple dwarfs - so yes that makes them unique.I thinking removeing the alingment at this stage in the game is a garbage move. The only thing it does is add blandness and zero ablility to make a unique or less rare of a class/race combintation. Not to mention the fact that it goes against everything that what made Freeport evil and unique and Qeynos good and unique. While your at it just merge all fighters in to one tank class, why have any of them unique, since they all do the same thing anyway.

Surculus

07-30-2010, 05:36 AM

As some of you may or may not know, PvP Servers have this feature. You can be a Qeynos based Shadowknight or a Freeport based Templar. This change came into effect when the PvP-RP Server Venekor was still around. The update was implemented mainly to balance things out for faction based raiding and grouping since you couldn't have both a Defiler and a Templar in a raid previous to this update unless you were in exile.On the RP side of things, the guild I am in, Firiona Vie's Champions (Good aligned guild as the name suggests) had a hard time justifying first, the acceptance of the Tier'Dal and other races into their ranks and secondly the variety of evil based classes. RP wise this can be obtained with cleaver and creative reasoning though on the other side of game mechanics i think this would be a bad move.With RP servers on PvP based servers, the two factions of Good and evil are at war. Neither side can communicate with the other, group or in any way co-exist at certain times it seems. Being able to be a good aligned baddie or vice versa works here because there is still that separation of good and evil. On PvE servers where all players can communicate and interact with each other it seems to be pointless at least in the way of game mechanic. Let us RP our toons our own way? Well it can be hard to justify why a Coercer who controls and twists peoples minds can be good in any way. Even though this may be hard, it is still not impossible. But to be honest i would rather adapt my RP to the environment i am placed in, it makes it more fun and interesting to me personally.My apologies if these points on PvP servers have already been raised. i have to completely read this thread yet.

Surculus

07-30-2010, 05:46 AM

On a different note.What the hell SOE? This is really the best use of your time and out money? The old phrase "If it ain't broke don't fix it." comes to mind. It wasn't broken, there was nothing wrong with it, there was no need to change it so why the hell have you? You have added a lot of cool stuff this update it seems but this seems pointless and a waste of time. There needs to be diversity in the two factions otherwise there is no reason for people to try the other faction. Really seems pointless.EDIT/ADDITION: In what way are Coercers neutral? They twist, control and manipulate peoples minds, forcing their bodies to do things against their will that usually lead into acts that are detrimental to either themselves or their own kind.

BabyAngel

07-30-2010, 06:30 AM

I am also a bit concerned about the faction imbalance this will produce.... theres already faction problems on most the servers and freeport is crazily out numbered,

Travleer33

08-03-2010, 02:58 PM

<cite>Aull wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Powers wrote:</cite><blockquote>A bad, bad idea. There needs to remain some difference in the ethos between Freeport and Qeynos. Assassins in Qeynos? It destroys the whole idea of there being one "good" city and one "evil" city.RP is enhanced by having boundaries. Anything-goes RP is bad RP.Powers &8^]</blockquote>Truth.</blockquote>This indicates you have little imagination or real life experience. The restrictions are silly from any angle you look at it in this particular game.

Hikinami

08-04-2010, 09:58 AM

So was the question of the new neutral classes having to betray or not answered? I want to know if I can just do a citizenship quest on my new "neutrals" instead of going through haven.

Barx

08-04-2010, 11:35 AM

<cite>Hikinami@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>So was the question of the new neutral classes having to betray or not answered? I want to know if I can just do a citizenship quest on my new "neutrals" instead of going through haven.</blockquote>Being a neutral class doesn't mean you can change citizenship without going through betrayal like everyone else. It just means that you can pick the same class after betraying (but still lose your masters).

Hikinami

08-04-2010, 12:00 PM

<cite>Barx@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Hikinami@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>So was the question of the new neutral classes having to betray or not answered? I want to know if I can just do a citizenship quest on my new "neutrals" instead of going through haven.</blockquote>Being a neutral class doesn't mean you can change citizenship without going through betrayal like everyone else. It just means that you can pick the same class after betraying (but still lose your masters).</blockquote>Oh right. Wow I don't know where my brain went on that one.

jester0770

08-06-2010, 01:40 PM

I saw speak of a whole bunch evil/good classes becoming neutral. Nowhere did I see any talk of the race alignment change. With that said doesn't that mean a Dark Elf or Troll whatever class would be stuck in an evil city, or did I miss some talk of races becoming neutral.

Amphibia

08-06-2010, 02:17 PM

<cite>Cusashorn wrote:</cite><blockquote>^ Antonia does not allow for evil people to exist in her city.</blockquote>How would you define "evil people"? I know fantasy lore tends to be real simplified in this aspect, but it really doesn't have to be. Personally I prefer it not quite so black and white, so I have no issue with this change... except:And this is for the devs: PLEASE GO ALL THE WAY. Don't leave a few classes restricted "just because" (that's how it looks, quite honestly), either do this 100% or not at all. Right now it doesn't make any sense.

Sharakari

08-06-2010, 02:19 PM

Personally I could care less about the alignment of classes but if all classes become neutral, as a "good" character I want to be able to do all the evil questlines in all the evil cities!

Rick777

08-06-2010, 02:35 PM

They ruined the lore when they made betrayal easy. At this point I don't think I care anymore about alignment, but I remember being one of the first toons to have an Iksar Templar back when it was very hard and time consuming to betray. Now it means nothing so they might as well go ahead and make everyone neutral.It's when they combine classes is when I think I'll be bummed. My Templar is different enough from an Inquisitor that it gives it a lot of flavor playing him, I will definitely miss being a Templar and not just a Cleric.

Myrien

08-06-2010, 02:42 PM

<cite>Nevissa@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>While I'm not the biggest fan of the change, if it's going to be done, there's no reason for it to not be done all the way. Swashbucklers are not more good than rangers. Defilers are not more evil than inquisitors. If you start to make a case for one class, you can make a case for any class to be neutral.</blockquote>Speaking of swashbucklers, I honestly never understood why they're a 'good' class, rather than a neutral class. If memory serves correctly, I believe that swashbucklers were described as being cut-purses in the original EQ2 manual. While Robin Hood may have been a famous legendary thief, I can't think of too many times when thieves were ever considered to be 'good'. Swashbucklers should have been a neutral class, from the start.A few others that have never sat right with me: -How is a warlock a 'good' character? They use disease and poison to kill their enemies. How is that good? Shadowknights and necromancers use the same tools - disease and poison - and yet they're somehow evil, while warlocks can be good? If warlocks can use disease and death for good, then shadowknights and necromancers should be able to do the same things. It's not the tools that make one evil; it's how you use them. If disease and poison are acceptable tools for one class to be good-aligned, then they should be acceptable tools of good for all classes that use them. -Whoever said that a paladin's divine power had to be good divine power? Are evil and neutral gods not also divine in Norrath? It would be logical to me that a paladin could serve any deity, and receive that deity's divine power.-Every nation and empire needs dirty deeds done from time to time. Ergo, every nation and empire needs assassin-type characters. They aren't necessarily evil.-Why are illusionists 'good' and coercers 'evil'? Both overpower the minds of their enemies to achieve victory.Some people are making the argument that there should be a complete separation between good and evil. In EQ2, however, good and evil really aren't separated along class boundaries. Najena being an evil conjuror has been mentioned. Dartain is arguably a 'good' or at least neutral necromancer. The necromancers in Paineel are certainly neutral, if not good. Throughout the entire game, players are hired to murder, steal, pillage, burn, and destroy pretty much everything they see. My paladin has been hired to kill far, far more people than my necromancer. Forgive me, but there's not much 'good' about that. Ergo, in my mind at least, good is less about a character's class, than it is about their motives and actions.

Alenna

08-06-2010, 02:48 PM

<cite>Rick777 wrote:</cite><blockquote>They ruined the lore when they made betrayal easy. At this point I don't think I care anymore about alignment, but I remember being one of the first toons to have an Iksar Templar back when it was very hard and time consuming to betray. Now it means nothing so they might as well go ahead and make everyone neutral.It's when they combine classes is when I think I'll be bummed. My Templar is different enough from an Inquisitor that it gives it a lot of flavor playing him, I will definitely miss being a Templar and not just a Cleric.</blockquote>Betrayal easy, it took me a few months to finish betraying and getting faction with qeynos to move my Ragtonga fury and I was even duoing with a friend during that time.

Rick777

08-06-2010, 02:50 PM

<cite>Alenna@Guk wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Rick777 wrote:</cite><blockquote>They ruined the lore when they made betrayal easy. At this point I don't think I care anymore about alignment, but I remember being one of the first toons to have an Iksar Templar back when it was very hard and time consuming to betray. Now it means nothing so they might as well go ahead and make everyone neutral.It's when they combine classes is when I think I'll be bummed. My Templar is different enough from an Inquisitor that it gives it a lot of flavor playing him, I will definitely miss being a Templar and not just a Cleric.</blockquote>Betrayal easy, it took me a few months to finish betraying and getting faction with qeynos to move my Ragtonga fury and I was even duoing with a friend during that time.</blockquote>A "few months" is not what I would call easy, a couple of hours is what it takes now to do fully. Plus try doing that with a Templar back in the old days, ahh the good ole days.

kelvmor

08-06-2010, 07:31 PM

<cite>Kizdane@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Nevissa@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>While I'm not the biggest fan of the change, if it's going to be done, there's no reason for it to not be done all the way. Swashbucklers are not more good than rangers. Defilers are not more evil than inquisitors. If you start to make a case for one class, you can make a case for any class to be neutral.</blockquote>Speaking of swashbucklers, I honestly never understood why they're a 'good' class, rather than a neutral class. If memory serves correctly, I believe that swashbucklers were described as being cut-purses in the original EQ2 manual. While Robin Hood may have been a famous legendary thief, I can't think of too many times when thieves were ever considered to be 'good'. Swashbucklers should have been a neutral class, from the start.A few others that have never sat right with me: -How is a warlock a 'good' character? They use disease and poison to kill their enemies. How is that good? Shadowknights and necromancers use the same tools - disease and poison - and yet they're somehow evil, while warlocks can be good? If warlocks can use disease and death for good, then shadowknights and necromancers should be able to do the same things. It's not the tools that make one evil; it's how you use them. If disease and poison are acceptable tools for one class to be good-aligned, then they should be acceptable tools of good for all classes that use them. -Whoever said that a paladin's divine power had to be good divine power? Are evil and neutral gods not also divine in Norrath? It would be logical to me that a paladin could serve any deity, and receive that deity's divine power.-Every nation and empire needs dirty deeds done from time to time. Ergo, every nation and empire needs assassin-type characters. They aren't necessarily evil.-Why are illusionists 'good' and coercers 'evil'? Both overpower the minds of their enemies to achieve victory.Some people are making the argument that there should be a complete separation between good and evil. In EQ2, however, good and evil really aren't separated along class boundaries. Najena being an evil conjuror has been mentioned. Dartain is arguably a 'good' or at least neutral necromancer. The necromancers in Paineel are certainly neutral, if not good. Throughout the entire game, players are hired to murder, steal, pillage, burn, and destroy pretty much everything they see. My paladin has been hired to kill far, far more people than my necromancer. Forgive me, but there's not much 'good' about that. Ergo, in my mind at least, good is less about a character's class, than it is about their motives and actions.</blockquote>Warlocks are worse than just disease and poison. They use -Void- magic. They are directly in contact with the Void. They even summon Void demons, like Nightbloods. Yet, they're still -neutral-. Makes no sense.

ElnAckom

08-06-2010, 11:53 PM

Reiteration: Turn the content people loose on in-game lore and quest-based explanations for this. Hire Ouka as a contractor if you need to, LOL!

Alenna

08-07-2010, 12:14 AM

<cite>Rick777 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Alenna@Guk wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Rick777 wrote:</cite><blockquote>They ruined the lore when they made betrayal easy. At this point I don't think I care anymore about alignment, but I remember being one of the first toons to have an Iksar Templar back when it was very hard and time consuming to betray. Now it means nothing so they might as well go ahead and make everyone neutral.It's when they combine classes is when I think I'll be bummed. My Templar is different enough from an Inquisitor that it gives it a lot of flavor playing him, I will definitely miss being a Templar and not just a Cleric.</blockquote>Betrayal easy, it took me a few months to finish betraying and getting faction with qeynos to move my Ragtonga fury and I was even duoing with a friend during that time.</blockquote>A "few months" is not what I would call easy, a couple of hours is what it takes now to do fully. Plus try doing that with a Templar back in the old days, ahh the good ole days.</blockquote>drat I can't get onn to test do you mean to tell me they changed the betrayal quest for GU57?

Cusashorn

08-07-2010, 01:18 AM

^ No, they just made it pointless for anyone to now go through it unless they're still a Swashbuckler, Brigand, Paladin, Shadowknight, Mystic, Defiler, Conjurer, or Necromancer.

Alenna

08-07-2010, 02:00 AM

<cite>Cusashorn wrote:</cite><blockquote>^ No, they just made it pointless for anyone to now go through it unless they're still a Swashbuckler, Brigand, Paladin, Shadowknight, Mystic, Defiler, Conjurer, or Necromancer.</blockquote>aaah kk

Onorem

08-07-2010, 02:12 AM

<cite>Alenna@Guk wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Rick777 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Alenna@Guk wrote:</cite>A "few months" is not what I would call easy, a couple of hours is what it takes now to do fully. Plus try doing that with a Templar back in the old days, ahh the good ole days.</blockquote>drat I can't get onn to test do you mean to tell me they changed the betrayal quest for GU57?</blockquote>It's not a new change for GU57. When's the last time you betrayed? It hasn't been a months, weeks, or days (depending on time constraints) issue for quite some time. It takes a few hours from start to finish if you have the time to grind it out.

Rick777

08-07-2010, 09:01 AM

<cite>Alenna@Guk wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Rick777 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Alenna@Guk wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Rick777 wrote:</cite><blockquote>They ruined the lore when they made betrayal easy. At this point I don't think I care anymore about alignment, but I remember being one of the first toons to have an Iksar Templar back when it was very hard and time consuming to betray. Now it means nothing so they might as well go ahead and make everyone neutral.It's when they combine classes is when I think I'll be bummed. My Templar is different enough from an Inquisitor that it gives it a lot of flavor playing him, I will definitely miss being a Templar and not just a Cleric.</blockquote>Betrayal easy, it took me a few months to finish betraying and getting faction with qeynos to move my Ragtonga fury and I was even duoing with a friend during that time.</blockquote>A "few months" is not what I would call easy, a couple of hours is what it takes now to do fully. Plus try doing that with a Templar back in the old days, ahh the good ole days.</blockquote>drat I can't get onn to test do you mean to tell me they changed the betrayal quest for GU57?</blockquote>As it is currently it's a couple of hours work, if even that.

kelvmor

08-07-2010, 04:00 PM

I gotta say, I disagree with the OP. But that's because I disagree with several other classes they made neutral.I don't care how 'good' you are, Necromancy is never going to be allowed in Qeynos. Which also means no Shadowknights. Why? Any Necromancer who tries to take up residence in the city would immediately have a small army's worth of Paladins and clerics busting down their door and smiting the place to hell. The Celestial Watch is not going to allow abominations of nature and the gods to enter the city. 'Nuff said.Defilers are also inherently evil. They -enslave- souls to use in their generally dark, hexing magics.

Chefren

08-08-2010, 03:25 AM

<cite>Rick777 wrote:</cite><blockquote>A "few months" is not what I would call easy, a couple of hours is what it takes now to do fully. Plus try doing that with a Templar back in the old days, ahh the good ole days.</blockquote>Back in the good old days you couldn't do it as a Templar, you had to do it as a Cleric.

Anastasie

08-08-2010, 11:31 AM

They just need to change the whole process and separate changing city alignment from changing classes. This should have been fixed a long time ago.

Banbha

08-08-2010, 12:11 PM

<cite>Cawti@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>This change doesn't really make sense to me. Why just those 8 left with good/evil restrictions? If you are changing that many it seems like it should be all or nothing.</blockquote>I agree. Leave it alone or make all classes neutral. Why single out these 8 classes?!?

Myrien

08-08-2010, 02:42 PM

<cite>kelvmor wrote:</cite><blockquote>I gotta say, I disagree with the OP. But that's because I disagree with several other classes they made neutral.I don't care how 'good' you are, Necromancy is never going to be allowed in Qeynos. Which also means no Shadowknights. Why? Any Necromancer who tries to take up residence in the city would immediately have a small army's worth of Paladins and clerics busting down their door and smiting the place to hell. The Celestial Watch is not going to allow abominations of nature and the gods to enter the city. 'Nuff said.Defilers are also inherently evil. They -enslave- souls to use in their generally dark, hexing magics.</blockquote>Why then, are warlocks not inherently evil? As has been stated, they not only use disease and poison as tools (as do shadowknights, necromancers, and defilers) but they employ Void magic. How can there possibly be any good in a person who uses magic that way, if in fact the classes that you referenced are inherently evil? In my opinion, your position, and the allowing of good warlocks while prohibiting other classes that use the same tools from being 'good', is based more upon an arbitrary decision, rather than any logical sense of continuity.

kelvmor

08-08-2010, 07:26 PM

<cite>Kizdane@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>kelvmor wrote:</cite><blockquote>I gotta say, I disagree with the OP. But that's because I disagree with several other classes they made neutral.I don't care how 'good' you are, Necromancy is never going to be allowed in Qeynos. Which also means no Shadowknights. Why? Any Necromancer who tries to take up residence in the city would immediately have a small army's worth of Paladins and clerics busting down their door and smiting the place to hell. The Celestial Watch is not going to allow abominations of nature and the gods to enter the city. 'Nuff said.Defilers are also inherently evil. They -enslave- souls to use in their generally dark, hexing magics.</blockquote>Why then, are warlocks not inherently evil? As has been stated, they not only use disease and poison as tools (as do shadowknights, necromancers, and defilers) but they employ Void magic. How can there possibly be any good in a person who uses magic that way, if in fact the classes that you referenced are inherently evil? In my opinion, your position, and the allowing of good warlocks while prohibiting other classes that use the same tools from being 'good', is based more upon an arbitrary decision, rather than any logical sense of continuity.</blockquote>I have to say, I'm pleased to see more people with intelligence on these boards.Back to Warlocks. Disease is not a primary Warlock thing, in my experience. Void magic and poison are. I have the feeling that originally, Warlocks were supposed to be evil and Wizards were supposed to be good. Admittedly, I myself have RP'd an Erudite Warlock in Qeynos as being secretly evil, doing twisted experiments with bio and Void magic on people or creatures he's abducted in the basement of his otherwise quaint and homey South Qeynos estate.I've never understood why they aren't evil. Void magic is something one would think as being seen as evil. My good-aligned characters tend to be suspicious of warlocks. Just like they're suspicious of all the supposedly reformed (I.E. Drizzt-like) evil races that run about in Qeynos. My dwarves are not going to trust dark elves, ogres, Iksar, or arasai. They don't even trust mages in general, and there's no way they're going to even try to do anything other than attack a troll.I don't have an explanation as to how a Warlock could not be evil. I know someone who RPs a good Warlock, someone that mostly focuses on the poison side of things, because she's also an alchemist. She pulls it off.As for Necromancers, Shadowknights, and Defilers... That wasn't really an arbitrary decision. By lore standards, Qeynosian morals and such wouldn't allow for anyone that practices those three dark arts to live there without constant persecution by the Celestial Watch and the Paladins of the Guard. Mithaniel Marr's worshippers in New Halas wouldn't let someone of that profession live there. Kelethin sees Necromancy and such as an abomination of nature, as I said earlier. I'm basing this off the lore.

Mikkachu

08-08-2010, 07:58 PM

This is difficult, in some ways.It's much easier to come up with reasons why classes could be evil then it is for classes to be good. The Iskar brawler tradition was originally a monk one, and there are still roots of that in their current fighting style. Najena is certainly an evil conjurer. We've ran in to poachers and other rangers who've turned their abilities on the animals one would think they would protect. Illusions can certainly be used for evil (...although Lucan may have some issues against enchanters these days). Evil pirates are a staple of the genre, and swashbucklers are usually more gray then anything.While Lucan would very much not want Paladins in his city (and that probably has a lot more to do with Lucan then anything else- if paladin is specifically holy warrior who gains powers from their faith in the gods, I coud see one fitting in to Neriak or Gorowyn), most of the others are a bit give and take. Templar and Mystic, I can't come up with any 'evil' examples of note, but I imagine someone can come up with something.On the other hand... there are examples of good Necromancers in the game. Although the names are harsh, I could see Bruisers and maybe Birgands being able to find a place in the city of good: the biggest arguements against Bruisers are that the fight in a brutal style that hurts others very muchly and follow a cruel idealogy when they stop to consider it, which is not on its own 'evil', and the biggest against brigands is probably 'they're jerks who fight dirty'. Shadow Knights, coercers, assassins, and defilers all follow philosophy that actively harms, and a good Inquisitor is a bit hard to take.That's not even, though, which is what it needs to be....I don't know. I think I'd rather we stick with what we have, or everything opened for everything. Either the 'roleplay'/'lore' reasons matter, in which there is no way Antonica is going to have assassins and coercers running around her city, or the players are trusted to come up with their own reasons for the class breakdown, in which Antonica may allow that specific coercer and assassin in their city, as she knows that they are on the side of good despite their methods, and thus she should be able to trust this specific good necromancer, too. Either keep with the lore, or take the rug out, I think.

Morghus

08-08-2010, 09:11 PM

The way I see it, good and evil in relation to the classes is way too archaic in its current distinction of black and white. The real world is typically grey. What ever happened to judging people by their merits? I've seen a lot of mention as to how warlocks shouldn't be neutral, however I believe that is wrong.Warlocks use the power of poison, disease, and the void. I fail to see how such power is inherently evil, magic itself as a whole would be neutral right? What matters more in my opinion is the intent behind the individual's actions not merely their profession or methods.Just look at Gorowyn in comparison to other cities. It is mechanically evil, yet good and neutral players need not fear the guards, and are even able to interact with their merchants I believe.On the other hand, a player from Gorowyn is killed on sight in Qeynos and while tolerated in New Halas they are unable to interact with merchants. As usual, I simply attribute this fact to the close-minded nature of those who claim to be good, it is fueled by fear of the unknown and fear of what is not fully understood.Good and evil are propaganda tools. They are always used in judgment, and it is always obscene.

KNINE

08-08-2010, 10:12 PM

no dev responses to this thread at all.. guess there is no real answer lol

Myrien

08-08-2010, 10:56 PM

<cite>kelvmor wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Kizdane@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>kelvmor wrote:</cite><blockquote>I gotta say, I disagree with the OP. But that's because I disagree with several other classes they made neutral.I don't care how 'good' you are, Necromancy is never going to be allowed in Qeynos. Which also means no Shadowknights. Why? Any Necromancer who tries to take up residence in the city would immediately have a small army's worth of Paladins and clerics busting down their door and smiting the place to hell. The Celestial Watch is not going to allow abominations of nature and the gods to enter the city. 'Nuff said.Defilers are also inherently evil. They -enslave- souls to use in their generally dark, hexing magics.</blockquote>Why then, are warlocks not inherently evil? As has been stated, they not only use disease and poison as tools (as do shadowknights, necromancers, and defilers) but they employ Void magic. How can there possibly be any good in a person who uses magic that way, if in fact the classes that you referenced are inherently evil? In my opinion, your position, and the allowing of good warlocks while prohibiting other classes that use the same tools from being 'good', is based more upon an arbitrary decision, rather than any logical sense of continuity.</blockquote>I have to say, I'm pleased to see more people with intelligence on these boards.Back to Warlocks. Disease is not a primary Warlock thing, in my experience. Void magic and poison are. I have the feeling that originally, Warlocks were supposed to be evil and Wizards were supposed to be good. Admittedly, I myself have RP'd an Erudite Warlock in Qeynos as being secretly evil, doing twisted experiments with bio and Void magic on people or creatures he's abducted in the basement of his otherwise quaint and homey South Qeynos estate.I've never understood why they aren't evil. Void magic is something one would think as being seen as evil. My good-aligned characters tend to be suspicious of warlocks. Just like they're suspicious of all the supposedly reformed (I.E. Drizzt-like) evil races that run about in Qeynos. My dwarves are not going to trust dark elves, ogres, Iksar, or arasai. They don't even trust mages in general, and there's no way they're going to even try to do anything other than attack a troll.I don't have an explanation as to how a Warlock could not be evil. I know someone who RPs a good Warlock, someone that mostly focuses on the poison side of things, because she's also an alchemist. She pulls it off.As for Necromancers, Shadowknights, and Defilers... That wasn't really an arbitrary decision. By lore standards, Qeynosian morals and such wouldn't allow for anyone that practices those three dark arts to live there without constant persecution by the Celestial Watch and the Paladins of the Guard. Mithaniel Marr's worshippers in New Halas wouldn't let someone of that profession live there. Kelethin sees Necromancy and such as an abomination of nature, as I said earlier. I'm basing this off the lore.</blockquote>Apologies, after rereading my post, I wasn't very clear. I had in mind that the game's lore itself is somewhat arbitrary in restricting various classes. Your position is solidly based off of lore, but that lore isn't really coherent or consistent.

Cusashorn

08-08-2010, 11:06 PM

<cite>Kizdane@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>Apologies, after rereading my post, I wasn't very clear. I had in mind that the game's lore itself is somewhat arbitrary in restricting various classes. Your position is solidly based off of lore, but that lore isn't really coherent or consistent.</blockquote>It's not consistent when changes like this are always breaking it. The game has standards by which you're suppose to play your class. You can roleplay and say you're a good necromancer all you want, but the very act of raising the dead is no different than defiling it, and the lore states that Qeynos, Kelethin, or New Halas (the questline even goes in detail about this) would ever allow it.Just because you want to be a good necromancer or whatever doesn't mean the game is going to let you. Restrictions are set in place because classes are suppose to fall into them.I still don't like these class changes either, but at least I've been reassured that there will be lore to explain it.

Myrien

08-09-2010, 12:08 AM

<cite>Cusashorn wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Kizdane@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>Apologies, after rereading my post, I wasn't very clear. I had in mind that the game's lore itself is somewhat arbitrary in restricting various classes. Your position is solidly based off of lore, but that lore isn't really coherent or consistent.</blockquote>It's not consistent when changes like this are always breaking it. The game has standards by which you're suppose to play your class. You can roleplay and say you're a good necromancer all you want, but the very act of raising the dead is no different than defiling it, and the lore states that Qeynos, Kelethin, or New Halas (the questline even goes in detail about this) would ever allow it.Just because you want to be a good necromancer or whatever doesn't mean the game is going to let you. Restrictions are set in place because classes are suppose to fall into them.I still don't like these class changes either, but at least I've been reassured that there will be lore to explain it.</blockquote>You're missing the point. Just because lore has always been a certain way, doesn't mean that the lore is consistent within itself.