Armageddon MUD General Discussion Board

General => Archives => Guild Testing Secret Group! => Topic started by: Brokkr on June 20, 2018, 05:37:24 PM

Title: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Brokkr on June 20, 2018, 05:37:24 PM
This thread is meant for discussion of the new classes.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: MatisseOrOtherwise on June 20, 2018, 06:01:38 PM
I posted in the Discord, but got no opinions, so I'd like to ask here.

Question: What applications could Infiltrator have that other revealed classes couldn't do better?

Not jabbing. Just genuinely curious so I can put in my head what they're "for".
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: valeria on June 20, 2018, 06:32:13 PM
I appreciate the opening of this forum for the purposes of transparency.  I'm sure I'll have some thoughts, maybe even some Feelings, that I'll want to post later after I've read all the things.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Veselka on June 20, 2018, 06:36:01 PM
This is tight.

That is all.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: MatisseOrOtherwise on June 20, 2018, 06:38:50 PM
Additionally, my personal opinions:

Adventurer's two weaponry competencies should be Piercing and Chopping, not Piercing and Bludgeoning. They're a master lumberjack but can't chop people?

Infiltrator feels weak. Maybe it's broadly spread, but something seems off.

Scout should get master scan at the very least. They're called scouts. Let them scout. How can someone called a "scout" not be able to pick out snakes in the sands, given time? Stalkers should NOT be the only ones with master scan.

I don't mind that Raiders don't get master scan. They're fighters. But I think they should get journeyman scan, not advanced - and, perhaps, they should also get journeyman bandage, or apprentice. You don't get into dozens of fights without knowing how to slap some cloth on yourself from time to time.

Dune Trader says "Stealth specialised for wilderness environments" but has neither sneak nor hide. Is this intentional? Brokkr has confirmed this /is/ intentional. "
If you pick up sneak/hide via subguild, even if it is a city flavor, you will be able to use it in the wilderness as well."

Raiders being a prime wilderness class but getting neither food foraging nor "Fair recovery from exertion" is a bit odd. I guess they're more of a one-hit-wonder kind of fighter, while scouts can fight for longer, but not necessarily stronger?

Maybe soldiers and craftspeople should get city-hide flags but no city-hide skills etc. They'd make good guards and aides with a subguild to compensate, for example.

Soldiers at least should 100% get a city-hunt flag but no city-hunt skill, so they can compensate. Maybe craftspeople get the city-sneak flag but soldiers get city-hunt.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Brokkr on June 20, 2018, 06:52:49 PM
I think maybe folks are taking the name literally, when it is just a name for a certain set of skills.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: mansa on June 20, 2018, 08:01:37 PM
I think maybe folks are taking the name literally, when it is just a name for a certain set of skills.

Am I my name, or by the actions I do?


I think the best way to counteract that is to have more examples of what you can do with a skillset in the guild descriptions.   I'll try and give more examples when I think of some, but all I got right now is "thief-catcher'
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: hyzhenhok on June 20, 2018, 08:05:21 PM
I'm just a bit confused be the overall philosophy here.

Miscreant is literally a combination of Burglar and Pickpocket, gets all of the important skills to master and doesn't even have to branch any of them. Enforcer and Raider appear to be Warrior + extended subguild in a single guild at the expense of a few combat maneuvers.

Everything else seems a bit weak by comparison (and more like what I expected). I guess I undervalue the various sprinklings of crafting skills.

And I agree that it seems perception skills are a little less common than they should be, since it seems characters who previously would have been rolled as Ranger will be divided between Raider, Stalker and Scout, and only one of those gets the Ranger's perception suite.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Brokkr on June 20, 2018, 08:11:55 PM
Characters are good at their competency.  They are less good at other things.

If you want master sneak/scan, you will give up some combat ability and some crafting ability.  If you want to be the best at combat, you will give up survival skills, either totally or skill level.

If you want to have great combat and great perception skills...it will take two of you.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: perfecto on June 20, 2018, 08:21:12 PM
I noticed that some of the new crafty classes branch  (leatherworking - armor repair - armor making) and others are branching (armor making - armor repair)  Is that intentional? or an oversight?  Just seems that now some classes will get both skills very easily where others may never get both.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: perfecto on June 20, 2018, 08:55:56 PM
I also had an interesting idea after reading over the sekrit feedback thread about custom crafting.

What if... Instead of having a 0 karma subclass selection to be able to custom craft, and limiting everyones skill selections...

Everyone from every class and walk of life had the ability to custom craft (up to the level of their crafting skill) but to submit one of these crafts cost you 1 CGP? 

That way everyone could make things suitable to their characters as they live their lives, threshing out their stories.  At the same time it would keep your workload down as Imms because we'd all have to wait for the CGP to regenerate before we could do it again.  Which if memory serves takes a good while?

Thoughts?
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: mansa on June 20, 2018, 09:06:56 PM
...

Thoughts?

Bring it up in a different thread regarding custom crafts?
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Brokkr on June 20, 2018, 09:57:54 PM
They branch that way intentionally.  Armor Repair is only before Armor making in one instance, in order to slow down acquisition of armor making but make it possible.  This was done because the class is also the only one that gets skinning along with armor making, which is a powerful coin generating combination.

As for your idea, I don't think 0 karma folks would like it much.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: mansa on June 20, 2018, 10:03:37 PM
http://www.armageddon.org/help/view/Raider
http://www.armageddon.org/help/view/Raider%20Branching


Branching states "Parry to Blind Fighting" but the main Raider helpfile doesn't mention Blind Fighting

http://www.armageddon.org/help/view/Infiltrator
http://www.armageddon.org/help/view/Fighter%20Branching

Branching has "Listen to Watch" but the main Infiltrator helpfile had it starting with Watch
It also doesn't mention 'Threaten' as a skill to branch in the helpfile - I was on the wrong page.  I was on fighter.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: mansa on June 20, 2018, 10:34:41 PM
Labourer:

Fletchery to Sword Making?
Not
Knife Making to Sword Making?

Other classes have Knife Making to Sword Making
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: BadSkeelz on June 21, 2018, 12:03:45 AM
I'm glad the branching paths are clearly outlined. I would not have guessed at some of these at all. (Not that I understood old branching paths very well either. But still, good change!)
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Armaddict on June 21, 2018, 02:34:57 AM
Miscreant:
Lower piercing skill or remove it.  Remove backstab.
Remove poisoning.
Lower climb skill (advanced).
Lower pick skill (advanced).

Infiltrator should probably be the main honcho for the actual infiltration/lethality.
Master stealth instead of Advanced (Really? What was this idea?)
Master climb
Lose chopping at least, probably both chopping and slashing
Master poisoning, low advanced/high journeyman brew
Lose value
Lose peek because they don't even have steal anyway
Let them keep pick at advanced off of branching, but maybe take away pick making (iffy on this one)


Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Krath on June 21, 2018, 02:44:55 AM
So, as I read over the NEW guild list something comes to mind, there are really only Five choices:

Enforcer (Self explanatory) , Raider (Self explanatory), Miscreant (Self explanatory), Scout (legacy ranger),  and Heavy Crafting.

Why would you bother with the others?
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: X-D on June 21, 2018, 02:54:40 AM
I think there are only four.

Raider(warrior/outdoorsman) Enforcer (warrior/slipknife) So that is 1 with two different subs.
Scout (legacy ranger) Or close enough.
Miscreant (burgler/pickpocket/assassin) And looks rather over powered. Not that I mind that if every other class balances the same way...which they do not seem to. So...nah.
And heavy crafting.

To be honest, the ONLY way I see the current lineup working is if you plan on getting rid of subclasses.
That is all most of them look like to me anyway...either a current main guild and advanced sub or two advanced subs together.

With the current list, my prediction is, inside of 6 months you will not see a majority of them played and in fact 95% will be one of the five classes I listed.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Insigne on June 21, 2018, 03:30:16 AM
Scout should get master scan at the very least. They're called scouts. Let them scout. How can someone called a "scout" not be able to pick out snakes in the sands, given time? Stalkers should NOT be the only ones with master scan.
I think the problem lies in their names. Looking at the chart (https://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,53139.msg1000588.html#msg1000588) that was posted, I'm a little confused why Scout is a light combat class. Why is Stalker mixed? The vibe I get when I see Stalker is more of a combat/desert assassin role while Scout reads as more of a utility-based class.

With the current list, my prediction is, inside of 6 months you will not see a majority of them played and in fact 95% will be one of the five classes I listed.
Personally, I like the addition of balanced classes with broader skillsets. I think they're well-suited to certain concepts. But, Brokkr, is there any chance we could see the numbers of apps for the new classes?
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Vox on June 21, 2018, 03:49:34 AM
Hi!

Long time assassin player, first time New Classes poster.

Miscreant looks like the super rogue class, including all burlgar/pickpocket but weakened assassin skills.
1. Lose backstab and sap
2. Lose hunt
(now you have a super rogue who can steal and pick locks and stuff but can't brutally kill someone still necessitating players work together)

Enforcer has strong assassin/warrior combat skills but weak rogue/stealth skills and no scan??
1. Please lose guarding/rescue, slashing and chopping(soldier, raider etc can have all those)
2. Please make sneak and hide as high as miscreant
3. Add master poison
4. Add advanced city hunt
5. Add master city scan and listen
(Now you have a brutal killer but who can't make their own picks and pick locks still necessitating players work together)

Infiltrator just seems the baby of Miscreant and Enforcer.. if you adjust those two you can just drop infiltrator all together.

Just my quick two cents for what they're worth!
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Armaddict on June 21, 2018, 10:44:10 AM
On further thought:

Any chance we could get some comparison between new 'master' levels and old 'master' levels?

i.e. Does infiltrator stealth capped at (advanced) roughly equal current assassin sneak and hide?
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Nao on June 21, 2018, 10:49:34 AM
Brokkr said on another thread that light combat weapon skills are the same as current master/warrior weapon skills. Nothing about the other skill levels, though.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Krath on June 21, 2018, 11:14:01 AM
Question for clarification some of the classes do not have the ride skill does that mean they do not have the ride skill or was it an oversight?
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Brytta Léofa on June 21, 2018, 12:25:36 PM
Question for clarification some of the classes do not have the ride skill does that mean they do not have the ride skill or was it an oversight?

Looks like it's a whole thing: https://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,53544.0.html
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Brokkr on June 21, 2018, 01:10:44 PM
Warrior doesn't have ride on its skill list either.  If it isn't listed, it will work like it does for them.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Brokkr on June 21, 2018, 01:20:42 PM
http://www.armageddon.org/help/view/Raider
http://www.armageddon.org/help/view/Raider%20Branching


Branching states "Parry to Blind Fighting" but the main Raider helpfile doesn't mention Blind Fighting

http://www.armageddon.org/help/view/Infiltrator
http://www.armageddon.org/help/view/Fighter%20Branching

Branching has "Listen to Watch" but the main Infiltrator helpfile had it starting with Watch
It also doesn't mention 'Threaten' as a skill to branch in the helpfile - I was on the wrong page.  I was on fighter.

Thanks!

Fixed Raider helpfile.  Technically listen does branch to watch, but watch is put on everyone's skill list at chargen.  So essentially it is functioning like a starting skill.  Took it off the branching page.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Brokkr on June 21, 2018, 01:29:42 PM
Labourer:

Fletchery to Sword Making?
Not
Knife Making to Sword Making?

Other classes have Knife Making to Sword Making

That is the way it works atm.  I can't remember if I was trying to make it different than other paths, or if I added knife making later.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Brytta Léofa on June 21, 2018, 01:37:15 PM
Brokkr, some of the help files say, e.g., "Hunting specialized for wilderness environments" when the guild doesn't get hunt.

Should that be removed? or is it an indication that if you get hunt from a subguild you'll get (e.g.) wilderness hunt enabled?
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Brokkr on June 21, 2018, 01:43:56 PM
It is intentional and it an indication that if you get hunt from a subguild you'll get (e.g.) wilderness hunt enabled.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: worldofsand on June 21, 2018, 01:47:52 PM
There are some peculiar branch paths in some classes. Unless branching points have been lowered to something far more lenient than the previous "almost maxed" requirment, some of these seem borderline impossible to branch. Since we're finally rid of the issue of some guilds having to take 10-20 days to branch parry, it's strange to see the following:

Quote
enforcer:
bash -> disarm
piercing weapons -> backstab
Bash is nearly impossible to raise much higher than journeyman or maybe advanced. I've never even heard of someone mastering it. It increases very slowly, and for some races, you'll have an incredibly hard time failing once it's around journeyman.

Piercing into backstab sounds like a nightmare unless it branches at journeyman. If it has to be near maxed, most enforcers will never branch one of their defining abilities. This also massively inflates the value of any subguild that gives backstab.

Quote
raider:
kick -> disarm
Kick is another one of those skills that just don't go up properly. You can be a 10+ day warrior and still have apprentice kick even though you use it regularly. Furthermore, this is a guild designed heavily for mounted combat where you can't kick at all.

Quote
soldier:
slashing weapons -> riposte
chopping weapons -> hack
Same as above, weapon skills are notoriously gruesome to raise. The vast majority of even Bynners and soldiers never get past the halfway point. Without huge changes to how weapon skills increase, I think it's a mistake to gate important skills behind them.

Quote
fighter:
guarding -> threaten
Threaten is mostly a skill for muggers, robbers and raiders. Those are characters that can't realistically train guarding unless they first spend an incredibly long time in a military clan. Since there are only really three of those left in the game, and two of them are very much at odds with any kind of robber concept, this seems like a strange branch.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Brokkr on June 21, 2018, 02:05:17 PM
Enforcer backstab and sap branch just a tad lower than advanced weapons used to pop up.

Enforcer and Raider disarm is fairly heavily gated, you are correct.  This is intentional.  Fighters don't have a lot of unique skills, so part of the balancing was to give them starting disarm at the same time other heavy combat characters would really need to work at something to get it.  This is a trade off for Enforcer and Raider starting with survival skills.

Both of these points are mitigated by the fact that combat skills for heavy combat characters start higher than they do for warriors. It is the one thing you can't see in the help files.  Perhaps a play tester or two will chime in on their thoughts on starting skill levels.

Soldier riposte and hack branch no where near the max of the weapon skills they branch from.

Raiders and Enforcers get threaten to start with.  Fighters have to work for it.  Threaten has uses for law enforcement (perhaps even moreso than for raiders) and shouldn't actually be that hard to get, if you are in a clan that practices it.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: worldofsand on June 21, 2018, 02:43:05 PM
Quote
Enforcer backstab and sap branch just a tad lower than advanced weapons used to pop up.

That's still pretty stingy. Not sure how much "just a tad" is, but if you still need piercing/bludgeoning at mid-advanced then it's going to be just like ranger parry used to be, i.e. 20+ days played to branch. I had hoped we'd get away from the problem of classes taking RL months to branch very important skills.

The whole reason to play enforcer is because it gets master backstab/sap. Otherwise it's basically just a raider without ride, archery, listen and scan. Most warriors never branched their special weapon skills. If you have to reach almost the same skill level to branch class-defining skills on an enforcer, I think that's problematic.

Just sounds like one is overwhelmingly compelled to pair this class with slipknife to not only start with backstab but also get master sneak/hide, and poisoning. It seems like too much of a synergy, especially considering the fact that it's a combo that actually gets almost all the same skills.

Quote
Enforcer and Raider disarm is fairly heavily gated, you are correct.  This is intentional.  Fighters don't have a lot of unique skills, so part of the balancing was to give them starting disarm at the same time other heavy combat characters would really need to work at something to get it.  This is a trade off for Enforcer and Raider starting with survival skills.

I would much prefer if enforcers and raiders get a lower cap on disarm, instead of getting it to master but having it nearly impossible to branch. Out of curiosity, does anyone ever actually master kick and bash? I'm just leery of these branches that pretty much say "you don't really get this skill unless your name is X-D."

And, again, a huge incentive to take a subguild whose skills overlap with your class', just to start with an important skill instead of having to spar for RL months in order to get it. It feels a bit like backwards design if you deliberately take a subguild with skill overlap because that's a bigger asset to your class than a subguild that gives you something you wouldn't otherwise get at all.

I just feel like... how's a raider ever really gonna branch disarm? I've never seen kick go above journeyman. I've seen advanced dual wield and weapon skills before kick hits journeyman. Even if it generously branches at just the threshold to advanced, that sounds gruelling.

If the intent is for certain core class skills to be something most players don't actually obtain, I think that's a mistake.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Brokkr on June 21, 2018, 02:43:47 PM
To address some previous posts:

Krath / XD: Seems like you are talking about certain play styles.  What would you choose for a noble?  Aide?  GMH Agent?

Armaddict / Vox:  Soooo, you want to remake assassin.  Sorry.  You get a guy that really knows combat and if he hits his backstab you are in trouble, but he has to find an opportunity to have his stealth work.  You have a guy that has a slightly broader toolset (poisons), can decently sneak and can decently fight.  And you have the guy that is an absolute ghost stealth wise, but is going to need to rely on their poisons and what not to finish off their target, most likely.

Realize none of those are the old assassin, they are intentionally created to not be.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: WithSprinkles on June 21, 2018, 02:57:32 PM
Would it be a bad thing for the mercantile classes to get flee? Even with the fact that they have journeyman combat skills, they are likely some of the only people likely to pull out a shield with any regularity and HACK is now a thing.

I'm not certain I understand why this seems to solely be a combat character utility. I get that it's not just running in the right direction, but also running without provoking an attack of opportunity, but even a low chance is better than almost no chance.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: BadSkeelz on June 21, 2018, 03:03:51 PM
@Brokkr,

Nice to know that soldier branches are lower than the old advanced weapon skills branch point.

Re: threaten, if this skill has "uses for law enforcement" isn't it kind of weird that soldier doesn't have it at all? I expected to see threaten (and possibly scan or hunt) in it's skill list much more than weapon crafting.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: hyzhenhok on June 21, 2018, 03:05:52 PM
Some more thoughts:

I like Enforcer and Raider as they are. They're meant to be subtypes of warrior, not subtypes of Assassin and Ranger. I can actually see myself rolling a Fighter, too; with subguilds the opportunity cost of not going Enforcer or Raider isn't that high.

I guess the light combat classes seem underwhelming because we are not familiar with the combat skill rebalancing? If they're actually better than current ranger/assassin, it kinda makes sense. Still, comparing the light combat Infiltrator and Soldier to the mixed Miscreant and Laborer the balance doesn't quite seem right. Infiltrator isn't good enough at stealth and Miscreant is too good at murder, so I'm not sure why anyone would pick Infiltrator over Enforcer or Miscreant. I do like the Infiltrator vs. Miscreant division versus the old Assassin v. Burglar v. Pickpocket division, I just think the balance should probably be tweaked.

Soldier...just seems like a missed opportunity, because it seems like it'd be perfect spot to fill the "I want to be like a Fighter, but I want to trade a bit of combat skill for perception without any of that wilderness or stealth nonsense" niche. Instead it trades combat expertise for weapon crafting. It can't be because Light Combat classes aren't allowed to have perception, because Infiltrator and Stalker both get Scan. It seems like it would be more intuitive if Fighter -> Soldier -> Laborer went Pure Combat -> Trade some combat for perception -> trade some more combat for crafting, instead of -> first trade combat for some perception and some crafting -> trade even more combat for great perception and even more crafting. Again, it seems like you'll usually be better off picking Fighter or Laborer (or any of other light/heavy combat classes) than using Soldier as a base class.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: BadSkeelz on June 21, 2018, 03:25:34 PM
My impression of the Soldier class is that it wasn't envisioned to be able to fulfil the militiaman law-enforcement "thief catcher". Instead it seems much better tooled towards a moderately self-sufficient combatant. Much like how the Mercenary subguild is. So the name is a bit of a misnomer.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: worldofsand on June 21, 2018, 03:58:28 PM
Is there some measure of standardization between scan and hide levels with the new classes? Previously, every guild that got either skill got it to master. You only had less than master if you got it from a subguild or race. The master "bracket" is a lot narrower than the previous ones, and still there was a huge difference between having the lowest master hide/scan or the highest. The pre-master brackets are much wider, and most classes that get these skills get them at advanced. Are their caps distributed all throughout the advanced bracket?

Scan has a very narrow window of viability. If the target has more than like half a skill bracket's worth in hide than you have in scan, you simply can't spot them. In fact, low advanced scan would spot virtually nothing. Granted, that's because all guilds that got hide got it to master, but the same is true of NPCs. There are very, very few hidden NPCs you can spot with anything short of near-master scan. Even rats aren't detectable until you're a ways into advanced. There are NPCs that even maxed ranger scan with very high wisdom has a miniscule chance to spot. If there are guilds whose advanced scan caps at just the threshold to advanced, they won't be able to spot practically any NPCs in the 'rinth, for instance.

Advanced sneak/hide can work because they're fairly binary, but scan below master was previously near-useless. Now it's a lot more spread out, which sounds like a good idea... but! Only three guilds get master scan, and none of those are in any way suited for law enforcement. In fact, soldier, fighter and enforcer don't get scan at all. And most subguilds with scan get it to journeyman. Journeyman scan might as well not exist. You might spot a kagor, that's about it.

There's going to be a period of time where most new characters are completely helpless against legacy rangers, burglars, pickpockets and assassins. Of the old guilds, all but warrior and merchant get master hide. You will not spot them with advanced scan. That'll correct itself over time, but I'm more concerned with the possibility that not enough of the new classes have a high enough scan for it to be useful. If a number of them get low advanced scan and most classes with hide get it to high advanced, that'll cause some problems.

For reference, this is what the new classes get:

Scan
advanced: raider, infiltrator, scout, pilferer, adventurer, dune trader,
master: miscreant, stalker, laborer

Hide
advanced: enforcer, raider, infiltrator, scout, pilferer, adventurer, fence
master: miscreant, stalker,
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Krath on June 21, 2018, 04:12:48 PM
To address some previous posts:
Krath / XD: Seems like you are talking about certain play styles.  What would you choose for a noble?  Aide?  GMH Agent?

Touche...I also noticed some skills that are not listed on those guilds that balance it out..I think it will be fun.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Brokkr on June 21, 2018, 04:25:20 PM
My impression of the Soldier class is that it wasn't envisioned to be able to fulfil the militiaman law-enforcement "thief catcher". Instead it seems much better tooled towards a moderately self-sufficient combatant. Much like how the Mercenary subguild is. So the name is a bit of a misnomer.

The soldiers you see acting as law enforcement in, for example, Allanak, are a small portion of the total soldiers.  This was more oriented towards soldiers that are soldiers, rather than law enforcement.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Brokkr on June 21, 2018, 04:34:48 PM
Lots of stuff, then...

For reference, this is what the new classes get:

Scan
advanced: raider, infiltrator, scout, pilferer, adventurer, dune trader,
master: miscreant, stalker, laborer

Hide
advanced: enforcer, raider, infiltrator, scout, pilferer, adventurer, fence
master: miscreant, stalker,

I spent a decent amount of time on stealth.  I even made an excel matrix that given certain variables, like relative hide/scan skill levels, would tell me exactly what was not detectable and what was, and the percentage for what was detectable.

I tried to do what I could without changing the actual code around stealth/detection.  Everyone having master hide is part of what makes scan at any other level not worthwhile.  Not everyone has master hide now.  Scout's hide is better than raider's hide.  Likewise, scout's scan is better than raider's scan.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Armaddict on June 21, 2018, 05:03:40 PM
Disclaimer:
This is not really a criticism so much as it is a description of feedback I probably would have given.  I haven't done all the spreadsheet stuff, nor have I had beta testers.

When I read through the skills for the new classes, I'm kind of suffering through what I wouldn't describe as a dislike for many classes, but more of a 'I don't get it' or 'I'd never play that if I could play this other one' sort of feeling.  To me, it is coming across as the beta testing was done blindly, and by that I mean without an overall view of the other classes, and thus where the class they were testing comes into play.  SO.  This is less of a direct 'Put this skill here and remove this one' that I was doing, and describing what I think might be a good way to move forward with any changes that are desired.

General notes and tl/dr notes:
-I don't know skill levels.  I'm referring to things as (high master) or (middle master), just to provide a relationship between it and other skills for other classes at the same skill level.
-Subguilds should be revamped entirely to provide 2-4 skills at least journeyman in scope.  Delete extended and crafting subguilds entirely.
-Scan should only be present in the infiltrator class, row 2 and down of wilderness, and the general/city theme.
-Theme can be shown more clearly than what I've seen so far.  Mix up maxes of weapon types based on it, with general/city being free from theme but also limited by lack of theme.
-Theme should be strongest in rows 2 and 4, with 2 built around aggression and 4 built around self-sustenance or profit.  Combat is strongest, but with variance for flavor/rolebuilding, in row 1.  Mercantile is strongest, but with variance for flavor/rolebuilding, in row 5.
-Some rows naturally have more skills as they blend combat vs utility.  But if you have more skills, less of them, even the important ones, should reach master.  The shift from infiltrator to miscreant in current form is making infiltrator worse at everything that its skillset should be centered around if following theme.


Crafting:
I don't do much crafting, so largely, I am not doing direct critiques.
-Custom crafting should be main guild instead of the proposed subguild idea.  'Light mercantile' tier should be able to custom craft straightforward, functional things in their scope, not necessarily low quality or crude, but without bells and whistles and without exotics.  'Heavy mercantile' should be able to craft more exotic, 'flashy' types of things within their scope.
-Crafting above the 'mixed' tier (i.e. In light combat and heavy combat) should be subsistence based only.  They can craft things that keep their themed class going (i.e. Scout with fletchery), but not new items entirely (i.e. Enforcer with daggers).  We can add more subsistence crafting as desired in the future with weapons maintenance for each weapon type, etc.

THEMING:
Each of the themes needs to be highly differentiated from each other to define them as different, as well as preventing the 'This guy does everything' feel.  Criminal is set on manipulating advantage/disadvantage, Wilderness is set on mobility, and General effectively has higher maxes on everything combat, but lacks the 'theme-based' support/utility skills.  They are more subguild-friendly.  This theming comes through in some way as described below.

However, also importantly, 'Heavy Combat' classes are basically themed around combat, effectively it's own theme in different environments.  Their support/utility skills are selective and often limited, providing more for 'main approaches' to combat than making them able to serve super competently outside of a heavy combat role.  'Light combat' classes are essentially the epitome of using a theme to facilitate their combat.  Likewise, Heavy Mercantile moves largely out of scope, based on limited tools of utility and survival versus serving competently as that theme.

Weapon skills:
*I still think spears should be separated from piercing.
**Piercing is largely variable due to daggers being the main form of self defense
***Heavy Mercantile only ever receives Low Jman Piercing, with the exception of general/city.

This was one of my major head-scratchers.  I'd design this differently, providing 'tiers' for each of the x-axis theme, i.e.:
Criminal:  Tier 1: bludgeoning , Tier 2: slashing, Tier 3: chopping (piercing varies for each y-axis tier)
                -Heavy Combat: Bludgeoning (Master), Piercing (High Advanced) [Close in, brutal fighting suited for the poorer city folks]
                                        Slashing (Low-Middle Advanced) [Less ideal for tighter combat], Chopping (High Jman-Low Advanced)[Least ideal]
                -Light Combat:  Bludgeoning (Master)[Tier 1], Piercing (Master) [Bumped for themed combat]
                                        Slashing (Low-Middle Jman) [Tier 2], Chopping (NONE), [Tier 3]
                -Mixed:             Bludgeoning (Advanced)[Tier 1], Piercing (Advanced)[Bumped for themed combat]
                                        Slashing (None) [Tier 2], Chopping (None) [Tier 3]
                -Light Mercantile: Bludgeoning (High Jman), Piercing (High Jman)
     
Wilderness: Tier 1: Piercing, Tier 2: Bludgeoning, Tier 3: Chopping, Tier 4: Slashing
                -Heavy Combat: Piercing (High Master), Bludgeoning (High Advanced-Low Master), Chopping (High Advanced), Slashing (Low
                                         Advanced)
                - Light Combat: Piercing (Low-Middle Master), Bludgeoning (Middle Advanced-High Advanced), Chopping (Low Advanced), Slashing
                                        (High Jman)[Themed, swords are ideal mounted weapons and can be combined with mounted combat bonuses]
                - Mixed:            Piercing (Advanced), Bludgeoning (High Jman), Chopping (Low Jman)
                - Light Mercantile: Piercing (High Jman), Chopping (Low Jman)[Themed for woodworking]

General:  No tiers due to general theme, all weapon skills available will be of equal max
                -Heavy Combat: All (High Master)
                -Light Combat: All (Low Master)
                -Mixed: Slashing (Low Master), All else (Middle Advanced)
                -Light Mercantile:  Slashing (Low Advanced), All else (High Jman)
                -Heavy Mercantile: Slashing (Low Jman), Piercing (Middle Jman)

So, you can see what I mean by tiering.  With minor swaps, there is a steady decline in both the number of weapon skills, and their skill level, but it's kept in the tiering priority based on theme.  Wilderness/hunting is more biased to spears and piercing weapons than swords, due to what's available and what you encounter.

So you do the same with other skills.  However, the 'other' combat skills and utility skills need to be weighed out against each other.  I won't do an exhaustive list as much as I will a demonstration.
Combat Skills:
*Guard AND Rescue are proportionate to each other; Guard allows stopping someone in an alley, which is harder in the wilderness by and large, but the General/City Theme allows them to be equal to each other.
**Only the General/City Theme should have Hack and Riposte.


Criminal:  Tier 1: Disarm [Advantage/Disadvantage manipulation, CQC], Sap OR Backstab, Guard
               Tier 2: Kick, The other OR, Rescue, Parry
               Tier 3: Bash, etc
               Heavy: Disarm (Master), Sap (Master), Guard (Master), Backstab (Advanced/Jman), Kick (Advanced/Jman), Rescue (Advanced/Jman)
               Light: [This theme makes the Light combat more akin to current assassin] Disarm(Advanced), Backstab (Master), Sap (Master),
                        Guard/Rescue Nixxed or minimized
               ETC, with Theme first considered.

Wilderness: Tier 1: Charge, Rescue, Bash, Ride, Parry
                  Tier 2: Disarm, Kick, Guard
               ETC

General: Tier 1: Kick, Bash, Disarm, Guard, Rescue, Parry
             Tier 2: Ride
               ETC

Again, the general theme.  As you move from heavy to light to mercantile, you end up losing combat abilities as you move down, with minor variances made for role (for example, Scout might have better shield use than you'd imagine due to their prevalence performing -as- scouts in military units, which often use shields.  Otherwise, you largely see higher skill caps for dual-wield and two-handed in wilderness theme)

Utility Skills:
Now, I won't follow the same format for this.  I think you get the gist as far as tiering.  The big deal, is that the more combat capable the class is, the -stronger the theme for that combat should be-, while simultaneously getting -less of the themed skills-.  For example:

Enforcer gains hide.  They get it to Low Master or High Advanced.  But they do not get sneak.  They are the brutes, but often lie in wait for mugging or for their assigned quarry to arrive.  They are limited in utility outside of combat.
Infiltrator gains Hide and Sneak at Master.
Pilferer gets pick at master, steal at master, peek at master, and hide and sneak at advanced.  But as seen above, they sacrificed a lot of combat.
Only the Miscreant gets Hide, Sneak, Steal, Peek, Pick, and all else at advanced or lower master than the others without sacrificing their combat viability over the long term.

In this way, the 'theme' part of grows stronger on rows 2 and 4 of the 'grid', weaker on the heavy combat and mercantile tiers, and weaker on the mixed but with the true 'balance' of theme vs combat.  Likewise, the General classes all become more appealing to anyone wanting higher 'pure, unthemed' skills/combat skills and perception, with their theming coming in more minor degrees from a subguild.

I'm not sure if this is just a ramble.  But I do know that I see some things moving down from combat heavy to mixed in each 'theme' column that really...-really- surprised me, and made the Mixed row far too appealing in comparison with light combat and light mercantile.

Maybe I should write out full skill lists with explanations and see if that makes it make more sense.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: infinitehope on June 21, 2018, 05:44:13 PM
As one of the testers, i'll chime in about the starting levels for heavy combat skills:

Amazing. Thats simply it. The difference is huge, and noticeable, to the point where a fresh heavy combat was able to hold their own and last a while in a fight against a character of an older guild, that has been active and around, for a good bit. The character was maybe 8 hours played at the time. They still lost the fight, but they did far better that a fresh warrior would, from my observations

I'd also like to point something out, that brokkr clarified in one of the locked topics.

Ever since a recent change, Warriors weapon skills wouldn't go past advanced.

Heavy Combats get to master in weapon skills and a lot of thing. They essentially have the potential to be better fighters than warriors. The hard part is getting there.

Light combats are probably about comparable to a warrior, in terms of numbers and max potential.

As a result, its going to be really difficult to compare old guilds to the new classes, IMO. They're just so different that its hard.

As more characters roll in with the new classes, the scope of the game and how things are done.. in my opinon, I think its going to change the game massively and how people do things.

I'm excited for that.

Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Lizzie on June 21, 2018, 05:57:51 PM
*Incoming long Armaddict post, READERS BEWARE!*

tl;dr

Carry on.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: X-D on June 21, 2018, 06:43:38 PM
I would like to address these points.

Quote
Krath / XD: Seems like you are talking about certain play styles.  What would you choose for a noble?  Aide?  GMH Agent?

Noble, something with listen and scan and something to do, same as you do now...other then the need for high listen and scan it does not matter what you take for any of the currently open noble houses. Any of your city based light crafters with stealth and such...same as now. Aide, miscreant of course..with a crafting sub. Gmh agent, Heavy crafter(merchant), miscreant(assassin) or scout(ranger) with crafting sub...same as now. There is a reason why long time players make jokes about those roles and what class they are. Hey, the ivory skinned woman, fale aide, assassin or burgler? Nothing will change with the new classes. In fact, I bet that miscreant, as it sits right now will be the goto class for a VAST majority of those roles...with a crafting sub.


Quote
Armaddict / Vox:  Soooo, you want to remake assassin.  Sorry.  You get a guy that really knows combat and if he hits his backstab you are in trouble, but he has to find an opportunity to have his stealth work.  You have a guy that has a slightly broader toolset (poisons), can decently sneak and can decently fight.  And you have the guy that is an absolute ghost stealth wise, but is going to need to rely on their poisons and what not to finish off their target, most likely.

Realize none of those are the old assassin, they are intentionally created to not be.

I will address the bolded section first. As it is the crux of the problem I see with the new classes lineup. The tried and true method of balance in arm, what makes people need each other/other classes is the fact that each one is essentially the best at what they do but in a somewhat narrow scope, which is broadened or blurred with subclasses. You mentioned before that warriors for instance cannot even detect say assassins, like that is a bad thing. No, that is a good thing. Balance done by making people simply not that good or all essentially the same does not work. Being exceptional at what you do does...Knowing that in melee Nobody but another warrior stands a chance or in the alleys nobody but another assassin stands a chance...that is what actually works.

No veteran player is going to take Fighter for example, The trade is simply not worth it...slightly higher starting skills, hack and riposte and easier branches verses survival skills, perception skills, stealth etc...not a good trade when you know you are in for the long haul anyway. Especially when you can simply take slipknife on raider and outdoorsman on enforcer. And who is going to take Infiltrator over miscreant? Everybody knows that many of the skills that they both get, anything less then master is essentially worthless or death sentence. Just the fact that Infiltrator only gets advanced poison and no brew skill means it is out for many.

I state again. As far as the new classes go today, Once the new has worn off...say 6 months after they go live, a VAST majority of classes in game, and I mean between 90 and 95% And 95-100% with people who have played more then two years will be Raider/enforcer (same class in my opinion) Scout(with a crafting sub), miscreant(with an aggressor sub) and Craftsperson with either protector sub or a sub with high skinning.
Four classes.

This is why I wondered if staff planned on taking out mundane subclasses...it is the only way many of the new classes have any legs at all. (disclaimer) No I am not advocating the removel of subclasses. (in before the outcry)
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Armaddict on June 21, 2018, 06:51:41 PM
Quote
Armaddict / Vox:  Soooo, you want to remake assassin.  Sorry.  You get a guy that really knows combat and if he hits his backstab you are in trouble, but he has to find an opportunity to have his stealth work.  You have a guy that has a slightly broader toolset (poisons), can decently sneak and can decently fight.  And you have the guy that is an absolute ghost stealth wise, but is going to need to rely on their poisons and what not to finish off their target, most likely.

Wholly untrue.  I want a light-combat option that fits within the criminal theme.  'Mixed' entails mixture between combat and non-combat, which means giving it access to the best of both non-combat and combat options is essentially removing the need to ever be an infiltrator or pilferer.

Edit:  For more clarification, infiltrator is actually based in aggressive action.  Cutting out their ability to subsist out of aggression reliably makes them act within role.  In its current state, miscreant is better than either of its adjacents in anything but what boils down to crafting rather than theming.  Make the pilferer the resource-based rogue, the infiltrator the aggression-based rogue, and the miscreant the guy who supports either of them.  The 'mixed' portion of the criminal theme is particularly, overwhelmingly capable at anything except joining the Byn, and they're not even bad at that.

Edit again:  Furthermore, I find it odd that one of your objectives was to eliminate class-roles similar to what we have.  Are assassin or ranger types suddenly out of the theme of the game, while burglar/pickpocket/assassin was way better?  Did we need a warrior/assassin and merchant/burglar more?
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Brokkr on June 21, 2018, 07:21:42 PM
What I find funny is the reason Miscreant still has backstab is that I figured everyone would scream outrage if I put forward classes where no one with backstab got master level sneak skills.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: X-D on June 21, 2018, 07:26:20 PM
Not one I care about...backstab been so gimped over the years anyway. :)
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Delirium on June 21, 2018, 07:28:12 PM
IMO, the best way to figure out what works and what doesn't is going to be through play.

It's hard to tell how well classes will/won't work until (multiple) players have had the chance to test them out.

I think miscreant having backstab makes sense, but time will tell.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Armaddict on June 21, 2018, 07:30:19 PM
What I find funny is the reason Miscreant still has backstab is that I figured everyone would scream outrage if I put forward classes where no one with backstab got master level sneak skills.

We are ever unpredictable!

No, once again, I'm not trying to sound attacking here.  But I have concerns about how the 'jack of all trades' for each theme also seems to become the de-facto master of certain things through that versatility, when tradition says they should be a step behind.  In other words, I think in practice, miscreant will outperform the infiltrator in terms of winning combat, and outperform the pilferer in subsisting through avoidance of combat.

That and stronger theming in the heavy combat slot.  I admit my light-combat critiques above in the criminal tree are highly suspect and could be changed to stray away from the stealth aspect, but that is generally what I think of when I think of combative criminal that isn't a brute.

And for the record, I had the same idea as far as stealth.  Where the magical invisibility button has long been a concern, I thought having more people depend on the skill at advanced instead of a bunch of masters running around was a good solution.  I did, however, view the light-combat and light mercantile rows as the 'perfected' stealth tiers where it remained more reliable save against the most observant.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Armaddict on June 21, 2018, 07:36:39 PM
Likewise, in the wilderness tree, I'd find a way to emphasize the scout as strongly themed aggression via wilderness skills while the adventurer was strongly themed subsistence without combat.

The heavy combat tier, I view as combat themed with variance in specialization, basically.

And general being the most skillful and perceptive, but least utility-based.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Vox on June 21, 2018, 07:40:17 PM
+1 everything X-D wrote

Re: Brokkr, I will certainly do my part to utilize the lethality of the new classes in new and creative ways. But it feels punishing to the assassin archetype to spread their abilities over other classes with the purposed intent of separating high master backstab from high master sneak/hide. Enforcer trying to sneak and hide with low advanced stealth is suicidal..

Will all the NPC’s in game be changed to the various new classes? Will this mean NPC guards may not have scan and even if they do it may not be very high?
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Speciation on June 21, 2018, 09:31:26 PM
Bash is nearly impossible to raise much higher than journeyman or maybe advanced. I've never even heard of someone mastering it. It increases very slowly, and for some races, you'll have an incredibly hard time failing once it's around journeyman.
Bash isn't too difficult to raise unless on a half-giant. It can be mastered before a weapon skill even reaches advanced.

Kick is another one of those skills that just don't go up properly. You can be a 10+ day warrior and still have apprentice kick even though you use it regularly. Furthermore, this is a guild designed heavily for mounted combat where you can't kick at all.
I agree with kick being difficult to raise because you can branch weapons on warriors before mastering kick.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Cabooze on June 21, 2018, 10:49:14 PM
the 'soldier' class isn't a true soldier, being that they can't scan. They are immediately circumvented, as a role, by every sneaky class. Sure, they might have listen, but that's useless on its own short of listening in on people and other small coded benefits against sneaky stuff.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Brokkr on June 21, 2018, 11:15:47 PM
AoD PCs aren't true soldiers.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: mansa on June 21, 2018, 11:20:21 PM
I think we are mixing up skill trees with character jobs.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: CodeMaster on June 21, 2018, 11:30:16 PM
AoD PCs aren't true soldiers.

IMO laborer looks perfect for the AoD patrol types.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Insigne on June 22, 2018, 12:41:31 AM
Speaking of laborers, I noticed they branch hack but it doesn't seem very feasible for southerners:

lumberjacking -> axe making -> hack

In line with the documentation for the southern fighting style (http://armageddon.org/help/view/Southern%20Fighting%20Style), would it be possible for laborers to branch hack OR riposte depending on their starting location? I was thinking they could branch similarly to hack:

fletchery -> swordmaking -> riposte
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Brytta Léofa on June 22, 2018, 01:57:57 AM
Not sure who created that Google Docs spreadsheet (I found the link in Discord and then lost it again), but I made an ugly Python script (http://bryttaleofa.org.s3-website-us-east-1.amazonaws.com/guilds-spreadsheet.py) to dump all the skills into a .csv. Could be adapted to output in the schema of that spreadsheet pretty easily.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: perfecto on June 22, 2018, 02:51:46 AM
The more I read Brokkr's responses to all this "rabble rabble rabble" the more I think he knows exactly what he's talking about.

IMO, the best way to figure out what works and what doesn't is going to be through play.

It's hard to tell how well classes will/won't work until (multiple) players have had the chance to test them out.

This too is going to be a major factor on the game, you all know it!

I'm not yaying or naying anything, just saying, knowhati'msayin'?

Also I think my idea about the custom crafting earlier in this thread was a decent idea  ::)  0-karma folks shouldn't be working on mastercrafts, they should be figuring out the game! and then mastercraf... (cough cough) custom crafting.. when they have points to spend. 

Can't wait to see everyone's input in a year from now, when we're allowed to talk about it.    8)
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Vox on June 22, 2018, 04:54:23 AM
Soooo, you want to remake assassin.  Sorry. 

I find myself coming back to this and wondering what the thinking is behind tearing apart assassin?
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Nao on June 22, 2018, 05:55:53 AM
I thought miscreant got everything assassins got - what am I missing?
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Vox on June 22, 2018, 06:22:03 AM
I thought miscreant got everything assassins got - what am I missing?

Miscreant currently has the most rogue appeal and the most assassin cross-over, but backstab and sap at levels far lower than an assassin would need to be reliable methods of attack. (honestly, Miscreant looks like a ton of out of the box rogue fun though)

Enforcer has assassin quality backstab and sap but without the stealth component to make them reliable methods of surprise attack. (assuming you can get both piercing and bludgeoning up past advanced to even branch them) But so far as brutal thug goes, Enforcer looks epic (save for a baffling lack of scan/listen.)

I mean, if you're feeling randy just give Miscreant high backstab/sap and you have the perfect rogue class. Individual playstyles will then determine how assassiny/pickpockety/burglary a character actually ends up being but they'd have the potential to master it all in time if they really wanted and that was their concept.

I'm just mourning the death of Assassin as an archetype here, I'm gonna need some time to process. :)
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Brokkr on June 22, 2018, 11:15:47 AM
Speaking of laborers, I noticed they branch hack but it doesn't seem very feasible for southerners:

lumberjacking -> axe making -> hack

In line with the documentation for the southern fighting style (http://armageddon.org/help/view/Southern%20Fighting%20Style), would it be possible for laborers to branch hack OR riposte depending on their starting location? I was thinking they could branch similarly to hack:

fletchery -> swordmaking -> riposte

I agree that would be cool if we could do it, but the way our skills code works we can't currently support something like that.  I'm not a coder, but I suspect it would take a major rewrite of how skills work in order to enable something like this, based on my understanding of how skills do work.

Or a major effort in creating a mechanism for class specific skill trees per starting location.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Brokkr on June 22, 2018, 11:24:26 AM
Soooo, you want to remake assassin.  Sorry. 

I find myself coming back to this and wondering what the thinking is behind tearing apart assassin?

Apologies, that probably came off with the wrong tone.  The current assassin didn't fit into the design dynamic of the new classes.  Unfortunately, the pain points of the assassin guild were the same things that kept it somewhat balanced.  In addressing pain points and looking to create a dynamic for the future where it doesn't take as much time investment to get a class up and running*, where there are different flavors that can encompass a variety of RP roles and where there are intentional gaps or weaknesses to each class, the assassin class didn't fit.

*Of course it is going to take Enforcers a while to get backstab and sap without a subguild.  Realize some folks like that achievement grind, just like with advanced weapons currently.  So it was a bone in that direction along with a balance thing.  An enforcer with either backstab or sap (again, discounting subguilds) will be more likely than one with both.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Brokkr on June 22, 2018, 11:31:58 AM

Miscreant currently has the most rogue appeal and the most assassin cross-over, but backstab and sap at levels far lower than an assassin would need to be reliable methods of attack. (honestly, Miscreant looks like a ton of out of the box rogue fun though)

Harder to OHK and thus needing to rely on something else is an intentional weakness for the Miscreant.

Enforcer has assassin quality backstab and sap but without the stealth component to make them reliable methods of surprise attack. (assuming you can get both piercing and bludgeoning up past advanced to even branch them) But so far as brutal thug goes, Enforcer looks epic (save for a baffling lack of scan/listen.)

The lack of scan/listen is an intentional weakness.  As are lack of brew/poison.  The idea was killers, probably of opportunity or planning, not folks with the skills to hunt down/detect and kill folks.(without a subguild at least)

I mean, if you're feeling randy just give Miscreant high backstab/sap and you have the perfect rogue class. Individual playstyles will then determine how assassiny/pickpockety/burglary a character actually ends up being but they'd have the potential to master it all in time if they really wanted and that was their concept.

Miscreant as is is pretty close to that Overpowered line as is.  Close enough I'm not sure which side it falls on.

I'm just mourning the death of Assassin as an archetype here, I'm gonna need some time to process. :)

R.I.P. Assassins, we never really knew you.*

Mostly because our vision just went black and then we saw the mantis head.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Insigne on June 22, 2018, 12:06:40 PM
Speaking of laborers, I noticed they branch hack but it doesn't seem very feasible for southerners:

lumberjacking -> axe making -> hack

In line with the documentation for the southern fighting style (http://armageddon.org/help/view/Southern%20Fighting%20Style), would it be possible for laborers to branch hack OR riposte depending on their starting location? I was thinking they could branch similarly to hack:

fletchery -> swordmaking -> riposte

I agree that would be cool if we could do it, but the way our skills code works we can't currently support something like that.  I'm not a coder, but I suspect it would take a major rewrite of how skills work in order to enable something like this, based on my understanding of how skills do work.

Or a major effort in creating a mechanism for class specific skill trees per starting location.
Aw! I understand. Thank you, anyway, for taking the time to explain why a tiny detail like this isn't currently possible.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: hyzhenhok on June 22, 2018, 02:28:57 PM
Miscreant is definitely OP. I'd say you almost get there just by giving them the entire burglar/pickpocket kits without requiring branching at all. As a player of several pickpockets, I'm surprised there wasn't any fear of having character who can get Master Steal + Master Sleight of Hand online much faster than current Pickpockets (absent subguilds).

Anyway, Enforcer/Infiltrator/Miscreant each only have a few holes in their kits compared to the Assassin, so unless subguilds are totally  nerfed into the ground you'll still be able to make an Assassin-like character, probably a *superior* Assassin-like character. You'll just have to invest a bit more into getting it. Good design IMO.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Krath on June 22, 2018, 03:33:36 PM
This is a serious question:

Will you be bringing Trap back? PLEASE!
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: infinitehope on June 22, 2018, 03:45:19 PM
Miscreant is definitely OP. I'd say you almost get there just by giving them the entire burglar/pickpocket kits without requiring branching at all. As a player of several pickpockets, I'm surprised there wasn't any fear of having character who can get Master Steal + Master Sleight of Hand online much faster than current Pickpockets (absent subguilds).

Anyway, Enforcer/Infiltrator/Miscreant each only have a few holes in their kits compared to the Assassin, so unless subguilds are totally  nerfed into the ground you'll still be able to make an Assassin-like character, probably a *superior* Assassin-like character. You'll just have to invest a bit more into getting it. Good design IMO.
I don't think Miscreant is OP to the point it needs nerfing, is it strong? Hell yeah, within its scope of the game/world . A miscreant immediatly becomes much less powerful when you put them outside, in the wilderness, unless they took a subguild to give them some of that versatility.

And with how ride works for the new classes, it'll add even another level of difficulty for non-wilderness specialized characters, when it comes to wielding weapons while riding. (https://gdb.armageddon.org/index.php/topic,53544.0.html new ride described here)

Lets not forget that while miscreant gets 'advanced' in their weapon skills, its definetly not as good as infiltrators. A dedicated assassin that doesn't bother with thievery, but doesn't abandon subterfuge and stealth would be a perfect infiltrator. To me, infiltrators are like, the zalanthan version of a ninja, with a versatile skillset based around killing in a variety of ways. Another thing to note, a more combat focused class will start with stronger skills in their combat focus, where as a mixed class will probably be more diversified. A mixed class probably has a bigger 'grind' ahead of them over all. (lets not talk about combat grind. Its a long road no matter how you put it it)

Enforcers are ultraviolence with an oppourtunistic approach to it, while still having some more subtle skills, they rely on sheer force of power and skill in combat.

My very first character was a pickpocket, and I had been pushing for the combination of burglar and pickpocket since my first year on armageddon, I'm happy to see it become a thing. Is it overpowered? I agree with brokkr that its on the edge, but at the same time, the other 'mixed' classes, to me, are nearing it as well.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: JohnMichaelHenry on June 22, 2018, 04:38:16 PM
Perhaps the answer to the backstab dilemma is to add a new skill for roguish combat. Like circle or some kind of critical hit chance.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: lostinspace on June 22, 2018, 05:14:53 PM
Perhaps the answer to the backstab dilemma is to add a new skill for roguish combat. Like circle or some kind of critical hit chance.

POCKET SAND! SHASHASHA
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: JohnMichaelHenry on June 22, 2018, 05:19:53 PM
Can't really tell if you are joking, but things like that are exactly what I had in mind. dirt kick, quick dagger thrust to the neck, smoke for a quick escape, I think it would add a lot to combat, but certainly would separate the roguish types from the fighter types. :)
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: lostinspace on June 22, 2018, 05:52:51 PM
Not at all, a skill that blinds your opponent for a little bit would be great for rogues.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Speciation on June 22, 2018, 06:01:59 PM
I think it's fine for city classes to have both brew and poisoning (Miscreant) since getting the herbs needed for the poison would be the tricky part but the problem I see with Stalker is that they are suited for getting the herbs, making the poisons, AND applying them to their own weapons. So instead of promoting interaction between classes and players, the Stalker can just do everything on their own like the current Ranger but are a little worse at fighting/shooting. I think Stalkers could be a little worse at poisoning since their focus is more on knowledge and survival rather than assassins without backstab but riding and archery. I just would like to see poisons as a more niche thing instead of everyone running a bag full of every cure and three poisoned knives on their belt at all times. Maybe this could be solved with a change to poison to make it last for a limited amount of time and be a reward for being prepared before a fight.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: SuchDragonWow on June 22, 2018, 07:38:58 PM
I took a few hours to make a chart thingy, because I needed to look at it, and break it down.  I realize not all skills are equal, but one person's backstab is another person's jeweler, so whatever, I didn't want to debate that.  Just a numbers breakdown.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1g5Hyi-OI9eevFhT5vpfex5Mr4H50WJZChenirKOFrOI/edit?usp=sharing

While making the chart, I already had a few thoughts, but I want to catch up in the thread before I make some points.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Brokkr on June 22, 2018, 07:57:06 PM
Interestingly, I started with a chart that looks quite similar to that, to help assign skills.  It didn't work quite the same, and was really so I could visually see patterns of who had which skills, and how they flowed across classes.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: MatisseOrOtherwise on June 22, 2018, 07:59:59 PM
So, from that chart, it seems Infiltrator /is/ objectively the weakest.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Brokkr on June 22, 2018, 08:01:58 PM
The chart ignores advice I've given about how the skills cascade, so not really.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: SuchDragonWow on June 22, 2018, 08:06:06 PM
So, from that chart, it seems Infiltrator /is/ objectively the weakest.

The chart isn't necessarily meant to convey any balance, as objectively, stonecrafting, for instance, is worse than jewelrycrafting.  It just is.

Interestingly, I started with a chart that looks quite similar to that, to help assign skills.  It didn't work quite the same, and was really so I could visually see patterns of who had which skills, and how they flowed across classes.

Exactly, I just have to have something to look at so I can ingest it all, and make an objective assessment.  That said, I've caught up in the thread, and I wanted to make a few points of my own.

1)  Flavor wise, I do agree that it would be cooler to have Adventurer get chopping instead of bludgeoning.

2)  Did I miss something, or does trample no longer exist?  I thought I used it recently ...

3)  Shouldn't Soldier get Blind Fighting, as well?  Maybe at advanced, like the other light combats.

4)  I noticed Subdue is the only skill given at Apprentice.  Furthermore, it is capped for all classes at Advanced.  What's the possibility of maybe staging it up one tier, so that Advanced = Master, Journeyman = Advanced, etc.?
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: MatisseOrOtherwise on June 22, 2018, 08:08:36 PM


4)  I noticed Subdue is the only skill given at Apprentice.  Furthermore, it is capped for all classes at Advanced.  What's the possibility of maybe staging it up one tier, so that Advanced = Master, Journeyman = Advanced, etc.?

It was mentioned on the discord that only certain roles get given master subdue because reasons, I believe.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Vox on June 22, 2018, 08:23:52 PM

Miscreant currently has the most rogue appeal and the most assassin cross-over, but backstab and sap at levels far lower than an assassin would need to be reliable methods of attack. (honestly, Miscreant looks like a ton of out of the box rogue fun though)

Harder to OHK and thus needing to rely on something else is an intentional weakness for the Miscreant.

Enforcer has assassin quality backstab and sap but without the stealth component to make them reliable methods of surprise attack. (assuming you can get both piercing and bludgeoning up past advanced to even branch them) But so far as brutal thug goes, Enforcer looks epic (save for a baffling lack of scan/listen.)

The lack of scan/listen is an intentional weakness.  As are lack of brew/poison.  The idea was killers, probably of opportunity or planning, not folks with the skills to hunt down/detect and kill folks.(without a subguild at least)

I mean, if you're feeling randy just give Miscreant high backstab/sap and you have the perfect rogue class. Individual playstyles will then determine how assassiny/pickpockety/burglary a character actually ends up being but they'd have the potential to master it all in time if they really wanted and that was their concept.

Miscreant as is is pretty close to that Overpowered line as is.  Close enough I'm not sure which side it falls on.

I'm just mourning the death of Assassin as an archetype here, I'm gonna need some time to process. :)

R.I.P. Assassins, we never really knew you.*

Mostly because our vision just went black and then we saw the mantis head.

Thanks for taking the time to address my thoughts and for the enormous amount of work, care and planning that clearly went into the creation of these classes. While I certainly mourn the death of the archetypes, (since I'm a grizzled vet that's played Arm for the last 23 years), I have no doubt things will evolve as further player-experience is gained in 'real'-world scenarios and updates to subguilds occur, in the meantime I really appreciate the transparency and the willingness to discuss these things.

My next question is: since the creation of these classes seems to blend various subguild mechanics with previous archetype mechanics, will there be MAGE versions? Something that's like 'Destruction Krathi' for example that has a collection of spells and flavored combat skills allowing for a subguild to be chosen then for flavor like other classes?  That way I could be a Miscreant/Destruction Krathi if I wanted to be a rogue who manifested.. or a Destruction Krathi/master jeweler if I manifested younger.  Perhaps there could even be some sort of 'cost' for choosing a main-class mage in which you got a few more spell possibilities but would have a series of flavor echoes randomly spawn around you as your spells raised in power. Indicating that you couldn't just hide in plain sight.. Thoughts?
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Brokkr on June 22, 2018, 09:05:15 PM
So, from that chart, it seems Infiltrator /is/ objectively the weakest.

The chart isn't necessarily meant to convey any balance, as objectively, stonecrafting, for instance, is worse than jewelrycrafting.  It just is.

Interestingly, I started with a chart that looks quite similar to that, to help assign skills.  It didn't work quite the same, and was really so I could visually see patterns of who had which skills, and how they flowed across classes.

Exactly, I just have to have something to look at so I can ingest it all, and make an objective assessment.  That said, I've caught up in the thread, and I wanted to make a few points of my own.

1)  Flavor wise, I do agree that it would be cooler to have Adventurer get chopping instead of bludgeoning.

2)  Did I miss something, or does trample no longer exist?  I thought I used it recently ...

3)  Shouldn't Soldier get Blind Fighting, as well?  Maybe at advanced, like the other light combats.

4)  I noticed Subdue is the only skill given at Apprentice.  Furthermore, it is capped for all classes at Advanced.  What's the possibility of maybe staging it up one tier, so that Advanced = Master, Journeyman = Advanced, etc.?

1.  I guess I've considered lumberjack axes as more tools than actual weapons.
2.  Some skills initiate only your skills list with different mechanisms that being on your class skill list.  Trample is one of those skills.
3.  It was a way to differentiate them.  Laborer also doesn't get it, while Stalker and Miscreant do.  Sort of like...if your experience is fighting in a city, or in general, you probably aren't fighting in a blinding sandstorm or darkened tunnel, often.
4.  This gets a shrug, because it wouldn't matter.  I wouldn't change the skill level the normal classes get, I would change the skill level on the sponsored role only guild down.  So in the end it would just be catering to some folks OCD, which isn't a huge priority.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Brokkr on June 22, 2018, 09:08:55 PM
My next question is: since the creation of these classes seems to blend various subguild mechanics with previous archetype mechanics, will there be MAGE versions? Something that's like 'Destruction Krathi' for example that has a collection of spells and flavored combat skills allowing for a subguild to be chosen then for flavor like other classes?  That way I could be a Miscreant/Destruction Krathi if I wanted to be a rogue who manifested.. or a Destruction Krathi/master jeweler if I manifested younger.  Perhaps there could even be some sort of 'cost' for choosing a main-class mage in which you got a few more spell possibilities but would have a series of flavor echoes randomly spawn around you as your spells raised in power. Indicating that you couldn't just hide in plain sight.. Thoughts?

Changes to things like magick subguilds/spells/etc. tend to have a really long time between initial ideas and execution, for various reasons.  While there are ideas floating around for various magick related things, none of them relate to any re-implementation of magick main guilds.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: SuchDragonWow on June 22, 2018, 09:16:44 PM
Thanks for the replies.  All of that makes sense.  I guess the only one I still would point towards is that, yeah, lumber axes are tools, but there's some synergy to knowing how to swing an axe and learning to chop mf's up.  Just my two cents there.

Thanks for all the hard work.  It's looking rad.  I noticed some of the new balance you've created with stealth and perception, in particular.  I look forward to trying these out.

And as for "people will only play these four classes", don't worry.  People will pick OP classes and still suck at it, and people will pick what are perceived as subpar classes to try and roll people with it.  If you suck at games, there's no amount of handicap that'll get you to victory.  Still, this is a roleplay game, and picking classes that have the best combination of combat skills sounds about as boring as it gets.  In a roleplay game, I mean.  With stories and personalities.  But heeyyyyy.



Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: JohnMichaelHenry on June 22, 2018, 10:03:09 PM
After looking more carefully over the help files, it helps me to look at each class as an individual one, and it seems they do indeed have the relevant skills that will let them stand out in a group. I also noted that some of the ones that lack a few skills, have abilities that could make up for it. Also, I am one of the ones who definitely wants to try a lot more than the four or five listed favorites.
Oh and I kinda think bludgeoning on Adventurer is good. Not just because I always adventure myself in the mountains with a staff and a knife, but bludgeoning seems to the goto combat weapon skill. Just pick up that big branch and hit something with it!

Edited to add: Oh and I noticed on Fighter it says increased capacity for alcohol and pain, which, even though I don't really know what that means, it could certainly be a reason to choose fighter over the other heavy combat choices. Mixed with the right subguild, I can see it as very versatile and fun.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: AdamBlue on June 23, 2018, 04:25:53 PM
Adventurer seems really good. It gives you some token combat ability enough to kill most animals with no problem, while making you relatively bad at fighting other combat-based characters, all while being primarily a crafting guild. This lets you go on sweet adventures, live entirely off the land. If you think about it, it's the earliest thing you're going to get to Rambo. Someone out in the Grey, making their own bows, own traps, knives and spears. Living in the hide of their most recent kill. Sure, they may not be ripped like a combat or mixed class, but they get the job done and without relying on a single other soul.
It's so robust I can't believe it. I love it.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: roughneck on June 24, 2018, 12:25:30 PM

No veteran player is going to take Fighter for example, The trade is simply not worth it...slightly higher starting skills, hack and riposte and easier branches verses survival skills, perception skills, stealth etc...not a good trade when you know you are in for the long haul anyway. Especially when you can simply take slipknife on raider and outdoorsman on enforcer. And who is going to take Infiltrator over miscreant? Everybody knows that many of the skills that they both get, anything less then master is essentially worthless or death sentence. Just the fact that Infiltrator only gets advanced poison and no brew skill means it is out for many.

I state again. As far as the new classes go today, Once the new has worn off...say 6 months after they go live, a VAST majority of classes in game, and I mean between 90 and 95% And 95-100% with people who have played more then two years will be Raider/enforcer (same class in my opinion) Scout(with a crafting sub), miscreant(with an aggressor sub) and Craftsperson with either protector sub or a sub with high skinning.
Four classes.

Stalker > Scout but hey, everyone has an opinion.

And, I can see value for Fighter with the right subguild.

Brokkr - This question may have been covered but I didn't see it. Will the mechanics around skill caps remain the same when you choose a sub that gives the opposite city/wilderness version of a skill that the main class already has? For example, if I were to take outdoorsman on miscreant, would the wilderness sneak and hide default to the same skill cap as miscreant's city sneak/hide? Will it now show up on the skill list as different skills altogether, or will you only get to choose on version or the other?
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: X-D on June 24, 2018, 07:42:03 PM
Actually, I have moved stalker over scout too.:) More careful inspection.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Brokkr on June 24, 2018, 09:42:32 PM

No veteran player is going to take Fighter for example, The trade is simply not worth it...slightly higher starting skills, hack and riposte and easier branches verses survival skills, perception skills, stealth etc...not a good trade when you know you are in for the long haul anyway. Especially when you can simply take slipknife on raider and outdoorsman on enforcer. And who is going to take Infiltrator over miscreant? Everybody knows that many of the skills that they both get, anything less then master is essentially worthless or death sentence. Just the fact that Infiltrator only gets advanced poison and no brew skill means it is out for many.

I state again. As far as the new classes go today, Once the new has worn off...say 6 months after they go live, a VAST majority of classes in game, and I mean between 90 and 95% And 95-100% with people who have played more then two years will be Raider/enforcer (same class in my opinion) Scout(with a crafting sub), miscreant(with an aggressor sub) and Craftsperson with either protector sub or a sub with high skinning.
Four classes.

Stalker > Scout but hey, everyone has an opinion.

And, I can see value for Fighter with the right subguild.

Brokkr - This question may have been covered but I didn't see it. Will the mechanics around skill caps remain the same when you choose a sub that gives the opposite city/wilderness version of a skill that the main class already has? For example, if I were to take outdoorsman on miscreant, would the wilderness sneak and hide default to the same skill cap as miscreant's city sneak/hide? Will it now show up on the skill list as different skills altogether, or will you only get to choose on version or the other?

At some point during this the way in which stealth and hunt works in regards to city/wilderness was totally re-written.  Previously it was tied directly into guilds/subguilds.  The ability is the enabler of which environment one can use sneak/hide/hunt in.  We can apply this in a database rather than in the code to guilds and subguilds.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Delirium on June 24, 2018, 09:45:50 PM
So, to be sure I understand:
if you get journeyman wilderness hide from a subguild, and advanced city hide from a main guild, you won't just have one hide skill on your list, capped to advanced - you will have two hide skills, with their respective caps?
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Brokkr on June 24, 2018, 11:54:39 PM
No.  There is one hide skill.  Abilities determine behavior of the hide skill.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Hauwke on June 25, 2018, 12:01:28 AM
Is it an either or situation, or is will it still be possible to have both?
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Cind on June 25, 2018, 12:14:16 AM
Artisan sounds like my baby. Going to raise that baby right.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: JohnMichaelHenry on June 25, 2018, 01:09:54 AM
Okay. I'm starting to see what you guys are saying about scout vs. stalker. Seems like stalkers are gonna make better scouts than scouts will. Scout does have more weapon skills, and can master dual wield and two handed, so maybe I'm not giving that enough weight? It really looks like a whatever you can do, I can do better situation.

Edited to ask: Does seeing 'advanced' in your weapons skill necessarily mean the level is the same  as someone else that has 'advanced'? I would understand if the mixed classes advanced would be at the start of advanced, while the light combat classes advanced would be close to master.

Oh right! Are there stat bonuses still? Very curious to know how they would distribute if so....
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: JohnMichaelHenry on June 25, 2018, 03:28:23 AM
http://www.armageddon.org/help/view/Raider
http://www.armageddon.org/help/view/Raider%20Branching


Branching states "Parry to Blind Fighting" but the main Raider helpfile doesn't mention Blind Fighting

http://www.armageddon.org/help/view/Infiltrator
http://www.armageddon.org/help/view/Fighter%20Branching

Branching has "Listen to Watch" but the main Infiltrator helpfile had it starting with Watch
It also doesn't mention 'Threaten' as a skill to branch in the helpfile - I was on the wrong page.  I was on fighter.

Thanks!

Fixed Raider helpfile.  Technically listen does branch to watch, but watch is put on everyone's skill list at chargen.  So essentially it is functioning like a starting skill.  Took it off the branching page.

So nix my earlier comment about watch for Artisan, I guess everyone gets it to some degree...

Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Nao on June 25, 2018, 03:59:30 AM
Okay. I'm starting to see what you guys are saying about scout vs. stalker. Seems like stalkers are gonna make better scouts than scouts will. Scout does have more weapon skills, and can master dual wield and two handed, so maybe I'm not giving that enough weight? It really looks like a whatever you can do, I can do better situation.

Edited to ask: Does seeing 'advanced' in your weapons skill necessarily mean the level is the same  as someone else that has 'advanced'? I would understand if the mixed classes advanced would be at the start of advanced, while the light combat classes advanced would be close to master.

Oh right! Are there stat bonuses still? Very curious to know how they would distribute if so....

It's been said somewhere on this board (too lazy to dig it up now) that they are different. The light combat "advanced" is roughly the same as the caps the current warrior. The caps for the mixed classes are lower.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Hauwke on June 25, 2018, 06:14:57 AM
If you even get to that point. The only reason you would even need advanced in a weapon skill is for pvp.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Cind on June 25, 2018, 11:39:31 AM
Fence and Dune Trader sound good, though, like they are worth exploring to someone who has their heart set on Artisan.

I haven't really looked at ALL the others, which one(s) would you guys say is the new ranger? Is it Adventurer?

Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Riev on June 25, 2018, 12:18:29 PM
If you even get to that point. The only reason you would even need advanced in a weapon skill is for pvp.

There are no more advanced weapons.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Delirium on June 25, 2018, 12:25:30 PM
If you even get to that point. The only reason you would even need advanced in a weapon skill is for pvp.

There are no more advanced weapons.

He means advanced weapon skill level.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: MatisseOrOtherwise on June 25, 2018, 02:02:57 PM
Fence and Dune Trader sound good, though, like they are worth exploring to someone who has their heart set on Artisan.

I haven't really looked at ALL the others, which one(s) would you guys say is the new ranger? Is it Adventurer?

It's split between Scout and Stalker. Scout has the combat, Stalker has the overall competency and breadth.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: worldofsand on June 25, 2018, 04:22:02 PM
I don't think miscreant looks that overpowered. It's pretty much just pickpocket and burglar lumped together, which is something people seem to have wanted for years; and then a slightly higher backstab than burglars got, and master poisoning. And when you get right down to it, having the poisoning skill yourself is kind of so-so. If you have access to the important poisons, you almost certainly have access to somebody who could apply them for you anyway if you didn't have the skill yourself. It's kind of like crafting skills that way: convenient to have, but it's not something that gives you a distinct advantage you couldn't get in some other way, unlike combat and stealth skills.

With no combat skills at master, there will be serious limits to the havoc such a character can create. It'll basically fight like a pickpocket, plus advanced backstab, which is really perilous to use in real situations. Backstab is a skill where missing against another PC very easily means your death. Depending on where in the advanced spectrum they cap, it may be barely usable.

I'm more curious about enforcer. It's basically the old warrior plus master backstab and advanced stealth. That sounds incredible. They even get climb, just to ensure that you're completely free to pair it with either slipknife for master hide/sneak and to start with backstab, or a riding subguild if that's the route you're taking the character. That's some crazy synergy.

And that brings up a concern I'm starting to have. It's clear that the subguilds were designed for the old guilds, where four out of six guilds got master scan. Now that only three out of fifteen get that, and most classes with scan cap at advanced, the subguilds with advanced or master hide have become way more valuable.

I think there's a potential problem here. Looking at enforcer, the benefits of pairing it with slipknife are immense. You get master stealth, which only two classes now get (and only one city-based class). You get to start with backstab instead of having to branch it from piercing at - apparently - just short of what it took to branch the unique warrior weapon skills of old. And hey, you get advanced poisoning on top, because why not.

I'm leery of the notion that there's a subguild that gives so much to certain classes. The difference between advanced and master hide is HUGE. If we're going from a game where two thirds of classes get master scan and stealth, to a game where one fifth of classes get master scan and a measly two classes out of fifteen get master stealth, I don't think there should be a subguild that gives master sneak and hide. This change of dynamic has made it too much of an asset.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: sleepyhead on June 25, 2018, 04:35:07 PM
Subguilds are about to get reworked, according to Brokkr.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Armaddict on June 25, 2018, 05:49:31 PM
Quote
I don't think miscreant looks that overpowered. It's pretty much just pickpocket and burglar lumped together, which is something people seem to have wanted for years; and then a slightly higher backstab than burglars got, and master poisoning. And when you get right down to it, having the poisoning skill yourself is kind of so-so. If you have access to the important poisons, you almost certainly have access to somebody who could apply them for you anyway if you didn't have the skill yourself. It's kind of like crafting skills that way: convenient to have, but it's not something that gives you a distinct advantage you couldn't get in some other way, unlike combat and stealth skills.

Your opinion will probably change after I play one.  That skillset is ridiiiiculous.  You're a one (wo)man plague on any enemy, with little to no chance of being caught in anything, and even if you are, you're utterly competent at eliminating an attacker.  (Sidenote:  Removing parry from this guild is also an option.)

Other people seem to be voicing the same concerns about light combat vs mixed tier (i.e. The scout vs stalker) I think mixed, as a rule, needs to have its 'aggressive utility' skills dropped in skill level to not rival/beat light combat and light mercantile, people who will be utterly dependent on those things, or their combat abilities dropped to levels that make them very competent early, but somewhat vulnerable and more dependent on those things in rivalries.

Believe it or not, advanced poisoning vs master poisoning is actually a big deal, as far as how it unfolds in gameplay.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Bogre on June 25, 2018, 09:16:34 PM
I don't think Miscreant is OP. It's basically the 'rogue' role and I'm fine with it the way it is.

I don't know how the subguilds are going to get revamped, but I don't think I'd be a fan of anything making them weaker.

The Infiltrator, though, I could see getting master hide/sneak, so they can, uh, infiltrate. There's not much that this class gets to promote it above the Enforcer + subguild. With higher capped stealth skills that makes them essentially a more fighter-y legacy assassin and gives them a good niche.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Armaddict on June 25, 2018, 11:33:49 PM
I'm still firmly in the camp that miscreant should have advanced sneak, hide, and poisoning, and infiltrator should get those to master with a couple of their skills dropped (the peek on infiltrator weirds me out).

But whatevs, we'll see how it all ends up when everyone is rocking these badboys.

I hope the subguild revamp is true, because these main guilds look pretty close to fully-skilled out to me.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: JohnMichaelHenry on June 25, 2018, 11:58:03 PM
I sorta had the same concerns but in another thread it was pointed out that advanced weapon skills on mixed are not going to get as high as advanced weapons skills on light combat. That will matter. Also, miscreant seems just right to me. Lots of thief action and real risky in toe to toe. As it should be.

Arma, sounds like you really wanna be a miscreant first.  ;D Go for it.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Hauwke on June 26, 2018, 12:07:36 AM
Im not sure why everyone is obsessed with getting super high weapon skills. Getting to jman in slashing then spending your time getting sworded in the face is a far more productive use of your time to skill up because in the end, its the 'not getting whooped in the face' part that will save your character, not the ability to land every single blow.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: hyzhenhok on June 26, 2018, 12:10:02 AM
I'm still firmly in the camp that miscreant should have advanced sneak, hide, and poisoning, and infiltrator should get those to master with a couple of their skills dropped (the peek on infiltrator weirds me out).

But whatevs, we'll see how it all ends up when everyone is rocking these badboys.

I hope the subguild revamp is true, because these main guilds look pretty close to fully-skilled out to me.

...I'll take Miscreant being overpowered to having burglars/pickpockets basically removed from the game for want of decent stealth. I'd just lower the caps on the combat skills and require Sleight of Hand, Hunt and Poisoning to be branched. And all the Infiltrator needs is better sneak/hide.

Now I just have to decide between playing a Miscreant or one of the new more casual-friendly heavy combat guilds for my first new class.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Nao on June 26, 2018, 02:26:48 AM
I'm still firmly in the camp that miscreant should have advanced sneak, hide, and poisoning, and infiltrator should get those to master with a couple of their skills dropped (the peek on infiltrator weirds me out).

Why would infiltrator get both better stealth and better combat ability than miscreant? The tradeoff in arm before this (and plenty of other games) was raw combat abilty for stealth/utility. Giving infiltrator the advantage at both doesn't make sense to me at all.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Leudoberct on June 26, 2018, 07:15:22 AM
Does anyone else find it odd that Raider does not get skinning whatsoever? It's supposed to be a wilderness class. I know that it could be argued that they lack skinning for balance, but I find it pretty hard to believe that someone who would be spending most of their time out of a city wouldn't at least know how to get a bit of meat off an animal to keep themselves going. I would say that them being able to perfectly cut something difficult, like a shik, is a bit hard to believe, but definitely not getting some meat off a chalton. I think it would be nice for them to get journeyman skinning, like current warriors, so that they can get some food from an animal, but not necessarily anything valuable.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Hauwke on June 26, 2018, 07:20:59 AM
Does anyone else find it odd that Raider does not get skinning whatsoever? It's supposed to be a wilderness class. I know that it could be argued that they lack skinning for balance, but I find it pretty hard to believe that someone who would be spending most of their time out of a city wouldn't at least know how to get a bit of meat off an animal to keep themselves going. I would say that them being able to perfectly cut something difficult, like a shik, is a bit hard to believe, but definitely not getting some meat off a chalton. I think it would be nice for them to get journeyman skinning, like current warriors, so that they can get some food from an animal, but not necessarily anything valuable.
Agreed, they are afterall a wilderness class. It kind of makes sense that enforcer, a city based class does not get it. But a class designed to spend their time outside needs at least a small bit of self sufficiency when it comes to feeding themself. It all stems back to the discussions that go around every so often about how its wierd that you can completely fail to cut up a man sized beast and not get anything to eat.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: JohnMichaelHenry on June 26, 2018, 10:03:23 AM
I'm still firmly in the camp that miscreant should have advanced sneak, hide, and poisoning, and infiltrator should get those to master with a couple of their skills dropped (the peek on infiltrator weirds me out).

Why would infiltrator get both better stealth and better combat ability than miscreant? The tradeoff in arm before this (and plenty of other games) was raw combat abilty for stealth/utility. Giving infiltrator the advantage at both doesn't make sense to me at all.


Raider is a wilderness class yes, but they are also heavy combat. As staff has stated, you will need your friends dude.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Harmless on June 26, 2018, 10:51:01 AM
I just hope we always do have subguilds. There's a lot of good back and fourth here, I don't consider myself expert enough at a bunch of classes I have never played to be able to give a lot of feedback, but let's just keep subguilds around so that we can patch up the wonky holes in what we expect our characters to be able to do, please. Also, great work to all involved in this project.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Brokkr on June 26, 2018, 11:18:28 AM
Does anyone else find it odd that Raider does not get skinning whatsoever? It's supposed to be a wilderness class. I know that it could be argued that they lack skinning for balance, but I find it pretty hard to believe that someone who would be spending most of their time out of a city wouldn't at least know how to get a bit of meat off an animal to keep themselves going. I would say that them being able to perfectly cut something difficult, like a shik, is a bit hard to believe, but definitely not getting some meat off a chalton. I think it would be nice for them to get journeyman skinning, like current warriors, so that they can get some food from an animal, but not necessarily anything valuable.
Agreed, they are afterall a wilderness class. It kind of makes sense that enforcer, a city based class does not get it. But a class designed to spend their time outside needs at least a small bit of self sufficiency when it comes to feeding themself. It all stems back to the discussions that go around every so often about how its wierd that you can completely fail to cut up a man sized beast and not get anything to eat.

If you look at all the Heavy Combat classes, you may notice that none of them have any economic skills.  By that, I mean skills that can be used to generate coin.  That includes crafting and it also includes skinning.  That said, they are slightly better at skinning that other classes that don't have the skinning skill.  Such that if you kill a couple of scrab or a few chalton, you should be able to get some meat to feed yourself.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Armaddict on June 26, 2018, 12:15:16 PM
I'm still firmly in the camp that miscreant should have advanced sneak, hide, and poisoning, and infiltrator should get those to master with a couple of their skills dropped (the peek on infiltrator weirds me out).

Why would infiltrator get both better stealth and better combat ability than miscreant? The tradeoff in arm before this (and plenty of other games) was raw combat abilty for stealth/utility. Giving infiltrator the advantage at both doesn't make sense to me at all.

Because they won't have pick, peek, steal, listen, or any of the more utilitarian skills.  They have emphasis on themed combat, which is stealthy, which means they are specialized in it and thus GOOD at it, but at the cost of being less useful than the miscreant outside of combat situations.

Likewise, because miscreant gets to do -all- of the things that both infiltrator and pilferer do, outside of crafts, they are less adept at them.  Again, it's the jack-of-all-criminal-things, master of none scenario, where the way we have it set up actually has them more adept at combat through the majority of the average lifespan of a PC and with all the utilitarian skills to higher maxes, to boot.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Nao on June 26, 2018, 12:35:20 PM
I'm still firmly in the camp that miscreant should have advanced sneak, hide, and poisoning, and infiltrator should get those to master with a couple of their skills dropped (the peek on infiltrator weirds me out).

Why would infiltrator get both better stealth and better combat ability than miscreant? The tradeoff in arm before this (and plenty of other games) was raw combat abilty for stealth/utility. Giving infiltrator the advantage at both doesn't make sense to me at all.

Because they won't have pick, peek, steal, listen, or any of the more utilitarian skills.  They have emphasis on themed combat, which is stealthy, which means they are specialized in it and thus GOOD at it, but at the cost of being less useful than the miscreant outside of combat situations.

Likewise, because miscreant gets to do -all- of the things that both infiltrator and pilferer do, outside of crafts, they are less adept at them.  Again, it's the jack-of-all-criminal-things, master of none scenario, where the way we have it set up actually has them more adept at combat through the majority of the average lifespan of a PC and with all the utilitarian skills to higher maxes, to boot.

The Infiltrator get all the skills you listed, except steal, though.  Or are you suggesting taking those away and swapping them out for better sneak/hide? I don't know if I'd like that - none of them are directly combat skills, and pick can be just as useful for assassinations (the only combat scenario where stealth skills really come into play) as higher hide skill.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Brokkr on June 26, 2018, 12:41:43 PM
I'd say infiltrator, with skills like bash and a higher parry than assassin got, is more of a switch.  It can function as a straight up fighter to an extent, and it can function like an assassin, to an extent.  As opposed to be wholly one way or the other, which is where you would appear to want to shift it.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Armaddict on June 26, 2018, 01:00:28 PM
Infiltrator vs Miscreant:

Weapon skills:
Advanced 4 vs Advanced 2.
  The advanced 4 is mostly meaningless.  Using chopping or slashing when you have sap and backstab is essentially going to come down to depending on the defensive portion of that, which is really just emphasizing breadth training.  Bynners will do it, and that's probably about it, because training your primary skills will be important.

Combat skills:
--Parry (advanced) vs Parry (advanced)
  Why?
--Backstab (master) vs backstab (branched advanced), Sap (advanced) vs Sap (branched advanced)
  This is a boon in infiltrator's favor, to be certain, but when included with the other skills is not a -huge- boon.  Their stealth is more unreliable, making the opportunistic nature of it harder to manage given the drawbacks acknowledged by most who play the classes that have them now.
--Dualwield(master), Two-handed(master), shield use(advanced) vs dualwield(advanced), twohanded(advanced), shielduse(advanced)
  Unless the master levels are high on this, the high parry skills of both parties make this in favor of infiltrator, but not by a huge amount.
--Crossbow(master) vs Crossbow(advanced)
  Yay, I can use crossbows better in the city?  Does anyone ever actually see this being done in a way that people won't be flailing their arms around about after because they think it was twinky?
--Blowgun-use(branched master) vs Blowgun use(branched advanced)
  Haven't played with this skill enough to know how much of a boon this actually is, but I'm pretty certain getting it up to master will be both twinky and a long process.


Now, on to why the miscreant is actually stronger in combat, and why I actually kill people more as a burglar, currently, than I do as an assassin.
--Sneak (advanced) vs Sneak (master), Hide (advanced) vs Hide (master)
  Criminal engagement is largely based on opportunism.  You have to follow and watch people for opportunities to actually do what you want to do.  While I may have better backstab, I have to worry a whole lot more about actually having the opportunity to use it unless I'm just an alley brawler.  While I may have better throw, my ability to do it safely is greatly reduced.  While I may have better blowgun use, my ability to stay hidden doing it is less (<--Unsure of, again, I haven't used the skill much yet).
--Poisoning(advanced) vs Poisoning(Master)
  This skill goes up faster than combat skills.  Master is granted the ability to discern which poisons are being used.  Master is able to get to the point where expensive poisons are reliable and thus you aren't wasting thousands of coin to get a single dose applied.  It is more deadly using opportunism (i.e. Stealth and perception) than higher levels of backstab and sap with less opportunity to safely use them.  Master sneak and hide makes this powerful as hell.  Current poisoning levels on burglar make it deadly, but they have to waste doses, which they can luckily afford due to their broad skillset for money acquisition.
--Hunt (advanced) vs Hunt(Master)
  Miscreant is better at tracking down their prey, I guess.
--Scan (advanced) vs Scan (Master)
  Miscreant is better at finding hidden opponents, I guess.
--Pick(branched advanced) vs pick(master)
  Makes sense I suppose, though I think miscreant should get high advanced and pilferer be the master picker.
--Climb (advanced) vs climb (master)
  Makes sense, I can be alright with this, though if we removed listen and such utility/spy tools from the infiltrator I'd want this bumped up.
--listen (advanced) vs listen (master)
  I can be alright with it.  Again, kind of where I see pilferer being instead.
--scan (branched advanced) vs scan (master)
  Whut


So on and so forth.  Then weigh out the skills that one gets and the other doesn't in both directions...and it's just undesirable.  In other words, if you pit them face to face in the arena, yeah, you'll probably see infiltrator winning.  But as far as being the criminal combat-specialist vs the criminal 'mixed' tier...the ability to actually eliminate a target is leaning away from the combatant because it was decided to theme them -for- that, instead of making them an actual criminal-themed combatant.  They're a mini-enforcer, not the stealthy combatant.  We've made the miscreant the stealthy combatant and given them sheer potential for non-combat survival as well.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: hyzhenhok on June 26, 2018, 02:06:15 PM
I would also note that in theory the designs seem to indicate that you're supposed to have to rely on your friends and work in groups sometimes. And I can see that in theory maybe you'd want an Infiltrator-Miscreant duo for sneak jobs that might involve combat. However, the Infiltrator's inferior stealth means the Miscreant is never going to want him to come along.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Rumor on June 26, 2018, 06:31:27 PM
I think people are undervaluing advanced sneak and hide with this iteration of the game,  perhaps. There's only three classes that are getting mastery level of detection skills, the rest are at advanced or lower. Meaning with equipment, you can potentially still get somewhat reliable stealth against players.

It also seems designed so that the "biggest" guy(heavy combat) you can sneak up on, still might be able to beat you down if you get the jump on them. We'll call it the "smaller" guys (mixed), has the best way to spot stealth and stealth themselves. This prevents some apex predator type character from being able to remain invisible while still seeing everything going on.

Theory crafting is interesting, but I'm super curious and excited to see how this plays out and how a meta-game will naturally take shape with so many options and variations. I also think with some clever use of subclass reworking, this system can potentially be incredibly fun and diverse. There's always going to be a hierarchy or meta-game that gets adopted by the player base, but I think with more variation, what is hopefully accomplished, is that we get more experiences from playing with a handful of people than what we currently experience now. Clans, gangs and merchant houses and the like will feel much more fleshed out. New characters joining up might bring about completely new elements to affiliations and that just sounds rad.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: lostinspace on June 26, 2018, 06:52:39 PM
Okay sure, but will npc soldiers and guards be adjusted to have lower detection skills or fewer of them with current detection skills? You got to make it past the guards at the door before even worrying about other players detecting you.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Rumor on June 26, 2018, 07:05:10 PM
Okay sure, but will npc soldiers and guards be adjusted to have lower detection skills or fewer of them with current detection skills? You got to make it past the guards at the door before even worrying about other players detecting you.

Maybe with this discussion, they might. Who knows? Would be pretty cool.

Editing to add: I think it might make more sense for someone who's job it is to guard something to have the higher levels of detection, where-as someone just walking around or "generic" npcs like soldiers, random shop npcs, or flavor npcs wandering around on the street might be at the lower end of the spectrum or closer to advanced at best.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: JohnMichaelHenry on June 26, 2018, 08:17:52 PM
Okay sure, but will npc soldiers and guards be adjusted to have lower detection skills or fewer of them with current detection skills? You got to make it past the guards at the door before even worrying about other players detecting you.

Maybe with this discussion, they might. Who knows? Would be pretty cool.

Editing to add: I think it might make more sense for someone who's job it is to guard something to have the higher levels of detection, where-as someone just walking around or "generic" npcs like soldiers, random shop npcs, or flavor npcs wandering around on the street might be at the lower end of the spectrum or closer to advanced at best.

My opinion with this idea is just the 'watch' skill. It will be best if guards and such have to pick who they want to keep an eye on, while the real sneaky hidey types can still plan and get inside.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: hyzhenhok on June 26, 2018, 10:43:29 PM
I think people are undervaluing advanced sneak and hide with this iteration of the game,  perhaps. There's only three classes that are getting mastery level of detection skills, the rest are at advanced or lower. Meaning with equipment, you can potentially still get somewhat reliable stealth against players.

Unless advanced stealth in the new game is what master stealth used to be, I think we understand perfectly well. Without master sneak/hide, the danger isn't that you are detectable by people with perception. The danger is that you're going to fail your checks and thus be detectable by people without perception. "Somewhat reliable" is not reliable enough when one misstep is likely to get your character killed or marked for death.

It'd be great if the stealth mechanics were changing such that sneaky characters were detectable by only people with roughly equivalent or better detection skills. AFAIK no such rework is happening or is planned.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Delirium on June 26, 2018, 10:52:58 PM
It might be interesting if hide were a toggle rather than a binary hidden/not hidden check. Someone without scan would still see your shadow if your hide skill was terrible, and be able to look at you. Anyone looking at you would roll for a success to see your short description (whatever it would currently be, i.e. the masked man, the hooded figure, the tall guy). The higher the scan skill, the more information they get when they look at your 'shadow'. Scan vs hide would still work exactly like it does now, with a check each time you try to look at or interact with a hidden person. That would at least give you a shot at getting away undetected, even if you rolled the equivalent of a critical fail pratfall.

Then again, that might make hide too powerful. It's already an invisible button once you hit master. Probably part of the point of all this is to reduce the ability for people to ghostwalk through the city and murder without risk.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Armaddict on June 27, 2018, 12:16:04 AM
Quote
Probably part of the point of all this is to reduce the ability for people to ghostwalk through the city and murder without risk.

Unless...they're...-less- focused on combat?
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Morrolan on June 30, 2018, 11:35:35 AM
I, for one, want to say thank you to staff for all the work you put in. I am looking forward to trying something new.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Brytta Léofa on June 30, 2018, 01:41:46 PM
I'm super excited about using one of these for my next concept.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: SuchDragonWow on June 30, 2018, 06:45:35 PM
I'm super excited about using one of these for my next concept.

Yeah, I'm hoping the higher distribution of skills, along with subguilds, will allow for more flexible concepts.  Interested to tinker around with it.
Title: Re: Public Discussion of New Classes
Post by: Cind on July 04, 2018, 02:43:03 AM
The new classes are live, right? Excitement!