EQ2 Summit

[Nanyea]

A bunch of us just recently got back from SanDiego and our preview of EQ2, and all of these sites have a writeup in some form or another

The Runes
EQ2 Druids Grove
Ogaming- eq2.ogaming.com/
EQ2 Fantasy
EQ2 Warcry- www.eq2.warcry.com
EQ2 Vault- www.eq2vault.ign.com
EQII.com- www.eqii.com
EQ2 Graffe- eq2.graffes.com
EQ2 Stratics- www.stratics.com
Kingdoms of Norrath- www.kingdomsofnorrath.com
aster University- www.castersuniversity.com
MMOHell.com
MMORPG.com www.mmorpg.com
Allakhazam- eq2.allakhazam.com
EQ-Squared
EQ2 CRGaming- eq2.castersrealm.com

[Dumar]

Once they progress further down they'll take the Crusader route and then really the difference between the Paladin and Shadowknight is really the good and evil versions of almost the same abilities or the same type of character.

Awesome!

[Lleauaric~EW]

why cherry pick a tidbit?

In EQ Live Paladins and Shadowknights and such were hybrids of other classes, they basically had a couple abilities from each class. In EQ2 are they being built from the ground up originally or are they still going to be hybrids?

The Paladin and Shadowknight are both Subclasses of the Crusader Class. The Crusader is a Class from the Fighter Archetype. When someone wants to be a Paladin or Shadowknight they would begin their adventuring career as a Fighter. Once they progress further down they'll take the Crusader route and then really the difference between the Paladin and Shadowknight is really the good and evil versions of almost the same abilities or the same type of character. Like in EQ Live the Paladin is sort of a Fighter/Cleric and the Shadowknight is sort of a Fighter/Necromancer. We don't have that sort of distinction, but there will be a distinction between the two. The Shadowknight is more of the evil person who will still have Lifetaps and that sort of thing.

Basically the Paladins and Shadowknights will still have the flavor that you're used to having, but they're not a derivative class is what I think you were asking. The Paladin isn't just a half-ass Cleric and a half-ass Fighter, same for the Shadowknight.

Exactly, so as you get higher as a Paladin you won't start getting low level Cleric spells for example?

No, they have their own spell lines built up from scratch.

One of the concerns I think a lot of people have when you say that basically the Shadowknight is the evil version and the Paladin is the good version, is that players start to think that there are actually 12 end classes as opposed to 24. Because while the spell names may be different and the spell effects may look different, but in reality they actually do the same exact thing.

That won't be the case for sure. They're the same in that they're both Knights of either good or evil. But their spell selection will be different; the Paladin will be heavy on heals and such where the Shadowknight really won't have any of that at all. There will be a definite distinction between the two.

We wanted it to be meaningful in addition to being good role-playing flavor at the top level. Really most of what your character is going to be in a purely functional sense will be defined at the Archetype level, but you'll get things you're better at, you'll specialize in some areas and weaken in others as you go up that will make you distinct at the end.

[Samus Aran]

I'm too lazy to read all of the writeups... but can anyone tell meh what the general attitiude was after the summit? Were people excited, soso, or sad after this?

[Immy]

I heard it through the grapevine that a monkey in depends ran on stage and started flinging feces at everyone

[Samus Aran]

Originally posted by Immy
I heard it through the grapevine that a monkey in depends ran on stage and started flinging feces at everyone

Yes, Chris Cao was there.

[The Bog]

I hear Andy Sites offered to give people lifts home, but merely lifted them on top of his shoulders and ran them to their houses.

[Shinrai]

Sony, with a beta period getting shorter and shorter, is going to perfectly balance that many classes so they're totally individual yet perfectly interchangeable? That should be fun to watch.

The fact they're wasting time wining and dining a bunch of chat board owners is confusing enough in itself.

Thanks for collecting the links though

[doharg]

With 24 classes and a super rigid archtype class structure, it will hard as hell to have a great deal of class definition. I see alot of potential problems if they stick to the current setup.

[Vekruul Shuth]

I care less what they say...We know how they will balance each subclass.

Pally Spell: Holy Might.40 DD

SK spell: Holy Shit!.40 DD

Pally spell: Armor of Love:50 AC

SK spell: Armor of Hate 50 AC

Or somewhere down those lines...No balancing needed.Just re-naming!

[Goofy]

frankly if they are really bent on releasing the game by year end, i highly doubt that class balancing/tuning can be done right.

Maybe thats why they are inviting the influential community leaders and feeding them info they want to release, wining and dining, so that good infos get released out of these supposedly trustworthy, unbiased, websites.

This might boost box sales of yet another poorly tuned/bugged out SoE Product.

Working as intended(TM).

[The Bog]

Pally Spell: Holy Might.40 DD

SK spell: Holy Shit!.40 DD

I don't know why, but I found that hilarious

[doharg]

frankly if they are really bent on releasing the game by year end, i highly doubt that class balancing/tuning can be done right.

The problem is that time can't fix what they have got their minds set on. For instance, the question isn't IF a monk can be ballenced tank-wise against a Warrior, the question is, SHOULD a monk be ballenced tank-wise against a warrior?" The answer is no, and the only reason they are trying is because they decided on the structure of the class tree before seeing if standard RPG classes would fit into it. The result? They had to invent classes to fill the spots on the tree and now the world of Norrath now has two types of rogues (should only be one) on top of a rogue-like assassian, and two types of types of bards (should be zero - but I'll save that argument for another time). I just think that if that is best they could come up with, they should have asked the players for a class tree that makes more sense.

[Rythonn]

Originally posted by doharg
The problem is that time can't fix what they have got their minds set on. For instance, the question isn't IF a monk can be ballenced tank-wise against a Warrior, the question is, SHOULD a monk be ballenced tank-wise against a warrior?" The answer is no, and the only reason they are trying is because they decided on the structure of the class tree before seeing if standard RPG classes would fit into it. The result? They had to invent classes to fill the spots on the tree and now the world of Norrath now has two types of rogues (should only be one) on top of a rogue-like assassian, and two types of types of bards (should be zero - but I'll save that argument for another time). I just think that if that is best they could come up with, they should have asked the players for a class tree that makes more sense.

Why should they have to follow "standard RPG" rules? You make it sound like a bad thing that they are producing their own ideas? Would you rather a cookie cutter game everytime?

[doharg]

Originally posted by Rythonn
Why should they have to follow "standard RPG" rules? You make it sound like a bad thing that they are producing their own ideas? Would you rather a cookie cutter game everytime?

I know what a Ranger is, I know what a Paladin is and a Monk...but WTF is a Swashbuckler (a gay pirate?), and a Brigand, and a Dirge. RPG is based on time tested concepts that can only be tampered with so much before they fail. 12 classes works perfectly, which means that 24 classes will have lots of redundancy. You'll see, time always proves me right =p