WR Logic Behind Race/Class options

[Stormfyst]

I understand that the core ideas of WR came from EQemu which obviously came from EQlive. Is there any reason to keep the current Race/Class restrictions? Gnome Monks, Dwarven Shamans, Dark Elf Paladins worshipping their God with their holy might. There are some obvious roleplaying conflicts when you think of these race/class combos. I was just curious if WR staff has ever looked at redefining the possible combinations.

And before anyone gets cute, yes i understand illusions are perma. That's not what I'm referring to here.

 

[Sanyia]

No thanks! A Dwarf Shaman? Dwarfs don't strike me as particularly adept to interact with the world of natural forces. Let them be their original classes, for which they are well suited.

But that's just my personal opinion, last thing I wanna see is a Troll Wizard, even if only meant as a joke.

 

[luciferblack]

Alright, but here IS a valid question I think...

Why is it that half elves can be warriors and paladins, but not clerics? Every other class that can be warriors and paladins can be clerics as well. THAT makes no sense.

 

[Sanyia]

My guess is that half-elves are a marginalized group, not being either human or elven prevents them from being fully accepted in society.

Priesthood could be seen as a privileged position in the relationship between the people and the deity that automatically confers prestige to the Cleric.

The other explanation I can think of, is simply that half-elves' wisdom is not top-notch (which was mentioned in the EQ guide booklet that came with the game, I think).

But that's just guesses.

Originally Gnomes could be Warriors and Necromancers, but not Shadow Knights, and Halflings could be Clerics and Warriors, but not Paladins.

 

[luciferblack]

Priesthood could be seen as a privileged position in the relationship between the people and the deity that automatically confers prestige to the Cleric.

The other explanation I can think of, is simply that half-elves' wisdom is not top-notch (which was mentioned in the EQ guide booklet that came with the game, I think).

See I still don't think that's the reason. I mean, they get to be paladins with powers granted by their deity...AND druids (wis-based).

I just think it's because SOE is dumb. Yep. That's all.

And yeah I remember when gnomes and halflings weren't SK's and rangers. I laughed when I first saw a gnome SK. Oh too funny... I thought "Someone crush it, please..."

 

[Aeolwind]

I pondered over this for a couple minutes, and kept discounting my own arguments. "They can be druids...but so can halflings", the end result argument comes down to: They might be half woodelf, half human. Just like Ogres and Trolls can be SK's but not Necromancers.

They are in the boat with Ogres and Trolls, they are just too dumb or aloof (in an RP sense) to pull off serious Good/Evil...more of good lite, or Pious Lite.

 

[Thinkmeats]

I understand that the core ideas of WR came from EQemu which obviously came from EQlive. Is there any reason to keep the current Race/Class restrictions?

As I understand it, it's extremely difficult to change them because of how the devs originally coded it.

 

[Reem]

I understand that the core ideas of WR came from EQemu which obviously came from EQlive. Is there any reason to keep the current Race/Class restrictions?

As I understand it, it's extremely difficult to change them because of how the devs originally coded it.

Plus think about how long it would take to reprogram all items to work with new Race/Class combos. It would be a waste of time that could be used for working on Patches and Epic Quests and so on...

Why fix something that isnt broken. :roll:

 

[luciferblack]

I pondered over this for a couple minutes, and kept discounting my own arguments. "They can be druids...but so can halflings", the end result argument comes down to: They might be half woodelf, half human. Just like Ogres and Trolls can be SK's but not Necromancers.

They are in the boat with Ogres and Trolls, they are just too dumb or aloof (in an RP sense) to pull off serious Good/Evil...more of good lite, or Pious Lite.

Okay, so why can they be druids? Just as wis based as clerics are. Makes no sense. Troll and ogres...meh okay, their intelligence lacks so they can't be int based classes.

Iksar can only be necros and no other int based class, but being that they were a strictly "evil" race, that made sense from a RP perspective I suppose.

The half elf thing I never understood. Tried to rationalize it and it just plain makes no sense. Not asking WR to change anything, but just saying that I always questioned the reasoning behind it.

 

[zodium]

We can't alter the client.

 

[luciferblack]

We can't alter the client.

I know that. My comments were merely questioning the SOE logic....or lack thereof...

I think there's plenty of options for people to play with. Race/class doesn't make your character unique...YOU make your character unique.

 

[Foonie]

We can't alter the client.

We can still make gnome monks though, we simply have to alter it after creation. Also, afaik it wouldn't be impossible to alter it so that if you chose an iksar monk you would get a gnome monk instead.

 

[zodium]

We can't alter the client.

We can still make gnome monks though, we simply have to alter it after creation. Also, afaik it wouldn't be impossible to alter it so that if you chose an iksar monk you would get a gnome monk instead.

It wouldn't be impossible, but it'd be stupid as shit.

 

[Stormfyst]

it's nice of me to forget i posted this. sorry i was moving when this was posted. lots has happened since then.

anyway, i didn't realize race/class was client coded. makes perfect sense.

and btw, for those who say it woudl be stupid to see a dwarven shaman, you should look around more. classes can be any race they want to be (visually) with illusions. it's the starting stats and racial traits that really mix things up a bit.

 

[zodium]

it's nice of me to forget i posted this. sorry i was moving when this was posted. lots has happened since then.

anyway, i didn't realize race/class was client coded. makes perfect sense.

and btw, for those who say it woudl be stupid to see a dwarven shaman, you should look around more. classes can be any race they want to be (visually) with illusions. it's the starting stats and racial traits that really mix things up a bit.

not to mention the fact it makes zero sense lore-wise but hey who cares about lore integrity right

 

[Ciaran]

and btw, for those who say it woudl be stupid to see a dwarven shaman, you should look around more. classes can be any race they want to be (visually) with illusions. it's the starting stats and racial traits that really mix things up a bit.

Ahhh but to get the illusion you have to go find one of your friendly neighbourhood chanters to cast it for you, and they have to be of the right level and actually have the spell and everything else. Plus it's impermanent. And on the real subject an illusion doesn't change how you were raised, the classes are reminiscent of how the race raises their children.

 

[diolas]

I know a gnomish bard....

 

[Liam]

Technically speaking, it wouldn't be impossible to see a raised and trained Dwarven Shaman, but it certainly is not the norm.


You players are the norm.

 

[zodium]

Technically speaking, it wouldn't be impossible to see a raised and trained Dwarven Shaman, but it certainly is not the norm.


You players are the norm.

Ivory Tower GMs.

 

[Ciaran]

Technically speaking, it wouldn't be impossible to see a raised and trained Dwarven Shaman, but it certainly is not the norm.


You players are the norm.

Maybe from a group of extremely primitive dorfs but my understanding of the shaman class was that they were the primitive types (like the iksar and barbarians) who were closer to that primitive tribal type worldview.