Heroica RPG - Expert Job Class Discussion

[Flipz]

That would actually hurt Battle Mages, though, since they don't get nearly as much SP as some classes. I'd actually argue that the change would make more sense on Mystic Knight, since they already have a heavy focus on enchanting their weapon in both their SHIELD and their Enchant roll.

Keep in mind, this is basically stripping a ranged class of their ranged ability--even though there's some benefit in being able to add effects to elemental spells, it's still a severe nerf. Yes, it would make both classes much more interesting, but Mystic Knight has a LOT of things going for it to support the nerf (though I'd probably still want to see its class HP bonus buffed a little in exchange), whereas Battle Mage doesn't really have what it takes to survive the change.

I almost feel like if Battle Mage really needs a change, some sort of "blood rage" ability would be better suited--maybe an increase in damage as their target becomes more injured, or perhaps an optional bonus for every consecutive turn spent attacking the same enemy? (The latter could be interesting--it would tie Berserker's weird ability back into lore, but by making it optional would avoid completely nerfing Battle Mage. Maybe "The Battle Mage gains a stacking temporary +1 bonus to their WP for every previous consecutive attack against the target"?)

[Waterbrick Down]

Meaning that if it was rolled the gem would be merged with the weapon and removed from their inventory. Since when a mystic knight upgrades a weapon it is permanent. A chi monk doesnt get a permanent boost from their ability correct? Just a one time shot. Allowing the addition of elemental attacks to a weapon without consuming the weapon would be far too strong of an ability. And it would need to be the gem they were using for the attack.

Chi Monk's don't use weapons, they can choose to imbue their HIT's CRITICAL HIT's and COUNTER's with an element from a gem they have in their possession for the cost of 1 ether. The thought is to allow Battle Mages to do the same thing except instead of imbuing their fist they temporarily imbue their weapon with an element from a gem they have in their possession for the cost of 1 ether. Damage is essentially the same as a SPELL except it's affected by row and takes a weapon's special effects into account.

[Flipz]

Meaning that if it was rolled the gem would be merged with the weapon and removed from their inventory. Since when a mystic knight upgrades a weapon it is permanent. A chi monk doesnt get a permanent boost from their ability correct? Just a one time shot. Allowing the addition of elemental attacks to a weapon without consuming the weapon would be far too strong of an ability. And it would need to be the gem they were using for the attack.

How is it any stronger than being able to cast unlimited elemental spells at will (like all Mage classes currently do)?

[Waterbrick Down]

That would actually hurt Battle Mages, though, since they don't get nearly as much SP as some classes. I'd actually argue that the change would make more sense on Mystic Knight, since they already have a heavy focus on enchanting their weapon in both their SHIELD and their Enchant roll.

Keep in mind, this is basically stripping a ranged class of their ranged ability--even though there's some benefit in being able to add effects to elemental spells, it's still a severe nerf. Yes, it would make both classes much more interesting, but Mystic Knight has a LOT of things going for it to support the nerf (though I'd probably still want to see its class HP bonus buffed a little in exchange), whereas Battle Mage doesn't really have what it takes to survive the change.

I almost feel like if Battle Mage really needs a change, some sort of "blood rage" ability would be better suited--maybe an increase in damage as their target becomes more injured, or perhaps an optional bonus for every consecutive turn spent attacking the same enemy? (The latter could be interesting--it would tie Berserker's weird ability back into lore, but by making it optional would avoid completely nerfing Battle Mage. Maybe "The Battle Mage gains a stacking temporary +1 bonus to their WP for every previous consecutive attack against the target"?)

Note this wouldn't replace a Battle Mage's SPELL and GREAT SPELL rolls, they would still have Spell Casting, it would just give them an option to peform an elemental attack (albeit taking row into account) with the special effects form their weapon.

[Flipz]

Hmm, in that case I guess it would work all right for Battle Mage (though lore-wise it still makes more sense for Mystic Knight). I actually wouldn't mind it replacing ranged spellcasting on MK, though, although now I think of it that's probably still a bad idea for consistency's sake.

[Myrddyn]

Ah, I see. Well, I'm likely going to change Erik to Battle Mage anyway, to take advantage of the extra opportunities to petrify/doom/hex opponents with counter and AOE shield, and I was going to just not use spellcasting very often.

So I'm fully in favour of (and fully biased towards) this idea.

[JimBee]

I'm thinking this would be more suited to Battle Mages, in which case it would be an addendum to Counter, Hit, and Critical Hit.

It wouldn't make sense if Mystic Knights and Battle Mages didn't use weapons, but since they do at the cost of not being able to use the effect of a weapon, i.e. if a weapon deals the blinded effect a spell directed through it does not. Magic based classes as a rule have to choose between using a weapon that deals an effect and casting an elemental spell, my thought is why not create a magic based class whose niche is that they don't have to choose.

Why does a niche need to be created? I feel like each Advanced Class (in the set of ACs) is unique enough. Mystic Knights have some pretty unique abilities, and Battle Mages hit harder and more often than any other AC.

I see your point about the ability to imbue attacks, but I just don't think it would be fair. Spellcasting is a really powerful and flexible ability as it is, and the tradeoff is that casting spells doesn't incur any weapon effects. I've always liked that rule and think it's a good way to balance things. Any mage class can still choose to attack normally like any other class, too, if they really want to use their weapon's effects. Chi Monks can imbue attacks, but they can't use weapons so their "spellcasting" is often less powerful than that of any other spellcaster.

[Waterbrick Down]

Why does a niche need to be created? I feel like each Advanced Class (in the set of ACs) is unique enough. Mystic Knights have some pretty unique abilities, and Battle Mages hit harder and more often than any other AC.

I see your point about the ability to imbue attacks, but I just don't think it would be fair. Spellcasting is a really powerful and flexible ability as it is, and the tradeoff is that casting spells doesn't incur any weapon effects. I've always liked that rule and think it's a good way to balance things. Any mage class can still choose to attack normally like any other class, too, if they really want to use their weapon's effects. Chi Monks can imbue attacks, but they can't use weapons so their "spellcasting" is often less powerful than that of any other spellcaster.

Depends on how you do the math, Berserkers and Hunter's can do as much damage or more and as often as a Battle Mage and have Berserkers also have the benefit of SP (granted they also have the focused taget issue). Also it should be noted that imbued attacks are not as powerful as spells since they would take row into account. The trade-off still exists, half damage with weapon's abilities vs. full damage without weapon's abilities, it simply takes the elemental damage element out of the equation.

[JimBee]

Oops, I meant Mage ACs.

I suppose you're right about the fact that the only thing that changes is the multiplier, which is also changed by row as well as element vs. no element (the way it is currently). With that in mind, I wouldn't be that opposed to such a change.

[Palathadric]

Ah, I see. Well, I'm likely going to change Erik to Battle Mage anyway, to take advantage of the extra opportunities to petrify/doom/hex opponents with counter and AOE shield, and I was going to just not use spellcasting very often.

So I'm fully in favour of (and fully biased towards) this idea.

I would tend to see Raider as a better option for that.

Minus the counter.

Edited December 4, 2014 by Palathadric

[Flipz]

I think one thing to note about the Dragoon class is that it is a long term class, Dragoon doesn't really get good till level 40 or 50. By level 60 a Dragoon's Shield roll does one of the highest damage attacks among all the classes. They aren't necessarily meant to fill a certain roll, yes they can use shields, but that doesn't make them good tanks. Yes they can wield super cool weapons, but that doesn't make them good status inflictors. Dragoons are survivors and high damage output machines and have a dragon, if you're looking to fulfill another roll than you probably need to look at another class. I agree more observation would be good, but I haven't seen anything to really persuade me that the class needs changes.

But that's just it--they don't "do" anything at all until Level 50 at minimum. (Trust me, having both run a 40s-level Dragoon and played alongside them, it's not much of an improvement.) That's 30-90 battles of contributing virtually nothing to the party at all. In other words, Dragoon--the class that punishes you if you don't aggressively pursue it before you hit Level 40--is the ultimate dream class for those "play on autopilot" players who do little other say "repeat" for six months. I really like the concept of having to train the dragon over time, but the disconnect there is something fierce.

And yes, there's other classes that don't fit neatly into established roles--Chi Monk, Witch, Shaman, Artisan, and Regulator among a few others. But of them, a good portion are flexible classes--meaning they aren't predispositioned for a specific role, but are flexible enough to fulfill any one of them depending on build--while Regulator still hasn't been played as itself at any significant level (yes, Pie's been a Regulator for a long time, but his entire build is transferable between any number of classes, not to mention the Pheles Rod/Kris completely changes the way you'd play ANY class; we've seen Pie play Pie, not so much Regulator), so it's hard to tell what it actually does. There's also a few that carve out a role of their own utterly separate from what any other class can do (Alchemist and Harlot come to mind). But even for those, it's clear what they DO do--Alchemist makes items and Gold, which they can use to help either the party or themselves, while Harlot deals middling damage to enemies but has some pretty unique built-in debuffs on their attacks. Dragoon is..."has a dragon". That's enough for roleplay, but it's not enough to define its own combat role--telling a player their combat role is "has a dragon" is like telling an actor to act a quality ("I want you to feel melancholy") instead of an action ("I want you to watch Anna leave, then turn back to the audience and try to process what she meant to you.").

(And yes, that second part of that bit of direction is somewhat iffy as well, but it's better and more helpful to the actor than "feel melancholy".)

Edited December 30, 2014 by Flipz

[Waterbrick Down]

I'd argue a Dragoon combat role is a high damage output melee class with a good deal of survivability worked in. It's slightly less powerful when compared to say the Barbarian Chieftain as far as damage output, but it has SP and High Assault in it's favor and in the long run comes out more powerful than a ton of classes. I'd stress again the class is a long term investment, even beyond the initial gaining access to it, you sacrifice utility in the beginning for being a powerhouse in the end.

[Myrddyn]

And yes, there's other classes that don't fit neatly into established roles--Chi Monk, Witch, Shaman, Artisan, and Regulator among a few others.

Shaman is a healer. It has an option to heal, and it fully heals the entire party on a shield roll - which is the most healing of any advanced class, if you don't consider the revival and effect removal of Druid. Plus it has extra critical heals, which means it does the most healing on critical heal rolls as well. Offense-wise, it has extra critical hits rather than standard hits, and it does some damage on a shield to a single target - but with the damage being dependent on the health loss of the rest of the party, I'd hesitate to describe it as an offensive class.

[Flipz]

Shaman is a healer. It has an option to heal, and it fully heals the entire party on a shield roll - which is the most healing of any advanced class, if you don't consider the revival and effect removal of Druid. Plus it has extra critical heals, which means it does the most healing on critical heal rolls as well. Offense-wise, it has extra critical hits rather than standard hits, and it does some damage on a shield to a single target - but with the damage being dependent on the health loss of the rest of the party, I'd hesitate to describe it as an offensive class.

Exactly; it hits VERY hard for a pure healer, and its SHIELD skill does damage to the enemy party--the only healing class besides Sage and Prophet to do so. (Sage also hits very hard for a healing class, but thanks to having Meditate over Counter it falls more squarely into the "healer/support" role.) To put it another way, you could (and have) run Shaman as an offense class, but your could also run it as a pure support class--it doesn't fall squarely into either one based on rolls alone, it depends on what weapons and artifacts you bring into it.

I'd argue a Dragoon combat role is a high damage output melee class with a good deal of survivability worked in. It's slightly less powerful when compared to say the Barbarian Chieftain as far as damage output, but it has SP and High Assault in it's favor and in the long run comes out more powerful than a ton of classes. I'd stress again the class is a long term investment, even beyond the initial gaining access to it, you sacrifice utility in the beginning for being a powerhouse in the end.

It's not a high damage output class, though, not until Level 50 or higher--120 and 118 are making that painfully obvious. Even then, at Levels 50-60, it's unreliable damage; yes, Dragon's Wrath and High Assault are good at that level, and regular Hits are passable, but Dragon Aid is pretty trash even past 60.

And again, there's nothing you can really do to customize the class. My Dragon Aid is pretty much exactly the same as Thormanil's (with the only difference being element) no matter what I upgrade or equip, and prior to 50 our SHIELD rolls are the same way. Compare that to Necromancer Althior versus Necromancer Namyrra, or Paladin Monk Pretzel versus Paladin Boomingham (or even better Paladin Cronk), or Sorcerer Thalion versus Sorcerer Heckz versus Sorcerer Arthur; they're all the same classes, but they express them in different ways, ranging from subtle to massive. With Dragoon, however...well, Dragoon Arthur and Dragoon Thormanil are pretty much interchangeable in a mechanical context, and more than that there's nothing we can do that another class can't do better. And yes, that includes the roleplaying advantages of having a dragon--minus the Shadeaux ties (which other Heroes can do just as well or better without actually being a Dragoon), anyone can (with effort) make an interesting companion character (hello there, Barty and McCafferey!), and a Ranger could potentially have an actual dragon if they wanted to.

I like the idea of the class, don't get me wrong, I just think it needs something to make it stand out more, to make it more fun to play.

[Waterbrick Down]

It's not a high damage output class, though, not until Level 50 or higher--120 and 118 are making that painfully obvious. Even then, at Levels 50-60, it's unreliable damage; yes, Dragon's Wrath and High Assault are good at that level, and regular Hits are passable, but Dragon Aid is pretty trash even past 60.

And again, there's nothing you can really do to customize the class. My Dragon Aid is pretty much exactly the same as Thormanil's (with the only difference being element) no matter what I upgrade or equip, and prior to 50 our SHIELD rolls are the same way. Compare that to Necromancer Althior versus Necromancer Namyrra, or Paladin Monk Pretzel versus Paladin Boomingham (or even better Paladin Cronk), or Sorcerer Thalion versus Sorcerer Heckz versus Sorcerer Arthur; they're all the same classes, but they express them in different ways, ranging from subtle to massive. With Dragoon, however...well, Dragoon Arthur and Dragoon Thormanil are pretty much interchangeable in a mechanical context, and more than that there's nothing we can do that another class can't do better. And yes, that includes the roleplaying advantages of having a dragon--minus the Shadeaux ties (which other Heroes can do just as well or better without actually being a Dragoon), anyone can (with effort) make an interesting companion character (hello there, Barty and McCafferey!), and a Ranger could potentially have an actual dragon if they wanted to.

I like the idea of the class, don't get me wrong, I just think it needs something to make it stand out more, to make it more fun to play.

It's a high damage output class in respect to other classes around it. Even at level 40 the closest class to do more damage consistently is the Barbarian Chieftain and that becomes outclassed as the Dragoon hits higher levels (assuming equal level and equal WP let's say 20, at level 40 it comes out to 100 Damage to all enemies, vs. 120 Damage to 3 enemies). Dragon's Aid isn't really trash either when compared to things like AIM, STEAL, or MEDITATE that the other classes have. Let's also not forget about SP, being able to wield shields gives a big advantage as far as surviving a fight when compared to non shield-bearing classes. Yes, they're not a reliable tank, but I don't think they're designed for that role in the first place, their SP design is more based on the Black Knight (Special Dodge/Hide) than other Knight based classes.

Concerning your point about differentiation, some classes are more suited for it than others, any Mage based class is going to have more options available to it from the get go, because they can choose between focusing on Scrolls, Elemental Damage, or a special combination of artifacts and specialty weapons. If you look at a simpler class like Hunter or Raider, you're not going to see as much variation mechanically at one point you could have swapped Hunter Skrall, Hunter Benji, and Hunter Xander and mechanically not seen much difference. It comes with the territory. It also should be noted that some of the variability within classes has to do with available artifacts. Aside from 1 drop thus far, there hasn't been a single item that is specifically for Dragoon's in order to allow for more variability. I understand you enjoy creating different builds for different classes, I'm just not sure though what role/roles you're envisioning Dragoon's fill.

[swils]

Except you aren't when you're playing a more complicated class (see: Quest 35 with you playing Shaman). I mean, I can't speak to how much fun you're having, but I've certainly noticed more interaction with other characters as Shaman and Barbarian than as Dragoon and Raider; perhaps that's a function of time, but then again there was that big burst of interaction during the stats-free portions of your Dragoon career (Training Room, Hall, early 103) compared to what happened after you started experiencing the mechanics.

But like I said, I'm not you. What are your thoughts on your experience playing the class?

I don't know, I don't not enjoy it, but then, I'm really struggling on the RP front lately (and activity in general), and it's clearly a class that would be more enjoyable to a stronger roleplayer. I have to wonder if it wouldn't be easier to see the dragon as an actual character, instead of just a job trait, if they were an actual party member? So instead of "Thormanil and (his pet/companion) Arx" it would actually be "Thormanil and Arx". I haven't come up with many ways to put Arx to use outside of battle, or at least haven't seen much success with what I've tried. That may change as he grows and becomes a more intimidating, full-fledged dragon (can't wait for a QM to plan out having us take a dangerous and demanding hike only to load the party up on Arx's back and fly us straight to our destination, heh). It'd definitely make battle more interesting if you controlled two characters, with interactive rolls between them. They'd share "Dragon's Wrath" except that the Dragoon would attack in addition to the AoE breath, "High Assault" would land on the next turn of either dragoon or dragon, consuming the other action that would have taken place, Dragon Aid would remain but the Dragon would have Dragoon Aid, basically same thing but with a weapon attack. So it'd be possible to have two Wraths proc a turn, and the dragoon's weapon's effects wouldn't become fairly meaningless. Dragons would have their own hp pool and there could be a whole line of Dragon-specific artifacts that can change their performance. Obviously damage numbers would have to be retooled to accommodate.

:shrug: (why isn't that a thing?)

That's mostly me dreaming and thinking about a what-if. I don't expect, nor necessarily want, it to happen. I just feel like it would make the Dragon more of a unique character than something that we pick up and drop off at a whim when we switch classes. I'm going to stick with Dragoon for a while, see if I can't find more enjoyment in it later on. I think a trip to the Fields is going to be in Thormy and Arx's near future.

[Flipz]

Concerning your point about differentiation, some classes are more suited for it than others, any Mage based class is going to have more options available to it from the get go, because they can choose between focusing on Scrolls, Elemental Damage, or a special combination of artifacts and specialty weapons. If you look at a simpler class like Hunter or Raider, you're not going to see as much variation mechanically at one point you could have swapped Hunter Skrall, Hunter Benji, and Hunter Xander and mechanically not seen much difference. It comes with the territory.

A fair point about Mages, but I disagree with your counterexample of Skrall/Benji/Xander; while you all had some similar item builds, you each itemized your weapons differently, which is the main area of customization for Hunters--Xander went gemless but had an awesome bow to boost damage output, and while Skrall and Benji both did the same bow upgrades basically at the same time, Benji had the whole "constant class switch" thing going for him and affecting his builds (not to mention that Beast Warrior actually plays very differently from Hunter, with the latter mainly sticking in the Back Row and differentiating targets based on Favoring and damage output, whereas Beast Warrior has some Back Row potential but changes to a melee-only class on a SHIELD and generally picks targets based on self-survivability or odds of getting a Steal roll. (Speaking of which, I'd love to see Steal on Beast Warrior replaced with Dirty Fighting from Infiltrator and the Sticky Gloves made suitable for Infiltrators--a minor change, but it would really do a lot thematically to highlight the duality and opposition between the two classes; not that they aren't already differentiated enough, it'd just be cool to see.)

It also should be noted that some of the variability within classes has to do with available artifacts. Aside from 1 drop thus far, there hasn't been a single item that is specifically for Dragoon's in order to allow for more variability.

Eh, I'd say 2 Artifacts that I can think of; yes, the Unicorn Helmet is suitable for multiple classes, but its ability is still a unique "thing" that Arthur can do that Thormanil can't. That being said, however, it's also not a large ability that seriously differentiates between the two in battle--it's more of a "eh, that's interesting" sort of thing. (It's definitely a step in the right direction, though.) I do think you may be on the right track with regards to Artifacts, though; as far as I can recall, every Artifact currently suitable for Dragoon is either pure SP or else SP plus some immunities, with the exception of the aforementioned Unicorn Helmet (which is good, but still very much an "immunity" ability)--but as we've all seen, Dragoons don't make ideal tanks.

I understand you enjoy creating different builds for different classes, I'm just not sure though what role/roles you're envisioning Dragoon's fill.[/size]

That's just it--I don't know either. On the surface, it seems like it'd hit hard, but it just...doesn't, even with some of the better weapons in the game. (Seriously, even now WP:20 is pretty epic WP-wise, if not quite as high as some others.) On the surface, it seems like there's a lot of Artifacts to transform it into a tank, but it just...doesn't work, thanks to High Assault taking them out of the Free Hits. Neither of these is a bad thing on their own, but when the Dragoon doesn't seem to have any role--not even a role it defines itself Harlot or Alchemist or Assassin--it's a bad sign.

I don't know, I don't not enjoy it, but then, I'm really struggling on the RP front lately (and activity in general), and it's clearly a class that would be more enjoyable to a stronger roleplayer. I have to wonder if it wouldn't be easier to see the dragon as an actual character, instead of just a job trait, if they were an actual party member? So instead of "Thormanil and (his pet/companion) Arx" it would actually be "Thormanil and Arx". I haven't come up with many ways to put Arx to use outside of battle, or at least haven't seen much success with what I've tried. That may change as he grows and becomes a more intimidating, full-fledged dragon (can't wait for a QM to plan out having us take a dangerous and demanding hike only to load the party up on Arx's back and fly us straight to our destination, heh). It'd definitely make battle more interesting if you controlled two characters, with interactive rolls between them. They'd share "Dragon's Wrath" except that the Dragoon would attack in addition to the AoE breath, "High Assault" would land on the next turn of either dragoon or dragon, consuming the other action that would have taken place, Dragon Aid would remain but the Dragon would have Dragoon Aid, basically same thing but with a weapon attack. So it'd be possible to have two Wraths proc a turn, and the dragoon's weapon's effects wouldn't become fairly meaningless. Dragons would have their own hp pool and there could be a whole line of Dragon-specific artifacts that can change their performance. Obviously damage numbers would have to be retooled to accommodate.

:shrug: (why isn't that a thing?)

That's mostly me dreaming and thinking about a what-if. I don't expect, nor necessarily want, it to happen. I just feel like it would make the Dragon more of a unique character than something that we pick up and drop off at a whim when we switch classes. I'm going to stick with Dragoon for a while, see if I can't find more enjoyment in it later on. I think a trip to the Fields is going to be in Thormy and Arx's near future.

To be fair, 118 hasn't exactly been the most idea quest for roleplaying--it's basically been the entire party talking to themselves until they met the four talking through the vent, only for that conversation to suddenly get cut short in favor of another fight.

That's actually a cool idea--by giving the Dragon HP and a separate action, it would set Dragoon firmly in the realm of crowd control (something that up until now has been rather limited, since none of the "summon" classes aside from Sylvan Ranger can cancel Free Hits and Marauder has yet to see Hero play), allowing for flexibility while also adding a unique upkeep cost for the power; right now, having buffs not really affect the Dragon damage is logistically logical but mechanically unsound (why would a Dragoon ever care about Encouraged/Weakened when their Dragon is unaffected, or why would they want to be Lucky to have a shot at a Dragon's Wrath that's weak and does more harm than good?). If the Dragoon and their Dragon were separate entities, however, it would make sense to have to apply buffing consumables separately, and would also add lorewise to the idea of being a caretaker, with the Dragoon having to care for their companion's HP in addition to their own. This would be a huge expense to keep up, but it's the price you'd have to pay to get the coverage and damage output of two separate Free Hit-cancelling rolls. (Well, that and an overall decrease in power from the current numbers, but that'd be a given if the class was split this way.)

The only downside I'd see, from a mechanics perspective, is the problem of experience and KOs; I definitely would want Dragoons and their Dragons continue to share their Level as they currently do (managing separate experience gains would be a nightmare otherwise, especially with the Medal of Glory being a thing), but what would happen if a Dragon got KO'd and the Dragoon failed to revive them before the end of the battle? (Solution: the Dragoon gains no experience, since the point of Dragoonhood is gaining experience in working as a team rather than looking out for only yourself?) Likewise, stuff like Trial Brew could also be difficult to handle if the Trial effect only exists on one of the two. (Then again, I've come to realize that Trial Brew is problematic enough on its own. )

Great food for thought either way, though. I'd probably want to see Dragon's Wrath use up both the Dragoon's and the Dragon's turns (sort of how you explained High Assault working, but in reverse--if the Dragon rolls a SHIELD, the attack takes place, and then the Dragoon's next turn is already used up, and vice versa if the Dragoon rolls a SHIELD the Dragon loses their next turn), but it's definitely a great idea to think about.

[Sandy]

That's mostly me dreaming and thinking about a what-if. I don't expect, nor necessarily want, it to happen. I just feel like it would make the Dragon more of a unique character than something that we pick up and drop off at a whim when we switch classes. I'm going to stick with Dragoon for a while, see if I can't find more enjoyment in it later on. I think a trip to the Fields is going to be in Thormy and Arx's near future.

I think that is a fine suggestion, and I promise to look into Dragoon's build. I agree that it is a bit too hit-and-miss for an Expert Job Class. Making the dragon a permanent "tamed monster" could make it more balanced, since the Dragoon could rely on his weapons more.

[The Chosen Minifigure]

Here is my mockup of a new L30 class.

It still needs finetuning and to be brushed up on a couple of small details, but I'm pretty happy with it.

Elemental

These dedicated mages have mastered control of the four elements of Fire, Water, Earth and Air.

Additional Heath: +8

Additional Ether: +8

Weapons: Elementals can utilise any weapons other than barbarians weapons, provided they are imbued with one of the four elements. They can also wield daggers and staffs.

Job Traits: Specialised Scrolls-All scrolls whose effect includes one of the 4 elements has a 2/3 chance of success instead of a 1/2 chance, Manipulation-Elementals can manipulate the 4 elements outside of battle to put out Fire, halt Water, tunnel through Earth and calm the Air.

Battle style: True elemental- Elementals can cast spells of all kinds, but are particularly proficient with the Fire, Water, Earth and Air, the 4 "true" elements.

1. Shield: Natural forces-The Elemental casts a powerful spell, drawing power from nature itself, and attacks an enemy with 3 times its weapon power added to its level (WP:15x3+30=75 elemental). Additionally, if the element is one of the 4, the attack will also deal: Fire-Weakened, Water-Asleep, Earth-Stunned, Air-Fragile. If ether is depleted, nothing happens. If no gem was chosen, one is chosen at random.

2. Nature's Anger: The Elemental deals damage equal to 3 times it's weapon power added to its level.

If using one of the 4 elements, it deals damage equal to 4 times its weapon power added to its level.

3. Nature's annoyance: The Elemental deals damage equal to 2 times it's weapon power added to its level.

If using one of the 4 elements, it deals damage equal to 3 times its weapon power added to its level.

4. Elemental Affinity: The Elemental is struck by the opponents attack. If it is imbued with one of the 4 elements, the Elemental redirects it at the attacker.

5. Damage: The Elemental is struck by the opponents attack.

6: Special Damage: The Elemental is struck by the opponents Special skill. If the skill affects all enemies and uses two of the 4 elements, the Elemental selflessly protects the others from the attack, making it affect only him.

Thoughts?

[Asphalt]

I think that is a fine suggestion, and I promise to look into Dragoon's build. I agree that it is a bit too hit-and-miss for an Expert Job Class. Making the dragon a permanent "tamed monster" could make it more balanced, since the Dragoon could rely on his weapons more.

I think making the dragon more of a team mate would benefit the class a great deal. It makes sense too since they seem to be treated as intelligent beings. It would allow greater freedom for the players and add that extra kick in the teeth the class seems to be missing. It would also add an element of danger and tension. If there are any old timey Roleplayers in the house, you might remember the extreme downside to a wizards familiar. If it was killed the wizards got smacked hard in return. Could the dragon bond be treated that way as well? If a Dragoons dragon was ever killed there could be consequences. The first being they lose access to the class obviously.

[Waterbrick Down]

I think making the dragon more of a team mate would benefit the class a great deal. It makes sense too since they seem to be treated as intelligent beings. It would allow greater freedom for the players and add that extra kick in the teeth the class seems to be missing. It would also add an element of danger and tension. If there are any old timey Roleplayers in the house, you might remember the extreme downside to a wizards familiar. If it was killed the wizards got smacked hard in return. Could the dragon bond be treated that way as well? If a Dragoons dragon was ever killed there could be consequences. The first being they lose access to the class obviously.

I think loss of access to the class might be a little extreme in a forum based RPG when time for character advancement is so much longer than table-top RPG's and thus investment in certain character advancements so much more valuable. I do like the idea of consequences if the Dragon goes down though, perhaps the Dragoon becomes weakened, slowed, and fragile until the Dragon is revived?

[Flipz]

I think loss of access to the class might be a little extreme in a forum based RPG when time for character advancement is so much longer than table-top RPG's and thus investment in certain character advancements so much more valuable. I do like the idea of consequences if the Dragon goes down though, perhaps the Dragoon becomes weakened, slowed, and fragile until the Dragon is revived?

I think loss of access to the class might be a little extreme in a forum based RPG when time for character advancement is so much longer than table-top RPG's and thus investment in certain character advancements so much more valuable. I do like the idea of consequences if the Dragon goes down though, perhaps the Dragoon becomes weakened, slowed, and fragile until the Dragon is revived?

I'd just go with, "if the Dragon is down at the end of the battle, you don't get experience". Should be plenty motivation to keep both halves of the class alive.

[Zepher]

I actually really like WBD's suggestion, especially since the Dragoon can prepare against those possibilities. My other suggestion, and I'm not sure if this has been tossed out already but I feel like it might have been: maybe downgrade some attacks severely if the dragon is downed. I think making the dragon separate will make the class a whole lot better, but I think without a downside it will end up making it TOO much better.

[Flipz]

I actually really like WBD's suggestion, especially since the Dragoon can prepare against those possibilities. My other suggestion, and I'm not sure if this has been tossed out already but I feel like it might have been: maybe downgrade some attacks severely if the dragon is downed. I think making the dragon separate will make the class a whole lot better, but I think without a downside it will end up making it TOO much better.

Well, for starters, High Assault would be right out, and Dragon's Wrath would lose half (or more, depending on Level tier!) of its power. I had kinda taken that as a given, given the suggested mechanic of the rolls.

I don't like the idea of making it a flat effect, since a.) it makes it super easy to build immunities to nullify them, and b.) would get in the way of the Dragoon being able to give up their own turn to revive their partner.

Another option: the Dragon and Dragoon share a single health pool. If one gets Knocked Out, the other has to stop fighting in order to tend to their partner.

EDIT: Actually, that last bit would work pretty well even with separate health pools; it does get in the way of the Dragoon being able to revive the Dragon, but it is pretty darn simple...

Edited January 7, 2015 by Flipz

[UsernameMDM]

Thoughts?

Avatar rip-off? Seems too niche to me and at the same time cliche.