Diktator.8927

In your opinion. In my opinion, it's not a good thing, as I do prefer having a clear trinity (or even a quaternity? with support specs being added to that trio). I've been always saying that boons are a garbage system in general, due to what they became. I have no problem with some of them, or even most of them: - as long they aren't perma buffs (or at least for a lot of them you would need to really build your character to get it, with max concentration, runes, etc.) - as long as they all of them aren't present on every class/spec, because it kills class identity/diversity in a way, because everyone can do everything, regardless of the class (I think some stuff should be unique to some professions/specs, without making that unique stuff mandatory to have in group content - meaning they should be self buffs only) - as long as they aren't required for everyone in the group to have, because frankly, there should be more diversity. There should be power specs that benefit more from fury, and some that don't care about it (or crit) at all. The game should allow for more build diversity in terms of gear/stats, other than "go full berserker for power dps". Some classes should focus more on crit and fury, some should focus on the raw damage without the crit (endless possibilities really, some could focus on attack speed + crit, for the high apm specs, some could focus on pure damage, some could be dmg + crit for big but slower hits, etc.). Sadly this kind of thing doesn't seem to exist in GW2, as all power builds are fairly similar in terms of stats they choose (it's similar with condi), and crit is required to deal as much damage as possible.

None of that applies when stuff like stacking exists in endgame PvE content. And you don't want to sacrifice dps, so you wont use vitality gear. Sure for open-world PvE, you can be ranged. Same for PvP and WvW. In open-world, I run half viper's, half trailblazer's gear. I had plenty of survivability, when combined with some runes, sigils, traits, and skills (lots of healing when doing damage, so usually if I pull a bunch of mobs, I just heal through their damage). I didn't rely on shroud that much for survivability, though it was always a nice option for emergency heal/shield. Besides, the way some Wells work, you do want to use them on top of enemies, meaning you are going into melee range. So I wouldn't say it's a pure ranged class, like for example a Longbow Ranger would be. Don't get me wrong, it's not a melee class either. Other than wells, Specter doesn't really have much mobility, besides dodging. I think Shroud was fine in PvE. The changes should've been focused around Consume Shadows trait.

There should be a clear distinction imo. All professions should be able to have access to almost all roles. One elite spec however, shouldn't have access to all roles. Now the question of which roles, it depends on the espec. Berserker should mainly be a dps spec, be it condi or power. Druid, for example, is clearly a healer/support spec, it shouldn't be able to do DPS as well (if we're talking group content, in open-world PvE it should have enough tools and damage to make it viable for solo play). Now especs like Firebrand cover too many roles, while being good at all of them. While some specs that are a jack of all trades could/should exist, they shouldn't be the top mandatory picks that are simply too strong. Firebrand does great as a quickness provider, it's a great condi dps, it also offers a lot of defensive boons, even heals, all at the same time.

You're just amplifying the "issue" that doesn't exist. They said they wouldn't agree with most of your list, which is why they think there's no right answer to the question. To me it was a pretty clear and straightforward response. But you've somehow failed to understand what they were saying, and instead chose to debate over it. They could've made their own list, and then someone else could've disagreed with them and made their own list, and we could go on and on like that. There is no universal answer to this question, though some picks obviously can be better than others. I'd personally pick Firebrand over Willbender. Guardian is really squishy, and it relies on boons and active defense. Willbender kinda requires you to do damage to keep yourself alive, and is more difficult to play than Firebrand. Firebrand is just much easier and more versatile, while allowing you to use tomes to either heal yourself, buff yourself, deal dmg, etc. on top of having access to a ton of boons otherwise, via Mantras and stuff. For the Revenant, I'd say Renegade and Herald are both great picks. I'd say Renegade being ranged is irrelevant, as you're mostly going to fight close range anyways, especially against harder enemies that take a bit longer to kill. Also if you pick the All For One trait, you'd want to be in range of your summons to get Protection. Both are one of the tankiest especs you could pick, if built correctly. For Thief, I'd go with Specter any day. As you have said, you're relying on dodging and active defense on Daredevil. Specter can just tank damage, at least right now before the patch drops. Specter has Consume Shadows, which heals for a ton, or gives a large barrier, it has access to Shroud which automatically makes it more tanky, due to basically having 2 health bars. Overall it has a lot of tools that make it great for dealing with single target threats, like champions, bounties, etc. For a lot of these choices, the gear, runes, and sigils also matter a lot.

That's the point? It's an RPG game after all. You can't have everyone doing everything, you need some defined roles. Would you be complaining about Druids being kitten at dps right now? Their role is very-well defined, they're primarily a healing/support spec. If you wanted to go the DPS route, you technically could, but you're not gonna be great at it, in fact you'll be quite bad at it. Every other MMORPG I've played has defined roles, if you want to pick a certain role, you need to pick a certain class. That's the case with most games that deal with different classes. If we take @Kaleban.9834's example, where each elite spec is designed for a different role, in GW2 you would have access to all roles in all 9 professions.

Yeah, that's fine then. And obviously if we didn't care about the game, we wouldn't be discussing it here in the first place. It might be because we couldn't understand each other's points, though I think I understood yours fairly well, so I'm not sure if you necessarily made "better" points. If I wanted to sum it up in a few sentences, then it would be something like this. Mesmer's class theme and fantasy doesn't align with what Bard's usually are in other games. Bard would be it's own separate class, with it's own separate kit, with it's own separate class mechanics and unique abilities. It would work better that way, then being thrown into a profession that's thematically different, and that focuses on different things. If you disagree with this, then we simply perceive what Bards and Mesmers do (and how they do it) differently, and that's where our disagreement stems from. Cheers, and have a nice day/night.

Listen, this is going nowhere obviously. If you are trolling, then good job. If you aren't, then I'm so, so sorry. If Bards were introduced, they would have a separate profession mechanic, as well as other unique mechanics, just like any other class... I think this should be very obvious, without having to say it (apparently it isn't). The differences you pointed out between Warrior and Guardian mean nothing. In the end, they all end up doing damage, or buffing allies, right? They just do it differently, with different mechanics. Btw, those are already existing professions, ofc you would be able to list their differences, as they are straight forward. How do you expect me to list all the differences between a Bard and any currently available profession... when Bard doesn't even exist in the game lol. I'm not a game/class designer, and I frankly don't have enough time to theorycraft you an entire class from scratch, covering their entire kit, with all the abilities and what they do. Do you want me to create a brand new class, come up with new mechanics, new abilities, and everything? I'm sorry, if you were looking for that answer. Let's just say it would be very different from a Mesmer. Glamour abilities have nothing to do with Bards, Mantras don't have anything to do with Bards, Shatters have nothing to do with Bards. No I wouldn't be content if they just changed the name of some abilities. I seriously don't know where this is coming from. Yeah, that's EXACTLY what I meant. It's obvious that you aren't willing to accept anything other than your own view, and that you aren't even interesting in understanding my point. Thank you for confirming that.

Yeah, I'm not doing that. Again, I've been pretty clear, but you intentionally keep dismissing or ignoring my points. What can any class do that other class cannot? I mean it's such a weird question. What can a Warrior do that a Guardian cannot? Each class can do almost everything in this game, boons, ranged and melee dps. The way they look like while doing it differs, the way how they do it might differ, but they do end up doing the same thing as everyone else (doing damage, buffing allies, healing, etc.). What would Bard do that's not in the game? Again, you have to look at how it does what it does, and how does it look like when it does it. You can't simply ignore that point. I wouldn't be able to do it playing as a Mesmer, because it's simply not a class focused around instruments, sounds, songs, chords, notes. You play a song to buff allies, you play a chord to damage an enemy. Maybe you could have different instruments being used for different things, certain "softer" sounding instruments focusing on buffing and healing, and harsher ones being used for damaging abilities. I mean the possibilities are there. I have pointed out to other games, as they have well designed Bard classes. So if you are for some reason unfamiliar with them, there's a chance to familiarize yourselves with the concept of a Bard class.

The class is literally about illusions, phantasms, deception, mind control. How do you even come to a conclusion that spells out Bard, is just beyond me. I've given you a bone with the lullaby, and not only have you took it, but you are now using it as your argument. It's only one potential spell, out of the entire Bard kit.. Playing different songs, chords, notes, even using voice, so sound is a big component of the class. AoE spells that buff allies are also a thing. Aion, Allods Online, Lost Ark, all have great Bard classes so if you're unfamiliar with them, go check out some videos from those games.

Well, at least now I know I'm not touching my Scrapper ever again.

I'm sorry, but it's like I'm talking to a brick wall. Have you tried reading what I've said, and tried understanding my point? I've explained it very well, and you are getting caught up on an irrelevant Bloodmage comment. I've said Necro already encompasses the Blood mage fantasy, and I've just given an example of how they could make an elite that focuses more on it. They don't need to, they just could if they wanted to. I'm not asking for it, it's an example. I said Paladin does fit into the Guardian fantasy style of class, though visually it's not currently 100% there. It could be with a new elite. Cleric is a cloth wearing character (among other things), I wouldn't put it under Guardian, as it's different. I have also explained the profession themes fairly well, and given the equivalents from other games. In your descriptions, where does the Bard theme fit? Is it about Strength and physical prowess? Nope, so not a Warrior. Is it about Conviction and Altruism? Nah, not really. So not a Guardian either. Is it about Possession and Otherworldly Magic? Nope. Not a Revenant. Is it about Nature Magic and Wilderness Master? Nah, not a Ranger either. Is it about Science and Ingenuity? Nope, not a scientist, not an Engineer. Is it about Shadows and Cunning? No, I don't see bards as that dark and mysterious. Not a Thief. Is it about Reality and Mind Alteration? No, overall it's not. You could reach and say playing a lullaby to put an enemy to sleep could be mind alteration. But it's not a Mesmer either. Is it about Matter Creation and Manipulation? No, it's simply not an elementalist or a mage. Is it about Occultism and Contamination? Hell no it isn't, so it's not a Necro either. That was simple enough. Bard doesn't fit anywhere. It's not only about color schemes, it's about an overall visual appearance of the class. That encompasses skill icons, visual effects from abilities, animations, particle effects, how the skills interact with everything, etc. It's also about the lore/fantasy/theme/identity of the class.

The base of the whole argument wasn't about what class I think is missing. Everyone has their own preference, and everyone might want different classes to be added. I also haven't spent any time theorycrafting potential new classes, I just have rough ideas of what's missing, that other games have. The way I see classes currently, is that a profession determines the visuals, the identity/fantasy of the class. Each profession is unique and different from each other. Different especs just act as different ways to play within that profession fantasy/identity, in most cases. In other games they are called builds, in GW2 they're elite specs (and they do a bit more than what changing a build in other games does). Adding a Bard as a new profession, for example, would add a completely new and different class identity/fantasy, with completely new and different visuals, mechanics, etc. Adding a Bard as an elite spec to whatever other profession just wouldn't be the same in any way. You're missing out on completely different visuals, weapon choices and their skills, mechanics, etc. You're just getting a different build for the base profession, that acts as a Bard. You're also missing out on potential new especs for that profession, that would have the same theme, but with different twists, just like current especs. So instead of just having one bard class as the elite spec, you could have 3-4 different types of Bards. The same way you have 3-4 different Summoners or Elementalists (core + 3 especs). We're just back to my main argument, and I think I've been pretty clear at explaining it. Though I seem to have to repeat it in every single post, so that might not be the case. You think that any new class could be added under current professions as an elite spec. I'm simply arguing that some new classes would be better suited to having a whole new dedicated profession to them. I wouldn't, for example, want a Reaper to be its own profession. It fits nicely as the melee summoner/necromancer, Scythe fits the theme and the identity of the core profession perfectly. Here are just a few descriptions of the current professions. Elementalists - Mages/Spellcasters that use different elemental magic, fire, water, air, earth. Pretty straightforward. - (Potentially)Covers all magic type of classes from other games. Warriors - Weapon masters, heavy armor, strength. - Covers default melee warriors/knights from other games. Rangers - Nature, survival, spirits, pets. - Covers Archers, Rangers, Druids, Wardens from other games. Necromancers - Dark/blood magic, undead, summoning, corruption, plagues, feeding on life force. - Covers the summoner/necromancer, dark/blood magic, etc. type of classes from other games. Guardians - By the description, Paladins essentially, holy knights. Visually, not really. In practice, lots of fire. Virtuous fighters, protect/support allies, etc. - (Potentially)Covers the holy knight/Paladin classes from other games. Thieves - Stealthy, using shadows, sneaking. Very agile. - Covers assassins, thieves, and other similar classes from other games. Engineers - Different sorts of turrets, gadgets, explosives, elixirs, mines, bombs, rifles, pistols, etc. - Covers all the engineer/tinkerer type of classes from other games. Mesmers - Magical illusionists, using clones, phantasms. - Covers all the illusionist/psionicist types of classes from other games. Revenants - More unique to this game I guess. Using different heroes/legends from the mists, utilizing their power. Dark-ish knights? - (Potentially)Covers the dark knight/shaman types of classes from other games. Now mind you, while they do cover certain class fantasies, etc., some of them cover more than one fantasy. Necro for example covers summoners, the undead, dark magic, blood magic, plagues and diseases, corruption...but they all have the same visuals. It does allow for 4th expansion to add a blood mage for example. So a Paladin could be introduced under the Guardian profession, sure. It seems to fit in perfectly, even though we don't really have a "real Paladin" in the game right now. Visually it's just not the same as Paladins from most other games, but an espec could potentially change that. A Bard just wouldn't fit in anywhere, other than as a separate profession. The current elite specs do fit in in those professions, but how would a Bard fit any of them? When I actually think about it, it's the only class fantasy that isn't represented. Sure, there might be a few others like Monks/Martial Arists/weaponless classes, but they just wouldn't fit in GW2, as it ties your abilities to your weapons. Cleric/Priest type of class arguably doesn't exist either. I'm not sure if there are any other classes that are so unique that wouldn't fit into current professions. Most melee warrior type of unique classes could just be placed under warrior. The solution would be straight forward, but apparently it's a sin to have one armor type with 4 professions, compared to the usual 3.

I just don't understand the obsession with " 3 new classes per health bar or 3 classes per armor type". Just put it anywhere honestly, it doesn't matter that much. It doesn't matter if you have the same "Health level" as another class of the same armor type. But yeah, your suggestions are perfectly applicable to the game, and I don't see why they couldn't do something like that, at some point. I'm not even saying they need to add all the elite specs at once, or even all professions at once. This way you have 3 brand new unique classes, which can have their own separate especs that differ from one another. The reason why I didn't go in depth about theorycrafting new possible classes and their especs, is because I was stuck arguing about whether these already exist in game, or the difference between introducing them into the game as especs vs new professions. In my opinion, those classes would be completely different if introduced as new professions, rather than just especs. This way, Bard as a whole is focused around music, notes, chords, etc. You could have different especs, focusing on different parts of the musical theme, rather than just having one espec from a completely unrelated profession doing it all (which ends up in doing none of it to the fullest). With Paladin, you could have a more healing oriented spec (like Druid), a more durable, support-like spec, and a full on dps spec. Though I'm unsure if that aligns with anet's current vision of everyone doing everything. The only issue that rarely anyone brings up, is time and money required to develop those. For a game as big as GW2, you'd think they'd have a massive team behind it, yet they don't. So right now we can only dream about something like this happening.

Agreed. Boons are nothing special at this point. They should be temporary buffs to help you in certain situations, not perma buffs.

BDO, and honestly a lot of action-combat MMOs, usually come nowhere close to having as much customization and uniqueness about their class systems as tab-target games do. AA doesn't really have "more" classes, rather it allows you to combine different skill trees and make your own class. Majority of the influence comes from one tree, a bit less from the other tree, and the least from the 3rd tree (though you could distribute skill points equally between the 3, it wouldn't be great though). ESO is great, the only reason I'm not playing it over GW2, is because of its terrible combat. The class system in ESO is alright, nothing special, not great, not terrible. Listen, sure, elite specs could fill different class ideas instead of new professions, to an extent. But they would need to be at least on the level of Druid and Specter when it comes to how much they alter the class visuals, feel, role, identity, fantasy, gameplay, etc. Harbinger is just a variation of Necro, Reaper is a melee variation of Necro, Chrono is a variation of Mesmer, Virtuoso is a variation of Mesmer, etc. Specter feels like a somewhat unique class, taking the shroud mechanic from Necro, and using it to get that Warlock feel when combined with scepter. Druid transforms the class in a way, especially when you use a Staff. It's not just a boring dps with a pet. Compare that to the other 2 especs that feel very similar, and you see how different the Druid actually is. So if they were ever to create a true Paladin class, or a Bard, a Priest/Cleric, or whatever other class that exists in other games, it would need to be on that level, otherwise they simply wont feel like brand new classes.