|
General For serious discussions about general Wyvern topics. |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
||||
|
||||
The Wyvern 'Tier' System
For those of you familiar with D&D, I'm sure you can already guess where I'm going with this. For those of you that aren't, let me break it down for you.
In the Dungeons & Dragons community, there's evolved a tier rating system for the different character classes one can play. Each class is rated on a scale of Tier 1 through 5, with 1 being the best "overall" classes in the game. Now, I'm going to steal this from a post on another site, but here's a basic overview of the system: Quote:
I'll see if I can write something up to make the Tier system more relevant to Wyvern, despite it being pretty applicable as it stands. In the meantime, what considerations do you think need to be taken to determine where each Guild (and possibly even extending to Guild/Race combo) falls in the Wyvern world?
__________________
"If I were to kiss you here they'd call it an act of terrorism--so let's take our pistols to bed & wake up the city at midnight like drunken bandits celebrating with a fusillade." - Hakim Bey
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
Looking at the descriptions, the top tier class would be able to do "absolutely everything." What is absolutely everything in Wyvern? As far as I can tell the only distinctions that can be made are the ability to deal damage and the ability to stay alive. All Wyvern activities (questing, RDing, PKing) fall under those two in differing quantities.
If we are considering dealing damage and staying alive as our criteria, that brings about another problem concerning the latter. Many guilds rely on the same armor and the same items to stay alive. For example, my paladin and my caveman both use resistance potions, healing potions, resistance rings, DSMs, skull shields, cloaks of the lion, amulets of the eagle, unicorn horns.. I could go on. So if the items used aren't guild exclusive, it seems that the ability of a character to stay alive seems more tied to their race (my giant has more HP, my human can mana shield) How do we rate guilds on their survivability, then? As far as weapon types and damage types go, most guilds tend to be about equal, except for archers. Rogues also do pierce damage like archers do, but end game they have gem weapons to take the edge over platinum bow/bolts or the guild specific arrows/bow. In spite of all this uncertainty, I'd hastily throw together [Caveman, Axeman, Paladin, Mage] [Monk, Rogue, Ranger] [Archer] Rouges, Rangers, and Monks are a notch down because of armor restrictions, or lackluster guild bonuses. All three classes miss out on platinum. I'm not sure how their guild armor stacks up versus DSMs. If they are equal or better, they could possibly be included in the above tier. I don't know much about this Monks do get a big healing bonus, but they are the only melee guild to not get a health bonus. Rogues do pierce damage and have a relatively small HP bonus. Their addition bonuses are in skills that aren't too game breaking, such as lock picking and hurled. Rangers get a solid bonus to HP (50% for whipsman) but they don't have secondary skill bonus like Paladins (strength) or Axeman (Strength and FW.) One could argue that death is that skill, but it pigeon holes them in to using the magic whip spell. If not using magic whip, it could be argued that the death magic allows for vampire blading, which could be true, but strength and FW just directly benefit a character without any additional effort. Conjurers are bleh. I don't mean to sound discouraging, I am actually wildly interested in this. I'd like to hear your thoughts on what exactly it is that you are considering so I can analyze it more in depth.
__________________
Spado [Level 27 Frost Giant Paladin] Yaa [Level 25 Human Caveman] Last edited by Shootout : 12-11-2011 at 08:40 PM. |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
Like solo Hades at level 19. The only real problem is PvP. Player movement patterns aren't patterned (at least the ones who realize you don't run straight at the archer). Last edited by Morwen : 12-11-2011 at 08:36 PM. |
#4
|
||||
|
||||
The extra spaces I suppose were an exaggeration, but I put them below the others not because of their ability to survive but the caution they must take to do so. As far as bonuses go, they get neither a bonus to HP or MP, the only guild besides monks to do that. Theoretically, they would therefore have a harder time taking damage than the classes I put above them. Their style of play, again theoretically, likely would slow down the ability to train, relatively to meleers at least.
I suppose a talented player with an insightful build could prove this wrong, so this brings me back to the rating system. Are we assuming an average player in X class, or the best possible X class player? And I was going to reference the scores list as evidence of how archers trained slower than others, but using that list to discuss the current metagame would I guess be inaccurate. So much has changed over the years, so.
__________________
Spado [Level 27 Frost Giant Paladin] Yaa [Level 25 Human Caveman] Last edited by Shootout : 12-11-2011 at 08:55 PM. |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
I was assuming that it was at optimal performance. Otherwise each of the classes could be ranked much lower simply because someone can't play that style very well.
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
Personally, I'd suggest ranking based on "a decent build" -- i.e., someone playing with a reasonable eye to their build, a fair amount of experience, and so forth.
For what it's worth, my own experience with archers is that they are capable of soloing nearly anything -- but slowly, due to a combination of caution and low DPS. (Sadly, gem bolts do not appear to be in the future of Wyvern at all.) |
#7
|
||||
|
||||
Any comments on your brainchild Kama?
__________________
Spado [Level 27 Frost Giant Paladin] Yaa [Level 25 Human Caveman] |
#8
|
||||
|
||||
Sorry I haven't been replying - but I wanted to let other people's ideas gain a bit of momentum before I chimed in again.
I agree with Jez that it should be based on a more average build; although, I wouldn't rule out taking the "potential" of a class into account. In terms of Wyvern - and I had a convo with Jez about this too, actually - I don't think much exists for Tier 1 characters. Not unless we take into consideration the optimal race/guild/item/playstyle combinations, so on. Generally, I think the balance point in Wyvern is around Tier 2-3. There isn't really a class that can 'do everything' as defined in the terms of D&D. (On that note - I might not reply much for a few days, but I'll be popping my head in no less. So, I'd love to see some more discussion on what you guys think are considerations to make and how to revamp this into something very functional for Wyvern.) Edit: I forgot I wanted to ask - Do you guys think we should base this on the guild alone, or work guild/race combinations into it somehow? The latter'd be a bit harder (unless anyone has some ideas), but it might end up being a more accurate/versatile representation.
__________________
"If I were to kiss you here they'd call it an act of terrorism--so let's take our pistols to bed & wake up the city at midnight like drunken bandits celebrating with a fusillade." - Hakim Bey
Last edited by Kama : 12-14-2011 at 04:41 PM. |
#9
|
||||
|
||||
It's difficult to discuss guild effectiveness without race, but then the list wouldn't be much of a "class" ranking.
__________________
Spado [Level 27 Frost Giant Paladin] Yaa [Level 25 Human Caveman] |
#10
|
||||
|
||||
Most races are stuck in a particular category (guilds or simple styles) by their own abilities.
Rakshasa are generally melee, with the ability to invest somewhat in the magical arts. Archery is out of the question. Giants are generally bruisers, coming in heavy and hitting hard with very little magical aptitude (storm giants may be an exception). Archery, while not out of the picture, is so rarely used it might as well be marked under "out of the question". Dwarves start out with heavy bonuses in the fighter's field, but are still able to use magic with their comparatively low reserves of magic. Archery is often unused. Pixies are generally inept at any form of physical combat and in order to engage in it MUST have dabbled in the magical arts. They're highly geared toward being mages. Archery is not an uncommon sight, since it's often the fallback for pixie players who don't want to be mages but know that being a fighter would be much more difficult. (Since archery is essentially a 'caster' class without reliance on magic.) Elves are capable of being fighters and have the fastest base attack speed in the game but most must supplement their abilities with magic in order to survive. Elves are more apt with magic than most races and so they have a good chance of making decent mages. Archery is the elves' forté, with the archery's guild giving HEAVY bonuses to wood elves in the guild. The Naga are a race that have traditionally been used as unarmed fighters, which they are capable of excelling at with their various forms. They also possess some natural aptitude with water magic and have a decent magical reserve. Archery is rare, but not improbable. Halflings, the jacks of all trades and master of one. Halflings have shown the ability to make decent fighters, often having to supplement their survivability with magic. They are superb mages, being one of the races with a magical reserve large enough to warrant trying to be a mage. They also have natural proficiencies in two different types of long-ranged weaponry, and are viable archers. Their greatest advantage is the extra skillpoint per level, allowing them a total of 100 at level 25 instead of the normal 75. (And my favorite) Humans are able to rise up into the higher ranks of fighting in close quarters but still fall short of the more capable races of rakshasa, dwarf, and giant. Humans make excellent spellcasters, arguably on or above the levels of pixies in magical might though a human's reserves are much smaller. Humans also make decent archers, having no negatives to the trade and no biases against the race being archers. Their greatest advantage is the extra skillpoint per level, allowing them a total of 100 at level 25 instead of the normal 75. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Assuming optimal races were chosen and optimal equipment was possessed I find that Shootout's choices are fairly accurate. (Minus the archers of course. ) |
#11
|
||||
|
||||
I still dont see a reason to play an archer as a human, when you can play a halfing and get more bonuses. On the other hand, I like the abillity to shoot bolts on my Naga, really helps out with the damage output.
__________________
The dark cries of the past and the future is inevitable, power is where everything is at. I look toward the day of being the best I can be. |
#12
|
||||
|
||||
The Wyvern guild/race/class/combat system is very intertwined, so much so that it is difficult to analyze them separately. Looking at the bonuses from the Mages guild, the guild itself is not particularly strong. The mages have by far the weakest skill bonuses. However, magic is strong in Wyvern and therefore I put the Mages "guild" in my highest tier.
__________________
Spado [Level 27 Frost Giant Paladin] Yaa [Level 25 Human Caveman] |
#13
|
||||
|
||||
Have you seen the human archer picture?
__________________
"To give anything less than your best is to sacrifice the gift." - Steve Prefontaine Glacio (Frost Giant Axeman) (level 30) Then (Human Mage) (level 28) Shoot (Rakshasa Caveman) (level 26) Magiz (Halfling Enchanter) (level 26) Patron (Human Conjurer) (level 25) Dboss (Halfling Rogue) (level 25) |
#14
|
||||
|
||||
Yeah, the picture looks BAD.
I would role a halfing over a human for an archer anyday, mage also.
__________________
The dark cries of the past and the future is inevitable, power is where everything is at. I look toward the day of being the best I can be. |
#15
|
||||
|
||||
I disagree. I think they look quite nice.
Quote:
Oh, and don't forget that you have to use tiny armor when you're a halfling as well. Makes things twice as expensive (and before you throw out 'shrink spell', the mage guild's robes and hat cannot be shrunk, along with other certain items I believe). |
#16
|
||||
|
||||
Well I tried to fully understand the tier system but I just couldn't for some reason, probably because I have never played D&D. I look at it and I don't see how it could be applied effectively (I think because I just can not understand it) and what would be the point of adding this system. Would this system be advantageous in any way?
When I play Wyvern I feel that I "grow" as that one class, be it paladin, axeman, mage, or the rare unguilded, and as I gain levels and can spare the skill points I will assign some side abilities. It sounds as though tier 6 is comparable to level 1-5 and tier 1 is level 30+? If by reading this you see which aspect(s) of the tier system I am not getting please let me know as I would like to be able to contribute! P.S. I think human archer pictures look amazing! Also, I always choose human over halfling as I loathe halflings for their innate abilities. P.P.S. I agree with Morwen a lot, except that I think a pixie makes an excellent melee race. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
But isn't the point of wyvern to make all characters around like a tier 3?
|
#18
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
What I'm looking at is where they fall at the current time, as I'm sure it will change in the future as more and more changes are made. Quote:
In D&D, your available skills are very strongly tied to what class you play. You can invest in other skills, but for double the cost. With only a few skill points per level, most players will spend points in maxing a few class skills. Wyvern is a little bit different, in that there are skills you should take points in to be effective in a certain playstyle, but nothing quite as limiting to as what you can do. That's why, in D&D, you get the 'do everything' classes - the Tier 1 - whose class features are more versatile and less specialized than other classes, and thus allow them to be effective in the largest amount of circumstances. The further down the scale you go, the more effective that class might be in a more limited set of situations, but overall it takes more effort to make them really shine. Alright, that being said, I'd like to pose another question to the rest of you - what makes a good character in Wyvern? And, what makes a great character in Wyvern? Which builds have a more natural power progression, requiring less effort to get the most reward? I think these are the sort of things we should consider, in addition to resilience and ability to deal damage.
__________________
"If I were to kiss you here they'd call it an act of terrorism--so let's take our pistols to bed & wake up the city at midnight like drunken bandits celebrating with a fusillade." - Hakim Bey
Last edited by Kama : 12-17-2011 at 12:25 AM. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
I'm kind of bored, so I thought I'd post my two-cents about Archers, because they're the only guild I ever focused on.
Its been a while since I last played my Archer, but based on my personal experience and opinion, Archers at their best would be Tier 4. "Tier 4: Capable of doing one thing quite well, but often useless when encounters require other areas of expertise, or capable of doing many things to a reasonable degree of competance without truly shining. Rarely has any abilities that can outright handle an encounter unless that encounter plays directly to the class's main strength. DMs may sometimes need to work to make sure Tier 4s can contribue to an encounter, as their abilities may sometimes leave them useless. Won't outshine anyone except Tier 6s except in specific circumstances that play to their strengths. Cannot compete effectively with Tier 1s that are played well." In my experience an Archer was only able to perform "well" when the environment allowed a wide range of movement. With an open area, an Archer can angle their shots to hit their enemy, and dodge and avoid potential risks and attack from a new position. Outside of these circumstances an Archer is at a handicap, and any other class would be better. In PvP, an Archer is supremely out classed, because enemies are constantly moving, and the Archer must remain stationary in order to attack. In RDs, an Archer has fewer avenues in which to run, and often times has to lure opponents into a firing area, which isn't safe. There is also the situation of going down stairs to the next lvl. Clearing that first room is either difficult or tedious, and most of the time you have to find creative ways to deal with it. No one ever wanted to RD with me, so I can't comment on working with a group in an RD. In LQs, an Archer struggles working with team mates for a few reasons. Archers avoid damage altogether. I self casted Mana shield as a means to boost survivability, but Archers are too squishy to sit and take hits (unless you have exact resists for a certain enemy, but even then that isn't enough, especially late game and LQs, lol). If spells are flying around from Melee characters engaging a LQ Boss, the Archer has to often dodge those enemy spells, and whenever an Archer is moving, they cannot attack, thus any possible DPS an Archer could do is cut down every time they need to move. In PVE Areas, where Monsters and Spawns are predictable, an Archer can succeed. There is a major difference between success and greatness though. I cant say anything about pure damage output of an Archer vs. X Guild, but it seems like I could never do as much damage as others. In one of the few LQs I participated in, I was a Lvl 26 Human Archer beaten by a lvl 21 Naga (Monk I think). Elven Archer would do more damage, but I don't know if the Racial + Guild Race Bonus would change things that much. |
#20
|
||||
|
||||
Alright, so - I do want to reply to Akando's post, but first - reading a few other threads has sparked a few ideas in my head.
The foremost consideration in creating something that even resembles a 'Tier' system, I think, is deciding what our 'Target Tier' is. Basically, the optimal balance point for the game. Since all classes are slowly migrating towards this point of balance, there is really only so much that can be done on this and endure for very long. To further tweak the D&D system to suit our needs, perhaps one way to start is by considering Tier 1 as 'Grossly Overpowered' and Tier 5(/6?) as 'Grossly Underpowered', and everything in-between moving closer to the balance point. The question then becomes the variable (tier) we set as the 'optimal balance point'. At any one time, following this framework, there should only be a handful of possible builds that would fall in the far upper or lower ends of the scale. This is what the wizards are striving for, so it's what we've got to work with. Once we know where the optimal balance point, we can set to expanding the system to better suit Wyvern. This is where some ingenuity and originality comes into play, and I'd love to hear any suggestions anyone has. Just a few ideas, I'll get back and edit/post if anything else comes to mind, possibly reply to a couple posts.
__________________
"If I were to kiss you here they'd call it an act of terrorism--so let's take our pistols to bed & wake up the city at midnight like drunken bandits celebrating with a fusillade." - Hakim Bey
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
First attack system | malyce | Suggestions | 8 | 03-20-2011 11:39 PM |
Warning system | anatil | Suggestions | 2 | 06-15-2009 03:45 PM |
New XP system | anatil | Suggestions | 4 | 07-13-2008 03:43 AM |
Economy System | Null | Features and Ideas | 0 | 04-03-2007 02:41 PM |
Your system here!! | Shreddy | Chit-Chat | 29 | 12-13-2006 05:14 PM |