Lets say you were the class design guy for EQNext....

[RevengeofGio]

Also EQNext is a lot like classic EQ (for discussion's sake), but they are going to fix some/most of the classes in terms of quality of life & role in combat.


On the drawing board are what classes?


What classes actually stand up pretty well without a change?


What would you change? Would you limit it only to QOL? or would you try to "fix" a class?

[Gadwen]

I would make sure that all classes can solo their way to max level, also would make sure that all classes are equally powerful in terms of damage potential, healing, and defensive abilities/spells so that group composition doesn't matter.

:D

[ramul]

I would implement a -40% exp penalty on non-hybrid classes....That'll teach them.

[Messianic]

I would make sure that all classes can solo their way to max level, also would make sure that all classes are equally powerful in terms of damage potential, healing, and defensive abilities/spells so that group composition doesn't matter.

:D

...There's this game called World of Warcraft you should really try. ;P

[Aaron]

http://i.qkme.me/3opqui.jpg

[Samoht]

i don't want classes to solo all the way to 60, but i would like to see versatility so that classes can fulfill more than a single role on demand like they did with rift. being pigeon-holed into looking specifically for pal/sk/war or enc/shaman/bard or cleric/druid/shaman for 3/6 roles in the group really makes it hard to make efficient dungeon groups on the fly.

[Asap]

Fix warrior aggro generation. Apparently hate generation on this server is potential swings, but I don't think it's working correctly.

[Reguiy]

http://i.qkme.me/3opqui.jpg

[lawll]

I HOPE that things like debuffs/CC are needed and every class brings something different to the table or has one skill or buff that's needed to progress.

[Stinkum]

Did Cpt. Murphy in Gadwen's avatar mysteriously grow a fro recently or was that always like that?

[Nocte]

This list isn't thoroughly thought out, but I kind of liked the general idea of how EQII did classes/subclasses. This is my take on that. I'd like to see multi-classing ability within a specific archetype (rogue/priest/caster/tank) and alignment (good/neutral/evil).

Casters:
Summoner (pet class) - good/neutral -- [summons elementals]/[summons monsters]
Cultist (crowd-control) - neutral/evil -- [curse-based spells]/[necromancy]
Arcane (nukes) - good/evil -- [fire & air]/[earth and ice]

Rogues:
Thief (utility) - good/neutral -- /[swashbuckler, flashy moves, lots of utility]
Assassin (melee DPS) - evil/neutral -- [poisons, stealth]/[burst damage, gadgets]
Ranger (ranged DPS) - good/evil -- [animal companion(s), bow/melee auto-attack]/[traps, bow/melee auto-attack]

[B]Tanks:
Knight (armored tank) - good/evil -- [paladin]/[shadow knight]
Monk (avoidance tank) - good/neutral -- [tranquility: less dps in favor of amazing avoidance. no auto-attack]/[patience: dps with precise burst damage attacks. no auto-attack]
Berserker (DPS tank) - neutral/evil -- [axe-throwing, AE melee damage]/[leaps to target, AE melee damage]

Priests:
Cleric (reactive heals and AC/HP buffs) - good/evil -- [courage]/[fear]
Druid (heal over time and haste) - good/neutral -- [plant-based]/[storm-based]
Shaman (ward healing <see EQII> and debuffs) - neutral/evil -- [ancestral/spirit-based]/[poisons/disease]

[Gadwen]

...There's this game called World of Warcraft you should really try. ;P

No thanks, I was just laying out the most likely plan for the EQ Next devs =)

[RevengeofGio]

Personally I'd fix the ranger as a class and try to make the class a true archer with some melee capability. I'd use talent trees (basically AA's) to give rangers focuses:

1) Archery/Scouting
2) Nature magic/knowledge
3) Defensive melee, disengages

Main points:

PVE - Most rangers know that you can pretty much kill anything that can be snared in classic eq, but its boring. I'd rather have a situation where a ranger needs to set up and use cover to aim a major shot that can either kill an easy opponent out right or severely wound a harder opponent (like a dark blue) then the ranger could use their faster shots, nature magic and limited melee to finish off an opponent. A moving opponent has a much higher miss check than one who has stopped. A ranger that misses this sniper shot would have a much tougher time killing an opponent.

Group role/raid role - I wouldn't want rangers to have "tank" abilities so when I say defensive melee I'm talking more slash their eyes and jump backwards or blade shield stuff. Their group role would be using their big shots to finish off targets and defensive skills to pry things off healers/casters... not to be tanked but to give them a moment. In a raid I'd make rangers gain knowledge of raid targets based on type and how often the ranger has attacked said target type. This knowledge would allow a ranger's sniper type shots to debuff raid targets for short durations in a unique way.

[fadetree]

Just in general, I would :

1. Make death extremely painful. Large exp loss, possible character degrades and difficult and necessary CR.
2. Have nearly all gear wear out and break eventually unless repaired.
3. Not have instances.
4. Implement 'classes' through basic archetype selection and then exclusive skill trees, with skill levels via usage.
5. Implement actual weather with real effects.
6. Make world travel a pain in the ass. No automatic transporters.
7. Make mobs smart and deadly.

Then, when like only two people want to play, throw it all away and make a shiny wow clone.

[SamwiseRed]

i hope they have corpse runs and very very very slow mana regeneration