Priest Justice

[Raegen Keenarrow]

Imo, priests shouldnt be the ones carrying out the fights, sure they could put out some damage like the rest of fighting classes or SHOULD, but Imho, you shouldnt need a group of 5 priests or something to win a battle or two, not sure if Im sending the msg...
They should be somewhat like a support class or yeah, experts in healing and stuff, the frontlines should be left to knights, maybe rangers, and some other ''misc.'' (babas etc) classes that are in the religion.
Their purpose should be just to support, to boost the morale of their allies, something around those lines.
Just my 2 cents here, and Im pretty sure this has been said between these posts (or hope so)

+1

Exactly. I haven't played a Priest on Pang, but I have played them before. Now back when I was first playing a priest, it was all about bone armor with a war mace and kite shield. The priests were weak. They merely supported their "Paladins" as my old server called them or Pang's Knights. They were the strongest of rite casters and that's where they shined. A Priest could be quite deadly if given the opportunity to cast rites though. As for the front line fighting, that should be left for the Knights, Barbarian's, Ranger's and any other Fighters in the religion while the Priest remains a support. Then again we do have Monks to consider as well, they are support already aren't they? I'm just saying a Priest should never be the best hand to hand combat + superb survivability + mobility.

P.S -- About Glarundis talking about "Barbarian" name being weird for being stronk doesn't make one barbaric. He is right. It's up to the player, to RP it as a Barbarian however. I love the name myself and one day wish to see an all barbarian MMO or single player large exploration game. ^^

[blckfire]

Just to add something more to this.

Pangaea has two styles of gameplay that in the end converge into one. Solo and Multiplayer mode.

You start has a Solo player that will start to create connections inside a game and eventually join a guild or a religion. Inside that guild or religion you will have a role (oh shit it's a role playing game), more than role playing your character you also need role play your class accordingly.

To me, like said in the previous posts, a priest should be somewhat of a support class (not everybody in the staff shares this view, this my own opinion) his faith supports his actions and he should be able to help his team mate through his faith to obtain a positive result out of each situation. Then again this is a multiplayer role playing game, so you should count with others to fill in your weaknesses and you should fill in the others weaknesses.

Resuming, classes should be complementary and not be all at the same level for the several aspects of the game. Although, in Pangaea, there are some classes that fill some purposes and others, other purposes, there are still a lot of classes that overlap in the roles they have on the battlefield. For me, this should be addressed to make each class unique making it so that a player can choose a class based on his own play style.

[Demian]

The last few posts are ideas just as any we've seen before about the Priest class, but why should we so dramatically change the class? I don't think the people here who made a Priest made one to play some support/blesser character. They made it to fight along the rest of the people which they consider to be fun. And like Qual said, we have a Monk class already which pretty much fills the role of a support character, along with Druids.

I'm not saying they're bad ideas, I'm just saying there's no reason to completely change the class many of us have spent a lot of time training just to see it become something we didn't choose to play.

Edit: Make a new class?

[Argon]

And yet we are talking about switching from 100 to 85% resist. I think you are overreacting. Now there is RPwise a clear difference from magicusers and fighters. Things can be tweaked within the tome in order to balance a bit what was taken out. But in my view this is not something that will unbalance too much in prejudice for the priest.


Argon

[blckfire]

In every game there is evolution. Most of the times players are against evolution. In the end they learn to move on to what is the current meta and adjust to it, accordingly.

It's like you guys live in stone age and still want to live in stone age although steel and iron was discovered.

[Demian]

And yet we are talking about switching from 100 to 85% resist. I think you are overreacting. Now there is RPwise a clear difference from magicusers and fighters. Things can be tweaked within the tome in order to balance a bit what was taken out. But in my view this is not something that will unbalance too much in prejudice for the priest.

In my eyes 100 -> 85 resist might not have been necessary but I won't change class over it, simply because I enjoy playing a Priest.

My last post was simply an answer to those who wish to completely change the role of the Priest class. I just don't see it as a right thing to do since that's not what we expected of the class when we made and even heightened it. It would kind of be like suddenly changing the Mage to some healer class. They made one to hunt and deal damage but end up healing others. I doubt they'd stay in that class for long since that's not what they wanted.

Evolution would be altering the Priest class in a way that doesn't change it's role. Which I'm not saying the resist change did.

[Mike]

In every game there is evolution. Most of the times players are against evolution. In the end they learn to move on to what is the current meta and adjust to it, accordingly.

It's like you guys live in stone age and still want to live in stone age although steel and iron was discovered.

Well it's not like we're talking about changing from silenced to regular M4 or moving some runes around. Adapting to the meta in this case means putting in hours of training due to class changes.

[blckfire]

Well, Pangaea is and always will be a game to be played with patience and dedication. That's why we haven't gone totally crazy with this. Although, I would've loved to redo a lot of classes from the ground up.

[Mike]

Well, Pangaea is and always will be a game to be played with patience and dedication. That's why we haven't gone totally crazy with this. Although, I would've loved to redo a lot of classes from the ground up.

Full wipe would have been a respectable choice - not within the frame of the priest debate, but in a larger perspective.

[Glarundis]

Then again this is a multiplayer role playing game, so you should count with others to fill in your weaknesses and you should fill in the others weaknesses.

Resuming, classes should be complementary and not be all at the same level for the several aspects of the game. Although, in Pangaea, there are some classes that fill some purposes and others, other purposes, there are still a lot of classes that overlap in the roles they have on the battlefield. For me, this should be addressed to make each class unique making it so that a player can choose a class based on his own play style.

while i do like the fact we have a class system here, i must say this is far from classes being complementary... we don't have a clear healer/tank/dps/booster situation..at best we have like, a bard for blesses, some chars that throw spells, and then fighters. many of them with very small differences. do we really have a clear difference between knight/warrior/barbarian/ranger (except for the archery) in the battlefield? even priests work the same, even though they have rites. it's about blessing up, gearing up with a nice weapon, trying to hit and trying to stay alive..it's like this for pretty much every char save for a few with a few special things..

i'd rather have a much more specialized class system, even though it'd be much more of a pain to just have 5 chars (:P) because then, we would see priests with leathers and staves, but with really kickass rites. we would see assassins pretty much all the time in hiding and stealth, but really kicking ass with poisoning and backstab. as it is, assassins are using platemail with chain tunic lol... for so long we had archers (archers ffs!does the name stand up for something?) kicking ass with spears in robberies

for this to be a reality, we'd need a full wipe (i wouldn't mind a single bit if that meant a really new class system) but more than that, instead of classes being based on skills, we'd need a lot more things apart from skills to diferentiate classes. right now what do we have that is special to some classes? warrior hp regen and mage hp regen..every class should have it's own specific regen, etc etc..

not saying we can't play the game as it is.. but it certainly could be different, and better

I don't think the people here who made a Priest made one to play some support/blesser character. They made it to fight along the rest of the people which they consider to be fun. And like Qual said, we have a Monk class already which pretty much fills the role of a support character, along with Druids.

I'm not saying they're bad ideas, I'm just saying there's no reason to completely change the class many of us have spent a lot of time training just to see it become something we didn't choose to play.

perhaps that's why priests have always been at the center of pangaea. they are named priests, and yet, as you say, no one (well, very few ppl) made them to play as priests. they just made them because they knew priests had major blesses and kicked ass wherever they went. now over the time priests got great nerfs, so now they're not nearly as good, but still ppl complain.. it's like a love story about the priest class there once was in pangaea. i think if the ppl that have a priest and just want to kick ass in the battlefield found out that there's a clear winner in the battlefield as priest used to be, they would switch classes instantly (if they didn't have to retrain the new class)..oh well, atleast there's not one single class that is a clear winner as priests used to be some time ago..atleast that