I am curious to know how roles will be implemented.
I understand that you upgrade your proficiency with a certain weapon but will players just be able to play a lot and upgrade themselves to a super fighter ?
For example,
your fighting someone sword to sword. You notice that they still have a good chunk of health left and yours is almost depleted because they have more invested in their sword skills .So you decide to run like the coward you are . Well⊠while your dashing up a mountainside for your life, the superior swordsman pulls out a bow. (Heâs been polishing up on his archery ) And with the precision of a sniper with the eyes of a hawk, shoots you down. Oh you had so much life left in you. The places you wish you had seen. The things you wish you could have done ⊠Your lifeless corpse rolls down the slope and settles at his feet. Picking up your precious belongings he lets out a chuckle and he then proceeds to t-bag your beautiful face.
End example.
Will people that have played longer be able to run around and bully all of the newer people ? Because they have more skill invested in their weapons ?
Perhaps players should be forced to commit to a role of their choosing rather than be good at everything?
My last question is this: Will supportive roles be implemented into Oort? If so how?
I was literally thinking about a scenario just like that as you posted this.
I thought that it could be an idea to add a class proficiency to the game that would prevent someone from using absolutely any weapon that they liked at any moment, but instead allowing them to use one until they switched class proficiency in a city or something.
Say that when I made a new character I decided to pick a warrior class with swords and such, later on I might find out that my guild need an archer instead of a warrior for the dungeon theyâre going to.
Enter class proficiency.
I can head to an alter, or trainer, or anything else and pay a set amount to switch classes so that I can play as a ranger for my guild whilst they need it. No changes to your character, just their gear and abilities (should those be implemented).
Then when we finish with that, I might decide that I want to go back to being a warrior and I head back to the proficiency store and pay to switch back again.
but i would say yes they will be better, but i imagine the worlds will be split in pvp and pve worlds, so if you cant take it, dont head to pvp worlds.
i know alot of people want to be able to do everything but that always felt kind of sad to me, i found a quote that kinda sums up my feelings ââi enjoy roleplaying in rpgs like neverwinter, i prefer to go dagger rogue but people will usually yell at me because it is not the highest min maxing stats, but i dont care, i just want to play a rogue, back in the days people would pick a way to level up and not everybody would be equal, the crafter would not be as strong as the warrior, and the warrior not as smart as the mage, and that is okayâŠââ
i hate the idea of preset classes. people should be able to level up what they want to use and be good with that, but if they allow 2 weapons (as they most likely will so people can have a melee and a range) and it takes you the time it takes in wow to get from 1 - 100 then its fine, i will most likely pick some weapons and stick with it, if i want to relevel i have to use low tier weapons and basically start over.
Iâve already said in another thread that I try and look for the best solution for everyone. Iâm thinking in terms of letting people experience all of the different weapon types with once character. Not so much present classes, but a limit to how powerful a character can be in terms of their combat styles. Perhaps there could be a weak ranged weapon that people with the warrior proficiency could use. I just thing that removing all ties to weapon limitations runs the risk of one player being able to dominate the other with ease thanks to his combat prowess up close or form afar. Fights between groups should be based around roles being shared and teamwork and 1v1 fights a test of skill between two players. Not just a test to see who has more weapons to pull from their sleeve mid fight.
Idk, I kind of like the idea that if someone wants to switch roles they would have to start from scratch. This would force players to commit to their role and take it more seriously.
ofc you cant just constantly switch, but having skill bars and builds for the individual things is the key, they need to be out of combat but can then switch between weapons, you see it in a way that says ââhmm, he kicked my â â â â completely because he had more weapon proficiencyââ well ofc he did. i see it in a way that ââhmm i have to fight this guy, which build and weaponset of what i have would counter him the bestââ
that would remove any freedom from the game, which kinda sucks. basically you have to level over, but losing your progress would be stupid. so if i get skill 100 in swords and i want to use hammers instead, i need to go back and level just like i did with swords, but maybe i get tired of doing that and i go back to leveling hammers, i can then use a ton of time to get both of them to max level and i can switch between then depending on the situation.
The problem I see with that is that a lot of the time, the power of a weaponset is based on the opponent. I like being able to counterplay an enemy if I really want to win, and you canât do that if there isnât any kind of limit to what they could have up my sleeve. You could use your strongest axe and bow, but he might have a shield that renders your bow damage next to nothing and a sword that just flat outdamages yours.
At that point it just starts becoming a boss fight instead of pvp.
its like duel spec in wow. or multi builds in TSW, or builds in GW2. they all allow that kind of thing.
so when you are not in combat you can switch weapons. for example if you are doing pve vs a boss and see your hammer isnt doing enough dmg, you can try to switch some skills around to increase your dps, if that doesnt work you will switch to your sword for more dps and that might work.
you should just get a general idea, so say he is 100 hammer and 50 in bow, you can see he wears both, and then lets say 75 in heavy armor, then his power would be around 225. if he 50 over you he is red, 25 over you orange, your level, white, 25 under you green and 50 under you gray.
Okay there you go, my major concern was that it would be difficult to know whether running into a fight was a good idea if you couldnât have some kind of way to predict what you were up against in terms of stats and gear. But if weâre assuming that you can see their gear and view their stats, even if itâs just color based then Iâm satisfied.
isnt that kind of fun though, if you are confident enough to iniate a fight, you should also have the decency to finish it.
ââgive me all of your money or i will slash you to pieces and take them anywaysââ dude turns around and smacks him over the face, dealing 50% of his health as dmg ââwhat theâŠââ 1 more hit⊠dead
showing a general difference is kinda meh, because it makes it EASIER, that also means that people can easily see who they can kill without efford and who they cant instead of considering risk vs reward.
i would clearly like to know ofc since it would be nicer, but i would personally abuse it to kill all the low level people who wanders in pvp areas.
But whatâs to stop a group of people with superior stats running around and chasing down anyone they find? I mean this could present the idea of bandit players, which Is cool I guess its just something to consider.
Well in this thread i agree with Zouls, i think you can be able to have your skills level with no âskill points cap but with skill eficiency capâ, but they should take their effort⊠i mean⊠i want to use two handed sword/unarmed i can train them, but if i want to train other weapon skill it will take a LOT of time⊠and with a lot i mean A LOT just because iâm training one skill from the 0 lvl to lets say⊠45 lvl???
Also the weapon skill level shouldnât be that OP i think it will be more something like the skill of the player.
âThe important thing is not weapon, but that guy who is behind itâ => Translated âThe important thing is not weapon level, but how skilled is the playerâ
Still and op weapon at max skill its⊠a lot of damange!!!
âskill points cap but with skill eficiency capâ edited par XD
There definitely needs to be a cap though. If there is no cap I mean in theory a player could level up his proficiency with an item to the point where he is godly. Slaying beast and man in one sweep of his sword.
?
.So you decide to run like the coward you are 
. Well⊠while your dashing up a mountainside for your life, the superior swordsman pulls out a bow. (Heâs been polishing up on his archery 
) And with the precision of a sniper with the eyes of a hawk, shoots you down. Oh you had so much life left in you. The places you wish you had seen. The things you wish you could have done 
⊠Your lifeless corpse rolls down the slope and settles at his feet. Picking up your precious belongings he lets out a chuckle and he then proceeds to t-bag your beautiful face.
? Because they have more skill invested in their weapons 
?