08-26-2011, 12:57 AM
At first, I wanted to make a long ramble on my views of how things should be, but I came to realize that I don't think it'd do much good anyway. So, instead, I'm going to do two things. The first is lay out some short and sweet thoughts out of my head, and you can take them for what they're worth.
Thragash going down the path of a Runemaster was rather enlightening to me, in many ways. Seeing all of that happen gave me things to think about, but it also gave me a lot of frustration, which is probably the cause of half of my crankiness on this subject. One thing that always bothered me about the RP that Thragash would find himself in was how his skills were handled in combat RP. I do not exaggerate when I say that, during his duration as a Runemaster (and later a Bone Crusher) he has lost more fist-fights than he has won, generally against people not specializing in fist-fighting like he does. Such is the sense of humor of Lady Luck. My first thought, then, is that it always sucks for a character to supposedly be good at something, and lose to someone who supposedly is only fair at it. Doubly so when it happens consistently, as Lady Luck is as cruel as she is humorous.
I can also honestly say I've lost track of the number of whispers I received that were due to people saying that Runemasters should/should not be able to do X. My second thought is that poorly-defined skill-sets cause nothing but confusion and headaches.
My third thought is that 90% of all drama sparked by RP is sparked by conflict RP in particular.
The recent argument in the variant system thread has given me the a lot to think about. The talk about battle-mages also got me thinking. My fourth thought is that battle-mages are essentially, from a combat perspective, identical to enhancement shaman: the concept is a character that is normally a caster uses their magic to augment their weaponry and defenses to instead become a melee fighter.
My fifth thought is that it is ironic given this that there are more people playing battle-mages than there are enhancement shaman. I do not know, nor understand the reasons for this, aside from possible preferences for racial selection or class background. My sixth thought is that this is rather sad and sort of steals what makes enhancement shaman special as a character concept (at least from a combat perspective,) coming from someone who is personally a fan of the shaman class. My seventh thought is that all of these thoughts could be applied, in one form or another, to the human archer debate.
My eighth, and final, thought is that I find it dismaying that people claim that the base class list is too restrictive and boring, when those base classes haven't even been used to their full potential by many.
Dang it, I told myself I wouldn't go off on a long ramble.
The second thing I want to do is pose questions for the sake of discussion. These questions are not rhetorical, nor am I attempting to be disrespectful with any of them. I honestly want to understand why everyone else feels the way they do, and get a handle for what everyone thinks.
1. Do you feel that certain classes should have a natural bonus in things such as fist-fight or non-magic tournaments, or do you believe that everyone should be on a level playing field for these?
2. Do you believe that, given the way many such fights explained in #1 are handled, that the warrior class has anything truly special about it for the purposes of RP? (Please do not answer "you can play a civilian as one.")
3. Given the different talent specs and different classes present within WoW, what kinds of character concept do you feel requires branching out from the base classes?
4. Presuming that the variant system is what is chosen in the other thread, what do you think the line should be as far as dividing what should require an application and what should not? Do you think that it's even possible to draw an unambiguous line for this?
Also, feel free to make rambling rants of your own on my list of thoughts, and all.
Edit: Herp-a-durp, I can count. This is why I shouldn't type at four in the morning.
Thragash going down the path of a Runemaster was rather enlightening to me, in many ways. Seeing all of that happen gave me things to think about, but it also gave me a lot of frustration, which is probably the cause of half of my crankiness on this subject. One thing that always bothered me about the RP that Thragash would find himself in was how his skills were handled in combat RP. I do not exaggerate when I say that, during his duration as a Runemaster (and later a Bone Crusher) he has lost more fist-fights than he has won, generally against people not specializing in fist-fighting like he does. Such is the sense of humor of Lady Luck. My first thought, then, is that it always sucks for a character to supposedly be good at something, and lose to someone who supposedly is only fair at it. Doubly so when it happens consistently, as Lady Luck is as cruel as she is humorous.
I can also honestly say I've lost track of the number of whispers I received that were due to people saying that Runemasters should/should not be able to do X. My second thought is that poorly-defined skill-sets cause nothing but confusion and headaches.
My third thought is that 90% of all drama sparked by RP is sparked by conflict RP in particular.
The recent argument in the variant system thread has given me the a lot to think about. The talk about battle-mages also got me thinking. My fourth thought is that battle-mages are essentially, from a combat perspective, identical to enhancement shaman: the concept is a character that is normally a caster uses their magic to augment their weaponry and defenses to instead become a melee fighter.
My fifth thought is that it is ironic given this that there are more people playing battle-mages than there are enhancement shaman. I do not know, nor understand the reasons for this, aside from possible preferences for racial selection or class background. My sixth thought is that this is rather sad and sort of steals what makes enhancement shaman special as a character concept (at least from a combat perspective,) coming from someone who is personally a fan of the shaman class. My seventh thought is that all of these thoughts could be applied, in one form or another, to the human archer debate.
My eighth, and final, thought is that I find it dismaying that people claim that the base class list is too restrictive and boring, when those base classes haven't even been used to their full potential by many.
Dang it, I told myself I wouldn't go off on a long ramble.
The second thing I want to do is pose questions for the sake of discussion. These questions are not rhetorical, nor am I attempting to be disrespectful with any of them. I honestly want to understand why everyone else feels the way they do, and get a handle for what everyone thinks.
1. Do you feel that certain classes should have a natural bonus in things such as fist-fight or non-magic tournaments, or do you believe that everyone should be on a level playing field for these?
2. Do you believe that, given the way many such fights explained in #1 are handled, that the warrior class has anything truly special about it for the purposes of RP? (Please do not answer "you can play a civilian as one.")
3. Given the different talent specs and different classes present within WoW, what kinds of character concept do you feel requires branching out from the base classes?
4. Presuming that the variant system is what is chosen in the other thread, what do you think the line should be as far as dividing what should require an application and what should not? Do you think that it's even possible to draw an unambiguous line for this?
Also, feel free to make rambling rants of your own on my list of thoughts, and all.
Edit: Herp-a-durp, I can count. This is why I shouldn't type at four in the morning.