Maybe instead of a mount he can summon the power of a horse ie increase speed and strength but not appearance... that is the only way. also my opinion is a shape shifter of some sought. also i believe there will be a religious character in there somewhere and also some sought of ranged character. the shape shifing would filter into one of these moulds.
Although i never liked the paladin i believe saying that there wont be a religious type character is stupid cause it is based around demons and angels... there will be a religious type character. whether he is a knight type character, a priest, arch bishop mace/polearm class i dont know but there will be one.
And I bet you there won't be a religious "Priest" like character. For the simple fact that Blizzard would not so blatantly follow a D2 cookie cutter roster of Characters for Diablo 3. If they did I would be both surprised and strongly disappointed. I dearly hope that the folks at Blizzard have more creativity than you Gaschk13. No offense meant. I do however concede that they will make a ranged char. This is not due to lack of originality but obligation, we can only pray they will make him not so obviously "Rogue" like. I think that they know of this and when they are finished making the mandatory archer, will try to blow our minds with a last "highly controversial" character, defining the boundaries of Hack N' Slash heroes.
If they didn't, once again I would have to be thinking; "What the fuck have they been doing for 7 years if all the characters are predefined from D2!"
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]Diablo 3, Hottest shit to happen to 21st Century Entertainment since Georges "Rush" St-Pierre.______________ --------~~Mattheo's Quote of the day~~---------
----------Brought to you by Diablofans.com Forums -------- Originally Posted by mattheo_majik
I LOVE being a SEX TON!!!
Sigh my argument is there its not about being creative... i can be if i want to be there are many characters i would like to see in d3 but alas i have just come to the terms that they arent going to be in it. If they are obligated to make a ranged character because the rules of making an rpg clearly state there must be a physical ranged character then im pretty sure they are gonna follow there own rules and put in some sought of religious character. its not being uncreative its seeing that there is a religion that is followed by a large majority of sanctuary and thinking to themselves 'where would a character come from oh wait maybe from westmarch???'
I said i didnt like the paladin and i probably wont like the holy character but im 99% posotive that there will be one in the game im sorry to break it to you.
The chance of a holy character is pretty unlikely since hell and heaven are equally dangerous to humanity. It'll end up being humans vs. hell vs. heaven so there can't be one.
I said i didnt like the paladin and i probably wont like the holy character but im 99% posotive that there will be one in the game im sorry to break it to you.
Don't be sorry dude, you're not breaking much to anyone but a sad theory about Diablo having anything to do with religion. It's not because there is a concept of heaven and hell that there is religion. Yes the idea of heaven/ hell may have religious roots but it was taken out of context and put in Diablo to give it credibility. It's not a realistically based game if you haven't noticed yet, it's what we call Fantasy. That's like you saying that Lord of the Rings is a religious themed book just because they have the concept that Gods gave immortality to Elves, and fallen Gods became evil entities (Devils). Once again, it's fantasy. They don't have to make direct relations to life like religious themes. That's what you're not getting, what you are doing is comparing a "must have" ranged class to another char that made a one time appearance in a once Gothic looking Diablo, (The Paladin)... Ranged Combat is a game system in itself that cannot be neglected in modern day gaming. Religion isn't, and has absolutely nothing to do with the character roster. Your flamboyant statement that "Blizzard will follow their own rules" is just ridiculous. Where the hell did you pull that logic anyways?
What, did Blizzard give you insight on the fact that their game is pro religious and they have an obligation to fulfill in bringing it to light in Diablo 3??? If they did please share your wisdom on this subject with us. To my knowledge, Blizzard has only ever followed their rules on making games interesting and they have clearly stated that we won't be seeing a rehash, so thus technically canceling your "logic" (or lack thereof).
Now you may not like the Pally, or religious character, I don't really care. I could just as easily say that I DO like them. But this again has nothing to do with the fact that there is NO obligation or logical need for Blizzard to repeat a character roster. They would have much more to gain from designing something new and interesting than doing a repetition of an 8 year old game. What I'm thinking is that they designed a new class, something we haven't seen in Diablo, thus creating a point of interest for new comers that aren't die hard fans of Diablo, which is good marketing and simultaneously giving old fans something new to play around with for a few years. That simple.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]Diablo 3, Hottest shit to happen to 21st Century Entertainment since Georges "Rush" St-Pierre.______________ --------~~Mattheo's Quote of the day~~---------
----------Brought to you by Diablofans.com Forums -------- Originally Posted by mattheo_majik
I LOVE being a SEX TON!!!
Hmm this has gone slightly offtopic. First few pages are good though keep it up : )
Actually if you take time to really understand what we are talking about, you would realize that this is not at all off topic. Its in fact completely relevant to the subject at hand. How can you make a discussion about a character type if you can't negotiate the pros and cons of making the choices. Someone had previously voiced that they would like to see a religious /knight type of character. Consequently, we started talking about why we shouldn't have this char and instead have a slightly more "original" character. You apparently have a lack of understanding on the subject, or are simply not interested enough to try and follow. That's your problem, so I would politely ask that you would refrain yourself from needlessly posting judgments on active opinions that we are passing to this thread.
___________________________________
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]Diablo 3, Hottest shit to happen to 21st Century Entertainment since Georges "Rush" St-Pierre.______________ --------~~Mattheo's Quote of the day~~---------
----------Brought to you by Diablofans.com Forums -------- Originally Posted by mattheo_majik
I LOVE being a SEX TON!!!
Wizard = HIgh arcane magic
Witch Doctor = Ritualistic vodoo
Barbarian = Full brutal force and ancestral magic
We have left
- Natural Powers
- Divine powers ( Holy/Unholy)
- Shadow arts (assassination and torture)
- Mystical powers (conjuring powerful spirits,animals or legendary creatures)
- Specialty in bows, spears, daggers
-Psychic powers? (If it hasn't already been taken by the Wiz)
Wizard = HIgh arcane magic
Witch Doctor = Ritualistic vodoo
Barbarian = Full brutal force and ancestral magic
We have left
- Natural Powers
- Divine powers ( Holy/Unholy)
- Shadow arts (assassination and torture)
- Mystical powers (conjuring powerful spirits,animals or legendary creatures)
- Specialty in bows, spears, daggers
-Psychic powers? (If it hasn't already been taken by the Wiz)
Seriously, you forgot swordsmanship? Every RPG has a character who specializes in sword and shield. The Barbarian is not that class. He's going to specialize in axes, two handed swords, mauls...there will be a sword wielding class, mark my words.
If the barbarian isn't sword/shield focused for melee pvp it will be a complete disaster. I despise two handed weapon/dual weapon configurations, and don't want to play some sissy "knight" character.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
zsfh-maz of UsWest, 95 BvB king
"Because "half-assed" is not a "style"." - DragoonWraith, champion of character customization and legimitate art direction in D3
Hey man, knights are cool =)! I didn't add swordsmanship because of the barbarian's sword mastery skill which can also be considered as swordsmanship. The paladin is not gonna come back, but I agree with you mahamoti, there will be a justice warrior, whether it is a holy knight or a demented zealot.... only blizzard knows!
Hey man, knights are cool =)! I didn't add swordsmanship because of the barbarian's sword mastery skill which can also be considered as swordsmanship. The paladin is not gonna come back, but I agree with you mahamoti, there will be a justice warrior, whether it is a holy knight or a demented zealot.... only blizzard knows!
*Sighs*
Here we go again with the "Holy Knight" idea. You guys ever think out of the box? The barb is good enough with a sword. I hate the idea of a warrior that only relies on sword and shield, it's useless since you could get the same results with a barb. You guys are just wasting a character slot.
(Angelmaz)If the barbarian isn't sword/shield focused for melee pvp it will be a complete disaster. I despise two handed weapon/dual weapon configurations, and don't want to play some sissy "knight" character.
Finally someone who makes a little sense in here aside from me... Having two sword wielding heroes is wasteful designing, PERIOD. We need new weapon types, new heroes, not more of the same shit we saw in D2.
I was reading the Chronicles of Drizzt from R.A Salvatore, which is an extensive set of books over many series and in the story there is a particular character which could make for a very interesting build. This character is named Pwent Tibbledwarf and he is a gutbuster warrior which is essentially a dwarven warrior with a ridged and spiked armor used more for offensive purposes then defensive. He is a melee fighter that doesn't use much weapons apart from his body and his devastating armor. They do carry shields occasionally however but once again they are also used offensively. When they go into battle rage they thrash and flail while jumping on enemies to shred them apart and are very good in masses of enemies since they create confusion and have an area effect damage. They also have a plethora of battle tactics and possess the ability to change/upgrade their armors with more offensive designs which could be implemented as different skill trees in D3.
Now this of course could be done in a warrior other then a Dwarf since there are none in sanctuary. But the idea remains very interesting nonetheless. And it is really a way to create a new play type in Diablo other than swinging with a weapon. Obviously this is only an idea out of my head and nothing very concrete but it only serves as an example to what we could achieve with a little imagination...
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]Diablo 3, Hottest shit to happen to 21st Century Entertainment since Georges "Rush" St-Pierre.______________ --------~~Mattheo's Quote of the day~~---------
----------Brought to you by Diablofans.com Forums -------- Originally Posted by mattheo_majik
I LOVE being a SEX TON!!!
lol you want me to think out of the box okay then. The next char will be an elite bowman/spearman. He comes from a long lineage of imperial guards that vows to protect mankind from deamons and evil entities. They were once dragon tamers and renowned for their immence courage in fierce battles. These guards have not been seen for centuries, but as soon as the worldstone was destroyed, their master sent his best soldier to investigate the carnage that once was Mont Arreat. He his a master at conjuring magic, mystical powers and is a technical expert in hand to hand combat, ranged combat and small weapons ( daggers, death stars ...). Here one small idea for youmattheo_majik...
lol you want me to think out of the box okay then. The next char will be an elite bowman/spearman. He comes from a long lineage of imperial guards that vows to protect mankind from deamons and evil entities. They were once dragon tamers and renowned for their immence courage in fierce battles. These guards have not been seen for centuries, but as soon as the worldstone was destroyed, their master sent his best soldier to investigate the carnage that once was Mont Arreat. He his a master at conjuring magic, mystical powers and is a technical expert in hand to hand combat, ranged combat and small weapons ( daggers, death stars ...). Here one small idea for youmattheo_majik...
No one was really asking a design for the ranged char since we know that's going to be there, plus most of what you did was spew pointless lore instead of efficient character design. (I shouldn't have to mention the fact that there are no dragons in Sanctuary.) We know one of the next char will be ranged, we don't need your help on that one.
But what I've been saying for the past day or two, which you amazingly haven't caught on to yet, is that if the last character should be a sword N Shield fighter, it would be a waste of a character since we already have the barb who is more than capable of accomplishing this feat...Get it? I can't explain any more than that.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]Diablo 3, Hottest shit to happen to 21st Century Entertainment since Georges "Rush" St-Pierre.______________ --------~~Mattheo's Quote of the day~~---------
----------Brought to you by Diablofans.com Forums -------- Originally Posted by mattheo_majik
I LOVE being a SEX TON!!!
Hey... wow. I didn't come here to get insulted, I know how to read and I understood what you meant. The point is that the knight is my opinion and the complete opposite is yours. I respected your opinion and you seem to be unable to respect mine. What is your problem? You're right about the dragon thing though , but.... who cares, nothing I say about the next char will actually happen. This comes from my imagination and represents what would be cool for ME. Unlike you, I haven't read a ton of Diablo books and I don't think I ever will. The only reason I want a justice warrior to return in any form is that I really really enjoyed the paladin. It was the first char I played when I got my D2 and I can relate to this one the most. The only reason why I think he will come back is because while we won't see any D2 char return to D3 except the barb, we will still see the same archetypes return. The wizard tries to please the sorcerer/mage enthousiast, the Witch doctor appeals to the morbid/dark/necro type of player ..... etc. The ****** wil please to people like me the other one will please both assassin/amazon and druid lovers. So you see, everyone will have their piece of the fun, may it be newcomers or Diablo 1-2 vets. Waste of character slot you say, Blessing I say!
Edit: Plus, I don't think that you completely caught the concept of holy warrior? Every hero is a warrior, they fight and they kill, may it be with magic or brute force. The Zealot asks a higher power to guide him into his battles and destroy his foes, the barb uses his brute force/ancestors to smash anything in his way. The difference is flagrant and yet you don't seem to grasp it!
which you amazingly haven't caught on to yet, is that if the last character should be a sword N Shield fighter, it would be a waste of a character since we already have the barb who is more than capable of accomplishing this feat...Get it? I can't explain any more than that.
The barb does not fill the role of a heroic sword and shield fighter. He specializes in two handed weapons and doesn't fit the same play style as a knight. I have zero interest in playing the barbarian, but would most definitely like to play a knight. I agree with Psyxix on the things he said.
The barb does not fill the role of a heroic sword and shield fighter. He specializes in two handed weapons and doesn't fit the same play style as a knight. I have zero interest in playing the barbarian, but would most definitely like to play a knight. I agree with Psyxix on the things he said.
There we go again....Misinterpretation. Did I say that the barb would fill the role of a Heroic Sword and Shield...? No, I said he fills the role of melee sword and shield fighter. The difference is subtle however immense. I'll print it out for you in plain words so you do not mistake my meaning again.
Barbarian, A melee char that can specialize in nearly every close range weapons available, makes for a very customizable char. Wide range of playability, fills the role of melee artist/weapons master so that we don't have to waste another char doing it.
Paladin (Knightish Holy Warrior, Sword and Shield Specialist) Very original and fun (though not diversified) build that was done and played nearly a decade ago by D2. Something that we do not need to see again in D3 just so that a few sword and shield fans can get their kicks. Now don't think I favour the Barb over the Pally, it's not what this is about. If it were up to me neither would of made it into the final game of D3. I would of opted for an entire new roster. But doing another Knight-like warrior, would in fact close off the D3 roster with a near exact carbon copy of what D2 gave us on initial release. Fun? Not really. If you remember correctly, they gave us the usual (warrior, knight, magic, ranged) but then risked adding something new (necro) which ended up being one of the most popular and appreciated char in D2. I see this maybe happening with Witch Doctor if he's the only new creative char on the list.
This is the only thing I have ever implied. I never said that the knight was a bad char, or that the barb was any better. I'm just speaking in a position where I want to play something new in D3, something along the lines of Witch Doctors and new types of fun characters to explore.
_____________________________________________________
Hey... wow. I didn't come here to get insulted, I know how to read and I understood what you meant.
Psyxix, calm down. I never hinted that you didn't know how to read, and I have ever been polite in my criticism of your logic. I have never personally insulted you, if I did it would of been taken out as spam/flaming. Get a grip of yourself. And if you truly understood what I meant you would of known better than to think I''m insulting anyone. All I said was that I ask for you to think out the box and in reply you gave me a text filled with sarcasm about a Uber hybrid archer/mage/assassin that is totally and obviously done on purpose as an exaggeration to disprove my statement on creativity.
If you understand what I meant, why didn't you just say; "Well ok, I get that you don't want the same roster for D3, so why don't we just work creatively on thinking up of a new char like the thread implies." Then write to us a half logical char build instead of that crap about a dragon hunter. Or even positively give some feedback on my last idea of a melee char, the one in my last post that you also ignored. If you had taken me seriously I would of maybe even agreed with your new (however ridiculous build). It's not that I don't respect your opinion, it's that I don't agree with it, there's a major difference. Now if what you mean is that we can't come on these forums to argue over ideas politely without it seeming disrespectful, then I believe you do not belong here.
Hopefully this is not the case.
BTW
(No I've never read a Diablo Novel, it was a thread made last few weeks discussing about dragons in Sanctuary, and I'm an avid player so that's why I mentioned that we shouldn't make a dwarf looking char since I knew there has never been such a thing in Diablo games. How did I know? Because unlike you sometimes, I always take myself and others seriously and wouldn't go off ranting about things I don't know without getting informed first. (Dragons?))
Finally I don't agree with your idea that Blizzard have to set obligations on themselves to insert so so character just to please Paladin/Barb/Wizard fans. I certainly know they didn't remake the barb cause so many people loved him from D2. They put what they think is interesting or what they believe could be done better. Because they are the designers. Your kind of thinking just impedes progress and creativity and simply doesn't reflect the truth about how Blizz makes games.
Everyone knows you can't please everyone. Also, most have come to terms with the fact that if you want to keep games interesting, you have to start thinking out of the box and come up with new ideas. not just more of the same.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]Diablo 3, Hottest shit to happen to 21st Century Entertainment since Georges "Rush" St-Pierre.______________ --------~~Mattheo's Quote of the day~~---------
----------Brought to you by Diablofans.com Forums -------- Originally Posted by mattheo_majik
I LOVE being a SEX TON!!!
But what I've been saying for the past day or two, which you amazingly haven't caught on to yet, is that if the last character should be a sword N Shield fighter, it would be a waste of a character since we already have the barb who is more than capable of accomplishing this feat...Get it? I can't explain any more than that.
I understand your wish of new stuff. I really want to see new gameplays, new stuff, new kind of spells, new weird stuff skills, like the plague of toads.
But i disagreee with you. We really can't have a game with only one melee figther. And i don't think the barbarian is a Sword N' Shield character just be cause he have ONE shield mastery skill. Of course hes a melee, but tehres thousant ways to creat a melee class.
And they allready said the classes will be really archetyple. And no archetyple are more important in a medieval fantasy game then the Knight, wich is almost the symbol of anything releted to the medieval times. How ridiculous it would be to play a game that allmost all armors and matial weapons are european knight's armor without a knight ?!
I hope they creat a good and new knight, not just a páladin's clone. However i really don't expect anything creativy in D3, as they already said that the class will follow our old rpg archetypes and blizz itself are not very creative.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"In time the hissing of her sanity
Faded out her voice and soiled her name
And like marked pages in a diary
Everything seemed clean that is unstained
The incoherent talk of ordinary days
Why would we really need to live?
Decide what is clear and what's within a haze
What you should take and what to give" - Opeth
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Shapeshifting into a centaur, even
Sounds like a solid plan!!!
And I bet you there won't be a religious "Priest" like character. For the simple fact that Blizzard would not so blatantly follow a D2 cookie cutter roster of Characters for Diablo 3. If they did I would be both surprised and strongly disappointed. I dearly hope that the folks at Blizzard have more creativity than you Gaschk13. No offense meant. I do however concede that they will make a ranged char. This is not due to lack of originality but obligation, we can only pray they will make him not so obviously "Rogue" like. I think that they know of this and when they are finished making the mandatory archer, will try to blow our minds with a last "highly controversial" character, defining the boundaries of Hack N' Slash heroes.
If they didn't, once again I would have to be thinking; "What the fuck have they been doing for 7 years if all the characters are predefined from D2!"
--------~~Mattheo's Quote of the day~~---------
----------Brought to you by Diablofans.com Forums --------
Originally Posted by mattheo_majik
I LOVE being a SEX TON!!!
I said i didnt like the paladin and i probably wont like the holy character but im 99% posotive that there will be one in the game im sorry to break it to you.
Don't be sorry dude, you're not breaking much to anyone but a sad theory about Diablo having anything to do with religion. It's not because there is a concept of heaven and hell that there is religion. Yes the idea of heaven/ hell may have religious roots but it was taken out of context and put in Diablo to give it credibility. It's not a realistically based game if you haven't noticed yet, it's what we call Fantasy. That's like you saying that Lord of the Rings is a religious themed book just because they have the concept that Gods gave immortality to Elves, and fallen Gods became evil entities (Devils). Once again, it's fantasy. They don't have to make direct relations to life like religious themes. That's what you're not getting, what you are doing is comparing a "must have" ranged class to another char that made a one time appearance in a once Gothic looking Diablo, (The Paladin)... Ranged Combat is a game system in itself that cannot be neglected in modern day gaming. Religion isn't, and has absolutely nothing to do with the character roster. Your flamboyant statement that "Blizzard will follow their own rules" is just ridiculous. Where the hell did you pull that logic anyways?
What, did Blizzard give you insight on the fact that their game is pro religious and they have an obligation to fulfill in bringing it to light in Diablo 3??? If they did please share your wisdom on this subject with us. To my knowledge, Blizzard has only ever followed their rules on making games interesting and they have clearly stated that we won't be seeing a rehash, so thus technically canceling your "logic" (or lack thereof).
Now you may not like the Pally, or religious character, I don't really care. I could just as easily say that I DO like them. But this again has nothing to do with the fact that there is NO obligation or logical need for Blizzard to repeat a character roster. They would have much more to gain from designing something new and interesting than doing a repetition of an 8 year old game. What I'm thinking is that they designed a new class, something we haven't seen in Diablo, thus creating a point of interest for new comers that aren't die hard fans of Diablo, which is good marketing and simultaneously giving old fans something new to play around with for a few years. That simple.
--------~~Mattheo's Quote of the day~~---------
----------Brought to you by Diablofans.com Forums --------
Originally Posted by mattheo_majik
I LOVE being a SEX TON!!!
Actually if you take time to really understand what we are talking about, you would realize that this is not at all off topic. Its in fact completely relevant to the subject at hand. How can you make a discussion about a character type if you can't negotiate the pros and cons of making the choices. Someone had previously voiced that they would like to see a religious /knight type of character. Consequently, we started talking about why we shouldn't have this char and instead have a slightly more "original" character. You apparently have a lack of understanding on the subject, or are simply not interested enough to try and follow. That's your problem, so I would politely ask that you would refrain yourself from needlessly posting judgments on active opinions that we are passing to this thread.
___________________________________
--------~~Mattheo's Quote of the day~~---------
----------Brought to you by Diablofans.com Forums --------
Originally Posted by mattheo_majik
I LOVE being a SEX TON!!!
Wizard = HIgh arcane magic
Witch Doctor = Ritualistic vodoo
Barbarian = Full brutal force and ancestral magic
We have left
- Natural Powers
- Divine powers ( Holy/Unholy)
- Shadow arts (assassination and torture)
- Mystical powers (conjuring powerful spirits,animals or legendary creatures)
- Specialty in bows, spears, daggers
-Psychic powers? (If it hasn't already been taken by the Wiz)
Seriously, you forgot swordsmanship? Every RPG has a character who specializes in sword and shield. The Barbarian is not that class. He's going to specialize in axes, two handed swords, mauls...there will be a sword wielding class, mark my words.
"Because "half-assed" is not a "style"." - DragoonWraith, champion of character customization and legimitate art direction in D3
*Sighs*
Here we go again with the "Holy Knight" idea. You guys ever think out of the box? The barb is good enough with a sword. I hate the idea of a warrior that only relies on sword and shield, it's useless since you could get the same results with a barb. You guys are just wasting a character slot.
Finally someone who makes a little sense in here aside from me... Having two sword wielding heroes is wasteful designing, PERIOD. We need new weapon types, new heroes, not more of the same shit we saw in D2.
I was reading the Chronicles of Drizzt from R.A Salvatore, which is an extensive set of books over many series and in the story there is a particular character which could make for a very interesting build. This character is named Pwent Tibbledwarf and he is a gutbuster warrior which is essentially a dwarven warrior with a ridged and spiked armor used more for offensive purposes then defensive. He is a melee fighter that doesn't use much weapons apart from his body and his devastating armor. They do carry shields occasionally however but once again they are also used offensively. When they go into battle rage they thrash and flail while jumping on enemies to shred them apart and are very good in masses of enemies since they create confusion and have an area effect damage. They also have a plethora of battle tactics and possess the ability to change/upgrade their armors with more offensive designs which could be implemented as different skill trees in D3.
Now this of course could be done in a warrior other then a Dwarf since there are none in sanctuary. But the idea remains very interesting nonetheless. And it is really a way to create a new play type in Diablo other than swinging with a weapon. Obviously this is only an idea out of my head and nothing very concrete but it only serves as an example to what we could achieve with a little imagination...
--------~~Mattheo's Quote of the day~~---------
----------Brought to you by Diablofans.com Forums --------
Originally Posted by mattheo_majik
I LOVE being a SEX TON!!!
No one was really asking a design for the ranged char since we know that's going to be there, plus most of what you did was spew pointless lore instead of efficient character design. (I shouldn't have to mention the fact that there are no dragons in Sanctuary.) We know one of the next char will be ranged, we don't need your help on that one.
But what I've been saying for the past day or two, which you amazingly haven't caught on to yet, is that if the last character should be a sword N Shield fighter, it would be a waste of a character since we already have the barb who is more than capable of accomplishing this feat...Get it? I can't explain any more than that.
--------~~Mattheo's Quote of the day~~---------
----------Brought to you by Diablofans.com Forums --------
Originally Posted by mattheo_majik
I LOVE being a SEX TON!!!
Edit: Plus, I don't think that you completely caught the concept of holy warrior? Every hero is a warrior, they fight and they kill, may it be with magic or brute force. The Zealot asks a higher power to guide him into his battles and destroy his foes, the barb uses his brute force/ancestors to smash anything in his way. The difference is flagrant and yet you don't seem to grasp it!
The barb does not fill the role of a heroic sword and shield fighter. He specializes in two handed weapons and doesn't fit the same play style as a knight. I have zero interest in playing the barbarian, but would most definitely like to play a knight. I agree with Psyxix on the things he said.
There we go again....Misinterpretation. Did I say that the barb would fill the role of a Heroic Sword and Shield...? No, I said he fills the role of melee sword and shield fighter. The difference is subtle however immense. I'll print it out for you in plain words so you do not mistake my meaning again.
Barbarian, A melee char that can specialize in nearly every close range weapons available, makes for a very customizable char. Wide range of playability, fills the role of melee artist/weapons master so that we don't have to waste another char doing it.
Paladin (Knightish Holy Warrior, Sword and Shield Specialist) Very original and fun (though not diversified) build that was done and played nearly a decade ago by D2. Something that we do not need to see again in D3 just so that a few sword and shield fans can get their kicks. Now don't think I favour the Barb over the Pally, it's not what this is about. If it were up to me neither would of made it into the final game of D3. I would of opted for an entire new roster. But doing another Knight-like warrior, would in fact close off the D3 roster with a near exact carbon copy of what D2 gave us on initial release. Fun? Not really. If you remember correctly, they gave us the usual (warrior, knight, magic, ranged) but then risked adding something new (necro) which ended up being one of the most popular and appreciated char in D2. I see this maybe happening with Witch Doctor if he's the only new creative char on the list.
This is the only thing I have ever implied. I never said that the knight was a bad char, or that the barb was any better. I'm just speaking in a position where I want to play something new in D3, something along the lines of Witch Doctors and new types of fun characters to explore.
_____________________________________________________
Psyxix, calm down. I never hinted that you didn't know how to read, and I have ever been polite in my criticism of your logic. I have never personally insulted you, if I did it would of been taken out as spam/flaming. Get a grip of yourself. And if you truly understood what I meant you would of known better than to think I''m insulting anyone. All I said was that I ask for you to think out the box and in reply you gave me a text filled with sarcasm about a Uber hybrid archer/mage/assassin that is totally and obviously done on purpose as an exaggeration to disprove my statement on creativity.
If you understand what I meant, why didn't you just say; "Well ok, I get that you don't want the same roster for D3, so why don't we just work creatively on thinking up of a new char like the thread implies." Then write to us a half logical char build instead of that crap about a dragon hunter. Or even positively give some feedback on my last idea of a melee char, the one in my last post that you also ignored. If you had taken me seriously I would of maybe even agreed with your new (however ridiculous build). It's not that I don't respect your opinion, it's that I don't agree with it, there's a major difference. Now if what you mean is that we can't come on these forums to argue over ideas politely without it seeming disrespectful, then I believe you do not belong here.
Hopefully this is not the case.
BTW
(No I've never read a Diablo Novel, it was a thread made last few weeks discussing about dragons in Sanctuary, and I'm an avid player so that's why I mentioned that we shouldn't make a dwarf looking char since I knew there has never been such a thing in Diablo games. How did I know? Because unlike you sometimes, I always take myself and others seriously and wouldn't go off ranting about things I don't know without getting informed first. (Dragons?))
Finally I don't agree with your idea that Blizzard have to set obligations on themselves to insert so so character just to please Paladin/Barb/Wizard fans. I certainly know they didn't remake the barb cause so many people loved him from D2. They put what they think is interesting or what they believe could be done better. Because they are the designers. Your kind of thinking just impedes progress and creativity and simply doesn't reflect the truth about how Blizz makes games.
Everyone knows you can't please everyone. Also, most have come to terms with the fact that if you want to keep games interesting, you have to start thinking out of the box and come up with new ideas. not just more of the same.
--------~~Mattheo's Quote of the day~~---------
----------Brought to you by Diablofans.com Forums --------
Originally Posted by mattheo_majik
I LOVE being a SEX TON!!!
I understand your wish of new stuff. I really want to see new gameplays, new stuff, new kind of spells, new weird stuff skills, like the plague of toads.
But i disagreee with you. We really can't have a game with only one melee figther. And i don't think the barbarian is a Sword N' Shield character just be cause he have ONE shield mastery skill. Of course hes a melee, but tehres thousant ways to creat a melee class.
And they allready said the classes will be really archetyple. And no archetyple are more important in a medieval fantasy game then the Knight, wich is almost the symbol of anything releted to the medieval times. How ridiculous it would be to play a game that allmost all armors and matial weapons are european knight's armor without a knight ?!
I hope they creat a good and new knight, not just a páladin's clone. However i really don't expect anything creativy in D3, as they already said that the class will follow our old rpg archetypes and blizz itself are not very creative.