I find the current 4 classes to be very interesting, to the point that I will let my friends pick their class first, and I will choose between the classes remaining while still being able to enjoy whatever I end up with.
However, I feel that some Diablo purists will be disappointed if D3 lacks an Archer class or a Paladin class.
Especially the Paladin, since that's the only class my friend and his brothers play. It was arguably the most popular class of World of Warcraft at launch, another of Blizzard's titles. My point is that D2 and WoW have cemented the Paladin as a popular character, as a class most players can identify with and enjoy using in their battle versus evil.
Therefore, whether the 5th class is an Archer type or a Paladin variant, be it named Knight, Crusader or any other title, I feel that many D2 players who enjoyed the Amazon or the Paladin will be disappointed.
I also think that lore-wise, the Paladin is a perfect fit to the world of Sanctuary. It made a lot of sense that some of the Paladin's greatest holy powers only affect undead and demons, which are legion in Sanctuary.
What about you guys? Do you know any friends who swear only by the Paladin? As I mentionned above, I have 2 friends and one of their siblings who play nearly exclusively a Paladin, with my other friend playing Barbarian and assassin. I liked the Necromancer and Barbarian in D2 but I can play any class.
Well of course the Paladin is going to be popular, it's basically been one of the most powerful/easy to use classes.
And don't even try to say it was balanced in D2, the pally was possibly the most rigged class in that game.
It's not popularity when players are forced to create a hammerdin to stay competitive, it was one of the few viable ways left to mf, or do runs.
I myself, never played a paladin, and I do mean never. I tried several times, but could never get into that character class.
And it's not exactly a perfect fit lore-wise, humans are just basically being manipulated by the heavens to fight against their enemies, the demons. The heavens want control of sanctuary as well, remember.
I definitely know what you mean with an archer class though, it seems foolish to leave out some form of ranged physical damage attacker.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote from "Sixen" »
"One in every 10 million people can potentially have a headache from this pill." God forbid she is the 0.000000001% of having a headache.
I don't want to sound like a dick here but, I really don't think the Paladin class has "cemented" itself as a part of Diablo.
Diablo 1 was the Warrior, Rogue, and the Sorcerer.
The Barbarian is the spiritual successor to the Warrior,
The Amazon is the spiritual successor to the Rogue,
The Sorceress is the direct successor of the Sorcerer.
Those are the core classes in Diablo. The Necromancer, Paladin, Assassin, and Druid, are all experimental off classes.
If you look around, you'll see that out of all the experimental classes the Necromancer is the most popular. In-fact if you go back a bit through the news archives you'll find there was a small uproar when people found out the Necromancer wasn't coming back.
The Witchdoctor is the spiritual successor to the Necromancer,
that pretty much "cements" the Pet/Curse Archetype as a new Core Class. Leaving the Paladin, Assassin, and Druid out in the cold.
As you can see the Paladin and Assassin are coming back in the form of the Monk. So already you kinda have your wish, the Paladin is coming back, or at least the bastard child of the Paladin and Assassins love making.
The Final class will be a Ranged fighter, its a core type to Diablo, and without it, all Bow weapons in the game would be worthless. I wouldn't be surprised to see the Druid and come back in some sort of Amazon/Druid Animal Wilderness Bow using Hunter kind of Hybrid like the Paladin/Assassin Monk.
In the end many players love the Paladin, I wont argue that, but there are ALOT more players who love the Barbarian, Sorcerer, Necromancer, and Amazon, and we cant bring back EVERY class, some of em have got to go to make room for new classes, new ideas, and improvements.
I was one of the people upset that the Necromancer wasn't gonna be there to play in D3. Necromancers and Barbarians should be in all sequels because of their role in the game and story line in the novels. I did not care that the Paladin didn't show up because I personally don't like the class. I am giving him one more try to see if I could be persuaded to play the Paladin in the next patch and so far, Avengers would be the only Paladin that I like.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Just as the Scorpion hunts...
Silently Lurking...
"Nothing is True. Everything is Permitted." ~ Ezio Auditore de Firenze
For real, they're just going to have to get over it.
Blizzard said the only class coming back was the Barbarian.
If they literally did everything everyone wanted - we wouldn't have a very fun game.
There will NOT be a Paladin.
Sure, just get over it and go play some joke Monk and Witch Doctor class, which just feels like that, jokes. They have some fun mechanics I'm looking forward to, but there is a reason I enjoyed the Paladin more than other class. None in D3 seems to have any "soul" that makes sense, have stupid looking personalities too.
My point is, they remove good class, but I'm not seeing good replacements. I really WILL miss the Paladin, and the Necromancer too actually.
I don't want to sound like a dick here but, I really don't think the Paladin class has "cemented" itself as a part of Diablo.
Diablo 1 was the Warrior, Rogue, and the Sorcerer.
The Barbarian is the spiritual successor to the Warrior,
The Amazon is the spiritual successor to the Rogue,
The Sorceress is the direct successor of the Sorcerer.
Those are the core classes in Diablo. The Necromancer, Paladin, Assassin, and Druid, are all experimental off classes.
The three classes originally introduced in Diablo 1 were all basic characters. True, the barbarian was a spiritual successor of the warrior, but not the successor. Blizzard branched out with their characters allowing for similarities between classes while still keeping each one seperate with unique skills, but not necessarily unique playability. The Paladin and Barbarian are the melee focused spiritual successors of the original warrior. My main point is that regardless of what the returning classes are called or what makes them unique as character choices, they will all have similargameplay when compared to the three main archetypes. I actually think this is the very thing that is stumping Blizzard's team from coming up with a truly innovative game changing character class.
I understand the fondness some people have for classes and gameplay they thoroughly enjoyed and appreciated. But it's time to move on- this is Diablo 3, not Diablo 2 or 1.
Blizzard isn't trying to make a repeat of D2 or D1, else they'd be telling us to play D2 again or making a new D2 or even D1 expansion. Rather, Blizzard is moving forward with the story, gameplay and adventure that is the Diablo series: the sheer fun of hack-and-slash RPG wherein you can crush hordes of dark baddies.
In moving forward, one of the aims of Blizzard or any other game developer is to explore the world they crafted. They're trying to show more of the world, new stuff never seen or tried out before. They showing what fits, what's actually and surprisingly there. That means moving away from the old and doing the new. No Necromancer, but Witch Doctor, no Assassin (or Paladin?), but Monk.
The only reason to keep or maintain the old is to tie the new game with the previous one- hence the Barbarian. But they have to make room for the new by getting rid of some of the old. Even the potion system of the previous games got an overhaul.
As to why the Barbarian got in and not the Paladin, I dunno... But I suspect that, as far as the Barb fills in for the Warrior-type of character, the Barb is closer to the War than the Pally. I think they picked the Barb over the Pally because the Pally gets most of his power elsewhere, nevermind that they're also plate-wearing tanks and master men-at-arms.
For paladin fans, I really think we should just wait for the announcement of the last, unrevealed class- it may just surprise and please you. I'm not a paladin fan myself, but the wait is killing me as well.
Quote from "Jamoose" »
As i said somewhere on this forum before... the last class will be a mix between a paladin and an archer / amazon
I am very, very intrigued by this idea... :cool:
D&D already has a mix of archer and mage: the Arcane Archer. It's cool enough.
I know an RPG campaign world (Iron Kingdoms by Privateer Press) where they mixed magic and guns in one class: the Gun Mage. They even have two version of it: one that favors magic over gunplay, another that uses magic to enhance natural marksmanship. It's cool too.
But what happens when you give a holy warrior a bow or crossbow? Jamoose, your idea/prediction is awesome.
I wouldn't. It's what he gets for being the massively over-powered character in Diablo II for years. I hate Paladins just for that. Everyone makes them because their power is unchecked at all.
Now, if it was FAIRLY BALANCED in Diablo III, I wouldn't mind.
He won't be returning, though. He would be too similar to the Monk.
I wouldn't. It's what he gets for being the massively over-powered character in Diablo II for years. I hate Paladins just for that. Everyone makes them because their power is unchecked at all.
Now, if it was FAIRLY BALANCED in Diablo III, I wouldn't mind.
He won't be returning, though. He would be too similar to the Monk.
Alright, some of you need to understand, It's not about how the Paladin was balanced in the latest set of patches, but instead the fact that he was the holy dedicated warrior focused solely on destroying the invading evil, is the reason players want him back. He was a character that inspired you to want to cleanse the world of these demonic forces and save the ppl from their grasp. I actually stopped playing D2 regularly before synergies and the overbalances that came with them were added, and back than the Pally was a popular class too. Even with the way they have him now, it wouldn't mean they'd have to design him in the same way if he were to come back but....
Quote from "Messenger" »
For paladin fans, I really think we should just wait for the announcement of the last, unrevealed class- it may just surprise and please you. I'm not a paladin fan myself, but the wait is killing me as well.
One thing is certain about this company, it's the fact they don't overlap flavors, so for you and others hoping for his return as the fifth class, not going to happen. The Monk fills the holy class flavor. Plus the fact that the team have repeatedly stated (which I still don't understand why ppl aren't comprehending this), no other classes will be making a return besides the Barb. At least for the initial game.
I still think people want the Paladin back because of ! That and many other things Seth had in mind when he was writing his post!
Well I don't want him for that... Its probably the most boring skill in the entire game. Spamming it sucks, its so, SO unsatisfying, its insane. The way it hits... bleh... BORING.
Zeal for the win. That is actually fun. Add in Holy Shield, Charge and Vengeance, and some auras... I don't know. Lots of little things. Still love it. Thats all I still play in D2 right now.
It's not about how the Paladin was balanced in the latest set of patches, but instead the fact that he was the holy dedicated warrior focused solely on destroying the invading evil, is the reason players want him back. He was a character that inspired you to want to cleanse the world of these demonic forces and save the ppl from their grasp.
Agreed. The Paladin embodies the good and holy warrior archetype that's just brilliant to play.
However that being said, I'm not missing the Paladin. We get new classes, new skills, new ways to play. It's a new game, and change isn't always bad. You don't necessarily need to have every archetype in the game, and if we lack the knight now, then I'm sure we'll see some conception of him again in the expansion.
PlugY for Diablo II allows you to reset skills and stats, transfer items between characters in singleplayer, obtain all ladder runewords and do all Uberquests while offline. It is the only way to do all of the above. Please use it.
Supporting big shoulderpads and flashy armor since 2004.
I never felt the "holy dedicated warrior focused solely on destroying the invading evil" when playing as the Paladin. I judge a character based on how it plays, not on the background lore. It was pretty much a regular knight character for me, nothing special.
Well then we differ I guess. The skills and playstyle affect your perception of the class, but to me the appearance, look and feel (not playing feel) of a class also have an impact. I think that's partly why I never really could enjoy the Barbarian, and doubt I will in D3 either.
PlugY for Diablo II allows you to reset skills and stats, transfer items between characters in singleplayer, obtain all ladder runewords and do all Uberquests while offline. It is the only way to do all of the above. Please use it.
Supporting big shoulderpads and flashy armor since 2004.
Alright, some of you need to understand, It's not about how the Paladin was balanced in the latest set of patches, but instead the fact that he was the holy dedicated warrior focused solely on destroying the invading evil, is the reason players want him back. He was a character that inspired you to want to cleanse the world of these demonic forces and save the ppl from their grasp. I actually stopped playing D2 regularly before synergies and the overbalances that came with them were added, and back than the Pally was a popular class too. Even with the way they have him now, it wouldn't mean they'd have to design him in the same way if he were to come back but....
Oh, there's no lack of understanding there. What I am saying is simply that, if you could read my inductive voice there, this: The Paladin is hugely popular in Diablo II because his power is unchecked and can kill anything in the game (well, besides one monster). He has massively overpowered skills which deal in the thousands of damage without any monsters being resistant. He has skills that take down a boss with no more than one point in them.
The reason he is so popular is because he is broken, and that is what I am addressing. If you argue against this, you have not played Diablo II in the last couple years.
So, inductively, what I was stating was that if anyone, since there are many out there, want the Paladin back from Diablo II because he was so "ub3r l33t", it will not happen on that basis.
And this has not purely been an issue because of patches. Smite was still insanely overpowered and still is.
Now, if you want him back based on a minority view, because of his archetypical importance to complete the characters, my only argument is that he is really too similar to the Monk in many ways and both would have to be reworked to fit him in (the Monk is a heavy mix of the Assassin and Paladin in my opinion).
I can guarantee you, however, if he was in the game, if he was no less than exactly what he was in Diablo II, in looks, skills, and power (if not greater), we will have many, many angry threads going up on this forum crying about it.
Well all the "bring back the Pally" posts and threads I've been reading talk about wanting him back because of what he represents, of what they feel would be missing without a class of his stature. I've not seen one mention anything about wanting him back because of the way his skills are currently implemented.
What you're talking about is the "flavor players" who I don't even count for anything really because, they just play what's efficient and don't really care about the integrity of this game or this series.
Now, if you want him back based on a minority view, because of his archetypical importance to complete the characters, my only argument is that he is really too similar to the Monk in many ways and both would have to be reworked to fit him in (the Monk is a heavy mix of the Assassin and Paladin in my opinion).
Exactly! They are to similar, I think that's why people keep asking for the Paladin back instead. They don't want the Monk in the game. I think what Blizzard is getting at with the Monk though is trying make the difference gap between the Holy Class and Barb bigger. Thus really representing the Holy Class as a melee and deadly character. Like the Paladin was, the difference is now is that he just doesn't have a high defense and hp. Which I don't mind, it adds a new form of thinking to the class.
Quote from "Elight" »
Well all the "bring back the Pally" posts and threads I've been reading talk about wanting him back because of what he represents, of what they feel would be missing without a class of his stature. I've not seen one mention anything about wanting him back because of the way his skills are currently implemented.
What you're talking about is the "flavor players" who I don't even count for anything really because, they just play what's efficient and don't really care about the integrity of this game or this series.
I believe the monk represents what they ask for too. They just want the Pally back so much they can't seem to see it. The only difference is that the Monk is not a Knight. We all see a Knight to be a protector because of how they're normally shown to be. Besides, there's not much lore into the Monk as of now. Currently its difficult to argue over the feel of the Monk and Paladin, as the Paladin is complete and the Monk isn't.
As for the "Flavor Players" there's a lot of em in the Battle.net forums.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
However, I feel that some Diablo purists will be disappointed if D3 lacks an Archer class or a Paladin class.
Especially the Paladin, since that's the only class my friend and his brothers play. It was arguably the most popular class of World of Warcraft at launch, another of Blizzard's titles. My point is that D2 and WoW have cemented the Paladin as a popular character, as a class most players can identify with and enjoy using in their battle versus evil.
Therefore, whether the 5th class is an Archer type or a Paladin variant, be it named Knight, Crusader or any other title, I feel that many D2 players who enjoyed the Amazon or the Paladin will be disappointed.
I also think that lore-wise, the Paladin is a perfect fit to the world of Sanctuary. It made a lot of sense that some of the Paladin's greatest holy powers only affect undead and demons, which are legion in Sanctuary.
What about you guys? Do you know any friends who swear only by the Paladin? As I mentionned above, I have 2 friends and one of their siblings who play nearly exclusively a Paladin, with my other friend playing Barbarian and assassin. I liked the Necromancer and Barbarian in D2 but I can play any class.
And don't even try to say it was balanced in D2, the pally was possibly the most rigged class in that game.
It's not popularity when players are forced to create a hammerdin to stay competitive, it was one of the few viable ways left to mf, or do runs.
I myself, never played a paladin, and I do mean never. I tried several times, but could never get into that character class.
And it's not exactly a perfect fit lore-wise, humans are just basically being manipulated by the heavens to fight against their enemies, the demons. The heavens want control of sanctuary as well, remember.
I definitely know what you mean with an archer class though, it seems foolish to leave out some form of ranged physical damage attacker.
Not to say nobody liked playing it, but the majority of us made a hammerdin because you could farm anything with it.
Diablo 1 was the Warrior, Rogue, and the Sorcerer.
The Barbarian is the spiritual successor to the Warrior,
The Amazon is the spiritual successor to the Rogue,
The Sorceress is the direct successor of the Sorcerer.
Those are the core classes in Diablo. The Necromancer, Paladin, Assassin, and Druid, are all experimental off classes.
If you look around, you'll see that out of all the experimental classes the Necromancer is the most popular. In-fact if you go back a bit through the news archives you'll find there was a small uproar when people found out the Necromancer wasn't coming back.
The Witchdoctor is the spiritual successor to the Necromancer,
that pretty much "cements" the Pet/Curse Archetype as a new Core Class. Leaving the Paladin, Assassin, and Druid out in the cold.
As you can see the Paladin and Assassin are coming back in the form of the Monk. So already you kinda have your wish, the Paladin is coming back, or at least the bastard child of the Paladin and Assassins love making.
The Final class will be a Ranged fighter, its a core type to Diablo, and without it, all Bow weapons in the game would be worthless. I wouldn't be surprised to see the Druid and come back in some sort of Amazon/Druid Animal Wilderness Bow using Hunter kind of Hybrid like the Paladin/Assassin Monk.
In the end many players love the Paladin, I wont argue that, but there are ALOT more players who love the Barbarian, Sorcerer, Necromancer, and Amazon, and we cant bring back EVERY class, some of em have got to go to make room for new classes, new ideas, and improvements.
Blizzard said the only class coming back was the Barbarian.
If they literally did everything everyone wanted - we wouldn't have a very fun game.
There will NOT be a Paladin.
Sure, just get over it and go play some joke Monk and Witch Doctor class, which just feels like that, jokes. They have some fun mechanics I'm looking forward to, but there is a reason I enjoyed the Paladin more than other class. None in D3 seems to have any "soul" that makes sense, have stupid looking personalities too.
My point is, they remove good class, but I'm not seeing good replacements. I really WILL miss the Paladin, and the Necromancer too actually.
The three classes originally introduced in Diablo 1 were all basic characters. True, the barbarian was a spiritual successor of the warrior, but not the successor. Blizzard branched out with their characters allowing for similarities between classes while still keeping each one seperate with unique skills, but not necessarily unique playability. The Paladin and Barbarian are the melee focused spiritual successors of the original warrior. My main point is that regardless of what the returning classes are called or what makes them unique as character choices, they will all have similar gameplay when compared to the three main archetypes. I actually think this is the very thing that is stumping Blizzard's team from coming up with a truly innovative game changing character class.
Blizzard isn't trying to make a repeat of D2 or D1, else they'd be telling us to play D2 again or making a new D2 or even D1 expansion. Rather, Blizzard is moving forward with the story, gameplay and adventure that is the Diablo series: the sheer fun of hack-and-slash RPG wherein you can crush hordes of dark baddies.
In moving forward, one of the aims of Blizzard or any other game developer is to explore the world they crafted. They're trying to show more of the world, new stuff never seen or tried out before. They showing what fits, what's actually and surprisingly there. That means moving away from the old and doing the new. No Necromancer, but Witch Doctor, no Assassin (or Paladin?), but Monk.
The only reason to keep or maintain the old is to tie the new game with the previous one- hence the Barbarian. But they have to make room for the new by getting rid of some of the old. Even the potion system of the previous games got an overhaul.
As to why the Barbarian got in and not the Paladin, I dunno... But I suspect that, as far as the Barb fills in for the Warrior-type of character, the Barb is closer to the War than the Pally. I think they picked the Barb over the Pally because the Pally gets most of his power elsewhere, nevermind that they're also plate-wearing tanks and master men-at-arms.
For paladin fans, I really think we should just wait for the announcement of the last, unrevealed class- it may just surprise and please you. I'm not a paladin fan myself, but the wait is killing me as well.
I am very, very intrigued by this idea... :cool:
D&D already has a mix of archer and mage: the Arcane Archer. It's cool enough.
I know an RPG campaign world (Iron Kingdoms by Privateer Press) where they mixed magic and guns in one class: the Gun Mage. They even have two version of it: one that favors magic over gunplay, another that uses magic to enhance natural marksmanship. It's cool too.
But what happens when you give a holy warrior a bow or crossbow?
Now, if it was FAIRLY BALANCED in Diablo III, I wouldn't mind.
He won't be returning, though. He would be too similar to the Monk.
Alright, some of you need to understand, It's not about how the Paladin was balanced in the latest set of patches, but instead the fact that he was the holy dedicated warrior focused solely on destroying the invading evil, is the reason players want him back. He was a character that inspired you to want to cleanse the world of these demonic forces and save the ppl from their grasp. I actually stopped playing D2 regularly before synergies and the overbalances that came with them were added, and back than the Pally was a popular class too. Even with the way they have him now, it wouldn't mean they'd have to design him in the same way if he were to come back but....
One thing is certain about this company, it's the fact they don't overlap flavors, so for you and others hoping for his return as the fifth class, not going to happen. The Monk fills the holy class flavor. Plus the fact that the team have repeatedly stated (which I still don't understand why ppl aren't comprehending this), no other classes will be making a return besides the Barb. At least for the initial game.
Well I don't want him for that... Its probably the most boring skill in the entire game. Spamming it sucks, its so, SO unsatisfying, its insane. The way it hits... bleh... BORING.
Zeal for the win. That is actually fun. Add in Holy Shield, Charge and Vengeance, and some auras... I don't know. Lots of little things. Still love it. Thats all I still play in D2 right now.
However that being said, I'm not missing the Paladin. We get new classes, new skills, new ways to play. It's a new game, and change isn't always bad. You don't necessarily need to have every archetype in the game, and if we lack the knight now, then I'm sure we'll see some conception of him again in the expansion.
Oh, there's no lack of understanding there. What I am saying is simply that, if you could read my inductive voice there, this: The Paladin is hugely popular in Diablo II because his power is unchecked and can kill anything in the game (well, besides one monster). He has massively overpowered skills which deal in the thousands of damage without any monsters being resistant. He has skills that take down a boss with no more than one point in them.
The reason he is so popular is because he is broken, and that is what I am addressing. If you argue against this, you have not played Diablo II in the last couple years.
So, inductively, what I was stating was that if anyone, since there are many out there, want the Paladin back from Diablo II because he was so "ub3r l33t", it will not happen on that basis.
And this has not purely been an issue because of patches. Smite was still insanely overpowered and still is.
Now, if you want him back based on a minority view, because of his archetypical importance to complete the characters, my only argument is that he is really too similar to the Monk in many ways and both would have to be reworked to fit him in (the Monk is a heavy mix of the Assassin and Paladin in my opinion).
I can guarantee you, however, if he was in the game, if he was no less than exactly what he was in Diablo II, in looks, skills, and power (if not greater), we will have many, many angry threads going up on this forum crying about it.
That is all.
What you're talking about is the "flavor players" who I don't even count for anything really because, they just play what's efficient and don't really care about the integrity of this game or this series.
Exactly! They are to similar, I think that's why people keep asking for the Paladin back instead. They don't want the Monk in the game. I think what Blizzard is getting at with the Monk though is trying make the difference gap between the Holy Class and Barb bigger. Thus really representing the Holy Class as a melee and deadly character. Like the Paladin was, the difference is now is that he just doesn't have a high defense and hp. Which I don't mind, it adds a new form of thinking to the class.
I believe the monk represents what they ask for too. They just want the Pally back so much they can't seem to see it. The only difference is that the Monk is not a Knight. We all see a Knight to be a protector because of how they're normally shown to be. Besides, there's not much lore into the Monk as of now. Currently its difficult to argue over the feel of the Monk and Paladin, as the Paladin is complete and the Monk isn't.
As for the "Flavor Players" there's a lot of em in the Battle.net forums.