The very traditional civilized hero. The fair guy, the protector of the inocents and virgins, the "lawful good with 18 CHA". The guy who's dream is become a city guard and protect the people from those vile bandits and beats.
-My view of D3 classes:
Barbarians: though hes far from the Dungeons and Dragons barbarian archtype (primitive, instinctive, wild). He lives in cities with large walls and a mechanic gate. They wear heavy armors and are, above all things a people of honor and a ultimate battle tacticians. They are very keeperers of of the world (stone!).
However his hulking muscles, brutal fight style and somewhat violent nature makes him far from the protector of virgins.
Witch Doctor: I don't even have to argue right ? Naked dude that summon zumbies.
Wizard: He/Shes are the counterpart of the cerebral, wise, diciplined wizard archetype. Reckless, rebel and prideful, the D3 wizard have as it's most characteristical point the courage to cast forbidden spells. He/she is surely a untamed genius.
Monk: Though his seens to be a fair person, he's much more like a wonderer selfperfecionist then the guardian of justice. His the kind of guy that passed 25 years training in some isolated abbey and see the urban culture as a bunch of wierd habits. Thats makes him kind of savage.
Look at his story in D3 site (http://www.blizzard.com/diablo3/characters/monk.xml). He just kicked everyone's asses in the tavern ! C'mon fight in taverns is the tradition of the brawler heroes. Not to mention the attack that explode people from inside out.
Think in D3 character as a whole party of heroes, they really look like a bunch of crazy dudes. Theres something anti-heroic and savage in all D3 heroes and that cool. But i wish the last class would something to counter balance that a little.
I feel this way too. Being apart of this series since the day D1 came out (actually before if counting the demo), the passion for me has always been the setup of having this world consumed with darkness, then you play this character who steps in to challenge the evil and shed some light into the world. Being motivated not so much by personal gain, but doing so to fight for those who can't fight for themselves....just because someone has to. The warrior was representative of that in D1, and the paladin in D2. With the revelation of the monk though, it seems less likely that there will be a class of this stature in D3.
That's always been the heart of this series to me, and to be honest, the more I find out about the new classes, the less motivated I am to play this latest installment. Some of these classes seem as dark and destructive as the creatures we will be fighting against.
That's always been the heart of this series to me, and to be honest, the more I find out about the new classes, the less motivated I am to play this latest installment. Some of these classes seem as dark and destructive as the creatures we will be fighting against.
And funniest thing is that the class who should be the "good guy" have most gore skill in the whole game.
It's funny cos a lot of people say they miss the really "dark" character...
I see what you mean :thumbsup: Personally I don't like those kinda "lawful good" type chars that much, the ones with flowing golden locks who speak in a very proper accent and sip tea, they just seem a bit boring. But I do agree that their presence is important in a game nonetheless because of what they symbolise.
But I guess there will either be a "good" char or a "dark" char in the last slot, and then probably the opposite in an expansion... so if we see a good char next we will eventually see a dark one, and vice versa.
well i think i have to agree with that! i kinda miss something about the attitude and the few from the D1 chars, but i actually dont miss it from D2 as many many people defend... Recently i just did something i really wanned for so long! i played D1 allover again, with the whole 3 classes, but i did it like, reading every single tome and listening to every single char in the village! and its just amazing! how the story calls you, how everything is just perfect! the way the villagers talk about each other! every piece of conversation about some quest or so, also tells you about the life in tristram and people who live or lived there!
And the 3 classes are so well structured, i dont know maybe more 'mature like' ! they have this role in the world! and they just go there and do what they have to do , because they are the best in what they do! like heroes, but not 'heros' like you hear from Monks opening video, that sounded like crap!
so what im trying to say is, i do miss something! and its essentialy from D1!
and as more a play D2, and i expect D3 to be good, its going so far from D1 SO FAR... the more i see, the less i like!
JUST WANNED SOME REAL BLIZZARD NORTH DIABLO 1 SEQUENCE!
take care guys!
I think you've put your finger on what has been bothering me the most about the Diablo 3 classes and preventing me from really getting interested in them.
I don't really need a blonde, angel-faced, radiant character whose sole purpose in life is to protect the innocent but I'd like someone who has this goal primarily in mind as they fight the legions of hell. One exception is allowed though in my book.
For example, the Diablo characters were all surrounded by great auras of mystery and seemed to have pretty dark natures. The Warriror for example was probably a mercernary-type looking for glory but it is clear that he wished to save the people of Tristram. The same goes for the Rogue and the Sorceror. The Rogue was a warrior looking to test her skills and the Sorceror was a scholarly type seeking to discover the secrets hidden within in the labyrinth. But all of these characters seemed to possess that drive to save Tristram along with their own ambitions (as well as their clans').
Diablo 3's characters are very different from this, and if you ask me, less engaging. Especially the Wizard I find, who seems more like an annoying, spoiled brat than a character that I would want to play or engage with. And I normally love to play spellcaster classes.
I think the self-serving motives of the characters are what make them so boring in my eyes. They're not really convincing and that's why one of the things I've found myself getting the least excited about are the characters. Now I realize why. Thanks for this post.
True. They are less convincing. As much as Diablo is a "fictional" universe, its still "serious", in a way. I'm not saying one need to take the game seriously, no, but the "serious", realistic look of it means a lot.
The Barbarian doesn't even look like a true Barbarian anymore. Mainly because of the armor I've seen him with. The Wizard, like said above, looks like some kind of spoiled brat. The Witch Doctor and the Monk looks like complete joke, the Witch Doctor is just self explanatory, and the Monk is like a living clich?.
They just look like bad jokes to me. I'm not looking at the game the same way I did. I don't give a fuck (yes, I'm blunt) anymore about the characters. I seriously hope the feel for the whole game together when I play it will still be good. Somehow, sometimes I'm just expecting it all to become just a big joke.
I hate overthinking what is going to happen with Diablo 3. I'm expecting good gameplay, but whats that really? Heh. I'm just gonna leave it at that.
I hate lame-ass "do-gooder", "kiddy cartoon protaganist", "boy scout" characters so i'm glad none of the announced classes are like that.
and how are the original classes a "do-gooder"-type?
they all went to Tristram for fame, for riches and all got corrupted and the warrior because his ego was so big thought that he could contain Diablo
For a man with only 2 posts, you have a hot lead right there.
Imagine Blizz brings the Valkyrie as a playable class!
BTW great thread OP. Remembering the fact that the Barb is the same dudey from D2 really kicks that feeling of anti-heroism to another level. Think about it. In his character artwork he looks tired, old and grey. I still believe that the D3 storyline will be class specific! Coming together early along in the game.
and how are the original classes a "do-gooder"-type?
they all went to Tristram for fame, for riches and all got corrupted and the warrior because his ego was so big thought that he could contain Diablo
Whether the Warrior's ego was big or not, he still sacrificed his body to try to keep Diablo under wraps and save the world. He knew he would gain nothing by doing so. The Rogue and Sorceror did this as well but of course that's not canon. But it shows what concept of the characters Blizzard had in mind when they designed them.
And I hate one-dimensional, lame do-gooder types as well Valtonis but I would like them to have some self-sacrificing goals to go along with their flaws. Everyone has various ulterior motives but there should be in my mind an essential goodness of spirit. A token rebel or borderline evil character is fun too but I think the majority of the characters should be essentially righteous.
Remembering the fact that the Barb is the same dudey from D2 really kicks that feeling of anti-heroism to another level. Think about it. In his character artwork he looks tired, old and grey. I still believe that the D3 storyline will be class specific! Coming together early along in the game.
That's actually a good point, never noticed it before but it's true. There's nothing exciting (for me) about the Diablo 3 characters and this is personified by the barbarian.
The very traditional civilized hero. The fair guy, the protector of the inocents and virgins, the "lawful good with 18 CHA". The guy who's dream is become a city guard and protect the people from those vile bandits and beats.
Boring and one dimensional. We have a fairly holy good-doer, called the monk, even if he is a "selfperfectionist." And I'm fine with that!
My view of D3 classes:
Barbarians: though hes far from the Dungeons and Dragons barbarian archtype (primitive, instinctive, wild). He lives in cities with large walls and a mechanic gate. They wear heavy armors and are, above all things a people of honor and a ultimate battle tacticians. They are very keeperers of of the world (stone!).
However his hulking muscles, brutal fight style and somewhat violent nature makes him far from the protector of virgins.
We shouldn't equate Barbarian with "wild man" in the purest sense of the term. What were the historical barbarians to Rome anyway? Even Conan's kin and people (both by birth and bloodied adoption) lived in fortified communities, with culture, technology, laws and whatnot, however savage they were to the Romans (or us).
Monk: Though his seens to be a fair person, he's much more like a wanderer self-perfecionist then the guardian of justice. His the kind of guy that passed 25 years training in some isolated abbey and see the urban culture as a bunch of wierd habits. Thats makes him kind of savage.
I gotta point out that most martial arts heroes, like Shaolin Monks, did see moral perspective and action as being hand-in-hand with physical and mental perfection. The practice of becoming as best you can be was applied to both mastering yourself and protecting others. In some philosophies, they were the same thing.
Look at his story in D3 site (http://www.blizzard.com/diablo3/characters/monk.xml). He just kicked everyone's asses in the tavern ! C'mon fight in taverns is the tradition of the brawler heroes. Not to mention the attack that explode people from inside out.
Don't forget that he didn't start the fight. And those who did attack him weren't exactly... "normal folk". As for the exploding heart trick, it's more effective in downing an opponent in single blow than a normal punch. Lastly, taverns are where you go to meet people- other adventurers who can aid you, gossips and informants who can give you knowledge to your advantage, even people who you may lead you to the baddies. There is no shame in visiting a tavern, even as a most holy and refined adventurer, if it will help you do good.
Forgive me for my quibbles, but here's my main point:
Based on what you're saying, you have to understand that violence, even of the goriest kind, is part of even the most virtuous heroes, the kind you're looking for.
First, if the bad guys really want to hurt you or other people, no amount of arguing with them is going to stop them.
Second, mercy in combat or warfare is a luxury and a gift. It's wonderful when given, but it's very hard to give in the first place.
Third, you may have the nicest, most dignified, shiny and consecrated avenging blade in the land, but put it through the torso of a foe and that foe will still be leaking blood and guts out- just like any other weapon.
Meaning no disrespect for stating something in so frank a manner, but you seem to have an issue with the gore the heroes display and produce. Any truly holy paladin or truly noble knight is a soldier and warrior by nature and at heart. They are defenders of virtue by force of arms. And that means fighting, hurting and killing. As much as the highest of ethical standards of would like such people to simply disarm or incapacitate their foes, rather than tear them apart in a shower of viscera, the harsh realities of combat or even life rarely allow such to be the case. It's very, very rarely not kill-or-be-killed.
Also, this is a Diablo game.
Think in D3 character as a whole party of heroes, they really look like a bunch of crazy dudes. Theres something anti-heroic and savage in all D3 heroes and that cool. But i wish the last class would something to counter balance that a little.
You said it yourself. Leave your eyes open- I think it's highly likely. At the least, Blizz will probably still surprise us (though we can guess that it's likely a ranged attacker class.)
We shouldn't equate Barbarian with "wild man" in the purest sense of the term. What were the historical barbarians to Rome anyway? Even Conan's kin and people (both by birth and bloodied adoption) lived in fortified communities, with culture, technology, laws and whatnot, however savage they were to the Romans (or us).
I gotta point out that most martial arts heroes, like Shaolin Monks, did see moral perspective and action as being hand-in-hand with physical and mental perfection. The practice of becoming as best you can be was applied to both mastering yourself and protecting others. In some philosophies, they were the same thing.
Don't forget that he didn't start the fight. And those who did attack him weren't exactly... "normal folk". As for the exploding heart trick, it's more effective in downing an opponent in single blow than a normal punch. Lastly, taverns are where you go to meet people- other adventurers who can aid you, gossips and informants who can give you knowledge to your advantage, even people who you may lead you to the baddies. There is no shame in visiting a tavern, even as a most holy and refined adventurer, if it will help you do good.
Forgive me for my quibbles, but here's my main point:
Based on what you're saying, you have to understand that violence, even of the goriest kind, is part of even the most virtuous heroes, the kind you're looking for.
First, if the bad guys really want to hurt you or other people, no amount of arguing with them is going to stop them.
Second, mercy in combat or warfare is a luxury and a gift. It's wonderful when given, but it's very hard to give in the first place.
Third, you may have the nicest, most dignified, shiny and consecrated avenging blade in the land, but put it through the torso of a foe and that foe will still be leaking blood and guts out- just like any other weapon.
Meaning no disrespect for stating something in so frank a manner, but you seem to have an issue with the gore the heroes display and produce. Any truly holy paladin or truly noble knight is a soldier and warrior by nature and at heart. They are defenders of virtue by force of arms. And that means fighting, hurting and killing. As much as the highest of ethical standards of would like such people to simply disarm or incapacitate their foes, rather than tear them apart in a shower of viscera, the harsh realities of combat or even life rarely allow such to be the case. It's very, very rarely not kill-or-be-killed.
Also, this is a Diablo game.
You said it yourself. Leave your eyes open- I think it's highly likely. At the least, Blizz will probably still surprise us (though we can guess that it's likely a ranged attacker class.)
OMFG.
You missed 100% of my point.
I'm just to lazy and busy to respond all this totally no sense. You just put a million or more words on my mouth lololol. Just to point out, in my own post I said the Witch Doctor is the most "savage" character but as you can seee in my signature and in many other threads, his by FAR my favorite D3 character.
My point is, i'm missing someone like D2's Paladin. Not in terms of gameplay or background. But in terms of what the class represent to the whole group of D2 heroes.
Actual D3 character looks like a bunch of over the top rebel protagonists of a half assed action movie. I think D3 need something more traditional to balance our charcter options (tradition = dungeons and dragons).
OMFG.
You missed 100% of my point.
I'm just to lazy and busy to respond all this totally no sense. You just put a million or more words on my mouth lololol. Just to point out, in my own post I said the Witch Doctor is the most "savage" character but as you can seee in my signature and in many other threads, his by FAR my favorite D3 character.
My point is, i'm missing someone like D2's Paladin. Not in terms of gameplay or background. But in terms of what the class represent to the whole group of D2 heroes.
Actual D3 character looks like a bunch of over the top rebel protagonists of a half assed action movie. I think D3 need something more traditional to balance our charcter options (tradition = dungeons and dragons).
Well, excuse me! :confused: You talked mostly about background and gameplay, citing Lawful Good, too much gore, being the fair guy, protecting innocents and virgins. And traditional D&D does include the Barbarian, Wizard and Monk (who covers a lot of what you're hoping for, more than you think)- and I'm not talking about 3.0-3.5.
Honestly, you don't have to be so snide, especially where I was responding in good faith. :mad:
Well, excuse me! :confused: You talked mostly about background and gameplay, citing Lawful Good, too much gore, being the fair guy, protecting innocents and virgins. And traditional D&D does include the Barbarian, Wizard and Monk (who covers a lot of what you're hoping for, more than you think)- and I'm not talking about 3.0-3.5.
All the "LG" stuff is a comparison to what the pally represents in D2 and no class do the same in D3.
And you just get where i want. Those D3 class does not 've D&D tradition at all despite their names.
Honestly, you don't have to be so snide, especially where I was responding in good faith. :mad:
I'm sorry, i was just stressed when i wrote your answer. It's just that the way you write bothers me... "Covers a lot of what you're hoping for, more than you think". Assume you know more about this subject then me is not good faith, expecially after you put words on my mouth and try to divinate aspects of my personality.
Alot of people disagred with my OP and I respected it well because they simply voiced their opnion about the subject. It may sounds ridicolous but I felt offended by your post, not because you don't agree with me but because you twisted my opnion into something really fagy.
All the "LG" stuff is a comparison to what the pally represents in D2 and no class do the same in D3.
And you just get where i want. Those D3 class does not 've D&D tradition at all despite their names.
What does "LG" mean? It's not confined to just the strict warrior and spiritual laws paladins from most fantasy world adhere to. It's every guy and gal who believes equally in order and altruism, whether they're in shining plate or wearing cloth. It's the person you described, the adventurer who wants to defend the innocent and defenseless- it's just that how he does that can vary, from taking vows and donning heavy armor, to entering a monastery and disciplining himself, to even sharpening his cunning and dexterity to strike at villains from the shadows.
Also the Barbarian, Wizard, Monk don't have D&D tradition? They first appeared when Gary Gygax was still running TSR.
I'm sorry, i was just stressed when i wrote your answer. It's just that the way you write bothers me... "Covers a lot of what you're hoping for, more than you think". Assume you know more about this subject then me is not good faith, expecially after you put words on my mouth and try to divinate aspects of my personality.
OMFG.
You missed 100% of my point.
I'm just to lazy and busy to respond all this totally no sense. You just put a million or more words on my mouth lololol.
That was my response to your rude reply. I didn't say anything disrespectful to you the first time I posted. You shouldn't expect people to be nice to you when you laugh at them in their face.
As for figuring out your personality- over and over and over you kept citing how gory and violent every other character class was. You showed it was a big issue for you in looking for a class you wanted- nevermind that the paladins you admire are bloodied and experienced warriors themselves.
Alot of people disagred with my OP and I respected it well because they simply voiced their opnion about the subject. It may sounds ridicolous but I felt offended by your post, not because you don't agree with me but because you twisted my opnion into something really fagy.
I responded only according to what you said and how you said it.
You said the Barbarians were a people of honor, yet went on to dismiss them simply because they're buffed up and violent. Nothing there contradicts LG or defending the weak.
As for the monk, I shared what I knew about them, from both their real world source to what's usually depicted in various fantasy media. I pointed out that indeed they are defenders of justice. And when it came to the story, you glossed over the fact that the monk didn't start the fight (they shoved aside the storyteller, while producing weapons- clearly intending to attack), and the fact that the monk saw through their leader's guise (a demon). You simply called to attention that he was fighting in tavern, nevermind that any character in epic action fantasy can (and probably will) get involved in a tavern brawl, one way or another.
@ JTE: As I said before, let's watch for the unannounced 5th class- he might still provide the nobility that's missing in the roster.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
-My view of D3 classes:
Barbarians: though hes far from the Dungeons and Dragons barbarian archtype (primitive, instinctive, wild). He lives in cities with large walls and a mechanic gate. They wear heavy armors and are, above all things a people of honor and a ultimate battle tacticians. They are very keeperers of of the world (stone!).
However his hulking muscles, brutal fight style and somewhat violent nature makes him far from the protector of virgins.
Witch Doctor: I don't even have to argue right ? Naked dude that summon zumbies.
Wizard: He/Shes are the counterpart of the cerebral, wise, diciplined wizard archetype. Reckless, rebel and prideful, the D3 wizard have as it's most characteristical point the courage to cast forbidden spells. He/she is surely a untamed genius.
Monk: Though his seens to be a fair person, he's much more like a wonderer selfperfecionist then the guardian of justice. His the kind of guy that passed 25 years training in some isolated abbey and see the urban culture as a bunch of wierd habits. Thats makes him kind of savage.
Look at his story in D3 site (http://www.blizzard.com/diablo3/characters/monk.xml). He just kicked everyone's asses in the tavern ! C'mon fight in taverns is the tradition of the brawler heroes. Not to mention the attack that explode people from inside out.
Think in D3 character as a whole party of heroes, they really look like a bunch of crazy dudes. Theres something anti-heroic and savage in all D3 heroes and that cool. But i wish the last class would something to counter balance that a little.
That's always been the heart of this series to me, and to be honest, the more I find out about the new classes, the less motivated I am to play this latest installment. Some of these classes seem as dark and destructive as the creatures we will be fighting against.
And funniest thing is that the class who should be the "good guy" have most gore skill in the whole game.
I see what you mean :thumbsup: Personally I don't like those kinda "lawful good" type chars that much, the ones with flowing golden locks who speak in a very proper accent and sip tea, they just seem a bit boring. But I do agree that their presence is important in a game nonetheless because of what they symbolise.
But I guess there will either be a "good" char or a "dark" char in the last slot, and then probably the opposite in an expansion... so if we see a good char next we will eventually see a dark one, and vice versa.
And the 3 classes are so well structured, i dont know maybe more 'mature like' ! they have this role in the world! and they just go there and do what they have to do , because they are the best in what they do! like heroes, but not 'heros' like you hear from Monks opening video, that sounded like crap!
so what im trying to say is, i do miss something! and its essentialy from D1!
and as more a play D2, and i expect D3 to be good, its going so far from D1 SO FAR... the more i see, the less i like!
JUST WANNED SOME REAL BLIZZARD NORTH DIABLO 1 SEQUENCE!
take care guys!
I don't really need a blonde, angel-faced, radiant character whose sole purpose in life is to protect the innocent but I'd like someone who has this goal primarily in mind as they fight the legions of hell. One exception is allowed though in my book.
For example, the Diablo characters were all surrounded by great auras of mystery and seemed to have pretty dark natures. The Warriror for example was probably a mercernary-type looking for glory but it is clear that he wished to save the people of Tristram. The same goes for the Rogue and the Sorceror. The Rogue was a warrior looking to test her skills and the Sorceror was a scholarly type seeking to discover the secrets hidden within in the labyrinth. But all of these characters seemed to possess that drive to save Tristram along with their own ambitions (as well as their clans').
Diablo 3's characters are very different from this, and if you ask me, less engaging. Especially the Wizard I find, who seems more like an annoying, spoiled brat than a character that I would want to play or engage with. And I normally love to play spellcaster classes.
I think the self-serving motives of the characters are what make them so boring in my eyes. They're not really convincing and that's why one of the things I've found myself getting the least excited about are the characters. Now I realize why. Thanks for this post.
The Barbarian doesn't even look like a true Barbarian anymore. Mainly because of the armor I've seen him with. The Wizard, like said above, looks like some kind of spoiled brat. The Witch Doctor and the Monk looks like complete joke, the Witch Doctor is just self explanatory, and the Monk is like a living clich?.
They just look like bad jokes to me. I'm not looking at the game the same way I did. I don't give a fuck (yes, I'm blunt) anymore about the characters. I seriously hope the feel for the whole game together when I play it will still be good. Somehow, sometimes I'm just expecting it all to become just a big joke.
I hate overthinking what is going to happen with Diablo 3. I'm expecting good gameplay, but whats that really? Heh. I'm just gonna leave it at that.
and how are the original classes a "do-gooder"-type?
they all went to Tristram for fame, for riches and all got corrupted and the warrior because his ego was so big thought that he could contain Diablo
For a man with only 2 posts, you have a hot lead right there.
Imagine Blizz brings the Valkyrie as a playable class!
BTW great thread OP. Remembering the fact that the Barb is the same dudey from D2 really kicks that feeling of anti-heroism to another level. Think about it. In his character artwork he looks tired, old and grey. I still believe that the D3 storyline will be class specific! Coming together early along in the game.
Whether the Warrior's ego was big or not, he still sacrificed his body to try to keep Diablo under wraps and save the world. He knew he would gain nothing by doing so. The Rogue and Sorceror did this as well but of course that's not canon. But it shows what concept of the characters Blizzard had in mind when they designed them.
And I hate one-dimensional, lame do-gooder types as well Valtonis but I would like them to have some self-sacrificing goals to go along with their flaws. Everyone has various ulterior motives but there should be in my mind an essential goodness of spirit. A token rebel or borderline evil character is fun too but I think the majority of the characters should be essentially righteous.
That's actually a good point, never noticed it before but it's true. There's nothing exciting (for me) about the Diablo 3 characters and this is personified by the barbarian.
Boring and one dimensional. We have a fairly holy good-doer, called the monk, even if he is a "selfperfectionist." And I'm fine with that!
I gotta point out that most martial arts heroes, like Shaolin Monks, did see moral perspective and action as being hand-in-hand with physical and mental perfection. The practice of becoming as best you can be was applied to both mastering yourself and protecting others. In some philosophies, they were the same thing.
Don't forget that he didn't start the fight. And those who did attack him weren't exactly... "normal folk". As for the exploding heart trick, it's more effective in downing an opponent in single blow than a normal punch. Lastly, taverns are where you go to meet people- other adventurers who can aid you, gossips and informants who can give you knowledge to your advantage, even people who you may lead you to the baddies. There is no shame in visiting a tavern, even as a most holy and refined adventurer, if it will help you do good.
Forgive me for my quibbles, but here's my main point:
Based on what you're saying, you have to understand that violence, even of the goriest kind, is part of even the most virtuous heroes, the kind you're looking for.
First, if the bad guys really want to hurt you or other people, no amount of arguing with them is going to stop them.
Second, mercy in combat or warfare is a luxury and a gift. It's wonderful when given, but it's very hard to give in the first place.
Third, you may have the nicest, most dignified, shiny and consecrated avenging blade in the land, but put it through the torso of a foe and that foe will still be leaking blood and guts out- just like any other weapon.
Meaning no disrespect for stating something in so frank a manner, but you seem to have an issue with the gore the heroes display and produce. Any truly holy paladin or truly noble knight is a soldier and warrior by nature and at heart. They are defenders of virtue by force of arms. And that means fighting, hurting and killing. As much as the highest of ethical standards of would like such people to simply disarm or incapacitate their foes, rather than tear them apart in a shower of viscera, the harsh realities of combat or even life rarely allow such to be the case. It's very, very rarely not kill-or-be-killed.
Also, this is a Diablo game.
You said it yourself.
OMFG.
You missed 100% of my point.
I'm just to lazy and busy to respond all this totally no sense. You just put a million or more words on my mouth lololol. Just to point out, in my own post I said the Witch Doctor is the most "savage" character but as you can seee in my signature and in many other threads, his by FAR my favorite D3 character.
My point is, i'm missing someone like D2's Paladin. Not in terms of gameplay or background. But in terms of what the class represent to the whole group of D2 heroes.
Actual D3 character looks like a bunch of over the top rebel protagonists of a half assed action movie. I think D3 need something more traditional to balance our charcter options (tradition = dungeons and dragons).
Honestly, you don't have to be so snide, especially where I was responding in good faith. :mad:
All the "LG" stuff is a comparison to what the pally represents in D2 and no class do the same in D3.
And you just get where i want. Those D3 class does not 've D&D tradition at all despite their names.
I'm sorry, i was just stressed when i wrote your answer. It's just that the way you write bothers me... "Covers a lot of what you're hoping for, more than you think". Assume you know more about this subject then me is not good faith, expecially after you put words on my mouth and try to divinate aspects of my personality.
Alot of people disagred with my OP and I respected it well because they simply voiced their opnion about the subject. It may sounds ridicolous but I felt offended by your post, not because you don't agree with me but because you twisted my opnion into something really fagy.
Ok, i'm the drama queen now
Also the Barbarian, Wizard, Monk don't have D&D tradition? They first appeared when Gary Gygax was still running TSR.
That was my response to your rude reply. I didn't say anything disrespectful to you the first time I posted. You shouldn't expect people to be nice to you when you laugh at them in their face.
As for figuring out your personality- over and over and over you kept citing how gory and violent every other character class was. You showed it was a big issue for you in looking for a class you wanted- nevermind that the paladins you admire are bloodied and experienced warriors themselves.
I responded only according to what you said and how you said it.
You said the Barbarians were a people of honor, yet went on to dismiss them simply because they're buffed up and violent. Nothing there contradicts LG or defending the weak.
As for the monk, I shared what I knew about them, from both their real world source to what's usually depicted in various fantasy media. I pointed out that indeed they are defenders of justice. And when it came to the story, you glossed over the fact that the monk didn't start the fight (they shoved aside the storyteller, while producing weapons- clearly intending to attack), and the fact that the monk saw through their leader's guise (a demon). You simply called to attention that he was fighting in tavern, nevermind that any character in epic action fantasy can (and probably will) get involved in a tavern brawl, one way or another.
@ JTE: As I said before, let's watch for the unannounced 5th class- he might still provide the nobility that's missing in the roster.