Energy = reduced mana cost
Lethality = uncomfirmed
Multistrike = multiple projectiles or multiple hits
Power = increased damage
Striking = additional strike damage added to any skill
Haha, no...that is completely impossible. The reason you can't play the male is because they haven't finished his character yet...stuff like voice acting and animations will be different for the male.
A wizard is a mage that does indeed hold a knowledge of many different disciplines of magic and not a specific emphasis on any one. That is what we see here, so why is the name Wizard childish as opposed to befitting? Please don't sound like a bunch of nooblets.
Actually the word "Wizard" doesn't really fit this class and seems very much out of place to me. Let me explain why.
Firstly, the etymology of the word is not at all gender-neutral (for that matter, neither is warlock). I consider it a grammatical error to refer to a female spellcaster as a wizard, and I have never heard it used to refer to a female in any context before.
In popular use during 16th century England, "wizard' was used to denote a helpful male folk magican
Secondly, the word conveys the sense of a wise old man. For example, like Gandalf in LOTR.
During the 15th century, the term "wizard" referred to "philosopher, sage", from Middle English wysard (from wys "wise" and the ...
However, the Wizard class that we have been shown is certainly not a wize old sage. She could not be more opposite from that. She is a young, reckless and headstrong attractive "sophomore".
I do not have any problem with the word Wizard by itself, but it doesn't make sense to me to completely misuse the word as they have done. If it were a wise old man, that would be another story.
Considering what she is, I think she would be much more appropriately named the "Sorcerer/ess" (it should be a different title for male/female), or the "Mage/Magician". Sorcerers are usually used to refer to spellcasters that are not necessary wise and may be headstrong. I don't care that the name is already been used before. If they don't change the fundaments of the class (which they haven't really), then I see no reason to completely change the name simply for the sake of trying to trick people into thinking that its a new concept because its not really. The word Magician sounds slightly less male-biased then wizard and also does not contain the root for "wise" so I think that would also be a better choice.
Firstly let me respectfully please ask Zoltrix to stop compulsively shutting down any thread mentioning the Wizard and ask them to post it here. There are many different aspects that people may be discussing and it is no more correct to force everyone to discuss on a single thread anything vaguely relating to the wizard than it is to suggest that all threads related to Diablo 3 should be discussed under the same topic.
My post now is intended to be in reference to the topic someone started concerning the limited number of attack skills vs. buff skills on the Wizard skill tree. This is not a Wizard specific topic becaus it likely relates to all characters, and I hope that the moderators here regain some sense and allow topics to be separated so that individual topics are not lost in a deluge of wizard frenzy............................
Anyway...I agree that the new trend in skill distribution does not promote diversity. Not only that, but it seems that all the damage skills are level 1 skills (almost), so all you do is use the same friggin level 1 skills throughout the entire game, and add some small percent buffs to them over time. Sounds kinda boring. Skill runes will help but its still just a modification, not a whole new way to attack, so I dont think it helps ENOUGH.
No ranged class when we've seen bows drop? Unless you think the rogue will be a ranger/rogue hybrid (which for the record could be right up my alley if implemented correctly).
Indeed, that is exactly what I think. Specifically, I think that the next two classes will be a Knight class and a Ranger class, the ranger being one who specializes in bows and nature.
Also, may I be the first to note that the female Wizard is apparently Asian?
The more I think about it, the more I think the new skill system sucks...you can no longer save up your skill points for high level spells, you are forced to waste points on low level spells to access the high level ones, even if you'll never use the low level spells in the late game. I don't like that...
4 or 5 skills each tier. tiers at lvl 1, 5, 10, 15, 20.. no lvl 20 skills are in yet.
11:25 Rushster: there are no dependencies of skills. but you need 10 points in a given skill tree to enable skills at levle 10, and then 15 at lvl 15. etc, I assume.
11:25 Rushster: this is all subject to change, of course. during further development.
11:26 Rushster: there are a mixture of attack and passive spells. in all trees. and damage types vary. wizard has masteries that increase casting speed, all types of damage, critical hits in types of damage, provide physical and magial armor. boost weapon damage, etc. huge variety. looks likea LOT of different builds will be possible. melee wizard for sure.
So, this is interesting..its a completelt new skill system, but it actually sounds cool to me
1 class down, 2 to go...looks amazing
But hey, isn't the class supposed to be something a lil different.
I mean wizard sounds like a remake of sorceress to me so far based on announced skills...
I mean, Charged Bolt, Tornado, Frost Nova...
Where is the innovation???
THIS ONE HAS THE POWER TO BEND TIME AND SPACE
A wielder of the elements and a master manipulator of time, the wizard can hurl environment-shattering lightning bolts, channel explosive arcane energies, and create pockets of space outside the normal temporal flow.
Lethality = uncomfirmed
Multistrike = multiple projectiles or multiple hits
Power = increased damage
Striking = additional strike damage added to any skill
Actually the word "Wizard" doesn't really fit this class and seems very much out of place to me. Let me explain why.
Firstly, the etymology of the word is not at all gender-neutral (for that matter, neither is warlock). I consider it a grammatical error to refer to a female spellcaster as a wizard, and I have never heard it used to refer to a female in any context before.
Secondly, the word conveys the sense of a wise old man. For example, like Gandalf in LOTR.
However, the Wizard class that we have been shown is certainly not a wize old sage. She could not be more opposite from that. She is a young, reckless and headstrong attractive "sophomore".
I do not have any problem with the word Wizard by itself, but it doesn't make sense to me to completely misuse the word as they have done. If it were a wise old man, that would be another story.
Considering what she is, I think she would be much more appropriately named the "Sorcerer/ess" (it should be a different title for male/female), or the "Mage/Magician". Sorcerers are usually used to refer to spellcasters that are not necessary wise and may be headstrong. I don't care that the name is already been used before. If they don't change the fundaments of the class (which they haven't really), then I see no reason to completely change the name simply for the sake of trying to trick people into thinking that its a new concept because its not really. The word Magician sounds slightly less male-biased then wizard and also does not contain the root for "wise" so I think that would also be a better choice.
My post now is intended to be in reference to the topic someone started concerning the limited number of attack skills vs. buff skills on the Wizard skill tree. This is not a Wizard specific topic becaus it likely relates to all characters, and I hope that the moderators here regain some sense and allow topics to be separated so that individual topics are not lost in a deluge of wizard frenzy............................
Anyway...I agree that the new trend in skill distribution does not promote diversity. Not only that, but it seems that all the damage skills are level 1 skills (almost), so all you do is use the same friggin level 1 skills throughout the entire game, and add some small percent buffs to them over time. Sounds kinda boring. Skill runes will help but its still just a modification, not a whole new way to attack, so I dont think it helps ENOUGH.
Indeed, that is exactly what I think. Specifically, I think that the next two classes will be a Knight class and a Ranger class, the ranger being one who specializes in bows and nature.
Also, may I be the first to note that the female Wizard is apparently Asian?
The Witch Doctor is that. It's all you get. The next two are going to be a knight and rogue. This is Diablo after all.
Info taken from live blog here:
http://www.diii.net/blog/comments/blizzcon-2008-live-blog/
http://www.incgamers.com/Videos/265/Diablo-3-Gameplay
One of the more interesting spells creates a large bubble and apaprentl any enemies moving through it are slowed, but you are not
10:54
Rushster: 3 skill trees.
10:55
Rushster: 15 skills in each on display at the show. most too high level to use.
10:59
Rushster: official wizard selection screen descripation:
beautiful and headstrong, this upstart wizard manipulates the primal forces of the universe to vanquish her foes.
10:59
Rushster: only the female wizard is playable, so can't say what the male's description would be. presumably he's not beautiful. heh
THIS ONE HAS THE POWER TO BEND TIME AND SPACE
http://www.shacknews.com/screenshots.x?gallery=10866&game_id=5483#img127261