Official Blizzard Quote:
Most of the Monk?s skills will focus on combat skills and attacks, along with his various escape skills. And we talked at Blizzcon that we?re likely to put some defensive and supportive abilities on him. Possibly Auras. We?ve not done the next round of skills on him yet so we?re not exactly sure.
The idea of auras returning in Diablo III from Diablo II (whose Paladin used them excessively and exclusively) has sparked some conversation and controversy on our very site, raising concerns about their distribution among the Diablo III characters, as opposed to the solitary character distribution in Diablo II, to their functionality being unchecked. If they will function exactly the same in Diablo III has yet to be announced, but since there's only so many ways you can possibly have them, it is most likely that they will be very similar.
In spite of the previous claims of some Blizzard representatives about not having a single support character, however, things are starting to look like a bit of change is on the horizon:
Official Blizzard Quote:
We definitely want to do that with one class. Whether or not it?s the Monk hasn?t yet been decided. The Monk does seem to be the logical choice. The only reason we might not do with him is that he?s too logical.
And, of course, they are absolutely right. Fans have been anticipating this for some time since this character is so obviously related to the Paladin of Diablo II, who functioned in a very similar way. But, is this too predictable for the game? Should we be seeing something more original and less archetypical in Diablo III?
When asked specifically about the Monk's armor type, since it has been heavily discussed that it would not be normal for the Monk to be using heavy armor, Wilson responded with an echo from Diablo's past, where all characters were able to wear any kind of armor regardless of their class:
Official Blizzard Quote:
We?re an item based game. The idea of a character that doesn?t use items is foreign to our basic game philosophy. So one of the things we decided when we were creating the Monk was that we were not going to explore that aspect of the character. We?re going to make a Diablo Monk, and the Diablo Monk uses items.
Is this hold-off from Diablo II a good idea? Although the equipment will not physically appear heavy:
Official Blizzard Quote:
[...]the Monk?s armor isn?t going to look like heavy plate armor. It?s going to look like a shirt, what our imagination of what the Monk?s armor could be. It?s definitely going to be equipment, but he?s not going to look like he?s covered in metal[...]
Do you agree that this level of atypical armor allotment to the Monk is a positive move on the Diablo III team's part?
The interview also hinted passingly at the possibility of the Monk being able to dual-wield fist weapons, much like the Assassin of Diablo II, and the possibility of the Monk's tattoos developing through the story line, which Wilson said "[they are] tied to the story arcs we create for the game."
Yeah, aura(bonus) apply only to the caster it's already exist it's called passive skill, we don't need to see that with an aura, LOL. The reason why they have aura is only for cooperative playing.
It may be silly to say "auras are only for pallys". But, I think that the people you are referring to are trying to make a slightly different point. That being, if the designers want to try so hard to include characteristics akin to that of the paladin, then why didn't they just retain the paladin as a character class?
This is probably true.
By posting here we are not attempting to tell the game designers anything, we are merely discussing the topic amongst ourselves.
If sharing diminishes the effect of the aura to the aura'd character, then it's not necessarily a "no brainer". Sharing may be the appropriate thing to do from a strategic standpoint during group play, but it would require an unselfish act by the aura provider.
I think that's a really good point. Rep for that
just make the plated armor look like it has more mobility on a monk. i think it's enough, and it will look cool for me. like, the won't be anything on the joints... i dunno.
so. the other thing. i will be happy if the monk have auras. i can't see why it would go wrong. they could balance it with many different things.
I believe that such thinking results in bad sequels.
I don't think they need to compare at all. Instead, simply take the
good points of the last game and improve on them. Like you said.
No matter if it is similar or "feels" the same as the previous game. So by saying Auras, people automatically assume there will be a repeat of D2. But what they are not thinking, is maybe they just used a familiar term to actually create something totally new, but possibily "based" on the old concept.
You can call it comparing games, I call it evolution. I think the later is more productive. :rolleyes:
In response to the second part, I don't think the designers are "trying so hard to remake Paladin Like Skills". They just wanted to make party friendly skills available to a character and maybe decided they should also be called Auras for the lack of better terms. :confused:
Which brings me back to the "you are comparing" , they are "evolving" idea.
That's like saying since they are "trying so hard to make sorceress like skills why don't they just call the Wizard, a Sorceress...."
You see where I'm going? Don't compare and say, well it feels similar so it should be the same.
Thus answering the last part, why dont they just retain the paladin?, cause it's a new game and they mostly agree on making new chars... It's not cause they have a few familiar concepts that they should give everything a Diablo2 Tag Name on it.
Although I agree fully, I do also realize that most hardcore players are even more aware of the existing problems and also need'nt be reminded constantly. Drawing conslusions and saying "OMG, people will abuse auras again" without even knowing what auras will look like in D3 is pretty pointless. But I do agree that for discussion sake some can state the obvious and pass it for an opinion.:P
This very "soft solution" was already put up, and already answered to..
If by sharing auras they decided to reduce power, then it would become a no brainer to NOT share it and instead boost the individual character (Monk), since Blizzard are making all of them EPIC anyways. Not like they will cry about not having a small boost from the "hypothetical" Monk Auras.
Consequently making sharing Auras totally redundant. That's all hypothetical though.
To my understanding, that's pretty much what Blizz meant. Equiping heavy armor that will respectfully be visually implemented as ornate clothing/armor to lighter characters. Not shiny plate mail. Which would be rediculous. I don't think however that we should worry much about it since it's been what Blizz has been doing althrough the Diablo Franchise.
(D1 - Rogue, and Mage could wear Full Plate that didn't look like FPM)
(D2 - Barb, Assassin, Sorceress)
They all had believable armors IMO.:thumbsup: