I could really batter a piece of cod right about now.
More screenshots added here for those who like other people’s holiday snaps.
In other news, trained swords on Sunday and was suddenly much happier with my char. I think the problem has to do with the fact that I couldn’t find the #&*^@*% fist-AoE builder – I’m sure there is one, or there used to be in beta, but I played through almost 50 skill points without a single bloody AOE (not counting the 20-second cooldown one) and it wasn’t fun.
Actually, maybe I just wanted to go back to having a sword. I like swords, even though my newest one makes a drudge board look good. The plan was to also train Assault Rifles just to see how that works with Blades, but at the moment I’m enjoying my Blade/Blood combo so I haven’t put anything into AR yet. Time enough… whenever.
Sometimes I love the blogosphere: it binds us together, it enables us to share and circulate ideas, and it allows us to have far-reaching and far-branching debates about all manner of gaming things under the sun.
Sometimes I loathe the blogosphere, for exactly the same reasons.
So as I read the various posts and discussions spawned by Eric of Elder Game’s original post — including my own (Eric link at top, everyone else at the end of the post) — I end up wondering: do we actually read each other, or do we just use each other as opportunities to bang on our own drums, grind our own axes, and stand on our own soapboxes?
I’m bemused and almost irked enough by it to be doing one of these petty, self-justifying set-the-record-straight posts, which in itself irritates me even further. (Doesn’t help that I’ve only had one cup of coffee, come to think of it.*) On the bright side it’s the weekend and nobody reads blog posts over the weekend, so I can mutter quietly and mostly to myself in my corner.
Record–straightening #1. I never said classes were better than not-classes. I said Eric said skill-based is hard, and I agreed with him based on my personal gaming experience. Actually, I do believe I said once or twice that classless is very rewarding, but it’s a lot more work — granted that my only “development” experience of that is for tabletop games, but while I didn’t mess about with million-dollar budgets, I do have some idea of the relative amount of work-time required between managing a classless, skill-based campaign and managing the opposite.
(For those who like this kind of thing underpinned by “evidence,” the tabletop game I ran for the longest time — about 8 years — was Ars Magica, which is pretty much a skill-based game with incredibly messy and open-ended rules, at least the ruleset we used, which was mostly 3rd ed with a smattering of 2nd, 4th and house rules.)
Once again. In a purely theoretical sense I still don’t see what’s so contentious about “skill-based is harder to design and balance than class-based” — I really don’t. As an extremely general statement, it seems pretty straightforward to me. Given the perils of speaking for others at this stage, I won’t — but I certainly never said that just because something is more difficult to design, nobody should bother with it.
Record-straightening #2. I never made any comments about easy/hard and choice/not-choice. Other people’s drums. Sure, I have stuff to say about those things, but I didn’t say them in that post.
I’m still boggling at how this has, once again, become a debate about easy-mode versus iron-man Mr. Real Player, even in terms of development. If you like structure, you’re a sheeple. If you like to be able to screw up your character without hope of recovery, you’re a brave pioneer forging ahead into the wilds of game adventure.
Yes, I’m paraphrasing rather inaccurately. I felt it was my turn.
I’m definitely starting to think it would be useful for the gaming community as a whole to lose the “if it made me want to chew my arms off, it was BETTER” elitist attitude we’re dragging around with us whether we notice it or not. There are arguments to be made for both simplicity and complexity and they’re a great deal more, um, complicated than simply saying one is better than the other, which is a pretty meaningless assertion without context, actually.
I’m done griping now. Move along. Nothing to see here, classy or otherwise.
* Please. No advice on how I should quit drinking so much coffee if it makes me that grumpy. Can’t a person even use hyperbole on her site anymore without being adviced-at? I’m really just grumpy by nature and coffee has nothing to do with it. Now get off my damn lawn!
PET! PET! PET! PET! PET! PET!
“They stalk the wilds of Tyria, trusting their keen eye, loyal pets, and the power of nature itself to win the day. Introducing the ranger, the most recently revealed Guild Wars 2 profession! A master of many skills, the ranger can lay traps, strikes foes from afar with his bow, or command fierce animal companions – and that’s just getting started!”
Here’s the info page for those who just don’t like to click on pix: click me instead!
Yeah, it sounds just like a WoW Hunter, but you know what? I don’t care! I loved my hunter back when I played WoW. I still love the class, for all the vitriol that’s been spat at it by all the other classes and all the nerfs the class has supposedly been hit with in the last few years.
You get a pet. You get to sneak around and wear camo colours a lot. You get a freaking BOW AND ARROWS! What’s not to like?
When the Guild Wars 2 mailing came up in my inbox and I saw RANGER REVEALED!!!11oneone I got the same effect I always do. Part of me thought “oh boy oh boy oh boy I get to play a ranger again!”
Will the class match my expectations? Probably not. But the first tabletop RPG character I made was — you guessed it — a bow-toting, friend-to-beasts, red-in-tooth-and-claw-(and-with-cool-leather-boots) ranger.
Say what you like about how easy they are to play, or how they’re just too much fun (riiiight) — but they ARE fun. And I love em.
If, from now on, you could only ever play ONE more holy trinity character type, what would it be? I’ve been asking myself that for a couple of days and I, sad altoholic that I am, can’t come up with a single answer. What I probably wouldn’t be, because I’ve had very little experience with it, is a tank, but I can’t decide between DPS and healing.
Just as well it’s not a question that’s likely to be relevant in games. If I had my total druthers, I’d make a healingnukingcantakealittledamage hybrid — lately I seem to be inching away from my snicker-snack DPS damage dealing preferences (though my dreams last night were full of Witch Elves and why they should be nerfed) and more towards healers.
That said, it’s not so much that I really love checking health bars and spamming heal spells, and I don’t get bigger jollies out of it the more people I have to do it for. What I love about healing is that it gives me a margin for error. I’m not a super player and I’m not superly geared out — nor do I care to be. Being able to slap a magical band-aid on myself fills those little non-leet gaps.
I suspect that when The Secret World is revealed, I’ll probably gravitate towards someone with bandaid-slapping skills. Or maybe someone with a big honkin’ katana. Or both.
One thing is pretty certain. If they look like the above, I certainly won’t be playing Illuminati anything. Seriously, will the fashion police come take that woman a-way?
Horns-dilemma, meet Ysh. Ysh, horns. Or, as the lolcats would say: this is dilema. I are on it.
I have one character slot left on my second EQ2 account, and it’s eating away at me like sulfuric acid — or maybe like the sea on the shore. It’s not too painful, and I’ve been resisting, but that empty space where a character should be will eventually wear me down. So yes, dilemma — two, actually.