When will we see a new class? Not archetypes, not a complaint

Candlestick Maker

Well-known member
this is getting old, most of the archetypes are wonky in one way or another. I totally get the economics invloved (from a laymen's PoV) but serioulsly, stop with the half-baked attempt add new classes.

*If the current coding won't allow it to happen, just say so. If it doesn't make fiscal sense, just say so.

NO, I won't give any ideas, I'll let the other players fill in those blanks.
 

unbongwah

Well-known member
When the first set of Archetypes came out, the devs clearly stated that they were a lot easier to implement than new classes. Reading between the lines, they'd probably need a really strong incentive to go thru the hassle of implementing a new class rather than retrofitting in new features with more Archetypes.
Lynnabel said:
Why Archetypes?

There are a lot of great reasons to go this route, and we'd love to talk through some of them to help explain why we're angling in this direction.

1: Making new classes is hard - both technically and design-wise. There are only so many D&D classes in the books and the ones that are left retread old ground considerably. We'd never be able to make Class 16 without significant overlap with existing character options, something that feels bad from a design perspective and worse from a player perspective. Tons of great design space is locked up already and we needed a way to go back and fill in our gaps.
2: Technically speaking, this is a lot better than making new classes for a lot of reasons due to how DDO's engine functions. There's a ton of work to get a new class up on the LFM panel, for example, that with Archetypes we simply do not need to do. It prevents our UI from becoming bloated in a variety of places. It also prevents player information overload - rather than having 30 classes, sticking to our current 15 means they're still easily recognizable at a glance UI-wise.
3: This allows us to revisit design space that our existing classes touch upon and give it the love it deserves. If an existing class sorta-supports an archetype, this is a way for us to build that idea out and give it support in a way that doesn't mess with existing builds and archetypes.
4: Archetypes are easier for us to build than regular classes which means we can release more of them more frequently. It also means that we can do weirder things with them - if our ideas don't pan out, design-wise, we're not wasting years of work on a risky idea that doesn't land. We can take more risks, which feels great for us and will likely turn out some insane and unbelievable results.
5: Archetypes give us a great way to schedule revamps and retooling of existing class features. We have historically had a hard time pinning revamps down to a set schedule, but this gives us a great way to order and organize our class initiatives. For example, (and we're going into this later down in this post), Dark Apostate releases alongside a revamp of Divine Disciple. If we're building a Archetype, that's a great time to shore up other parts of the class we're building on - since it all fits together into one cohesive whole.
6: Archetypes are an experiment to see if they resonate better with the players than new Universal Trees do. Universal trees are a struggle to design because they need to appeal universally across many builds - and these are the exact opposite. We want to build narrow, flavorful, high-impact and interesting options that players can choose from, compared to Universal Trees that everyone can access on top of an existing class split. This definitely isn't to say that we won't ever make more Universal Trees, but for right now we're trying this new direction to see if it lands better.
 

Candlestick Maker

Well-known member
As per Lynnabel

6: Archetypes are an experiment to see if they resonate better with the players than new Universal Trees do. Universal trees are a struggle to design because they need to appeal universally across many builds - and these are the exact opposite. We want to build narrow, flavorful, high-impact and interesting options that players can choose from, compared to Universal Trees that everyone can access on top of an existing class split. This definitely isn't to say that we won't ever make more Universal Trees, but for right now we're trying this new direction to see if it lands better.

TY unbongwah I get it, BUT...
 

Smokewolf

Well-known member
this is getting old, most of the archetypes are wonky in one way or another. I totally get the economics invloved (from a laymen's PoV) but serioulsly, stop with the half-baked attempt add new classes.

*If the current coding won't allow it to happen, just say so. If it doesn't make fiscal sense, just say so.

NO, I won't give any ideas, I'll let the other players fill in those blanks.
You need to realize that the Dev's will never bring in a new class / archetype that's better or even on-par with the default options.

Closest I've seen yet to surpassing the original class / enh is Dragon-Lord...
 

Candlestick Maker

Well-known member
You need to realize that the Dev's will never bring in a new class / archetype that's better or even on-par with the default options.

Closest I've seen yet to surpassing the original class / enh is Dragon-Lord...
I enjoy DL quite a bit. it's an example of getting it right. so,, that's one, ...
 

woq

Well-known member
Stormsinger seems fun and decent enough: it would be good if not for r7+ caster pens. Dragon Lord is good and fits a niche yes. Dark Hunter is like ranger, but better due to sneak/trapping outside enh trees.

Every other archetype, imo, has been a half-baked miss and relegated to Heroics/low difficulties and/or used almost exclusively as a splash class. Could be wrong here anyway.
 

Darkwolfer2002

Well-known member
I like the majority of archetypes because I'm not a strict end-game content pushing player. I like everyone else have an opinion. My top 3 are Blight Caster, Dragonlord, and maybe toss up between Stormsinger and Dark Hunter.

Now to answer the OP. Probably not very often as this is based off of D&D, and specifically off of 3ed though they have been implementing more modern ideas. Obviously psionics has not been introduced, but it is a lot of work for them to implement a whole new class with skills/spells/PLs/archetypes (eventually). I'm sure they have toyed with the thought. They probably run a risk vs. reward focus group on it every now and then.

Don't hold your breathe but never say never either.
 

Eoin

The Crispness of Crowattic
You assume that they wouldn't half-bake the trees on new class.

A bigger question is what additional classes could they add that would work with action murder hobo zerg fest that is the game that would give a different game play. Then out of those classes how many of those could be an enhancement tree or two replacement on an existing class.

Like Psion would be nice and all, but the casters are already basically using a power point system and no one is going to wait for you to telekinesis a crest. Soulknife could be a rouge archetype and psi warrior a fighter. Mystic theurge on a flavored soul. Hexblade on warlock. Spirit shaman on druid. Truenamer can go in the circular file... though a class were you had to alias say commands...
 

erethizon1

Well-known member
I'd much rather get archetypes twice as fast (or much faster as we are getting them now) than new classes. I like past lives and the faster they can add them, the better. The archetype system has done wonders to accelerate the growth of past lives. Hopefully they will keep it up until Legendary past lives are added.
 

Dielzen

Well-known member
  • Dragonlord - When more than 50% of all fighters are DL, it's clear that this Archtype is a little too strong, and it's become almost the defacto dip for a number of builds.
  • Wild Mage - Almost nobody endgames sorc much anymore, but of that ones that do, WM is virtually non-existant. The random chance of death just isn't worth the middlin DPS gains.
  • Stormsinger - I used to be one of the few bards at endgame, now they're all over the place, mostly due to this Archtype. I'd say this one is in a great place, overall.
  • Dark Apostate - Let's give a caster tree a bunch of weapon enhancements, but no bonuses to actually make weapon DPS worthwhile? Superbad and no identity
  • Blightcaster - Arguably OP for leveling, but quickly gets closer to junk as you get closer to cap
  • Sacred First - I don't have much experience with this one, so can't give a good reason, but it's clearly not great at cap based on the near-zero number of endgame SF I've seen
  • Dark Hunter - As long as you want to go melee, DH has the potential to be the better ranger with tempest as a primary tree and able to get traps while being pure. It's also a better choice for inquisitive builds which are the current meta. For a bow-user the lack of AA is too punitive, imo
  • Acolyte of the Skin - I've seen a couple niche melee builds that are decent, otherwise it's not very good
  • Dragon Disciple - based on the current preview, it has no identity/niche that will make it viable for endgame, and the # of centered builds that will want to use some of the weapon options is fairly limited.
There are all just my opinion based on playing them and observing the relative % of these at endgame on the servers I've played on, I'm sure a bunch of people will take offense to some of these POVs
 

rabidfox

The People's Champion
A bigger question is what additional classes could they add that would work with action murder hobo zerg fest that is the game that would give a different game play. Then out of those classes how many of those could be an enhancement tree or two replacement on an existing class.
Cavalier is a classic class missing (and psionic stuff but that's a bigger workload to do). I doubt they'd add mounted combat (but nothing would be zergier than mounted speeds inside quests BWHAAHAH!), so the only thing it really needs is polearms. Generating a whole new class of weapons would be a massive task, so they should go the dual shooter inquis style trick and just make the tree convert staffs (or other weapons) into a polearm animation with a long reach/abilties. But even this could be just an archetype even if conventionally it's a class of its own.
 

Stoner81

Well-known member
The comparison here is DH vs regular ranger. They lose evasion and gain medium armor bonuses and trap skills...unless you're playing a non-trapper Inquis, they're better than a regular Ranger. oh, and SA dice/imbue dice
Ahhh ok thank you for the information.

Stoner81.
 

Solarpower

Well-known member
A bigger question is what additional classes could they add that would work with action murder hobo zerg fest that is the game that would give a different game play.
Like... one ? Spirit Shaman is basically a Druid with Spontaneous casting. That's new.
Everything else (if I recall correctly) are more or less Fighter/Rogue/etc variants.
Even Psionics would be played as any caster, no difference. Just with some new icons on their powers (same as Alchemists do).

Mystic theurge on a flavored soul.
Mystic Theurge is Prestige Class, not the Base one. It's place is to be another Universal Tree. 😎

Truenamer can go in the circular file...
Isn't it another variant class, not the Base one ?
Well, it's quite different and can be add into DDO as a new Class, why not ?
But I doubt it's even possible to squeeze it into DDO...
Take the Druid for example. Their animal form abilities are placed in the spell list ! 😅
 
Last edited:
Top