It seems to me that the very fact of the existence of classes in LE is an important point here.
There are many games with a classless system that allows you to erase boundaries, rules and logic as much as possible.
But the developers started with a class system, this already suggests that they have action logic and boundaries.
The fact that the Druid comes from the class “close to nature”, the Lich and the necromat from the adept of black magic, and the paladin from the guard, also speaks of the presence of logic and boundaries.
For example, a Druid, not a magician, turns into beasts. This is an example of classical logic. And Sork and SpellBlade come from a magician.
Although it is permissible for a magician to transform into magical entities (not related to nature), or into other mystical entities. And this is also consistent with the logic.
And the fact that the original classes have an extension of this logic due to subclasses does not violate the general logic that the developers adhere to.
The fact is that I believe that SpellBlade should use swords of his choice (and not only those that are specially created for him, like Crystals or some unique ones).
And at the expense of their own skills, to increase their effectiveness.
That is, take Crystal Blade for example. In my opinion, it should not be (or at least not with such efficiency), but there should be an ability (passive) of SpellBlade himself, which gives such a boost for swords.
I have already cited above as an example, for example, passives for strengthening a spell. For example, make it like now +20 to spell damage (with any weapon). If a sword is used, it is increased by + N.
Or the same thing with a passive for damage over time. Base bonus, + bonus if using a sword.
(I gave only examples, I’m not saying what needs to be done specifically like this)
I don’t mind that players can use something else if they want it, even with staves, even scepitres, even with axes, it’s a matter of their imagination.
But the very role of SpellBlade should be brighter, and the possibilities for swords expanded.
Logic to me is defined by the ruleset… which is created by the developers to govern their creation and everything within it. The ruleset is entirely made up and becomes the basis for any logical interpretation intended by the developer/designer…
Traditional Rulesets - like DnD etc - might form the basis for the LE ruleset, but I do not ASSUME that they apply exactly to LE so I do not ASSUME that LE wants me to think of a Class in the traditional interpretation like a NWN or BG or anything else…
If the LE ruleset defines Druids as the shapechangers with a nature theme, then logic dictates that Druid classes transform physically into other forms of a natural shape. I would then find it illogical based on this rule for a Rogue to be able to transform into a Rat…
Take spellblade right now… Its illogical that a Spellblade cannot hold a 1h hammer in its off hand… why not? Is the hammer too heavy? But a spellblade can hold a 2h sword? Does it cause him harm? Will he drop it on his toe? The ruleset for Spellblade determines that a Spellblade cannot hold a 1h hammer in the offhand… So for me it then becomes a logical explaination based on the ruleset the developers have designed…
I think we have long since left the thread & my original “devils advocate” questions to you…
My general summary is that you have very useful suggestions & ideas - and I agree with a lot of them - however, I think that you are too “distracted” by the traditional views on rpg classes and are struggling to see that it isnt that important (imho) vs improving the deficits of the Spellblade class within the ruleset that the devs have created for it…
Communicating with you and others on this topic, I realized another problem.
You see SpellBlade as an independent class that essentially has nothing to do with a mage or Sork (except that they have elemental damage).
Because magician and Sork are spells, and SpellBlade is a melee element. In fact, for you he is a warrior who, apart from the barrier and the warp, should not use anything from the magician.
Take a look at the Paladin for example, who can use almost all of Sentinel’s skills and many of the Void Knight’s skills (and vice versa). Because there is no contradiction between Sentinel and its subclasses, they are all warriors. The difference in damage is corrected by conversion.
That is, we see a high level of interaction, and hence diversity in the possible gameplay and builds. We see a similar thing in Primalist, where many skills from adjacent classes are combined.
The problem of SpellBlade, as in the perception of his essence (for someone he is a warrior, for someone a magician). And also that they have a different base of damage, spell and melee, which is difficult to combine, it is not enough just to use conversion.
What you describe also holds true for Rogue (Bladedancer/Marksman) and Acolyte (Lich/Necromancer)
This is mainly due to all 3 of them, missing the 3rd mastery, which will most likely create a better overlap between masteries, because all 6 of the current masteries of those 3 classes are on very opposite sides of a spectrum (Spells VS Melee; Melee VS Bow; Spells VS Minions).
For Acolyte it’s the least severe currently, but for Rogue and Mage it is.
I think Mage and Rogue will make a lot more sense with the 3rd mastery and it will tremendously increase build variety with some mix and match builds using multiple different things.
This will of course add more diversity and more different assemblies, but it won’t solve the problem I’m talking about.
For example, I (and I know that I’m not the only one), like the fact that the developers left the mechanics for using spells.
The question is how to improve this system so that it organically connects these classes, for those who want it.
And you don’t need to tell me that there is Sork for spells, they are different things.
It seems like you want to make the Spellblade more caster-like
Just because the Spellblade does not use skills with a “spell tag” in a lot of builds, doesn’t make him less “spellcaster-like”.
I mean he literally can shoot giant waves of fire/lightning or summon frosty icicles while fighting his foes with melee weapons.
If that’s not, what you would like this class to be, that’s fine, but calling that a “problem” is pretty drastic.
The direction the LE devs seem to go with Spellblade is a melee orientated, Elemental enhancing fighter, that can proc/trigger a lot of stuff will using melee attacks.
There are also builds that can actually utilize manually casted spell, so there is definitely the option for that.
Again, I think a lot of your concerns will get impacted, with the Rune Master. We will most likely also see more of those melee/spell hybrid Uniques like Battlemage’s Endeavour
The game is in Beta. That means it’s not complete. Did you miss that? Why are you expecting “full-fledged” anything?
What lore? There is effectively zero lore for any class in this game. You get an extraordinarily brief intro for your base class and about two sentences of dialog from the shade you talk to when choosing your Mastery. That isn’t lore. It’s an elevator pitch.
It does. You just don’t like what it is. That is absolutely not the same as it not being there.
If you want to equip a sword and role-play in an action RPG, then equip a sword. Like, is your complaint really “YOU GUYS IT’S CALLED A SPELL BLADE NOT A SPELL STAFF”? Come on.
Most people read a class name and two sentences and go “Neat!” or “No thanks!”. Somehow you decided instead to write a Lord of the Rings worth of canon about Spell Blades in your head and then get weird about nobody else sharing that vision on the forums. Your argument is utterly inane.
I’m really happy about the unique Spellblade staff because I personally like the theme of a staff wielding magic warrior. I like martial arts combat style in films and games and that staff adds it for me, at least a bit.
I would not be so nitpicking on phrases like “Spellblade” has “blade” and thus may only use blades weapons. O like exceptions like the S&B Rogue.
Also theres “man” in Necromancer", but nobody is complaining about it being not fitting to a female character (hopefully I’m not opening pandora box uere).
There’s not that much lore in LE, at least not so much that we have lore based restrictions that affect the gameplay.
Everything the devs do is for creating gameplay related stuff. If the lore then doesn’t fit, it gets altered. In 90% of the cases it’s not the other way round.
That is a very good observation… I agree… I definitely see each mastery class as an independant class… To me they dont even need to be categorised into a base class (mage.rogue.sentinel) once they are mastered… Its almost as if the class is transformed for me into something new like a child born of different parents but independant in its own right.
I did not miss this, but we do not have the opportunity to communicate (two-way) with the developers and we do not know what they think and plan, so all we can do is to unilaterally express our thoughts and wishes.
I’m not going to convince anyone of anything. If SpellBlade is a Warrior for you, so be it. Consider him even a barbarian or a murderer, your right.
I just expressed my thoughts and wishes to the developers, if they find it useless, so be it. If it helps them in any way, I will be glad.
That’s not true, the devs are active on Discord & they do sometimes post here as well. Plus some evil Gatekeepers who seek to suppress all dissent and wrongthinkcough the Community Testers do have a closer relationship with the devs, Mike streams on Twitch every Friday and he answers a lot of questions. The streams would probably be harder to understand if you’re not fluent at English though, so Discord might be a good place to start.
They will answer the question there, what will Runamaster be like and what changes are planned in SpellBlade against this background? No, they will not answer. I am talking about this, that on a specific issue, there is great uncertainty.
Therefore, I have to judge on the merits, on the basis of what we have today.
Just to add my grain of salt: Blade doesn’t necessarily mean ‘sword’ but all weapon (or tool) with a sharpe edge. But i think they called it ‘Spellblade’ just for flavor purpose.
They could also call it a Battlemage or a Magic Warrior. A class that mix together magic and martial proficiency. After that, they could be more focus on spell or martial art but they choose the current Spellblade.
I do not try to invent what is not, I look at what is and express my opinion about what I like or dislike.
For example, I like the fact that SpellBlade is based on a magician, not a warrior. I love that the developers made spell triggers and made it possible to use spells.
I like the way the developers have done in the Surge Crackling Blades node. You are not required to use the sword, but you can get bonuses from it.
You say that “Blade” is just a name, it doesn’t mean anything, but the game says something else.
Others say that SpellBlade is NOT a MAG, there is Sork for that. But the game speaks of ANOTHER.
All I want is for the developers to expand and improve these mechanics that they themselves introduced. I hope that such an interesting class does not turn into an ordinary “Warrior that waves a fiery sword”.
If someone thinks that SpellBlade is a warrior, or a barbarian or ranger, that is their right, as well as my right to consider him a magician.
And the right of developers to assess whether they are interested in it or not.
I didn’t say that blade mean nothing, i’m just saying that blade doesn’t refer to a sword. It just refer to a magician that also take martial training. It doesn’t mean that he is a warrior but he isn’t a traditional mage anymore. So yeah, spellblade is more likely to slash his weapon for some fancy effect.
I am not suggesting that other weapons be banned.
Heavy wrote above correctly, if you want to use axes, or hammers or daggers, use.
I’m just saying that there are skills that emphasize closeness to the sword, and I think it would be good if there were more such skills.
Or take CrystalBlade, which has a very high efficiency for SpellBlade, why not make it so that it does not have such an overestimated efficiency against other swords. To make other swords more relevant as well.
You are not forced to use CrystalBlade today. So I do not propose to force.
Let me give you another example.
Let’s take the Infused Weapon passive skill.
Add to it an increase in melee elemental damage by N% when using a sword.
At the same time, slightly reduce such a bonus for CrystalBlade.
This will increase interest in other swords.
For other types of weapons, this does not change anything about the effectiveness that is now. Use axes, even hammers or two-handed weapons.
