View Poll Results: Rate the DS concept

Voters
106. You may not vote on this poll
  • Complete waste

    36 33.96%
  • Unplayable

    16 15.09%
  • Just another idea

    27 25.47%
  • Playable

    5 4.72%
  • I'd give it a go

    22 20.75%
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst
1
2
3
LastLast
  1. #21
    The Insane Didactic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    The Emerald City
    Posts
    17,045
    Support specializations are not viable in World of Warcraft gameplay.
    Right, as the world goes, is only in question between equals in power, while the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must.
    - Thucydides

    There is a modern myth that people have always tended towards democracy, constitutions, electoral rights; but in truth, love of freedom has never been the predominant note of popular politics. At most times, popular demand has been for a strong government.
    - Eugen Weber

  2. #22
    Bloodsail Admiral DonQShot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Guimaraes
    Posts
    1,085
    Quote Originally Posted by ZenX View Post
    They don't need to be based on every different color there is as it stands there are more than five flights.

    ...and shame on you for "naming" my concept terrible all the while using using the concept of empowerment and paths here.

    http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...ht=dragonsworn

    Rookie, bring in the story before you bring in the mechs.
    Well there is also the chromatic dragonflight but its not strong enough lorewise nor as important as the other dragonflights to make a spec based on it. And also if I did, they would be just a repetition of the other specs.
    Now, please don't take it personal if I thought ur concept mechanics were terrible lol. Come on I wasn't the only to dislike it =P. But I did say ur overall idea was interesting, which is why I owe you credit for getting me interested in making this class, and moreso, using the Empowerment idea, which I adapted to my concept.

    But yes, indeed ur background story is okay, but I'm not interested in the stories, I'm interested in the mechs, and I think mine surpass yours so the rookie comment was unfortunate...

  3. #23
    Bloodsail Admiral DonQShot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Guimaraes
    Posts
    1,085
    Quote Originally Posted by Didactic View Post
    Support specializations are not viable in World of Warcraft gameplay.
    well I know where this is coming from, but I wouldn't be dumb to the point of making a support spec if I thought it wasn't viable. All that Blizz needs to do is exactly what I did(or tried to), which is to base the support spec rotations in granting better buffs, preferably stackable, which benefit both the caster and the party, in disadvantage of damage dealing rotations. This way, it gives a fair chance on soloing to support specs(again, just because their rotations aren't directly damage dealing does not mean they can't deal enough damage) and creates a new role for raiding, pvp and dungeons, which brings better and new buffs to the party. There, was I clear =)?

  4. #24
    Bloodsail Admiral DonQShot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Guimaraes
    Posts
    1,085
    Hey there fellow Azerothians =).
    This will be, I believe, the final update I will have the pleasure to announce, before I send this ideas to Blizz... I have successfully copyrighted this concept and so I am here hoping for your kind reviews, which are always a good feedback and sign of how good and acceptable my concepts are.
    So, be aware, the time is now for you to decide what can be the next (hero) classes! Have fun reading!

  5. #25
    Seems well-developed, but wouldn't work in WoW at all. Too few weapons usable and 5 specs just aren't going to work.
    To add to that, paths seem OP, Reptilian Longevity racial is either OP or useless.

    Can you copyright a concept based on a franchise you're not affiliated with in any way? Anyway, I really doubt Blizzard would want to implement this.
    Last edited by Creotor; 2012-11-02 at 01:09 AM.

  6. #26
    Im down for this idea

    ---------- Post added 2012-11-01 at 08:15 PM ----------

    Cool idea, sounds way overpowerd though

  7. #27
    Bloodsail Admiral DonQShot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Guimaraes
    Posts
    1,085
    Quote Originally Posted by Creotor View Post
    Seems well-developed, but wouldn't work in WoW at all. Too few weapons usable and 5 specs just aren't going to work.
    To add to that, paths seem OP, Reptilian Longevity racial is either OP or useless.

    Can you copyright a concept based on a franchise you're not affiliated with in any way? Anyway, I really doubt Blizzard would want to implement this.
    Just think about it, how many classes use swords and polearms with intellect? At the moment, only holy palas(who else imo). There isn't really any other class that can benefit from intellect directly nowadays, since casters now use wands. So, as I see it, there are plenty of int swords available for the dragonsworn. The specs issue has been discussed for sooo long that I think the only people that have the answer are the devs themselves. Still, I firmly believe that 3,4 or 5 specs mean nothing and change nothing. If you care to discuss this topic again I have np =). Yes, the paths may be OP, its only a matter of nerfing them down a notch =P.

    And yes I can protect my intellectual creations as they are considered an artistic piece, so Blizz cant touch this XD

    ---------- Post added 2012-11-02 at 03:56 AM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by SadisticPanda View Post
    Im down for this idea

    ---------- Post added 2012-11-01 at 08:15 PM ----------

    Cool idea, sounds way overpowerd though
    Thxz! Could u tell me where it feels OP btw?

  8. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by DonQShot View Post
    And yes I can protect my intellectual creations as they are considered an artistic piece, so Blizz cant touch this XD
    Actually, Mythic Entertainment (Now EA Mythic, I think) might have something to say about you ripping off their intellectual property. Using the name 'Dragon Sworn" was not the best idea, nor was using Dark Age of Camelot screenshots to illustrate "your" idea.
    Last edited by Aetherick; 2012-11-02 at 04:24 AM. Reason: left in part of Color tag

  9. #29
    Wow lol, are you the same guy that keep posting about this every few months? I even remember seen the same pictures and everything. Lets move on pls, no need to resale the same thing over and over, bring something new next time kkthx.
    "The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits."

    Albert Einstein

  10. #30
    Bloodsail Admiral DonQShot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Guimaraes
    Posts
    1,085
    Quote Originally Posted by Aetherick View Post
    Actually, Mythic Entertainment (Now EA Mythic, I think) might have something to say about you ripping off their intellectual property. Using the name 'Dragon Sworn" was not the best idea, nor was using Dark Age of Camelot screenshots to illustrate "your" idea.

    Are you trolling? I don't even know where to begin to reply to such lack of common sense. Can't you seriously see the difference between a work of literature and common names and representative images? I am inclined to say you are a banned troll who just made a new account to continue pissing on the forums...

  11. #31
    The Insane Didactic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    The Emerald City
    Posts
    17,045
    Quote Originally Posted by DonQShot View Post
    well I know where this is coming from, but I wouldn't be dumb to the point of making a support spec if I thought it wasn't viable. All that Blizz needs to do is exactly what I did(or tried to), which is to base the support spec rotations in granting better buffs, preferably stackable, which benefit both the caster and the party, in disadvantage of damage dealing rotations. This way, it gives a fair chance on soloing to support specs(again, just because their rotations aren't directly damage dealing does not mean they can't deal enough damage) and creates a new role for raiding, pvp and dungeons, which brings better and new buffs to the party. There, was I clear =)?
    In which case you will see another example of Shaman Syndrome - a class being mandatory because they possess unique buffs that hamper groups that try running without them in comparison to the ones that do hamper them. So again, no. Support classes are one of those things that have to be integrated at launch or cannot be introduced at all.
    Right, as the world goes, is only in question between equals in power, while the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must.
    - Thucydides

    There is a modern myth that people have always tended towards democracy, constitutions, electoral rights; but in truth, love of freedom has never been the predominant note of popular politics. At most times, popular demand has been for a strong government.
    - Eugen Weber

  12. #32
    Bloodsail Admiral DonQShot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Guimaraes
    Posts
    1,085
    Quote Originally Posted by Didactic View Post
    In which case you will see another example of Shaman Syndrome - a class being mandatory because they possess unique buffs that hamper groups that try running without them in comparison to the ones that do hamper them. So again, no. Support classes are one of those things that have to be integrated at launch or cannot be introduced at all.
    Yet I still don't see where is the problem in going into a 10 man raid(I'm not talking about Pugs, just yet) and taking 2 tanks, 2 healers, 2 supporters and 4 dps. None of each gets in the way of the others. Even now, if you go into a LFD group you still cant get all the buffs available(how many times have u been fighting for control with your Blessing of the kings against a Legacy of the Emperor or a Mark of the wild?) so this is always unfair to someone.

    And i will even show you how a support spec would actually benefit the game: It's integration on LFR/D is easily manageable bymaking a requirement for support specs in partys (be aware that this is not the only support spec/class that I made) and because a support spec would be useful in challemge modes and heroic dungeons. The second part of the benefit, even though its quite obvious you still resist on acknowledging it, is that you bring specific roles to a party/raid because they are good at doing one thing and bad at the rest. You bring dps and it does damage but cannot effectively heal nor tank. You bring healers and what are they good for? healing and nothing else. If you would bring a support spec, the only thing it would be good at was supporting, so I don't see where would it be OP or at a clear advantage against other roles. The third advantage of a support spec in wow is, again, its help in filling the missing buffs that I mentioned before as well as, with some mastery and skill, improve either the dps or the tank or the healer. As I said, a support spec's range of skills is very limited in terms of classes so they do not bring buffs that can benefit the entire party in equal effectiveness. Forthly, a support spec works good in various other games, so why not take what's good from these games and add it to WOW? Fithly and Finaly, I think this would shake the game up and be really cool to play with and against.

  13. #33
    Quote Originally Posted by DonQShot View Post
    Are you trolling? I don't even know where to begin to reply to such lack of common sense. Can't you seriously see the difference between a work of literature and common names and representative images? I am inclined to say you are a banned troll who just made a new account to continue pissiong on the forums...
    Actually, not a banned troll at all, just never had a strong enough desire to post until now (DAoC was my first MMO, so probably slightly overprotective of it).

    And the point I was trying to make was somewhat dual, though I do admit it was a bit of a snarky way to make it.

    I would like to give an example for the primary aspect of the point I was trying to make: say you had an idea for a creature with multiple eyes which had magical powers. You called them "beholders" and used an image of the D&D beholder to help illustrate what you meant, but you were very certain to change their background so that they didn't resemble the D&D creature in any way, except for those already mentioned (name and image concept). You could not successfully copyright this idea, as beholders (among a few other creatures) are a part of D&D's brand identity.

    Now lets check out the other end of the spectrum (where the snarky came in, and likely why you suspected me of trolling): you were able to make so many differences that even Hasbro/Wizards of the Coast's most rabid lawyers couldn't touch your idea. You have stated that you plan on pitching this idea or Blizzard. As many other posters have pointed out, the idea of a "support spec" is not viable in World of Warcraft's current gameplay model (hence the consolidation of party/raid buffs, "bring a player, not a class", etc). That would mean that, if they did like your ideas, they would have to institute them with sweeping changes to meet their design philosophy, while at the same time making certain to skirt around the possibility of getting too close to the Dragonsworn concept from rival MMO Dark Age of Camelot. If you posit that a change in the concept, while leaving name and imagery the same, is good enough for you to get around the Dark Age of Camelot copyrights, you would also be agreeing that a similar amount of changes, again while leaving the name and imagery the same (or perhaps changing the name, and keeping the imagery? Vice-versa?) would allow them to get around your copyright.

    Basically, it boils down to one of two choices (and yes, I realize this is a bit of an oversimplification, but I believe it will get my point across):
    Either your copyright will hold, and they cannot use your name or anything inspired by your concept without being in violation of it, which would also mean that you could not use the name or anything inspired by the Dragonsworn of Dark Age of Camelot.
    OR
    You will be supporting the fact that, while (obviously) inspired by the Dragonsworn from Camelot, even down to using screenshots of the game to illustrate the idea, and keeping the same name, a change in concept is enough to be considered purely your intellectual property; therefore changes Blizzard would have to make to support this class in their game with their design philosophy while also avoiding stepping on the intellectual toes, if you will, of a competing MMO will likely also be enough to bring their concept out form under the copyright you have maid and having it become THEIR intellectual property.

    You cannot argue that copyright should be both loosely and strictly enforced.

  14. #34
    Feels too much like skyrim

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IBmNL...ature=youtu.be (#1 SSB Gold run on Bleeding Hollow)
    "Your lights will go out. The darkness will envelop you. And you will fear the shadows that move within it."

  15. #35
    Bloodsail Admiral DonQShot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Guimaraes
    Posts
    1,085
    Quote Originally Posted by Aetherick View Post

    I would like to give an example for the primary aspect of the point I was trying to make: say you had an idea for a creature with multiple eyes which had magical powers. You called them "beholders" and used an image of the D&D beholder to help illustrate what you meant, but you were very certain to change their background so that they didn't resemble the D&D creature in any way, except for those already mentioned (name and image concept). You could not successfully copyright this idea, as beholders (among a few other creatures) are a part of D&D's brand identity.
    Yes, so far so good. I understand your confusion and I am glad to help you clear out the clouds in your mind =). In your given example, since I copied the name and the basic/main frame of the original beholder, and since the differences are too feeble to become an unique creation on its own, its quite obvious that the rights would belong to D&D. But had I made, still in this example, a completely different creature and still named it beholder, D&D would not have any rights over it, because they did not invent the word beholder... Maybe if I just made a reskin of the D&D beholder and called it something else, they could come against it, since it was their art design.

    Now lets check out the other end of the spectrum (where the snarky came in, and likely why you suspected me of trolling): you were able to make so many differences that even Hasbro/Wizards of the Coast's most rabid lawyers couldn't touch your idea. You have stated that you plan on pitching this idea or Blizzard. As many other posters have pointed out, the idea of a "support spec" is not viable in World of Warcraft's current gameplay model (hence the consolidation of party/raid buffs, "bring a player, not a class", etc). That would mean that, if they did like your ideas, they would have to institute them with sweeping changes to meet their design philosophy, while at the same time making certain to skirt around the possibility of getting too close to the Dragonsworn concept from rival MMO Dark Age of Camelot. If you posit that a change in the concept, while leaving name and imagery the same, is good enough for you to get around the Dark Age of Camelot copyrights, you would also be agreeing that a similar amount of changes, again while leaving the name and imagery the same (or perhaps changing the name, and keeping the imagery? Vice-versa?) would allow them to get around your copyright.
    My friend, you are forgetting that Blizzard has their own Dragonsworn copyright and it was in accordance to that one that I created my class. DaoC and D&D have nothing to do withe the discussion. It seems you only paid attention to the images I posted, which are in fact, the least important bit.
    That is because I have done a class that is made to work on WOW, not DaoC or any other mmo, and I sure did not based, let alone copy, any of my ideas from other games. In all honesty, in this case I was inspired by Skyrim, but you will find no relation nor reference to it, and less will you find such blatant similarities like names or images or spells or abilites or anything really, as those mentioned by you about DaoC. The images I used were not copyrighted if that's what is bothering you lol.

    Basically, it boils down to one of two choices (and yes, I realize this is a bit of an oversimplification, but I believe it will get my point across):
    Either your copyright will hold, and they cannot use your name or anything inspired by your concept without being in violation of it, which would also mean that you could not use the name or anything inspired by the Dragonsworn of Dark Age of Camelot.
    OR
    You will be supporting the fact that, while (obviously) inspired by the Dragonsworn from Camelot, even down to using screenshots of the game to illustrate the idea, and keeping the same name, a change in concept is enough to be considered purely your intellectual property; therefore changes Blizzard would have to make to support this class in their game with their design philosophy while also avoiding stepping on the intellectual toes, if you will, of a competing MMO will likely also be enough to bring their concept out form under the copyright you have maid and having it become THEIR intellectual property.

    You cannot argue that copyright should be both loosely and strictly enforced.
    As I said, and it becomes obvious by reading the ability tables I posted, this is a fullly independent concept, with original ideas put together to make a working method. At most, some names like the dragons, races and famous npc have to be naturally in, as I want to keep some basic ties with Blizz nonetheless ^^

  16. #36
    Bloodsail Admiral DonQShot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Guimaraes
    Posts
    1,085
    Quote Originally Posted by Theholypally View Post
    Feels too much like skyrim
    Okay u caught me =P) No, but seriously, where do you see Skyrim elements? This is 90% WOW gem material =p

  17. #37
    Turn your specs into resorces (like shadow orbs or DK runes) and you might have something more workable. As it is your class reads like a pen & paper not a button-masher (and yes I've played both).

    As a pen and paper I recommend submitting this and anything like it to the bellow link (with some tweaks for the different rule set):
    http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/Main_Page

    They, I'm certain will appreciate your hard work!

  18. #38
    http://www.wowwiki.com/Dragonsworn

    I like it. Did you know about this before the idea?

    Could play something along the lines of...

    Since the battle against Deathwing, the Dragonflights have become more reliant on the powers of the mortal races.
    Last edited by cuervos; 2012-11-06 at 02:31 AM.

  19. #39
    While I like it in concept...

    -Race-bound specs will (probably) never happen.
    -Try to stick to 3 (4 tops) specs.
    -Bronze and Blue can easily be lumped into one category because, frankly, arcane mages are already time wizards.

    Would work in concept, but in execution, its pretty meh.
    Ultraxion yells: I am the beginning of buttonclickers...the button which blots out my wipe mechanic...the click which tolls my doom...
    Ultraxion yells: For this moment ALONE was I made. Look upon your button, mortals, and click!

  20. #40
    The Lightbringer Kevyne-Shandris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Basking in the Light
    Posts
    3,255
    Blizz can't even balance the few sub-classes they do have, we really don't need another to fudge the rest.

    It's fun, it's kewl, but it's just one more piece of work on top of the other sub-classes that somehow NEVER gets balanced.

    Closest I felt as balanced for healing for example, was hand tweaked raids like ICC. Which GC did away with.

    If they can't get this sub-class balanced from the vanilla days, how do you think a new class will ever get balanced?
    From the #1 Cata review on Amazon.com: "Blizzard's greatest misstep was blaming players instead of admitting their mistakes. They've convinced half of the population that the other half are unskilled whiners, causing a permanent rift in the community."
    Blizzard's blame game in action: Deleting 6,100+ of Kevyne's posts and threads from the WoW forums.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •