"Forced" or "Mandatory" covenants

[LorDC]

Or we can let Blizzard base it on some cool, traditional and modern RPG values

And exactly why covenant-lock specificially is a good thing? You know what is also cool and traditional in RPGs? Permadeath! Let's add it too. Is it a good idea? If not, then "cool, traditional, RPG" is not a enough to justify anything. If yes, then I have a whole bunch of other suggestions that should be implemented.

moving the goalposts of the definition of RPG like you keep doing.

RPG is already extremely vague concept. DnD, Ultima, Witcher, Final Fantasy, Mass Effect, Diablo, Space Rangers and WoW are all RPGs.

Also, choosing one of four distinct factions with strengths and weaknesses feels like an awesome call back to Warcraft 3.

Ah, that Warcraft 3 where you have to chose a faction once for the next two years of your ladder play and can not change it? Or was it that you had to chose a single upgrade path and lock it in for the next two years?
Oh, I remember! In WC3 you could freely chose to play whatever race with whatever build- and upgrade-order you chose every match with zero consequences on another one. And it wasn't tied in any way, shape or form to your single-player campaign.

[ManiaCCC]

And exactly why covenant-lock specificially is a good thing? You know what is also cool and traditional in RPGs? Permadeath!

Permadeath was never core part of RPG. Just saying.

[LorDC]

Permadeath was never core part of RPG. Just saying.

Back in the days of Pen&Paper RPGs and later with roguelikes it certainly was.

Anyways, bundling power and storyline choices was never core part of an RPGs too.

[ManiaCCC]

Back in the days of Pen&Paper RPGs and later with roguelikes it certainly was.

Anyways, bundling power and storyline choices was never core part of an RPGs too.

What are you talking about? One of the grandfather of RPG is D&D and it was all about building power and choices. Also core rules for D&D had several ways, how to bring death player back - from simple resurrection, reincarnation to reborn into different being, while keeping his progress.

Look, it does not matter at this point, I see you are strongly against locked covenants and there are enough arguments against it without making up fake ones.

[LorDC]

What are you talking about? One of the grandfather of RPG is D&D and it was all about building power and choices. Also core rules for D&D had several ways, how to bring death player back - from simple resurrection, reincarnation to reborn into different being, while keeping his progress.

Look, it does not matter at this point, I see you are strongly against locked covenants and there are enough arguments against it without making up fake ones.

I am not making anything up, rather I am making separate arguments about permadeath and story/power bundling.

To generalize my argument: you can come up with any mechanics you wish and two things about it will be true:
1) It was implemented in some games that are considered RPGs.
2) It wasn't implemented in some games that are considered RPGs.

So, any statement of the "It's RPG therefore it is good to have X" kind does not have any weight. You have to measure pros and cons on a per-case basis. And having or not having some mechanic associated with an arbitrary three-letter-acronym labels is neither pro nor con.

[ManiaCCC]

I am not making anything up, rather I am making separate arguments about permadeath and story/power bundling.

To generalize my argument: you can come up with any mechanics you wish and two things about it will be true:
1) It was implemented in some games that are considered RPGs.
2) It wasn't implemented in some games that are considered RPGs.

So, any statement of the "It's RPG therefore it is good to have X" kind does not have any weight. You have to measure pros and cons on a per-case basis. And having or not having some mechanic associated with an arbitrary three-letter-acronym labels is neither pro nor con.

You could also look on it like this.

Some players just like ideas of choosing the covenant while this choice have some sort of permanence, they see it as RPG element, which was lost over time not just in WoW but in many games in general. You want make your argument stronger so instead talking about "why the semi-permanent choice is interesting for many players", you are attacking the RPG part so, thus, downplaying their original argument.

I understand your part of your argument, but I also see semi-permanent choice as important part of the RPG, but we don't need to argue, if it is RPG or not, because it's irrelevant, what is relevant, that the idea of making choice like this is compelling to me and for other players too.

None of us is right or wrong, we are just looking on this issue from different perspectives. I see it as interesting choice, which will definitely bring more flavor to my characters and in the end, making it more fun for me, and you see it as technical issue, which is completely unnecessary, because you know you will always want the best tool for the job, so this whole semi-permanence will just bring stupid busy work for you, constantly respeccing covenant based on activity you will be doing. I get it.

I just feel this whole issue and debate around is toxic as hell. People are attacking each other while there is no other issue than just we all enjoy different things. And we all love WoW so we want be WoW enjoyable for us as much as possible.

[A Chozo]

And exactly why covenant-lock specificially is a good thing?

RPG is already extremely vague concept. DnD, Ultima, Witcher, Final Fantasy, Mass Effect, Diablo, Space Rangers and WoW are all RPGs.

Why covenant-lock is a good thing has been completely explained through this thread several times over. Let's not loop the discussion again.

Yes, RPG is a extremely vague concept, which is irrelevant.

[LorDC]

You want make your argument stronger so instead talking about "why the semi-permanent choice is interesting for many players", you are attacking the RPG part so, thus, downplaying their original argument.

Well, looking at how this discussion about whether WoW is an RPG or not lasted what? Five pages? It certainly is an important point for the other side. Or they just can't deconstruct and analyze their own arguments for important points.

I see it as interesting choice, which will definitely bring more flavor to my characters and in the end, making it more fun for me, and you see it as technical issue, which is completely unnecessary, because you know you will always want the best tool for the job, so this whole semi-permanence will just bring stupid busy work for you, constantly respeccing covenant based on activity you will be doing. I get it..

And that is what I actually wanted to hear in response to my arguments. Some real argument. And that begs for a whole set of questions:
1) How important this flavor is? What about all other completely flavorless aspects of the game?
2) How important is bundling actual power choices with it?
3) How important it will be a month from now on?
Or in general: is it worth it? Because practice shows that in general good gameplay is more important than good flavor.

- - - Updated - - -

Why covenant-lock is a good thing has been completely explained through this thread several times over. Let's not loop the discussion again.

It was also explained why it is a bad thing.

Yes, RPG is a extremely vague concept, which is irrelevant.

Vagueness of RPG concept is extremely important as long as someone is making or arguing about design decisions based on it. Which you seem to do.

[A Chozo]

Vagueness of RPG concept is extremely important as long as someone is making or arguing about design decisions based on it. Which you seem to do.

I happen to like RPGs, Blizzard is making a decision with designs rooted on a traditional, successful idea from RPGs - power intertwined with plot.

RPGs still are vague, their reasoning is still sound.

[LorDC]

I happen to like RPGs, Blizzard is making a decision with designs rooted on a traditional, successful idea from RPGs - power intertwined with plot.

RPGs still are vague, their reasoning is still sound.

Some other game that came out god knows when and had completely different gameplay had feature X and was successful therefore it is a good idea to add this feature X to WoW. Did I understand your argument correctly? Because it does not sound like a sound reasoning to me.

[NineSpine]

Some other game that came out god knows when and had completely different gameplay had feature X and was successful therefore it is a good idea to add this feature X to WoW. Did I understand your argument correctly? Because it does not sound like a sound reasoning to me.

This system is a good idea because it sounds fun to a lot of people and the only people upset about it are tryhards who think they are in method because of their server-sixth heroic kills.

[LorDC]

This system is a good idea because it sounds fun to a lot of people and the only people upset about it are tryhards who think they are in method because of their server-sixth heroic kills.

Sorry for asking, but was it serious or sarcastic?

[A Chozo]

Some other game that came out god knows when and had completely different gameplay had feature X and was successful therefore it is a good idea to add this feature X to WoW. Did I understand your argument correctly? Because it does not sound like a sound reasoning to me.

Don't need to go that far.

World of Warcraft has this feature where you chose a faction, race and class and it's all locked for that character, forever, changing their skills and the storylines they encounter. Highly successful game.

Let's do a similar thing with the Shadowlands' Covenants.

[Krakan]

Don't need to go that far.

World of Warcraft has this feature where you chose a faction, race and class and it's all locked for that character, forever, changing their skills and the storylines they encounter. Highly successful game.

Let's do a similar thing with the Shadowlands' Covenants.

It doesn't though they just charge you money to change.

Covenants will fail because they restrict different types of content at the higher levels.

Its azerite gear all over again expect it to get dumpsters for another poorly thought out system like essences.

[klogaroth]

Don't need to go that far.

World of Warcraft has this feature where you chose a faction, race and class and it's all locked for that character, forever, changing their skills and the storylines they encounter. Highly successful game.

Let's do a similar thing with the Shadowlands' Covenants.

The problem with this is that World of Warcraft also has this feature where you can change spec and talents. That's the problem with your whole "it's an RPG" argument. It describes so many different systems within games, so many different games that are very different to play, have very different numbers of players, it even describes games that aren't video games at all.

"It's an RPG" doesn't tell you what to do, because it covers so many possibilities. It also ignores any further drilling down. It puts playing WoW under the exact same category as a pen and paper system and looks no further. There are some things you can share, but there are a lot of things that absolutely do not translate from a pen and paper role playing game to a massively multiplayer online video game.

Also race and faction aren't locked forever. They are far easier to change than covenant unless you have no gold.

[NineSpine]

Sorry for asking, but was it serious or sarcastic?

Serious. Fun always trumps the weird, neurotic, obsessive compulsive tryhard min-max nonsense.

[LorDC]

Don't need to go that far.

World of Warcraft has this feature where you chose a faction, race and class and it's all locked for that character, forever, changing their skills and the storylines they encounter. Highly successful game.

Let's do a similar thing with the Shadowlands' Covenants.

I don't see any casual relationship between WoW's success and it having permanent choice of race and class. During WoWs rise Blizzard didn't add any more permanent choices, so it was most certainly due to other factors. If anything, the most successful expansion - WotLK actually diluted existing choice with dual specs, race and faction change services.

[NineSpine]

The problem with this is that World of Warcraft also has this feature where you can change spec and talents. That's the problem with your whole "it's an RPG" argument. It describes so many different systems within games, so many different games that are very different to play, have very different numbers of players, it even describes games that aren't video games at all.

"It's an RPG" doesn't tell you what to do, because it covers so many possibilities. It also ignores any further drilling down. It puts playing WoW under the exact same category as a pen and paper system and looks no further. There are some things you can share, but there are a lot of things that absolutely do not translate from a pen and paper role playing game to a massively multiplayer online video game.

Also race and faction aren't locked forever. They are far easier to change than covenant unless you have no gold.

The first thing you do when you get WoW is choose a class, a permanent class that can never be changed on that character.

- - - Updated - - -

I don't see any casual relationship between WoW's success and it having permanent choice of race and class. During WoWs rise Blizzard didn't add any more permanent choices, so it was most certainly due to other factors. If anything, the most successful expansion - WotLK actually diluted existing choice with dual specs.

The issue is not that WoW was auccessful because of those things. The issue is that the claim that the game is ruined because another such choice has been added is obviously absurd. If permanent choices were bad design that rendered the game unplayable, then the game was bad and unplayable on day one when class was a permanent choice.

[Specialka]

The first thing you do when you get WoW is choose a class, a permanent class that can never be changed on that character.

- - - Updated - - -



The issue is not that WoW was auccessful because of those things. The issue is that the claim that the game is ruined because another such choice has been added is obviously absurd. If permanent choices were bad design that rendered the game unplayable, then the game was bad and unplayable on day one when class was a permanent choice.

Do not be so dense. It is not that permanent choices are bad. It is that SOME permanent choices are bad, a.k.a I fail to see how covenants will not crash down when it will be release as some covenants are totally op in certain activities and totally garbage in others activites when the game promotes playing all those activities. Hell, some covenants are good with certain spec and really bad with another spec of the same class. So it is even worse than essences because at least, you could switch specs (and could not reroll before essences buying through currencies).

[LorDC]

The issue is not that WoW was auccessful because of those things.

It is an issue, because that was an argument that was made.

The issue is that the claim that the game is ruined because another such choice has been added is obviously absurd. If permanent choices were bad design that rendered the game unplayable, then the game was bad and unplayable on day one when class was a permanent choice.

No need to go all black and white. No one is saying that perma-covenants will make the game unplayable. People are saying that perma-covenants wont make the game better.