Can my wife and I play together if we are different covenant?

[iperson]

???????

It makes no impact in terms of lore maybe but gameplay wise, you cannot do a lot of world quests with each other. Class halls were not as restricted

I believe the world quests are identical. Only the quest text changes. #Meaningful

[Hellobolis]

That is a false assumption. Literally furthest from the truth.

Like a hammer and an axe. Assuming you want to hammer the nails, both tools can probably do it.

So if you want to hammer like 10 nails you buy whatever is cheaper.
If you want to hammer 10 000 nails you probably pick a hammer.
If you want to hammer 100 nails and cut a tree you will be looking for hammer and axe in one.
If you want to cut 10 trees you will be looking for an axe
If you want to cut 1000 trees you will be looking for a chainsaw
If you want to cut 1000 trees and hammer 10 000 nails you will buy every tool you need.

That is literally covenant choice, your logic is faulty.

Sure, but everybody is arguing as if m+ is 10000 trees and raiding is 10000 nails and you can only pick one so its the end of the world, when in reality m+ could be 100 trees and raiding could be 100 nails and it's completely fine.

now im not too confident in blizz ability to balance, but considering the general lack of actual numbers posted about these abilities i'm leaning closer to the latter atm.

[kaminaris]

Sure, but everybody is arguing as if m+ is 10000 trees and raiding is 10000 nails and you can only pick one so its the end of the world, when in reality m+ could be 100 trees and raiding could be 100 nails and it's completely fine.

now im not too confident in blizz ability to balance, but considering the general lack of actual numbers posted about these abilities i'm leaning closer to the latter atm.

Most people (at least on forum) think they will need 10 000 trees (M+ 25 and higher) and 10 000 nails (mythic cleared first month) while reality is they will only do 100 trees (M+ ~18) and 100 nails (mythic cleared after 5 months or not even that).

[Rathwell]

???????

It makes no impact in terms of lore maybe but gameplay wise, you cannot do a lot of world quests with each other. Class halls were not as restricted

What? World quests are the same regardless of your Covenant.

[huth]

???????

It makes no impact in terms of lore maybe but gameplay wise, you cannot do a lot of world quests with each other. Class halls were not as restricted

No, they can do those just fine. World Quests are completely independent from Covenants. Only the Covenant campaign and certain Covenant specific activities(like the Path of Ascension or the Ember Court, all of which are solo activities) are restricted.

- - - Updated - - -

Most people (at least on forum) think they will need 10 000 trees (M+ 25 and higher) and 10 000 nails (mythic cleared first month) while reality is they will only do 100 trees (M+ ~18) and 100 nails (mythic cleared after 5 months or not even that).

Half of them will probably lose interest halfway through the first tree and bending one nail, before actually learning how to properly do either with the correct tools.

[AwkwardSquirtle]

If you were angling to misunderstand me as much as possible, you succeeded.

But first, if you think active covenant ability A and active covenant B have enough of a gulf between them for one to be "good" and the other to be "bad", you must have trouble with the color gray. One being optimal and the other being less so? Sure. But bad connotes a lot more than "not the optimal choice". But you seem to only speak hyperbole so I guess this isn't shocking.

But to clarify the point of mine you aren't getting - my point is that you do have a choice of covenant, but you are eliminating that choice when you choose to play elite tier competitive instead since that likely will shoehorn you into a specific covenant for it's active ability. Just like a raider who faction/race changes to exploit a specific racial ability.

These are all choices that you make. My original point was, and has continued to be, that acting like you don't have a choice of covenant is disingenuous. Of course you do. But you're denying yourself that choice by choosing the elite tier playstyle.

And if that's what you want, that's fine. Just accept that you made a decision with a cost and get over it.

I've decided I'd rather play the covenant I want, which is not necessarily the covenant that's optimal. I've accepted that the decision I've made comes with a cost (probably no elite tier for me) and I'm over it.

The problem is that it's bad game design. The choice is sold as an RP one, but for that, we have to sacrifice the aesthetic portion of the game which is a significant factor. That doesn't make the choice interesting. You seem to be under the impression that the difference between the best and worst covenants is relatively minor. While I hope this is the case, literally every previous iteration of the game indicates that it will not be.

Remember before Cataclysm when you had no control over your character's appearance and if you wanted to wear the gear you liked the look of the most you couldn't do relevant content? That was just a part of the game, sure, but then they fixed it by adding transmog, and it's one of the game's most popular features. People like choosing how their characters look. It's fun. Arbitrarily forcing a choice between that and performing at the highest level is not fun. If the decision being made makes the game less fun for a lot of players, then it's a bad decision.

[Nero Duskwind]

I want to play Kyrian and my wife is interested in playing Night Fae, aside from the campaigns for each covenant, how restricted is our game play together going to be? I know we can run dungeons and raids together, but how will this effect world quests and other general free play?

If anything, the diversification is to your benefit. Together, you're guaranteed to have a covenant bonus for half the dungeons.

[SoundOfGuns]

Not restrictive at all. The Covenant choice is about as binding when it comes to groups as the Scryer/Aldor choice was in TBC. It essentially effects only you and your character, and the only place your peers in other Convenants wouldn't be able to go is a Covenant Sanctum they're not a part of.

Really... Isn't there also an entire Questline going on at the end of each? I did not finish those, i wanted to... enjoy those later.

[Aucald]

Really... Isn't there also an entire Questline going on at the end of each? I did not finish those, i wanted to... enjoy those later.

There is, yes; the same as with the Scryers and Aldor - but that won't prevent you from doing them with your guildmates or what have you, either. Obviously helpers won't be able to see the denouement of them in the Covenant sanctum, but they can help with the various objectives.

[Aggrophobic]

I want to play Kyrian and my wife is interested in playing Night Fae, aside from the campaigns for each covenant, how restricted is our game play together going to be? I know we can run dungeons and raids together, but how will this effect world quests and other general free play?

They only really impact how well your class performs, not what you actually do once you're online.
They are far from balanced though so you might very well end up gimping yourslef if you go just for the looks.

[kaminaris]

Your analogy is completely wrong.

Cosmetics are useless in comparison to good skills so your analogy of a hammer and an axe that can both hit the nail is wrong.

Cosmetics don’t get you in M+ do they? So how will the player get in M+? By “choosing” the right path. A fallacy that allows players to think they made educated choices when it’s a gauntlet with only one possible answer.

Granted, there will be the odd RP fella who doesn’t Care about utility and they will choose the cool transmog. They are an exception.

The rest of us don’t have a choice. If you want to play with daggers outlaw is not a choice. If you want to shoot fireballs frost is not a choice.

Choice is: We have two dagger paths of same value. Not trashing subtlety and then telling players “but you had a choice”. No we didn’t. If we had chosen subtlety in BfA we would be obsolete.

You are better than that man, don’t just argue to win the argument, argue to not be given a shit game by blizzard for another two years. We can’t stand another BfA. Not without a break anyway.

Nope, my analogy is literally spot on.

Nobody was talking about cosmetics.

RIO gets you in M+, not covenant. And skills (and effort) gives you rio. Simple as that.
Covenants are literally the least of concerns about SL. And since BfA did fairly good I guess we can stand another BfA.

Covenants are like tools. Screwdriver, axe, hammer etc. You CAN use pretty much all of them to hammer the nails but some are better and some are worse for that job.
And skilled carpenter can hammer the nails with a fucking screwdriver better than massive amount of people using hammer that usually end up with their fingers crushed.

You are not given them at random
You do not need to wait 8 months to switch them while farmin everyday

[Ragingheadache]

Well, I disagree. I think he is a great content creator that really wants WoW to be a great game. He raised many good points and give lots of valuable feedback for a lot of previous, current and next systems that Blizzard wants.

The look on his face when he was busted for cheating and realised he would not be invited to a Dev Q&A. Priceless.

[rrayy]

Well, I disagree. I think he is a great content creator that really wants WoW to be a great game. He raised many good points and give lots of valuable feedback for a lot of previous, current and next systems that Blizzard wants.

IN other worrds, he makes points you agree with. Basically you think he is great because he panders to your opinions.

Preach is irrelevant. His opinion means nothing more than yours or mine. Using him to validate your opinion means you aren't able to make your own opinions and stand up for them yourself.

[glszino]

IN other worrds, he makes points you agree with. Basically you think he is great because he panders to your opinions.

Preach is irrelevant. His opinion means nothing more than yours or mine. Using him to validate your opinion means you aren't able to make your own opinions and stand up for them yourself.

Maybe don't imply things next time?

[tyrlaan]

Choice only exists between similar things. Looking good and playing good are two entirely different things so there can be no real choice. Sure enough, the ACT of choosing will be there. But its like being onboard the sinking Titanic and someone asking: Would you like the Tuxedo or the Life Vest.

Lol dafuq?

In what reality does ANY choice exist in a vacuum to the point that what you said is accurate?

When I decide to cook at home, I've made a choice. The impact of that choice is that I'm not going to have Chinese takeout. I clearly made a damn choice that has resulted in me not having Chinese takeout.

When I decide to get takeout, and choose a pizza place, I now get to choose my toppings, but I can't pick if I want fried rice or white rice because my decision to get pizza has ruled out Chinese takeout.

These are how choices work because consequences are a real thing.

Twist things as much as you want, but the argument that you have no choice here is purely a fiction you're telling yourself. If you CHOOSE function over form, this in turn impacts your choice of covenant. End of story.

The problem is that it's bad game design. The choice is sold as an RP one, but for that, we have to sacrifice the aesthetic portion of the game which is a significant factor. That doesn't make the choice interesting. You seem to be under the impression that the difference between the best and worst covenants is relatively minor. While I hope this is the case, literally every previous iteration of the game indicates that it will not be.

And you're countering me with your own assumption and claiming yours is inherently more right than mine? Lol.

Literally every previous iteration of the game indicates that the difference will be small, but since everyone likes to act like they're on team Method, they will bitch and moan about differences of 1% as if they completely ruin the game.

Sorry, it's one active ability. The concept that the difference between covenant A's ability and covenant B's ability will be so dramatic that this will matter to anyone but elite tier players is very, very hard to swallow.

Remember before Cataclysm when you had no control over your character's appearance and if you wanted to wear the gear you liked the look of the most you couldn't do relevant content? That was just a part of the game, sure, but then they fixed it by adding transmog, and it's one of the game's most popular features. People like choosing how their characters look. It's fun. Arbitrarily forcing a choice between that and performing at the highest level is not fun. If the decision being made makes the game less fun for a lot of players, then it's a bad decision.

This is a pretty poor comparison. The only thing stopping you from picking your covenant aesthetic is the belief that squeezing out a bit more dps from the covenant you don't really want is necessary for you to excel at the game.

IF that's actually true, you're elite tier and you've already accepted that you are willing to sacrifice quite a lot in order to perform at that level. You're probably already on board with race or faction changing to get an edge. It's the choice you made; aesthetics are simply not a priority to you and that's fine, but stop complaining about your choice like it's everyone else's problem.

If that's false, which is more likely the case since most people aren't playing at elite tier, you have made yourself your own enemy. Realize that the level of difference is simply not going to be material enough to matter and play what you want instead of what some guide written by Method tells you. Your capacity to play your class well, a.k.a. personal skill, is going to make loads more difference then the one extra button on your hotbars will.

Or hell, do the covenant you want the aesthetic from and then swap to the one you want the active ability from and quit whining.

[AwkwardSquirtle]

And you're countering me with your own assumption and claiming yours is inherently more right than mine? Lol.

Literally every previous iteration of the game indicates that the difference will be small, but since everyone likes to act like they're on team Method, they will bitch and moan about differences of 1% as if they completely ruin the game.

Sorry, it's one active ability. The concept that the difference between covenant A's ability and covenant B's ability will be so dramatic that this will matter to anyone but elite tier players is very, very hard to swallow.

It's not just one active. If it were, I'd probably agree with you. Covenant choice is 2 actives and a set of 3 soulbinds, all providing unique bonuses, plus conduits which modify the unique active in different ways. These things in isolation might be fine, but added together there's a real chance of a significant difference between covenants.

[rrayy]

Maybe don't imply things next time?

I am not implying anything. People only name drop Youtubers because they think it makes their opinion more relevant. They definitely name drop if they agree with the opinions and they sure as hell aren't going to call it great content if they disagree with everything. Name dropping Youtubers tells me not to take that person seriously as they are far more likely a fan boy trying to drive traffic to that Youtuber's channel.

[Hitei]

I don't see the reason for your aggressive tone but whatever.

So lets start over:

Cook at home or order chinese: Equal things that result in fulfilling the purpose of not feeling hungry.

Covenants with good skills bad mogs vs Covenants with bad skills good mogs: No choice. You will choose the better skill covenant to not suffer in game. You could ofcourse choose the good mogs but we all know how this ends.

On paper, there is "choice". In reality you have no choice but to choose what makes you not suffer. As I said before. Titanic is sinking. You have a "choice": Life vest or Tuxedo. You can't have both. You know you will die if you choose the tuxedo. There is no choice. Chinese vs cooking is still food. Even better if you cook it could taste better be more healthy etc. But it is a choice. You don't end up hungry in either case.

But you aren't ending up hungry, because you could pick any covenant and still completely all the content in the game. The food analogy is perfect, because any covenant will let you complete content (class and spec are much more important for that anyway), but one content will make it easier, much like ordering food, while another requires more effort, and one might taste better despite taking more effort to make and eat.

Your titanic example is bad. Picking a covenant doesn't kill you. It doesn't stop you from doing anything. It's not a tuxedo vs a life vest, it's a life vest with an emergency whistle vs a life vest made of tougher material vs a life vest with more under-padding. You're going to float with any of them. The whistle might get you noticed and pulled into a raft quicker when rescue shows up (read: easy in with groups and the upper tier of mythic raiding), but the other two are still going to get puled into the rafts, and the tough vest is better at dealing with sharks and the padded vest is much less uncomfortable.

[NineSpine]

It's not just one active. If it were, I'd probably agree with you. Covenant choice is 2 actives and a set of 3 soulbinds, all providing unique bonuses, plus conduits which modify the unique active in different ways. These things in isolation might be fine, but added together there's a real chance of a significant difference between covenants.

More variables are easier to balance, not harder to balance. This is a common misconception about design. If all players got was one ability, it would be extremely difficult to balance. By having so many variables, there are not only more opportunities for tuning, but there are so many variations that the meta can shift dramatically in shorter periods of time. For example, the best covenant might change as we unlock soulbinds, and then it might change with certain conduit acquisitions, and then it might change with certain gear, etc. etc.. On top of that, different players are going to have different versions of many of these things. For example, who is better: The person with the slightly better active ability for the situation... or the player with more ideal better soulbinds? What if that player also has better conduits?

[NineSpine]

Ever heard of R.io? Have you got any idea whats going to happen once players have access to data about what covenant is "bis"? This is not about you or me being wrong you are too personal about it. This is about whether I have a choice but to play as expected by others.

I love subtlety. You think I have a choice to play it as a pvp player at 2400+? Absolutely no choice whatsoever. You play the bis spec or you get replaced/blacklisted/isolated until you delete.

If they make all covenants equal sure but they arent so there is no choice. Feel free to believe otherwise ofc I am not here to change anyone's mind.

Min maxing to be top end is a choice, and it is a choice that will always exist no matter what. It's not realistic to expect anything different. If you want to compete at that level, you need to be willing to min max your character. Your expectation is absurd and unrealistic.