Guild Wars 2

Another vote for Canthan Samurai.

Sword, short sword, greatsword, longbow, yari (spear) or a more generic “polearm” (naginata-like).

Both sword and short sword may be off-hand.

Short sword and yari/naginata/polearm may be introduced to other classes.

A Crossbowmen style class. These guys would wear medium to heavy armor and fight with shields at close-range. So we could have a ranged-type, high DPS on a single target with heavy armor.

What we are missing is the Evil Heavy armor class, so something like Death Knight.

Light: Good Elementalist, Neutral Mesmer, Evil Necromancer.
Medium: Good Ranger, Neutral Engineer, Evil Thief
Heavy: Good Guardian, Neutral Warrior, Evil ?

Maybe evil is not the best word for it so something dark that can use death magic, etc.

I would love to see a class similar to Dark Avenger from Lineage 2. With stun from shield, it would be nice to see more heavy armor classes using mainly 1h weapon + shield, not 2h all the way

Bran.7425:

Unfortunately, between the Warrior and the Guardian, Guild Wars 2 has exhausted most of fantasy class archetypes that use heavy armor.

I have to disagree. Dark Knight and Battlemage are two classes that would fit very well with heavy armor. Gladiator/Blademaster, Cleric, Skald, etc, could perhaps also fit with heavy armor. There could also be an engineer type class with heavy armor. Heavy armor doesnt necessarily equal soldier in my opinion, but could be open to caster or rouge type classes too.

Samurai, dunno how those are done, since they’re essentially Warriors with spears, swords, greatswords and longbow.
It’s either Cantha or Tengu that brings the profession into this game, if at all…

Warriors, they pretty much contain all possible, Pikeman, Fighter, Barbarian, Samurai, etc.
Although Samurai wear medium armor and Barbarians are 90% naked…

Lancers and Dragoons are no-go, both are cavalry infantry, although Dragoons (Uses fire-arms) ride horses to reach their destination but fights on foot. Lancers (uses Spear on horse-back) are for reason a Centaur “profession”. (Odd that Harathi Sharpshooters are not called Dragoons, even if incorrect, since Centaurs are permanently “mounted”)

Great-axes are very unlikely, since they’re not different from Greatswords.

Polearms however, they can be converted from Spears (Many spear have designs similar to Halberds, Naginatas and Pikes).

For Warrior, they’d use the Halberd as basis, that being Spear and Axe with greater reach than Greatsword, this is the “Two-handed Axe” that even has better range.
(Dunno if Hoplite/Phalanx with Shield and Spear combo are possible, but that falls mostly into Warriors expertise…)

Guardian, spears could be given as throwing weapons, Javelins etc. Could also wield Spear and Shield as Hoplite/Phalanx…

Perhaps Ranger would use them as Pikes and other possibilities.

Paragons, along with Monks got shredded into bits and given to other professions, Guardian got many of that, like “Anthem of Flame” (Virtue of Justice), Fall Back (Retreat), Stand Your Ground, spear throwing, Light of Deliverance (Virtue of Resolve), Ray of Judgement and more…

Death Knight/Dark Paragon for demoralizing and debuffing, unfortunately we have profession that does that, Necromancers, they can inlfict conditions and remove boons.

Unfortunately PvE is designed for direct dmg DPS, which is 99% of it, thus any profession with more anything else, than direct dmg DPS, are drawing the short straws, since they’re designed to give better chances at longer lasting combat scenarios, but as 99% of mobs are trash, combat never lasts long enough and there’s not enough mobs that makes 2/3 of abilities good for 100% of all PvE content and match direct dmg DPS results.

Pirate…
Scorpion Wire already exists, Thieves have it…
Stuff like cannons and other unusual mechanical wonders, falls into the expertise of Engineers…

Then again, it’s up to ANet to invent and add some classes, tho most likely ones are “Dervish” and “Ritualist” after proper redesigns and lore entries.

Gunner/Cannoneer
It’s the logical 3rd choice. (almost) Fully ranged heavy damager.

The model for a cannoneer exists in the game in Horik. It’s bound to happen at some point I recon.

A golemancer, an engineer who focused on heavy constructs rather than mobility…

ShadowDragoonFTW.3418:

TheRiverBlues.2607:

We got the fighter (Warrior) Paladin (Guardian), it seems we lack a barbarian .

Well, the Fighter in this game essentially is the Barbarian. I don’t know what you would expect a barbarian to differently, flavor-wise. Adrenaline sounds just like Berserker Rage to me.

Was thinking in a sense of how a Fighter is a military soldier, not a savage warrior.

ProTech.8402:

What we are missing is the Evil Heavy armor class, so something like Death Knight.

Light: Good Elementalist, Neutral Mesmer, Evil Necromancer.
Medium: Good Ranger, Neutral Engineer, Evil Thief
Heavy: Good Guardian, Neutral Warrior, Evil ?

Maybe evil is not the best word for it so something dark that can use death magic, etc.

This… this is just god-awful reasoning. For starters, there are no “evil” classes in this game. It’s pretty apparent all through the personal story that everyone is just as “good” as everyone else. Even the necromancers stay to the cleaner side of things. They don’t even reanimate corpses, or blow up corpses, or do other gross things with corpses that other fantasy Necro’s do. They just make new creatures, and have a lot of toxin-related abilities. So, dark, yes, but not evil.

TheRiverBlues.2607:

ShadowDragoonFTW.3418:

TheRiverBlues.2607:

We got the fighter (Warrior) Paladin (Guardian), it seems we lack a barbarian .

Well, the Fighter in this game essentially is the Barbarian. I don’t know what you would expect a barbarian to differently, flavor-wise. Adrenaline sounds just like Berserker Rage to me.

Was thinking in a sense of how a Fighter is a military soldier, not a savage warrior.

Right, but then, my point is, what would be the distinction between a “Fighter” and a “Barbarian”? The Warrior in GW2 already uses as his specialty class ability the same mechanic that other games use for a barbarian type class. So what would GW2’s barbarian do instead?

pessimist.7294:

Didint the paragon from GW1 used heavy armor?

Paragon had a baby with Monk and they named it Guardian.

ProTech.8402:

What we are missing is the Evil Heavy armor class, so something like Death Knight.

Light: Good Elementalist, Neutral Mesmer, Evil Necromancer.
Medium: Good Ranger, Neutral Engineer, Evil Thief
Heavy: Good Guardian, Neutral Warrior, Evil ?

Maybe evil is not the best word for it so something dark that can use death magic, etc.

Interesting, I never realized this pattern. Nice find.

ProTech.8402:

What we are missing is the Evil Heavy armor class, so something like Death Knight.

Light: Good Elementalist, Neutral Mesmer, Evil Necromancer.
Medium: Good Ranger, Neutral Engineer, Evil Thief
Heavy: Good Guardian, Neutral Warrior, Evil ?

Maybe evil is not the best word for it so something dark that can use death magic, etc.

Hmm, death knight….dark knight….BATMAN!

Some players may feel that because there are currently only 2 classes that use heavy armor compared 3 that use light or medium that this implies the need for an additional class to use heavy armor. I personally don’t see that as a compelling argument.

Rather, if they do add new classes, I’d hope they get evaluated for need within the game, and then allocated with the correct armor for the style. That very well could be another class that uses heavy, but it could also be medium, light or something else entirely. What about a class that can only wear jewelry and perhaps some very limited clothing options with no armor bonus at all? What about a class that can wear a new ultra-heavy armor that gives even more armor than heavy? What about a hybrid that allows the class to wear any type of existing armor (perhaps with some restrictions/trade-offs)?

When trying to come up with a new class, let the ideas flow – don’t limit the creative potential by artificially limiting it to a perceived omission in the current options.

So I’d envision a heavy caster to be something like a cross between elementalist and warrior. I’m tempted to call it battle mage, but the name doesn’t fit.

Take Auras and Attunements from the elementalist, shouts and stances from the warrior. Instead of having a ranged skirmisher like the ele, this would be a melee brawler.

Where as elementalist summons elementals to help fight a mob, this class would become part elemental.

Attunements would pick which elemental you take the traits of and auras would be defined by the elemental. Fire might give bonuses to damage, air for precision, water for healing power, earth for toughness. Each element would also give weapons an enhancement buff/condition.

Auras would do damage to enemies and buffs to allies within X units.

Elite skills would allow transformation into elementals similar to norn transformations.

Torsailr.8456:

So I’d envision a heavy caster to be something like a cross between elementalist and warrior. I’m tempted to call it battle mage, but the name doesn’t fit.

Take Auras and Attunements from the elementalist, shouts and stances from the warrior. Instead of having a ranged skirmisher like the ele, this would be a melee brawler.

Where as elementalist summons elementals to help fight a mob, this class would become part elemental.

Attunements would pick which elemental you take the traits of and auras would be defined by the elemental. Fire might give bonuses to damage, air for precision, water for healing power, earth for toughness. Each element would also give weapons an enhancement buff/condition.

Auras would do damage to enemies and buffs to allies within X units.

Elite skills would allow transformation into elementals similar to norn transformations.

This is why I think the Dervish would be a perfect fit. They’re a cross between fighters and mages.

I vote for dragoon but I’m still trying to figure out how to make the mechanics unique. My latest iteration has them using only 2-handed weapons and being highly mobile. As for their profession mechanic, imagine them having a meter similar to Necromancer’s Life Force. It charges from using skills normally and from being attacked, much like a fighting game. To use the “Dragon Force,” the player has to hold down the button for a skill. The longer they hold, the more of the force bar is used and the most powerful the skill will be.

Storywise (which is also a work in progress) Dragoons are related to elder dragons but not the ones we know. My idea is that the Zephyrites know of more dragons and have made peaceful contact with 3 of them, which is where they get their aspects from. They’re hiding this information from us because Dragon Bash showed we are openly hostile towards them, not to mention we managed to kill one. However, the situation with Mordy, not to mention the sabotage and constant threat of Inquest, has some of them seeking to take a more active role in the world. This faction would introduce the Dragoon profession to us.

The story is actually a lot more complex than that. I’ve come up with an reasons behind the dragons’ actions and how some can be friendly while others are hostile but that’s a post for another day.

I would LOVE to see a heavy class with a Spear, ON LAND!!!!
It just sucks that GW2 made Spears only available under water..
But ya, I also want a 3rd Heavy class since it’s just so weird to having 3 Light and 3 Medium classes and not having a 3rd Heavy class yet..
It would’ve been amazing if they could’ve added Paragon with Dervish and Ritualist. Dauym, that would have been awesome.

One of the problems with a third Solider profession is that the two existing ones are already covering a lot of ground. Adding a “Lancer” profession wouldn’t work because adding non-aquatic spears and tridents means Warriors and Guardians would likely get them as well, so that archetype would be handled by the existing professions. “Samurai” doesn’t work for the same reason; adding Japanese swords to the game means the other Solider professions are likely to get them and can fill that role much easier. Likewise with Barbarian / Berserker: the Warrior already possesses a lot of that archetype’s trademarks.

In the same vein, a “Deathknight” feels like it would be stepping on both necromancers (“Evil Magic”) and Guardians (“Armored Magic users”). Likewise for “Steamknights” (engineer territory). There’s so little overlap with the existing professions that having some kind of “Warrior + other Profession” approach just won’t work. Look at the Mesmer, a profession unlike any other in MMOs. That’s that kind of approach we would need.

- It cannot be unique solely on the basis of a new weapon type.
- It will not borrow or overlap with any other profession’s theme or playstyle.
- It will need a unique mechanic that is substantially different from anything else in-game.

So, an actual suggestion?

“Slayer”
Archetype Keywords: Mastermind, Specialist, Tactician, Assassin, Sage, Debuffer
A soldier that combines rigid physical training with a lifelong pursuit of knowledge, the Slayer is an artist on the battlefield. Where a painter sees shapes and color, the Slayer sees openings and vulnerabilities, missteps and opportunities. Pit them against any foe and watch as strengths melt into weaknesses; to face a Slayer is to face both sharpened blade and mind working in perfect harmony.

Profession Mechanic: “Favored Enemy”
The Slayer’s profession mechanic is built around studying their target to learn their weaknesses. This is represented by a “Focus” gauge that fills as players use their F1 skill (which changes based on weapon choice) and various Utility skills. When the focus gauge is half full, the F2 skill unlocks, while players must wait until it is completely full to utilize the F3 skill. Note that Focus is not an energy type; it is not consumed by using skills.

These F2 and F3 skills change depending on what type of enemy is targeted, and are tailor made to inflict the most harm. For example, facing a magic-using enemy gives the Slayer skills that are built to disadvantage casters (such as a F2 Leap attack and an F3 interrupt). Facing a physical combatant would grant skills that keep them at range, such as an evasive strike and an immobilize.

F2 is always a damage or condition-inflicting ability and usually has a short cooldown.
F3 is always a control or defensive ability, such as immobilize, daze or block.

Weapon Selection:

• One Hand: Axe, Sword
• Off Hand: Axe, Sword, Pistol, Dagger, Torch
• Two Hand: Rifle, Shortbow
• Aquatic: Harpoon Gun, Spear

Skills:

• Extra Weapons: The Slayer is always prepared. Extra Weapon skills are just that; small weapons the Slayer keeps on his person for special situations. They function like reverse signets; instead of granting a passive effect that ends when activated, they grant a special passive effect only while the skill is on cooldown.
  • Example: “Sidearm” – Fire a shot that dazes and cripples from a backup pistol. While recharging, endurance regeneration is increased.

• Shouts: The Slayer’s shouts are all used to call out an enemy’s weak spot, giving all allies who attack that enemy a bonus. Shouts are also the primary utility skills for generating Focus.
  • Example: “No Mercy!” – Weaken the enemy and remove one boon. If already weakened, inflict x stacks of Torment.

• Predictions: Prediction skills work similar to the Guardian’s virtues; they can function as passive auras that affect the player and surrounding allies, or they can be activated to gain an immediate effect.
  • Example: “Do your Worst” – Grants x toughness to all nearby allies. Activate to gain retaliation and stability.

• Traps: The Slayer can use traps to help subdue their prey. Focus is generated by attacking enemies that are under the effect of a trap.
  • Example: “Flare Trap” – Set a trap that fires a blinding signal flare when triggered. Increases visibility of enemy within the area of effect, increasing the chance to critically hit them by x%.

• Assault: The Slayer has several specialized attacks used to disable or manipulate foes with their sheer lethality.
  • Example: “Blunt Force Trauma” – A powerful blow that knocks the target down for x seconds and inflicts x seconds of confusion.

Hmm, ran out of space. I wanted to add two points to the above post;

1. The Slayer is, amusingly, like a heavily armored version of Robert Downy Jr.‘s portrayal of “Sherlock Holmes”; they see every angle of the fight before it happens and finish their foe with ruthless efficiency. When facing a Slayer, the battle can be over before it even begins. They don’t just out-fight their opponents but out-think them.

2. The “Extra Weapon” skills were originally called “ kitten nal” skills, with the “Kitten” part there being a British slang term for the posterior. Heh. The idea is that the Slayer is a one man/woman army that carries more weapons than a sane person would probably ever need. Unlike Engineer weapon kits, you would use these extra weapons straight from the toolbar without equipping them. Others included a throwing Javelin and a small shield (“Buckler” that you could use to block attacks. There’s an old bit of Legend of Zelda art that shows Link with all of the gear he uses strapped to his back. That was kind of the idea there, an armor fighter with extra weapons tucked away.

Sorry for the double post, ran out of room.

Retro.6831:

Hmm, ran out of space. I wanted to add two points to the above post;

1. The Slayer is, amusingly, like a heavily armored version of Robert Downy Jr.‘s portrayal of “Sherlock Holmes”; they see every angle of the fight before it happens and finish their foe with ruthless efficiency. When facing a Slayer, the battle can be over before it even begins. They don’t just out-fight their opponents but out-think them.

2. The “Extra Weapon” skills were originally called “ kitten nal” skills, with the “Kitten” part there being a British slang term for the posterior. Heh. The idea is that the Slayer is a one man/woman army that carries more weapons than a sane person would probably ever need. Unlike Engineer weapon kits, you would use these extra weapons straight from the toolbar without equipping them. Others included a throwing Javelin and a small shield (“Buckler” that you could use to block attacks. There’s an old bit of Legend of Zelda art that shows Link with all of the gear he uses strapped to his back. That was kind of the idea there, an armor fighter with extra weapons tucked away.

Sorry for the double post, ran out of room.

ok, this idea i love, imho this one wins………….space marines would still be cool though. yes i will keep pushing at it XD

Retro, I think you did an amazing job in your opening paragraph explaining just why some of these other ideas won’t work. It’s not about opposing ideas just because we don’t like them — it’s because there are legitimate gameplay-related reasons why they just won’t work.

Retro, I think you actually came up with a viable 3rd heavy profession with a unique flavor and flair. Kudos!

Retro.6831:

…Adding a “Lancer” profession wouldn’t work…

Yeah, since “Lancer” is mounted infantry, which rides horses and use spears, which is specifically a “Exclusive NPC Centaur profession”.

Same goes for wishywashy “Dragoons” (Ride horses to reach battle field, but fights on foot with firearms, Harathi Sharpshooters pretty much fit this description, although they don’t “dismount”), they too would end up as “Exclusive NPC Centaur profession”.

Doesn’t really makes sense to have a heavy class that uses a pet/spirit for combat. Why does it have heavy armour if it’s better at ranged combat?
Only way I see this working if it were to have longbow/rifle based ranged skills, but with long CD on them, to justify that class of armour; enemies will be able to close the distance between shots, then it’d switch to melee weapon with cc skills (like a mace or hammer that roots/traps/kicks/bashes etc.) and then back to ranged.

@ frost:

Your comments are nonsense. You clearly never ever have played games like Tera or Ragnarok Online or any offline RPG with characters that use polearm weapons of any sort to have any idea about that weapon at all.
Spears, Halberds, Naginatas, Glaives, Pikes and so on are all weapons, which can be used unmounted as same as mounted, they were only prefered to be used on mounts, because they were for mounted combat (Lances) the most ideal weapon, because it are the most powerful weapons that have the best synergy from your mounts movement.
Their thrust attacks are due to your mounts movement so powerful, that you could easily pierce through with your weapons through your victims armor with your attacks and from top of your mount its also easier to attack the most vital point of an enemy to easily kill them with 1 strike – the head – by basically decapitating your foes from the top of your mount with a sword as the power from your slashes from a fast running mount are so good, that you can easily slice with your sword through the neck of your foe like moving a hot knife through butter.

A Pole-Arm Weapon doesn’t mean, that it automatically has to be used only for mounted infantries, thats nonsense.
You can also perfectly combat very fine with such weapons without using any sort of mount on land at all.

Your arguments are just cheap tries to make Lancers as a possible class look bad, because its obvious that you just don’t like something like that to become a playable class, most likely because you fear it might come together as a content feature with playable “mounts”… thats all.

And if its just the name term of “Lancer” or “Dragoon” that is it, that you don#t like, then just call that class a “Partizan” as thats also a good name for a polearm weaponed soldier

http://darksouls.wikia.com/wiki/Partizan_%28Dark_Souls_II%29?file=Dark_Souls_2_Partizan_Tutorial_%28dual_wielding_w_power_stance%29

Is a Class Name, but the term is also known very well for Spears itself (because of the class fighting alot/mainly with spears and other similar polearms like Pikes, Glaives or Halberds of all sorts) and this video shows clearly, that you can combat with such weapons also completely without mounts in backmind

As a class name, “Partisan” recalls more of an irregular fighter rather than purely a spear-user. A Partizan was a catch-all term for a spear or polearm at points in the Renaissance, yes, but it’s certainly not suitable for a class name.

That being said, I’d rather see something that looks like these guys: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reiter

It would fit with the general pseudo-Renaissance air of the game while also providing for a unique type of heavily-armored class. You could rename them Cuirassiers or Gendarmes or anything like that. The main point would be they would be a melee class focusing on finesse in combat as opposed to brute force like the Warrior, how to translate that into the game proper would obviously be up in the air.

Their main weapons would be rifles, pistols and swords, whether or not to include dual-wielded swords in there is up to Anet. Obviously mounted combat is out of the question but there is a general quality to the fighting style of a Reiter that makes them unique even without the horse. In any case that’s the sort of class I’d like to see, and it doesn’t even require any additional work on new weapon types to implement.

Another soldier class? Hmmmnn, does anyone recognize this character?

http://fairytail.wikia.com/wiki/Erza_Scarlet

How about making a class like that, where their uniqueness comes from special power imbued in their armor, a power they can swap around with their profession mechanic (F-skills) that give them different battle capabilities.

I’m hoping that they won’t make another heavy class.

Mainly because I think that “Warrior” already covers everything and the guardian was already a stretch. IMO, guardians should have been a healing/protection based light armored class.

Now lets look at Warriors.
Armored guy with Mace —→ Warrior,
Armored Guy with Great Axe --→ Warrior,
Armored Guy with dual pistols —-→ wussy Warrior but still one
Light-armored guy with Katana? —→ Ninja but that’s not a heavy class anymore by definition.

Magic-users, on the other hand has far less limitations. For example
Time magic —→ Chronomancer (been suggested here on these forums),
Plant magic --→ Chloromancer (like from Rift),
Communer with Spirits —→ The Ritualist (from GW1)
and the list goes on limited only by imagination. These, like the Guardian, should all be light armored classes and only by some ridiculous determination not to make a monk did we get the Guardian.

Anyway, its my hope that Anet stops coming out with any more Heavy armored classes and just give us more Light armored ones. For the Warriors, just give them more weapon types to cater to more play styles.

justkoh.4073:

I’m hoping that they won’t make another heavy class.

Mainly because I think that “Warrior” already covers everything and the guardian was already a stretch. IMO, guardians should have been a healing/protection based light armored class.

Now lets look at Warriors.
Armored guy with Mace —-> Warrior,
Armored Guy with Great Axe —-> Warrior,
Armored Guy with dual pistols —--> wussy Warrior but still one
Light-armored guy with Katana? —-> Ninja but that’s not a heavy class anymore by definition.

Magic-users, on the other hand has far less limitations. For example
Time magic —-> Chronomancer (been suggested here on these forums),
Plant magic —-> Chloromancer (like from Rift),
Communer with Spirits —-> The Ritualist (from GW1)
and the list goes on limited only by imagination. These, like the Guardian, should all be light armored classes and only by some ridiculous determination not to make a monk did we get the Guardian.

Anyway, its my hope that Anet stops coming out with any more Heavy armored classes and just give us more Light armored ones. For the Warriors, just give them more weapon types to cater to more play styles.

Why not a heavy armor wearing mage (primarily melee-mid range) that is offensively focused, thematically (compared to guardians which are defense/support focused)?

Spellsword(?)
Heavy Armor (would fill in the medium base health that is missing for a heavy class)
Weapons: Axe(main/off), Sword (main/off), Greatsword, Hammer/Mace, Focus/Warhorn, Torch, and a Shortbow or longbow for range. I’d say staff too, as long as it’s utilized as a melee-mid ranged weapon (like a bo staff).
Magic: Focusing on arcana or a creative mix of the different schools of magic. According to ( http://esprits-dorr.fr/node/261 ), mixing is/could be possible.

As for skill theme, I think it would focus more on imbuing weapon attacks with magic or weapon attacks with a secondary magic affect (terrible example, but third swing of hammer could hit the ground, resulting in a magic damage aoe).

@justkoh – Your imagination when coming to people with heavy armor is very limited. Just because they have heavy armor, it doesn’t exclude them from a lot of different things.

I take offense to you saying the Guardian is “a stretch”. Have you never played a Paladin in other RPGs? That’s what a Guardian is. A holy fighter, imbued with the spirit of justice. Some people would also make the comment that he’s a Runeknight/Mageblade, which are two other fantasy trope characters that are heavy armor but deal with magic (in this case, with elemental instead of holy, usually).

There can be just as many classifications of “big armored guy slinging spells” as there can be of “weak clothy guy slinging spells”. What’s preventing us from having a variant of the heavy armored guy that does illusion-style spells like the Mesmer? The fact that we already have a mesmer, yes, but what if we didn’t have a Mesmer class already? Would you decry the fact that the illusionist had heavy armor, and why?

In the same regard, what’s wrong with having a “time mage” in heavy armor? They could very much use their time-related magic to get an edge in melee combat. Freeze your enemy for a second so you can get a lethal hit on him, speed yourself up to react faster, etc., etc…

Selene.9415:

Why not a heavy armor wearing mage (primarily melee-mid range) that is offensively focused, thematically (compared to guardians which are defense/support focused)?

Spellsword(?)
Heavy Armor (would fill in the medium base health that is missing for a heavy class)
Weapons: Axe(main/off), Sword (main/off), Greatsword, Hammer/Mace, Focus/Warhorn, Torch, and a Shortbow or longbow for range. I’d say staff too, as long as it’s utilized as a melee-mid ranged weapon (like a bo staff).
Magic: Focusing on arcana or a creative mix of the different schools of magic. According to ( http://esprits-dorr.fr/node/261 ), mixing is/could be possible.

As for skill theme, I think it would focus more on imbuing weapon attacks with magic or weapon attacks with a secondary magic affect (terrible example, but third swing of hammer could hit the ground, resulting in a magic damage aoe).

I kinda sorta thought the same thing, but IMO, Mesmer is a ‘spellsword’, i.e. a magic duelist who uses a sword.

Sort of why I thought, take the other path in the fork and make a ‘spellarmor’ or some such.

Leo G.4501:

Selene.9415:

Why not a heavy armor wearing mage (primarily melee-mid range) that is offensively focused, thematically (compared to guardians which are defense/support focused)?

Spellsword(?)
Heavy Armor (would fill in the medium base health that is missing for a heavy class)
Weapons: Axe(main/off), Sword (main/off), Greatsword, Hammer/Mace, Focus/Warhorn, Torch, and a Shortbow or longbow for range. I’d say staff too, as long as it’s utilized as a melee-mid ranged weapon (like a bo staff).
Magic: Focusing on arcana or a creative mix of the different schools of magic. According to ( http://esprits-dorr.fr/node/261 ), mixing is/could be possible.

As for skill theme, I think it would focus more on imbuing weapon attacks with magic or weapon attacks with a secondary magic affect (terrible example, but third swing of hammer could hit the ground, resulting in a magic damage aoe).

I kinda sorta thought the same thing, but IMO, Mesmer is a ‘spellsword’, i.e. a magic duelist who uses a sword.

Sort of why I thought, take the other path in the fork and make a ‘spellarmor’ or some such.

To me a spellsword is a warrior that uses magic, not exactly a duelist type. Mesmer seems like more of a nightblade to me (if you’re familiar with TES classes). Spellsword = Warrior that isn’t afraid to get into the fray, similar to a guardian but their abilities are more selfish as they’re focused on the offensive as opposed to party leadership/defense/support.

They could also go with a “Dragon Knight”. Might be interesting, and could tie in with the Inquest lore :o

Retro.6831:

“Samurai” doesn’t work for the same reason; adding Japanese swords to the game means the other Solider professions are likely to get them and can fill that role much easier. Likewise with Barbarian / Berserker: the Warrior already possesses a lot of that archetype’s trademarks

Just wanted to add that dismissing a “class” because the weapon can be used by another class fails to understand how GW skill system works.

1. a “japanese sword” is a 2 handed sword which already exist in game, so yeah, warriors would use them (and guardians and rangers and mesmers) since they already do…

2. The weapon itself means nothing as the skills are what the determine the play style. Warrior GS vs Mesmer GS are two completely different weapons (melee vs ranged) they basically just share a skin.

The slayer suggestion sort of reminded me of The Witcher, which is a great thing really, though Geralt uses medium armor, not heavy. Very interesting nonetheless.

kitten.9065:

Retro.6831:

“Samurai” doesn’t work for the same reason; adding Japanese swords to the game means the other Solider professions are likely to get them and can fill that role much easier. Likewise with Barbarian / Berserker: the Warrior already possesses a lot of that archetype’s trademarks

Just wanted to add that dismissing a “class” because the weapon can be used by another class fails to understand how GW skill system works.

1. a “japanese sword” is a 2 handed sword which already exist in game, so yeah, warriors would use them (and guardians and rangers and mesmers) since they already do…

2. The weapon itself means nothing as the skills are what the determine the play style. Warrior GS vs Mesmer GS are two completely different weapons (melee vs ranged) they basically just share a skin.

You misunderstand; a “Samurai” class is basically a “Warrior with Japanese flavor”; even if there is a unique mechanic present, the two are incredibly similar. You make a point of referencing how different Warrior and Mesmer versions of Greatsword function, but that’s because the Warrior (heavily armored non-magical melee-centric class) and Mesmer (lightly armored magical ranged-centric class) are different as well. Samurai is just too similar to Warrior, and I haven’t seen any posts in this thread that suggest how they could be made different (and at that point, is it even worth calling it “Samurai” anymore?).

I’d personally base a new soldier class around the dervish.

Dervish in GW1 were a light armor class (IIRC), the use of heavy armor can be explained because of the increase of conflict after Palawa Joko took over Elona, which made them start to use extra protection.

One of the big problems about bringing a dervish class into GW2 is their dependence on human gods in GW1 (imagine a Charr becoming the Avatar of Melandru, for example). This could be explained adding some extra lore that after the gods went silent, they learnt to go straight to the source, so instead of becoming the avatar of melandru, for example, they become the avatar of nature.

The dervish’s signature weapon is the scythe, which could mean a new weapon class, but considering that there are already at least two staff skins that look like scythes, maybe it could also work if they wield staves as melee weapons, with a magical blade appearing over them when they wield them, kinda like the one necromancers get but light instead of dark. To preserve the theme they could also use other magical weapons as melee ones, like for example using a scepter like a sickle.

Just some ideas thrown in to the mix.

Retro.6831:

kitten.9065:

Retro.6831:

“Samurai” doesn’t work for the same reason; adding Japanese swords to the game means the other Solider professions are likely to get them and can fill that role much easier. Likewise with Barbarian / Berserker: the Warrior already possesses a lot of that archetype’s trademarks

Just wanted to add that dismissing a “class” because the weapon can be used by another class fails to understand how GW skill system works.

1. a “japanese sword” is a 2 handed sword which already exist in game, so yeah, warriors would use them (and guardians and rangers and mesmers) since they already do…

2. The weapon itself means nothing as the skills are what the determine the play style. Warrior GS vs Mesmer GS are two completely different weapons (melee vs ranged) they basically just share a skin.

You misunderstand; a “Samurai” class is basically a “Warrior with Japanese flavor”; even if there is a unique mechanic present, the two are incredibly similar. You make a point of referencing how different Warrior and Mesmer versions of Greatsword function, but that’s because the Warrior (heavily armored non-magical melee-centric class) and Mesmer (lightly armored magical ranged-centric class) are different as well. Samurai is just too similar to Warrior, and I haven’t seen any posts in this thread that suggest how they could be made different (and at that point, is it even worth calling it “Samurai” anymore?).

Fine then we can use Warrior and Guardian as an example they still have different uses and play style even thought hey both use GS and Heavy armor.

And for your other question the proposal for a Canthan based heavy class was to extract it directly from lore that already exists. http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Ministry_of_Purity

The suggestion made was that for flavor the class would uses fighting styles to change the weapons skills (think Ele). It would a more difficult class of heavy as one would have to chain attacks while switching fighting styles so rotations would be a lot more complex depending on what combos are you going for.

I don’t dislike your idea, just thought that your reason for dismissing the other ideas is flawed.

locoman.1974:

I’d personally base a new soldier class around the dervish.

Dervish in GW1 were a light armor class (IIRC), the use of heavy armor can be explained because of the increase of conflict after Palawa Joko took over Elona, which made them start to use extra protection.

One of the big problems about bringing a dervish class into GW2 is their dependence on human gods in GW1 (imagine a Charr becoming the Avatar of Melandru, for example). This could be explained adding some extra lore that after the gods went silent, they learnt to go straight to the source, so instead of becoming the avatar of melandru, for example, they become the avatar of nature.

The dervish’s signature weapon is the scythe, which could mean a new weapon class, but considering that there are already at least two staff skins that look like scythes, maybe it could also work if they wield staves as melee weapons, with a magical blade appearing over them when they wield them, kinda like the one necromancers get but light instead of dark. To preserve the theme they could also use other magical weapons as melee ones, like for example using a scepter like a sickle.

Just some ideas thrown in to the mix.

I love the Dervish though I would consider them a light class, no? But yeah My Derv/Rit was my favorite class combo in GW1. So many good memories.

They kind of shot themselves in the foot with the warrior class, as many games have done before them. It just fills too many creative niches, pretty much anything armored, armed, and martially driven can fall under a warrior.

tigirius.9014:

I’d suggest the restore engineers to soldier class, they were like that in BWE2.

What? No they weren’t, I played the engineer during all the BWEs. Engineers were a soldier class at some point, but it was before any of the betas.

Techwarriors: they wear heavy armor which is powered/configured by various offensive or defensive modules. Module A, for example, could be used for infighting, offering appropriate melee defense capabilities and channeling power through melee weapons. Module B could be for ranged assault, firing beams/salvos of energy using typical ranged weapons while making use of some sort of missile defense.

But but but how is this possible? The Pact did it!

Retro.6831:

Adding a “Lancer” profession wouldn’t work because adding non-aquatic spears and tridents means Warriors and Guardians would likely get them as well, so that archetype would be handled by the existing professions.

I think it would make more sense to give the new weapons to one medium and one light-armor class: for spears, I would give them to Rangers and Necromancers.

locoman.1974:

I’d personally base a new soldier class around the dervish.

Dervish in GW1 were a light armor class (IIRC), the use of heavy armor can be explained because of the increase of conflict after Palawa Joko took over Elona, which made them start to use extra protection.

One of the big problems about bringing a dervish class into GW2 is their dependence on human gods in GW1 (imagine a Charr becoming the Avatar of Melandru, for example). This could be explained adding some extra lore that after the gods went silent, they learnt to go straight to the source, so instead of becoming the avatar of melandru, for example, they become the avatar of nature.

The dervish’s signature weapon is the scythe, which could mean a new weapon class, but considering that there are already at least two staff skins that look like scythes, maybe it could also work if they wield staves as melee weapons, with a magical blade appearing over them when they wield them, kinda like the one necromancers get but light instead of dark. To preserve the theme they could also use other magical weapons as melee ones, like for example using a scepter like a sickle.

Just some ideas thrown in to the mix.

I was just about to type something similar, but your description is waaaay better
+1

ShadowDragoonFTW.3418:

@justkoh – Your imagination when coming to people with heavy armor is very limited. Just because they have heavy armor, it doesn’t exclude them from a lot of different things.

I take offense to you saying the Guardian is “a stretch”. Have you never played a Paladin in other RPGs? That’s what a Guardian is. A holy fighter, imbued with the spirit of justice. Some people would also make the comment that he’s a Runeknight/Mageblade, which are two other fantasy trope characters that are heavy armor but deal with magic (in this case, with elemental instead of holy, usually).

There can be just as many classifications of “big armored guy slinging spells” as there can be of “weak clothy guy slinging spells”. What’s preventing us from having a variant of the heavy armored guy that does illusion-style spells like the Mesmer? The fact that we already have a mesmer, yes, but what if we didn’t have a Mesmer class already? Would you decry the fact that the illusionist had heavy armor, and why?

In the same regard, what’s wrong with having a “time mage” in heavy armor? They could very much use their time-related magic to get an edge in melee combat. Freeze your enemy for a second so you can get a lethal hit on him, speed yourself up to react faster, etc., etc…

I had to log in and LOL at someone who “takes offence” at such trivial things. What are you gonna do about me then since you take offence?

Selene.9415:

Why not a heavy armor wearing mage (primarily melee-mid range) that is offensively focused, thematically (compared to guardians which are defense/support focused)?

Well, maybe I’m traditional about this but magic users to me are light armored.

Obviously, Anet could make anyone wear anything just to break the mold but I’ll just not like it as much (won’t stop me making one to try though).

justkoh.4073:

Selene.9415:

Why not a heavy armor wearing mage (primarily melee-mid range) that is offensively focused, thematically (compared to guardians which are defense/support focused)?

Well, maybe I’m traditional about this but magic users to me are light armored.

Obviously, Anet could make anyone wear anything just to break the mold but I’ll just not like it as much (won’t stop me making one to try though).

Pure magic users, maybe, but there’s a long list of various classes that integrate magic into a close-up fighting style. The guardians are very much a protective class, mostly trying to mitigate damage and AoE healing, which the classic paladin class tends to do in one way or another.

I will admit, like many others have pointed out, the warrior and guardian have covered most of the traditional soldier-type class tropes. Warrior is basically “guy with weapon” and shouts that can make him much stronger, while guardian does much of the magic-in-armor fighting that is standard for them.

I have a loose idea for this class to be one that can take allies’ damage for them, or reduce the amount of damage they take in for a while. For instance, give them a shout “Just a flesh wound!” which gives regeneration to himself an allies for 2-4 seconds, say. Or perhaps a block skill that would heal her up instead of wound her. Still in an incubation stage, but maybe others will think up something creative.

Retro.6831:

kitten.9065:

Retro.6831:

“Samurai” doesn’t work for the same reason; adding Japanese swords to the game means the other Solider professions are likely to get them and can fill that role much easier. Likewise with Barbarian / Berserker: the Warrior already possesses a lot of that archetype’s trademarks

Just wanted to add that dismissing a “class” because the weapon can be used by another class fails to understand how GW skill system works.

1. a “japanese sword” is a 2 handed sword which already exist in game, so yeah, warriors would use them (and guardians and rangers and mesmers) since they already do…

2. The weapon itself means nothing as the skills are what the determine the play style. Warrior GS vs Mesmer GS are two completely different weapons (melee vs ranged) they basically just share a skin.

You misunderstand; a “Samurai” class is basically a “Warrior with Japanese flavor”; even if there is a unique mechanic present, the two are incredibly similar. You make a point of referencing how different Warrior and Mesmer versions of Greatsword function, but that’s because the Warrior (heavily armored non-magical melee-centric class) and Mesmer (lightly armored magical ranged-centric class) are different as well. Samurai is just too similar to Warrior, and I haven’t seen any posts in this thread that suggest how they could be made different (and at that point, is it even worth calling it “Samurai” anymore?).

Well, as the class is based in “we need another heavy armor class”, I expect something similar, in looks, to already existing heavy classes. Nothin could prevent this Canthan Samurai to wear already existing skins for heavy armor, swords, etc…

The differences should come from play style, weapons available, elite skills, etc…

The first difference I can see is that Samurai wouldn’t wear shields, their defensive options need to focus in avoid being hit, ignore hits, reduce damage or similar tricks. It should be heavy, but somehow “agile”.

Unique mechanics can be present as fighting techniques, stances, or ancestors. Invoking ancestors could be a mechanic, different than current Guardian invocations. It could point to a “aggressive spirituality”, I invoke the ancestors of my family, who appear here, in full armour, ready to slash all of you.

Elite skills based on ancestor invocations could use some diversity. You invoke warriors, or healers, or ninjas, or mages. The weapon abilities could also use some difference, the same way sword skills in warrior and guardian are different.

If they ever do implement samurai class I sure hope they somehow prevent it from being given to white characters.

Vermillion Hawk.9037:

As a class name, “Partisan” recalls more of an irregular fighter rather than purely a spear-user. A Partizan was a catch-all term for a spear or polearm at points in the Renaissance, yes, but it’s certainly not suitable for a class name.

That being said, I’d rather see something that looks like these guys: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reiter

It would fit with the general pseudo-Renaissance air of the game while also providing for a unique type of heavily-armored class. You could rename them Cuirassiers or Gendarmes or anything like that. The main point would be they would be a melee class focusing on finesse in combat as opposed to brute force like the Warrior, how to translate that into the game proper would obviously be up in the air.

Their main weapons would be rifles, pistols and swords, whether or not to include dual-wielded swords in there is up to Anet. Obviously mounted combat is out of the question but there is a general quality to the fighting style of a Reiter that makes them unique even without the horse. In any case that’s the sort of class I’d like to see, and it doesn’t even require any additional work on new weapon types to implement.

Do you even have a clue, what you just suggested there?
A “Reiter” as you call it, is just the German word for “rider”, which just means, somebody who rides on a mount.
Using something like this for a class, which has then no integrated mount combat mechanic that works like a combination between ranger pet and necro death shroud combat mode change, is absolutely unfitting.

However as third Class Name it would be good, because its not related to either Lancer or Dragoon which people seem to desperately want not to see here in GW2, because of most likely Final Fantasy 14 having them (and by the way, also there without Mounts being an integrated part of the class, it would be just good for them here in GW2, because that way the 3rd So,ldier would be definetely unique and it would make GW2 compared to FF14’s version more unique, thats the whole point)

A Partizan could easily be designed to a Polearm Weapon User (as symbolic Main Weapon), together with Sword, Shield, Rifle, Pistol, Longbow, Staff and Greatsword together with Mounts as their integrated class mechanic to be able to switch between Ground Combat and Mount Combat which would change out the Skill Bar of you then based on which weapon you are using.

However, if peole have problems with the name of even Partizan, then I guess, your suggessted Cuirassier would go for it too
—-

There will never something totally unfitting, like a Samurai…same as like that we will never see back Assassins in the way we know them for GW1 or that we will get to see “Ninjas”. If, then only as outfits, like we got the “Shadow Assassin Outfit”

Same as like that we won’t see the Dervish back as a 3rd soldier class, thats just nonsensical desperate wishthinking, because it absolutely doesn’t fit to the complete design how they worked in GW1, as there they were a medium class that used no heavy armors…

The class will also absolutely get no unfitting 2 word name, so forget such nonsense like Dark Knight, Death Knight, Dragon Knight, Holy Knight and so on ..
If at all, then it becomes just only a “Knight”, because thats it what is fitting to GW2’s Class Name Scheme

I wonder…about a class that uses magic to either “summon” weapons/armor to use or “creates” weapons/armor out of raw magical energy.

The unique mechanic would be to equip the weapon/armor stored in it. Say F1 & F2 for weapons and F3 & F4 for armor sets.

When you equip weapon/armor it gets stored in the unique mechanic instead of on your character. Then when you use the mechanic it creates a magical weapon of that type. IE if you have a Sword stored in F1 then when you hit F1 you summon a glowing magic sword into your hand that lasts until you leave combat.

F1 & F2 would swap weapons.
F3 & F4 would let you swap armor sets.

Utility skills might adjust cooldowns, reach, or add special attacks to a weapon.

Retro.6831:

One of the problems with a third Solider profession is that the two existing ones are already covering a lot of ground. Adding a “Lancer” profession wouldn’t work because adding non-aquatic spears and tridents means Warriors and Guardians would likely get them as well, so that archetype would be handled by the existing professions. “Samurai” doesn’t work for the same reason; adding Japanese swords to the game means the other Solider professions are likely to get them and can fill that role much easier.

I don’t get your point about new weapon types: I could see a katana wielded by a guardian, a thief and a mesmer…. why do you think it should be forcely added to the warrior as well?