Thread: On Suggestions for New Classes

Hi folks. Before I begin, this is not another "Here's a suggestion for a new class that I think would be neat" thread.

Rather, I'd like to think of it as something that people who do want to suggest new classes can look at to help formulate what they want in terms of class ideology a little more: having a great mechanical idea falls down if you can't ground it in something that the game environment and atmosphere finds amenable, after all... just has having a great ideological basis for a class can't work if it can't be made to fit in well with the existing mechanics well enough.

So, what I'm going to outline here is a brief summary of the classes we have, the races that play them, and the ideological space they fill. Along with that, hopefully, I'd like to draw out the gaps this leaves.

The first major hurdle is race selection for a class. We have four races available to us and that is, most likely, never going to change. Each class can be played by some or all of these races, but currently the table for selection is not completely balanced; some races have access to more classes than others, and there's an imbalance of different race-sets across the nine classes we have. Originally this was done deliberately; Hobbits are a much lesser presence in Middle Earth than, say Men... and as a result they have a smaller class selection to pick from. This intention towards unevenness translated into class formulations that locked them out of certain things, such as Champion.

As the game has grown, this imbalance has been moderately maintained, however, the more classes turbine adds, the harder that is to do fairly, and a time may come where the imbalance of class selection must be discarded... when that time comes, We can look more closely at the table for who can access what as a first reference for building new classes.
So, let's look at it then (forgive me, I've got no spreadsheeting tool on this computer):

Currently we have nine classes. Three of these are considered the "core triad" classes, and as a result were envisioned in a way that mean they could be granted to all four races... Thus we got Minstrel as our first healer, Guardian as our first tank and Hunter as our first DPSer.

After that, we were given four classes, the spread of which was designed to capture the relative presence of the four races in relation to one another: Man was given all four, Elves were given two, and Hobbits and dwarves were both given only one of those four other classes each.

From this, we got the ideologies for:

Champion; Elves and Dwarves are fine, but Hobbits are too small in stature and it doesn't countenance with their general nature.

Lore-Master; Elves are fine, but hobbits don't have the inclination or scholarly dedication for it, and dwarves are different enough in their base nature that they are inclined differently to the use of word and power.

Burglar; Fine for Hobbits, but it is at its basis dishonest and deceitful, so elves would never have a bar of it, and Dwarves lack the physical stealthiness for the job.

And Captain; Reserved for Men alone, since there are to be no more great captains of elves, and the role of being a great and inspiring leader, with tangible charisma, is so counter to the norm of both dwarves and hobbits that the few exceptions of their cases act more as proving the general rule.

At Moria, we were given two new classes, both designed to fill core positions as options against the primary triad, but also intended to maintain at least partially this access disparity. Hunters already had champions against their spot, though no opposition as ranged dps, as a result the classes we got came out thus:

Warden; against the tanking position. As a nimble avoidance tank, it was debarred to Dwarves, but acceptable to Hobbits and Elves.

Rune-Keeper; pitched both to be an option for primary healing spot, and as an option against the ranged dps spot. This was the first class to debar the race of Men, and is to date the only class that does so. It filled the ideological spot by being imagined as class heavily dependant upon the real active power in middle-Earth, that of rune, sign and word, but by virtue of tapping it so directly was incomprehensible to the more short-lived races and those not inclined towards true uses of power.

Thus elves and Dwarves were acceptable, Hobbits and Men were not.

This moved us from a balance that was (in brackets is the count cutting the original core triad, to whom all have access):

Men: 7 (4), Elves: 5 (2), Dwarves: 4 (1), Hobbits: 4 (1).

To:

Men: 8 (5), Elves: 7 (4), Dwarves: 5 (2), Hobbits: 5 (2).

And thus the balance is still more or less preserved as originally intended.

So, this brings us to where we stand now. When we wish to think about and suggest new classes, this intention is something to be kept in mind, however, the ultimate truth is that, the more classes are added, the more this standard must inevitably relax.

What I want to do is illustrate the class access sets that haven't been used yet, for people to possibly think about, since the other feature to note is that, after the initial core three, no class/race access set is repeated. What have we got to work with then?

First off, potentially: classes that lock out three of the four races; Single-race exclusive classes.

People have asked for these, to stand opposite Captains, and it does seem as though, if Turbine makes the decision to relax their current access balance, then specialist race-specific classes may be some of the first we get.

There are Three sets to fill in this position:

Hobbit-only,
Dwarf-only,
Elf-only,

When suggesting a class then for this set, then, we should think carefully about exactly what uniquely defines a race. For men, Captains, it was their charisma and inspiration; the ability of men to both inspire, and to be inspired. A similar unique trait or feature must ultimately be the ideological focus of any class suggestion designed as a single-race exclusive class then.

After that we have the sets that allow two and debar two. Of this formation, we have three possible sets to fill still:

Fine for Dwarves and Hobbits, but not for Elves or Men.
Fine for Dwarves and Men, but not for Elves or Hobbits.
Fine for Elves and Hobbits, but not for Dwarves or Men.

When suggestion a class to fill this set, ideologically we would need to find a basis that lends itself to both of the allowed races, while giving a distinct disinclination to the other two. Finding a trait or feature about the races that they share in some fashion that the other two races do not is key in working out a conceptual class that works.

For example, one set that hasn't been filled, as above, is for men and dwarves, but not for elves and hobbits. What features do they share that elves and hobbits do not? My first thought here, in this case, is their desire for acquisition and possession. Both dwarves and men are prone to greedy desires and wants, and have a very healthy daring and rash streak to them; rashness and covetousness are two features that men and dwarves share, which both hobbits and elves distinctly do not. Here then, may be a good seed for imagining a class idea.

Lastly, the sets that allow three of the four races, and debar only one. There are two sets in this pattern that have not been filled as of yet, the other two possibilities filled by Champion (hobbits), and Warden (dwarves):

Allowing all but Elves.
Allowing all but Men.

Here, when imagining a class concept, the focus for ideas should be more towards the failing of the race debarred, moreso than the features shared by the allowed race: Champion debars Hobbits for their stature and general nature. Warden debars Dwarves for their distinctly un-nimble disposition. This is, unfortunately, much harder to do for elves, since they are more or less designed by Tolkien to be his close approximation of perfection. Their only real failings are sometimes their pride and aloofness, and at other times the weight of the ages leading to a sorrow that saps their resolve... and these are not so easy to work with. Any ideology that contains elements of deception and dishonesty will also suffice for this, but it cannot, of course, be evil, or misaligned enough to exclude dwarves as well... Burglar utilised this feature to lock out elves, for example.

All in all, that's eight possible combinations that haven't been used yet. To maintain the balance, classes would need to be added in sets of two or three, and preserve the form of Dwarves and hobbits one each, Elves 1-2, and Men 1-3, however, this may not ultimately be viable to stick to.

The most important thing I'd like to reiterate here is that I'm not talking about Role at all. Role is something that can be conceptualised and worked out in tandem with this, of course, but for the moment, I'm most interested in a focus on concept and ideology; suggesting the seeds from which an interesting, viable and fitting class could be created. At this point, Role is something that is being gradually dissolved and diffused in favour of inter-class synergy in groups and net effectiveness... and while this is more true for some of our classes than others so far (in particular, the original triad are the three most firmly locked into hard role categories, though this is more or less to be expected, unfortunately), advancements of the classes and the additions of new ones have worked more towards this diffusion than away from it. Everything a group needs is already covered twice; if it wasn't we wouldn't be able to succeed... now it is much more simply about useful and viable options.

As I said; this is not a post suggesting a new class, merely my thoughts about how we might best go about suggesting new classes, and some of the important things that need to be considered.

Thoughts, suggestions, ideas?

-Niara

I read this entire thing till I got to;

As I said; this is not a post suggesting a new class, merely my thoughts about how we might best go about suggesting new classes, and some of the important things that need to be considered.

Then i was like... O.o i read this whole thing looking for the words "My class idea is" and now i feel like an idiot...

Yeah, sorry about that, in that case. As I meantioned, what I was aiming to do was bring up some useul framework for people to think about when proposing a new class. A lot of people have been asking for or suggesting new classes of late, and while I'm neither strongly for or against that, I think anything that helps people formulate the best, most fitting, most viable suggestiosnthey can might be useful.

This was not so much a suggestion to turbne, but a suggestion to those making suggestions for classes here.

............wow............... .......

A couple options that were missed. Classes that are playable by all the characters and a class that is only playable as a female like the dwarves are only male.

I would propose someone who is split between healing and support. A character who knows nature well enough that they can trap, confuse, heal and support their fellows. Too often a fellowship is weak on the support and it would be nice if the healer could lend a hand to keep the enemies at bay especially those that are keeping people from being healed. The name can be figured out later. Played by Hobbits and Elves as they have a connection to nature the other races lack.

I would also propose a class that is an expert at making every other class better. Like the Captain in someways but not as much in-the battle. As this class attacks they position targets for the hunters to do more damage, they make the burglars dazes and chances of causing a fellowship maneuver to increase. They can heal and increase the treat of the guardian. They can inspire the warden to do more damage and to hold up in battle longer. They could enhance the loremasters spells and help them keep their targets out of commission. They could give the captains more chances to buff or get them in a battle readies state. They could enhance the healing and draw targets to themselves for the minstrels. And they could supply ferver to the champion and allow his attacks to land in critical spot more often. They could have an ability to take off almost every type of corruption. These survivors and friends in hard times would be an added bonus to any group Again the name can come later. Played by dwarves and hobbits as they have shown a desire to learn about all the races better than the men who worry about themselves and the elves who keep to themselves.

I would also propose a class that is tough and hardy and uses their knowledge of the body to give extra morale and power to fellows in the middle of battle. Like the Captain the heavy fighter could heal but that would be all he does besides giving a power boost from time to time like the loremasters can. If needed this class could take a beating and tank for the group or go with a skilled fellowship and be able to heal the the main aggro man and not die too fast if they take some aggro as they lead the attack. The focus of this warriors healing would be on themselves and their shield buddy who would be keeping enemies ofd the rest of the fellowship because they would have limited ability to be healed. Played by Dwarves and men since they are rugged enough and possess the intelligence to handle the healing arts.

Three potential classes - now for creative names.

Shamans - healers and supports like the leader who helped the Riders of Rohan reach the White City
Comrades - class buffers like Merry and Pippen helped their kings.
High Lords - tank and heal like Emowen the daughter of Rohan

Itneresting thoughts, thankyou.

I left out playable by all, primarily because our orignal core triad makethree calsses that cover the "playable by all" base quite thoroughly, and any new classes we might get seem likely to be specialisations or refinements that leave room for exclusion. always an option though, you're correct.

I'm not sure turbine will ever put is a gender requisite class, simply becuae Dwarves are left not "male" but deliberately ungendered, and assumed as male by in game NPCs by convention... whole threads go on about this and people fall onto all sides of the debate, but as it stands, turbine make it ambiguious without being definite for Lore reasons.

I think if we did get a Gender specific class, we'd need by default to have one of each, and that becomes difficult to do without seeming arbitrary... we might propose a concept that could fit inot "males only" given the universe IP... but it would be harder to find a conceptualisation that fits "female only", to the exclusion of males so inclined.

I feel also that such classes would need to be restricted to Elves/Men/Hobbits... simply because it would cause objection and a grat deal of turmoil when delaing with dwarves... since people do polarise to very heavily ontat score... or else it would restrict dwarves tot he male ide and turbine would need to make an offical caveat on the description denoting that, when abroad, females are indistinguishable from males and don't allow themselves to be discovered.


A concaeptual idea for the category of Men/dwarves, excluding Elves/Hobbits: Somthing along the lines of a treasure hunter: not like a burglar, which is sneaky and thievy, a treasure-hunter is much more overt, being all dash and flare and charm, seeking fantastic riches and prizes found and earned, rather than discovered and pinched.

This plays to the Men's and Dwarve's sense of acquisition and desire for shiny valuables and treasure, as well as their shared sense of brashness and daring... elves would be excluded because, like burglar, it's still somewhat not-so-above-the-board a profession, and they generally lack that sense of brashness except when driven by a generally muhc nobler cause. Hobbits would be excluded because, while they love food and drink, they're generally very generous and prefer to give gifts away than to acquire them, and as before, in spirit they generally lack the brash overtness found in treasure-hunters.

As I mentioned above, I won't discuss Role so much here, since all roles and jobs in group are well covered, twice over, by our exisitng classes already; new classes will never fill an unfulfilled role, now, but will be equal part options for whatever jobs they do.

Originally Posted by Harla

Hi folks. Before I begin, this is not another "Here's a suggestion for a new class that I think would be neat" thread....

Thoughts, suggestions, ideas?

-Niara

One of the best written posts I've read on the subject. +rep for you!

And....can we get this stickied???

Thankyou, I appreciate the vote of conpetance. Any thoughts on the matter yourself?