As the title suggest. Would you like to see a traditional Paladin type class in Guild Wars 2? I'll admit, I really enjoy playing a hammer and sword monk in RA these days.. 

Also, I'm not real familiar with the lore of the game...are there paladins in the lore anywhere?

Unfortunately, with NCSoft spending its time on Aion, it seems more and more (to me, at least) that GW2 may be vaporware.

Originally posted by Skooma2

Unfortunately, with NCSoft spending its time on Aion, it seems more and more (to me, at least) that GW2 may be vaporware.

Right but assuming it's not vaporware, would you like to see a paldin in GW2?

Originally posted by Skooma2

Unfortunately, with NCSoft spending its time on Aion, it seems more and more (to me, at least) that GW2 may be vaporware.

So you're of a belief that ANet's staff just drinks coffee and surfs the internet all day?  Man, that would be an awesome job. *sips coffee*.... oh wait  :P

 Personally I'm against the idea.

I'm too much of a fan of the Proph system where each class was a basic template and putting together different archetypes was a matter of dual-classing (Paladin = W/Mo.)

Anet screwed that up somewhat with the 4 additional classes from the later campaigns, and honestly, Anet seems to have abandonned all processes and ideals that they valued so highly in GW. All I can say is that if there actually IS souch a thing as a paladin class in GW2, the GW might as well not have a sequel.

Originally posted by Gennadios

 Personally I'm against the idea.

I'm too much of a fan of the Proph system where each class was a basic template and putting together different archetypes was a matter of dual-classing (Paladin = W/Mo.)

Anet screwed that up somewhat with the 4 additional classes from the later campaigns, and honestly, Anet seems to have abandonned all processes and ideals that they valued so highly in GW. All I can say is that if there actually IS souch a thing as a paladin class in GW2, the GW might as well not have a sequel.

Exactly. The first thing I thought when I read the thread title was.."How would that be different from a War/Mnk?". Nice to see someone else had the same thought.

Originally posted by Skooma2

Unfortunately, with NCSoft spending its time on Aion, it seems more and more (to me, at least) that GW2 may be vaporware.

Not even remotely close to vaporware as GW1 didn't suck and they already have most of their staff working on GW2, ANet is in charge of GW2 (and has nothing to do with Aion), but probably NCSoft told them something like "hey, you can have one or two more years to polish your game, no need to hurry and shut up about hyping it", especially as they pushed betas from 2009 to 2010.

@ Topic

Never played a W/Mo with Healing Hands or Mark of Protection? That's your bubble ;) The profession system is flexible enough to allow a "paladin" equivalent.

However since I don't know how GW2 will be, there's a possibility we may see a melee healing class in GW2.

Never played a W/Mo with Healing Hands or Mark of Protection? That's your bubble ;) The profession system is flexible enough to allow a "paladin" equivalent.

However since I don't know how GW2 will be, there's a possibility we may see a melee healing class in GW2.

Right, but those spells are on a massive cooldown. W/Mo aren't exactly good healers and in case you guys haven't noticed, laughed at. A Paladin would be able to dish out good damage and good healing. W/Mo are mostly medium/light damage with strong tanking abilities.

Maybe give the monk a melee attribute that healed your party or individual targets for a % of damage dealt? Weapons could include staves or twin hooks. I'd be okay with something like that instead of a Paladin.

I'd just like to see a melee healer class, like a Paladin. (I do like my hammer monks)  ^_^

Originally posted by dynamo122

A Paladin would be able to dish out good damage and good healing.

So you want your own overpowered class? Bards suck in DnD for a reason. A character who does everything "well" makes others useless. This is not balance.

And I voted "NO" by the way.

Asking such a question, shows you are not familiar with GW.

GW enables you to create your own builds. A paladin in GW can be:

W/Mo, N/Rt, Rt/N, so many builds of E, A/Mo, P/anything, D/manythings.

In short you can have many builds of many classes that provide both damage and healing/protection. The skill system is versitile enough to enable you that. You dont have to restrict yourself to a single "class" which is actualy a "build" like in other  games.

This is the fun of GW. People got out of the skill system builds that even the creators didn't think of.

 lol ,if its like the firat  areanet or whatsnot is making the game the only thing ncsoft do is publish it on their production line so for them 1 game more or less isnt an issue 

dont sweat it if its areanet doing this game you WILL  see a great game soon they might delay it for november since there are so many game coming out in september but we ll probably see it before the end of the year

Guild Wars came out with some very creative classes like the Ritualist, Dervish, and Paragon. I'm sure they can come up with better ideas than an old fashioned Paladin. They might have a class similiar to a Paladin but I bet it will be more unique in style and gameplay. 

My favorite class always was a Ritualist from when Factions came out. I hope they take that over to Guild Wars 2. ^^;

Originally posted by redOrc

Asking such a question, shows you are not familiar with GW.

GW enables you to create your own builds. A paladin in GW can be:

W/Mo, N/Rt, Rt/N, so many builds of E, A/Mo, P/anything, D/manythings.

In short you can have many builds of many classes that provide both damage and healing/protection. The skill system is versitile enough to enable you that. You dont have to restrict yourself to a single "class" which is actualy a "build" like in other  games.

This is the fun of GW. People got out of the skill system builds that even the creators didn't think of.

 

I voted no for a paladin class. Primarily because the dual class sytem already allows you to make unique warrior types.  Any new classes would have to have strong base attributes, that can be combined with another profession. The game is so flexible when it comes to creating unique character types there is no reason for a built in hybrid.

Hmm soneone should start the Create a Class for GW2 thread. :) 

Originally posted by drbaltazar

 lol ,if its like the firat  areanet or whatsnot is making the game the only thing ncsoft do is publish it on their production line so for them 1 game more or less isnt an issue 

dont sweat it if its areanet doing this game you WILL  see a great game soon they might delay it for november since there are so many game coming out in september but we ll probably see it before the end of the year

Nope, they said we'd have the first gameplay event/beta in 2009, but they decided to push it for 2010 (probably NCSoft played a factor in pushing this, but it's actually great, which MMO wouldn't like a few more months or years of development before release?). So I'd say GW2 will be released on 2011 or 2012, not counting on a 2010 2nd half release if they will let us see the game like they did with GW1.

I won't be impressed if we have an E3-For-Everyone GW2 preview event dominating the E3, the same way we had our first-ever GW1 gameplay public preview.

Originally posted by redOrc

Asking such a question, shows you are not familiar with GW.

GW enables you to create your own builds. A paladin in GW can be:

W/Mo, N/Rt, Rt/N, so many builds of E, A/Mo, P/anything, D/manythings.

In short you can have many builds of many classes that provide both damage and healing/protection. The skill system is versitile enough to enable you that. You dont have to restrict yourself to a single "class" which is actualy a "build" like in other  games.

This is the fun of GW. People got out of the skill system builds that even the creators didn't think of.

 

I'm perfectly familiar with Guild Wars, I've been playing it since open beta.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with an attribute or class that deals damage in melee and converts some of that damage into party healing. It could very easily be balanced to ensure it's not too powerful or not too weak. If not that then atleast give W/Mo the ability to heal effectively.

I almost get the feeling that people here don't like the paladin archetype for reasons i'll never understand.

Originally posted by dynamo122

Originally posted by redOrc

Asking such a question, shows you are not familiar with GW.

GW enables you to create your own builds. A paladin in GW can be:

W/Mo, N/Rt, Rt/N, so many builds of E, A/Mo, P/anything, D/manythings.

In short you can have many builds of many classes that provide both damage and healing/protection. The skill system is versitile enough to enable you that. You dont have to restrict yourself to a single "class" which is actualy a "build" like in other  games.

This is the fun of GW. People got out of the skill system builds that even the creators didn't think of.

 

 

I'm perfectly familiar with Guild Wars, I've been playing it since open beta.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with an attribute or class that deals damage in melee and converts some of that damage into party healing. It could very easily be balanced to ensure it's not too powerful or not too weak. If not that then atleast give W/Mo the ability to heal effectively.

I almost get the feeling that people here don't like the paladin archetype for reasons i'll never understand.

well just cause you play the game doesn't mean you understand....

Warrior monks use to be what you did    back in proph days....(just wanted to state this)

warriors have natural low energy regen...and natural low energy (havent played in a while but assume its energy) 

this is why they are bad healers...and shit  eles can tank much better  or at least obsidian flesh warriors were what it was all about tank wise...the point of combo classes is the fact that you can mix and match to see what works for you...or now i guess you can just look on wiki and find out the best build of the week....(damn wiki ruined the game)(which you all lost)

warrior monks are not great healers..simple..damn, i remember back in the old days it was mending + sword and thats how you played warrior...not so simple now....and there are a lot of things wrong with skills that do dmg and give health..or wait no there is not it is called touch rangers..ever see one..not unless you pvp....necros already have skills that let them convert their dmg to health...you sir should play your GW more

do i know anything more then anyone here about GW2  no.....but if Anet can do what they did with GW ....and i am sure they can....i will be sitting here in 2012 playing GW2 like the rest of you reading this fourm

Let's wait until after all of the Aion buzz is over for news of GW2. If after that point we hear no news of Guild Wars 2 then even I will start to be concerned.

warrior monks are not great healers..simple..damn, ...you sir should play your GW more

 

Yeah W/Mo aren't good healers. So how about instead of making them a good healer...we

make a PALADIN class (or attribute) that CAN heal good, yeah?

I've got thousands of hours in the game. I hit rank 7 hero before the game was one year old. I know EXACTLY what I'm talking about...

Pallys? I just wanna see some GW 2 info...

The original 6 prof system with primary/secondary was a great design.  Hybrid classes were essentially different pri/sec combos.  Factions and NF added sorta pre-hybrid classes, which I guess they needed to add something new.  But, if you don't like wammos and you want a holy warrior, that's kinda what a Paragon is (note all the angelic symbolism and party healing) or dervishes (healing, holy dmg).

Personally, I hope they go back to the more basic set of profs for GW2, or even move a bit away from profs/classes altogether.  They can incorporate aspects of the extra 4 hybrid classes, but I its better to go back to the idea of  "pure building block" of the core classes and let players make their own hybrids.

Originally posted by Joiry

The original 6 prof system with primary/secondary was a great design.  Hybrid classes were essentially different pri/sec combos.  Factions and NF added sorta pre-hybrid classes, which I guess they needed to add something new.  But, if you don't like wammos and you want a holy warrior, that's kinda what a Paragon is (note all the angelic symbolism and party healing) or dervishes (healing, holy dmg).

Personally, I hope they go back to the more basic set of profs for GW2, or even move a bit away from profs/classes altogether.  They can incorporate aspects of the extra 4 hybrid classes, but I its better to go back to the idea of  "pure building block" of the core classes and let players make their own hybrids.

Right, I say though if they don't create a Paladin class, then atleast remove smiting or divine favor and make  a melee attribute with melee abilities that heal and do damage. Because  traditional monks are melee masters. I'd be content even with monks using their staves to fight in melee with. (though i'd probably go warrior secondary and use a hammer )

Originally posted by dynamo122

Right, I say though if they don't create a Paladin class, then atleast remove smiting or divine favor and make  a melee attribute with melee abilities that heal and do damage. Because  traditional monks are melee masters. I'd be content even with monks using their staves to fight in melee with. (though i'd probably go warrior secondary and use a hammer )

No, traditional monks were aesthetic hermits. Few professed to be healers and even fewer were warriors.

Not that it really matters, GW has an original IP, Anet is under no binding contract to to follow any given bit of pop culture when deciding what a class can and can't do.

Melee/touch range heals are a fail idea. Most MMOs work under a spike based metagame, health can go from full to 0 in a matter of seconds if not prepared. Having to run back and forth to provide healing adds precious seconds on top of a given spell's casting time.

Besides that, there's a reason MMO's split their classes between offense and support. The offense cycles through enemies to find weak targets to pick appart. The defense cycles through the party roster to find weak team mates to heal. If you go hybrid you WILL suck, not only because of over extended attributes, but also because as a human your focus and reflexes are limited and you simply won't be able to compete with a player dedicated to a specific task.

No. In Guild Wars you can combine different classes and thus make the equivalent of a paladin class (which by the way is one of the worst - if not the worst - combinations ever in GW1), then adding a Paladin would be mildly retarded as it would essentially be to implement and already implemented class in the game...

Apart from that the Paladin class should be discouraged as it's just a plain bad class in a team game, as I hope GW2 will be considering how important the perma-teaming is for GW1. In a solo game where everything is about you alone a class that can do some mediocre damage and halfassed healing is nice because everyone needs damage and healing, but in a team game you can instead of focus on one thing and instead of doing mediocre damage and halfassed healing do good damage or healing.

IMO healing + melee just does not work in the GW universe. Balancing requires distinctive rolls.