In general, I hate class restrictions based on race.  I've always found it to be annoying, and make little sense.

I'm soooooooooooooooo looking forward to this game, and it would be great if the classes were more open... but I'm not going to let something like that ruin what looks to be, in so many other ways, a really great game.

---

Originally posted by MMO.Maverick
This is negating history as well as reality. If we're confronted with one thing, then it's that history and modern day has shown that people can't be whatever they want to be. In the past many were slaves or had to work from dawn to evening just to feed their family, or were suppressed by their culture or gender and a multitude of other reasons on which they had little to no influence on. Even these days we see that the 'you can be whatever you want to be' isn't true. Whole hordes of people who want to be actors or famous writers or wellknown singers never see their dreams fulfilled even when having tried their hardest, in other regions of the world women still get suppressed, no room to 'be whatever you want to be' for them, nor people who had the misfortune to be born in the wrong country, severely limiting their options for their lives to choose from. That's the real world.

---

That's a completely different idea, and I suspect you know that. What you have here is all about external influences. You can be a writer or an actor or a singer if you choose to be. Whether you become famous is a matter of skill and luck. They are not the same thing at all. Choosing to do something, and becoming famous for it, are in no way whatever the same idea. Not to mention, if we are playing a game, we are assuming the player characters are good at whatever they choose to be, obviously.

If you are a slave, that is an external thing that is put on you, and is a level of control almost no one sees in this world today, and I doubt we would see in a game. And even so, that doesn't preclude someone from being what they are. For example, you even start as a slave in AoC, and as a prisoner in The Elder Scrolls. But you are still something else. You could be an archer or a magician or a fighter. As long as you are enslaved you wouldn't be able to do what you want, regardless of what it is, and so is a completely different thing again.

Yes, women and various races and religions have been oppressed for thousands of years, but if history has shown us anything, it is that people can choose to be what they want, and in so doing fight that oppression. Being oppressed or put into a situation that limits your freedom, still does not and never could prevent people from making their own choices. Circumstances, like slavery or oppression, might make it more difficult to act on your choices, but none of that prevents you from making them, or being what you want to be. Look at women writers of centuries ago. They existed, even in a society that said they couldn't exist. Look at slaves in America running away and becoming writers or public figures.

Again, external limiting factors cannot prevent a person from being who they are. Let's not get into obscure psychology like Stockholm, but in general this remains true. And this is kind of my point. Anyone, anyone, anywhere, can make the choice to do anything, and any time. But depending on what the action is, there may be consequences, depending on what external factors may be exerted upon them. That's the real world.

Here's an example I heard about this Star Wars games. If this game took place right after Empire, obviously no players should be allowed to be Jedi. That isn't a freedom thing. That's an every-Jedi-got-killed thing. But thousands of years in the past, there were Jedi and Sith. Like I said, I don't know the specifics of Star Wars lore, but I find it very difficult to believe it would be more realistic to have none than to have too many.

From what I can tell, what is weird about chiss is that there would be many at all running around on the planets players might visit in the game. They just didn't in the lore, spend much time off their world. But if you are off the world, and off doing whatever, becoming a hero, then you should have the option to be what you want to be. The weird thing isn't them being whatever class, the weird thing is people seeing in the local bar or running around in general. Not to mention, of the two known chiss force users, one was a Jedi. Of course, if I'm right, both of them are in the distant future compared to this game.

I just don't see how a thousand members of a race no one even knows about about being imperial agents is less lore breaking than a thousand members of a race no one even knows about being Sith force users. So how is a thousand chiss running around less lore breaking than a thousand chiss running around doing something else. It's still lore breaking. It sounds like they just shouldn't have used this race in the first place. If most people don't even know the race exists, it's going to be lore breaking to have a bunch running around no matter what, because players can play them at all.

I am still not trying to say this is always better for all games, or all players, or for this Star Wars game. But it will always be more realistic.

   I think the early MUDs had it right. Any race could choose any class but some races were better suited to some classes.

  Giants didn't make good mages. They had low int and poor mana...BUT...since Draconian spells were based on health they could hit for a ton..just not very often.  Elves were good mages because of high int and mana but were not very good warriors. Low Str and health...BUT..they had great dex and dodges.

  Alot like life...we all have out stong and weak points.

Originally posted by Dubhlaith

That's a completely different idea, and I suspect you know that. What you have here is all about external influences. You can be a writer or an actor or a singer if you choose to be. Whether you become famous is a matter of skill and luck. They are not the same thing at all. Choosing to do something, and becoming famous for it, are in no way whatever the same idea. Not to mention, if we are playing a game, we are assuming the player characters are good at whatever they choose to be, obviously.

(wall of text)

I just don't see how a thousand members of a race no one even knows about about being imperial agents is less lore breaking than a thousand members of a race no one even knows about being Sith force users. So how is a thousand chiss running around less lore breaking than a thousand chiss running around doing something else. It's still lore breaking. It sounds like they just shouldn't have used this race in the first place. If most people don't even know the race exists, it's going to be lore breaking to have a bunch running around no matter what, because players can play them at all.

I am still not trying to say this is always better for all games, or all players, or for this Star Wars game. But it will always be more realistic to me

You mentioned real life. There are enough examples irl and in history that people can't be what they want to be, that's a simple fact of life. Whether it's because of genetics, culture, how someone was raised, born in slavery, born handicapped or blind or deaf or stupid or with the wrong color (which 50 years ago wasn't even that odd to be barred from a lot of careers bc of it), there are all kinds of limitations.

I added "to me" in that last statement of yours: it would be more realistic to you, that's what it's all about: it would help you in your suspension of disbelief, the rest of your examples like the Chiss one that you drag into the discussion are just irrelevant. You are trying to project your idea of how a Star Wars universe in a game should look like, but there are hordes of people with their own idea of how it should look like, which can be equally valid and to them more realistic while at the same time totally contrast to your idea/need for realism.

Anyway, this is starting to look like running in circles: clearly you'd like to have all races to be able to play all classes for your sense of immersion. It won't be there. And no, having all classes be available to all races has nothing to do with reality (which was a bad example and farfetched what you gave) and neither is it required for immersion in an MMORPG, as MMO's like WoW, EQ and EQ2 with their own class/race restrictions clearly showed. But, you're entitled to your own preferences in MMO features of course, just like everyone else.

Originally posted by Tardcore

Originally posted by rygard49

 I think having unnatural race/class combos just in the name of freedom severly limits immersion, and completely destroys lore characters that were special because of their unique choices despite race. Example:

I think a lot of us are familiar with a character by the name Drizzt Do'Urden, but just in case... He's a Dark Elf who grew up underground in a society where everyone followed a dark Goddess, and every Dark Elf was EVIL. Like seriously, fucked up in the head EVIL. But somehow this one guy grows up with a pure heart and makes his way out of the caverns to the surface of the world and becomes a hero, and paragon for the forces of good.

Now how shitty for the story of this character if it turned out that an MMORPG based on that lore allowed every Dark Elf  to make the same moral decisions, and come up to the surface as well. His uniqueness would be destroyed, and it just becomes an uninteresting, commonplace occurence.

In single player games, that would be fine. You're the only one playing and you're the hero. In an MMO, it's lore shattering.

While I understand your point, and agree it is an excellent one. Sadly such a thing is no more ridiculous than every player being the equivilent of Drizzt DoUrden. If an MMO can survive with a world where every player's character becomes a larger than life hero such as Do'Urden without bursting at the seams, then I see a little lore bending to accomodate those players who like to march to a different drummer, and enjoy a wide range of choice char/race wise, as a small evil at most.

 

And to go further if a relatively new to the SW galaxy race such as the Chiss cause so much trouble lore wise, they should be replaced with a less difficult one from the plethora that Lucas already created.

Bend something enough and it's going to break. There's got to be a line you draw somewhere if you want to maintain any integrity of the lore. Keep in mind, I'm only talking about really weird combos. Twi'leks, for example, can do any of that stuff. They should be every class. Sith Pureblood, on the other hand... probably not gonna be a republic soldier anytime soon.

No argument from me about Chiss.

i skimmed the 2 pages of this thread... didnt read all of it but ill say what i think

one of the first posters said it perfectly well

StarWars lore is a sacred thing (SWG screwed with it and they got slammed by the community... look hot the game is doing now)

also

Star Wars is an already set and finished universe, you cant just start changing things like having an ewok join the empire as a storm trooper, you cant have a droid jedi, some things are permitted, droid bounty hunter sure... trandoshan bounty hunter sure... jawa bounty hunter (HOUDINI!!!!) nope can't happen

Guild wars is a lore in progress, as the games get developped they can add and make the changes, untill GuildWars story does not end there can be as many changes as they want. so if they want to make a silvari warrior they can, because its their lore in progress... for all you know, say something bad happens and GW2 has to shut down in 2 years they can decide to actually end the world with a comet crashing into tyria wiping all life... done lore is complete, nothing can be added or changed. at that point new games based on guild wars will have to follow the lore and wont be able to change facts.

Originally posted by Elikal

The answer was relatively elegantly given from ArenaNets' Community Manager Regina Buenaobra, when she was asked whether mixes like Sylvan Engeneers or such would not make a strange mix:

"Players in general are exceptional and unusual figures, heroes who stand out among their people. Just as there are asura warriors and norn necromancers, it's not unheard of for an inquisitive, mechanically-inclined sylvari to become an engineer."

THIS. I wish some Biblical Miracle would write that sentence in flaming script on the walls of Bioware. THIS is why there should be a Chiss Jedi or a Twilek BH or ANY mix the player can make. The PLAYER is a HERO! Isn't that what Bioware always emphasizes? And if the player is a hero, why should he not be something else that the many other stereotypical Jedi, BH or Smugglers? The player is the hero, he is per se an unusual character. And he IS an individual. Heck, there were Hutt Jedi! Not that I want to play one, but everything is possible and isn't it "your story"?

 

I think it's just another sign that ANet is ahead of Bioware in innovation and design. Wish Bioware devs werent so goddamn stubborn about "their vision" of things.

its call george lucas is god of star wars, and what god says goes, goes.  god does not wish all races to be all classes so they shall not be.

Originally posted by neorandom

Originally posted by Elikal

The answer was relatively elegantly given from ArenaNets' Community Manager Regina Buenaobra, when she was asked whether mixes like Sylvan Engeneers or such would not make a strange mix:

"Players in general are exceptional and unusual figures, heroes who stand out among their people. Just as there are asura warriors and norn necromancers, it's not unheard of for an inquisitive, mechanically-inclined sylvari to become an engineer."

THIS. I wish some Biblical Miracle would write that sentence in flaming script on the walls of Bioware. THIS is why there should be a Chiss Jedi or a Twilek BH or ANY mix the player can make. The PLAYER is a HERO! Isn't that what Bioware always emphasizes? And if the player is a hero, why should he not be something else that the many other stereotypical Jedi, BH or Smugglers? The player is the hero, he is per se an unusual character. And he IS an individual. Heck, there were Hutt Jedi! Not that I want to play one, but everything is possible and isn't it "your story"? 

I think it's just another sign that ANet is ahead of Bioware in innovation and design. Wish Bioware devs werent so goddamn stubborn about "their vision" of things.

its call george lucas is god of star wars, and what god says goes, goes.  god does not wish all races to be all classes so they shall not be.

     I find it funny that if someone disagrees with something "Star Wars", it is instantly George Lucas's fault.  Funny thing is BioWare has never said, "George Lucas made me do it!"  At least not that I have found.  Personally, while I admit that I like the idea of limiting the class/race combos (with the possibility of expanding it later after certain accomplishments are met), I am not willing to call out George Lucas until BioWare lays the blame at his feet.  Until then, it is the Developers fault, not the IP owners fault.  Keep in mind, limiting certain combinations also has the side benefit of reducing programming time after all.

---

Originally posted by MMO.Maverick

---

Originally posted by Dubhlaith

That's a completely different idea, and I suspect you know that. What you have here is all about external influences. You can be a writer or an actor or a singer if you choose to be. Whether you become famous is a matter of skill and luck. They are not the same thing at all. Choosing to do something, and becoming famous for it, are in no way whatever the same idea. Not to mention, if we are playing a game, we are assuming the player characters are good at whatever they choose to be, obviously.
(wall of text)
I just don't see how a thousand members of a race no one even knows about about being imperial agents is less lore breaking than a thousand members of a race no one even knows about being Sith force users. So how is a thousand chiss running around less lore breaking than a thousand chiss running around doing something else. It's still lore breaking. It sounds like they just shouldn't have used this race in the first place. If most people don't even know the race exists, it's going to be lore breaking to have a bunch running around no matter what, because players can play them at all.

I am still not trying to say this is always better for all games, or all players, or for this Star Wars game. But it will always be more realistic.

---

You mentioned real life. There are enough examples irl and in history that people can't be what they want to be, that's a simple fact of life. Whether it's because of genetics, culture, how someone was raised, born in slavery, born handicapped or blind or deaf or stupid or with the wrong color (which 50 years ago wasn't even that odd to be barred from a lot of careers bc of it), there are all kinds of limitations.
I added "to me" in that last statement of yours: it would be more realistic to you, that's what it's all about: it would help you in your suspension of disbelief, the rest of your examples like the Chiss one that you drag into the discussion are just irrelevant. You are trying to project your idea of how a Star Wars universe in a game should look like, but there are hordes of people with their own idea of how it should look like, which can be equally valid and to them more realistic while at the same time totally contrast to your idea/need for realism.
Anyway, this is starting to look like running in circles: clearly you'd like to have all races to be able to play all classes for your sense of immersion. It won't be there. And no, having all classes be available to all races has nothing to do with reality (which was a bad example and farfetched what you gave) and neither is it required for immersion in an MMORPG, as MMO's like WoW, EQ and EQ2 with their own class/race restrictions clearly showed. But, you're entitled to your own preferences in MMO features of course, just like everyone else.

---

No, I don't want them to change it, nor would I care if they did. I'm not going to play this game regardless of the decision, which has of course already been made. Nor am I trying to say it would be better for the game overall. I can't make that call, because I don't know what the developers are trying to do, nor do I know what would sell the best. I am saying it would be more realistic if they did it as Elikal explained. And I am not working from a position of opinion. This is the way it is.

This is about realism. There are tons of examples, in real world history, of people overcoming those things you describe, such as racism, and being something you wouldn't normally expect, so it is unrealistic of you to put say that something like that would prevent a special case, as all PCs are designed to be, in just about every RPG I can think of, from choosing an unusual path.

Using blindness and other handicaps is equally ridiculous, because if we are creating our characters, we are usually making them ideal physical specimens, and if we do not, that is a choice on our part in any case. Again, there are people, in the real world, women leaders from centuries ago, famous black people from decades ago, any number of things, that show people can and do overcome adverse circumstances to be something outside the norm. And isn't that what a player character is, by definition, someone who is above average, at least in some ways? Otherwise, why are we playing as them?

I am going to try to say this another way, to see if it sinks in. In the real world, people can make their own choices, regardless of what life has thrown at them. Yes, outside influences can affect their success or the final outcome, but, and this is the part I feel I need to stress, they can choose to at least try. in the 1950s, a black man could choose to go into a white bar and ask for a drink. That was an option for him. He would probably get his ass handed to him, if not killed, but that was a choice that was open to him. Do you follow that?

In the medieval era, a woman was not allowed to go anywhere without a male escort or a personal letter explaining the situation from her male caretaker (husband or father, etc.) However, a woman could leave and go on her own, and some did. They would be met in many situations with adversity, but that was an option that was open to her. Do you follow that?

The point is that the most realistic course will always be more options, albeit perhaps with consequences, perhaps severe ones. But more options will always be more realistic, because in the real world, we have infinite options at all times. If I wanted to move to America and and join a snake-handling Baptist church or whatever, I can. That is an option that is open to me. If I want to walk the streets for money, I can. If I want to move to China and start advocating for the freedom of Tibet, I can. If I want to join a dojo and train in martial arts or try to become a yogi, that is something I can do. If I want to become a professional chef, that's something I can go out and give a shot. I can move to LA and try to be a film star. I can try to become a famous poet.

Do you see the point? My success is not guaranteed (in fact, in China, I'd probably have some very dire consequences coming my way), but it is a choice, I have choice. Life is positively replete with choices. There is no situation in which a developer telling me "nope, can't do that" could be more realistic. It doesn't exist, I don't think. If you think of one, tell me. I'd be very interested.

In any case, I think I'm going to start a thread about this. This subject is too interesting, and apparently contentious.

Again, this isn't about my preferences for the game. I don't know what's best for the game, as a whole. I do know what would be more realistic. And I think that was what Elikal was getting at.
(Elikal, if I am misrepresenting your position, I apologise.)

Dubhlaith, I want to first state i don't disagree with you on having more options in a game is good provided it makes sense within the world. 

What i will counter is the fact of realism in games.  Yes it's possible to be anything in real life within reason, i can't be a bull no matter how much i want to be, however in games we are trying to simulated a fantasy or make believe world. Sure some things like gravity tend to persist but thats more of a design choice rather then a requirement. We could simply have a game with no gravity or far less gravity and go with that and it would be okay. Wouldn't be realistic but there ya go.  However if we try and place every game next to realism we run into problems.

For one thing in a game especially in most MMOs (not all mind you) if you die/get defeated you don't stay dead or wake up in an emeny camp soon to be killed as would likely happen in a similar situation in real life.  So theres some leap of logic to play there.  You can of course explain it away by saying that your soul returns to the nether realms but i pluck it back and place you in a new body thus you reappear at a designated points, oh and i have 25 brothers and sisters who can do the exact same thing and they just happen to be scattered at towns and various important places.   Not that the system is bad but it's...contrived at best to explain a mechanice that wouldn't make sense normally in real life but does in this world.

Also in the real world unless your some kind of body builder you normally can't hold 8 bags full of swords/shields/armor/plants/pets/mounts (vehicle and animal) spare bones of mammoths, and anything else you pick up. I know they are suppose to be larger then life but i've seen skinny twigs of characters able to hold all this (cause they had high str) high str would have of course locked their character into looking musculare in real life but it was okay in the game because they are special and thus this is okay (another leap of logic)

So we here again in the game have to take a leap of logic and assume that because of lore reasons our characters simply choose to take a vow that they won't follow these paths for any reason because that is simply how they are.

Do any of these 3 examples make sense when placed next to real life? Nope.  Do they need to for the game..nope (which you stated) in the end we just have to preceive some things as part of the game world.  Provided of course theres good reason for this provided in game.

Originally posted by Dubhlaith

No, I don't want them to change it, nor would I care if they did. I'm not going to play this game regardless of the decision, which has of course already been made. Nor am I trying to say it would be better for the game overall. I can't make that call, because I don't know what the developers are trying to do, nor do I know what would sell the best. I am saying it would be more realistic if they did it as Elikal explained. And I am not working from a position of opinion. This is the way it is.

 

(snips)

Again, this isn't about my preferences for the game. I don't know what's best for the game, as a whole. I do know what would be more realistic. And I think that was what Elikal was getting at.
(Elikal, if I am misrepresenting your position, I apologise.)

Like I said, this is going nowhere: you're citing examples and claiming it's the Ultimate Reality, I'm citing examples that show the other side of reality, and that's how we keep pingponging. Useless. And beyond ridiculous. Here you have people who scorn BW for the 'Heroic' interpretation they want to give to character development, yet at the same time want their characters to be able to do everything because that's what 'heroic' historic characters were. Now, what is it? Want your char to be regular guy Uncle Owen or 'heroic' and someone unique? Ridiculing BW for their 'heroic' approach towards game design, yet at the same time wanting your characters to be heroic in other ways sounds like double standards to me.

And all this talk about realism: you want your character to be not like ordinary humans were but 'special', while at the same time ignoring the restrictions that most of the people irl experience as well as the consequences that breaking those restrictions led to. If you want to make the claim for realism then you should go all the way: also accept the limitations and restrictions that real life also brings. Else it's just half baked.

Besides that, everyone who is clamoring for no class/race restrictions who didn't raise a fuss and indignation about it in other MMO's like EQ or WoW, I'll call hypocritical, so I'm really curious how people dealt with restrictions in those games.

Anyway, you don't even intend to play the game, so this sounds like just another sandbox/themepark discussion to me, with sandbox fans trying to impose their favored preferences in MMO gaming upon other MMO styles as 'The Way to do things'.

I agree to disagree, I find the whole claim of 'realism' preposterous and dinner buffet mentality, not accepting the whole reality but just the pieces that you like. It's simply how you like to play your game, no class/race restrictions, because it fits your immersion and suspension of disbelief, that's all: your own personal taste. Making any higher claims is just silly.

I'm not sure the leap of logic you made to compare gravity or death to the ability of a sentient creature to decide for itself, but whatever.

I made a thread here where we can debate this until the crows eat out our eyes if we want, but I don't think it's fair to the discussion this thread was supposed to be about, so I'm not going to debate it here.

I miss the days when Bioware was *about* freedom and choice.

Originally posted by Dwarvish

 

   I think the early MUDs had it right. Any race could choose any class but some races were better suited to some classes.

  Giants didn't make good mages. They had low int and poor mana...BUT...since Draconian spells were based on health they could hit for a ton..just not very often.  Elves were good mages because of high int and mana but were not very good warriors. Low Str and health...BUT..they had great dex and dodges.

  Alot like life...we all have out stong and weak points.

 I fully agree-early MUDS you could be any class with any race. You may have not been the best cleric as a troll, but you could be one. 

The idea of linear development of a character based solely on race and what  class you can play based on that race,  limits you as a gamer to who and what you want to be ingame.

Originally posted by Elikal

The answer was relatively elegantly given from ArenaNets' Community Manager Regina Buenaobra, when she was asked whether mixes like Sylvan Engeneers or such would not make a strange mix:

"Players in general are exceptional and unusual figures, heroes who stand out among their people. Just as there are asura warriors and norn necromancers, it's not unheard of for an inquisitive, mechanically-inclined sylvari to become an engineer."

THIS. I wish some Biblical Miracle would write that sentence in flaming script on the walls of Bioware. THIS is why there should be a Chiss Jedi or a Twilek BH or ANY mix the player can make. The PLAYER is a HERO! Isn't that what Bioware always emphasizes? And if the player is a hero, why should he not be something else that the many other stereotypical Jedi, BH or Smugglers? The player is the hero, he is per se an unusual character. And he IS an individual. Heck, there were Hutt Jedi! Not that I want to play one, but everything is possible and isn't it "your story"?

 

I think it's just another sign that ANet is ahead of Bioware in innovation and design. Wish Bioware devs werent so goddamn stubborn about "their vision" of things.

 While i don't dismiss your sentiment, your argument is slightly flawed. There was only ever ONE Hutt Jedi in lore, Beldorion. Name me a single Hutt bounty hunter? I can't think of any.

Not disagreeing with your point, i agree games like this are more fun if you can play the race and the class you want to play without having to compromise becuase the dev's restrict class choice. I also agree with the MUD approach that you can have any race playing any class, but certain races are better suited to those classes and some others are not. Case in point for mmorpg's, half ogre mages, elf champions and furbolg bards/animists in DAoC to name a few.

Originally posted by Dubhlaith

Gobla, I don't know why this particular issue threw you into such a tizzy, but yes, more freedom is always a good thing. I was specifically referring to race/class combos, as I feel was obvious in my post, but it does in fact apply to all things. Yes, when you have more freedom, you will have a few moron children make virtual penises. It happens. But you also get some pretty impressive stuff, like here and here. It took me about ten seconds to find that. There is a lot of majesty in that game, too.

It's more a case of you give extreme you get extreme right back. If you make a post containing extreme statements such as freedom is always better then you'll receive replies of an extreme nature. And I was being very sarcastic, though I suppose that can be a bit hard to detect over the internet.

But if you really believe more freedom is always better then why exactly aren't you out there playing Second Life? Or better yet C++? Because that's the logical resolution of your statement that more freedom is always better. You might also want to read this post about too much freedom. And yes, these are extreme examples. If you don't want such extreme things thrown at you then stop making extreme statements.

I was specifically thinking about twi'leks when I wrote that post. And yes, I *was* talking about Bioware's design choices, specifically race/class combinations. I will admit to not knowing much about Star Wars lore, but if the Chiss thing is genetic, that they are unable to use the force, that's one thing, but if it is just that they tend to not be jedi, that's another. Like I said in my original post, which again, was primarily focused on race/class combos, there is no reason players shouldn't be able to choose things that are not the norm. What some people in this thread are doing is hiding behind the idea of "lore" when what they really mean is stereotypes. We see a lot of stereotypes in the real world, but that does not mean people cannot choose whatever path they want. In the real world, you can be whatever you want to be. So don't try to say that in a game it makes more sense to not be able to. I don't care what your lore is, it is not more believable that people wouldn't be able to choose

Stereotypes are cool in fantasy games. Dwarves drink beer, fart and grumble about the younger races. Elves write poetry, make fine music and drink sweet wines. The moment you allow these to be broken then they're lost and you've no longer got a game with Dwarves and Elves in it, you've got a game with short stubby bearded Humans and tall pointy eared Humans.

And in RL there are only humans. We've got no frame of comparison about how different races would think and act. Do you honestly believe that Elven brains are just carbon copies of Human brains? That there's no differences at all? That a Twi'Lek is just a funky skinned human with two fleshy appendages on his/her head?

Humans can be whatever they want to be. Humans have the freedom to choose. Humans think like we do. Humans choose like we choose. Elves, Dwarves, Twi'Leks, Chiss etc. may not be whatever they want to be. They may not have the freedom to choose. They may not think like we do. They may not choose like we do. We don't know what they would do because we don't have Elven, Dwarven, Twi'Lek, Chiss etc. Brains.

But if you want to know how it works in RL then maybe we could look at a group of creatures that, unlike humans, have very close relatives. Let's take the big cats, because big cats are cool. We've got Lions, Tigers, Leopard and Jaguar. These basically look like different skinned versions on each other ( like fantasy races ). They can interbreed ( like fantasy races ). etc. As good a comparison as any.

Now Lions are one race and they often live in prides. They group up and they have their social structure there. Now prides are cool, so we're going to include these in our big cat game in the form of a class. A pet class. Now should this class be playable by Tigers, Leopards and Jaguar who do not live in prides? Of course not, that's silly because they don't have Lion brains and as such don't have Lion behaviour.

Now let's take a more standard class for our big cat game. The Warrior. Now Tigers are the biggest at 300kg, so obviously good warrior material. Lions are also good at 250kg, again good warrior material. Now Jaguars have a bit of a problem at only 135kg. That's about half of what Tigers and Lions have. But let's go with the whole completely unfounded in real-life explanation that speed compensates for strength, this is a game anyway. So Jaguar warriors are in. Then we come to the Leopard. Leopards come at max 91kg! 3 Leopards are less then one tiger! How far do you want to stretch this thing for Leopards to become Warriors?

How hard is it too imagine that some Fantasy races might not have Human physiologies? Maybe they've got lighter bones meaning that in a world inhabited by strong-boned warriors they never ever become warriors because those that do get all their bones broken in training and are never seen again. Maybe there's some minor racial trait causing the Republic or Imperial Military to reject individuals from those races into their elite squadronds ( like how in Real Life woman aren't allowed in combat roles ).

If developers want players to feel special and like they are playing an interesting story, or playing a believable role, the players need choice. Of course, in a well-made game, choice comes with consequences. Let's have a look at a Bioware game that was actually decent, NWN. Yes, they used D&D rules, but bear with me.

Each race had specific strengths and weaknesses. But you could choose to be what you want (yes, they have alignment restrictions, but that makes sense, at least to me, because that is just a representation of the choice you can make), but there are benefits and costs to the choices you make. For example, a halfling rogue is going to be better than a half-orc rogue, but the orc would be a much better barbarian.

So you should be allowed to do what you want, but it should make sense. I think games should allow us FFA PvP in the way EVE does, in that if you do it, there are going to be consequences. If you run into a town and take a swing at a merchant, you are going to be in some trouble with the law. If you want to be a jedi that doesn't use a lightsaber, that should be your prerogative, but expect whatever negative things might happen as a result.

Becaues in the current day and age every single player would be crying "BAL4NZE!!!!111!!". If you make a choice available then players expect that choice to be balanced compared to the other choices. They do not want to pick a half-orc and then be penalised for it. They want that half-orc to be equal to that halfling. And just look at the EvE forums about the many threads complaining about how this and this race's Battleships are better then this and this other race's Battleships and how it's unfair and unbalanced and takes away player freedom rather then add to it.

If you make it possible to roll a Jedi without a lightsaber then these are either going to be stronger or weaker then normal Jedi because perfect balance does not exist. As such they'll either never be chosen and people will whine about it or they'll always be chosen and you're now in a 'Star Wars' universe where 90% of all Jedi stopped using lightsabres. Yeah..... now that's realistic.....

More freedom is always more realistic in an RPG. That isn't an opinion, because the most realistic thing would be to be able to do anything, but with consequences for your actions, just like in reality. More freedom might not always be more fun for everyone in a game, but I think it would be for me, in all cases. Bioware has obviously gone more and more towards reducing freedom and putting the player and the game on rails, and if that is what some players want, I am glad there are games for them. But don't hide behind lore to say something doesn't make sense. It doesn't have to make sense. People make nonsensical choices all the time, and it would be more realistic to be able to make those choices in the game.

It all depends on whether you want a serious game that actually represents the other source material around it or if you want a completely silly game set in a completely different world that slightly resembles the original source material.

I for one would like to keep the sparkly magical vampires wielding lightsaber guns out of Star Wars.

I am aware I ended up being more broad in my discussion that race/class combos, but that is the basis for the post. So don't get any idea about taking things out of context, my contentious green man.

As I said, don't make extreme statements like you're making if you don't want extreme answers.

Edit:

I took out a bit that perhaps too snarky.

Gobla, you continually miss the entire point of my statements, and I don't know a clearer way to explain it. It isn't an extreme statement. Bringing cats into the discussion is just...bizarre. Implying we don't have races in the real world with their own cultures and quirks and idiosyncrasies is off-base and flat-out wrong. Genetically, culturally, and sociologically, Caucasians and Asians are not that much closer to one another than High Elves and humans or Dark Elves are. So saying that there couldn't be a dwarf that doesn't like poetry is like saying there is no Irish person that doesn't like beer. (Case in point, I don't drink.)

So, long story short, you're wrong. I don't normally make blanket statements, but here it fits. So either you aren't paying attention, or you are incapable of understanding the point that is being made, or you don't understand what free will or sentience is (Hint: It is one of the things that separates us from cats.) In any case, I am done smashing my face against a thick green wall. Let us agree to disagree.

Originally posted by Dubhlaith

Gobla, you continually miss the entire point of my statements, and I don't know a clearer way to explain it. It isn't an extreme statement. Bringing cats into the discussion is just...bizarre. Implying we don't have races in the real world with their own cultures and quirks and idiosyncrasies is off-base and flat-out wrong. Genetically, culturally, and sociologically, Caucasians and Asians are not that much closer to one another than High Elves and humans or Dark Elves are. So saying that there couldn't be a dwarf that doesn't like poetry is like saying there is no Irish person that doesn't like beer. (Case in point, I don't drink.)

So, long story short, you're wrong. I don't normally make blanket statements, but here it fits. So either you aren't paying attention, or you are incapable of understanding the point that is being made, or you don't understand what free will or sentience is (Hint: It is one of the things that separates us from cats.) In any case, I am done smashing my face against a thick green wall. Let us agree to disagree.

High Elves are just a different strain of human? You might want to look into like 95% of the origin stories of Fantasy worlds.....

I've yet to see Caucasians or Asians get centuries old while the rest of us die in 100 years.

And cats don't have free will or sentience? Where did you get that? I don't think you want to get into that phylosophical debate because frankly there's no way for either side to win. We don't know what cats think.

In an mmorpg, every dwarf would dislike poetry. Everyone would play the elf that chose mortality, everyone would play the dark elf that went good etc making it quite silly. It's an MMORPG after all, YES you have to take other players into consideration. If that's not your thing, play a friggin single player game.

Also, drawing lines between caucasian/asian and human/elf.... that's where it went bizarre. Lol'd.

Originally posted by Elikal

Originally posted by Ikonic
Its an IP issue, not an innovation issue.

Bollocks. Thinking outside the box isn't an IP issue, it's an issue of a narrow thinking.

 We know you are going to buy the game therefore they don't need to cave into  your desires in order to get you as a customer.

Originally posted by waynejr2

Originally posted by Elikal

Originally posted by Ikonic
Its an IP issue, not an innovation issue.

Bollocks. Thinking outside the box isn't an IP issue, it's an issue of a narrow thinking.

 We know you are going to buy the game therefore they don't need to cave into  your desires in order to get you as a customer.

     Good point.