Most likely it is an issue of balance and also a way to give each class it's own distinct feel.

Originally posted by Dawnstar

Most likely it is an issue of balance and also a way to give each class it's own distinct feel.

Arent the class skills supposed to give each class its own distinct feel?  The weapon restrictions dont really tie into the whole personal story thing from waht i can see.

Originally posted by Lord.Bachus

That could be true, but how could i know?  As said i am still wayting on the perfect sandbox game, which will not be ArcheAge.

Blasphemy! Actually, I can't get too excited for ArchAge until I know it's releasing in the west. Looks great so far though.

On topic: OP, you got the answer. Weapons are tied to skills, when they add more skills you'll get more weapons. Yay

It would seem because they simply chose to for whatever reason.

Many MMOs in the themepark section seem to have the same thing, limiting certain classes to certain weapons; I would prefer they didn't but not much you can do.

If it bothers you enough to not play the game simply don't; if it doesn't bother you that much then make suggestions and try to rally support for the idea whenever you hit beta. That is really all you can do.

Originally posted by DeserttFoxx

Originally posted by Dawnstar

Most likely it is an issue of balance and also a way to give each class it's own distinct feel.

 

 

Arent the class skills supposed to give each class its own distinct feel?  The weapon restrictions dont really tie into the whole personal story thing from waht i can see.

I think it's a combination of class skills and the weapons available to the class and how they interact.  Just my opinion..

Originally posted by Axllow18

It would seem because they simply chose to for whatever reason.

Many MMOs in the themepark section seem to have the same thing, limiting certain classes to certain weapons; I would prefer they didn't but not much you can do.

If it bothers you enough to not play the game simply don't; if it doesn't bother you that much then make suggestions and try to rally support for the idea whenever you hit beta. That is really all you can do.

Where did i say it bothered me enough not to play the game?

I did say i would make a suggestion about it in beta.

You might as well ask questions like "Why are there only 8 classes?" "Why don't they add more weapon types?" "Why are there only 3 elites per class?" or simply "Why not more?"

It's pointless to ask any of these. They'll add more when they get to it. Sheesh.

Originally posted by DeserttFoxx

It seems like guild wars could easily go the route of allowing every weapon for every class, obviously functioning in different ways for each class. If you look at say, the greatsword on a mesmer vs the greatsword on a warrior, same weapon, on a mesmer is suddenly a long range cannon type weapon, on the warrior the traditional large cleaver it should be.

Is there an actual reason behind say, a mesmer not being able to dual weild pistols? or a warrior being able to use a staff, or whatever else, perhaps there are some strictly mage type weapons like the totems and stuff, but a large amount of the weapons and weapon combinations seem like they should simply be availble to every class.

I personally will be making this sugestion when i get into the beta, but i was wondering what others thought, did they mention the reason behind the restrictions? As it stands now it seems fairly arbitriary.

 If you're going to give every class every weapon, then why not just do away with classes alltogether? Skills are tied to weapons. Every class having access to every weapon would be perfect for a classless game. It would mean elementalists shouldn't have different attunements because of balance. Engineers shouldn't have kits etc.

The game has classes and elementalists are not going to be wielding greatswords anytime soon. It's fantasy! Weapon restrictions for certain classes can sometimes simply make sense.

Originally posted by JoeyMMO

Originally posted by DeserttFoxx

It seems like guild wars could easily go the route of allowing every weapon for every class, obviously functioning in different ways for each class. If you look at say, the greatsword on a mesmer vs the greatsword on a warrior, same weapon, on a mesmer is suddenly a long range cannon type weapon, on the warrior the traditional large cleaver it should be.

Is there an actual reason behind say, a mesmer not being able to dual weild pistols? or a warrior being able to use a staff, or whatever else, perhaps there are some strictly mage type weapons like the totems and stuff, but a large amount of the weapons and weapon combinations seem like they should simply be availble to every class.

I personally will be making this sugestion when i get into the beta, but i was wondering what others thought, did they mention the reason behind the restrictions? As it stands now it seems fairly arbitriary.

 If you're going to give every class every weapon, then why not just do away with classes alltogether? Skills are tied to weapons. Every class having access to every weapon would be perfect for a classless game. It would mean elementalists shouldn't have different attunements because of balance. Engineers shouldn't have kits etc.

The game has classes and elementalists are not going to be wielding greatswords anytime soon. It's fantasy! Weapon restrictions for certain classes can sometimes simply make sense.

Or show lack of imagination among the game developers. Not that I'm saying GW2 suffers from this, but many games from table top D&D onward have always seemed to fetter their own creativity by enforcing these so called "class restrictions" upon themeselves.

I thought that was the main reason GW2 had such a large following, because A-net was so passionite about doing things differently and not just following the same path of copy paste mechanics so many other MMOs had done before.

So that said I don't understand why some fans seem to think Deserttfox's proposal is so heretical. Don't get me wrong, I don't feel GW2s current class/weapon choices are very restrictive, but then again, more variety in weapons choices actually sounds like it could be fun.

Originally posted by JoeyMMO

Originally posted by DeserttFoxx

It seems like guild wars could easily go the route of allowing every weapon for every class, obviously functioning in different ways for each class. If you look at say, the greatsword on a mesmer vs the greatsword on a warrior, same weapon, on a mesmer is suddenly a long range cannon type weapon, on the warrior the traditional large cleaver it should be.

Is there an actual reason behind say, a mesmer not being able to dual weild pistols? or a warrior being able to use a staff, or whatever else, perhaps there are some strictly mage type weapons like the totems and stuff, but a large amount of the weapons and weapon combinations seem like they should simply be availble to every class.

I personally will be making this sugestion when i get into the beta, but i was wondering what others thought, did they mention the reason behind the restrictions? As it stands now it seems fairly arbitriary.

 If you're going to give every class every weapon, then why not just do away with classes alltogether? Skills are tied to weapons. Every class having access to every weapon would be perfect for a classless game. It would mean elementalists shouldn't have different attunements because of balance. Engineers shouldn't have kits etc.

The game has classes and elementalists are not going to be wielding greatswords anytime soon. It's fantasy! Weapon restrictions for certain classes can sometimes simply make sense.

Did you read his post? How hard would it be to add different skills for each weapon to each class making them perform differently? Answer: Not any harder than what they've already done, it would just add a bit of time.

I'd love this idea to be implemented. But for different reasons, character look, persona reasons. It could add more to set each player apart on a visual level. While your Warrior carries a large sword, mine carries a staff and a set of pistols, make pistol skills more close range melee oriented, step back a bit to use the staff(martial arts style). How would a decent implementation of that not be beneficial?

Is A-net above the idea of a suggestion box? Is any company?

Whats awesome about GW2, is that the skills are not tied to attributes intrinsically like they were in GW1. Additionally, status effects are not skill-unique, but rather come from a global pool. So, once they get to a a point where one weapon's skills are balanced, it will stay balanced. If they find that snares are doing a bit too much slow, they can adjust all snares all at once. Further, without dual professions, theres not going to be any unexpected synergy that makes certain builds obviously more powerful than any other.

Now, why am I blathering on about this?
Because it means that A.net has a longevity plan for the balance of the game (which they didn't have in GW1); once they get balance to a certain stable point, they can begin adding more stuff to balance without damaging the existing balance. Whether that means more weapon choices, or more races (Races would most likely be easier to balance), or another profession remains to be seen.

On a personal note, I would love to see an Ele wield a greatsword. I can imagine one doing a horizontal spin backwards, only to release a gout of flame (or a wall of ice, or gust of wind, or a pool of mud) as the sword comes back around to the fore. Adding weapons choices, IMO, doesn't in any way change the identity of the professions. The Class mechanics are what defines them, weapon skills can be tuned to match (like a dagger ele doesn't really match what my ideal image of an ele is, but the skills make it work as an ele). Similarly, I can see a warrior or thief using a staff, just make it martial-arts style combat; just because one profession uses a weapon one way, doesn't mean every profession has to use it that way.

But realistically, we should wait for the game to get balanced before demanding more weapon/skill choices.

Ye somehow i understand the OP, but then again you would have so many build choice it wwould be just too much. What would be cool is if the reskin option let you actually use skin from other weapons in pve and the WvW, especially the skin your class can't use.
 
I'll just edit a second to say that i really don't think this limitation is arbitrary, from my understanding they used weapon in a similar way fps use them, this mean each weapon actually have specific purpose, like aoe, range and who knows what else. So switching weapon will actually be a big part in the combat success, something that is rather absent from mmo.

I hear they will allow to switch to any weapon you like in combat. Something in synergy to the revamped elite skills.

Originally posted by DeserttFoxx

It seems like guild wars could easily go the route of allowing every weapon for every class, obviously functioning in different ways for each class. If you look at say, the greatsword on a mesmer vs the greatsword on a warrior, same weapon, on a mesmer is suddenly a long range cannon type weapon, on the warrior the traditional large cleaver it should be.

Is there an actual reason behind say, a mesmer not being able to dual weild pistols? or a warrior being able to use a staff, or whatever else, perhaps there are some strictly mage type weapons like the totems and stuff, but a large amount of the weapons and weapon combinations seem like they should simply be availble to every class.

I personally will be making this sugestion when i get into the beta, but i was wondering what others thought, did they mention the reason behind the restrictions? As it stands now it seems fairly arbitriary.

In a few cases it doesn't make sense, I don' t see a elementalist with a 2handed axe or shield.

But in many cases it is because it would be a lot of work and it would be rather complicated for new players.

That work could be put into making 1-2 new classes instead, We are talking about a huge number of attacks that would have to be created and balanced. Most weapons need 2 attacks if you use it as main weapon, 2 as secondary weapon and one for each other weapon you combo it with and another one if you only uses it. That would be a lot of attacks to add.

---

Originally posted by bongolin
I hear they will allow to switch to any weapon you like in combat. Something in synergy to the revamped elite skills.

---

No you have 2 set you can switch in combat, out of combat you can do what you want, but you have to prepare 2 sets for combat. Actually i think its a good limitation, if not you would just be able to do everything and i don't think its actually good, having to prepare yourself and make choice is an interesting part imo.

Originally posted by Requiamer

 

---

Originally posted by bongolin
I hear they will allow to switch to any weapon you like in combat. Something in synergy to the revamped elite skills.

---

 

No you have 2 set you can switch in combat, out of combat you can do what you want, but you have to prepare 2 sets for combat. Actually i think its a good limitation, if not you would just be able to do everything and i don't think its actually good, having to prepare yourself and make choice is an interesting part imo.

:( Don't spoil my 1st April fun...

Originally posted by therez0

Whats awesome about GW2, is that the skills are not tied to attributes intrinsically like they were in GW1. Additionally, status effects are not skill-unique, but rather come from a global pool. So, once they get to a a point where one weapon's skills are balanced, it will stay balanced. If they find that snares are doing a bit too much slow, they can adjust all snares all at once. Further, without dual professions, theres not going to be any unexpected synergy that makes certain builds obviously more powerful than any other.

Now, why am I blathering on about this?
Because it means that A.net has a longevity plan for the balance of the game (which they didn't have in GW1); once they get balance to a certain stable point, they can begin adding more stuff to balance without damaging the existing balance. Whether that means more weapon choices, or more races (Races would most likely be easier to balance), or another profession remains to be seen.

On a personal note, I would love to see an Ele wield a greatsword. I can imagine one doing a horizontal spin backwards, only to release a gout of flame (or a wall of ice, or gust of wind, or a pool of mud) as the sword comes back around to the fore. Adding weapons choices, IMO, doesn't in any way change the identity of the professions. The Class mechanics are what defines them, weapon skills can be tuned to match (like a dagger ele doesn't really match what my ideal image of an ele is, but the skills make it work as an ele). Similarly, I can see a warrior or thief using a staff, just make it martial-arts style combat; just because one profession uses a weapon one way, doesn't mean every profession has to use it that way.

But realistically, we should wait for the game to get balanced before demanding more weapon/skill choices.

This ^ (post of the thread)

Maybe they just don't have the time or there are more pressing matters for them.

I don't think there is a real reason. I'd rather have the game released though than see it delayed to make changes. But that's just my opinion.

Originally posted by darkehawke

Maybe they just don't have the time or there are more pressing matters for them.

I don't think there is a real reason. I'd rather have the game released though than see it delayed to make changes. But that's just my opinion.

 

Its intentional, obviously. Balance is the number one for that decision. Then the diversity within the 10 skill system, you have active abilities to play dertain role/play style at a time. But not as in GW rock/paper style, where your build might be completely useless in some fights. In GW2 you always can perform average->good->superior, depend on your skill as player, the situation/build purose/team you are in/solo...etc.

All this arent my thoughts, its what Devs. said.

Originally posted by ropenice

A few touchy responses just because he would like to have weapons not have class-restrictions. This wasn't even a hater-type post. Things like this give GW2 fans a bad name. Hope this doesn't reflect how the community will act in game. Doubt it will, as forums usually don't represent majority of players in games. But why the bitter?

I know some people like to attack other people but please just stop with the "reflecting how the community will work" thing, it's getting annoying now.

In reply to the OP

Each weapon and set have a specific role they fill. Some fill control and some fill defence and some fill support. When a class has come to the point where if they introduce another weapon to that class it may seem out of place (for instance a Warrior with a staff, seriously wtf?)  or if it gets to a point where any weapon they introduce will overlap or overtake another weapon's functionality then they won't introduce it because of those facts. I understand what you mean by "why can't I wield a pistol in my main hand when I can do it in my off-hand?", it doesn't make much sense but it might just be like I said earlier, playstyle overlap my come into play between the Engineer or Thief versus the Mesmer or something like that.