I’m more referring to the logical functionality as to why a Fire Mage would be pretty useless in Firelands. Rather than the gameplay design not being functional because of how it performs against other specializations.
I think Blizzard is assuming that you’ll make alts to experience the other three.
Having alts is supposed to be easier in SL.
While a lot of players have alts - a lot also don’t.
It’s been mentioned elsewhere - but then that leaves the player with an odd strategy of having to go through each covenant and leaving the one they actually prefer until the very end - so that they don’t get hit with the punitive aspect of swapping covenants.
Definitely an odd way to approach the system, especially when you’re having to hold your preferred choice until the end and especially when you know you’re specifically joining other covenants with the intention on leaving them at some point; all around going against the “RP” approach that many players are saying this system helps to promote.
1 Like
People keep saying meaningful choices, this isn’t a rpg game that let you really choose, the ending doesn’t change because you made some choice. The story is already established.
And so Covenants are basicly one choice that is established by Blizzard. That you WILL be able to change, so all those talk about meaningful choice about this subject can go flat.
That’s called railroading.
" no matter what the PCs do, they will experience certain events according to the GM’s plan. In general, this is considered a flaw, displaying a lack of flexibility, naturalness of the scenario, and lack of respect for meaningful choices by the players."
Moreover if the major consequence is only as far as power design go, it’s a terrible system because it only impacts gameplay negatively.
1 Like
Another aspect of meaningful choice in a RPG is choices about building your character, which requires that you can’t just change those choices on a whim just because you’d be more optimal if you were something else.
This is a game that lets you make a lot of choices about how your character is built, but most of those choices can currently be changed extremely easily so the choice doesn’t really mean anything.
One could argue that the character power should be separated from the story choice of Covenants, but like I’ve noted before: I rather doubt that would make the people complaining about not being able to min/max in every facet of gameplay happy.
There’s also a difference between being able to change something, and having virtually no cost to being able to change it.
Not really meaningful choices are story based choices.
They are not linked to characters not being able to change.
This is just your personnal definition.
Based on nostalgia and old games that did that.
1 Like
So I gotta ask, do you want WoW to be a RPG, or an end-game grinder? I’m honestly asking, no negativity implied.
Imagine an pre-WoW RPG (Wizardry, etc.), where for example as a D&D style paladin, you go and join a warlock coven, would you think it would be ok for that game to allow that?
Are the Covenant bonus’ so HUGE that its a life and death difference, or just a minor % increase that really doesn’t matter in the long run, and the argument is really and truly just about being told what you can and cannot do?
We really need to hash that meta out, vs. just going back and forth on how/why to switch Covenants.
Claiming it’s just my “personal definition” is more arguing semantics than it is the actual point.
Call it whatever the hell you want, I’d like the choices about character building to actually mean something.
Covenants are far from the best scenario, but it’s better than nothing.
Heh no it’s saying you’re using a word for the bad reason.
Yes and we have those with factions, races and classes.
Heh some small new reps that will be gone next expansion and that will force you to grind mindless content (anima power anyone, ap 2.0) for borrowed power which lead to class design being worse? Yea I’d prefer nothing.
Most of those choices aren’t aloud by rules to simplify games. But it’s mostly lack of imaginations/preparations that restrain those choices. We even have lightforged dks in wow, people running around in yeti pajamas, but wanting to be able to switch covenants now that’s too much? Or even a covenant example, a paladin joining the necrolords or venthyrs.
Alternative solution:
Covenant abilities are just a new Talent tree line, and can just be swapped in rested zones, and have no actual tie in to the covenants, because we don’t need to be borrowing powers anymore, and it’d feel better to just have it permanently, rather than something that’s just gonna get taken away again.
2 Likes
I’d be fine with this as well.
You skipped over my whole point, the validity of a paladin joining a warlock coven.
Is that ok in your mind? Does an old school RPG game that allows that ok to you?
Yes. Old schools rpg like dnd actually didn’t have a lot of rules so the gm could decide how things worked. There was some basic alignment rules that’s it. But a righteous warlock paladin? I could see that, meet the paladin inquisitor.
What is funny is both paladin and warlock are high charisma classes so it would work out probably really well.
1 Like
One more time. If a “Good” paladin joined an “Evil” warlock coven, without changing from “Good” to “Evil”, in an old school RPG, would you be ok with specifically that? No alignment/philosophy changes, just joins another ‘club’ on a whim.
I’m trying to get to a discussion point, not a “gotcha”. If you can answer my above question as its stated, I would appreciate it.
How is that choice comparable to covenants? They are all the same thing. They don’t dictate my alignment. They are small factions/reputations that I happen to work for at the time.
You’re more trying to “gotcha” me to be fair.
A good paladin wouldn’t join a evil group. But that’s also just the old definition of paladin in dnd. In Wow paladins have worked with “evil” forces all the time, like with death knights many times.
Trying to get to the point if you think the Covenants choice is an ok thing RPG wise or not, not game mechanics wise or not.
My recollection of past time is that what we call today “class fantasy” was really “class design” and there were rules to the fantasy/design that could not be broken, again, in a RPG.
If you answered my question (which you did not /sigh) then I would have a basis to talk to you about what kind of game you think WoW is or is not, and then branch out from there to the meta about ‘player agency’ (aka being told what you can and cannot do by Blizzard), as far as the discussion goes.
Because right now people are arguing past each other based on if they thing WoW is a RPG or an end-game grinder/MOBA, and until that is settled, the rest does not matter.
Who gives a flying F what 1% bonus one ability gives over the other if its all about class/covenant design RPG wise, where if its a MOBA-like game engine end-game then that 1% means everything, and moreso the ability to swap around on a whim.
I’m just some person on the Internet, so I can’t prove anything to you, but honestly, I wasn’t trying to “gotcha” you, I was trying to set up an analogy example that we could have a discussion on. Truly.
The fact that you think so makes me think its better not to engage you in further discussion, as it would not be productive.
Good day citizen, be well.
What a farce.
Trying to strawman basicly and because I don’t fall for it your arguments can’t work?
Nope, again, honestly, wasn’t trying to strawman anything. Wanted to have a real deep discussion with you, but you are just dodging around, and IMHO not interested in having such a conversation.
Good day citizen, be well.
A discussion is a 2 sided things. You seem more prone to talk to yourself if anything. I have answered, you just didn’t like those answers.