Concept Class - Dragoon

My idea with this class is to have something similar to a pet, that you have teh capability of riding on, and you use Polearm style weapons to maximize attack distance, although since polearms are rather unwieldly, it will be harder to hit with, or deal less damage. I also am thnking along the lines of holy damage, kind of like a paladin style skill set. Please feel welcome to give any feedback.

Polearm Mastery
For every point in Polearm Mastery, the overall effectiveness of Polearm class weapons is increased.
Mount Mastery
For every point in Mount Mastery, your mount deals more damage (while unmounted), or you mount move 1% faster (while mounted).
Mounted Warfair (unique attribute)
For every point in Evasion, you have a 1% better chance of hitting with any attacks made while mounted
Divine Insight
No inherent effect. For every point in Divine Insight, several skills, especially those relating to holy damage and healing, become more effective.

Polearm Mastery Skills

5, 1/4, 2 Malicious Strike
This attack has a 25% greater chance of missing. If Malicious Strike hits, it strikes for +25-70 damage.
5, 1, 5 Dragoon's Rage
This skill lasts for 5-25 seconds. You attack 10-33% faster, but your attacks have a 10% greather chance of missing.
0, 2, 10 Signet of Precision
Your next 5-10 skills cannot be Dodged or Evaded. This skill ends if you use an attack skill.

Mount Mastery Skills

0, 12, 5 Charm Mount
Charm target mountable creature. Once charmed, you can mount or unmount the charmed creature by recasting this spell. (You can attack while moving if mounted, but your attacks have a 5% better chance of being Dodged).
5, 3/4, 5 Mounted Charge
For 5-10 seconds, you mount moves 15-25% faster while unmounted, or 10-15% faster while mounted.
10, 1, 4 Mounted Rampage
For 2-5 seconds, your Mount attacks 15-20% faster, and its attacks deal +5-25 damage, but its attacks have a 5% greater chance of being Dodged or evaded

Mounted Warfair Skills

10, 1, 10 Guardian's Defense
For 10-15 seconds, your mount takes 10-20 less damage from attacks.
10, 1, 15 Dragoon's Endurance (Elite)
You Evade the next 5 attacks made against you, and gain +25-115 health for 10-30 seconds

Divine Insight Skills

5, 1, 10 Diviner's Vengeance
While you maintain this enchantment, whenever enchanted player's attacks get Evaded, all adjacent enemies are struck for 15-30 holy damage, and that ally gets healed for 5-45 health.



I'm running a little short of ideas for spells/skills, but then again, i'm writing this at 11 p.m. lol. Any more ideas would be more then welcome. I would also like some feedback about the idea in general. Thanks in advance.

EDIT: at the time i wrote this, i had no idea that the concept had already been brought up, but i would still like some feedback.

EDIT 2: Since most people feel that evasion would be over-powered, i've changed it to Mounted Warfair, which gives a passive attack bonus while mounted.

I question the need for a Evasion type of primary. While it is helpful for a front line melee attacker, still feel such class wouldn't seem to have the agality. Well.. still, guess it might work...

want to hear more on how you would handle Mountable pets, in can they be kill, are they seperat from the rider, how would they attack, can they be damage or hurt or kill, etc.

Do you know the difference between Cavalry and Dragoons? Dragoons only ride into battle than dismount and fight as infantry, Cavalry stays on their mounts and fight from horseback. Trying to coin an inaccurate title does the identity little justice.

And as I have said in any class suggestion that supposes a passive evasive boost, it is totaly broken, just as broken as a passive movement speed boost. It takes an added skill to overcome evasive action, and for an Assassin who may fail an entire chain of attacks if one fails, that is totaly unacceptable, evasion is a skill, and in no other form is it acceptable.

So basicly you have a Mount skill which is just beast mastery accept you ride your pet, a broken evasion attribute, a polearm attribute which doesn't show any signs of working different than other melee weapons, and an inaccurate identity.

I know I am being brief with you, I swear it is the hyperspeed techno doing this, but the honest truth, this idea needs to bodyslam the drawing boards. I would give you what I have developed on Mount Riding classes, but I think I have enough to write my own thread on it, sorry.

BahamutKaiser - one thing i've noticed about all of your replies in any of the threads here are that they are purely pesimistic. You took the title one step beyond what it was meant, since dragoons also fight on mounts when dismounting would be nothing but needless hassle. and the evasion bonus is really insignificant, besides the fact that i tried to balance that out with the chance of missing on the attacks. please try to take every aspect into consideration before you tear down everything someone thinks up.

I read your post on usable dragons, and i think that the idea could be moulded to work, but it would require tweaking. I didn't post in your thread because with all the flaming i wasn't sure i should take the time to read all the way through it to pick out anything helpful. And i must apologize if i am sounding a little harsh, but to me it doesn't seem like you take the time to appreciate something someone else has done, when you get angered when they don't accept one of your own ideas.

ActionJack - the mounts are able to be targeted seperately from the dragoon at all times, whether mounted or not, but they can only attack when they do not have a rider. So if the mount gets killed with the dragoon on it, it will knock him over for a duration, deal damage, and cause deep wound. Which could balance out the passive speed boost the mount gets from the attribute. The "charm mount" skill lets you mount and unmount your "ridable pet", and it would truly act as a pet when not mounted, although i'm not sure i would give it dire/playful/etc. stats or not. And i must thank you for not flaming right off, and taking the time to ask for a clarification before making any negative criticism.

And to clarify, the Evasion attribute IS a main class attribute for the sole reason of its passive evasive bonus. Whereas i think that any class could benefit from the mount, which keeps it from being overpowered imo. Especially since some skills could only be used off the mount, and the "charm mount" skill take 12 seconds to cast, giving the enemy ample time to strike. The evasive bonus would be something unique to the dragoon, similar to the crit strike bonus the assassins get.


I have thought this through, and tried to balance as much as possible, so any comments on how to better balance this would be nice, rather then leaving pure flame, as well as a few new skill ideas. or perhaps even some ideas on what the different mounts could be.

Now lets all try to keep this peaceful

Sorry, but everyone here is wrong about the term dragoon. A DRAGOON, is a light to medium cavalry soldier that wields a pistol called a Dragon. hence the name. They do carry around other weapons, such as swords and lances, but in tactics wise, they rush to the enemy, unload the single shot dragon pistol, then retreat back to the back lines to reload then they move out and fire their weapons again. In the later 1800's, these single shot pistols were replaces by revolvers, and Dragoons were used as late as WWII and the Germans had them equipped with Lugers.


This is a Dragoon. Before this, in the 1600's, the English refered to them as a Harquebusier occasionally.

Before this, the term Dragoon never existed in Mideval times. NEVER, EVER existed! They were knights with lances, Lancers, or Jousters, or just common pikeman.

All terms for Dragoon that is used today, with the mastery over Dragons, and the jumping, and the random mastery over pole-arms have come from a term that Square-Enix uses almost constantly in their Final Fantasy games, and had nothing to do with 'real' dragoons.

people need to try and do some research before they talk about what term is used for what term.

This is why, if you want to make up an accurate term for a Profession such as this, please use 'Lancer'. It is ten fold more accurate for a profession like this than the 'Dragoon' is. Sorry for any insults and flaming I may have caused.


Now back to the class.

this would balance the class out, but all this damage that is caused to your character could be endlessly spammed by PvPers, and the overly smart enemy AI, so having a mount would never be really effective in PvP or PvE really under what you have right now.

I am not really too sure about evasion as an attribute. though it would never go higher than 16, which isn't too high, but say you use Dryder's defenses, you would have an evasion chance of 91%, which is far too high. a warrior would never be able to hit.

on mount mastery, its a good idea, and 16% faster would never really help you out, as I am guessing that Ranger stances wouldn't work as it is for the person, not the mount. But having mounts as a pet might be too much as, with a Ranger again, you could have two pets at once!?!

Actually, I am totaly right, where dragoons got their name from doesn't change the fact that they were light infantry which rode horseback but fought on foot. As time passed Dragoons became more and more like Calvery, the key phrase there is that they were like calvery, which is what the actual description of a Dragoon is. The origin of the name isn't a definition.

Wikipedia.
Dragoon is the traditional name for a soldier trained to fight on foot, but transport himself on horseback, in use especially in during the 17th and early 18th centuries

Dictionary
dragoon
–noun 1. (esp. formerly) a European cavalryman of a heavily armed troop.
2. a member of a military unit formerly composed of such cavalrymen, as in the British army.
3. (formerly) a mounted infantryman armed with a short musket.

Correcting me is no different than arguing with a dictionary, because I do not claim what I don't know. And even parrallel to calvery in the dictionary is just a lack of finer distinction.

Also, there is nothing "pestimitic" about my responses. They are critical, critical because I hold a far higher standard than others.

Things like passive evasive bonuses are totaly broken, whether you respect that or not. A chance to totally break an entire attack chain is an extreme capability, if it just reduced some damage that would be one thing, but the chance to totally avoid an entire or partial attack chain is unacceptable, Blame it on Assassin, but that is the way it functions, the ability to overcome that in any way requires a skill, a passive effect is broken.

The fact that you cannot recognize that assures me that you have absolutely nothing to offer me in the terms of advice on my ideas, so don't flatter yourself. You have a class with an inaccurate title, broken attributes and just short of a total lack of original abilities, poor work can be improved, but if you can't recognize it than your going nowhere.

Dragoons based on the "Famous" LoD Game would be awesome to play. As such, Riding around on pets might end up with endless streams of "He-Man" References. I HAVE THE POWER!

a mount should not only boost your movement speed but give you and extra 25% chance to dodge melee attacks. However your mount would have a -25% chance to dodge melee attacks. And yes, if you get pretty much raped everytime you get knocked off your mount then people would never target you, only your mount.

Mounts don't add evasion, I don't know where you get this analogy.... your a larger target. You may be able to withstand more damage with a brutish mount and heavy seige armor, but youv'e fallen off your horse if you think your evading attacks.

actually you are totally wrong still. Where the name comes from is very important if you are defining the term. In this case, a pistol commonly refered to as the Dragon, a carbine that seemed to shoot out fire, like a dragon. The origin of the name helps in definining the term.

and you failed in reading all of my post, you were too busy in protecting your pride, or whatever it was. I was also sayng that the term Dragoon is too innacurate for this type of class, and Lancer would be more accurate (the older definition, not the 19th century cavalry.)

the dictionary itself is wrong, as Dragoons were orgainzed into Companies, not troops. If they were cavalryman orgainized into heavily armed troops, then they would be cavalry, possibly cuirassiers, or hussars, not dragoons as you (and the incorrect dictionary) is implying.

the third definition is also wrong. A Dragoon also carried around Carbines, and later, revolvers and rifles.


this is still confusing. why would a soldier ride into battle then dismount. thats around ten seconds wasted where the opposing enemy would have pike and shot and cannons all over your position before you even dismounted. A Dragoon was a foot soldier, they never rode into battle. it would be one or the other. In a battle, it would be impratical to transition from cavalry to infantry in the heat of battle.

Mounts add speed, which IS evasion as it is (or in guildwars, Dodging.). A group of musketeers and archers wouldn't be able to keep a constant aim on the cavalry troop because they move around very fast (which considering the time we are talking about, nothing was really accurate anyways.) and unless the cavalry is running directly at the infantry, there would be little chance of a clear shot.

If a person could keep a constant run of 30 miles an hour they would be hard to shoot too. or even hit if they were running past you.


Were like calvery? Do you mean 'were like CAVALRY'? but from what you said before this, don't you mean, 'the key phrase there is that they were like Infantry'???

again, your spelling.

fix your grammer and spelling then if you are going to act like you are being so critical, but to me, and alot of other people here, you are just picking apart selected parts of things without looking at the whole. I dont even know if it is possible to take someone seriously who can't spell right.

And why are your posts any higher of a standard than anyone elses? Please tell me your logic!!!!!


so yes I am arguing with a dictionary, a dictionary that has quite a few errors in it.


Especially if it is a Webster's dictionary, and I think it is, because of the short definitions that are presented, or it is an oxford, etc. pocket dictionary, of which many of the definitions usually get lost when the definitions are abridged.



S_Sword101,

Sorry for the overly long off-topic post in your topic. back to your class, and a suggestion:::

have you considered having the mount add max. health or armor to your character, rather than speed and evasion?

Or not add anything at all, as you are riding something that has its own health and armor. so why not add to where attacks made by an enemy have a chance of either hitting you or your mount, in adition to the regular chances of hitting a certain body part.

Or maybe you and your mount could have a merged health bar, which would make it to where all attacks made by the foe would hit this bar, instead of two seperate bars?

the two of you (you and mount) have around 1,000 health combined, so that should be enough as it is. added Speed and Evasion shouldn't be much of an issue if you have this much health to work with.

It really doesn't matter whether your postulations about Dragoon are accurate, your wrong because you corrected me, and that is all there is too it. I said nothing about whether your explainations are accurate or not, but mine are, and saying they are wrong is ignorant and immature. Your explaination of origin is not a definition, it is background, there is a difference, and lack of recognition is ignorance. My definition of Dragoon is accurate, even more accurate than the dictionary, and your backtalk is just immature.

I will not suffer your slander or ignorance further, ignored.

By the Five Gods!

Do you have any idea of just how arrogant that line makes you sound? What that comes across as is 'it doesn't matter if you're right, you disagreed with me therefor you're wrong'. Do you really mean to claim that you're the sole arbiter of what is right, regardless of what the facts say?

I dare say, but I think when consider use of a word such as Dragoon, that the pop-cultural referenc/defination be also taken as same weight as its historical defination.

Words, and its usage, are ever changing. As GW is not a historical game, thus does not always need to be accurate (same as how FF took the liberty to re-define dragoon... well... also its partial context missinterpuration on change it to japanese and such....) In a case like this, must consider what would be more well know to an avarage gamer about the defination of Dragoon. Also the most important part is does it sound cool, and will it excit players (when and if use as a proffession name for GW).

Take the name Desert Eagle for example... does that name invoke a image of a flying eagle over desert (which would be a more truthful dipiction) or a .50AE semi-automatic pistols (which is something a gamer can more relate to).

So in that repect, I think it is fine for Dragoon to be a mounting, lance wielding, and even Dragon-like medium armor Warrior that most people of the RPG ciricle would relate to.

Well, thats my point, as I do like the name of Dragoon. But name are minor matter in considering a CC, so hopefully won't need to argue over it "too" intensively.

Ugh.

I cringe at the use of the name "Dragoon".

5, 1/4, 2 Malicious Strike
This attack has a 25% greater chance of missing. If Malicious Strike hits, it strikes for +25-70 damage.


+70 damage? lmao

The Assassin skill [skill]Unsuspecting Strike[/skill] can do well over 100 damage if timed correctly. I see no problem with 70 damage if it has a 25% of missing.

As for the class, I like. I don't care about being "historical correct" or anything like that, so kudos.

And BahamutKaiser, you do sound stuckup and ignorant of other's ideas. ¬_¬

You are not very accurate but you say you are??? hmmm, why are you? considering that both sources that you showed to me, conflicted greatly (the dictionary and Wiki). here is one example:

YOUR Dictionary:
"–noun 1. (esp. formerly) a European cavalryman of a heavily armed troop."

Wikipedia:
"Dragoons were organized not in squadrons or troops like the cavalry, but in companies like the foot soldier, and their officers and non-commissioned officers bore infantry ranks."

if you are too ignorant to use two sources that don't agree with each other, I can't take you seriously on anything you say from this point on.

and on a last note, what's with the elitists bullcrap? I might be accurate, but I am still wrong because I corrected YOU? so if I corrected ActionJack I wouldn't be wrong? If you can't even reconize that I am accurate, then doesn't that also make you ignorant as well, acording to your definitions you just presented to me??

well, depending on how fast a Lance is at attacking (and I am assuming that its about as fast as a Hammer attack.), +70 damage even without the 25% chance of missing would still not be very powerful, as compared to the Assasin which can attack quite a bit faster than that.

Kaiser, honestly, not even considering your non-sensical comments, the flaming of others needs to stop. I hate seeing ideas shut out because people couldn't be mature enough not to get into flaming competitions.

The concept class is just that - a concept class. Instead of acting like a bullheaded fool, you could try to give specific suggestions to the OP instead of simply "This is broken; sucks to be you though, since I am above helping you".

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

As for the class itself, I think a stamina system would be more effective in game than a health system for the mount. After extended periods of time of continuous movement, the mount would become fatigued and movement speed is decreased (halted?). Just what I think.