What's the point of the secondary profession?

Never played MtG so I have no idea about half of the replies in this thread. Nonetheless, I like the secondary profession system, it adds variety and allows for ingenuity with builds.

What you call "exploitive class interaction" I would call using the game to your advantage. Its the same reason I dont greif on touchers, the advantage of the combination of expertise, necromancer touch spells and ranger block stances has been identified and used to create a clever little build (before I get flamed into oblivion, yes, touchers are annoying and dont take half a brain to play (or combat), but the point stands).

I suppose my favourite build which uses the secondary profession to its full advantage is the Arcane Zeal dervish Order spammer, turning a traditionally melee class into a staff weilding pseudo healer with damage buffing capabilities and practically limitless energy is pretty clever imo.

I dunno, i just like the clever little builds that crop up now and again.

I fully agree with you, the problem is that Anets quest to create a homogeneous level playing field will result in "aberrations" like you use now to be gimped in some fashion or form should it ever become too popular.

Thus usually rendering such interactions short termed affairs going against Anet policy. Sometimes it seems like they dont really know where exactly they are going.

whats the point of having a utility knife when your gun runs out of ammo?

So your not complete shit when you run into problems

I fail to see the point in this. How many pve or pvp builds are complete shit without a secondary? Usually your secondary just gives you those one or two skills to perfect the build. If you entire build is composed of another professions skills it's usually not a good idea.

lolololo

1. T1 does not have highest rewards. T2 is the most-supported format by WotC. T1 is not even sanctioned anywhere at high-level, i.e. PTQs, PT, champs. (Mostly because the barrier to entry is so high money-wise, not because the format is bad, I actually like it second only to drafting)

2. All of the bolded decks are NOT PLAYED in T1. AT ALL. "Black reanimate" is just so generic a label, but yes, there is some reanimation present. Always was.

Twiddle desire... wtf? That was a T2 deck. T1 desire never played twiddles and desire isn't even the main card in the deck. Tendrils is, Yawgwin is, Empty the warrens (recently). Desire is just there like demonic tutor... you don't call it demonictutor.dec, do you? (EDIT: T2 twiddle desire wasn't even monocolored, U/R, if I remember correctly)

Sligh is 1.5 (legacy), not T1. Same for ravager, although ravager might be a rogue or a meta deck in t1, but it certainly never wins anything.

Sui black lol? This was never good. It's played in 1.5 somewhat, but it's bad even there. If you walked into a T1 tourney with sui black, people would laugh at you.

As for your experience in regionals, if you really did play in regionals for 4 years, how the hell can you be so completely ignorant of T1. I mean, sure, it's not your format, but wouldn't you learn something from just hanging with other players? So I'm gonna call BS on that. You never played competitively.

Again, hear hear.

When we just had Core and Prophecies skills, secondary profs were essential for providing balanced builds and filling the capability gaps in the primaries.

The introduction or Factions, Nightfall and EOTN skills has gradually brought us to the point where you can do just about anything just from the primary prof. Sure there might be a slightly better skill in the 2nd prof but your Primary Attribute would have 12-14 in it versus a secondary line that may only have level 6-8. Secondary prof is now largely an irrelevance unless you are using it for hard res or gimmick builds like Touch Ranger.

It's a little sad that we are so set in our ways. People now prioritise effectiveness over Role Play and things like Rangers with spells get laughed out of town.

I agree with you. And I'd say the "cooperative" part of the game is to blame for this.

When I first started playing during the WPE, I played my Me/Mo with half illusion, half healing skills on my bar. It's the concept of my character (I chose mesmer mainly because the class sounded a lot like blue color in MtG; the color I like the most) that he can heal+do some indirect damage; a support character at best. My friend's character was a healing monk who also specialized in Fire Magic (Fiery monk, as he called it. He also dyed his armor all red). It was all fun and game back then.

Now, once the game got released and I got to the part where your team needs some good cooperation in order to beat the mission (desert area, without the "Elona run" trick or "Necrotic traversal" dune of despairs), I realized that my build didn't really help the team much, as we kinda needed 2 good dedicated healers and damage from illusion magic was too low (or too slow to show its full effect) to be of any use.

THAT'S when my friend had to go full heal, or half heal, half prot (GOLE wasn't that useful back then, and we were still in the desert so I guess you can imagine how we still haven't got MoR or OoB yet), and I switched to domination magic after some discussion with my PvP-pro guildies.

And it's been like that ever since. I see no point coming up with some cool character concepts if they have no viable builds to get me through the game. I might do it if I play alone (which I do sometimes), but when I am with other people, how can I be part of a team with some lame build I know would make my team suffer? I'm quite sure most (responsible+sensible) people would agree with me here.

I know they're many viable builds which use skills from 2 professions. But, aside from attribute-less skills, rez skills, and utility skills that are useful with 0 in their attributes, how many builds left for you to use (with skills from 2 professions)? There're still many of them I'm sure. But, judging from class combinations (90) and number of skills, don't you think there should be MORE?

I like secondary professions.

Spirit's Strength.

oh... i should have mentioned there monk primary, mesmer secondary.

There is still point in coming up with character concepts and viable builds for them.

Often super effective build and okay-working flavored fun build can differ in few nonkey skills. Similary, terrible flavored build can be changed to okay build with few key skill changes. Or primary profession change change Mo/E to E/Mo and you go from fail to "okay".

Hell, improving teribad build to okay builds which keep flavor is fun.

Yeah, but I don't think I'd want people in my team to use "okay-working" builds when we're trying to finish something difficult.

I mean, it doesn't feel right to do anything less than "my best" when I play "cooperatively" with other people.

Or are you saying I'm weird for thinking that?

No, that is sensible approach to game: Failing because of bad builds is not fun. Causing group to fail because you have bad build is not fun either.

However you can never be sure you are using your "best" build. I am sure your "best" builds changed a lot during your career. Most people consider as "best" build quite different things. And most of people would laugh at builds they once considered to be great and would instakick anyone running them, yet environment changed only little.

And lot is helped with "i stopped messing around and i play for real now" attitude which accompanies playing "best" build.

So you are never playing best build ... you are just playing better build than your last one. And playing okay build instead of fail one counts as playing better. That makes "okay build" viable.

Viable when you don't know better, perhaps?

So what would you suggest? That I, who should know better NOW, make a build based on my character concept (of Nature-loving ritualist who has an animal companion and use only nature rituals to fuel his spirit-based skills)?

I can't. It won't work well and it would waste my teammates' time due to failure. Some new player might make such build and think it's the best they can come up (see my healing+illusion build above). But see, how long can a player be "new"? I'm quite sure we're not basing our opinions regarding things like this on "new players"' experience, but more on average players'.

Granted, I may not be using the best build out there right now. But I can't pretend to NOT know which build is "bad" either (which of course I wouldn't have thought they're bad last year or so).

For me, I found PvE failure occurs far more often with groups who don't know proper pulling and what skills to interrupt.
Whether their builds are better than a henchmen's made little difference except to attempt to make up for poor pulling and interrupting.

LOL Yeah, because one Dervish skill makes players actually useful in a team.

Thanks for nice example.

You see, your "nature loving spiritualist" has some potential. AKA, it can be improved and build upon. Of course, it wont work well - it is fail build.

This is how you turn it to okay build:

* Destruction
* Bloodsong
* Splinter weapon
* Charm animal
* Comfort animal
* Disrupting Lounge
* Ferocious Strike.
* Death Pact signet

Obviously, this is lacking build ... however it has tons of potential to support your team (just spam splinter, heh). Improvement i dare to say.

Obviously someone using this build would eventually end up as some sort of splinter barrager (R/Rt) or Chaneller (Rt/R) ... bot very powerful builds.

But without this "step in between" roleplayer wouldn't have continuity in which character which would make him comfortable using powerful builds.

I've found I often don't use my secondary skills because the PvE skills are so uber compared to all regular skills. Often it's 5 primary skills, three PvE skills. Hell, with Ursan I don't even use my primary skills.

That doesn't mean that having a secondary profession is a bad idea, it means that PvE skills are a bad idea.

It was just an example. Just because you can come up with some random build for it doesn't mean it's not a valid point. Well, I hope someone else got it.

And for what it worths, your build isn't quite fit with the concept I gave. And it's still laughable (no offense to you) that I won't let whoever uses that build to play with me (and I wouldn't dare using such build to waste somebody else's time).

Actually it is valid point: builds get improved, and can be improved.

If person sporting this build started with that 6 spirits + pet you envisioned and eventually went here because he thought about what he was doing and tried to improve, i would like to play with him, because he passed first test of being good player: will to improve. Besides, he has all of normal mode to figure out that it does not really work.

It no longer 100% fits concept, it improved it, as did player. And i want that player in my team because when i tell him to run something more effective, he is likely do it and learn thing or two from it.

That contrasts with PvX build user who things he got best build, runs it and does not really listen anything you tell to him, even if it is valid point and refuses to do as little as changing one skill for different one performing same task.

It matter of attitude: "i know i have issues, i want to fix them (and i play because i want to have fun)" vs "i am bestest thing that happened to you, you noob"

It's not that hard to chose who to play with. Especially when you can compensate for someones silliness.

Seriously, "playing with listening newbie" is quite pleasant experience. Much more than with pro who fears he would be humiliated because party is minute slower.

Anyway, this is not thread about this. reall point is: Secondaries work quite well if you make them work.

I believe this is irrelevant, since building a deck is building to win by a specific objective, while building a GvG build, for example, is still building to win by a specific objective. You aren't going to try build a deck to outdamage AND mill your opponent to death at the same time.

I'm guessing there's a somewhat different approach from the situation from my point of view compared to your point of view; when you say that if you have the mana and the spell is in your hand, then you can play the spell, then yes, you have 100% effectiveness.

However, splashing into White solely for healing, for example, means you are expending resources and lowering your effectiveness to bet on your Renewed Faith, for example. You are lowering your 'efficiency' not in numerical numbers, but in your potential to play. (Worded badly, but I guess you'll get the general gist.)

The main difference, I think, between GW and MtG in terms of profession and color comparison is that you have to have a primary profession in Guild Wars, wheras you can base your deck off two colors in Magic: the Gathering - this is evident in the various combo decks that utilize cards from two colors in a pretty balanced manner, or from UW/UB control decks. In Guild Wars apart from your skills defining your role, you have a primary attribute linked to your primary profession. As such, I think one can only consider comparisons to MtG to the 'splash' level; there are exceptions, of course.

The primary attribute effect is also something that is nonexistent in Guild Wars; hence there is no real deck-type equivalent to stuff like Thumpers and Touch Rangers.

Some skills require a substantial attribute investment, and still are used because they are worth the investment. Ward Against Melee/Foes on a Mesmer is a good example.

Ah, but that is the point. In Guild Wars, having a primary profession has a value to it, unlike Magic: the Gathering.

The secondary profession makes the game more interesting, as professions have clearly defined roles. Using a secondary profession would mean that you are able to use different abilities to augment your own. A monoprofessional game is less interesting as in a character cannot use fundamentally different abilities to augment his/her own. Essentially, it limits tactical options, which are interesting for the game.

This has no relation to the rest of my post, but QFT.

No. My point was that, having secondary profession doesn't really give you an opportunity to build a class based on your own "concept" with little concern on its effectiveness, which is something you can do in MtG and probably other games WITHOUT "Cooperative aspect".

And instead, secondary classes in GW are there so you can make a perfect build that works well with your teammates, which most of the time may not be something you have in mind as a concept of your character.

It was an agreement to Torqual's reply that it's because people have to play cooperatively in this game that we can't really "role play" with our own character concept anymore.

THAT was my point, which is why I said it's pointless that you tried to make a build out of my random example character concept; it's just an example. At the end of the day unless you can come up with builds for EVERY SINGLE CONCEPT and they all work well in cooperative play, my point still stands.

That doesn't make sense.

What you're actually saying is that MtG allows you to roleplay with a gimped deck because it's a single-player game, whereas GW doesn't allow you to roleplay with a gimped selection of skills because your teammates would object - but surely your point can't be that silly?

So what is your point?

And for the purpose of this discussion please remember that GW isn't MtG, isn't supposed to be MtG, but that GW is, unlike MtG, a multi-player game.

Two-Headed Dragon.

This point is preposterous. You seriously expect that every single concept should have a build that works well in competitive (or at least optimized) play? Conversely, would you expect that you would find every single concept in all competitive play when you take into account all the decks in MtG? Of course not.

Note that I changed 'cooperative' to 'competitive', as the previous word was far too vague for discussion - and the fact that pretty much all of GW is cooperative means that any build you make likely would be cooperative, in one way or another.

I don't use the word "competitive" because it implies PvP game, something I'm not talking about here.

My decks in MtG in which I make based on some random concepts won't win me a championship prize or whatever; it doesn't matter. I can make such deck AND have fun with it without wasting other people's time or anything. It may be difficult to win (of course these decks can win) if I face some better-made decks, but it's still fun (and of course if I want to win I'd just go with some championship decks like how you use the best builds in GW).

Imagine if GW is a solo (as in, only your character) game in which cooperative play is optional (like WoW), I'd be able to make whatever build I want as long as it can get me through the game; I won't hurt anybody. Nobody would care. Everyone can freely runs any build they want. I don't want to say this here but, in WoW, almost every talent build is viable in both solo AND cooperative environments. Something I think it's missing from GW mainly due to the limitation of skill bars (but let's not go there).

I'm not saying this is good/bad. It's just what I thought at first when I heard about GW (and how it's supposed to have a class/skill system similar to a deck of cards in MtG), but after a while I realized it's not true, and I'm explaining what I think makes it not true.

I agree. I've played with plenty of people with average or sub-par bars, and we've breezed through missions, even some of the more difficult ones.

People stress skill choice too much. Often, the ability to coordinate as a team is more important. I don't care if you can do 300 damage in 2 seconds. If all you are going to do is Leeroy into every mob that you see, you are not helping my team.

The concepts and mechanics of Magic: the Gathering makes it inherently competitive.

Then you are quite accurate indeed. If you want to talk about GW in MtG terms, it would be a deck that's simultaneously played by 4-8 players at the same time. In that sense, if your group wants to play something completely off the bat but great fun, then it would be equivalent to an MtG player playing a subpar deck that gives him great fun (hi Timmy).

I'm very glad that Guild Wars is based off parties. It makes it that much more interesting and skill-based.

Skill choice, however, is sometimes an indicator of how a person plays.

Besides, we can't do much on forums to educate player skill. So we do the second best thing. (Pretty much directly quoted from Marty )

First of all, I don't think I've ever seen the word "role-play" used together with MtG before.

Second of all, your beef is apparently that...
a) GW is not MtG, and
b) GW is, unlike MtG, squad-based.

May I perhaps suggest you would be happier, and find it less frustrating, to play MtG than trying to shoehorn GW into becoming MtG?

Might I also point out that for those of us who like to play solo, and perhaps even role-play, there are heroes, henches, and PvE?

Why are you getting all BFB defensive all of a sudden?

I'm not saying the way things are in GW is bad/I don't like it/anything. I'm just TELLING A STORY of what I thought GW was and how I realized later that it's NOT. And then I tried to explain why IT'S NOT LIKE MtG (because GW has cooperative play where "normal" MtG play doesn't) as I thought it would. If I'd thought it's bad I would've QUIT by then.

Clear enough? Or should I wait until you quit the club so you can "see"?

The era of Unlimited and Legends was pretty bad. They've had a decade to perfect the system, and are only just getting it down now. (Mirrodin anyone?)

GW2 will likely be different enough that not all lessons will carry over. Secondaries might be replaced by the notion of race-specific skills for example, with the ability to instead change your primary profession. Who knows at this point.

Wait... are you saying the pve is not a solo game?

Not in GW?

At least I can't solo on my characters (and by solo I mean only just me, no heroes or henchmen).

I pretty much see no use in a secondary... it's pretty much ignored for one particular skill that makes stuff easier, and/or a rez. There's pretty much absolute taboo for a class playing off its secondary... basically you got all these elitists that squeal "BUT YOU MUST ALWAYS DOWHAT I SAY IS THE BEST!!!" when you try to be creative.

If your creative build manages to synergize correctly, then I don't mind - like my pet warrior with ViM, it works in AB (don't tell me that AB doesn't count as GW, AB is what I do and if it works for AB, I'll use it, and I don't give a f*** about HA or GvG anyways) except that usually I die a lot... but after I die, my target degens to death or Hellreign kills them... I've made killer condition spammer N/W Meleemancers, E/D Dervamentalists... all of them work decently in AB.