That makes me sad At least with Lord of Destruction, the Druid was a pretty new character (and even the Assassin wasn't *really* identical to the D1 Rogue). It would be nice if they came out with a brand new character class for D3's expansion (or, preferably, two new classes).
I'm actually happy with crusader, and hope to see a necro some day. I'm not feeling the witch doctor or the monk in the diablo-world, so the more classic they go, I'm happy.
On March 22 2014 02:50 crms wrote: I'm actually happy with crusader, and hope to see a necro some day. I'm not feeling the witch doctor or the monk in the diablo-world, so the more classic they go, I'm happy.
I can't see them having both the necro and witch doctor in the same game, although I also prefer the D2 necro to the D3 witch doctor.
Crusaders lore presented in tomes you find during the game is really lame, like most of D3 lore. As for similarities between crusader and paladin, I don't mind. I liked pala in D2, I'm gonna like crusader in D3 (hopefully).
On March 22 2014 02:50 crms wrote: I'm actually happy with crusader, and hope to see a necro some day. I'm not feeling the witch doctor or the monk in the diablo-world, so the more classic they go, I'm happy.
I can't see them having both the necro and witch doctor in the same game, although I also prefer the D2 necro to the D3 witch doctor.
Same. I would have preferred a necro to the witch doctor. I like the rest of the classes though.
The crusader interests me. Heavily armored and defensive classes normally aren't ranged classes. The crusader was supposedly designed to be a melee/ranged hybrid.
Blizzard also didn't give them the innate 30% reduction to damage taken that the barb and monk gets. Their reasoning is that the crusader was designed around wearing a shield at all times. That implies that the barb and monk are now currently balanced around not wearing a shield.
On March 22 2014 02:50 crms wrote: I'm actually happy with crusader, and hope to see a necro some day. I'm not feeling the witch doctor or the monk in the diablo-world, so the more classic they go, I'm happy.
I can't see them having both the necro and witch doctor in the same game, although I also prefer the D2 necro to the D3 witch doctor.
Same. I would have preferred a necro to the witch doctor. I like the rest of the classes though.
The crusader interests me. Heavily armored and defensive classes normally aren't ranged classes. The crusader was supposedly designed to be a melee/ranged hybrid.
Blizzard also didn't give them the innate 30% reduction to damage taken that the barb and monk gets. Their reasoning is that the crusader was designed around wearing a shield at all times. That implies that the barb and monk are now currently balanced around not wearing a shield.
the crusader gets around that by having a passive that lets them wear a shield and a two hander. they will be the tankiest class while going damage, barb will be the tankiest class when going for pure defense
On March 22 2014 02:50 crms wrote: I'm actually happy with crusader, and hope to see a necro some day. I'm not feeling the witch doctor or the monk in the diablo-world, so the more classic they go, I'm happy.
I can't see them having both the necro and witch doctor in the same game, although I also prefer the D2 necro to the D3 witch doctor.
Same. I would have preferred a necro to the witch doctor. I like the rest of the classes though.
The crusader interests me. Heavily armored and defensive classes normally aren't ranged classes. The crusader was supposedly designed to be a melee/ranged hybrid.
Blizzard also didn't give them the innate 30% reduction to damage taken that the barb and monk gets. Their reasoning is that the crusader was designed around wearing a shield at all times. That implies that the barb and monk are now currently balanced around not wearing a shield.
the crusader gets around that by having a passive that lets them wear a shield and a two hander. they will be the tankiest class while going damage, barb will be the tankiest class when going for pure defense
I wonder how much damage reduction shields do on an average basis. The passive that allows crusaders to carry a 2h and a shield does carry a movement penalty. We can compute how much paragon strength points they have to give up to make up for it.
On March 22 2014 02:50 crms wrote: I'm actually happy with crusader, and hope to see a necro some day. I'm not feeling the witch doctor or the monk in the diablo-world, so the more classic they go, I'm happy.
I can't see them having both the necro and witch doctor in the same game, although I also prefer the D2 necro to the D3 witch doctor.
Same. I would have preferred a necro to the witch doctor. I like the rest of the classes though.
The crusader interests me. Heavily armored and defensive classes normally aren't ranged classes. The crusader was supposedly designed to be a melee/ranged hybrid.
Blizzard also didn't give them the innate 30% reduction to damage taken that the barb and monk gets. Their reasoning is that the crusader was designed around wearing a shield at all times. That implies that the barb and monk are now currently balanced around not wearing a shield.
the crusader gets around that by having a passive that lets them wear a shield and a two hander. they will be the tankiest class while going damage, barb will be the tankiest class when going for pure defense
I wonder how much damage reduction shields do on an average basis. The passive that allows crusaders to carry a 2h and a shield does carry a movement penalty. We can compute how much paragon strength points they have to give up to make up for it.
Loss of movement speed is kinda annoying but nothing that I would worry about. Mobs are faster then you anyway normally so its going to make minimal difference in combat while adding a lot of dps compared to 1h/shield.
On March 22 2014 02:50 crms wrote: I'm actually happy with crusader, and hope to see a necro some day. I'm not feeling the witch doctor or the monk in the diablo-world, so the more classic they go, I'm happy.
I can't see them having both the necro and witch doctor in the same game, although I also prefer the D2 necro to the D3 witch doctor.
Same. I would have preferred a necro to the witch doctor. I like the rest of the classes though.
The crusader interests me. Heavily armored and defensive classes normally aren't ranged classes. The crusader was supposedly designed to be a melee/ranged hybrid.
Blizzard also didn't give them the innate 30% reduction to damage taken that the barb and monk gets. Their reasoning is that the crusader was designed around wearing a shield at all times. That implies that the barb and monk are now currently balanced around not wearing a shield.
A barbarian that uses a shield is no true barbarian!
Some spenders are stupidly weak...like 200% weapn damage as a spender. Most runes are really boring and add either like 40% weapon damage proc or some heal. The awesome skills have loooooong cooldowns for no reason. Why do 1000% weapon damage skills that cost resources need 30 seconds cooldown.
On March 25 2014 11:06 LaNague wrote: Crusader feels kind of meh.
Some spenders are stupidly weak...like 200% weapn damage as a spender. Most runes are really boring and add either like 40% weapon damage proc or some heal. The awesome skills have loooooong cooldowns for no reason. Why do 1000% weapon damage skills that cost resources need 30 seconds cooldown.