Poll: Does anyone actually like being the "warrior"?

Recommended Videos

Nick Angelici

New member
Feb 14, 2010
116
0
0
I love the nonconventional classes, I play an artificer in DnD, which is basically a mage who makes robots which is awesome. I also enjoy playing the Bard.
in Final fantasy my favorite 2 classes are Blue mage and red mage in that order. Blue mage is a amazing class because you learn moves through enemies so basically you become the encyclpedia of kicking ass using everyone elses moves.

anything where I can play something that isnt a warrior, rogue, or healer is a definite play for me.
 

Mordwyl

New member
Feb 5, 2009
1,302
0
0
A lot of modern games seem to relegate the heavy melee class as a tank, which as you may expect is REALLY BORING. Now if it was something along the lines of Agrippa in Shadow of Rome...
 

Versuvius

New member
Apr 30, 2008
803
0
0
I will play and enjoy all roles, except healer. Because the whole idea of being a healer depresses me. And i heal and i heal and i heal. WAR had a good system. You needed to use your murder powers to build up reitous fury/souls etc for your powerful healbombs.
 

DarkhoIlow

New member
Dec 31, 2009
2,531
0
0
Yes I play warrior all the time in all the RPG's that allow it.

I've always enjoyed running around in a full plate swinging my battleaxe/greatsword(claymore) around.They usually perform a little worse than "pure dps'ers"(rogues)but I'd take the platemail over leather any day.

Regarding other roles,if Warrior is not available(which would be if were talking fantasy or even sometimes sci fi which most of the times is the soldier class)then I would go for another melee class.I haven't enjoyed long range combatants or caster dps.
 

DeathWyrmNexus

New member
Jan 5, 2008
1,143
0
0
If you just stand there in a fight as a warrior, you're an idiot and a dead warrior. In Dragon Age 1 and 2, you can use the warrior to devastate enemies and control the battlefield. Knockdown, stun, armor degradation, tanking, chaining effects... Ya, standing there swinging is how you play a warrior if you have no imagination. :/

Personally though, I prefer games that let me hybrid build but eh...
 

Mr_Terrific

New member
Oct 29, 2011
163
0
0
I almost always use the tank class whether it's a sword and shield or riot shield and pistol. This might sound stupid but as a kid, I always stood up to the schoolyard bullies that would pick on my friends. I guess I'm wired like that. I've never felt comfortable just sitting back at range and unloading damage, or creeping around in the shadows waiting to stab someone in the back.
 

Dutch 924

Making the impossible happen!
Dec 8, 2010
316
0
0
I think people prefer those other classes because the require more skill. Being the "attack head-first" person is much easier than sneaking around or using ranged weapons, especially in games where there are no guns.
 

Jaime_Wolf

New member
Jul 17, 2009
1,194
0
0
The main problem is that designers are still using warriors as a sort of base line. All of the warrior mechanics are, for the most part, the core mechanics. Everyone else gets those (with lower numbers attached) and then a ton of extra stuff.

The last edition of D&D is a great example. Fighters got quite literally nothing but more of the core abilities that everyone else did (ignoring the fighter-only feats which were primarily just stat bonuses). Every other class got all of that stuff with lower numbers and then an entire class worth of other abilities.

Thankfully, this trend is starting to get addressed. The latest edition of D&D gives fighters powers just like every other class (whether using a uniform mechanic for all classes like this is necessarily the best solution could be debated). Probably the best solution I've seen was the precursor to 4th edition D&D fighters - the Book of Nine Swords. It presented a very nice system for fighters (more or less the 4th edition system used by everyone) that was distinct from the Vancian spellcasting.

By and large though, video games have some catching up to do in this regard.
 

MassiveGeek

New member
Jan 11, 2009
1,213
0
0
When they hit like a fucking train and work like a one man army, FUCKING HELL YES GIVE IT TO ME!

I loved playing warrior in both DAO and ME1&2. But maybe that's just me.
 

ryanthemadman

New member
Nov 5, 2010
85
0
0
warriors are satisfying to play as sometimes. i like it in da2 how badass the warrior felt, even though i played through the first time as a mage (loved it).
in other news i like playing as a tankmage :3
 

Veldel

Mitth'raw'nuruodo
Legacy
Apr 28, 2010
2,263
0
1
Lost in my mind
Country
US
Gender
Guy
it depends how a game handles them like if it makes them just a punching bag pretty much no i dont

I tend to shift between War/Pld/Thf/ and a martial artist type char
 

freaper

snuggere mongool
Apr 3, 2010
1,198
0
0
I'll probably play warrior in Guild Wars 2, but not as a main.

It's usually stealth first, followed by magic and lastly the tanks and healers.
 

Eumersian

Posting in the wrong thread.
Sep 3, 2009
18,754
0
0
It really depends for me, as my choice typically varies from game to game with no rhyme or reason. For example, when I was big into Diablo II, I chose the barbarian class. I just felt like it at the time. That didn't stop me from playing other classes later, though. Likewise, throughout the Geneforge series, my first choice has always been a Guardian (the warrior type) or whichever class has the same characteristics in the 4th and 5th games.

In Dragon Ages 1 and 2, I was a mage. In Mass Effect, my Shepard was a Soldier. In any Elder Scrolls game, I've made it my mission to get into the Mages Guild first. In Exile III: The Ruined World, I chose to play a party of mages.

But whatever the case may be, I enjoy playing the games as long as they're good. The class I choose is typically a spur-of-the-moment choice. I like being a warrior just fine, as dull as it may seem.

Although, I never usually find myself playing a rogue or thief. I'm not sure why.
 

Raika

New member
Jul 31, 2011
552
0
0
I like to play as a weapon master in most RPGs. That usually means "warrior".
 

MightyRabbit

New member
Feb 16, 2011
219
0
0
I usually do my first playthrough as a warrior because it lets me learn the game system, and experiment with other classes through my party members. On my second playthrough, I then tend to choose whatever class suits my preferences.

Like in Mass Effect, I started as a Soldier, then decided to play Infiltrator the next time round. It also helps me figure out the path to the optimum endings/quest resolutions.
 

UnderCoverGuest

New member
May 24, 2010
414
0
0
That's because you're ALL PUSSIES!!!


And I mean that. Warrior these days only applies to people who have the balls to get up close and personal with enemies, or people who actually are interest in physical strength. In these modern times, it seems physical strength is only considered useful if you play sports, while all you computer-centered fellows prefer 'intelligence' and 'agility', to use some well known gaming lingo. It's disappointing to people like me, but at the same time a significant boon--for every fifty thin guys there is one single 200+ pound power lifting strongman who gets to feel significant superiority over the average scrawny guy, and well deserved too. People seem to think of muscle-bound guys (and gals) as self-oriented, steroid-injecting, gym-hogging, food-stuffing, brain-degrading, rude-to-others goofballs; and the longer that absolutely asinine display of ignorance keeps circulating around, the more and more superior guys like me are going to feel for having the strength, determination, courage, self-dedication, self-motivation, and confidence to lift weights and push our bodies beyond the norm to which they are held as standard.

So keep pointing at the warrior class, and keep saying hardly anyone likes it--because the more you say it, the more and more guys like me are going to point and laugh. Heh, and just to make your disillusionment even greater (assuming you're a: still reading this, and b: realizing that what I'm saying is true), we bodybuilding types are just as intelligent as you technology-oriented thin guys--do you realize the level of nutritional, anatomical and physiological knowledge is needed to gain a truly remarkable physique? Anyone can look good by working out on a regular basis, but if you want to push past the limit, then you need to get brains before you can get brawn.

Just to spite all you even further, who do you think would live longer in a zombie apocalypse; the scrawny kid who sits on his ass all day playing video games and feeling superior for it, or the muscular guy who can lift twice his own body-weight, know exactly what kind of rations to look for, know exactly how to maintain strength during zombie-infested famine, and have the physical capacity to fend off melee contact and break down doors?

So I go for Warrior. First time, every time. If there's one thing I can trust, it's my own physical strength. I know my limits. In a game, with magic or whatever, I wouldn't trust some arcane influence that 'makes me special'. I wouldn't trust the penetrating ability of that arrow against that rock monster. But I would trust my own strength to swing that war axe down onto that silly peasant who decided to try and rob me, or crash that war-hammer into that wolf's face, or thrust that broadsword into that ogre's neck, rather than stand cowering behind trees and foliage, running backwards and tripping over your own feet as you try to notch another arrow on the bow with the desperate hope that it somehow manages to hit the minotaur in time before he goes you--or to run around in circles gargling blue and purple liquid as you try to summon another fireball to put down that rampaging giant who is about to crush you with a tree.

Whatever--just do whatever the hell you want and leave the stuff that requires bravery and power to us big guys.

Edit: Before I get started on lunch, let me point to popular media, like anime or whatever; notice how the hero is always lean, looks kind of frail compared to his enemies who are usually bigger and stronger (and with less brains)--how the main hero always has unique powers that defy logic and physics, with a physical strength that far exceeds his physical form? It's the image representing an ideal--what someone wants to be. Whether it's the writer, or the viewer for whom it's intended, the lead will always be something for someone to aspire to, yet something that isn't out of their reach--and when you make your main character scrawny, you know it'll appeal to more kids, because most are themselves scrawny. It's shifting focus away from the strength-determined image of heroes as they were -before- modern times; in the old days, physical strength made you stand out as a powerful figure in society. These days, it's considered unnecessary, because we no longer need physical strength to perform our every day tasks.

In this technology oriented world, physical strength has become almost unnecessary--all you need is the physical capacity to get out of bed, sit down in a chair, do work on the computer, or walk around a building for a day, sit down to drive, sit down to chat, sit down to eat, sit down to play games or watch movies--sit, sit, sit, lazy, lazy, lazy, weak, weak, weak.
 

The Abhorrent

New member
May 7, 2011
321
0
0
Unfortunately, far too many games don't implement warriors well enough to be enjoyable to play as; not without resorting to giving them some other abilities (often magical). Aside from the innate appeal of having the best looking (heavy) armor and weapons (often two-handed swords), there's little appeal to playing a warrior-type class in a game.

... except for when they're done well.

So yes, I enjoy playing warriors; but I've seen many cases where they've been too over-simplified, preventing them from enjoying the depth other classes typically enjoy.

---

To give an example of a good warrior design, there's World of Warcraft. Specifically, tanking as a warrior; even more specifically, tanking in a chaotic situation (though not a situation caused by other players in your party doing something stupid). My perspective is a little dated at this point (WotLK-era, haven't played in a year and a half), but I'll give the general idea of what I mean.

Raid boss tanking is rather boring, testing the tank's gear & cooldowns rather than their skill. AoE-tanking wasn't much better, because enemies were rounded up easily. Where the real fun was in picking up enemies which spawned intermittently, forcing you to constantly react to a constantly changing situation; keeping everything under control required the tank to always be aware and persistently active.

Much maligned back in the day was the 5-man heroic called "The Halls of Reflection", where many groups struggled to make it past the waves of ghosts which could decimate any party which was either poorly coordinated or not excessively overgeared. Many resorted to line-of-sight pulling in a little alcove, which was risky issue where things could go wrong in an instant; often, it did.

I wasn't an overgeared tank, and warriors weren't the best at AoE tanking either. I didn't have the gear to reliably do the alcove, and it was often messy if not disastrous. My solution? Tank the waves out in the open, where I could see what was going on and react accordingly. And to my surprise, it worked. Wonderfully. I was (figuratively) dancing my head to do it, but it worked. It was intense, and it was a lot of fun.

So why is warrior tanking so much fun? You have a tool for every situation. Warriors were far from simple, and in fact often defied simplification. The Halls of Reflection were made to counteract the simple & easy approach many were using for 5 man dungeons at the time, and realizing that allowed me actually do it; even moreso, it allowed me to break loose and push my skills (if they could be called that) to their limit.

---

Warriors are fun, but they should be far more nuanced than many games do. They lack the ability to be flashy, and simple effectiveness gets dull after a while. So the solution is to give warriors depth; easy to learn, impossible to master. While they aren't as outwardly attractive as other classes, they should have the potential to be fun to play as.
 

st0pnsw0p

New member
Nov 23, 2009
169
0
0
Here's how I see it:
Aragorn was a ranger and he was awesome; Gandalf was a wizard (mage) and he was FUCKING AWESOME; Boromir was more of a warrior and he was killed in the first fucking book.