Which mmorpg's are you thinking of with these ideas? not every mmorpg has thieves/rangers as light armour wearers for instance(most give them medium armour) and in guild Wars 2 for instance the mesmer class uses illusion based magics but the way it does so its via the swords, daggers an greatswords its uses for melee as much as via illusionary clones that it creates as a way to boost damage in combat and also mess with its opponants head(s) so how would that class fit your rather strange concept of mechanics?

Something tells me your reaching for a scientific answer to preference instead of just accepting you prefer melee dps classes in your online games over spell flingers or ranged dps classes(which in a fair few mmorpg's ranger is counted).

Oh and i agree with butcher go read some fantasy novels and play D&D tabletop for abit it'll help you get a better understanding on where the concepts and ideas your talking about really come from more than any scientific formula will.

Quote from: Ishida52134;610899thanks. But I mean if that logic follows, then why wouldn't that mean I like applied mechanics? After all, in the same way as I stated in that scenario, rogues and warriors basically are complete opposites besides the fact that they deal physical damage. Btw, I stated that I include rangers as rogues so it's not only limited to stabbing things and melee. In addition, applied mechanics is the only thing they share right? Why wouldn't I like that singular trait then?

What exactly do you mean by "applied mechanics"?

Quote from: Broken-Serenity;610936Which mmorpg's are you thinking of with these ideas? not every mmorpg has thieves/rangers as light armour wearers for instance(most give them medium armour) and in guild Wars 2 for instance the mesmer class uses illusion based magics but the way it does so its via the swords, daggers an greatswords its uses for melee as much as via illusionary clones that it creates as a way to boost damage in combat and also mess with its opponants head(s) so how would that class fit your rather strange concept of mechanics?

Something tells me your reaching for a scientific answer to preference instead of just accepting you prefer melee dps classes in your online games over spell flingers or ranged dps classes(which in a fair few mmorpg's ranger is counted).

Oh and i agree with butcher go read some fantasy novels and play D&D tabletop for abit it'll help you get a better understanding on where the concepts and ideas your talking about really come from more than any scientific formula will.

it doesn't matter whether they do it through swords or daggers.. it's still magic.... And I already said I INCLUDE RANGERS AS ROGUES so I already said I like both melee and ranged dps.... I just said physical damage nothing about melee....

And by applied mechanics read the first post.

Quote from: Ishida52134;610939And by applied mechanics read the first post.

From you first post, it seems you mean Applied Mechanics as in, the discipline of Physics.

And again, enjoying a PC game and enjoying Physics have zero, zilch, nada to do with each other. I'm quite sure that there are lots of people with similar tastes in PC gaming, who couldn't care less about Applied Mechanics.

This is as ridiculous as suggesting that, because you play a Fire or Frost Mage in WoW, you're interested in Thermodynamics. Or that you're into Zoology because you play a Feral Druid. Those things have absolutely nothing to do with each other. Which is to say, these interests may coexist in anyone, but they do not follow from each other.

People don't play Warriors and Rogues because they like Physics. They do it because they like to stab things on the computer.

Well first, like I said I include rangers as a subclass of rogues so I don't really care about melee or ranged damage. I'm trying to find traits that are common to both rogues and warriors. Since rogues and warriors have totally completely different ideals except for one unifying trait, and I like both classes, doesn't that mean that i don't care about all their other traits since they could be anything except for that one unifying trait?

So, would a sniper wielding a futuristic energy/plasma weapon not fit in the physical damage? This is my main question at this point.....

I don't really understand why that doesn't imply applied mechanics though. Rogues and warriors have completely different traits except for one unifying trait which is physical damage/physical adeptness right? All their other traits are almost opposites of each other, which means I don't really care about their other traits if I like everything about rogues and warriors? Doesn't that mean I like that one unifying trait which is physical damage?

yup you like stabbing stuff via melee in online games, nothing physic's based about that....as for your sniper question well surely if you class the ranger as a rogue class then snipers fall into the same category since they also deal ranged damage via physical projectiles?(your energy weapon snipers are just fancy pants mages though so dont class those filthy pretenders in the same catergory lol).

Quote from: Broken-Serenity;610999yup you like stabbing stuff via melee in online games, nothing physic's based about that....as for your sniper question well surely if you class the ranger as a rogue class then snipers fall into the same category since they also deal ranged damage via physical projectiles?(your energy weapon snipers are just fancy pants mages though so dont class those filthy pretenders in the same catergory lol).

well using futuristic weapons, would that be considered physical? Or using any elemental weapon like flamethrowers and such.
Like an engineer class.

Engineers use bombs and granades so yeah physical class(plus in gw2 they're lumped in with thief and ranger so you could call them a rogue class), also flames do physical harm(burns) so your lines are getting blurred abit now.

so that doesn't imply applied mechanics then?

Technically applied mechanics covers every type of direct damage done so even magic attacks that do elemental damage(earth magic or fire for instance) counts under that system which may be why people are having issues figuring out what your actually talkign about when you mention applied mechanics.

I really dont see what applied mechanics has to do with this and think its bluring the issue. It is a field of study. Liking something that falls under its unbrella no more makes you an applied physics enthusiast than liking roses and dandylions makes you a botany enthusiast. You like physical violence (possibly mundane, non-magical physical violence). To like applied mechanics your interest would need to go way beyond that and into the actual theories of applied mechanics.

Quote from: Ishida52134;611009so that doesn't imply applied mechanics then?

No more than preferring to play a Priest implies a knack for theology. Which is to say, not at all.

Quote from: Broken-Serenity;611014Technically applied mechanics covers every type of direct damage done so even magic attacks that do elemental damage(earth magic or fire for instance) counts under that system which may be why people are having issues figuring out what your actually talkign about when you mention applied mechanics.

Well classical mechanics would only cover physical damage like stabbing, piercing, slashing, those types of damage. Burning would be more like fire damage.
So basically, it has nothing to do with applied mechanics? Like since rangers could be snipers with energy weapons which has nothing to do with classical mechanics right?

How else would I learn more about rogues and warriors other than trying to seek a common similarity and trying to learn more about that though?
I mean, if I like everything about rogues and warriors and combine all those traits together, for example, the clothing trait would range across everything from light to heavy armor, weapons would range from everything from melee to ranged. The only constant similarity is physical damage isn't it?

Ishida, I am not really sure what you are asking here. Are you quetioning whether your interest in rogues and warriors means you should look more into applied mechanics? If so, i think most people are stuggling to understand what your end goal is here.

You keep saying you want to learn more about these to classes, and somehow you believe the pathway to knowledge about is the road of applied mechanics. What do you mean when you say learn more about them? More about howthey operate and fuction? You are probably better off studying martial arts, athletics and a bit of medicine in that case. I just don't see what applied mechanics is going to do for you here.

Quote from: Ishida52134;611065I mean, if I like everything about rogues and warriors and combine all those traits together, for example, the clothing trait would range across everything from light to heavy armor, weapons would range from everything from melee to ranged. The only constant similarity is physical damage isn't it?

For most people reasons for liking a class are probably more to do with game-play factors?
*complexity of the class
*strategies the class uses to get by: focus on tanking vs. damage-dealing vs. crowd control vs. needing to constantly watch everyone's health bar to keep them alive.
*difference in how easy it is to kill members of the class.
etc.
 
Maybe rogues/warriors do use 'applied mechanics' but how could that translate into 'enjoyment' on your part? It seems almost as unlikely as someone playing a fire wizard because they think thermodynamics is cool.
 
Why don't you give us more information on what parts of playing Rogue or Warrior you enjoy, or what parts of Healer or Wizard you don't enjoy. For all we know liking the 2 classes you do could just be because wizards are too squishy and healers need too much work. Or if you're sure that it is "applied mechanics" that gives you your enjoyment of the classes, I'm curious as to how that's possible.