Heroes Do not Match Classes

I have heard a number of players discussing that particular heroes do not match the classes they were assigned. This is a direct result of Small Giant selecting class names that are easily recognizable archetypes. Each of these archetypes comes with preconceived notions of which heroes would fit and what talents might result. One example is Guinevere, she is classed as a wizard, but is wielding a mace which is clearly, to any experienced role player, a cleric’s weapon. There is actually a post on this and the answer from the devs is basically, “We had to shoe horn some heroes into certain classes because these classes need a healer, etc.” I could choose a number of heroes that are clearly not suited to their class, however that is not the point of this post.

The developers answer is arbitrary and counterintuitive. A better solution would be to require that class quests have 4 of that class and one wild card. Let the player decide what optional talent is required to complete the quest instead of forcing it. Even better would be to allow us to choose the talent grid for any given hero. If my Kage wants to be a wizard great! Someone else might want their Kage to be a paladin. Why limit the options?

My proposal would be to open all classes to all heroes. Once they select a class (the first step of the tree is class selection), they are fixed unless they are reset. Then we have the most flexibility and can build our own teams! Even better is that if we have multiples of a hero, each could be a different class and that would generate desire to ascend more of a given hero.

If you can’t do the first option, then I suggest that you correct the obvious class to hero-concept conflicts and change the class quests to be 4 same class and one any class. This alleviates the problem of some classes not having certain skill sets and corrects the issue of heroes that do not fit their class.

Any replies, please feel free to include examples of class to hero mismatch!




I wonder why only Guinevere is mentioned when people criticize the talent trees… I think this is very intentional they nerf her this way, and shake the idea of “best tank in the game”.

Hi Suicide,

Thanks for the comment!

I mentioned Guinevere because I wanted to bring in the dev’s reply. Kiril, Kashrek are some other examples. Does Kirll look like a Wizard to you?

1 Like

Jim, What you are proposing makes sense and is a fabulous idea…but the Devs just spent countless hours on this blunder and aren’t going to change it simply because we find it dimwitted that an obvious “Blood-Stained Druid” as stated on Gravemaker’s card, is now actually a barbarian. I think those who came up with this idea, never played D&D as kids where we played as either a Cleric, Fighter, Magic User or Thieves…So since we are stuck with this fiasco, I think we will just have to make the best of it, despite it not making sense.


Tibertus as ranger doesn’t make sense. The dude is literally carrying a sword…


Although ı like the new talents idea. I agree some of the hero classing is ridiculous. The heroes don’t match the class asigned to them.

Any roleplayer knows that a dwarf wizard is a blasfemy.
If the dwarven community would be aware of Kiril being a wizard, his brewery would be destroyed in a matter of seconds :joy:

Edit: seriously, why don’t you swap Agwe with Kiril? Both would improve a bit from it.


Opening all classes to any hero will lead to imbalances in the game

The classes are just about stats and special skills. Not appearances, names, or other cosmetics(hence why when you level up your hero through the class system, their appearance does not change while their stats do)

People are looking too hard into cosmetics when it’s simply about the mechanics


Agree with Rigs.

If the heroes were classified based on their looks, it would be nothing but ridiculous.

Classes were obviously introduced to 1. prolong the game and add further depth for people who already have maxed rosters. 2. provide balancing opportunities.

Example of Guinevere fits perfectly the second option. Making best tank in the game even better at being tank? Allowing people to freely choose the class would only create unkillable half-gods. You really wouldn’t enjoy it.


One example is Guinevere, she is classed as a wizard, but is wielding a mace which is clearly, to any experienced role player, a cleric’s weapon.

It never looked like mace at all to me, it looked like queens sceptor with a jewel in the middle. (You can look up “diamond sceptor”, or “jewel sceptor on google to get an idea of what I’m talking about) Even after staring at it and trying to see it as a mace, it still looks far more like magical sceptor to me— and not just because its glowing. You can blame all the anime, but I’ve always associated animated females who use sceptors and wands designed to look like sceptors in battle with magical wizard like powers.

Hypothetically even if I thought it looked like she was holding mace, I don’t think taking into account heroes design ahead of special skill is a good idea. Sure she heals, but I’ve played more games where the primary healers were in classes called “wizard” or “(X)-mage”. So I don’t see her fitting better into “cleric” than she does in “wizard”. Both make sense

Anyways I agree that heroes in some classes made me raise an eyebrow. Santa and Boril are examples but its to be expected for not every single hero to fit neatly in a category.

They could just remove the class name and just call it option 1-10… to many of you guys are hung up on a DND based mentality. It’s flavor and nothing more. The idea is about balancing classes with new abilities. Ignore the class name.


Exactly lol kinda wishing devs did just use class1 through class10 or something of that nature. Giving them these names has drawn all attention away from their true intent.


Should have just called them Class Alpha, Class Brave, Class Charlie, etc. etc. etc.


Beat me by like a minute. hah

So true. E&P is allowed to have its own fiction. Previously made popular games / fictional universes don’t have the authority to change the literal definition of an existing word.

The only ways “cleric” is defined in the real world is:

  1. A member of the clergy.

  2. a priest or religious leader, especially a Christian or Muslim one

  3. the official or sacerdotal class of a non-Christian religion

Just because E&P is using the word in a way that doesnt fit in with what a lot of role players are used to in the context of what they’re fans of— it doesn’t mean they should be policed.

1 Like

And clearly all Rangers are commoners who shun swords and rely solely on ranged weapons.



Tibertus as ranger doesn’t make sense. The dude is literally carrying a sword…

It depends what fantasy fiction universe you’re in. Yeah, if you like final fantasy Ranger is synonymous with Archer, but in plenty of other forms of media Rangers use spears, swords and axes as well.

I found that wikipedia has a whole page breaking down the character archetype

There were a lot of considerations in decideing what heroes ended up in each class.

Synergy with the class ability
Balanced numbers between each class
Thematic fit
Overall balance

Sure they all don’t make perfect sense, but the gameplay mechanics are more important than just class archetypes imo.


Ok, I get ignore the class name. However I think the class benefit should match the heroe’s abilities. Kiril’s special gains no benefit from the wizard ability. The other benefits of the class are generic. If this was done because wizards had to have a healer, then that was a non-creative way to do this. I suggested a simple solution above that would satisfy that need. Clearly wizard class is for damage dealers. If you want to include non-blaster types, make the ability increased impact instead of increased damage. So Kiril at first step would provide +35% (34.5) attack and defense buff and an additional 4.5% per major skill increase. That would make sense. Specifying damage unnecessarily penalizes him. Other class shoe-horning could be fixed the same way.

1 Like

What would that change do to guin?

Cookie Settings