85 réponses à ce sujet

[webbedfeet]

When I play mages, I tend to be 'lore-correct' and never, ever use lyrium potions (they're supposed to be rare IIRC) unless I'm in extremely dire straits. It makes for a pretty interesting game, since you actually have to run for the hills if you gather too much aggro and can't spam spells quite as much. Still overpowered, yes, but far less of a steamrolling-everything-in-the-face class.

I've played a couple of warriors...eh, not my play style, but they're not bad. A little bit too invincible for my tastes. I'm more comfortable playing squishy ranged people so I actually prefer playing archers to melee, even, although their skillsets are more boring, and melee rogue if I do melee. There's nothing wrong with warriors, per se, they're just not as fun for me. Not vulnerable enough. Which I suppose means I miss the point of the warrior class in general.

(This reply does not address the OP's concerns, just throwing my two cents in about the whole 'cannot play properly' and 'prefers different playstyle'. I like micromanagement! Sorry for the OTness.)

Modifié par webbedfeet, 24 avril 2010 - 04:03 .

[Monkeypasta]

Aisynia wrote...

Archers are badass.. but as far as I've seen, common opinion is that they are yawn-fests. A sentiment I (unfortunately) share. I want to like archery, but it just doesn't work out. I usually have a bow and a couple archery talents on my rogues, and pull the bow out for certain situations. I can take it in small doses for sure

Same here. In general I like archers, since they are good DPS and hit from afar, but in DA I didn't find a use for this class.

[Monkeypasta]

Mr_Steph wrote...

 Achers suck? Really? Because I've just completed DAO and Awakening with an archer and he's the most powerful character I've played with. Seriously about halfway through the game I was doing over 150 damage per shot and late game between 200 and 250. Arrow of slaying meant 1 dead emissary, great abilities to debuff enemies and in awakening with the first archer talent.........oh boy. I even managed to deal 1025 damage in one shot! I mean come on that is ****ing awesome!

So you soloed a pure archer? No melee weapons,
just bow and arrows? Sounds crazy :-)
I can agree that soloing with archer can be good, but it has no use in groups with such powerful mages.

[Monkeypasta]

Tinnic wrote...

So I am not sure if would necessarily say Warriors are overpowered.

Nobody ever said that. I even think they are less powerfull class in the game.
Well, archers might be worse :-)

[Mr_Steph]

Monkeypasta wrote...

Mr_Steph wrote...

 Achers suck? Really? Because I've just completed DAO and Awakening with an archer and he's the most powerful character I've played with. Seriously about halfway through the game I was doing over 150 damage per shot and late game between 200 and 250. Arrow of slaying meant 1 dead emissary, great abilities to debuff enemies and in awakening with the first archer talent.........oh boy. I even managed to deal 1025 damage in one shot! I mean come on that is ****ing awesome!

So you soloed a pure archer? No melee weapons,
just bow and arrows? Sounds crazy :-)
I can agree that soloing with archer can be good, but it has no use in groups with such powerful mages.

Yep. No melee weapons, just bows and arrows and I actually prefer that now. Used to like DW roque the most, but now it's a rogue archer.

[Aisynia]

Monkeypasta wrote...

Aisynia wrote...
I've played through as a warrior. I was practically invincible and killed everything in my path.. and it was utterly, utterly boring in every conceivable way.

In almost all cases I even found myself switching to mage, while my main hero warrior was acting by himself. You can EASILY create good tactics setup, but you can't do the same fo mage. You'll run out of tactic slots eventually :-)

I keep my mage tactics fairly simple.

[Aisynia]

webbedfeet wrote...

When I play mages, I tend to be 'lore-correct' and never, ever use lyrium potions (they're supposed to be rare IIRC) unless I'm in extremely dire straits. It makes for a pretty interesting game, since you actually have to run for the hills if you gather too much aggro and can't spam spells quite as much. Still overpowered, yes, but far less of a steamrolling-everything-in-the-face class.

I've played a couple of warriors...eh, not my play style, but they're not bad. A little bit too invincible for my tastes. I'm more comfortable playing squishy ranged people so I actually prefer playing archers to melee, even, although their skillsets are more boring, and melee rogue if I do melee. There's nothing wrong with warriors, per se, they're just not as fun for me. Not vulnerable enough. Which I suppose means I miss the point of the warrior class in general.

(This reply does not address the OP's concerns, just throwing my two cents in about the whole 'cannot play properly' and 'prefers different playstyle'. I like micromanagement! Sorry for the OTness.)

I never use Lyrium potions because I'm a blood mage and don't need them  I have 80% of my mana bar reserved for sustained spells while I use health to cast and Blood Sacrifice to renew health.

[Monkeypasta]

Aisynia wrote...
I never use Lyrium potions because I'm a blood mage and don't need them  I have 80% of my mana bar reserved for sustained spells while I use health to cast and Blood Sacrifice to renew health.

I always create a crazy battle mage with some healing abilities and always regret this, since the whole game becomes too easy after that :-)

Next time gotta make something more exotic like Blood mage or something.

[Monkeypasta]

Mr_Steph wrote...
Yep. No melee weapons, just bows and arrows and I actually prefer that now. Used to like DW roque the most, but now it's a rogue archer.

It probably took you like over 9000 hours to get to the end :-)

[Aisynia]

Monkeypasta wrote...

Mr_Steph wrote...
Yep. No melee weapons, just bows and arrows and I actually prefer that now. Used to like DW roque the most, but now it's a rogue archer.

It probably took you like over 9000 hours to get to the end :-)

Some of the higher end bows do incredible damage.

[Aisynia]

Monkeypasta wrote...

Aisynia wrote...
I never use Lyrium potions because I'm a blood mage and don't need them  I have 80% of my mana bar reserved for sustained spells while I use health to cast and Blood Sacrifice to renew health.

I always create a crazy battle mage with some healing abilities and always regret this, since the whole game becomes too easy after that :-)

Next time gotta make something more exotic like Blood mage or something.

Blood Mage/Spirit Healer is amazing.

You are very, very powerful, but you are also in very real danger of dying constantly, because you expend your health to deal damage, and you have to rely on Blood Sacrifice to heal yourself. The pure ally support of Spirit Healer is too good to pass up, and in extreme emergencies, you can turn off Blood Magic and heal yourself.

It's the one mage I have played that I have been able to replay time and again, as it is both overpowered, and very vulnerable if you aren't careful. Requires a good deal of attention. Sometimes, if my mind wanders, I will accidentally kill myself casting lol.

[Monkeypasta]

Aisynia wrote...
Blood Mage/Spirit Healer is amazing.

Guess it's more fun. I had Battle Mage/Spirit Healer/Keeper. Well... it's just a killing machine, nothing else :-)

[Aisynia]

I typically take Battlemage as my third spec on a BM/SH.

[webbedfeet]

Aisynia wrote...

Monkeypasta wrote...

Aisynia wrote...
I never use Lyrium potions because I'm a blood mage and don't need them  I have 80% of my mana bar reserved for sustained spells while I use health to cast and Blood Sacrifice to renew health.

I always create a crazy battle mage with some healing abilities and always regret this, since the whole game becomes too easy after that :-)

Next time gotta make something more exotic like Blood mage or something.

Blood Mage/Spirit Healer is amazing.

You are very, very powerful, but you are also in very real danger of dying constantly, because you expend your health to deal damage, and you have to rely on Blood Sacrifice to heal yourself. The pure ally support of Spirit Healer is too good to pass up, and in extreme emergencies, you can turn off Blood Magic and heal yourself.

It's the one mage I have played that I have been able to replay time and again, as it is both overpowered, and very vulnerable if you aren't careful. Requires a good deal of attention. Sometimes, if my mind wanders, I will accidentally kill myself casting lol.

I agree! I actually have a BM/SH in one of my files, and he's very fun to play. Mana still is a factor, though, because his constitution is crap (intentionally! I like coddling extremely squishy people) and turning BM mode on all the time is asking for a reload. IDK, I feel like it's one of the better combinations for an exclusively caster model....which happens to be my favourite model for mages. It's like....a glassier cannonnier glass cannon. Which is very good for me.

I might follow your example and make one with a less laughable CON next time, though, so I can actually pile status effects up. I've never played much with the status effects lines, so it should be interesting.

[Carmen_Willow]

Monkeypasta wrote...

Aisynia wrote...
I've played through as a warrior. I was practically invincible and killed everything in my path.. and it was utterly, utterly boring in every conceivable way.

In almost all cases I even found myself switching to mage, while my main hero warrior was acting by himself. You can EASILY create good tactics setup, but you can't do the same fo mage. You'll run out of tactic slots eventually :-)

On tougher fights, I've turned my warrior PC over to the AI while taking control of one of my mages.  Guess I'm not setting up my mage's tactics well, or it's simply easier to get warrior tactics right.

[DWSmiley]

Carmen_Willow wrote...

On tougher fights, I've turned my warrior PC over to the AI while taking control of one of my mages.  Guess I'm not setting up my mage's tactics well, or it's simply easier to get warrior tactics right.

Definitely the latter.  You can't let the AI handle area of effect spells.  I sometimes do the opposite but for the same reason.  If a fight looks fairly easy I'll take control of Alistair or whomever just as a mental break - a little mindless bash-and-slash.

[Patriciachr34]

Monkeypasta wrote...

Suron wrote...
again your points make no sense...a DW Warrior has dex just like a rogue....sword/shield can't be flanked..etc..

Why the hell do you want to make a DW warrior, when you have a rogue? :-)
Please, play something else, not just DA. You'll learn about classic warior, not this crap from teenager's dreams.

As for flanking - it's not that good. Too bad you can't set up a duel with trained rogue. Guarantee you a good nice blow.

The reason is that with a high strength and dex, a dual wield warrior is very powerful.  I have two DW options to stun an opponent and when followed up with riposte, they're dead.  The second option will knock them over just like a shield bash.  When surrounded, I can whirlwind doing damage to multiple opponents at once and potentially knock them over.  When my tank is holding an opponent I can circle in the back and do really good critical/backstab damage.  My heavy armor allows me to take massive damage without having to spam heal pots.  Most of the time my tactics consist of my tank holding the boss mob while I circle around and two shot the trash with the rogue.  We then both hit from behind for backstab/crit damage multipliers.  In a pinch, I can even tank.  When you add in the Champion Specialization, you get and give great party buffs and can stun a group with a shout.  This is not boring.  This is thrilling!  I love warriors.  They are the most versatile class in the game. :happy:

[R-F]

i've played all three classes to the end of the game and found all of them pretty fun. warriors are always my favourite because i like to be in the fray wearing the big armor and slaughtering my way through waves of enemies. mage and rogue were both fun but not until i got to specialize, before that i found them difficult to play, since i don't like playing support characters.

[Inzhuna]

I wouldn't say that warrior as a whole is boring. Instead, I'd say S&S and 2H is boring, whilst DW and archer are fun. Especially DW! Very much agree with what Patriciachr34 said above.

[Aisynia]

Inzhuna wrote...

I wouldn't say that warrior as a whole is boring. Instead, I'd say S&S and 2H is boring, whilst DW and archer are fun. Especially DW! Very much agree with what Patriciachr34 said above.

Which is to say, for many of us, the only reasons we would play a Warrior, as you get Dual Wielding and Archery with Rogues, plus lockpicking and trap disarming.

I personally modded my game to make 2h a lot faster and I still ended up playing a rogue that dual classed into warrior for the 2h talents. 2h is actually a lot of fun when it swings at a reasonable speed.

Modifié par Aisynia, 27 avril 2010 - 02:14 .

[Mirthadrond]

I loved my warrior on my first play. He hit hard, and had excellent aggro control, while my archer leilanna cleaned up with her bow in relative safety. This isn't even counting the awesome finishing moves with sword and shield.

[kormesios]

NPC warriors (Alistair, Sten, Ohgren) didn't interest me much as class. But my dual-wielding warrior was quite satisfactory, even compared to my rogue.



Without the need for significant cunning points, or many non-combat skills, he maxed out the fighting skills faster and was stronger as well. He still wore fairly "light" armor compared to other warriors, but heavier than a rogue; with the fatigue bonus he could last longer holding position in straight-up fight.



One quirk in my play style is that I hate "aggro management" techniques--they are way to gamey--which did mess with my rogue. Which is why the ability to last in a straight up fight matters for me. He attracted too much attention, and ended up being a bit of a glass jaw.



I still like rogues better as a concept, but I thought the rogue vs. warrior balance was good, for both power and fun.

[Monkeypasta]

I seriously don't understand WHY do you want to make a DW warrior? You'll get some kinda Rogue without lockpicking and stuff. Yes, DW warrior will swing weapons fact and have some warrior traits, but in my opinion Warrior is a fat guy with big axe or sword and shield. If I want a nimble skinny dude, I'll create rogue, NOT warrior. You can even make a mage-tank with strong armor and some mage spells in the pocket, but what's the point?



So yes, I never played DW warrior in DA, but tried W+S and DH - both are super boring, especially DH.

[Elhanan]

I am not too keen on finding small items like pieces of paper; pixel hunts are what these used to be called. While I utilize the Tab key frequently (NWN Vet), I still seem to have problems targetting these small glowing parts of debris.



But the game itself is one of (if not the best) RPG tale I have played.

[Vicious]

UPD: Silent Hero

I've almost forgot my mute protagonist friend. Seriously, why is that? In Mass Effect commander Shepard is quite talkative and in DA we have a dumb superman who can't say a word - only nod. Weird...

I don't see the silent hero returning for DA2. It's not an origins game, which cuts down on character possibilities, The hero being silent was a prominent complaint by most major reviewers, and EA will probably want them to cater to 'the masses' and duplicate Mass Effect's success and popularity.[which DAO fell short of.]



It will result in a lot of pissed off fans, but 95% of them will buy the game anyway. Since EA pays the bills, I don't see the silent protagonist returning.



And yes, I know this means a shorter game. *looks at DA2's apparent release date* So far makes sense.