49 réponses à ce sujet

[Dileos]

So you fail to see why someone who steals for money would be called a rogue?

Somebody who steals for money is known as a thief, not a rogue.


I can shoplift from a convience store, does that mean that I can turn myself invisible and carry daggers in the backseat of my car?

Its actually possible to go through the game without a single rogue in your party, and still access all the locked chests and doors in the game if you find the files for the removed "lock bash" feature.

Modifié par Dileos, 09 juin 2010 - 03:10 .

[Jonas1974]

Dileos wrote...

So you fail to see why someone who steals for money would be called a rogue?

Somebody who steals for money is known as a thief, not a rogue.


I can shoplift from a convience store, does that mean that I can turn myself invisible and carry daggers in the backseat of my car?

Its actually possible to go through the game without a single rogue in your party, and still access all the locked chests and doors in the game if you find the files for the removed "lock bash" feature.

A Rogue, in fantasy RPG's, actually includes Thieves, Assassins, and Bards

I am not saying only Rogues CAN complete the Stealing or Assassination quests....I am saying why would anyone else?  I just can't see a powerful Mage resorting to pickpocketing for extra cash.....

Modifié par Jonas1974, 09 juin 2010 - 03:18 .

[Elhanan]

For a mage, it is called Sleight of Hand; saves on mana....

[Jonas1974]

Elhanan wrote...

For a mage, it is called Sleight of Hand; saves on mana....

So for a Warrior it's called......Strong-arming?  LOL

[Arttis]

Arthur Cousland wrote...

It would have been nice for stealing/stealth to not be required for the Slim quests, or at least make some kind of warrior or mage counterpart. Kind of like how games such as Oblivion have their warrior/mage/thieves guild questlines.

i could complete all of those guilds while being a pure mage.
funny how a pure warrior could be the mages leader.
*when i mean pure i mean without learning anymore spells then the ones given to you at the start of the game*
oh how i played oblivion a ton.

[soteria]

actually just discussing how it would be better to have alternatives, to accomplish the same experience level and game completion without comprimising morality.

nowhere in any posts does it ask Bioware to fix anything.

please read the previous posts before speaking.

I read the thread, including the OP--or did you think I just skipped down and happened to read the post I quoted at random? Your complaint is that you want to do all the quests with a particular character, but you feel that character shouldn't be doing them. So don't. Frankly, it's ludicrous to suggest that a character who limits himself in what he is willing to do should be able to accomplish the same number of tasks as a character who will do anything.

Additionally, I find your RP argument flimsy. A powerful mage would be unwilling to steal, but a powerful rogue or warrior wouldn't mind? Why would an affinity to magic make a person unwilling to steal? And why is your "powerful mage" willing to do other menial or trivial tasks? RPGs have always asked characters to do improbable or trivial sidequests.

[Jonas1974]

soteria wrote...

actually just discussing how it would be better to have alternatives, to accomplish the same experience level and game completion without comprimising morality.
nowhere in any posts does it ask Bioware to fix anything.
please read the previous posts before speaking.

I read the thread, including the OP--or did you think I just skipped down and happened to read the post I quoted at random? Your complaint is that you want to do all the quests with a particular character, but you feel that character shouldn't be doing them. So don't. Frankly, it's ludicrous to suggest that a character who limits himself in what he is willing to do should be able to accomplish the same number of tasks as a character who will do anything.
Additionally, I find your RP argument flimsy. A powerful mage would be unwilling to steal, but a powerful rogue or warrior wouldn't mind? Why would an affinity to magic make a person unwilling to steal? And why is your "powerful mage" willing to do other menial or trivial tasks? RPGs have always asked characters to do improbable or trivial sidequests.

trying to figure out where you got the idea that i was asking bioware to fix anything.....

and I was using the "Mage" as an example......but since you mentioned it.....YES a stereotypical mage would do menial tasks....alchemy is pretty menial and tedious......but I don't envision a stereotypical Mage pickpocketing the masses....call me weird

I always try to envision any character I make as an "Adventurer", while avoiding "discipline" classes like Paladin or Monk, as they don't give the moral wiggle room of other classes.......but I also try to stay true to the class I am playing.....A Warrior makes his living by his sword, a Mage seeks knowledge and power through magic, and a Rogue makes up his own rules as he goes along.......

I don't "expect" to be able to do the same number of tasks with a "good" character as an "evil" character.....but I would like to.  I, as a player, would like to achieve as high of a level as I possibly can, while playing the style and alignment I have chosen.  I know it is a fart in the wind wishing for this, but it doesn't stop me from hoping.

[AntiChri5]

My Arcane Warrior (avatar) was a street urchin before being taken to the tower, he has ONE rank in stealing.



My female human warrior was always bothered by how constrained she felt by her rank, and how the training she got from her brother just didnt seem to work as well for her so she hung out with some shady sorts, and so has ONE rank in stealing. (this also explains why she has one rank in a sword and sheild talent, which you get for being a human noble, but is a master dual wielder)

[Yrkoon]

Jonas1974 wrote...

Dileos wrote...

So you fail to see why someone who steals for money would be called a rogue?

Somebody who steals for money is known as a thief, not a rogue.


I can shoplift from a convience store, does that mean that I can turn myself invisible and carry daggers in the backseat of my car?

Its actually possible to go through the game without a single rogue in your party, and still access all the locked chests and doors in the game if you find the files for the removed "lock bash" feature.

A Rogue, in fantasy RPG's, actually includes Thieves, Assassins, and Bards

But if we're talking about Fantasy settings, then the whole debate is pretty much pointless.  Thieves, Assassins, Bards, Clerics, Monks, Rangers,  and Fighters (try assigning a unique role to that last one there.  What's a fighter?  Answer:  One who fights... just like everyone else in Fantasy)  are all  Adventurers.  And adventurers pick up street skills when they adventure.  It's both believable, and within their  so-called "roles"

I am not saying only Rogues CAN complete the Stealing or Assassination quests....I am saying why would anyone else?  I just can't see a powerful Mage resorting to pickpocketing for extra cash.....

For Money?  For  the thrill?  For revenge?  For the spirit of anarchy?  But you're right about the stereotypical Mage.  They probably wouldn't go pickpocketting people for cash.  They'd have their Familiar do it  instead.  Or, they'd pickpocket the rich noble for the key to his vault.... which might just contain some ancient tome that they'd like to study, or learn from, or profit from, or gain power from.

Modifié par Yrkoon, 09 juin 2010 - 11:01 .

[Elhanan]

Or sweet talk the warden to steal it for them....

[RueTheDay003]

I never completed the Slim or Crow quests until I did play as my "evil" character...but I do agree that this game lends itself to the Rogue-type character. I was actually thinking of this the other day, and I believe that the standard/canonical Warden is a Female Noble Rogue, who has a "good" nature. I always use a Male Dalish Elf Rogue when I play my "evil" character, as the Dalish have no use for the Chantry (so it makes sense that my character wouldn't feel bad threatening a Revered Mother) and a lot of elves hate humans and walk around with a chip on their shoulders (see: Shiani, even though she has a MORE than valid reason).



But to return to the point, yes, I feel as though the game was built for a Rogue character. I've had parties where I haven't had a warrior, or haven't had a mage, but I've never not either been a Rogue or had Leliana with me at all times if I was playing as a Warrior or Mage.

[mousestalker]

Elhanan wrote...

mousestalker wrote...

The only real advantage to playing a rogue as the PC character is that you can potentially open every chest in game. That's it.

Or traps. Or avoid being beaten by mobs via Stealth. Or having more Skills than any other class. Or being able to place arrows in foes that do more damage than Warriors. And these are only a few observations; possibly more including Dirty Fighting which appears to work on a vast majority of oppents, and it is available as a first lvl/tier slot.

Pls do not misunderstand, I like Warriors; being able to accept tons of punishment, lay waste with 2H, etc. But they are the plainly wrapped class that can be fairly well duped with AI

And Mages can deal out more death than anyone, but still must rely on another class for the 'minor details' in order to gather more loot and avoid more damage.

Rogues have depth; are complex enough to be built many, many ways which is great for us that dislike appearing the same as any other.

I think you missed my point. The instant you acquire a companion of a given class, you acquire those skills as well. So once you have Lelianna or Zevran, you have access to rogue skills 'n talents. The only things you miss by not being a rogue are the chests you can not open because you lack access to the skill.

Mages and warriors can take traps and they can take stealing. They can not open chests or locks. If you choose not to take stealing on your warrior, that is your choice. My statement stands. The only advantage for a rogue PC is that you can maximize your experience by opening every chest in the game.

[Elhanan]

I believe I now understand, but traps are then included. One gets XP for disarming them, too.

[mousestalker]

You do indeed get xp for traps. Daveth can (in theory) disarm the ones in Ostagar.

[Jestina]

Rogues are nice but a little too tedious for me. All that having to remember to stealth and back stab stuff in combat. I'm just a more straight forward person in combat...so I do best with mage or warrior.

[Jonas1974]

Yrkoon wrote...

Jonas1974 wrote...

Dileos wrote...

So you fail to see why someone who steals for money would be called a rogue?

Somebody who steals for money is known as a thief, not a rogue.


I can shoplift from a convience store, does that mean that I can turn myself invisible and carry daggers in the backseat of my car?

Its actually possible to go through the game without a single rogue in your party, and still access all the locked chests and doors in the game if you find the files for the removed "lock bash" feature.

A Rogue, in fantasy RPG's, actually includes Thieves, Assassins, and Bards

But if we're talking about Fantasy settings, then the whole debate is pretty much pointless.  Thieves, Assassins, Bards, Clerics, Monks, Rangers,  and Fighters (try assigning a unique role to that last one there.  What's a fighter?  Answer:  One who fights... just like everyone else in Fantasy)  are all  Adventurers.  And adventurers pick up street skills when they adventure.  It's both believable, and within their  so-called "roles"

I am not saying only Rogues CAN complete the Stealing or Assassination quests....I am saying why would anyone else?  I just can't see a powerful Mage resorting to pickpocketing for extra cash.....

For Money?  For  the thrill?  For revenge?  For the spirit of anarchy?  But you're right about the stereotypical Mage.  They probably wouldn't go pickpocketting people for cash.  They'd have their Familiar do it  instead.  Or, they'd pickpocket the rich noble for the key to his vault.... which might just contain some ancient tome that they'd like to study, or learn from, or profit from, or gain power from.

i understand your argument, and agree to a point.....adventurers would pick up skills from different places and people along their journeys, but it is not the "possession" of the skills that concern me.  it is the "application" of said skills that makes the character.  It is a question of what motivates the character.....is it the lust for battle, the search for hidden knowledge, or the thrill of giving the law a big finger.  I can absolutley see a warrior trying to get into a locked chest in a villians hideout, or stealing a key to open a cell where a innocent is held, but pickpocketing for cash?.....just cant see it.  it changes the class itself to me.  that is something i only see a rogue doing, as it is part of their archetype. 

i can see any class "assassinating", but it is more the domain of Assassins (rogue spec). 

All i am saying is that 2 questlines SEEM tailored to rogues, with no alternative route for other classes.  There is no way to get overwhelming support at the Landsmeet without completing the Crows questline.....and i beleive there should be.

Modifié par Jonas1974, 09 juin 2010 - 07:39 .

[RueTheDay003]

Jonas1974 wrote...

All i am saying is that 2 questlines SEEM tailored to rogues, with no alternative route for other classes.  There is no way to get overwhelming support at the Landsmeet without completing the Crows questline.....and i beleive there should be.

I agree with you in regards to the questlines seeming tailored to rogues, but you do not have to do the Crows questline to get overwhelming support at the Landsmeet. Even without the man saying that you helped him with "a personal matter," if you do everything else the majority will go for you. I have won the LM many times without working for the Crows.

[RobotXYZ]

Your thread title invites a controversy. If you had said "Dragon Age Origins has much content for a rogue" I don't think you would have gotten much of a debate.

But by saying it is 'made for a rogue' that is going to far. After all a lot of time and effort went into the warrior and mage developement as well. Its very much debatable that dragon age origins is 'made for a rogue'.  There is content where you are defending a town (archetypical warrior), where you are in a wizard tower and in possessed fade dudes dreams (archetypical wizard).

I'm a fan of seeing the rogue get some love. They were crap in DnD unless the DM catered to them. CRPGs AdnD they were ok backstabbing and utility then the +1d6 rules pretty much screwed them up again (sucked in Ice wind dale 2 ....take one level of rogue on a wizard for utility) until HIPS came out.

They are really cool in D a O one of the funnest classes but yet the warrior and mage are all interesting options to investigate on playthroughs...

Modifié par RobotXYZ, 10 juin 2010 - 12:18 .

[Jonas1974]

RobotXYZ wrote...

Your thread title invites a controversy. If you had said "Dragon Age Origins has much content for a rogue" I don't think you would have gotten much of a debate.

But by saying it is 'made for a rogue' that is going to far. After all a lot of time and effort went into the warrior and mage developement as well. Its very much debatable that dragon age origins is 'made for a rogue'.  There is content where you are defending a town (archetypical warrior), where you are in a wizard tower and in possessed fade dudes dreams (archetypical wizard).

I'm a fan of seeing the rogue get some love. They were crap in DnD unless the DM catered to them. CRPGs AdnD they were ok backstabbing and utility then the +1d6 rules pretty much screwed them up again (sucked in Ice wind dale 2 ....take one level of rogue on a wizard for utility) until HIPS came out.

They are really cool in D a O one of the funnest classes but yet the warrior and mage are all interesting options to investigate on playthroughs...

i actually loved the DnD Rogues.....Shadowdancer FTW.......Rogues could be unstoppable in NWN1&2

[RobotXYZ]

The original DnD rogues were crap. Melee with no hitpoints and only a small chances of hiding in shadows unless at epic levels. AdnD they could spec their points into hide to have a good chance or suck it up and arm a bow with locks utility. The multiplier was awesome in StOA and Baldurs gate ranged was the best anyhow. Bhaal special abilities were amazing best of any class (use any device and spike trap) Icewind Dale 2 they got the shaft with 1d6 damage at every other level on a backstab. Literally no reason to take a rogue other than one level on a mage to disarm traps.

HIPS totally made rogues come back for NWN1/2!

Modifié par RobotXYZ, 10 juin 2010 - 01:33 .

[Yrkoon]

Jonas1974 wrote...
i understand your argument, and agree to a point.....adventurers would pick up skills from different places and people along their journeys, but it is not the "possession" of the skills that concern me.  it is the "application" of said skills that makes the character. 

But since  your  your main character does not have to  actually apply  his   stealing skills  in order  to complete  Slims quests,   this argument of yours doesn't really support your main point, The fact of the matter is that   Bioware  could have made it so that ONLY  a rogue PC can   get, and do,  Slims quests.   But they didn't.  And that says a lot.

It is a question of what motivates the character.....is it the lust for battle, the search for hidden knowledge, or the thrill of giving the law a big finger.  I can absolutley see a warrior trying to get into a locked chest in a villians hideout, or stealing a key to open a cell where a innocent is held, but pickpocketing for cash?.....just cant see it.  it changes the class itself to me.  that is something i only see a rogue doing, as it is part of their archetype. 

Ok, no offense, but this is at least the second time you've  cited "archetypes"  to try and establish  some point about  "rogues" in fantasy settings.  It's annyoing to me,  because  I've been a player of RPGs  (both pen & paper  and computer)  for the better part of 20 years, and what I'm seeing here  is a complete  lack of understanding on your part  of the Archetype itself.      First off, anyone  who's been around RPGs  knows that Rogues are a staple of a FULL party.  That is to say, Your typical Fighter  does not dare go on an extended adventure without a rogue by his side.  The point being that just about all general adventures feature "quests" and problems that you need a rogue to optimally complete..  Second,  aside from the fact that Pickpocketting, Stealth, Lock-picking, and Trap disarming   have ceased being skills exclusive to rogues  about 9 years ago (since 3rd edition D&D was released), there's still the fact that all adventurers have use for cash, and it is  their alignment and morals that determine how they're going to get that cash, NOT   their  assigned professions.

i can see any class "assassinating", but it is more the domain of Assassins (rogue spec). 

All i am saying is that 2 questlines SEEM tailored to rogues, with no alternative route for other classes.

You mean, it seems so to you.  But  it's far more logical   (and factual) to conclude that those two quest lines are tailored to a well rounded party -- one who's PC doesn't need to be a rogue at all.

  There is no way to get overwhelming support at the Landsmeet without completing the Crows questline.....and i beleive there should be.

  No, this is not true at all.    And you've already been corrected on this point  a page ago.  I guess  we need to start posting links to prove you wrong?


Link

As you can see,  The  highest support level a player can get at the landsmeet is  all the nobles but one.  You cannot get every noble to support you even if you do the Crows quest line.

And most importantly, you do  NOT need to do the Crows quest line to get all the nobles but one  to support you.  The Crows Questline is tied to one Noble at the Landsmeet:  Vaughn.  But Vaughn  1)can be killed prior to the landsmeet.  And he  2) can also be Bribed to support you.    And  he 3)   Can be  left in his cell so that he doesn't vote at all..

Modifié par Yrkoon, 10 juin 2010 - 11:57 .

[soteria]

All i am saying is that 2 questlines SEEM tailored to rogues, with no alternative route for other classes. There is no way to get overwhelming support at the Landsmeet without completing the Crows questline.....and i beleive there should be.

As others have said, this isn't remotely true. To add to what others have said, I don't know about overwhelming support, but it's entirely possible to win the Landsmeet without doing *any* additional quests.

[Jonas1974]

Yrkoon wrote...

It is a question of what motivates the character.....is it the lust for battle, the search for hidden knowledge, or the thrill of giving the law a big finger.  I can absolutley see a warrior trying to get into a locked chest in a villians hideout, or stealing a key to open a cell where a innocent is held, but pickpocketing for cash?.....just cant see it.  it changes the class itself to me.  that is something i only see a rogue doing, as it is part of their archetype. 

Ok, no offense, but this is at least the second time you've  cited "archetypes"  to try and establish  some point about  "rogues" in fantasy settings.  It's annyoing to me,  because  I've been a player of RPGs  (both pen & paper  and computer)  for the better part of 20 years, and what I'm seeing here  is a complete  lack of understanding on your part  of the Archetype itself.      First off, anyone  who's been around RPGs  knows that Rogues are a staple of a FULL party.  That is to say, Your typical Fighter  does not dare go on an extended adventure without a rogue by his side.  The point being that just about all general adventures feature "quests" and problems that you need a rogue to optimally complete..  Second,  aside from the fact that Pickpocketting, Stealth, Lock-picking, and Trap disarming   have ceased being skills exclusive to rogues  about 9 years ago (since 3rd edition D&D was released), there's still the fact that all adventurers have use for cash, and it is  their alignment and morals that determine how they're going to get that cash, NOT   their  assigned professions.

I have also played RPG's since the days of basic DnD, circa 1982 or so, and my understanding is quite different.  I play my party from the moral baseline of the LEADER, as he or she is responsible for the party's actions....and in this game is answerable for them.  And although a Fighter would absolutely bring a rogue along, if he was of a lawful alignment, would not permit the rogue to steal from villagers,,,,,he would use the rogue's abilities to unlock dungeon doors, disable traps, and open monster's chests.

I am not saying noone CAN do the side quests.....I am saying their profession is a reflection of their motivations, and IN MY OPINION, wouldn't do some of the things involved in those quests if they werent a rogue.

Modifié par Jonas1974, 10 juin 2010 - 07:20 .

[soteria]

Ok, instead of arguing that you need to be a rogue by class to do everything, it would have made a lot more sense to argue that you need to be a mercenary. I would counter that by saying that NO character, consistently roleplayed, would do every quest in the game. Other Bioware games have been the same way: both Mass Effects had quests that were pretty clearly Paragon or Renegade exclusively, even though anyone could do them.

And no, classes in Dragon Age are not by any means a reflection of motivations.  Mages are mages because they were born with magical affinity.  Rogue vs warrior is a choice in fighting style, no more or less.  Riordan, Howe, Duncan, Leliana, and Zevran are all rogues and all have vastly different motivations.

Modifié par soteria, 10 juin 2010 - 08:10 .