58 réponses à ce sujet

[Iscaredeath]

I know that the love letter was in the open chest at Arl eamon's estate. I just didn't like that my Human Noble rogue was four blocks from level 24 at the end of the game whereas my Human Noble warrior was only one block or two blocks into level 23. The only thing that made there gold total even in the end was the Rose's Thorn was expensive and the Keening Blade was free.

[Collider]

Kimarous wrote...

One could always offset the whole bash-open method by the risk of breaking items within. I remember such a mechanic in the KOTOR games.

Agree.

[Shepard Lives]

Celticon wrote...

 make picking a minigame

I'd rather eat a cactus than pick a lock though a minigame. I'm looking at you, Fallout 3.

The rogue-only locks were slightly off-putting, I agree, but it made a limited amount of sense. The most sensible choice would be to give to all Hawkes (but not to all partymembers) a lockpicking skill like the one in DAO (i.e. it requires skill points.)

Modifié par shepard_lives, 22 juillet 2010 - 12:24 .

[twincast]

I've never been a fan of lock-picking being a rogue talent instead of a skill. Skills should differ in cost according to class, with lock-picking being one that's cheap for rogues and voila, problem solved.



And the devs already informed us several months before release that in DA:O unlike games with their prior engines an object can be either destructible or pickable (or neither), but never both. No idea whether the mod community managed to change that limitation by now or whether BW changed it for DA2, but I very much doubt it. Obviously, I've never been a fan of this, either.

[Jimmie_Rox]

I just always took a rogue in my party, the annoying thing was in the origins stories and the bits where you where solo when you couldn't break locks but there wasn't anything nice in those chests at least AFAIK there wasn't. But I agree, a KoTOR style lock bashing mechanism sans lightsabers would be usefull. Though I'd probably still take a rogue ^^

[Ravenwoud]

why smashing the chest? cant you just destroy the lock instead of the whole chest.?



also, i just think you have to make lockpicking a talent and the problem is solved. no minigames or anything else. i mean, everyone can learn how to lockpick right?

[joriandrake]

I believe lockpicking should be made aviable as a skill like pickpocketing and poison making to every class



rogues should retain the bonus to dagger use and backstab however, and be the only ones with great sneaking abilities

[Celticon]

Should be able to reverse pickpocket live bombs onto NPCs imo. Then stealing would be more worthwhile as a skill.

As for breaking a chest with the risk of breaking the items inside, are we talking about adding a weapon durability system, or are those items simply destroyed for good?

It would also be nice if keys to locked containers could be looted in some levels, apart from unique drops like the Redcliffe chamberlain.

Modifié par Celticon, 22 juillet 2010 - 06:30 .

[Wotannanow]

You should definitely be able to break locks on chests if you have a strong character equiped with a heavy hammer. Also beating down weak wooden doors with a hammer or an axe should also be an option.

Mages should also be able to break down weak doors with a couple of fireballs. Strong wooden doors and metal doors should of course be immune to these tricks. Same with strong chests.

[munananustaja]

lock breaking is good in Baldurs gate when you can't have much strength (if i remember, 25 is max). so every one can't brake lock's.



In dragon age every warrior can broke the lock because you have always huge amount of strength.

[Tantum Dic Verbo]

If they make chests breakable, I hope they have the sense not to require rogues to burn points on lockpicking. The whole point of character abilities is to define character roles. While it may not make sense to deny enormous guys with axes the ability to smash into a wooden chest, it does reserve something to the rogue class.



If everyone has a way to open locks, then that aspect of the game no longer helps to define character. In fact, this would be one way that the game would be moving toward the hated and feared ME2.

[soteria]

If they make chests breakable, I hope they have the sense not to require rogues to burn points on lockpicking. The whole point of character abilities is to define character roles. While it may not make sense to deny enormous guys with axes the ability to smash into a wooden chest, it does reserve something to the rogue class.

That's a good point. I wouldn't really mind if they were to let warriors bash a door down, but with no skill/talent investment? To use the popular board phrase, it would be "a slap in the face" to require rogues to invest multiple points into mechanical expertise to open a lock when a warrior can just break it open. If they were to let warriors bash locks based on strength, I'd say just let rogues pick locks based on cunning with no talent or skill investment at all. I'm not a huge fan of that solution, either, since it makes all locks and traps too accessible.

[Demx]

Why was lock bashing taken out in the first game?

[andar91]

I never played a rogue, but it drove me nuts at how many chests my rogues couldn't open because they didn't have enough skill. I get making rogues useful and everything, but then they can't even USE their abilities! I support smashing option.

[FieryDove]

Narreneth wrote...


NO!  Mini games are horrible. No mini games.  None.  Ever.  EVER.

^^^^This a thousand times over.

[The Edge]

Collider wrote...

Kimarous wrote...

One could always offset the whole bash-open method by the risk of breaking items within. I remember such a mechanic in the KOTOR games.

Agree.

I Agree 2.

[Tantum Dic Verbo]

Siradix wrote...

Why was lock bashing taken out in the first game?

I don't think it ever was.  Locked chests exist in the game to give rogues a class ability (provided they're willing to use character development resources for it).  That was the design from the beginning. 

[Loc'n'lol]

One of the notable irks of the original game was how only mages could heal other characters. Only have rogues or warriors? Tough bananas. Granted, there exist mods to change this for those who care, but will this still be a matter of concern in the sequel, i.e. Hawke healy healy?

[Narreneth]

_Loc_N_lol_ wrote...

One of the notable irks of the original game was how only mages could heal other characters. Only have rogues or warriors? Tough bananas. Granted, there exist mods to change this for those who care, but will this still be a matter of concern in the sequel, i.e. Hawke healy healy?

Yeah, you're an ass.  The healing thing doesn't compare properly.  Healing is a tactical choice for combat.  Having a mage as a healer and only a mage affects combat and how your party is comprised tactically.  Lockpicking holds literally no benefit in combat situations and is only used outside of combat.  There can be plenty of incentive to have a rogue in the party even if warriors or mages can learn to pick locks.  Numbnuts.

[Rogue Unit]

Wow.

[soteria]

Narreneth wrote...

_Loc_N_lol_ wrote...

One of the notable irks of the original game was how only mages could heal other characters. Only have rogues or warriors? Tough bananas. Granted, there exist mods to change this for those who care, but will this still be a matter of concern in the sequel, i.e. Hawke healy healy?

Yeah, you're an ass.  The healing thing doesn't compare properly.  Healing is a tactical choice for combat.  Having a mage as a healer and only a mage affects combat and how your party is comprised tactically.  Lockpicking holds literally no benefit in combat situations and is only used outside of combat.  There can be plenty of incentive to have a rogue in the party even if warriors or mages can learn to pick locks.  Numbnuts.

Ok, aside from the fact that the tone of your post and straight-up insults were uncalled for and inappropriate... it's not even completely accurate.  Tactical removal of traps in combat is certainly useful in several fights.

[ztonkin]

Agreed. That and traps were reasons why I usually only rolled a Rogue. Make these skills universal! But since BioWare is trying to break the mold with DA2 and make it more accessible, I'm sure it's done.

[somebody99000]

soteria wrote...
That's a good point. I wouldn't really mind if they were to let warriors bash a door down, but with no skill/talent investment? To use the popular board phrase, it would be "a slap in the face" to require rogues to invest multiple points into mechanical expertise to open a lock when a warrior can just break it open. If they were to let warriors bash locks based on strength, I'd say just let rogues pick locks based on cunning with no talent or skill investment at all. I'm not a huge fan of that solution, either, since it makes all locks and traps too accessible.

Actually, that's already the case. You don't have to spend points on Deft Hands to unlock chests, you just need a high enough modified cunning. All Deft Hands does is give a large bonus (10 per level) to your modified cunning.  You can see this with Daveth; he can unlock a couple of chests at Ostagar even though he doesn't have any levels in Deft Hands.

Some of the other skills and talents work the same way, like Coercion. If you (somehow) had 110 cunning, then you could make every [persuade] in the game even without any levels in that, or if you had 110 strength, then you could make every [intimidate] in the game.

[Malanek]

wwwwowwww wrote...

I'll say it again, deft hands should have been a skill not a talent. With that being said it's not like locked chests contained anything really valuable anyways.
One of my biggest disappointments with the game was locked chests not having anything

Over the course of the game, I suspect it was well over 100gp you would miss out on without a rogue. Plus over a level of experience as well. I think they got the balance about right, you didn't need a rogue, but it was probably worth having one.

[SirOccam]

Maybe they could just make it so that you only get the exp if you pick the lock, but you can still get at the goods by bashing it. It sorta makes sense.