122 réponses à ce sujet

[Jimmy Fury]

vilnii wrote...
classes -
Why were class options so severely limited? There is nothing resembling a Monk for instance. Why does every living being in Thedas have to come under Mage, Rogue or Fighter? Bioware might be able to fix this by expanding the specializations at some point though.

I don't think the classes are a limitation so much as organization. Every combatant can, logically, fall under one of those classes based on the focus.  Mages use magic, Warriors are skilled in all weapons, and Rogues focus on technique and skill instead of raw force. Anyone who would fight can fall into one of those catagories. From there the specializations determine what specific style they focus on within their class.
With that said I would argue that there are monks in DA. To my knowledge D&D monks are martial artists correct? They focus on technique instead of raw force thus they would fall under the rogue class.
Lily from the Mage origin is a rogue. Since the Chantry already has it's Warriors in the form of the Templars, and it abhores magic, it stands to reason that Chantry sisters could be seen as DA's version of monks.
However, it's not a particularly useful or lore friendly specialization because, again, the Templars are the Chantry's fighters so warrior monks would be redundant.

-edit-
Although, since we know there's apparantly a war brewing the the Chantry is interested in stopping, it might be interesting to see what the Sisters are capable of when the Templar's alone aren't a large enough force...

Modifié par Jimmy Fury, 27 juillet 2010 - 05:49 .

[nikki191]

i was very impressed with how bioware designed the black city and the maker.. it gave it a very real world feel about it.. no one really knows the truth its purely on faith.

in regards to the comments about monks.. they would seem out of place in ferelden but we havent seen all of thedas so its quite possible that the amount of classes will be expanded the more we get to see of the world

Modifié par nikki191, 27 juillet 2010 - 05:55 .

[Saibh]

Haexpane wrote...

The whole "Maker" thing threw me off. I'm not a fan of the single deity system and everything "good" being to the maker, and everything "bad" being part of some hidden Maker's plan to make you a better person.

I prefer the old gods, norse, roman etc.. that are waging war with each other and using humans as pawns. Much more believable than some loner hipster "making" everything

...Really? Because three billion people disagree with you. They're all monotheistic, with the whole "one true god" thing. I myself am agnostic (along with the other "nonreligious" folk we take about one billion more). Whatever your religious beliefs, I hardly see how one is more believable than the other.

Personally, I think the whole polytheistic "Look, our gods exist!" thing is a cheap way to make a place seem more like a fantasy setting. Sometimes it works really well. Other times I just think they cobble together a bunch of cool sounding names and powers and call them "gods". I really enjoyed DAO's take on it--they don't know there's a god there, the same way we don't.

Modifié par Saibh, 27 juillet 2010 - 06:24 .

[Grommash94]

AlanC9 wrote...
 at least  some of the old Tevinter gods left, how many depending on your choices in DAO. I'm not quite clear if there's anyone left worshiping the latter.

I think it has been argued that Morrigan and Flemeth are dragon worshippers, and dragons have been speculated to be the 'children' of the Old Gods, so, I guess that may count? Sort of?

[Riona45]

soteria wrote...

Oh, but I guess you were just arguing about the actual meaning of the word faith, which doesn't implied to have proofs of your is believed at all, and in that sense you're surely right, since in the FR (for example) people didn't have faith in the gods, they just know that they exist. While in Thedas people who believe in the Maker or other gods actually have faith since they cannot demonstrate the existence of their gods (except for the Sacred Ashes part, maybe? Isn't it a kind of proof of the Maker?).

Yeah, they pretty much just redefined the word "faith" for their own purposes. They would have been better off to just talk about people "worshiping" the FR gods, but oh well.

The Forgotten Realms setting?  It does use the term "worship." 

Modifié par Riona45, 28 juillet 2010 - 12:03 .

[Riona45]

Akka le Vil wrote...

Mysteries, myths and legends make for a better atmosphere and stories than having gods walking on Earth as a matter of course.

If you're talking about the Time of Troubles, that actually wasn't "a matter of course."  It was supposed to be a one-time, earth-shattering event, but unfortunately (for a number of reasons I'd rather not get into) "gods walking the planet" has come to be thought of as The Usual even for some people who are actually fans of the FR setting.

Modifié par Riona45, 28 juillet 2010 - 12:06 .

[Riona45]

Haexpane wrote...

R.U.N wrote...

Sometimes less is more.
You don't want to overwhelm the player.

Indeed, can't have choices and depth in the spiritual successsor to BG2 now can we
I'm intentionally being over the top but...

Too late.  Was DA2 ever billed as "the spiritual successor to the BG series?"  Also, many people seem not to remember that in the BG series, you had a grand total of one origin (you were a ward at Candlekeep), and your choice of race and even class didn't make huge differences in the game.

[Bobad]

Riona45 wrote...

Haexpane wrote...

R.U.N wrote...

Sometimes less is more.
You don't want to overwhelm the player.

Indeed, can't have choices and depth in the spiritual successsor to BG2 now can we
I'm intentionally being over the top but...

Too late.  Was DA2 ever billed as "the spiritual successor to the BG series?"  Also, many people seem not to remember that in the BG series, you had a grand total of one origin (you were a ward at Candlekeep), and your choice of race and even class didn't make huge differences in the game.

Well the term 'spiritual successor to BG2' is so very much a marketing catchphrase, it's so ambiguous you can take any meaning you wish, so each person brings their own preconceptions.

[Riona45]

Grommash94 wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...
 at least  some of the old Tevinter gods left, how many depending on your choices in DAO. I'm not quite clear if there's anyone left worshiping the latter.

I think it has been argued that Morrigan and Flemeth are dragon worshippers, and dragons have been speculated to be the 'children' of the Old Gods, so, I guess that may count? Sort of?

I think we would still need quite a bit more proof that either of those two actually worship anything.

[Riona45]

Bobad wrote...

Well the term 'spiritual successor to BG2' is so very much a marketing catchphrase, it's so ambiguous you can take any meaning you wish, so each person brings their own preconceptions.

Oh, I've definitely noticed that.

But even so, I think they only ever used that catchphrase for DA:O.

[Sable Rhapsody]

Saibh wrote...

Haexpane wrote...

The whole "Maker" thing threw me off. I'm not a fan of the single deity system and everything "good" being to the maker, and everything "bad" being part of some hidden Maker's plan to make you a better person.

I prefer the old gods, norse, roman etc.. that are waging war with each other and using humans as pawns. Much more believable than some loner hipster "making" everything

...Really? Because three billion people disagree with you. They're all monotheistic, with the whole "one true god" thing. I myself am agnostic (along with the other "nonreligious" folk we take about one billion more). Whatever your religious beliefs, I hardly see how one is more believable than the other.

Personally, I think the whole polytheistic "Look, our gods exist!" thing is a cheap way to make a place seem more like a fantasy setting. Sometimes it works really well. Other times I just think they cobble together a bunch of cool sounding names and powers and call them "gods". I really enjoyed DAO's take on it--they don't know there's a god there, the same way we don't.

I agree with Saibh.  And besides, I would disagree that the Maker functions as a Manichean god the way you phrase it.  I mean, I know the Chantry spins it that way, where the Maker farts rainbows and can do no wrong, but it's just as easy to make a case using the in-game lore for the Maker being a selfish, uncaring, insufferable prat with far more ego than compassion.  

[Bahlgan]

I seem to have a habit of being caught in the middle of some self righteous and cynical people when it comes to games. Yea really all these people dissing the Maker, I mean seriously are you haters willing to judge a god based on its followers? What about the old gods, who abandoned their followers after they defiled the Maker's throne? What did the Maker did to you guys eh? <_<

[Hawksblud]

Sable Rhapsody wrote...

Saibh wrote...

...Really? Because three billion people disagree with you. They're all monotheistic, with the whole "one true god" thing. I myself am agnostic (along with the other "nonreligious" folk we take about one billion more). Whatever your religious beliefs, I hardly see how one is more believable than the other.

Personally, I think the whole polytheistic "Look, our gods exist!" thing is a cheap way to make a place seem more like a fantasy setting. Sometimes it works really well. Other times I just think they cobble together a bunch of cool sounding names and powers and call them "gods". I really enjoyed DAO's take on it--they don't know there's a god there, the same way we don't.

I agree with Saibh.  And besides, I would disagree that the Maker functions as a Manichean god the way you phrase it.  I mean, I know the Chantry spins it that way, where the Maker farts rainbows and can do no wrong, but it's just as easy to make a case using the in-game lore for the Maker being a selfish, uncaring, insufferable prat with far more ego than compassion.  

I think that as far as creating a 'fantasy' version of Europe, the Maker went very far to selling the vision. For better or worse, monotheistic religion defined many of the political dealings as well as everyday social interactions of our world's Middle Ages, and it definitely came through the same way in the game. As others have said, I thought it was very realistic, not just as a definition of 'god' but as a true look at what motivates people.

Modifié par Hawksblud, 28 juillet 2010 - 04:44 .

[Riona45]

Sable Rhapsody wrote...
I agree with Saibh.  And besides, I would disagree that the Maker functions as a Manichean god the way you phrase it.  I mean, I know the Chantry spins it that way, where the Maker farts rainbows and can do no wrong, but it's just as easy to make a case using the in-game lore for the Maker being a selfish, uncaring, insufferable prat with far more ego than compassion.  

You could also say that the Chantry doesn't realize that what they teach about the Maker is actually a bit disturbing.  He has a habit of abandoning his creations.  He "falls in love" with a woman who is already attached (I think married--don't remember at the moment).  Apparently, the Maker allows Blights to happen (one consequence of ignoring humanity, if for no other reason).  IIRC, there is a dialogue option at the beginning of the game that allows the PC to ask something to the effect of, "If the Blight is punishment from the Maker, why should we fight it?"  Creepy. 

[Riona45]

Hawksblud wrote...
I think that as far as creating a 'fantasy' version of Europe, the Maker went very far to selling the vision. For better or worse, monotheistic religion defined many of the political dealings as well as everyday social interactions of our world's Middle Ages, and it definitely came through the same way in the game. As others have said, I thought it was very realistic, not just as a definition of 'god' but as a true look at what motivates people.

I'll definitely say I agree with that.

[Riona45]

Bahlgan wrote...

I seem to have a habit of being caught in the middle of some self righteous and cynical people when it comes to games. Yea really all these people dissing the Maker, I mean seriously are you haters willing to judge a god based on its followers? What about the old gods, who abandoned their followers after they defiled the Maker's throne? What did the Maker did to you guys eh? <_<

Come on, it's these are just fantasy religions, there's nothing to be upset about.

[Bahlgan]

Riona45 wrote...

Bahlgan wrote...

I seem to have a habit of being caught in the middle of some self righteous and cynical people when it comes to games. Yea really all these people dissing the Maker, I mean seriously are you haters willing to judge a god based on its followers? What about the old gods, who abandoned their followers after they defiled the Maker's throne? What did the Maker did to you guys eh? <_<

Come on, it's these are just fantasy religions, there's nothing to be upset about.

That would be easy to say from someone who may have never been condemned by the public by who he/she chooses to follow.

[Saibh]

Riona45 wrote...

You could also say that the Chantry doesn't realize that what they teach about the Maker is actually a bit disturbing.  He has a habit of abandoning his creations.  He "falls in love" with a woman who is already attached (I think married--don't remember at the moment).  Apparently, the Maker allows Blights to happen (one consequence of ignoring humanity, if for no other reason).  IIRC, there is a dialogue option at the beginning of the game that allows the PC to ask something to the effect of, "If the Blight is punishment from the Maker, why should we fight it?"  Creepy. 

I really loved that dialogue option--I think you say it to Leliana, don't you? Honestly, I wished I could press further into Leliana's beliefs without her going "Oh shut up, you pessimist"...I'd also like to have the option to press into Morrigan's beliefs without sounding like...Leliana. I don't think you really even have the option, do you?

And I liked how the Maker was handled that way--we sort of have the same cases with a god that just doesn't seem to understand his own creations, and is eventually put off by his "failure". I liked how the Chantry rationalized the Maker's absence in every day life, but gave a reason why people still needed to worship a god that does nothing for them.

I definitely think Andraste...ism...is the most well thought-out religion in DA:O. We never find out too much about the Creators or the Avvar gods, but they never struck me as anything more special than having pretty stories attached to them.

Bahlgan wrote...

That would be easy to say from someone who may have never been condemned by the public by who he/she chooses to follow.

Please don't bring RL drama (or whatever you're talking about, I'm not sure) to defend yourself.

Modifié par Saibh, 28 juillet 2010 - 07:40 .

[The Hardest Thing In The World]

Please redo the Ranger "class", make it more interesting to play, please.

[Sique Foque]

While I love D&D, I think Dragon Age is a smart advancement/emancipation of these rules (speaking gameplay wise). Some aspects just feel outdated in D&D, i.e. the use of spells (just one per day, no mana), which really takes all flexibility from playing the game. You never know what lurks behind the next door and often you're just ****ed.

Still, more class specializations would be great, indeed.

Modifié par Sique Foque, 28 juillet 2010 - 09:47 .

[Bahlgan]

Saibh wrote...

Please don't bring RL drama (or whatever you're talking about, I'm not sure) to defend yourself.

Defending just myself is not quite the objective, in fact that's a bonus if anything. The humans of Dragon Age who worship the Maker tend to be viewed harshly by apostates and/or the Dalish, let alone the dwarves. Everyone hates those who currently worship the Maker.

The point of my argument, which I can clearly understand you don't seem to care, is that there are those who worship the Maker who may not even be prejudice as to damn those who follow other gods. Dragon Age did a poor job of covering those who are open to peoples' beliefs, but I know for certain there are others like myself who judge on karma alone. The humans also got a bit of religious, or moral, cruelty. Remember the Qunari invasion that happened was it 150 years ago? The humans of Ferelden were all but converted to the Qun. 

So my point is, for those who feel that the Maker is a d*** god, perhaps maybe you should consider there are those who just happen to follow him and are also trying to get by. I happen to also appreciate the way the dwarves and their "venerating of paragons". So everyone, everyone. Can't we all just get along now?

EDIT: Apparently the male copulation organ word isn't censored by the site.. My bad 

Modifié par Bahlgan, 28 juillet 2010 - 02:39 .

[AlanC9]

Sable Rhapsody wrote...
I agree with Saibh.  And besides, I would disagree that the Maker functions as a Manichean god the way you phrase it.  I mean, I know the Chantry spins it that way, where the Maker farts rainbows and can do no wrong, but it's just as easy to make a case using the in-game lore for the Maker being a selfish, uncaring, insufferable prat with far more ego than compassion.  

Sounds kinda familiar, actually.