145 réponses à ce sujet

[filetemo]

in DA we are stuck with rogue, mage, and warrior. Since from now on they say voiced predetermined characters will be the norm, does it mean we'll get stuck with these three classes forever? because if you have a premade character, you can't include classes who don't fit the lore.

If you wanted to create a barbarian, how could hawke be one if he lived in lothering? barbarians come from iced lands, from the deserts, the mountains, being a barbarian is not a combat class, is a way of life. You can't be one being born in a small town.

If you wanted to be a templar (which, well designed, would be a paladin-like class very differentiated from a regular warrior) how could you be living in a village, outside of your order?

If you wanted to create a necromancer,or a shaman, how could it be possible? you are a man living in a small town, how could you learn those arts? even the mage class for hawke should bring back story on how he is not chased by templar since he comes not from magi tower (and, BTW, I'd like to see how templars from kirkwall react in-game to a mage hawke, it would be weird if the talked to you as if you were some marrior or rogue not making comments on your aparent freedom from the circle)

All these classes could be added as sub-specializations for the other three classes, but they would not be as deep as a new class and certainly not fit the lore.
Having different origins would fix this, but voiced character means that, in case of doing them, it would be a hawke-like character (as in "pre-made") being voiced for all the origins, that could maybe be a solution, but always with having to record more dialogue and having a hawke barbarian, or hawke vampire, or hawke voiced qunari.

thoughts?

[Saibh]

We already have it confirmed that mage, warrior, and rogue are our only options. In the cases of specializations, we learn those from others or from books in DAO, so what does it matter where s/he's from?



Plus, do we actually know that Hawke was born and raised in Lothering? For such an obvious mage sister it seems unlikely.

[filetemo]

Saibh wrote...

 In the cases of specializations, we learn those from others or from books in DAO, so what does it matter where s/he's from?

because a specialization is not as deep as a new class.
besides, providing lore, specific armors and weapons and differentiated looks for new classes is more apealling than reading a book in game and saying "now I'm a combat mage" while you look the same as before and have just four new spells

[Aratham Darksight]

Making the base classes few and broad is a central part of how the DA game mechanics work. Unless the whole class advancement system is completely revamped, I don't see Bioware adding such specific, defined new classes, regardless of PC voiceover.



I think that a better approach would be to expand and deepen specializations instead of placing them alongside the base classes.

[HopHazzard]

filetemo wrote...

Saibh wrote...

 In the cases of specializations, we learn those from others or from books in DAO, so what does it matter where s/he's from?

because a specialization is not as deep as a new class.
besides, providing lore, specific armors and weapons and differentiated looks for new classes is more apealling than reading a book in game and saying "now I'm a combat mage" while you look the same as before and have just four new spells

Why would learning new spells or a new fighting style change your physical appearance?

I'm not really sure what you're about here. There have only ever been three classes and as far as anyone knows there are no plans for there to be more. And what does having a voice have to do with any of that?

[filetemo]

Aratham Darksight wrote...

I think that a better approach would be to expand and deepen specializations instead of placing them alongside the base classes.

That would be a solution to a problem bioware themselves created, which is the serious lack of different models for armors, mage robes, staffs and weapons. That would allow them to give more depth to the specializations instead to have to make unique looking classes, but again this is a solution for a base problem that shouldn't exist.Because the point is to have unique looking classes.

It seems the fact that a rpg is story driven makes the developers care a bit less about class gameplay and character looks. I'm not saying this should be like a mmorpg or oblivion in terms of in game weaponry and armors but five or six classes instead fo three would be more than enough for a game centered on dialogue and cinematic feeling.

[Unknown Username]

filetemo wrote...

in DA we are stuck with rogue, mage, and warrior. Since from now on they say voiced predetermined characters will be the norm, does it mean we'll get stuck with these three classes forever? because if you have a premade character, you can't include classes who don't fit the lore.

**snip**

All these classes could be added as sub-specializations for the other three classes, but they would not be as deep as a new class and certainly not fit the lore.
Having different origins would fix this, but voiced character means that, in case of doing them, it would be a hawke-like character (as in "pre-made") being voiced for all the origins, that could maybe be a solution, but always with having to record more dialogue and having a hawke barbarian, or hawke vampire, or hawke voiced qunari.

thoughts?

Your argument is flawed. 

You couldn't be any of these in DA:O, and your character was not voiced.  Origins didn't allow you to be a barbarian, vampire, qunari, etc.  You were still playing a "pre-made" character, in your terms.  I couldn't choose human warrior and NOT be the second heir in the Cousland family, I couldn't choose to be an Elf mage who wasn't brought up in the Circle.

You're expecting too much.  Bioware wants to tell a specific story -- and only certain things will fit into the story they're telling.  The choices are slightly more limited this time around, but that doesn't change the fact that you were still limited to one of a few pre-determined characters in DA:O

Modifié par Unknown Username, 29 juillet 2010 - 07:41 .

[filetemo]

HopHazzard wrote...


Why would learning new spells or a new fighting style change your physical appearance?

with a specialization come new ways of fighting and the warrior needs new armor and weapons to suit better his skills. With combat mage, you'll need mage-y light armor, with arcane warrior an unique mage designed armor would come in handy (as a more unique design for Spellweaver". But again, I can understand no looking changes for just a specialization. That's why new classes are needed. I hate to bring this, but look at Diablo III, every class looks radically different. This is a good thing even in story driven rpgs, very far from the gameplay of hack'n slashes like diablo

HopHazzard wrote...


I'm not really sure what you're about here. There have only ever been three classes and as far as anyone knows there are no plans for there to be more. And what does having a voice have to do with any of that?

voice over means a preset character, with only one origin, where some new classes who need mandatory origins and dialogue to fit the lore can't be added due to budget restrictions

[filetemo]

Unknown Username wrote...



Your argument is flawed. 

You couldn't be any of these in DA:O, and your character was not voiced.  Origins didn't allow you to be a barbarian, vampire, qunari, etc.  You were still playing a "pre-made" character, in your terms.  I couldn't choose human warrior and NOT be the second heir in the Cousland family, I couldn't choose to be an Elf mage who wasn't brought up in the Circle.

You're expecting too much.  Bioware wants to tell a specific story -- and only certain things will fit into the story they're telling.  The choices are slightly more limited this time around, but that doesn't change the fact that you were still limited to one of a few pre-determined characters in DA:O

I couldn't be any of these in DAO but while this was also a setback in the original game,it's not fixed in DA2, the supposedly improved sequel.

Bioware wants to tell a specific story, but there's a balance needed in a story driven rpg. I don't expect 50 different classes, but only three is too short.

[Gorthaur the Cruel]

I would prefer Dragon age stay with three balanced and distinct classes, rather then having them make a dozen useless classes. I believe I heard specializations would be changed and would be more useful in DA2.

[mopotter]

filetemo wrote...

in DA we are stuck with rogue, mage, and warrior. Since from now on they say voiced predetermined characters will be the norm, does it mean we'll get stuck with these three classes forever? because if you have a premade character, you can't include classes who don't fit the lore.

If you wanted to create a barbarian, how could hawke be one if he lived in lothering? barbarians come from iced lands, from the deserts, the mountains, being a barbarian is not a combat class, is a way of life. You can't be one being born in a small town.

If you wanted to be a templar (which, well designed, would be a paladin-like class very differentiated from a regular warrior) how could you be living in a village, outside of your order?

If you wanted to create a necromancer,or a shaman, how could it be possible? you are a man living in a small town, how could you learn those arts? even the mage class for hawke should bring back story on how he is not chased by templar since he comes not from magi tower (and, BTW, I'd like to see how templars from kirkwall react in-game to a mage hawke, it would be weird if the talked to you as if you were some marrior or rogue not making comments on your aparent freedom from the circle)

All these classes could be added as sub-specializations for the other three classes, but they would not be as deep as a new class and certainly not fit the lore.
Having different origins would fix this, but voiced character means that, in case of doing them, it would be a hawke-like character (as in "pre-made") being voiced for all the origins, that could maybe be a solution, but always with having to record more dialogue and having a hawke barbarian, or hawke vampire, or hawke voiced qunari.

thoughts?

Stuck?  I don't consider having the choice of mage, rogue or fighter as being stuck.   My fighter in DA had the option of learning berserker skills from Oghren.  We don't know yet (I don't think) what options we will have for skills in DA2.   And I don't remember reading that he is from Lothering, just that he is escaping from there. - will go check the what we know file.

I don't see why having a voice will make talking to other characters any different than talking to someone in DA:O. Actually I am one of the people who likes the idea.  They will probably have some way to tell what your character is.  In ME Kaidain mentions that my biotic is a L3.  He doesn't say that to every character, just the ones who use biotics.  i have no worries about having a voice.

As far as having a character with different backgrounds, who knows what they have planed for future games.   But  I can't see vampires in the DA world, but who knows and barbarians, some would say they are already here.

[HopHazzard]

filetemo wrote...

HopHazzard wrote...


Why would learning new spells or a new fighting style change your physical appearance?

with a specialization come new ways of fighting and the warrior needs new armor and weapons to suit better his skills. With combat mage, you'll need mage-y light armor, with arcane warrior an unique mage designed armor would come in handy (as a more unique design for Spellweaver". But again, I can understand no looking changes for just a specialization. That's why new classes are needed. I hate to bring this, but look at Diablo III, every class looks radically different. This is a good thing even in story driven rpgs, very far from the gameplay of hack'n slashes like diablo

HopHazzard wrote...


I'm not really sure what you're about here. There have only ever been three classes and as far as anyone knows there are no plans for there to be more. And what does having a voice have to do with any of that?

voice over means a preset character, with only one origin, where some new classes who need mandatory origins and dialogue to fit the lore can't be added due to budget restrictions

I believe the devs have already made comments about making the classes more visually distinctive. I still don't see how voice over makes the character more restricted. True it restricts the number of different characters one can choose from, but the whole Origins concept was rather unusual for games in the first place. I've never played a game before that gave me six different PC's to choose from.

[filetemo]

Solostran85 wrote...

I would prefer Dragon age stay with three balanced and distinct classes, rather then having them make a dozen useless classes. .

I agree, but I strongly believe five or six balanced and distinct classes could be made

[mopotter]

filetemo wrote...

Aratham Darksight wrote...

I think that a better approach would be to expand and deepen specializations instead of placing them alongside the base classes.

That would be a solution to a problem bioware themselves created, which is the serious lack of different models for armors, mage robes, staffs and weapons. That would allow them to give more depth to the specializations instead to have to make unique looking classes, but again this is a solution for a base problem that shouldn't exist.Because the point is to have unique looking classes.

It seems the fact that a rpg is story driven makes the developers care a bit less about class gameplay and character looks. I'm not saying this should be like a mmorpg or oblivion in terms of in game weaponry and armors but five or six classes instead fo three would be more than enough for a game centered on dialogue and cinematic feeling.

But not all of us see this as a "problem".  I would much rather them keep it as story driven rather than class driven.  

[Shepard Lives]

The classes are perfectly fine. There's absolutely no need to implement Clerics or Monks or whatnot. Instead, I wouldn't be surprised nor irked if BW made away with all specializations from DAO/DAOA and gave us more complex and interesting specs. It was pretty shallow in the first game. "Oh hey look, a new specialization! I get a couple bonus attribute points and four abilities." Lame. They should make specs thar are more synergic with the base class abilities.

[filetemo]

mopotter wrote...


But not all of us see this as a "problem".  I would much rather them keep it as story driven rather than class driven.  

more classes could bring class related quests.

and it can be perfectly story driven with two more classes. The fact that bioware won't implement them doesn't mean that including them would make the game any less story oriented than it is.

And adding specific items and armor for classes (or specializations) won't damage the story elements, in fact even for a story driven game items are less than enough, as are armor models and textures aswell

[andar91]

I think three classes works because nearly every class idea that you come up with can fit into one of them as either a build or a specialization. The only way we're really restricted is that one class can't do what another can (with the exception of Arcane Warrior). Warriors CAN'T cast spells and mages (generally) can't wear armor. And even if the Arcane Warrior carries a huge maul, he/she doesn't have access to the weapon skills. By doing this they make sure that each and every class has a unique role in battle.



I'm not sure what appearance has to do with classes, but I'm sure DA2 will have lots of new weapons, armor, and robes for us to put on our characters.

[Maverick827]

filetemo wrote...

Solostran85 wrote...

I would prefer Dragon age stay with three balanced and distinct classes, rather then having them make a dozen useless classes. .

I agree, but I strongly believe five or six balanced and distinct classes could be made

Name them and fully flesh them out, all the while keeping consistent with the lore of the game.

We'll be waiting.

[In Exile]

filetemo wrote...
I couldn't be any of these in DAO but while this was also a setback in the original game,it's not fixed in DA2, the supposedly improved sequel.

Bioware wants to tell a specific story, but there's a balance needed in a story driven rpg. I don't expect 50 different classes, but only three is too short.

But a barbarian does have to be a class just because D&D does it. A barbarian can very well be a 2-handed tree warrior who has a particular background. Just because you want a retread of D&D doesn't mean Bioware should provide it.

[filetemo]

there's plenty of room



barbarians wear light or no armor and have bonus for their rage (berserker class for warriors in dao quite didn't cut it)

monks fight unarmed and use spirit powers

paladins and clerics use divine (not arcane) powers



none of those fit in the three classes system yet, we'll see da2

[andar91]

filetemo wrote...

there's plenty of room

barbarians wear light or no armor and have bonus for their rage (berserker class for warriors in dao quite didn't cut it)
monks fight unarmed and use spirit powers
paladins and clerics use divine (not arcane) powers

none of those fit in the three classes system yet, we'll see da2

Barbarians, to me, are just a type of warrior.  I actually wouldn't mind seeing some sort of unnarmed class, but I think you could do that by simply adding talent trees for unnarmed or a specialization or both.  Paladins and clerics are just souped up warriors and healing-centric mages.

The simple fact of the matter is that there is NO divine magic in the world of Dragon Age.  The most well-known form of divinity (the Maker) isn't even present enough for everyone to believe in him.  Likewise with the elven gods.  I'm ninety-nine percent sure (took off one percent because I haven't seen a specific post contradicting this) that the developers have confirmed that there isn't divine magic in this setting.  Your note about monks having spirit powers wouldn't work either, because if you can't use magic unless you're a mage.  Now learning to resist poisons and strike in certain places to stun or whatever would make sense.  But still, a monk is a lot like a rogue.

The only thing I could think of around this is to add multiclassing, but I don't think they're going to do that because of gameplay reasons, not lore reasons.  But they may add it later, who knows?

[filetemo]

Maverick827 wrote...

filetemo wrote...

Solostran85 wrote...

I would prefer Dragon age stay with three balanced and distinct classes, rather then having them make a dozen useless classes. .

I agree, but I strongly believe five or six balanced and distinct classes could be made

Name them and fully flesh them out, all the while keeping consistent with the lore of the game.

We'll be waiting.

that's not my job but bioware's, yet still:

barbarian: avvar or chasind, light armor, two hander, skill tree based on rage , thirst of blood, etc...typical

cleric: disciple of andraste or chantry seeker,hammer and board with healing spells, undead repulsion

monk: qunary teologist or antivan pariah or tevinteran adept, fights unarmed or with staff, spirit powers, skills work like spells who use spirit instead of mana or stamina

templar: mainly two hander, bonus against demons, negates magic, addicted to lyrium, heavy armor, code of behavior strips him of status if broken (kinda asari justicar)

if I came with this in 2 minutes, bioware can make it  a gazillion times better

[filetemo]

andar91 wrote...

you can't use magic unless you're a mage. 

in awakenings there are spirit warriors, who have not magic powers but can make deals with fade spirits. Bioware borke that rule for the sake of gameplay

Modifié par filetemo, 29 juillet 2010 - 09:07 .

[Dennis Carpenter]

For me its all irrelevant.... Of all the skills and talents my characters have used in both DA:O and awakenings it amounts to a handful at best. Once you get familiar with particular skill sets and talents you tend to use those that work best in given situations for a given character. Though I used some skills at early levels they changed as I progressed and found that I rarely used them later on. The same with spells, of all the spells learned there are really only a handful that get used regularly, therefore adding more classes just wastes game space when refining skills and talent trees into being more useful is in my humble opinion a far better use of time and game space.

[In Exile]

filetemo wrote...

there's plenty of room

barbarians wear light or no armor and have bonus for their rage (berserker class for warriors in dao quite didn't cut it)

Why should barbarians have a rage ability at all? 

monks fight unarmed and use spirit powers

Where would these monks be from? There is nothing like that in the setting. What are "spirit powers"? How are these tied to the plot?

paladins and clerics use divine (not arcane) powers

What clerics? What divine powers? You mean from the gods we don't actually know exist?

Seriously, you just want to play D&D. Well, tough. This isn't D&D.