114 réponses à ce sujet

[soteria]

When people say "I can't do X because it goes against lore/setting!"



what they really mean is, "I can't be bothered to do X, and here's a convenient but inadequate excuse."



The "goes against lore" excuse is problematic because the boundaries of lore are often more flexible than that statement implies. If those boundaries were not flexible then the writers would risk backing themselves up into a corner when it comes to future installments (in this case, DLC, expansions, sequels).

This is the next thing to saying "They can just make whatever they want up, the established lore of the world is mostly meaningless." We are told, for example, that magic has rules... you can't bring someone back to life, you can't create ex nihilo, etc. They've made the codex fairly flexible by saying "this is just what the people of the world say about their world," but if they start breaking the rules they've made, the world becomes a lot less believable.



That's not even addressing the fact that the first part of that quote doesn't even make sense. Those of us that are saying it goes against the established lore wouldn't be the ones to do anything about it. No idea why you would say we mean "I can't be bothered to do X..."

[Hysteria]

Missing the Monk?....Don't worry, it won't be long before Diablo 3 comes out and simply dominates this genre of gaming ...you'll get your chance to play a monk

[CybAnt1]

I'd love to play a monk in a non-action-RPG, that's all.

I sure enjoyed playing one in BG2, NWN2 ... 

Not every martial arts game (or let's say one that contains martial artists) has to be like Mortal Kombat and push A+B+C+B+C+A to do the finishing move.

And yes, Jade Empire was sort of in that hybrid space between action and non action RPG that Mass Effect inhabits. Another reason I never got it.

I want to watch my monk do amazing things on screen, for sure, that should be based on his skill and my choice of tactics, not based on my ability to hit buttons in the right order.

Modifié par CybAnt1, 08 mai 2010 - 01:58 .

[Relshar]

Monks do use swords, I suggest you watch some Martial Arts films from China. They also use staffs and spears as well as fist and feet.



As for seeing one in the game as a player class, I would certainly play one. I was disapointed when the rogue wasn't give the ability to fight with a staff.

[CybAnt1]

Staves aren't even melee weapons in this game, only ranged weapons.



Of course, they could simply differentiate, and make mage staves (ranged) separate from quarterstaves (melee weapons).



And yes, I'm hoping "spirit sage" or whatever we want to call monk/"mostly" unarmed fighter, would have both weapon and non-weapon-based skills. Certainly one I would add is thrown weapons and Oriental weapons (but they have to make both, first.)

[Ryllen Laerth Kriel]

Hysteria wrote...

Missing the Monk?....Don't worry, it won't be long before Diablo 3 comes out and simply dominates this genre of gaming ...you'll get your chance to play a monk

Lol?

Wrong forums?

[Comrade Bork]

Army of Monks vs. Army of Archers/Light Infantry/Cavalry/ANYTHING ELSE, Monks would always lose. Hand-to-Hand combat has always been a self-defense tool, not an offensive one. I really want the unarmed professions in games to go away, unless there is an explanation as to why they exist (for example, a golem). It is not a viable tactic, unless one plans to scare the enemy to death due to loss of limbs.

[hexaligned]

Relshar wrote...

Monks do use swords, I suggest you watch some Martial Arts films from China. They also use staffs and spears as well as fist and feet.

As for seeing one in the game as a player class, I would certainly play one. I was disapointed when the rogue wasn't give the ability to fight with a staff.

 

True, people in this forum, both for and against, seem to be using DnD's version of a monk .  Monks from our world used all sorts of weapons, and were highly trained with them.  They only fought unarmed as a last resort, same as anyone else would.  They just happened to be really good at it.  Personally  when I say monk I mean a one handed broadsword, or a staff, fighter.  Throw in some kicks and takedowns to supplement the weapons and bam Monk.

Modifié par relhart, 08 mai 2010 - 08:23 .

[CybAnt1]

jynthor wrote...

Err a monk class does not even fit with the DAO lore.

*sigh*. 

[CybAnt1]

Army of Monks vs. Army of Archers/Light Infantry/Cavalry/ANYTHING ELSE, Monks would always lose. Hand-to-Hand combat has always been a self-defense tool, not an offensive one. I really want the unarmed professions in games to go away,

And maybe they should in Medieval European Combat Simulator, but I'm playing a fantasy game whose setting AFAICT may be based on medieval Europe but is also set on a completely different planet from Earth with a different cosmology. 

P.S. I've seen people say this on forums over and over again, but I would love to see this point really proven some day in the real world. I'm willing to take the best swordsman from your favorite Renaissance Faire (you'd have to find somebody in the modern world still good at swordplay) and put him up against an unarmed 13th degree black-belt in karate. 

Yes he has reach. The martial artist can evade. dodge, block, and disarm him (or parry him with a staff or stick if he's holding one or some other object), knock him to the ground,and might still kick his ass anyway. If his skill is much higher than the swordsman, the swordsman can still lose. 

Now I don't know how an army of martial artists would do against an army of swordsmen, that's a different subject, but this is a small-scale combat RPG, not a massive-battle RTS. 

[CybAnt1]

BTW, modern combat these days is mostly with guns, not hand-to-hand melee weapons like swords, but the Marines and other modern military forces continue to train soldiers in unarmed combat.



http://en.wikipedia....al_Arts_Program



Brown Belt -->

unarmed vs. hand held weapons



Part of the training program includes facing an armed opponent (with a knife or bayonet, say) unarmed. As far as facing somebody with a gun, well, generally I think they try and teach dealing with that situation through stealth. ambush, and surprise. Although it was cool to watch Remo Williams or the Bulletproof Monk dodge bullets, I don't think many martial artists claim they can do this in the real world.

[CybAnt1]

Here are some of the Bison System techniques for fighting unarmed against somebody with a knife. Granted, yes, a small knife is not a big combat weapon like a sword or axe.



http://unarmedcombat...d.com/id37.html



But since we're talking about fantasy RPGs, not the real world, here's how one RPG system (GURPS) handles unarmed vs. armed combat.



Note it deals with the points that have been raised in this thread, but doesn't suggest "the unarmed opponent will always lose".



http://www.sjgames.c...faq/FAQ3-7.html



See rule 7.4



Now BTW personally I think to make a unarmed martial arts system viable for a fantasy world with metal armor, it is ONLY viable if magically augmented (something they don't discuss here.)



And guess what Thedas already has magical augmentation to combat that bypasses armor (spirit warrior).

[maxernst]

Well, you know, some people want clerics. And there are probably other people who want to play half-orcs and gnomes. And so if you want to satisfy everybody, pretty soon you're playing the same old classes and races we had in AD&D. You might as well be playing in the Forgotten Realms, if you're going to force-fit the traditional D&D classes into every bloody game.

[The Palmer]

While reading through this thread, I noticed alot of people bringing up the same stuff over and over again, the main one being how "Martial arts doesn't fit the setting".



This, to me, suggests ignorance as far as not recognizing that every fighting style, apart from throwing spells, is based on martial arts.



Swordplay, is a martial arts.

Archery, is a martial arts.

Two-handed weapons? Yeah, those would be martial arts too.



So, to me, saying there can't be someone in the world of Dragon Age that can't augment his own body to successfully combat these other martial arts is just stupid. I love Dragon Age, I really do, and this post isn't to bash BioWare, its to make everyone realize that just because most enemies run around with weapons and heavy armor, doesn't mean that they couldn't be overcome with without weapons.



Essentially, that's what the purpose of a rogue is, to eliminate enemies through cunning and skill, not brute force and obscenely heavy weapons.



A unarmed fighter class could be introduced into the world, all melee fighting is based on martial arts, and, in training, soldiers would be taught how to fight in scenarios while being unarmed. While they would indeed be at a disadvantage, there's no reason why somebody could take those skills and go into seclusion with a few followers and some lyrium, and discover a way to magically augment the body.



Also, to settle the Silent Sister unarmed/Two-hander argument, all you have to do is look up. Weapons are part of martial arts, and it isn't inconceivable that along the way the Silent Sisters would add more and more diverse training to their regiment. You master something, what are you gonna do? Add a different style of training.

[CybAnt1]

Well, you know, some people want clerics.

No. Doesn't fit lore. Religion is just a mysterium and the Chantry is just a political force. There are no gods who grant spells, and the priesteses don't adventure, they hire us to do that. 

But yes, somebody did write a cleric class mod. I tried it. I want a 4th class, but that's not the right one, and didn't even seem to me to be the right way to do it. And it had bugs. 

And there are probably other people who want to play half-orcs and gnomes.

Not me. More playable races, though, well, maybe. 

Seems to me if they really wanted to break from Tolkien/D & D/90% of the fantasy settings out there, the two other races wouldn't be elves and dwarves. Oh sure, their take on elves & dwarves is a bit different, and suddenly they and humans aren't getting along all kumbaya-like, but it's still the same stuff. 

But as somebody said, most other games in trying to figure out other races hardly ever come up with anything much more original. In general, it's some form of animal human hybrid. In Avernum, you can be cat people or lizard people. In WoW, you can be cow people, wolf people, etc. 

And so if you want to satisfy everybody, pretty soon you're playing the same old classes and races we had in AD&D. You might as well be playing in the Forgotten Realms, if you're going to force-fit the traditional D&D classes into every bloody game.

No. I want them to have their own IP. It gives them freedom. However, having your IP doesn't mean you can't borrow (and maybe rework or reimplement) ideas from other existing IP. In fact, it give you the freedom to take what's already been done in other IP, and actually maybe do it better. 

[k9medusa]

What CybAnt1 said reminds me of Star Terk vs Star Wars debate -- both books / movies / shows are great, but the reason I like ST better then SW is the ST world / lore seems to fit better as a whole then SW does. SW just have to many races and it is hard to "get to know" them as well. The same thing can be said about DAO vs D&D.

[grieferbastard]

I saw where someone was talking about unarmed martial arts vs someone talented in sword fighting - fencing, what have you. I've got to wonder if you've ever talked to someone with a lot of experience in kung fu, karate, whatever about it. I bet the response to 'what would you do if confronted by a skilled fencer' would be 'get a weapon or avoid them'.

I realize that we're not talking about realism however, which is fine. The game is full of magic. The problem is that you take the idea of someone capable of punching or kicking someone hard enough to hurt them through silverite plate armor, or parrying a flaming sword bare-handed and you've got to ask - why can't you be that badass and ALSO wear full plate and a greatsword? 

At some point you need to draw a line. Me, I'd rather the line be drawn before we got to 'giant, absolutely absurd shoulder pauldrons' but it's a matter of taste. I can absolutely see where a traditional D&D monk class just doesn't fit into the 'european middle ages + magic' society and lore that was created for DA:O. Maybe the Qunari have some sort of unarmed combat style; I'd bet on it. Perhaps some Dalish tribes practice unarmed combat. However, much like the soldiers of today who certainly learn some unarmed combat training they all learn it as an emergency backup for when they don't have a useful weapon at hand.

I'd have a lot of trouble taking the 'I killed the Archdeamon - WITH MY BARE HANDS' guy seriously I admit. Just doesn't fit with armored knights.

[Vicious]

BTW, modern combat these days is mostly with guns, not hand-to-hand melee weapons like swords, but the Marines and other modern military forces continue to train soldiers in unarmed combat.



http://en.wikipedia....al_Arts_Program



Brown Belt -->

unarmed vs. hand held weapons



Part of the training program includes facing an armed opponent (with a knife or bayonet, say) unarmed. As far as facing somebody with a gun, well, generally I think they try and teach dealing with that situation through stealth. ambush, and surprise. Although it was cool to watch Remo Williams or the Bulletproof Monk dodge bullets, I don't think many martial artists claim they can do this in the real world.

Hi, as a currently serving U.S. Marine myself, I just wanted to let you know that using military martial arts is a good way to get your ass kicked in a real fight.

Modifié par Vicious, 09 mai 2010 - 02:56 .

[CybAnt1]

why can't you be that badass and ALSO wear full plate and a greatsword? 

Dunno. Why aren't rogues going up and engaging every enemy in plate armor with greatswords also? By your logic everyone in melee should be doing this. (We'll forget the mages and ranged archers.)

These fools are going in light or leather armor and using daggers, for gosh sakes. 

A rogue with dual daggers is a bigger DPS damager than a warrior with an axe or a sword, and possibly (due to ability to evade parry & hide rather than have his armor and huge HP pool absorb the damage) more survivable in some combats. 

Realistic or unrealistic? Different strokes for different folks?

Now again I agree, the only way an unarmed combatant/monk char in this game could work is with magical abilities. He would have to be magically augmented his strikes to penetrate metal armor, and using some magic to deflect attacks against himself while unarmored & unarmed. Good thing this is a fantasy setting, with magic, that does just that.

And anyway, like everybody's been saying in this thread, this class - I call my concept spirit sage - would never fight always and only unarmed, but mix up unarmed & armed combat. And yes, I know you can throw punches with any char right now, largely ineffectively (although by the time you reach the levels of DA:A even your fists can be rather powerful). All that's being discussed is, well, how about some kicks as well as punches, and some magical ju-ju to make them effective? Like Iron Fist, the superhero, who augmented his fist strikes? 

Modifié par CybAnt1, 09 mai 2010 - 03:13 .

[CybAnt1]

Hi, as a currently serving U.S. Marine myself, I just wanted to let you know that using military martial arts is a good way to get your ass kicked in a real fight.

That's good. I had a friend in the Marines who also told me that they trained him to kill with his bare hands if he had to, but I often wondered if that was just bravado. 

I wonder if it doesn't work why they haven't cancelled the program. 

But anyway, this is why I hate bringing discussions about the real world into things, when we're talking about a game. I'm betting you didn't fight dragons and ogres in the Marines, either. 

At that point, I'm more interested in the "world coherency" argument than the "realism" argument. And I still don't see anything about these class concepts that cause world incoherency. 

[OrlesianWardenCommander]

So you want a monk class? How are you going to fight people completely armored and expect to hurt him? Lol leave the punching and kicking to chuck norris its not needed in this game.

[CybAnt1]

*sigh* Another person not bothering to read the thread before chiming in.



BTW, k9, I like both series/shows/movies (Star Trek and Wars) and I've played games based on both settings. Unfortunately, I'm still waiting for somebody to do a Trek RPG that's NOT a MMO (and not the FPSes and adventure games which come close but aren't really).



I never found either world all that great in coherency. Star Wars seemed to be filled with alien beings whose names I never knew. For example, I had no idea the race called twi'leks were called that, I thought they were just "tentacle head" people in the Cantina Bar scene. And then I got to play one in KOTOR. Star Trek seems to be filled with alien beings who, as the joke goes, all seem to be humans with some kind of forehead prosthesis. Sure, the majority of stories involve the interactions of three key races (humans, Klingons, and Romulans), but the Trek universe has dozens of alien races, too. And those others, like the Ferengi, have also become staples.



BTW, to address another point -- there are many things you could complain about Forgotten Realms as a game setting (as opposed to D & D as a game system) but open-endedness wasn't one of them. Now honestly one thing I'm hoping is one of the reasons Bioware has created a new game setting not belonging to anybody else's IP regime is so that they have open-endedness and freedom .... NOT a straightjacket imposed by WoTC bureaucrats.

[soteria]

While reading through this thread, I noticed alot of people bringing up the same stuff over and over again, the main one being how "Martial arts doesn't fit the setting".



This, to me, suggests ignorance as far as not recognizing that every fighting style, apart from throwing spells, is based on martial arts.

Cute straw man. No one that I've noticed has said "martial arts doesn't fit the setting." It's, "DnD-style monks don't fit the setting."

That's good. I had a friend in the Marines who also told me that they trained him to kill with his bare hands if he had to, but I often wondered if that was just bravado.



I wonder if it doesn't work why they haven't cancelled the program.

It works... like most things in life, you get out of it what you put into it, and there's a lot of good reasons for the usmc martial arts program to continue that have nothing to do with this thread. It's just that the possibility of actually having to use your bare hands or even a knife in a combat situation approaches nil.



Back on topic, I do like the idea of a lightly armed and armored fighter who also uses strikes and holds in combat. That would be pretty cool.

[AlanC9]

CybAnt1 wrote...
 Now honestly one thing I'm hoping is one of the reasons Bioware has created a new game setting not belonging to anybody else's IP regime is so that they have open-endedness and freedom .... NOT a straightjacket imposed by WoTC bureaucrats. 

Of course, freedom can also mean freedom from something. Bio may consider themselves free from the kitchen-sinkness of the FR and D&D.