47 réponses à ce sujet

[Steel Majere343]

hello all, i was wondering who here roleplays and who plays for practicality? i'v had bad experiences and good experiences with both.

Roleplaying would be completely awsome in this game except that it makes the game significantly more difficult. if you don't metagame to some degree then you have a more difficult time but you don't have to worry about taking specific party members.

For example my first playthrough the game was the best, i wasn't worried about who would tank or a healer or anything, i just played, it was me (melee rogue) leliana, morrigan and sten and although i turned it to casual a few times it was fine.

but then i tried to not worry about tanking and a healer with Awakening, i ended up playing through half the damn game alone because i didn't take anders, he was an apostate, ohgren was a discrace to the order (in persona) and nathanials father killed my entire family, not to mention he tried to kill me so he was hanged.

From there there are only three more party members you can get, so, if i had any hope of getting a full party i had to ditch the roleplay and stick to practicality, recruiting everyone i could find without hesitation.

This scenerio has happened for me in origins as well, where playing without worrying about party roles (tanking and healing) made the game far more difficult. Long story short i hadnt recruited sten or leliana and killed wynne, leaving me and alistair to go through a chunk of the game alone which wasnt really fun.

so now whenever i play i metagame. I decide early who will be my tank, healer and my dps. This does get old as most of my playthroughs in origins now (actually all of them except the one time i was a spirit healer) i always have wynne. i also almost always have alistair.

so needless to say most of my playthroughs barely differ from each other at all. I recruit everyone possible and always have a tank, always have a healer, and always have two more geared towards DPS.

the game is getting slightly boring playing this way (ok..well..very boring) but i always end up regretting it if i dont play this way,

do you guys roleplay and suffer a more difficult gaming experiance or do you guys play for pure practicality, ditching roleplay in favor of combat ability?

i enjoy roleplaying better but because i usually end up regretting it i have reverted to doing whatever it takes to make sure my combat experience is smooth, meaning recruiting everyone i can no matter what and taking along certain characters even if i don't like them.

[Elhanan]

I do both, IMO.

My first HN refused to take Sten or Zev, as they represented those that murdered his family. He chose goals that were thought of as good overall, and did not take the theft based quests. One set of quests which were questionable was the Trial of Crows. After being approached, he took the quests as there were marks being sent against the Warden. And while he held an opinion against assassins, he decided to take the jobs himself. This was also the first time I performed those quests, too.

The rest of my wardens are much the same, though I do try and accept as many quests as viable for that character.

[ussnorway]

I agree... it's not one or the other... good, bad, evil and best are not facts but only points of view eg. play a human and the chantry are good but play an elf then they become a hypocritical humans only dictatorship.

[Gimme H]

i always roleplay,

like, i never gear up for stats, only for how i think my character should look,

and if it makes the game harder, great,

to be fair though my characters are always dedicated combatants so this never really becomes a problem,

but the result is, yes, less room for replay,

i cannot use the same companions that my main character has used a second time, because it would dilute that original experience,

and it's taken me many attempts to find a character i'm happy to complete a second playthrough on, he's still only at level 12,

of course i would prefer it if there were many more options available, companions and story wise.

[DWSmiley]

Parties with neither a tank nor a healer are quite doable. I never use the classic tank anymore - the high-armor, high-dex S&S. I'd rather have warriors who kill beasties quickly. High-dex rogues are also quite durable and deadly (and dex & str rogues, too, I admit). I'm not good enough to forego healing completely but poultices can be enough.

A no-tank and no-healer party is good for keeping me on my toes. They are more deadly but things can go wrong quickly if one gets careless.

Different banter and different tactics make it interesting to mix up the party composition.  It's never been a role-playing issue for me.  As Alistair tells you in Ostagar, wardens do whatever it takes to end a Blight and they do not apply a moral filter to who they recruit.  Though Alistair doesn't practice what he preaches, my warden does.

Modifié par DWSmiley, 24 août 2010 - 10:16 .

[Gimme H]

DWSmiley wrote...

Parties with neither a tank nor a healer are quite doable. I never use the classic tank anymore - the high-armor, high-dex S&S. I'd rather have warriors who kill beasties quickly. High-dex rogues are also quite durable and deadly (and dex & str rogues, too, I admit). I'm not good enough to forego healing completely but poultices can be enough.

A no-tank and no-healer party is good for keeping me on my toes. They are more deadly but things can go wrong quickly if one gets careless.

Different banter and different tactics make it interesting to mix up the party composition.  It's never been a role-playing issue for me.  As Alistair tells you in Ostagar, wardens do whatever it takes to end a Blight and they do not apply a moral filter to who they recruit.  Though Alistair doesn't practice what he preaches, my warden does.

yeah if you handle crowd control and damage well enough you don't need to worry about about tanking/healing,

[Steel Majere343]

you know as i'v said i like the game way better when i don't micromanage, but not micromanaging has gotn me in some very tight spots and a couple instances where i couldn't even complete the game due to lack of having a full party. the game does not ensure that you have a full party. Hell in the expansion the game doesnt ensure you have a party at all. You could end up completely stuck due to being forced to solo the game due to not accepting or recognizing the recroutment options.



Thats what kind of drove me away from that, that and all the times i tried playing without a tank or healer were absolutely horrible lol. Even on my first playthrough i had sten trying to tank and morrigan trying to heal. I didn't know who wynne was for 3/4s of the game because i was saving the tower for last. since they told me once i go in theres no comming out. SO i thought "oh i should wait till im prepared" stupid me the healer is in there.



On one playthrough i listened to the people on the forums who said it was possible and fun to do so without tanks and healers. Well, it was not fun to me lol. with no metagaming, i ended up, as i stated above, completely screwing myself on the expansion to the point where it was just stupid (im supposed to fight through hordes of enemies alone?).



So these days i much prefer to metagaming and just accept all party members, pushing any and all roleplaying views aside in favor of actually being able to survive lol.

[egervari]

The problem is that they didn't really think through the allies in this game.

You got 3 warriors available at any given time, two of which are exactly the same.

You got 2 mages, but Morrigan is seriously messed up from a practical perspective, so your PC mage and wynn tend to be much stronger together.

Then you got an archer and a two-handed rogue fighter, but the game slightly makes the rogue a more attractive option for your main character because of coercion and cunning synergy.

There just isn't enough variety. Your main PC cannot be warrior - period. If you pick a warrior, you are seriously limiting what characters you pick. Likewise, if you pick a rogue, you are also limiting what characters you can pick.

The only real flexibility that you have is if you pick a mage, because at least then, you can not take wynn and begin to mix things up.

[DWSmiley]

Morrigan isn't messed up at all. Her starting spells are all useful, though shapeshifting is tricky to use well. And you can add cone of cold with her first level up, followed by sleep. That is a very powerful repertoire.



DA is quite playable with any mix. There is no need to stick with tank/healer/dps/rogue. For instance, see beancounter's "Total Warrior Party" thread in the gamplay forum.

[egervari]

It is messed up. She has a point in lightning. Why? I dunno.



There's a few lines they really invested in that just don't seem to really do much. I mean, there were better options. I could make a stronger version of morrigan with half or 2/3 of the skill points that they used.

[Steel Majere343]

DWSmiley wrote...

Morrigan isn't messed up at all. Her starting spells are all useful, though shapeshifting is tricky to use well. And you can add cone of cold with her first level up, followed by sleep. That is a very powerful repertoire.

DA is quite playable with any mix. There is no need to stick with tank/healer/dps/rogue. For instance, see beancounter's "Total Warrior Party" thread in the gamplay forum.

lol it might have been you who got me to play through the game like that.

Your one of those "YOU CAN DO ANTHING IN DA!" people lol.

your very missleading. because da is not "quite playable with any mix" as you so put it. maybe through some serious metagaming you can make any party work, through sheer pultices numbers or huge insight into the games mechanics or plotting your spells precisly to counter whatever you lack. such as knowing all of the CC spells and picking just those or something.

But it is SO much more difficult on average to deviate from the tank healer setup.

For a normal player who picks this game up out of the blue and tries to play it, with no huge amount of insight into what all the spells do and stuff (and dont even say you can look at the spell descriptions because those things only really portray a fraction of what the spell actually is lol) it is insanely difficult to play through without a tank and healer. and god help you if you don't know what those are or how to build them correctly.

the way you put it makes it sound like the game is so simple and you can just jaunt through the game no matter your decisions when this is not the case, anything outside of healer/tank combo requires some serious game mechanic insight and planning ahead.

I know many storyline battles that will destroy an all warrior party for instance on a normal basis.

i could dig up the actual interview for you where they talk about how they got their battle ideas and such from MMOs. its not as if the game gives any insentive to not have a tank and healer. On the contrary its pretty much the oposite.  but even if we think of it in MMO terms the character variations are a little odd.

1 tank (not counting DLCs here, so alistair)
6 damagers (sten, dog, ohgren, morrigan, leliana, zevran)
1 healer (wynne)

what!? lol.

[Elhanan]

egervari wrote...

It is messed up. She has a point in lightning. Why? I dunno.

There's a few lines they really invested in that just don't seem to really do much. I mean, there were better options. I could make a stronger version of morrigan with half or 2/3 of the skill points that they used.

The Electricity tier could be used in conjunction w/ Mage warden to help make SotC, and Lightning is generally a Party friendly spell. And the wide variety of her spells may help new players explore other spell lines not explored earlier, at least it did for myself.

[termokanden]

Steel Majere343, this is exactly why I've involved myself in a long discussion about the difficulty of DAO in another thread.



Thing is, this is typical when discussing games on an internet forum. Nobody is going to admit anything was ever difficult.



As for Morrigan's spell selection. Yes you can argue that most of her spells CAN be used, but she is oddly missing the really good ones. She needs Fireball, Cone of Cold,, glyphs, Force Field, Heal, the good stuff. Don't even get me started on shapeshifting, I just don't see the point. Mages can cause so much more destruction in their mage form, and warriors and rogues do the whole melee thing way better.

[Gimme H]

why do you think she needs glyphs?

if she fills the cold line and the forcefield line, which is the obvious thing to do, plus whatever else you fancy - and the elctricity line works just fine, she's good enough to complete the game on nightmare as the only mage in the party with just heal for support

i know because that's what i did, with no tank either.

[termokanden]

Sure sure, I could do that as well, but now we're being Internet tough guys.

My problem with her spell selection is not that it could not be made into something good, but rather that is bad for her level. She would have been much more useful if she had focused on fewer spell lines and higher tiers. That also gives the player more freedom in choosing which other lines to take. As it is now, you can skip the lines she started but then you have wasted your talents.

Plus I still don't like shapeshifting.

Modifié par termokanden, 26 août 2010 - 10:26 .

[Last Darkness]

Practicality Wins fights, and keeps you alive. Of course since theres no Pvp/multi player theres no reason to swing your Epeens around.

[miltos33]

I have always been able in my rpgs to strike a balance between roleplaying and powergaming. In other words I wouldn't pick certain abilities which may conflict with the concept of my character but I would rather not go as far as to gimp my character because of this. This theory holds especially true in a single player and relatively easy game like Dragon Age.

[DWSmiley]

@SteelMajere - The learning curve is steep but it is not metagaming to have a good understanding of talents, spells and tactics and once you do, this game is not extremely difficult. All it takes to get that understanding is the patience to read the guides in the guide compilation thread plus other posts by people who research how the game works.



For example (@termokandon), find some of the posts by TBastian and you will learn how to build a shapeshifter who is quite effective without any mods. Or, as I mentioned in another thread, just give Morrigan the balanced greatsword from Ser Jory and you'll find her spider shape can be quite useful in Lothering - web, poison spit and the base damage of a greatsword without the slow swing. Though only after she's cast her spells, of course.



BTW - X-president also did a lot of research into shapeshifting and came up with an effective approach on how to play mostly while shapeshifted, which is quite different. It works and is an interesting variation but builds do not usually rely mostly on a specialization.

[Lumikki]

I do both, I'm good mage so no blood magic for me. Also because of that I travel with good companions, did not take the "evil" ones, if game did give me option. How ever, I do try to be practical too as not gimping my character with wrong choise what doesn't work well.

[Jacks Smirking Revenge]

Almost all my characters are built from RP for example;



My Crossbow Dwarf Commoner always heard tales of the Dwarven Grey Warden who held off waves of Darkspawn outside Orzammar. http://dragonage.wik...warven_Defender

[Steel Majere343]

termokanden wrote...

Steel Majere343, this is exactly why I've involved myself in a long discussion about the difficulty of DAO in another thread.

Thing is, this is typical when discussing games on an internet forum. Nobody is going to admit anything was ever difficult.

As for Morrigan's spell selection. Yes you can argue that most of her spells CAN be used, but she is oddly missing the really good ones. She needs Fireball, Cone of Cold,, glyphs, Force Field, Heal, the good stuff. Don't even get me started on shapeshifting, I just don't see the point. Mages can cause so much more destruction in their mage form, and warriors and rogues do the whole melee thing way better.

i think your right.

@DWS i think your proving my point there. Your saying shapshifting would/can be usefull if you equip her with a greatsword? really? because im sure that was the point and everybody is going to think of that when they consider shapeshifting morrigan lol.

and your saying if they read the guides then they would know, well thats exactly what im talking about. Unless you have (quoting myself here) "Great insight into the games mechanics" playing tank/healer less is almost stupid.

Am i saying its impossable? no, course not, i'v seen it done multiple times. But there defenately is metagaming involved in every example i'v seen. For them to pull it off it required them to have a huge knowledge base about how combat works in the game.

You should not have to go do research to succeed at a game. Think about the game from a fresh players perspective, you were one once.

Your telling me that the first time you played all of that just clicked? you just sat and said to yourself "ahh so if i have a whole party full of bards i wont need a tank! oh and that guy in the dalish village can supply me with pultices! oh and if i equipe a greatsword to my mage she will do good melee damage!" i could go on but im sure my point has gotn across here.

the games many decisions on who to take with you are missleading in making you believe any party is just as good as another. But thats the problem with games like this.

Relate this game to a game like Demons souls for instance (apples to oranges i know but hear me out).

In demons souls you can get one hitted from certain enemies, but is it cheap? no, because its your own fault. You can dodge it or block, good skilled players can get through entire stages without taking a single hit from an enemy (most enemies have a wind of before they strike). Because of this you always have a chance at winning and its never the games fault but yours.

In Demons souls if you configure your party incorrectly or build them wrong you can run into fights that are impossable for you to win, because the only things you control are movement, who to auto attack, and abilities and items.

and there are few things more frusterating then running into a fight that is impossable for your party to win. that's the part that takes away from the game for me.

As i'v said i do speak with experience, iv tried it both ways and done many a playthrough on this game. and there is indeed a huge leap in difficulty that suggests you should play with a tank and healer. Not to mention the abilities and hell, the game itself seem to actively promote it. (Taunt pulls all the enemies around to a single character).

[eucatastrophe]

Well a possible solution (what i do) is that if you're on a PC, get a respecialisation mod.

That way, you can start from ground-up for each character and set them on a path you want them.
Sure, it might be meta-gaming. (Alistair using a 2H sword? WTH?) But it opens up so many possibilties, both roleplay  and gameplay wise: Alistair's intriguied by Sten and his picking up the 2handed weapon reflects that. Or perhaps Sword/Shield was a Chantry thing and we all know that Alistair wasn't terribly enthusiatic about being a Templar. Maybe it is your character who is a master swordsman who decides to teach him a thing or two.

Anyway, for me, the conflict comes with story progression. I feel compelled (at least on the first, original playthrough) to take the good option because I feel I will miss out on the story (and level-experience) otherwise. I could have declined helping the young girl at Lothering, I could have released Kitty into the world, I could have been a rude, non-believer and never spoken to the Dwarf priest... but then I would never get to hear their story.

[Bahlgan]

I am mainly a roleplayer. Rarely will I choose any practicality in my game; even still so the practical moments more than likely fit into a role play factor.

[DWSmiley]

Steel Majere343 wrote...
You should not have to go do research to succeed at a game. Think about the game from a fresh players perspective, you were one once.

Your telling me that the first time you played all of that just clicked?

So if you were interested in chess you would expect to sit down in front a board, start moving the pieces around and succeed?

Or, to take a DA:O example - one would never know from the in-game descriptions that sunder arms and sunder armor are double attacks and thus much stronger than described.  But the character using the weapon surely would know that and it is not metagaming for the player to know it, too. Years ago, games were packaged with thick manuals describing the details.  Companies avoid those costs now but with the internet the gaming comminity can find out for itself and share the knowledge.

Of course it didn't all click the first time.  For many, a big part of the appeal of a game is getting better at it.  While many others aren't interested in such things and want to play the game for the story and characters, which is fine, too.  If that's you then stay on casual - surely you do not need a rigid party composition on casual.  It's not a competition.

And you continue to over-generalize.  You find it much more difficult to play the game without a tank and healer so you proclaim that's the way the game is.  But it isn't.

Modifié par DWSmiley, 26 août 2010 - 10:16 .

[TJPags]

Wow, seriously? Can't play without a tank and healer set up?



I've set any character as a tank. Never been a problem. Yes, I use Wynne now and then, and yes, I keep her on the healer line, but I much prefer using pots - those are insanely simple to make, given you have unlimited quantities of supplies.



The best defense is a good offense - and the best offense is to kill.