1380 réponses à ce sujet

[biomag]

Actually it won't feel like a ninja STEALTH warrior... at DA:O I never used stealth as it was totally pointless, seems they don't plan to change it as they already "improved" the rogue.

[Kiely]

Elanareon wrote...

Isn't it a bit more roguish holding one hand and striking precise spots to your enemies, thus the backstabs. And rogues hold daggers, warriors hold swords. Isn't that distinctive enough?

Its just really silly that warriors can't use dual weild... Why not make 2 different trees? WHY IS THE DISTINCTION OF classES ARE ON THE WEAPON SKILL TREES????

Its suppose to be on the rogue skill tree!

My rogue was using dual long swords by the end of the game, which I guess made him no different than a DW warrior??? Maybe that similarity is what they're trying to avoid.

[hangmans tree]

Dave of Canada wrote...

Lilacs wrote...

The point is WARRIORS are MASTERS of ARMS.  They should NOT be restricted to only using a sword and shield or a two-handed weapon to tank and only be a tank.

Warriors are also DPSer's.  My warrior is a dual wielder and I tanked as such, and she has a hit rate of 100.  She is level 34 now.  So limiting a warrior who can wield any weapon is outright ludicrous.

Then why bother having rogues if warriors can do everything but better?

What about backstab, critical strike, assassination, cripple, blind, mime, poison, bombs, using magical devices, stealth, steal and lockpik (and so on - which warriors cant do)? Dave, think about it please. Rogues have plenty. Its the implementation of certain rules and aspects that was wrong, not the philosophy behind it.
So taking away from master of arms a very ponderable fighting component is...wrong. IMHO.

[Inquisitor Recon]

Limit rogues to only being able to dual wield one "long" weapon and one dagger or equivalent.

Modifié par ReconTeam, 05 septembre 2010 - 05:29 .

[hangmans tree]

Rogues that can't dualwield make more sense to me....

[hangmans tree]

Illborne wrote...

hangmans tree wrote...

What about backstab, critical strike, assassination, cripple, blind, mime, poison, bombs, using magical devices, stealth, steal and lockpik (and so on - which warriors cant do)? Dave, think about it please. Rogues have plenty. Its the implementation of certain rules and aspects that was wrong, not the philosophy behind it.
So taking away from master of arms a very ponderable fighting component is...wrong. IMHO.

Warriors could steal, use poison, bombs and magical devices.

so why wont they restric THAT to rogues?

[Kiely]

biomag wrote...

Actually it won't feel like a ninja STEALTH warrior... at DA:O I never used stealth as it was totally pointless, seems they don't plan to change it as they already "improved" the rogue.

You found it pointless? Even combat stealth???

There was a very good exploit with combat stealth. If you lure enemies into an ambush away from their normal location and your entire party but the rogue dies, with stealth combat you could go into stealth and the enemies will retreat back to their location allowing your party to revive and regain health and stamina/mana before finishing off the remaining enemies... that was pretty useful.

Not to mention combat stealth was really useful in maneuvering your rogue into beneficial attack positions.

[Mystranna Kelteel]

biomag wrote...

Actually it won't feel like a ninja STEALTH warrior... at DA:O I never used stealth as it was totally pointless, seems they don't plan to change it as they already "improved" the rogue.

Stealth was awesome in DAO. Disarming room traps before triggering combat, setting up an incapacitating strike on a mage behind the front lines as your other troops pull the aggro, scouting ahead...

Maybe it didn't suit your playstyle, but stealth was far, far from pointless. XD

As for the DA2 rogue stuff, I think it's all kind of silly. DA2 rogues aren't so much rogues as they are circus acrobats.

All this flashy combat stuff they seem to be implementing sounds completely over the top.

[Kiely]

hangmans tree wrote...

Rogues that can't dualwield make more sense to me....

Really? DW rogues has been a Fantasy RPG staple for decades... can you explain?

[Jimmy Fury]

biomag wrote...
That's why I keep asking for weapon skills just for warrior class, combat skills that aren't related to weapon styles to rogues (mobility and evasion skills) and spells to casters. So if rogues or mages want to pick up weapons they don't feel like idiots as only warriors have favorite weapons classes and each player can give each of his characters the weapons he desires without being worth less than the typical class representative. The way it is now at DA:O you can't have anything else than a rogue with archery or dual wield. That's stupid and with the innovation for DA 2 it gets worse.

What you're asking for makes Rogues and Mages support for a perfect-killing-machine-warrior who can use every weapon flawlessly.
And yes, btw, i'm reading every word you write. Perhaps you're using the wrong words?
You want only warriors to have weapon based skills.
"Weapon skills just for warrior class"
So yeah, anyone else picking up a weapon would be useless because only the warrior has any skill with it. What's the point of a rogue using a bow if only warriors have bow related skills? None.
Heck, what's the point of having mobility and evasion skills if you can't land a hit with a sword?
There big skill tree will be.... how to best get out of the way? Wtf is the point of having them at all then? If they can't fight for crap, don't use magic, and their only claim to fame is not being hit with stuff... why the heck would you even recruit one?

Not to mention that by your breakdown Templars would be Mages... they use spells instead of weapon specific skills afterall... and completely get rid of anything like a berserker or guardian since they focus on defense and survival instead of weapons skill...

Some of us don't want to play as a warrior and it sucks when your character is just there as support for one of your companions.

Modifié par Jimmy Fury, 05 septembre 2010 - 05:34 .

[ashwind]

Dave of Canada wrote...

ashwind wrote...

Limiting DW to rogues only gives the name Rogue a new meaning: Warrior Ninja Locksmith holding two swords (exclusive).

This is a meaning in a lot of MMOs, RPG games and such nowadays. It's nothing new.

And I hate that.

A Roguish experience to me would be a character that rely more on intelligence rather than brute force. Give me a Master Backstab talent line that gives me a chance to kill an enemy with a well place backstab makes me feel more roguish. Give me a ninja style smoke bomb to blind enemies, let me throw darts to stun enemies while I am running towards them gives me a better roguish experience. Trip enemies instead of knockdown, etc.

Warriors are probably the weakest class when you complete Awakening - Solo Nightmare Harvester and friends with Rogue/legionnaire scout? Easy! Nearly 0 damage taken too. Arcane Warrior? Not as easy, you do notice your hit point reducing but again can be done without potions. Warriors?? (Thanks to the badly done Defense vs Armor system)

And now they decide to remove 50% of the combat skill from Warriors to better define: Warrior Ninja Locksmith Holding Two Sword class and call it Rogue!?

Also, the freaking Rune system - 6 runes for DW and 3 for a Two Handed Sword even though a 2H sword is maybe 4x larger than 2 daggers. 

What are they doing to give players who love Warriors a more... "spartan" feel? I hope I can punch a charging Ogre in the face and stop him dead in his tracks and not get pushed away together with the "Rogues" and "Mages"

class distinction my arse.

[Kiely]

Mystranna Kelteel wrote...

biomag wrote...

Actually it won't feel like a ninja STEALTH warrior... at DA:O I never used stealth as it was totally pointless, seems they don't plan to change it as they already "improved" the rogue.

Stealth was awesome in DAO. Disarming room traps before triggering combat, setting up an incapacitating strike on a mage behind the front lines as your other troops pull the aggro, scouting ahead...

Maybe it didn't suit your playstyle, but stealth was far, far from pointless. XD

As for the DA2 rogue stuff, I think it's all kind of silly. DA2 rogues aren't so much rogues as they are circus acrobats.

All this flashy combat stuff they seem to be implementing sounds completely over the top.

I totally agree on the first part!

I'm sort of looking forward to the acrobatic/flashy combat though.

[hangmans tree]

Kiely wrote...

hangmans tree wrote...

Rogues that can't dualwield make more sense to me....

Really? DW rogues has been a Fantasy RPG staple for decades... can you explain?

With knives or daggers at most - yes. It comes to mobility and such, hit and run tehnique. Over the recent years thieves and rogues tend to sway towards warrior class more and more. A rogue that can dualwield two longswords? COME ON! Try to sneak with those, scout or BACKSTAB.

And to bounce it right back: DW warriors wasn't a RPG staple for decades? Read on gladiator profession, learn about DW in ancient history...and they weren't rogues.

[biomag]

@Stealth at DAO... finished the game quite a few time, never needed stealth, even less to get backstabs.

Jimmy Fury wrote...

biomag wrote...
 

What you're asking for makes Rogues and Mages support for a perfect-killing-machine-warrior who can use every weapon flawlessly.
And yes, btw, i'm reading every word you write. Perhaps you're using the wrong words?
You want only warriors to have weapon based skills.
"Weapon skills just for warrior class"
So yeah, anyone else picking up a weapon would be useless because only the warrior has any skill with it. What's the point of a rogue using a bow if only warriors have bow related skills? None.
Heck, what's the point of having mobility and evasion skills if you can't land a hit with a sword?
There big skill tree will be.... how to best get out of the way? Wtf is the point of having them at all then? If they can't fight for crap, don't use magic, and their only claim to fame is not being hit with stuff... why the heck would you even recruit one?

Not to mention that by your breakdown Templars would be Mages... they use spells instead of weapon specific skills afterall... and completely get rid of anything like a berserker or guardian since they focus on defense and survival instead of weapons skill...

Some of us don't want to play as a warrior and it sucks when your character is just there as support for one of your companions.

Listen, if you just want to misunderstand my post, go on I won't even bother to respond. I never asked for a killing machine warrior and I wasn't talking about specialization either, neither was anyone else in this topic. So if you want to paint me as the demon on your wall, go ahead, but let me tell you, you are deliberately turning my words to make it fit something you can complain about. Others understood what I posted, so the problem ain't me.

[FedericoV]

I do agree with the decision of the devs. Was it for me there would not be a rogue class altogether but I understand that many players like that option, so they do the right trying to have more distinction between the two classes.

[jbblue05]

Rogues being able to wield two full-sized weapons and a warrior not being able to is completely stupid.

Duel-wielding two longswords is a warrior trait not a rogue trait.

Rogues are a tactical class while warrior is a combat class by taking away half of thier fighting styles your dumbing down the class. Buffing up S&S and 2-hander doesn't make warrior class better.

Dual-wield
Warriors= Two full sized weapons  Rogues= Dual Dagger or full sized weapon and dagger.

Archery
Warriors= crossbowmen  Rogues= short/long bowmen

[Kiely]

hangmans tree wrote...

Kiely wrote...

hangmans tree wrote...

Rogues that can't dualwield make more sense to me....

Really? DW rogues has been a Fantasy RPG staple for decades... can you explain?

With knives or daggers at most - yes. It comes to mobility and such, hit and run tehnique. Over the recent years thieves and rogues tend to sway towards warrior class more and more. A rogue that can dualwield two longswords? COME ON! Try to sneak with those, scout or BACKSTAB.

And to bounce it right back: DW warriors wasn't a RPG staple for decades? Read on gladiator profession, learn about DW in ancient history...and they weren't rogues.

Okay I hear you, you're more objecting to the DW long weapons, which I can appreciate.

I'm not arguing about the DW warriors. In AD&D they allow high level warriors to dual wield 2-handed weapons. Perhaps adding that would be a better way to distinguish between a rogue DW and a warrior DW?

Rogue DW = one long sword + dagger.

Warrior DW = could eventually wield two 2-handed weapons (with a minimum STR requirement).

[Jimmy Fury]

biomag wrote...
Listen, if you just want to misunderstand my post, go on I won't even bother to respond. I never asked for a killing machine warrior and I wasn't talking about specialization either, neither was anyone else in this topic. So if you want to paint me as the demon on your wall, go ahead, but let me tell you, you are deliberately turning my words to make it fit something you can complain about. Others understood what I posted, so the problem ain't me.

Again, what am I misreading or misunderstanding?
You specifically said you only want warriors to have weapon based skills.
How am I misunderstanding that just by explaining what that means for every other character in the game.
No weapon skills = crap in a fight. period.

And no, not everyone else is fine with what you said because i'm not the only one saying you're wrong.
This is nothing personal. I'm not demonizing you, i'm disagreeing with you. There's a difference.


And specializations are an extension of combat. Don't try to dismiss a logical and approrpriate point just because it hasn't been brought up yet.

Modifié par Jimmy Fury, 05 septembre 2010 - 05:57 .

[Mystranna Kelteel]

Kiely wrote...
Okay I hear you, you're more objecting to the DW long weapons, which I can appreciate.

I'm not arguing about the DW warriors. In AD&D they allow high level warriors to dual wield 2-handed weapons. Perhaps adding that would be a better way to distinguish between a rogue DW and a warrior DW?

Rogue DW = one long sword + dagger.

Warrior DW = could eventually wield two 2-handed weapons (with a minimum STR requirement).

What, like dual wielding scythes? XD


This whole argument is a little silly, imo. The line has to be drawn somewhere, otherwise you could boil down any weapon as being suitable for any class. If my rogue puts a lot of points into STR then why can't she wield a 2 hander and use the 2 hander skills? Is there some strange lore reason why a rogue would not be able to spin in a circle with a 2 handed sword? Nope, but for gameplay the line has to be drawn somewhere unless they implement one open skill set and remove classes altogether.