139 réponses à ce sujet

[Dave of Canada]

I really don't like the whole heavy armor rogue, I wear massive armor on my rogue and it just feels.. wrong.

[Arttis]

Well then just do not wear it!

[Aradace]

Arttis wrote...

Well then just do not wear it!

says the same person who probably thinks its ok for a mage to wear heavy armor too that ISNT a battle mage.

[Ladybright]

tmp7704 wrote...

If you look at it from another angle, by limiting options available to each class fo bare minimum, what is going to make one warrior not "look near identical" from another warrior, and one rogue from another rogue? Aside from minor flaws and/or advantages?

Specializations?

[Arttis]

Aradace wrote...

Arttis wrote...

Well then just do not wear it!

says the same person who probably thinks its ok for a mage to wear heavy armor too that ISNT a battle mage.

If they put the str in for it WHY NOT?!

[Dave of Canada]

tmp7704 wrote...

If you look at it from another angle, by limiting options available to each class fo bare minimum, what is going to make one warrior not "look near identical" from another warrior, and one rogue from another rogue? Aside from minor flaws and/or advantages?

But wouldn't that just be the same problem but on a worse escale when all warriors and a majority of rogues also look the same?

[Shepard Lives]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

In the no DW for Warriors thread, Mike wrote:

Mike Laidlaw wrote...

Removing
dual wield specialization from warriors allowed us to not only make the
classes more distinct, but to make the dual wield attacks all
distinctly rogue-ish. A warrior in plate mail being fast with two
daggers I could handle, but flipping and rolling into attacks? That
didn't make sense. So, we could either have boring, vanilla dual-wield
anims, or we could make them for rogues and deliver lithe, acrobatic
combat for a class that should be just that.

If removing DW talents from Warriors was done to prevent all those flippy animations from looking silly on characters wearing heavy armour, does this mean that Rogues - which do get the new DW talents - can't wear heavy armour?

If this is another completely arbitrary restriction to make the classes more distinct (since when is that a useful objective, anyway - what value does distinctiveness have?), I'm going to point it out.  A lot.  For months.

Au contraire, my friend, I believe distinctiveness is extremely important. I  want the combat and character building to feel very different based on the class I'm playing. And who made their rogue wear heavy armor? I sure as hell didn't. I fail to see the point in it, also from a role-playing perspective (in a way).

I'm kind of ticked off that I don't get to play dual-wielding warriors (read: unstoppable whirling machines of dismemberment) anymore, but I'm very much intrigued by how they're going to update the DW skill tree and its animations to make it feel more rogue-ish.

[Telum101]

Aradace wrote...

Arttis wrote...

Well then just do not wear it!

says the same person who probably thinks its ok for a mage to wear heavy armor too that ISNT a battle mage.

It is ok for any mage to wear heavy armour. The point is that we should have the choice to wear it. restricting the game to just having 3 basic classes with no diversity would just be boring.
Either way, it's not like you'd be forced to wear heavy armour as mage, or use daggers as a warrior, so it's not like it's harmful to you, unless you can't handle others playing a game differently to you?

[Dave of Canada]

Telum101 wrote...

Either way, it's not like you'd be forced to wear heavy armour as mage, or use daggers as a warrior, so it's not like it's harmful to you, unless you can't handle others playing a game differently to you?

But would you rather want people to play mages in heavy armor, dagger warriors and such or to have three very distinct classes (excluding specializations) that each have their own special fun gimmick? I'm thinking of it similar to Mass Effect > Mass Effect 2, the hybrid classes lost much of their hybridness but playing a Soldier had a very distinct difference than playing an Sentinel or Vanguard. 

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 05 septembre 2010 - 08:48 .

[Akka le Vil]

They removed dual-wielding for warrior ? 0_o

This is a joke, right !?

[Dave of Canada]

Akka le Vil wrote...

They removed dual-wielding for warrior ? 0_o
This is a joke, right !?

Nope. They want dual wield to feel fast (something that didn't fit the warrior class) so they instead tuned up the 2h / sword and board spec for warrior and made archery / dual wield rogue-exclusive.

[Shepard Lives]

Dave of Canada wrote...

But would you rather want people to play mages in heavy armor, dagger warriors and such or to have three very distinct classes (excluding specializations) that each have their own special fun gimmick? I'm thinking of it similar to Mass Effect > Mass Effect 2, the hybrid classes lost much of their hybridness but playing a Soldier had a very distinct difference than playing an Sentinel or Vanguard. 

And it was awesome. I'm hoping they do a similar job in DA2 (as in: making each class unique). In my opinion, they totally nailed it with ME2.

[Arrtis]

Akka le Vil wrote...

They removed dual-wielding for warrior ? 0_o
This is a joke, right !?

no...

[Arrtis]

They should have expanded the rogue and warrior specific abilities in order to make them feel different.

[Dave of Canada]

shepard_lives wrote...

And it was awesome. I'm hoping they do a similar job in DA2 (as in: making each class unique). In my opinion, they totally nailed it with ME2.

I hear the masses gathering at our homes ready to burn it down already.

[Dave of Canada]

Arrtis wrote...

They should have expanded the rogue and warrior specific abilities in order to make them feel different.

But Mages have spells giving them a "mage" experience and Warriors have two-handed weapons completely tailored for a "warrior" experience, why leave dual wielding a hyprid-mess that doesn't fit well for both classes?

[Shepard Lives]

Dave of Canada wrote...

shepard_lives wrote...

And it was awesome. I'm hoping they do a similar job in DA2 (as in: making each class unique). In my opinion, they totally nailed it with ME2.

I hear the masses gathering at our homes ready to burn it down already.

I'll just go get one of my clones and throw it at the raging mob while I escape with a giant catapult.

[Never]

How exciting! I can't wait for my rogue to be more roguey.

[Altima Darkspells]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...


I don't particularly see the need for classes, no, though I understand they do make it easier to balance the game.

At least two classes are required, since non-mages cannot use magic.  The Fereldan Circle refused to martially train their mages, but since the Hawkes are Apostates, they wouldn't necessarily have that disadvantage.

But still, you can only use magic if you were born to it, and dwarves cannot use it at all.

[The Hardest Thing In The World]

Aradace wrote...

Arttis wrote...

Well then just do not wear it!

says the same person who probably thinks its ok for a mage to wear heavy armor too that ISNT a battle mage.

Yup, those who got all excited over Hawke's magic and fighting skills in the trailer  and want to play Hawke like that in DA2, shouldn't be contributing to this thread!

I think there should be a penalty for Heavy Armored rogues, ie no stealth, backstabbing/hitting/critical penalties. Also, I find the idea of "no classes" intriguing.

[Dave of Canada]

The Hardest Thing In The World wrote...

I think there should be a penalty for Heavy Armored rogues, ie no stealth, backstabbing/hitting/critical penalties. Also, I find the idea of "no classes" intriguing.

Then why even bother having dual wield warriors if you're just limiting them completely?

[B3taMaxxx]

Warriors are already very limited/boring, well as far as a shield & sword warrior.

[The Hardest Thing In The World]

Dave of Canada wrote...

The Hardest Thing In The World wrote...

I think there should be a penalty for Heavy Armored rogues, ie no stealth, backstabbing/hitting/critical penalties. Also, I find the idea of "no classes" intriguing.

Then why even bother having dual wield warriors if you're just limiting them completely?

Sorry. I don't quite get you. There won't be DW warriors hence this thread about rogues in heavy armor. Bioware wants them classes to be more distinct.