139 réponses à ce sujet

[Perfect-Kenshin]

If they get their strength high enough, I don't see why not. Still, it's possible that Bioware has placed caps on each of the classes stats' (which would really take the point out of customization in the first place).

[Sylvius the Mad]

jonv1234 wrote...

However, in the lore of this game, the rogue is sopposed to be sneaky (note the Stealth skill), as well as be able to steal proficiently, (hence the stealing skill

That's only evidence that Rogues can be sneaky.  And we already knew that.

[Sylvius the Mad]

jonv1234 wrote...

It is true that rogues can wear any armour, given that their strength is high enough, but rather should they. Heavy armour will raise the threat mopdifier to a point where the rogue will be attacked first in a confrontation, and will have little chance of using the backstab or critical chance skills inherent to the class.

All attacks from stealth were backstabs.  All attacks to stunned opponents could be criticals.

There were still innumerable ways a Rogue in Heavy Armour could be effective.

I had a Rogue archer who wore heavy armour (his secondary weapon was a 2H sword, so he never learned any DW talents).

How many DAO characters won't be possible in DA2?

[DarkSpiral]

jonv1234 wrote...

Good point. Did the heavy armor detract from the dexterity needed to use a high level ranged weapon?

There is no stat penality for wearing heavy or massive armors.  There is a penalty to archery talents for wearing either, but Master archer removes it for heavy armor.

I imagine that the concepts are still present in DA2, but the system seems to have been reworked extensively (no specific info on Archery, but the other tress all have been) so the specific skills in question may be altered.

[Mistress9Nine]

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.

The way I see it they're trying to make the club more exclusive not by adding new stuff but by excluding other from it's use so it'll feel more valuable, whereas IRL we were just robbed. It's a harsh word but I can't think of any alternatives right now. Basically they're resting on their laurels.

[Sylvius the Mad]

jonv1234 wrote...

Good point. Did the heavy armor detract from the dexterity needed to use a high level ranged weapon?

No, because I wanted the Dex anyway for defense, and I didn't spend any points on Cunning.

DarkSpiral wrote...

There is no stat penality for wearing heavy or massive armors.

I think the question dealt with making the minimum dex requirements to use high-level bows.

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 05 septembre 2010 - 11:43 .

[DarkSpiral]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

I think the question dealt with making the minimum dex requirements to use high-level bows.

*scrolls back up*

Ah, yes I believe you're right.  My mistake.

[FedericoV]

I believe that anyone will be able to carry the armour he likes, but heavy/plate armours will have prereq and skill malus, so at the end no rogue will use them. Pretty simple and logic.

But the point is allways the same: there is no need of two classes for the melee fighters. They should make only one warrior/fighter class and give a lot of freedom in terms of customizations, skills and specializations. Following that route we would not have problems like the ones pointed out by the OP.

Modifié par FedericoV, 06 septembre 2010 - 12:07 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

FedericoV wrote...

But the point is allways the same: there is no need of two classes for the melee fighters. They should make only one warrior/fighter class and give a lot of freedom in terms of customizations, skills and specializations. Following that route we would not have problems like the ones pointed out by the OP.

I made that very point during DAO's development.

[Reaverwind]

FedericoV wrote...
But the point is allways the same: there is no need of two classes for the melee fighters. They should make only one warrior/fighter class and give a lot of freedom in terms of customizations, skills and specializations. Following that route we would not have problems like the ones pointed out by the OP.

I concur.

[Ortaya Alevli]

I suggest that fatigue should directly affect your defense rating.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Ortaya Alevli wrote...

I suggest that fatigue should directly affect your defense rating.

That would disadvantage 2-H warriors.  And dex-tanks.

[Ortaya Alevli]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Ortaya Alevli wrote...

I suggest that fatigue should directly affect your defense rating.

That would disadvantage 2-H warriors.  And dex-tanks.

DEX tanks, yes. Precisely. Though I didn't catch the 2H part.