333 réponses à ce sujet

[Riona45]

Lumikki wrote...

No, I'm not joking. You can make choises, but you can't make choises agaist story what Bioware has writen.

See my post above. 

Example if Bioware "force" you play apostate mage (Hawke or sister) agaist Chantry in story, you can't do anything agaist it, even how you would want play differently.

Yeah, if they do that.  There's no evidence so far that that will be the case, though.  You don't have to even play a mage, but if you do, you probably will have a choice as to how you react to things.  Why do I think this?  Because that's been the case in pretty much every BioWare game--no reason to assume they are changing it now.

As for Bethany?  She's an NPC character (not yours), so how she feels about something is supposed to be beyond your control unless the game allows you to influence her opinions in some way.  If she is anti-Chantry, then that's who she is.  I don't think you have grounds for complaining about a character that isn't supposed to be yours in the first place. 

Modifié par Riona45, 25 septembre 2010 - 06:25 .

[DragonOfWhiteThunder]

I believe that pro-Chantry mage Hawke could still work. Yes, Hawke is an apostate. No, he may not be able to join the Circle. However, the Chantry allows the Mage's Collective to exist, and if Hawke is instrumental in helping the Chantry to re-establish itself in Kirkwall, then it wouldn't be too surprising for the Chantry to turn a blind eye to Hawke's apostate status. Especially if they could plausibly deny knowing about it.



First character in DA2 is going to be a male mage, probably as close to Arcane Warrior as I can get. I loved playing that character in Origins, even if I didn't spec him very well.

[Lumikki]

Who says anything that I'm same side than Chantry? There is difference between helping someone and not go agaist them. Question does DA2 give that choise for mage player. I don't see any reason to be side with too good sides. I stay out of it totally or I'm agaist both sides if they don't let me to be out of it. I don't take sides between Circle of Mages and Chantry.

[DragonOfWhiteThunder]

Lumikki wrote...

Who says anything that I'm same side than Chantry? There is difference between helping someone and not go agaist them. Question does DA2 give that choise for mage player. I don't see any reason to be side with too good sides. I stay out of it totally or I'm agaist both sides if they don't let me to be out of it. I don't take sides between Circle of Mages and Chantry.

Ah, you're right, I misunderstood. But there's really two options here, either you assist the Chantry in reestablishing itself, or you don't. A mage who couldn't care less about the Chantry wouldn't assist them, in which case they fail to reestablish themselves and become a non-issue in Kirkwall. Sure, it has essentially the same effect as if Hawke tried to drive them out him/herself, but Mage Hawke could easily have the option not to get involved.

And the point of my original post still stands. Apostate Hawke doesn't necessarily have to be anti-Chantry.

[bobolda7]

Lumikki wrote...

Who says anything that I'm same side than Chantry? There is difference between helping someone and not go agaist them. Question does DA2 give that choise for mage player. I don't see any reason to be side with too good sides. I stay out of it totally or I'm agaist both sides if they don't let me to be out of it. I don't take sides between Circle of Mages and Chantry.

But usually organizations, especially powerful ones, like the Chantry enforce a with us or against us policy; see exalted marches. These situations can become unavoidable leaving out the neutral option.

[jalynntownsend]

bobolda7 wrote...

Lumikki wrote...

Who says anything that I'm same side than Chantry? There is difference between helping someone and not go agaist them. Question does DA2 give that choise for mage player. I don't see any reason to be side with too good sides. I stay out of it totally or I'm agaist both sides if they don't let me to be out of it. I don't take sides between Circle of Mages and Chantry.

But usually organizations, especially powerful ones, like the Chantry enforce a with us or against us policy; see exalted marches. These situations can become unavoidable leaving out the neutral option.

And thats why i am going to kill that bastard of a grand cleric and plunge the world of Dragon age down the path of the Dark side "lol gotta love KOTOR". I am a Libertatarian blood mage who use his power for the personal gain  of all mages.

[Lintanis]

Personal gain has a tendency to go wrong a lot , but sounds like fun 

[jalynntownsend]

so what as long as i stand at the top mountain

[Lumikki]

bobolda7 wrote...

Lumikki wrote...

Who says anything that I'm same side than Chantry? There is difference between helping someone and not go agaist them. Question does DA2 give that choise for mage player. I don't see any reason to be side with too good sides. I stay out of it totally or I'm agaist both sides if they don't let me to be out of it. I don't take sides between Circle of Mages and Chantry.

But usually organizations, especially powerful ones, like the Chantry enforce a with us or against us policy; see exalted marches. These situations can become unavoidable leaving out the neutral option.

Why not? You never have to do anything in life what you don't want except die. If chantry push they issue on me, I don't help them or go agaist them, what they can do to me except kill me? That is acceptable solution and game ends there.

There is two good side, Chantry and Circle of Mages, what seem to have this internal issues, like somekind of civil war about power and freedom between them. Why does Hawke has to get involved, he/she has nothing to do with it.

My point is that to fight agaist someone PLAYER needs to believe it's cause what is worth of fighting for. I don't see any reason to fight agaist Chantry or Circle of Mages. If you think killing my brother gives me that motive, think again.  Personal issues doesn't give me motive to fight agaist some organisation.

Of course this starts to be little bit off from this threads topic, but I ques been mage Hawke does create some issues.

Modifié par Lumikki, 25 septembre 2010 - 06:48 .

[bobolda7]

MariSkep wrote...

bobolda7 wrote...

Lumikki wrote...

Who says anything that I'm same side than Chantry? There is difference between helping someone and not go agaist them. Question does DA2 give that choise for mage player. I don't see any reason to be side with too good sides. I stay out of it totally or I'm agaist both sides if they don't let me to be out of it. I don't take sides between Circle of Mages and Chantry.

But usually organizations, especially powerful ones, like the Chantry enforce a with us or against us policy; see exalted marches. These situations can become unavoidable leaving out the neutral option.

I'm still crossing my fingers for the reforner option. Someone who creates another split from the main body of the Andrastian faith and hopefully inspires several mores splits throughout Thedas.

Kind of like the Reformation in our world? interesting .  It would be a good reason for Cassandra to be worried.

[bobolda7]

jalynntownsend wrote...

so what as long as i stand at the top mountain

You know that sounds more isolationist than Libertarian

[JamieCOTC]

Mage Armor

Better selection of staves

More magical weapons

Witch specialization

[His Dire Enmity]

I'd love to see more Arcane Warrior/Blood Mage 'epicness', if you will. Nothing like having 9 sustains going while HP - constantly regenerating - allows one to cast spells nonstop. The additional mage skills and Battle Mage profession given in Awakenings certainly established an already cheap class as much cheaper, but it was entertaining.



Perhaps they could give a specialization allowing - I don't know - summoning of demons/spirits from the fade? Maybe two specific specializations; one allowing the summoning of spirits while the other, geared toward evil characters, summoning demons.



Make Shape-shifting useful, somehow. Let us use our abilities in whichever form we take, except for those requiring a staff/weapon as a conduit? I'll accept limitations, but not being permitted to use -any- of my skills? Depressing. Lol.



I agree with what people have said about equipment upgrades, i.e. staves, armor, weapons, hoods like Morrigan's concept art, etc. Must have.

[bobolda7]

I would like for shapeshifting to have a focus where you pick one form and then can upgrade it like if I pick the wolf i can choose wolf abilities with the final one being a werewolf enhancement.

[jalynntownsend]

bobolda7 wrote...

jalynntownsend wrote...

so what as long as i stand at the top mountain

You know that sounds more isolationist than Libertarian

No an isolationist distance themselves from people. I intend to conquer the world of dragon age and liberate my magical brothers from the oppersive chantry. Even if it means to sell my soul to a demon for power. MIGHT = RIGHT ftw

[Lintanis]

 Im hoping that they unlock Mage Hawke in the demo at EuroGamer Expo 

[Risax]

Do the Tevinter Mages have to go tru a Harrowing, or something simmelair as well? Does anyone know?

[Lumikki]

simfamSP wrote...

The melee is more focused on defence. A mage is a powerful ranged. But what happens when a darkspawn WALKS TO YOU! and it attacks you. Your Warrior is busy with an ogre boss, you rouge is being attacks by 4. Your other mage is healing. Your not going to start shooting fairy dust at it? It's instinct, you wack it with your staff until it's dead.

I have no need to any melee based defense. I don't know how you play, but I never needed staff to anything, than game design wanted it to be in my hand.

I hated that I had to run away with Wynne every bloody time a darkspawn came towards me, and my stun spells were at cool down. I'm sure the attack will be ****, 10-20 damage. But it will prove useful.

I have no clue what you talk? Why would you need to run away? Control them, that's what I do. Oh, maybe You Wynne had no control spells like mine did?

Modifié par Lumikki, 26 septembre 2010 - 07:37 .

[Lumikki]

I did not need this temporary source of defence. If some control spells was reloading, I had 5 other control spells waiting, there was no need to defend my self in close combat range. If I run out of control spells Wynne had 5 more. I never even needed all the control spells, because enemies died.

[Lumikki]

I understand what you mean. But do you understand that no every mages need stick to defenced them self. It's not needed because some mages are NEVER in situation where it would be needed. Some other mage may even be often that kind situation, but it's all about how you play your mage.

Modifié par Lumikki, 26 septembre 2010 - 09:12 .