276 réponses à ce sujet

[nightcobra]

Xewaka wrote...

nightcobra8928 wrote...

xewaka, since now lockpicking is based on the cunning stat (it's also the one that changes evasion/defense rate this time around) it kinda takes away the "gimping" the rogue suffered for not picking combat talents on origins.

If it is stat-based, it should remain so across all classes. Unless other classes have stat-based exclusive abilities.

it's also a bit of the reason why i wrote it like this


locked chest/doors that can be opened by rogues and is dependant on cunning stat.

magical locks and barriers that can be dispelled by mages (like how the spirit form in the fade did with transparent doorways) and is dependant on magic stat.

and large obstacles like boulders or toppled statues that can be destroyed by warriors (like how the golem form in the fade was able to burst open through heavy doors) and is dependant on strenght stat. 

[Ortaya Alevli]

DSerpa wrote...

I headdesked because it was a rhetorical question and because I'd already explained why I thought it would be a bad idea a dozen times over earlier in the thread. Feel free to headdesk though. Just remember to headdesk in moderation, or else you risk permanent damage.

Perhaps you failed to make your case in a convincing manner, then. Your a dozen explanations aren't sufficient to make others think it's a bad idea or urge them to have a problem with it. By the way, I appreciate the concern, but the fellow forum goers provided excellent opportunities for me to accumulate enough experience in headdesking techniques, so your concern is not warranted.

I didn't. I was being ironic.

Ironic, indeed, enforcing an "asinine comment" with yet another annoying picture. Agree with you wholeheartedly.

[Ziggeh]

DSerpa wrote...
Like you said, not all warriors are tanks. If the tanking system were developed further in DA2 then yes, that would be an effective way to encourage people to bring a warrior

And not all rogues are lockpickers, so I don't think your list was valid.

DSerpa wrote...
But they do need to be equal, or at least somewhat close to equal.

It's the function, not the extent that's important. Also, as we can't reasonably balance the tedium of constant pot use with the annoyance of still shiny boxes and a bit of cash in hand, I'm not sure the term "equal" is one we can realistically discuss.

DSerpa wrote...
If I can replace a mage's utility with traps and poultices then it isn't exactly fair that I can't replace a rogue's utility with lockbashing or magic.

That's a reasonable point; There isn't a back up position. But then, I'd argue dying is a larger problem than having less cash. In fact, having less cash is the position massive pot use would put you in anyway, it would also give you less throughput due to priority usage, which is what missing out on the occasional good item would do.

DSerpa wrote...
I know. I just don't understand why you feel players should be punished from not bringing a certain class with them. And it is a punishment.

Ah, well, that's glass half empty talk. It's equally valid to say it's a reward for doing so.

[Ortaya Alevli]

DSerpa wrote...

Ortaya Alevli wrote...

Ironic, indeed, enforcing an "asinine comment" with yet another annoying picture. Agree with you wholeheartedly.

I bet you're a joy to have at parties.

With my asinine comments? No way in hell.

[Xewaka]

nightcobra8928 wrote...

Xewaka wrote...

nightcobra8928 wrote...

xewaka, since now lockpicking is based on the cunning stat (it's also the one that changes evasion/defense rate this time around) it kinda takes away the "gimping" the rogue suffered for not picking combat talents on origins.

If it is stat-based, it should remain so across all classes. Unless other classes have stat-based exclusive abilities.

it's also a bit of the reason why i wrote it like this


locked chest/doors that can be opened by rogues and is dependant on cunning stat.

magical locks and barriers that can be dispelled by mages (like how the spirit form in the fade did with transparent doorways) and is dependant on magic stat.

and large obstacles like boulders or toppled statues that can be destroyed by warriors (like how the golem form in the fade was able to burst open through heavy doors) and is dependant on strenght stat. 

Two things: First, the rogue bypass is based on their secondary attribute, while the other two classes, per your suggestion, are based on their main attribute. For equality, you might want to swap for Willpower and Constitution, even if they don't make as much sense.
Second: By your suggestion, now rogues are missing a secondary, exclusive, skill set compared to Warriors and Mages. If there is out-of-combat equality, there must be in-combat equality as well.

[nightcobra]

Xewaka wrote...

nightcobra8928 wrote...

Xewaka wrote...

nightcobra8928 wrote...

xewaka, since now lockpicking is based on the cunning stat (it's also the one that changes evasion/defense rate this time around) it kinda takes away the "gimping" the rogue suffered for not picking combat talents on origins.

If it is stat-based, it should remain so across all classes. Unless other classes have stat-based exclusive abilities.

it's also a bit of the reason why i wrote it like this


locked chest/doors that can be opened by rogues and is dependant on cunning stat.

magical locks and barriers that can be dispelled by mages (like how the spirit form in the fade did with transparent doorways) and is dependant on magic stat.

and large obstacles like boulders or toppled statues that can be destroyed by warriors (like how the golem form in the fade was able to burst open through heavy doors) and is dependant on strenght stat. 

Two things: First, the rogue bypass is based on their secondary attribute, while the other two classes, per your suggestion, are based on their main attribute. For equality, you might want to swap for Willpower and Constitution, even if they don't make as much sense.
Second: By your suggestion, now rogues are missing a secondary, exclusive, skill set compared to Warriors and Mages. If there is out-of-combat equality, there must be in-combat equality as well.

from what i heard in one of the kirkwall previews,  isabela had a smoke bomb skill (stunning surrounding enemies) if i'm remembering correctly.
it could be part of the buccaneer skill tree or the general rogues but it seems rogues might get a "saboteur" role in combat.

Modifié par nightcobra8928, 10 décembre 2010 - 08:17 .

[n2nw]

Marionetten wrote...

IRMcGhee wrote...
Pretty sure they said that any chests with anything major in it (plot stuff, special armour and weapons etc.) wouldn't be locked, so you won't miss out on any of that. Wouldn't surprise me if there are class-specific quests within the game, same as DA:O.

While this is true it still irks the completionist in me to have to leave chests behind just because I didn't bring a rogue. As a direct result of this I feel forced to bring a rogue along for every single playthrough. This discourages some of the more interesting party configurations. I've experienced the same dialogue lines from Leliana and Zevran way too many times.

Agreed.

Maria Caliban wrote...
If you want to open a lock, play a rogue or bring one with you. The point of a class based system is to give people choices by having different classes have different strengths and weaknesses? Should warriors toss fireballs? No, because that's a mage thing. Should mages be able to tank in massive armor using their int? No, because tanking is a warrior skill and wearing massive armor is based on strength. Should warriors and mages be able to pick locks? No, because that's a rogue ability.

As discussed though, not being able to wear heavy armor or throw fireballs will not make you miss out on any content, no matter how inconsequential.

ziggehunderslash wrote...
Hah, we're discussing realism in gaming mechanics again.
The international union of rogues is most displeased.

*giggle*

[Xewaka]

nightcobra8928 wrote...

from what i heard in one of the kirkwall previews,  isabela had a smoke bomb skill (stunning surrounding enemies) if i'm remembering correctly.
it could be part of the buccaneer skill tree or the general rogues but it seems rogues might get a "saboteur" role in combat.

Heh. You can't go wrong with blowing **** up.

[Apollo Starflare]

nightcobra8928 wrote...

from what i heard in one of the kirkwall previews,  isabela had a smoke bomb skill (stunning surrounding enemies) if i'm remembering correctly.
it could be part of the buccaneer skill tree or the general rogues but it seems rogues might get a "saboteur" role in combat.

It's part of the rogue tree 'debilitator' as of the Lothering demo.

[Wulfram]

So bombs are activated talents, rather than crafted items? Good news, if so.

[nightcobra]

Apollo Starflare wrote...

nightcobra8928 wrote...

from what i heard in one of the kirkwall previews,  isabela had a smoke bomb skill (stunning surrounding enemies) if i'm remembering correctly.
it could be part of the buccaneer skill tree or the general rogues but it seems rogues might get a "saboteur" role in combat.

It's part of the rogue tree 'debilitator' as of the Lothering demo.

thanks for confirming that i wasn't imagining it:D

[TMZuk]

DSerpa wrote...

What is the point of having so many companions to choose from if you bring people based upon their class and not their character? Why not simply have one warrior, one rogue, and one mage and eliminate party customization? When there is content that can only be accessed if you bring a [class] with you, most people feel compelled to reserve a spot for that [class]. What if I think that Leliana is a holier-than-thou **** and Zevran is an impertinent twit? What if I think that Varric is a supercilious ****** and Isabella is a pain in the ass? Either I drag along a character I don't like or I don't have anyone to disarm traps and unlock chests/doors. It's an annoying vestige from earlier RPGs designed solely to make rogues stand out from warriors. But if rogues can't stand  apart from warriors through combat alone, they aren't different enough from warriors to warrant a new class.

I whole-heartedly agree. I simply don't understand this nonsense we are being filled with, about making the classes more distinct. I want to recruit partymembers based on whom they are, not what they can do.

I -hate- this silly, oldfashioned mage/rogue/warrior/cleric setup, that has plagued D&D since the late 70's and continues to infest cRPG's today, even though most pnpRPG's has left it behind long ago. In a game like DA2, you don't even have the flimsy pretext of an excuse that you need class-balance. It's a single-player game, there's noone to compete with.

It was bad already in DA:O, where you had to drag along Leliana to get any locks opened, as Zevran was hopeless in that department, unless you played on PC and used a respec mod.

The ten thousand dollar question I have asked since the day we were told that classes in DA2 would be even more restricting and confining, is: WHY? Why can't I play a hybrid? I love playing hybrids. I always play hybrids in so far that it is possible. Even ME/ME2 allows hybrids. But In DA2 I have to play a MIGHTY WARRIOR, or a SNEAKY THIEF, or a CLEVER MAGE. Give the mage a long white beard, and a pointy hat, and Bioware has managed to include all the boring cliche's there is.

Modifié par TMZuk, 10 décembre 2010 - 09:17 .

[Ryzaki]

^I lol'd.

[Ziggeh]

TMZuk wrote...

I -hate- this silly, oldfashioned mage/rogue/warrior/cleric setup, that has plagued D&D since the late 70's and continues to infest cRPG's today, even though most pnpRPG's has left it behind long ago.

I agree that if something doesn't stand on it's own merits it should be replaced, but the reason this one survives is that it does have value.

TMZuk wrote...
In a game like DA2, you don't even have the flimsy pretext of an excuse that you need class-balance. It's a single-player game, there's noone to compete with.

Importantly, it's a party based single-player game.

TMZuk wrote...
The ten thousand dollar question I have asked since the day we were told that classes in DA2 would be even more restricting and confining, is: WHY? Why can't I play a hybrid?

Two reasons, there are probably other benefits, but these spring to mind because we've discussed them in this very thread:

Combat balance. No, you're not competing with another gamer, but you are competing with the games mobs. You want a challenge, and the extent to which the developers can tailor that challenge is directly proportional to their ability to accurately predict how powerful your party will be at the time. Maybe you value choice a little more than challenge, but if they can't entirely give you both they have to aim at a sweet spot that will hopefully please as many people as possible, something in which DA:O did not do so well, so it's hardly a suprise they would take several measures to resolve it.

Party Synergy. This is why I say the party based element is important. Well defined classes allows each element to compliment one another, to provide functionality that others can provide. This is the same reason MMOs use the system, to encourage you to group to complete content. It's exactly the same here: to create a situation where it's clear that a party more than four guys doing their own thing. Again, the extent to which the devs can instill this sensation is related to how much they know about your group. You might decide or by accident create that situation yourself in an open system, but it's not gauranteed, and that would be a flaw, making the party system redundant. It might as well be just one guy.

Do I get 10, 000 dollars? That could come in handy.

[Maria Caliban]

You want hybrid classes in a system that only had three classes to begin with? That sounds horrible! Why not just create a classless system. I mean, it makes sense to me in a system like DnD where you end up with fifteen classes all with their own little quirks, but what sort of crappy game would let you...?

*glances at avatar* Oh yeah.

[Ryzaki]

Ironically the class system is one of the few things I wanted DA2 to take from ME. >_> Shepard can hack and bypass regardless of his class.

[Ziggeh]

They replaced the synergy system wholesale on that one, it was a little clumsy you could bypass it with some classes, but that was an implementation problem. ME has the advantage of not having the trinity system.

[lv12medic]

Ryzaki wrote...

Ironically the class system is one of the few things I wanted DA2 to take from ME. >_> Shepard can hack and bypass regardless of his class.

That's because Shepard likes to play mini-games when the entire galaxy is in jeopardy. 

I doubt theres a perfect solution for lockpicking.  DA is supposed to be party based with each class filling a specific nitch so to speak.  I think restricting opening locked containers to lockpicking is fine (restricting it to rogues, I'm on the fence about that), though I do like the suggestion of others which add things accessible in exploration to Warriors and Mages.  Bashing down doors/obstacles and getting around magical barriers.  It would be like what you had to do in the Fade and be different forms to access different areas, just not blurry land everywhere you go.

Of course, with the more cinematic feel Bioware is going for, it would be interesting if things happend differently based on class.  Somewhat like when you have to go talk to Dwynn, if you were a decent enough Rogue you could pick the lock, otherwise you can kick down the door.  I think it would be interesting if people reacted to stuff like that, as in they act confused as to how you got in by picking the lock, or kicking the door in makes things turn into a battle from the start, or you blow the door open with a fireball and half the room gets blown apart.  Something like that, to add flare to playing different classes.  Or if they're in your party, you can ask NPC's to pull those things off, and they would do things slightly different depending on their take on the situation.

So you can ask Sten to get the door open and he plows through the door and hacks everyone to pieces, vs. asking Wynne and she politely knocks on the door or something.

But alas, that is all just more variables and scenes to deal with and would suck up a lot of resources unless its done sparringly.  Though doing stuff like that too often could make things somewhat annoying.

I argue with my self a lot if people couldn't tell already.

[FieryDove]

Ryzaki wrote...

Ironically the class system is one of the few things I wanted DA2 to take from ME. >_> Shepard can hack and bypass regardless of his class.

Yeah and my engineer was most displeased to find out she no longer was...worthwhile.

If there is a toolset I bet there will be another lockbash mod. It was apparently in the game but cut at some point.

[Ryzaki]

FieryDove wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

Ironically the class system is one of the few things I wanted DA2 to take from ME. >_> Shepard can hack and bypass regardless of his class.

Yeah and my engineer was most displeased to find out she no longer was...worthwhile.

If there is a toolset I bet there will be another lockbash mod. It was apparently in the game but cut at some point.

Engineers have combat drone. She has no reason to complain.

[FieryDove]

Ryzaki wrote...

Engineers have combat drone. She has no reason to complain.

A two second distraction does not equal the awesome uberness of Me1 Engineer.

Ha, but to be truthful its fine with me all can do it...I'd really rather have had the ability in 2 as an engineer to bypass all mini-games completely. But then I should not talk about mandatory mini-games...causes book length rants. sigh

[Ryzaki]

FieryDove wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

Engineers have combat drone. She has no reason to complain.

A two second distraction does not equal the awesome uberness of Me1 Engineer.

Ha, but to be truthful its fine with me all can do it...I'd really rather have had the ability in 2 as an engineer to bypass all mini-games completely. But then I should not talk about mandatory mini-games...causes book length rants. sigh

If you only use it as a two second distraction you have not used the full potential of combat drone.

But I won't tell you how to play.

Though really those mini-games were lame. Still at least Soldier Shep does go "drats! A bypass! Whatever shall I do?!?" 

[FieryDove]

Ryzaki wrote...

If you only use it as a two second distraction you have not used the full potential of combat drone.

But I won't tell you how to play.

Though really those mini-games were lame. Still at least Soldier Shep does go "drats! A bypass! Whatever shall I do?!?" 

Tell the truth the drone might have become powerful maxxed but I abandoned the playthorugh became a soldier and never looked back. As far as mini-games go...like planet scanning, everyone loved them. At least I recall Casey saying that at some point.  Ah well.