276 réponses à ce sujet

[Aermas]

*steps up onto his soapbox

The whole Tank, Healer, DPS, roles have ruined classes, now a class has to be combat focused & highly subjective to fight effectively. Since when do to tiny daggers do more than a broadsword? Since when did warriors start sitting there letting enemies pound them without reprieve? Since when did healing become a tenet to warfare?

They should abolish the class system & call it by it's true name, a combat role. To pretend that it a class is free from combat role stereotypes is stupid. No longer can you make a dex figher, you HAVE to play a rogue, no longer can you play a undead killing Cleric, you have to play a healer, no longer can you play a Utility only mage, you HAVE to play a Boomstick.

Modifié par Aermas, 11 décembre 2010 - 01:23 .

[Ziggeh]

Aermas wrote...

*steps up onto his soapbox

The whole Tank, Healer, DPS, roles have ruined classes

Not sure about ruining classes, but I certainly agree that the trinity thing is hugely problematic, if only because it's so common. Trouble is, I've never seen a better system.

[Ryzaki]

FieryDove wrote...


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.

...Everyone loved planet scanning?

BWAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHA!

Bull****. If he actually said that Hudson's lying through his teeth.

I mean there's a SONG about how bad it is.

Modifié par Ryzaki, 11 décembre 2010 - 01:31 .

[Sharn01]

ziggehunderslash wrote...

Aermas wrote...

*steps up onto his soapbox

The whole Tank, Healer, DPS, roles have ruined classes

Not sure about ruining classes, but I certainly agree that the trinity thing is hugely problematic, if only because it's so common. Trouble is, I've never seen a better system.

We are about to give Anima with some slight rule changes a try and see how it works out, D&D systems where never good for RPG's and 4th is probably the worst, though it would make a good tactics only game.

I have never played anima and know next to nothing about it, but the concept so far from what I read is that its a class based system with levels, at each level you get skill points to spend on anything you want, but the cost is based on the class you play.  So a rogue or warrior could learn magic, but it would cost more points and make them less effective fighters, and fighting skills would cost less for them then a mage. 

By keeping it a level based system where you get skills based on level to spend instead of buying each skill with XP only, it forces players to specealize in the things they actually want to be really good at, so you can be a jack of all trades and good at nothing, or good and some things and bad at others, but you cant just get awesome at everything once you have played long enough because the level forces you to chooose.

So, to me the class sytem sounds good in the game, I just hope the game mechanics measure up as well, its going to be a while before we actually get the system up and running to try it out, we have a campaign to finish first that we are currently playing.

Modifié par Sharn01, 11 décembre 2010 - 03:14 .

[Maria Caliban]

4e is better than 3.x is almost all aspects.

ziggehunderslash wrote...

Aermas wrote...

*steps up onto his soapbox

The whole Tank, Healer, DPS, roles have ruined classes

Not sure about ruining classes, but I certainly agree that the trinity thing is hugely problematic, if only because it's so common. Trouble is, I've never seen a better system.

Better system... for what?

[Sharn01]

Maria Caliban wrote...

4e is better than 3.x is almost all aspects.

ziggehunderslash wrote...

Aermas wrote...

*steps up onto his soapbox

The whole Tank, Healer, DPS, roles have ruined classes

Not sure about ruining classes, but I certainly agree that the trinity thing is hugely problematic, if only because it's so common. Trouble is, I've never seen a better system.

Better system... for what?

I believe he is referring to RPG's in general. 

Purely class based systems are unecessarily restrictive in the roles players can fill with their PC, and purely skill based systems always suffer from the skills reaching a cealing making it far more productive to always diversify then to specialize which makes roles pointless since everyone can always do everything.

[Ziggeh]

Maria Caliban wrote...

Better system... for what?

Combat. I mean the tank/healer/dps trinity.

[Crimson Invictus]

ziggehunderslash wrote...
Combat. I mean the tank/healer/dps trinity.

I'd say Guild Wars has no room for tanks (agro management skills and such simply don't exist) and has expanded roles instead for healers and protection classes which makes them more interactive to play but as to if that is a better system or not is obviously subjective.

Modifié par Liana Nighthawk, 11 décembre 2010 - 03:42 .

[Leonia]

I preferred pre-NGE SWG's system. Take a little from this discipline, a little from that, some of that over that.. and voila, unique class created! Skill-based systems for the win (Darkfall does this as well and has even less limitations, you can literally skill up every possible skill line in the game on one character if you feel inclined to do so and can have access to all weapon types, all magic schools, all the skills in between, etc.). Hybrid characters are way cooler than boring old trinity characters. But now we're talking in MMO terms, I'm not sure how well that translates into single-player games.

[Ziggeh]

leonia42 wrote...

 Hybrid characters are way cooler than boring old trinity characters. But now we're talking in MMO terms, I'm not sure how well that translates into single-player games.

I'll generally play as a hybrid if available as I liked hedging my bets, but the idea of the trinity system is to grouping feel more than a bunch of solo players doing their own thing. Making classes as specialised as possible is important to that feature.

[Aermas]

The way they handle skills in ME1/ME2 is nice, if they could expand on that & let the character choose which skill brackets they wanted, & have shorter brackets in some classes than others, like Warrior would have the full skill for weapons while a rogue would have half & a rogue would get a full bracket for mechanical apt. while the warrior would get half. They could even release DLC skill brackets, to give more customization,

[Apollo Starflare]

leonia42 wrote...

I preferred pre-NGE SWG's system. Take a little from this discipline, a little from that, some of that over that.. and voila, unique class created! Skill-based systems for the win 

I miss that system. I miss pre-NGE SWG. /deepsigh.

[upsettingshorts]

Starsider, represent. But yeah, I liked pre-NGE SWG too.

[Aermas]

Anyone thought of starting a poll yet?

[Leonia]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Starsider, represent. But yeah, I liked pre-NGE SWG too.

Chilastra represent! 

[Kileyan]

ziggehunderslash wrote...

Aermas wrote...

*steps up onto his soapbox

The whole Tank, Healer, DPS, roles have ruined classes

Not sure about ruining classes, but I certainly agree that the trinity thing is hugely problematic, if only because it's so common. Trouble is, I've never seen a better system.

I think it was Aemas that brought up another system for this specific issue, but it was even worse. It was a system where every dungeon had cunning lock, str locks and magic locks. A system where being required to be a rogue wasn't fixed, but it also required bringing a mage and a warrior with speicific magic stat and str stat requirements.

I'd say leave it alone, rogues are a mainstay, let them open some locks and don't make it worse, by trying to find some equality that isn't needed in all aspects of game play.

That said, I'm not particularly in love with opening locks as a rogue, I have np with mage having an open lock spell. Hell I'd love this game to expand upon more spell usage than combat.

edit: and I have to admit, the worst thing I ever heard from Bioware, was when they used to words holy trinity in one of their first interviews. That is a MMO term, with restrictions implied so that other players can get a group spot.

Modifié par Kileyan, 11 décembre 2010 - 05:34 .

[Aermas]

I made a poll, I'm not sure how to link it. Just click into my Profile's Polls

[AlanC9]

Sharn01 wrote...
 and purely skill based systems always suffer from the skills reaching a cealing making it far more productive to always diversify then to specialize which makes roles pointless since everyone can always do everything.

Not always. I can think of skill-based  systems where there isn't enough XP to max more than a couple of combat skills. And devs can always just put scaling in too.

The unavoidable problems with skill-based -- or at least, I've not seen a system that avoids both of these -- are that a simple system leads to everyone just throwing everything into one primary combat ability to stay relevant in combat, but a complex system leads to unpredictable synergies that blow up game balance.

[draction]

The problem I have with forcing a rogue on the party is from the story telling perspective since it pigeonholes you into either ignoring potential party combinations or leaving treasure uncollectable which tends to annoy the living hell out of me to be honest.

The traditional workaround is of course to play the rogue yourself regardless of whether you enjoy that play style or not. But this has always seemed like a design flaw when talking about a purely single player game where personal enjoyment should trump class balance in my humble opinion. And even this isn’t a perfect workaround in DAO since your class choice does have a rather large impact on the game.

I guess what I’m trying to say is out of combat interactions shouldn’t be straitjacketed by a need to balance out the classes combat value at least until BGII sized rosters and party size becomes viable again.

Modifié par draction, 11 décembre 2010 - 09:00 .

[Augustei]

n2nw wrote...

Okay, I searched but did not find.  I can't imagine this hasn't been brought up already, so forgive me if it's been passed through once.

As an obsessive-compulsive kleptomaniac, I really, really, really, really, really, REALLY hated that when playing DA as anything other than a rogue, you couldn't open a single, stinking chest.  It made me tick.  For hours.  Leaving all those things unopened in my origin(s) and Ostagar was cruel punishment to such a loyal fan.

When I saw lockbash on DA Nexus, I just wanted to kiss the modder who created it.  Will this be an option in DA2?  Or will we have to be or take a rogue with us to get through those pesky little locks?  And as for lockbash, I'm happy at losing loot due to the rough treatment.  I like the reality of it.  It's not actually collecting the loot that I'm after....it's the ability to be able to do so.  I will SO send you a fresh supply of kittens if lockbash is in the game.

/not really (but it's the thought that counts)

Yeah that mod was awesome, I Support this thread! We need Lockbash outside a mod in the core game.

/Signed

[Kileyan]

Aermas wrote...

I made a poll, I'm not sure how to link it. Just click into my Profile's Polls

That poll isn't very good IMHO.

I would click yes instantly if  I thought it was another option to open locks other than a rogue. Mage spell open lock, or warrior crowbar open lock. I am very much fine with that. But if  your post history is correct, you don't want that. You want warrior only locks, mage only locks. That doesn't fix anything, you will still be upset that you have to bring a rogue to the party, and all we wil end up with is a rogue still required, and a bunch other other odd ball locks that require us to click the mage or warrior before we can open it.

I'm fine with stat based story quests or what not. I'd love to have a certain treasure rich area only openable by a super high str warrior, or a mage with a certain skill. I do not, want every dungeon littered with an equal number of str or magic based "locks", just so that we can say rogues got what is coming to them for the exclusivity of lock skill.

[Kileyan]

[quote]Kileyan wrote...

[quote]Aermas wrote...

I made a poll, I'm not sure how to link it. Just click into my Profile's Polls[/quote]

That poll isn't very good IMHO.

I would click yes instantly if  I thought it was another option to open locks other than a rogue. Mage spell open lock, or warrior crowbar open lock. I am very much fine with that. But if  your post history is correct, you don't want that. You want warrior only locks, mage only locks. That doesn't fix anything, you will still be upset that you have to bring a rogue to the party, and all we wil end up with is a rogue still required, and a bunch other other odd ball locks that require us to click the mage or warrior before we can open it.

I'm fine with stat based story quests or what not. I'd love to have a certain treasure rich area only openable by a super high str warrior, or a mage with a certain skill. I do not, want every dungeon littered with an equal number of str or magic based "locks", just so that we can say rogues got what is coming to them for the exclusivity of open lock skills.

Modifié par Kileyan, 11 décembre 2010 - 09:37 .

[Aermas]

I was nonspecific for a reason, I just want to know if people want class equality, I'm not asking for what we can do to make things equal.

[Lord Gremlin]

Aermas wrote...

*steps up onto his soapbox

The whole Tank, Healer, DPS, roles have ruined classes

I say - **** these roles, just get rid of them altogether. Dear god, this **** comes from a damn D&D game for nerds. In DAO one can play with no regard to this role system and that's good.

[Ziggeh]

Lord Gremlin wrote...

Aermas wrote...

*steps up onto his soapbox

The whole Tank, Healer, DPS, roles have ruined classes

I say - **** these roles, just get rid of them altogether. Dear god, this **** comes from a damn D&D game for nerds. In DAO one can play with no regard to this role system and that's good.

You can, yes, in a couple of ways. All of them rather relied on the fact that the game balance was fairly horrid though. I'm not sure that's a better system.