276 réponses à ce sujet

[Wulfram]

Saibh wrote...

Probably the best reason is so you don't have to keep a specific person in your party no matter what. Leliana is the only lock-pick that has stats and skills suited for it. Zevran is the only other rogue, and you need to gimp his abilities to be able to accommodate lock-picking. It's annoying to have to have her in your party if you want to open chests and you're not a rogue.

I think they've said it's not going to require any talents this time, which might make it more universal among rogues.

[Crimson Invictus]

n2nw wrote...
I feel your pain. We should start a support group. LOL

We've known that about you for years.

[Snoteye]

Liana Nighthawk wrote...

If anything the chests allow them to help balance the low level issues of a rogue compared to a mage or a warrior via a couple of extra health pots or a weed to chew.

Which serves only to make the rogue deliberately weaker so it can use its weak ability to balance itself, where it could have gotten a more useful ability from the get-go. Lockpicking is a bad case of circular reference.

[n2nw]

Liana Nighthawk wrote...

n2nw wrote...
I feel your pain. We should start a support group. LOL

We've known that about you for years.

[Ryllen Laerth Kriel]

Actually mages do get content that is *mage only* in the form of spells and certain items and weapons. Warriors get content in the form of skills and armors or weapons.



I think warriors should have a chance at opening locks and if a mage can shapeshift into a swarm of bees, a lockpicking spell shouldn't be that hard either. Perhaps a system could be developed where rogues just recieved significant bonuses at opening locks. That would at least make more sense than saying warriors are too dumb/weak to try to open chests and mages just have no interest in using their magic to do it.



It kind of goes along with the other wierd inconsistancies in logic in the video game realm of character classes where mages and rogues can't learn to fight with certain weapons or with shields and how warriors can't dual wield in DA 2. I really wish the Dragon Age series would ditch the rigid class systems and allow stats to dictate possible skills. Or just use classes as a starting point of set, initial bonuses but allowing freedom to make a mage who can boost dexterity and learn to pick locks at the cost of being a more powerful mage. An nimble warrior or a rogue that dabbles with a slight magical talent would be fun too, depending on what skills you could open up to the intial stats of the characters.

[Ziggeh]

Snoteye wrote...

Liana Nighthawk wrote...

If anything the chests allow them to help balance the low level issues of a rogue compared to a mage or a warrior via a couple of extra health pots or a weed to chew.

Which serves only to make the rogue deliberately weaker so it can use its weak ability to balance itself, where it could have gotten a more useful ability from the get-go. Lockpicking is a bad case of circular reference.

In theory it should be because they're only weaker defensively, and so need potion support, or maybe more current leather pieces to get by solo, while contributing dps in groups just fine. Trouble being the Pin The Tail On The class Balance approach. Our old friend implementation again.

Modifié par ziggehunderslash, 09 décembre 2010 - 08:55 .

[Crimson Invictus]

Snoteye wrote...
Which serves only to make the rogue deliberately weaker so it can use its weak ability to balance itself, where it could have gotten a more useful ability from the get-go. Lockpicking is a bad case of circular reference.

I was only speaking as it is, rather than what it potentally should be.

Anything which benefits the rogue in the short term will only make them more powerful in the long, and the warrior is already a sad-looking soul sat in the corner being ignored. The awesomeness of dexterity on a rogue is a lack of balance in the system, rather than a fault of the class system.

Modifié par Liana Nighthawk, 09 décembre 2010 - 08:56 .

[Aermas]

Warriors get nothing special, they need something special

[Karl45]

Should have definitely switched pickpocketing and lockpick around; so any class can lockpick, but only rogues can steal.

Makes more sense and less annoying, but oh well.

Modifié par Karl45, 09 décembre 2010 - 08:57 .

[Ziggeh]

Aermas wrote...

Warriors get nothing special, they need something special

Like a pony.

[Snoteye]

Liana Nighthawk wrote...

I was only speaking as it is, rather than what it potentally should be.

I see.

/contribution

[Ryllen Laerth Kriel]

Aermas wrote...

Warriors get nothing special, they need something special

They get to use the weapon and shield fighting style and massive armor, if that is still about. No one else gets that!

I really hate these class limitations, I wish they were all just tossed.

[Snoteye]

Ms. Lovey Dovey wrote...

It makes for a more unique run-through when you replay the game.

I'd suggest that, from a player perspective, that's not a plus. If you don't replay games you don't care about a "unique" experience, you're only going to get one or two. If you tend to replay games a lot you'll either replay them in the way you like best or explore the game's options, both approaches a classless system would neatly support. Neither system encourages the unique experience but where the class system forces it the classless system merely allows it.

Modifié par Snoteye, 09 décembre 2010 - 09:12 .

[Ziggeh]

Snoteye wrote...

I'd suggest that, from a player perspective, that's not a plus. If you don't replay games you don't care about a "unique" experience, you're only going to get one or two. If you tend to replay games a lot you'll either replay them in the way you like best or explore the game's options, both approaches a classless system would neatly support. Neither system encourages the unique experience but where the class system forces it the classless system merely allows it.

I imagine a classless system is near impossible to balance, and it's not like DA:O was ace at it to begin with.

[biomag]

edit: deleted

Modifié par biomag, 09 décembre 2010 - 09:18 .

[Snoteye]

ziggehunderslash wrote...

I imagine a classless system is near impossible to balance, and it's not like DA:O was ace at it to begin with.

Probably. Alpha Protocol certainly didn't manage.

Modifié par Snoteye, 09 décembre 2010 - 09:18 .

[Ziggeh]

I think it add's strength to the party style system too, making it easier for the party members to compliment each other by limiting your choices to that extent. In the same way MMO's do it to force you into parties.

[Destructo-Bot]

There aren't going to be heaps of locked chests BEFORE you ever get a rogue in the party are there? It was maddening in some of the Origin stories of DA1 to see so many locked chests that you knew you'd never be able to visit again.

I don't mind the rogue only limit as long as there are not chests that CANNOT be opened if you don't play rogue (meaning you have the option to recruit a rogue character before you see your first locked chest).

Modifié par Destructo-Bot, 09 décembre 2010 - 09:23 .

[Legbiter]

I'm a loot hound as well so that means I'll always have a rogue in my party.

[Ziggeh]

DSerpa wrote...

Why not make herbalism, poison-making, and runecrafting exclusive to mages? Why not make vitality and combat training exclusive to warriors?

Mages have heals, warriors have taunt.

Yes, they're combat skills, but they're serving the exact same purpose.

[Shadow Warior]

Book Spoiler
In the Calling by David Gaider, Duncan mentioned that mages loked chests and doors by magic, if you where trying to lockpick it would burn you or something, like a trap
Spoiler over

Will there be something similar? Like having a mage dispell the chest before a rogue can unlock it in the circle perhaps
I find the idea intriguing

Modifié par Shadow Warior, 09 décembre 2010 - 10:21 .