398 réponses à ce sujet

[AlanC9]

Take away some things, add other things in. Without actually playing it I'm not in a position to make a call there.

[Ziggeh]

I'm still not sure which part of the increased class distinction thing people are having trouble with.

Modifié par Ziggeh, 23 décembre 2010 - 07:36 .

[MindRaven]

Ziggeh wrote...

I'm still not sure which part of the increased class distinction thing people are having trouble with.

well, they could have still kept AW in and still make it a distinct fighting style............

just let Mages increase their melee fighting prowess with their staves...........

[Ziggeh]

MindRaven wrote...

well, they could have still kept AW in and still make it a distinct fighting style............

Indeed, but it would have been distinct from mage; Essentially a new class.

I agree it's doable, and even agree with several of the more irate posters that it would be relatively easy. But evidently, they didn't want to.

I just object to the common and silly use of the word "lazy" a synonym for "I don't understand the reasoning".

[TheCreeper]

Yeah People throw Lazy around way to much here.

[Eldragon]

Ziggeh wrote...

I'm still not sure which part of the increased class distinction thing people are having trouble with.

I don't mind "class distinction", I really encourage it. However what I do mind is artificial limitations and reduction of player choice, especially when we already had those features in the original game.

e.g. Warriors can't dual wield (DW).  I don't see how that takes away from a rogue doing lots of backstab damage, but otherwise being frail. Warriors can still be meat shields that pull aggro with an extra weapon, and that does not really impede on the rogue's style. Play DA:O with a DW warrior, and a DW rogue in the same party. They play very differently, even if they both use the same weapons.

So for me at least, the prospect that all mages are pigeon-holed into  doing ranged damage to enemies, and you can't do anything else is very  disheartening, especially when we had a taste of what the melee-mage could be in the previous game. Of course, we don't have all the facts yet, and bioware has been silent on the issue. But what facts we do have make me nervious.

Because I have not played the game (no one here has), I'm being very careful not to pass judgement. I'm still going to buy the game and decide for myself.

Modifié par Eldragon, 23 décembre 2010 - 09:39 .

[Ziggeh]

Eldragon wrote...

However what I do mind is artificial limitations and reduction of player choice, especially when we already had those features in the original game.

That depends what you mean by artificial. All the limitations are artificial, as are all the choices, and I get why people look at things in isolation and note that something has been removed, but I really think such things need to be seen in context. This is not the best example of the issue as the gains are more woolly and subjective and the loss is obvious and direct.

Though I didn't spend much time messing about with an arcane warrior (it was a bit auto attack), I get the hybrid appeal. In any class based game I'll go for the paladin type, the melee healer, and in open /skill based skill based systems I'll build this way, as it makes for a very self sufficient solo unit.

But that's the problem right there, the reason for the further distinction is to increase the extent to which your characters are interdependent. What strengths does the AW have that cover others weaknesses, what weaknesses do they have that are covered by others strengths? If the answers to those questions do not match the mage generally (and by definition they won't), then it's a whole other class and the game needs to rebalance the other classes accordingly to match this new group dynamic, or just ignore the whole redesign focus.

Modifié par Ziggeh, 23 décembre 2010 - 10:26 .

[Wicked 702]

Ziggeh wrote...

I'm still not sure which part of the increased class distinction thing people are having trouble with.

Because for some of us (me at least), the MMOish style character design of:
Warrior=TANK
Mage=SQUISHY DPS
etc. etc.

is getting tiresome. There's no hard-fast rule that mages HAVE to be squishy, or unskilled with weapons, it's just the way the concept has generally been presented to us through the various mediums. Getting to play an arcane warrior mage, which was essentially a GOD in Dragon Age Origins, was much closer to the way I personally see them.

I don't like the traditional "class distinction." I want something to change that up. Moving back towards distinct classes is a personal negative, because it's too rigid and structured. RPGs to me are supposed to make me feel open, not boxed in.

[Thicos]

only 3 specializations?



Why?



Keeper, please and other new too ^^

[Ziggeh]

Wicked 702 wrote...
Because for some of us (me at least), the MMOish style character design of:
Warrior=TANK
Mage=SQUISHY DPS
etc. etc.

is getting tiresome.

I doubt anyone with experience of the trinity party system hasn't at least once looked at it and gone "is there really no other way to do this?", but the sad fact of the matter, doesn't seem there is. I'd love to see someone reinvent this particular wheel, I really would. I'm right on the front line when it comes arguing for booting out tired mechanics unless they have their own value, not dragging them along because it's felt they're needed for that classic rpg feel. But this one does, as much as it annoys me, its still spherical and still keeps rolling along

So as I see it, you either do it badly or you do it well. Origins didn't do it very well, and almost all of the reasons I have for thinking that are gone in DA2. There are a lot of discussions on this board that come right down to "choice versus (potentially) better overall gameplay". This is one of those, and for me, choice is only valuable if the game is worth playing. Mileage may vary.

[Wicked 702]

Ziggeh wrote...

I doubt anyone with experience of the trinity party system hasn't at least once looked at it and gone "is there really no other way to do this?", but the sad fact of the matter, doesn't seem there is. I'd love to see someone reinvent this particular wheel, I really would. I'm right on the front line when it comes arguing for booting out tired mechanics unless they have their own value, not dragging them along because it's felt they're needed for that classic rpg feel. But this one does, as much as it annoys me, its still spherical and still keeps rolling along

So as I see it, you either do it badly or you do it well. Origins didn't do it very well, and almost all of the reasons I have for thinking that are gone in DA2. There are a lot of discussions on this board that come right down to "choice versus (potentially) better overall gameplay". This is one of those, and for me, choice is only valuable if the game is worth playing. Mileage may vary.

Indeed. Well, that's the crux of it obviously. I'm somewhere on the other side. Fair enough.

I hate to bring up the BG example (really D&D in general), but there's a game where you had all kinds of class craziness going on. It does make the game a bit muddled in general, which is why people may prefer distinction, but I always liked it.

[jesuno]

Damn, we lost Arcane Warriors and Dual Wield Warriors?

[Aermas]

Yeah, let's reinvent it, I've got a few ideas
Combat Role
Sweeper- knocks enemies away to open up holes in their resistance
Artillery- stays back & launches attacks, either many attacks of lesser power or an big attack every so often
Interceptor - Takes out enemies that try to flank you or try to out maneuver you
Flanker - Tries to out maneuver the enemy
Scout - Finds enemies & leads them into areas that will but them at a disadvantage
Rank & File - a so so fighter but will a few of them they can make an impenetrable barrier to the opposing side

Modifié par Aermas, 23 décembre 2010 - 11:15 .

[White_Buffalo94]

Doesn't bother me. My Warden beyond the Fade with his Godbaby and Morrigan should be the most powerful Arcane Warrior I make, and if it was included in DA2 I'd feel like it was repetitve and I'd overpower Hawke just as I did my Warden-Commander

[Ziggeh]

Wicked 702 wrote...
I hate to bring up the BG example (really D&D in general), but there's a game where you had all kinds of class craziness going on. It does make the game a bit muddled in general, which is why people may prefer distinction, but I always liked it.

I've not actually played BG. I have this strange aversion to D&D that I don't apply to other gaming systems. Maybe an unfortunate childhood experience with a Beholder.

I can definitely see that a really relaxed, open system could work, and as you say, probably has, but I think there are a lot of advantages in the restrictions. Balance being the obvious one, balancing an open game must be pretty much a case of lobbing it all in and hoping for the best. There isn't really an objective need for things to be consistent or well balanced, but again, advantages, subjective though they might be.

[masseffect706]

So no shapeshifter? Oh well. It was bad in Origins but they could of made it good in Dragon Age 2.

I will miss Arcane Warrior but Force Mage sounds pretty awesome.

[Ziggeh]

Aermas wrote...

Yeah, let's reinvent it, I've got a few ideas

It's more to do with modelling and controlling damage intake and output.

A good start would be to think of something to replace health bars as a metric of how much a character "has left in them".

[Aermas]

Ziggeh wrote...

Aermas wrote...

Yeah, let's reinvent it, I've got a few ideas

It's more to do with modelling and controlling damage intake and output.

A good start would be to think of something to replace health bars as a metric of how much a character "has left in them".

No it's not, you could make everyone roughly the same but have them do different things in battle. Why in the world would a four man team go into battle & let one of them be surrounded by enemies?

If you are that eager to replace Hp, why not use a tiered system. With every hit you take you chance going down a tier unless a behind the scenes randomizer + Con was higher than the damage output.

Say you are battling a hurlock, & you are playing a character with 14 Con
The hurlock swung for 23 damage, 14 + randomized number + items/buffs/abilities
Say you get a total of 34 on the check, you do not go down a tier. But if you had gotten a 18 you now go from Fine to Bloodied & start taking penalties to your attacks & stats & such.

Condition Tiers
Fine
Bloodied
Injured
Unconscious

[Xewaka]

Aermas wrote...

Yeah, let's reinvent it, I've got a few ideas
Combat Role
Sweeper- knocks enemies away to open up holes in their resistance
Artillery- stays back & launches attacks, either many attacks of lesser power or an big attack every so often

That'd be mage, with CC and AoE effects.

Flanker - Tries to out maneuver the enemy
Scout - Finds enemies & leads them into areas that will but them at a disadvantage

That would be a rogue with stealth.

Rank & File - a so so fighter but will a few of them they can make an impenetrable barrier to the opposing side
Interceptor - Takes out enemies that try to flank you or try to out maneuver you

And that would be a tank warrior.

Aermas wrote...
If you are that eager to replace Hp, why
not use a tiered system. With every hit you take you chance going down a
tier unless a behind the scenes randomizer + Con was higher than the
damage output.
Say you are battling a hurlock, & you are playing a character with 14 Con
The hurlock swung for 23 damage, 14 + randomized number + items/buffs/abilities
Say
you get a total of 34 on the check, you do not go down a tier. But if
you had gotten a 18 you now go from Fine to Bloodied & start taking
penalties to your attacks & stats & such.
Condition Tiers
Fine
Bloodied
Injured
Unconscious

been reading StarWars D6 lately?

Modifié par Xewaka, 23 décembre 2010 - 11:45 .

[Ziggeh]

Aermas wrote...

No it's not, you could make everyone roughly the same but have them do different things in battle. Why in the world would a four man team go into battle & let one of them be surrounded by enemies?

To control damage.

Aermas wrote...
If you are that eager to replace Hp, why not use a tiered system. With every hit you take you chance going down a tier unless a behind the scenes randomizer + Con was higher than the damage output

Still doesn't create a synergy (and is pretty much hp with avoidance)

[Aermas]

Charger- Moves through enemy lines & moves fast

Sniper- Massive damage to single targets

Shepard- Directs the flow of combatants to where they will be at a disadvantage

[Aermas]

Ziggeh wrote...

Aermas wrote...

No it's not, you could make everyone roughly the same but have them do different things in battle. Why in the world would a four man team go into battle & let one of them be surrounded by enemies?

To control damage.

Aermas wrote...
If you are that eager to replace Hp, why not use a tiered system. With every hit you take you chance going down a tier unless a behind the scenes randomizer + Con was higher than the damage output

Still doesn't create a synergy (and is pretty much hp with avoidance)

I don't believe letting one teammate take fire from every enemy is in any tactical handbook

[Ziggeh]

This is like an allegory for why the trinity is still prevalent.

Modifié par Ziggeh, 23 décembre 2010 - 11:52 .

[Xewaka]

Aermas wrote...

Ziggeh wrote...

Aermas wrote...

No it's not, you could make everyone roughly the same but have them do different things in battle. Why in the world would a four man team go into battle & let one of them be surrounded by enemies?

To control damage.

Aermas wrote...
If you are that eager to replace Hp, why not use a tiered system. With every hit you take you chance going down a tier unless a behind the scenes randomizer + Con was higher than the damage output

Still doesn't create a synergy (and is pretty much hp with avoidance)

I don't believe letting one teammate take fire from every enemy is in any tactical handbook

It's called baiting.

[Ziggeh]

Aermas wrote...
I don't believe letting one teammate take fire from every enemy is in any tactical handbook

Lots of tactical handbooks recommend drinking a poultice when your health bar is low.