470 réponses à ce sujet

[Aermas]

 I'd like to ask what you think a warrior is, & if you think Bioware does a good job fulfilling that definition.

[Malevolence65]

A character who can deal a lot of damage, take a lot of damage, uses traditional weapons, and isn't really agile.

[Hawksblud]

Aermas wrote...

 I'd like to ask what you think a warrior is, & if you think Bioware does a good job fulfilling that definition.

Yes. But I don't think, in Origins, that there was enough differentiation between Rogue and Warrior. There was a lot of overlap, and if Rogue is to be a class of its own, it should be as different from Warrior as Mage is.

[Maria Caliban]

Aermas wrote...

 I'd like to ask what you think a warrior is, & if you think Bioware does a good job fulfilling that definition.

A warrior is a class that can:
Take massive amounts of damage
Wear impressive armor
Wield giant weapons with aplomb
Keep their squishy companions safe

They're a cross between a shield and a giant, metal covered penis extension.

[In Exile]

I think the warrior is a melee combat class. That's about it. I have always hated the concept of a tank - I think combat should be elegant and efficient, and the idea of just being a damage sponge basically has no interest for me. I wouldn't have played a S&S warrior in DA:O if the game didn't make playing a 2-Hander such a chore (plus those ugly animations! I just couldn't handle the baseball bat).

I like that in DA2, we have the more athletic and acrobatic aproach to combat, particularly flourishes like the sword twirling. I am aware how people hate that (or at least some do) but for me it makes a 2-hand warrior much more interest. Still wish they would thin out the ridiculous blade, though.

Modifié par In Exile, 22 décembre 2010 - 01:16 .

[Aermas]

So you do not think they can be agile?

Spartans were the consummate warriors, strong quick & cunning.

Every warrior training in history taught there warriors to be quick & not just strong & dumb.

[Ziggeh]

They're the brute force corner of the mind, strength, skill triangle. Either attacking or defending through robust, physical means.

[HolyAvenger]

They should also be able to deal out massive damage in melee at higher levels.

[In Exile]

Aermas wrote...

So you do not think they can be agile?
Spartans were the consummate warriors, strong quick & cunning.
Every warrior training in history taught there warriors to be quick & not just strong & dumb.

Are you talking to me? I didn't say that.

[blothulfur]

Anybody who practises the arts of war, I suppose you could call a rogue a warrior if he can fight or a mage who scraps a lot so personally I would abandon classes and go full on skill based so that we can tailor the system more to our desires though obviously mage craft would need some kind of special attention or intense point cost.

Within their system I think they are doing well though I can't help thinking the warrior should be a weapons master with any object even his bare hands as he is the weapon and the steel merely an extension of his will (the riddle of steel).

[Aermas]

ziggehunderslash wrote...

They're the brute force corner of the mind, strength, skill triangle. Either attacking or defending through robust, physical means.

I've heard of the Strength-Endurance-Flexibility triangle, but not a Mind Strength Skill triangle, (isn't mind & skill the same?)

Modifié par Aermas, 22 décembre 2010 - 01:18 .

[Maria Caliban]

Aermas wrote...

So you do not think they can be agile?
Spartans were the consummate warriors, strong quick & cunning.
Every warrior training in history taught there warriors to be quick & not just strong & dumb.

'Reality' is not 'class archetype.'

If you want agile fighter, there's this class called the rogue you might be interested in.

Warrior -> Strength and stamina
Rogue -> Dexterity and wit
Mage -> Intelligence

[Hawksblud]

Aermas wrote...

So you do not think they can be agile?
Spartans were the consummate warriors, strong quick & cunning.
Every warrior training in history taught there warriors to be quick & not just strong & dumb.

I think that's the sort of thing that might need to come down to specialization. A strong infantry force, heavy shield warrior has his place, but is very different from a quick-drop tactical team. Which is where, I believe, the warrior differs from rogue. I think that, with the classes as they are, it is necessary to create some sort of initial boundary between the strong and the quick, sacrificing one for the other. No limits on cunning, though. 

Edit: Ninja'd by Maria.

Modifié par Hawksblud, 22 décembre 2010 - 01:20 .

[Ziggeh]

Aermas wrote...

Spartans were the consummate warriors, strong quick & cunning.
Every warrior training in history taught there warriors to be quick & not just strong & dumb.

Haha, man, you know were this line of thinking goes right?

[TJPags]

People trained in various forms of combat and with a variety of weapons.



Which includes, to me, 2h weapons, S&S, dual weapons, ranged weapons. I don't see warriors as being limited to not being agile, nor do I think the idea of a tank does them justice at all.

[Dave of Canada]

Average damage, high defense brute force melee. Main stats being strength and constitution. They did a fairly decent job in Origins, though Dual Wield and Archery sort of hurt that view. Leave the dexterity, high melee damage and agile fighter to the squishy melee rogue archtype.

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 22 décembre 2010 - 01:21 .

[Aermas]

blothulfur wrote...

Anybody who practises the arts of war, I suppose you could call a rogue a warrior if he can fight or a mage who scraps a lot so personally I would abandon classes and go full on skill based so that we can tailor the system more to our desires though obviously mage craft would need some kind of special attention or intense point cost.
Within their system I think they are doing well though I can't help thinking the warrior should be a weapons master with any object even his bare hands as he is the weapon and the steel merely an extension of his will (the riddle of steel).

A yes a weapons master, I find it annoying that Rogues get dual weapons & archery, when this practices took years & years to develop compared to simply using standard weapons

[Ziggeh]

Aermas wrote...
I've heard of the Strength-Endurance-Flexibility triangle, but not a Mind Strength Skill triangle, (isn't mind & skill the same?)

I just made that up, I doubt it's an official term or anything. It's probably better to think of it as intelligence than mind and skill, as maria noted. That's a concept we're more familiar with.

[Ziggeh]

Aermas wrote...

A yes a weapons master, I find it annoying that Rogues get dual weapons & archery, when this practices took years & years to develop compared to simply using standard weapons

I found it annoying that mages could learn shapeshifting over the course of an afternoon, when in real life it takes decades of practice to perfect the art.

[Hawksblud]

Aermas wrote...

A yes a weapons master, I find it annoying that Rogues get dual weapons & archery, when this practices took years & years to develop compared to simply using standard weapons

*blink* Archery? I always considered the longbow, at least, to be pretty 'standard'. It's a pretty ancient discipline.

[blothulfur]

Spartans are kind of a bad example, they were heavily armoured and the phalanx is a very unwieldy fighting style and they oft times made amazingly poor choices on the battlefield. Spartans ask not the number of the enemy but where they are is a staggeringly dumb motto, you should know your enemy better than they know themselves.

[Aermas]

Hawksblud wrote...

Aermas wrote...

A yes a weapons master, I find it annoying that Rogues get dual weapons & archery, when this practices took years & years to develop compared to simply using standard weapons

*blink* Archery? I always considered the longbow, at least, to be pretty 'standard'. It's a pretty ancient discipline.

A present day marine doesn't have the hand strength to pull back the bowstring of a child's practice bow of the middle ages.

[TJPags]

Hawksblud wrote...

Aermas wrote...

A yes a weapons master, I find it annoying that Rogues get dual weapons & archery, when this practices took years & years to develop compared to simply using standard weapons

*blink* Archery? I always considered the longbow, at least, to be pretty 'standard'. It's a pretty ancient discipline.

It does take a hell of a lot of practice, though.  One reason why crossbows were developed.

[Aermas]

ziggehunderslash wrote...

Aermas wrote...

A yes a weapons master, I find it annoying that Rogues get dual weapons & archery, when this practices took years & years to develop compared to simply using standard weapons

I found it annoying that mages could learn shapeshifting over the course of an afternoon, when in real life it takes decades of practice to perfect the art.

It is in the game that Morrigan takes you aside at camp to teach you these skills, you have no clue on how long it took, you are just assuming that the instant of game time translates into an instant of consistent time spent within the games world

[Aermas]

Maria Caliban wrote...

Aermas wrote...

So you do not think they can be agile?
Spartans were the consummate warriors, strong quick & cunning.
Every warrior training in history taught there warriors to be quick & not just strong & dumb.

'Reality' is not 'class archetype.'

If you want agile fighter, there's this class called the rogue you might be interested in.

Warrior -> Strength and stamina
Rogue -> Dexterity and wit
Mage -> Intelligence

But as I see it, to be a rogue I will be forced to use backflips, poison, & smoke bombs. This is not the kind of fighter I want to play