470 réponses à ce sujet

[bsbcaer]

Aermas wrote...

(many pictures)

This is what a warrior is.

Well, from what you've provided as examples of warriors and what we know about DA2 (and how DA:O was), you shouldn't have any problem playing a fighter in the Dragon Age Universe.  From what you've provided, we're pretty much on the same page with respect to fighters; each example you provided seemed to have focused on one particular fighting style rather than a jack-of-all-trades. 

[AlanC9]

Aermas wrote...

When did I say I didn't believe in character classes? & no I'm "demanding" a break from the Tank-DPS-Healer mantra that ruins roleplay

Back in the Lockpicking thread. zigge called "troll" on you for this a few pages ago, if you'll recall.

I'm still going with incoherent ideas rather than trolling. "Tank-DPS-Healer" ruins roleplay, but your preferred class stereotypes don't? How so?

[Ziggeh]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Basically it's useful for a boss that hits extremely hard to the point that the encounter is designed to force at least two tanks to share the load.

It tends to be an artificial mechanic that enforces the use of a certain number of tanks within a given group. WoW does this all the time, mainly through debuffs that create a situation where having the boss continue to hit that specific tank will quickly become lethal.

[Aermas]

Piecake wrote...

Aermas wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Aermas wrote...
Someone trained in the art of war. Someone trained with weapons. Someone trained to strategize. Someone trained to outflank an enemy. Someone trained to stand on the front lines. Basically someone trained. How you fight is based on what strategy you use & what you were trained to do. Rogues are notoriously untrained.

For someone who doesn't really believe in character classes, you seem to be pretty free about demanding that classes enforce the stereotypes you prefer.

When did I say I didn't believe in character classes? & no I'm "demanding" a break from the Tank-DPS-Healer mantra that ruins roleplay

You should, since your argument would make a lot more sense that way because what you are advocating makes a 3+ class party system pretty usless. 

How is a 3+classes system useless?

[Ziggeh]

AlanC9 wrote...

I'm still going with incoherent ideas rather than trolling.

I'm giving him a substantial benefit of doubt. I seriously can't believe he doesn't realise he's running up and down the field with the goalposts.

[Piecake]

Aermas wrote...

How is a 3+classes system useless?

Did I say that?  I said what you are advocating would make it useless(though i think pointless would be a better word to describe it)

[bsbcaer]

Aermas wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Aermas wrote...
Someone trained in the art of war. Someone trained with weapons. Someone trained to strategize. Someone trained to outflank an enemy. Someone trained to stand on the front lines. Basically someone trained. How you fight is based on what strategy you use & what you were trained to do. Rogues are notoriously untrained.

For someone who doesn't really believe in character classes, you seem to be pretty free about demanding that classes enforce the stereotypes you prefer.

When did I say I didn't believe in character classes? & no I'm "demanding" a break from the Tank-DPS-Healer mantra that ruins roleplay

Seeing how you brought this up, I figured I would ask.  How does it ruin roleplaying?  We know next to nothing about talents/abilities for DA2, we know next to nothing about how points in various stat categories are going to effect combat (such as damage), so we know next to nothing about how we can build various classes....

[Aermas]

AlanC9 wrote...

Aermas wrote...

When did I say I didn't believe in character classes? & no I'm "demanding" a break from the Tank-DPS-Healer mantra that ruins roleplay

Back in the Lockpicking thread. zigge called "troll" on you for this a few pages ago, if you'll recall.

I'm still going with incoherent ideas rather than trolling. "Tank-DPS-Healer" ruins roleplay, but your preferred class stereotypes don't? How so?

I'm not saying my ideas are perfect, but within the Tank-DPS-Healer you cannot play certain styles of characters, & you certainly cannot play a shielded strong & fast warrior type.

[Maria Caliban]

grregg wrote...

Assuming that Tremor works as Maria described, it seems to be somewhat rule-free. If a warrior can perform a strike of that force, why not incorporate it into all combat? Making ground shake enough to throw people off balance requires a tremendous amount of momentum (unless of course the famous Kirkwall cliffs are rubber). A warrior with this capability should be able to punch door open without any trouble. Heck, he would likely be able to punch a hole in a wall. I doubt these are possible in DA2 though.

The same reason mages can't blast down stone walls with their spells: the engine doesn't support it.

As for why not every fighter attack uses it, that's because it uses Stamina, a limited resource. If a fighter used it for every attack, they'd be out of energy after the first wave.

In the world of DA, warriors have reservoir of physical power they can sometimes call upon during a fight. This was true in DA:O and it's true in DA 2.

This is not some new and strange concept that you've never encountered before and must struggle to integrate into understanding of the world. If a runner can sprint for a minute, then why don't they move that fast for an hour? Because high energy activities drain the body faster than medium or low energy ones. It's possible to create a sudden burst of speed or strength, but you can't maintain that peak for long.

In the end it's kind of weird, why give a warrior a superhuman power, that's only active when you punch the ground?

It isn't. Your character shows a burst of superhuman strength, speed, or ability whenever you use a stamina based power.

Modifié par Maria Caliban, 22 décembre 2010 - 07:28 .

[errant_knight]

Piecake wrote...

errant_knight wrote...

I'm not saying that warriors can't have magical abilities--ie templars--but if all warriors are magical, it becomes less meaningful. Personally, I wish war cry didn't knock people down, but as I said in my post, I can rationalize it as merely being a visualization of a mental effect. The more grandiose these things are, the harder a time I have doing it. And if every warrior has a magic sword that causes tremor, then that's too much magic, too. Part of the charm of the DA world is the fact that it's rooted in a world not unlike our own past. The more 'high magic' it goes, the more this is lost.

Well, I for one am glad they are making warrior and rogue attacks more magical and fantastic.  Personally, I find that a lot more consistent and believable that a group of 4 like that can kill vast hordes of enemies, including trolls and dragons and what not.  I really can't see normal, but skilled dudes(not including the mage of course) doing any of that, and find that a lot more absurd than warriors and rogues getting a bit of magical 'out-there' attacks.

Now, if we got rid of the hordes of enemies, especially the absurdly magical and powerful ones, then that would be a different story

I find it far more heroic it they're just people rising above their limitations, but your way of looking at it is completely understandable, just not my own preference

[upsettingshorts]

Ziggeh wrote...

It tends to be an artificial mechanic that enforces the use of a certain number of tanks within a given group. WoW does this all the time, mainly through debuffs that create a situation where having the boss continue to hit that specific tank will quickly become lethal.

I never played WoW but those of my mates in Conan who did said that the latter did it unquestionably better.  I can't say myself, though the stacking debuff thing was used, not necessarily exclusively, in at least two three encounters I'm aware of.  Different fights enforced different things.

For example my guild successfully killed a boss - once, usually we didn't fail so hard in the first phase - that demanded rapid aggro swapping after all of our tanks had died.  So it wasn't so much a question of raid class composition as it was discipline, organization, and tactics.

*though this is pretty off topic, so I'll switch to PMs*

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 22 décembre 2010 - 07:25 .

[bsbcaer]

Aermas wrote...

Piecake wrote...

You should, since your argument would make a lot more sense that way because what you are advocating makes a 3+ class party system pretty usless. 

How is a 3+classes system useless?

What he's saying is that what you're advocating (taking away and "nerfing"  rogue combat abilities so that they're not as effective as fighters in certain combat scenarios) would make a 3+ class party system pretty much uselss....

[bsbcaer]

Aermas wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Aermas wrote...

When did I say I didn't believe in character classes? & no I'm "demanding" a break from the Tank-DPS-Healer mantra that ruins roleplay

Back in the Lockpicking thread. zigge called "troll" on you for this a few pages ago, if you'll recall.

I'm still going with incoherent ideas rather than trolling. "Tank-DPS-Healer" ruins roleplay, but your preferred class stereotypes don't? How so?

I'm not saying my ideas are perfect, but within the Tank-DPS-Healer you cannot play certain styles of characters, & you certainly cannot play a shielded strong & fast warrior type.

We must have been playing very different games with respect to DA:O then....I played a strong and fast sword and shield fighter just fine.

Although, you still haven't defined what you mean by "mobility" and "fast"...you have to be less vague and more specific because your argument just really isn't holding water.

[TMZuk]

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 someone who specialises in warfare. It's all in the name, really.... War...rior.

A warrior can be anything. An english longbow-man, a french knight, a japanese samurai, a mongol horse-archer, an apache fighter, a spartan hoplite, a roman legionaire, a marine..... I could go on.

No, I don't think Bioware does a good job fulfilling that description, but then again, very few RPG's do. TES is probably what comes closest, since you can design your character anyway you want, but also Drakensang, a German RPG I recently discovered, where you start out as an archetype, but from there can go on to learn every skill you wish.

[Aermas]

bsbcaer wrote...

Aermas wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Aermas wrote...

When did I say I didn't believe in character classes? & no I'm "demanding" a break from the Tank-DPS-Healer mantra that ruins roleplay

Back in the Lockpicking thread. zigge called "troll" on you for this a few pages ago, if you'll recall.

I'm still going with incoherent ideas rather than trolling. "Tank-DPS-Healer" ruins roleplay, but your preferred class stereotypes don't? How so?

I'm not saying my ideas are perfect, but within the Tank-DPS-Healer you cannot play certain styles of characters, & you certainly cannot play a shielded strong & fast warrior type.

We must have been playing very different games with respect to DA:O then....I played a strong and fast sword and shield fighter just fine.

Although, you still haven't defined what you mean by "mobility" and "fast"...you have to be less vague and more specific because your argument just really isn't holding water.

Moving in & out of combat fast & effectively, & the ability to drop aggro & to outflank opponents. I have said this at least four times by now.

[errant_knight]

Ziggeh wrote...

grregg wrote...

Again, it is purely my personal preference, that's just how I like my fantasy worlds. It feels weird to me that warrior gets a superhuman ability that's after all limited to simple crowd control.

You know, I tend to view such things as a sort of analogy, as if "creating an earthquake that knocks dudes over" is essentially a synonym for "does something that knocks dudes over".  I appreciate we have evidence to the contrary, but I see the whole combat process as a set of helpful or attractive analogies.

Yeah, I get this, and it's how I can use some of the other talents like War Cry. Sometimes we have to take these things in a non-literal way and accept them as standing in for something more rational to make the game visually exciting. Thing is, I can't think of anything a warrior could actually do that would disable a group of fighters in that way as the result of a physical act. War Cry wasn't physical in the same way, so I could look at it as instilling fear and paralyzing response, but tremor leaves me at a loss. 

[Aermas]

TMZuk wrote...

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 someone who specialises in warfare. It's all in the name, really.... War...rior.

A warrior can be anything. An english longbow-man, a french knight, a japanese samurai, a mongol horse-archer, an apache fighter, a spartan hoplite, a roman legionaire, a marine..... I could go on.

No, I don't think Bioware does a good job fulfilling that description, but then again, very few RPG's do. TES is probably what comes closest, since you can design your character anyway you want, but also Drakensang, a German RPG I recently discovered, where you start out as an archetype, but from there can go on to learn every skill you wish.

*Ding Ding, We have a WINNER!

[Piecake]

Aermas wrote...

TMZuk wrote...

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 someone who specialises in warfare. It's all in the name, really.... War...rior.

A warrior can be anything. An english longbow-man, a french knight, a japanese samurai, a mongol horse-archer, an apache fighter, a spartan hoplite, a roman legionaire, a marine..... I could go on.

No, I don't think Bioware does a good job fulfilling that description, but then again, very few RPG's do. TES is probably what comes closest, since you can design your character anyway you want, but also Drakensang, a German RPG I recently discovered, where you start out as an archetype, but from there can go on to learn every skill you wish.

*Ding Ding, We have a WINNER!

Congratulations, you just broke the 3+ class party system

Modifié par Piecake, 22 décembre 2010 - 07:32 .

[bsbcaer]

Aermas wrote...

bsbcaer wrote...

We must have been playing very different games with respect to DA:O then....I played a strong and fast sword and shield fighter just fine.

Although, you still haven't defined what you mean by "mobility" and "fast"...you have to be less vague and more specific because your argument just really isn't holding water.

Moving in & out of combat fast & effectively, & the ability to drop aggro & to outflank opponents. I have said this at least four times by now.

And about four times now, we've said that you can do this in the original game (at least I could) and that. as far as we know, you can do this in the new game.  Taking out the "drop aggro and outflank opponents" part of it for a second (again, we can do that in the original and as far as we know, we can do this in the new game), what do you mean by moving in and out "fast and effectively"?  Do you want a sword and shield fighter flipping around the battlefield like a monkey on crack?  In the original game, I didn't really have much problem (shuffling  my sword and shield character from bashing one enemy to thwacking a second  before yelling at a third (or group of enemies)

[grregg]

Maria Caliban wrote...

grregg wrote...

Assuming that Tremor works as Maria described, it seems to be somewhat rule-free. If a warrior can perform a strike of that force, why not incorporate it into all combat? Making ground shake enough to throw people off balance requires a tremendous amount of momentum (unless of course the famous Kirkwall cliffs are rubber). A warrior with this capability should be able to punch door open without any trouble. Heck, he would likely be able to punch a hole in a wall. I doubt these are possible in DA2 though.

The same reason mages can't blast down stone walls with their spells: the engine doesn't support it.

As for why not every fighter attack uses it, that's because it uses Stamina, a limited resource. If a fighter used it for every attack, they'd be out of energy after the first wave.

In the world of DA, warriors have reservoir of physical power they can sometimes call upon during a fight. This was true in DA:O and it's true in DA 2.

This is not some new and strange concept that you've never encountered before and must struggle to integrate into understanding of the world. If a runner can sprint for a minute, then why don't they move that fast for an hour? Because high energy activities drain the body faster than medium or low energy ones. It's possible to create a sudden burst of speed or strength, but you can't maintain that peak for long.

In the end it's kind of weird, why give a warrior a superhuman power, that's only active when you punch the ground?

It isn't. Your character shows a burst of superhuman strength, speed, or ability whenever you use a stamina based power.

Hmm... I am not sure whether I understand you.

Stamina shouldn't feature in this discussion if my understanding is correct. If a warrior can perform a single superhuman strike against the ground, perhaps exhausting his stamina in the act, he should be able to do the same against other targets. I think. I wasn't proposing that EVERY hit is comparable to Tremor ability if that's what you are objecting about. But assuming that your info about Tremor is correct, a warrior can do an insanely powerful strike (subject to stamina limitations) but ONLY if it aimed at the ground.

And while engine limitations explain why it would be impossible to punch holes in walls, surely DA2 engine supports opening doors? Right? So given the force it takes to shake the ground, forcing doors open should be a piece of cake.

As for DA:O abilities being superhuman, they weren't really, were they? Pommel Strike, Shield Bash and the like hardly strike me as comparable to the ability to single-handedly create an earthquake.

[Maria Caliban]

Ziggeh wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

I'm still going with incoherent ideas rather than trolling.

I'm giving him a substantial benefit of doubt. I seriously can't believe he doesn't realise he's running up and down the field with the goalposts.

How did you change you name?

I have no idea what prompted this particular thread. I suspect Aermas simply has a vague feeling that rogues are getting awesome stuff while warriors are not, so something needs to address this.

He likes playing a warrior. Warriors have lost archery and DW. Also, he doesn't want to bring a rogue along to open locks. Whatever other arguments he makes is something he constructs as he goes along. As his arguments are simply a reaction to what others are saying as opposed to reflecting a coherent set of beliefs he already possesses, they're going to shift constantly when he talks to 5+ people who all have their own takes on the matter.

For example, I don't think that he wanted his highly mobile, shield using warrior who can easily lose aggrowhen he started the thread. It wasn't until he realized through the conversation that this particular thing was denied him that he decided it was worthwhile.

[Aermas]

bsbcaer wrote...

Aermas wrote...

bsbcaer wrote...

We must have been playing very different games with respect to DA:O then....I played a strong and fast sword and shield fighter just fine.

Although, you still haven't defined what you mean by "mobility" and "fast"...you have to be less vague and more specific because your argument just really isn't holding water.

Moving in & out of combat fast & effectively, & the ability to drop aggro & to outflank opponents. I have said this at least four times by now.

And about four times now, we've said that you can do this in the original game (at least I could) and that. as far as we know, you can do this in the new game.  Taking out the "drop aggro and outflank opponents" part of it for a second (again, we can do that in the original and as far as we know, we can do this in the new game), what do you mean by moving in and out "fast and effectively"?  Do you want a sword and shield fighter flipping around the battlefield like a monkey on crack?  In the original game, I didn't really have much problem (shuffling  my sword and shield character from bashing one enemy to thwacking a second  before yelling at a third (or group of enemies)

Charge in, charge out, shift left redirect, charge in, charge out. No backflipping needed.

[Ziggeh]

errant_knight wrote...
Thing is, I can't think of anything a warrior could actually do that would disable a group of fighters in that way as the result of a physical act. War Cry wasn't physical in the same way, so I could look at it as instilling fear and paralyzing response, but tremor leaves me at a loss. 

Yeah, it's definitely a case of how well you can fill in what's going on with this sort of thing. This specific case I think it depends on the area of effect. If it's small and reasonable immediate I can happily believe they've all just been pushed over. If we're talking DA:O mage earthquake scale......that I'd have problems with.

[Ziggeh]

Maria Caliban wrote...

How did you change you name?

Magic! (also, moderators)