So how exactly do I unlock Arcane Warrior? I have a male elf sitting around in the mage tower waiting for my mage to unlock it =P
Arcane Warrior..
Débuté par
Zenthar Aseth
, nov. 13 2009 01:41
#51
Posté 13 novembre 2009 - 10:13
#52
Posté 13 novembre 2009 - 10:24
Do the quest to get the help of the Dalish
#53
Posté 14 novembre 2009 - 12:17
It seems it would be more balanced if Arcane Warriors actually had to put some points into STR to qualify for weapons and armor. It's silly some scrawny little mage with 10 STR wears Heavy Armor. I hope they redesign Combat Magic so that STR won't be irrelevant for AWs. Being less squishy and able to melee as a mage should come at the cost of less potent spells. AW's don't really have to trade anything for that.
#54
Posté 14 novembre 2009 - 02:42
If I want to build an AW do I need to put points in CON to buff up HP or is it not necessary?
#55
Posté 14 novembre 2009 - 02:49
I'm playing AW/BM atm. last time I've switched from hard to nightmare cuz it was too easy. curiously on nightmare it still is lol.
I've even beaten High-Dragon in Mountains on nightmare.
Arcane Warrior-Blood Mage synergy is too strong. you CAN have 10 auras turned on and still cast GOOD nukes along with awesome crowd control while sitting in massive armor. AW for teh lulz. probably most OP, imba, whatever call it build in DA.
ps. I love powerbuilds. they're badass.
I've even beaten High-Dragon in Mountains on nightmare.
Arcane Warrior-Blood Mage synergy is too strong. you CAN have 10 auras turned on and still cast GOOD nukes along with awesome crowd control while sitting in massive armor. AW for teh lulz. probably most OP, imba, whatever call it build in DA.
ps. I love powerbuilds. they're badass.
Modifié par sacredl, 14 novembre 2009 - 02:53 .
#56
Posté 14 novembre 2009 - 02:52
My Arcane Mage already melts faces at level 12. Lookin forward to getting Blood Mage specialization just to see how retarded the imbalance can get.
#57
Posté 14 novembre 2009 - 09:49
Salz78 wrote...
If I want to build an AW do I need to put points in CON to buff up HP or is it not necessary?
Not necessary.. I've put about 4-5 points into CON, though.. so I have like 170 HP. AW's third skill makes HP fairly irrelevant, though.
#58
Posté 14 novembre 2009 - 10:37
As a matter of fact you are all being too fast to judge. Arcane Warrior the most powerful build?
Think again.
It takes one templar or one spell to render the AW completely useless in combat, and furthermore if you do dispel his combat magic he wont have enough mana to actually go for a Crowd control/damage dealer role. At that moment obviously you could go Blood Magic and compensate like that, but to be honest. Its dangerous versus any good player / strong foe. As the healing spells wont save you as it would otherwise.
Dexterity means that you will hit more with daggers or piercing weapons, and obviously bows. I got 32 dexterity on my AW and when I get some decent equipment that will also help me be untouchable even without armor - Going for a defence based AW. Obviously daggers etc wont hurt as much thus the need for a very strong dagger - which in fact I've yet to find.
Point remains. A warrior clicks an opponent and is ready to go no matter the dispels, his skills are at a constant /Go. Whilst the AW in fact is screwed if someone dispels him.
He is in no way overpowered.
You need to stop thinking about how this works in single player and perhaps consider the fact, that in any PvP situation it would look differently.
Single player game, granted. But thats not what really takes skills and we all know it.
Think again.
It takes one templar or one spell to render the AW completely useless in combat, and furthermore if you do dispel his combat magic he wont have enough mana to actually go for a Crowd control/damage dealer role. At that moment obviously you could go Blood Magic and compensate like that, but to be honest. Its dangerous versus any good player / strong foe. As the healing spells wont save you as it would otherwise.
Dexterity means that you will hit more with daggers or piercing weapons, and obviously bows. I got 32 dexterity on my AW and when I get some decent equipment that will also help me be untouchable even without armor - Going for a defence based AW. Obviously daggers etc wont hurt as much thus the need for a very strong dagger - which in fact I've yet to find.
Point remains. A warrior clicks an opponent and is ready to go no matter the dispels, his skills are at a constant /Go. Whilst the AW in fact is screwed if someone dispels him.
He is in no way overpowered.
You need to stop thinking about how this works in single player and perhaps consider the fact, that in any PvP situation it would look differently.
Single player game, granted. But thats not what really takes skills and we all know it.
#59
Posté 14 novembre 2009 - 11:05
Err.. it takes one templar? I only met Templars in the Circle quest.. and I wasn't an AW back then, even. Or are you talking about player templar vs player AW? If so, that's ridiculous. It's a single player game. It's never going to happen. And even then.. what spell would make the AW completely useless? What spell that a lyrium potion won't fix?
If you want a strong dagger, go to Orzammar. There's one that costs 140 gold.
AW is NOT screwed if someone dispels him. Not in the least. And I mean - not at all. First - he still has normal mage spells.. but he also has superior defence with his heavy armor. Second - he can just apply the buffs again... third... well, you don't need a third.
What YOU need to do is stop thinking about PvP situations. Really, that's so abstract I don't even understand why you're bringing it up. NO ONE else has been discussing PvP here.. why should we need to stop thinking about how it works in a single player game? That's absurd like hell. This IS a single player game. Why would we even consider what would happen if it was PVP? Even if you want to be all theoretical about it, PVP situations can't really be considered due to potions and other stuff that would make PVP stupid...
If you want a strong dagger, go to Orzammar. There's one that costs 140 gold.
AW is NOT screwed if someone dispels him. Not in the least. And I mean - not at all. First - he still has normal mage spells.. but he also has superior defence with his heavy armor. Second - he can just apply the buffs again... third... well, you don't need a third.
What YOU need to do is stop thinking about PvP situations. Really, that's so abstract I don't even understand why you're bringing it up. NO ONE else has been discussing PvP here.. why should we need to stop thinking about how it works in a single player game? That's absurd like hell. This IS a single player game. Why would we even consider what would happen if it was PVP? Even if you want to be all theoretical about it, PVP situations can't really be considered due to potions and other stuff that would make PVP stupid...
#60
Posté 14 novembre 2009 - 01:33
I generally prefer to use AW to make a armoured mage rather then a offensive meleer.
Early on I had a lot of problems with knock downs (a lot of them ignore defence) and spells.
Once you get Shimmering shield at 14 I suspect it would really pick up but that seems a long time to wait.
Early on I had a lot of problems with knock downs (a lot of them ignore defence) and spells.
Once you get Shimmering shield at 14 I suspect it would really pick up but that seems a long time to wait.
Modifié par themaxzero, 14 novembre 2009 - 01:33 .
#61
Posté 15 novembre 2009 - 09:57
You need to stop thinking about how this works in single player and perhaps consider the fact, that in any PvP situation it would look differently.
Despite it's SINGLE PLAYER game I've met literally 1 templar and 1 magic-disrupting mage still I'm reminding it's SINGLE PLAYER game. I'm passing my game on nightmare and I'm still feeling like it'd be easy. At least my AW/BM looks cool and badass, otherwise I wouldn't play him completely - he's just boring because curiosity of AW is it is possibly most uber-duper in game class with correct build but he can't do a simple **** with ANY other build.
Modifié par sacredl, 15 novembre 2009 - 09:58 .





Retour en haut






