21 réponses à ce sujet

[ubiach]

first ! i want to say my english is pretty bad !! im a french canadian but the french forum is empty so i take a try here i love the news concept of the social network ! good job bioware


how you think a warrior can be good with shield ? i love the way bioware make we can tank with the taunt and shield block etc !! but !! what the sub class is the best for this way ? champion ? did you think that can be good ? the party will be strong enought ?

my second question ! all time i tryed  to play a rogue or assasin in neverwinter i realized my 2hand warrior or berserker was more strong at end game !! you think dragon age origin would be like this ? 

i ask question because i dont know what i want to make for my first char ! a character based on armor and protection ! or a big damage dealer lol but if a berserker can do more dmg than a assasin i go berseker

[bodines1]

It is impossible to say which character will do more damage at this point. You will have to play or possibly read the manual and infer from that.



And champion + templar seem best suited to sword and shield, but again, just guessing

[hexaligned]

It depends on how much you want to micromanage your rogue probobly. If you aren't using stealth to backstab casters/archers or scouting ahead and laying traps, or directly controlling them to move behind enemies for extra damage, I don't think they are going to be power houses.

[Baelin Firestorm]

The role of a tank is primarily damage soaking and aggro managment. While warrior will be able to deal significant damage, you're going to see rogues and mages light up targets much better than you. It's your job to keep the flies off the burgers.



If you want to be a stone cold killer, then have one of your party be the meat shield while you take the enemy down.

[GhoXen]

There are some freedom of specialization in the game. Basically any warrior-type can spend a talent point or two into taunting/threatening talents and "tank". However, only a sword/shield warrior can tank a group of people effectively without getting severely bashed up, since only a shield-wielder with the appropriate talent can prevent additional damages from enemies' flank attacks.



As for the comparison between rogue and warrior, we do not know. Both warriors and rogues can choose to go face to face dealing damage: two-hander/DW respectively. Rogues can also choose to repeatedly stealth/backstab during combat for possibly even greater damage, the only downside of which is that it'd require a lot of micro-management.



You should also know that rogues have quite a number of in-combat CCs(crowd controls, such as stuns), debuffs on enemy and out of combat tricks such as lockpicking, pickpocketing, trap disarming or just scouting. I've been playing these sort of games for quite some time since RPGs were on paper, and personally I never considered any adventure a good idea without a rogue in group.

[ubiach]

it was possible to backstab without be stealth ? 

[hexaligned]

Backstab no, You get a bonus that is seperate from backstabbing for attacking from behind though.

[GhoXen]

A two-handed warrior would also get the flank bonus if he attacks he enemy from behind/flank. Backstab and flank attacks can stack their damage together. I am also not sure if it's possible to backstab someone in the face. *ponders*

[HenonChesser]

I think I'm missing something! Where are you guys getting classes like Warrior, Champion, and Templar from DA:O? Have I just not read around the site enough.



As for my input! I see a huge possibility for rouges to drop the stealthy, trap laying, sneak attack dealing overly personally characters from NWN that required way to much micromanagement for the speed of the game. Looking around, especially on the flash game Journeys a see a place for rouges to pick up the torch of the light, low defense, high damage dealers! STRIKERS! Like assassins and rangers!



If you wanted to move and kill, thats what I'd go for, but I'm planning on a Mage for my first to get a easily controllable broad spectrum of skills!

[GhoXen]

HenonChesser wrote...

Looking around, especially on the flash game Journeys a see a place for rouges to pick up the torch of the light, low defense, high damage dealers! STRIKERS! Like assassins and rangers!

In my opinion those are pretty weak compared to Minsc's way of fighting, even though he had only 80 health. The only thing better than a two-hander is backstabbing with a two-hander.

Sorry, nope, rogues can't get two-handers in DA:O, as much as I wish otherwise.

Modifié par GhoXen, 27 octobre 2009 - 03:47 .

[HenonChesser]

Minsc's was awesome. Two-handing is great and all. But considering the team focus of this game and the fact that its play style isn't so much like BG anymore I'd say two weapons are just as good if not potentially better! Considering the way the enchantments seem to be stacking. But I've never really given a fighter or barbarian build a chance in any game for my character, although I did like the two-handed paladin build!

[Varenus Luckmann]

HenonChesser wrote...

Minsc's was awesome. Two-handing is great and all. But considering the team focus of this game and the fact that its play style isn't so much like BG anymore I'd say two weapons are just as good if not potentially better! Considering the way the enchantments seem to be stacking. But I've never really given a fighter or barbarian build a chance in any game for my character, although I did like the two-handed paladin build!

I can attest that in some games, the pure brawling characters like fighters or barbarians are pure unbridled rage, mowing over opponents like there's no tomorrow.

Berserker/Reaver, anyone? 

ubiach wrote...
first ! i want to say my english is pretty bad !! im a french canadian but the french forum is empty so i take a
try here i love the news concept of the social network ! good job bioware

how you think a warrior can be good with shield ? i love the way bioware make we can tank with the taunt and shield block etc !! but !! what the sub class is the best for this way ? champion ? did you think that can be good ? the party will be strong enought ?

Impossible to say. Thematically, I'd say a Champion/Templar is
the best, but others will definately be doing more damage than you by the end, then. Much of that damage, however, will come from your support. Keep that in mind.

ubiach wrote...
my second question ! all time i tryed  to play a rogue or assasin in neverwinter i realized my 2hand warrior or berserker was more strong at end game !! you think dragon age origin would be like this ? 
[...]

If that's true, you simply weren't playing your rogues or assassins right.

Modifié par Varenus Luckmann, 27 octobre 2009 - 04:10 .

[Designation1z6874r0]

Know that both rogues and warriors will have seperate abilities that will make them shine.



Two-handed warriors are known for massive hits but take more time from swing to swing, their damage classification is Bursty.

Rogues and Dual wield warriors are known for less burst damage, but more reliable sustained damage.



One upside to being a two-handed warrior is the Indomitable talent, which makes you immune to knockdown effects so you'll have an easier time with enemy crowd control.



One upside of the rogue is that they get a backstab bonus making all their attacks hit for more



Of course you'll have to play the game and see for yourself, but in my opinion rogues will be more reliable damage dealers, but you will have to watch them carefully. Remember, rogues don't wear plate and you'll have to choose whether you want sustained damage with the risk of one of your damage dealers being squishy or if you want a damage dealer with unreliable damage who can take a few hits.

[GhoXen]

HenonChesser wrote...

Minsc's was awesome. Two-handing is great and all. But considering the team focus of this game and the fact that its play style isn't so much like BG anymore I'd say two weapons are just as good if not potentially better! Considering the way the enchantments seem to be stacking. But I've never really given a fighter or barbarian build a chance in any game for my character, although I did like the two-handed paladin build!

Ah, you missed my point.

My Minsc in Dragon Age Journeys was a two-handed wielding, raging, backstabbing rogue. What I wouldn't give to play that in the main game.

[Designation1z6874r0]

GhoXen wrote...

HenonChesser wrote...

Minsc's was awesome. Two-handing is great and all. But considering the team focus of this game and the fact that its play style isn't so much like BG anymore I'd say two weapons are just as good if not potentially better! Considering the way the enchantments seem to be stacking. But I've never really given a fighter or barbarian build a chance in any game for my character, although I did like the two-handed paladin build!

Ah, you missed my point.

My Minsc in Dragon Age Journeys was a two-handed wielding, raging, backstabbing rogue. What I wouldn't give to play that in the main game.

You do realize that as a rogue in DA:O you can wield a two-handed weapon and through Combat Specialization you can open up Two-handed fighting specialties, correct?

[GhoXen]

Designation1z6874r0 wrote...

You do realize that as a rogue in DA:O you can wield a two-handed weapon and through Combat Specialization you can open up Two-handed fighting specialties, correct?

Indeed? I was not aware of that, since two-handed specialization was not displayed during the character creation for rogue in the character creator.

[Meteo63]

HenonChesser wrote...

I think I'm missing something! Where are you guys getting classes like Warrior, Champion, and Templar from DA:O? Have I just not read around the site enough.

Go to the Dragon Age Wiki. They've got all the specialization classes there.

[Silver Sparkle]

Actually a rogue in DAO can backstab without using stealth!!!!!
Basically backstabs are possible in conjunction with stun and flank maneuvers!!!
So you need to stun or flank a creature for your attacks to be counted as backstabs.

Rogues also get lock picking. Warriors dont. 

CONCLUSION: So you cannot replace a rogue with a warrior!!  and expect to get a character that has all the rogues skills.

Modifié par Silver Sparkle, 27 octobre 2009 - 04:51 .

[GhoXen]

Hm, aren't those flank attacks just considered as "flank" attacks? >> Where is the source of this?

[Silver Sparkle]

I think flank refers to getting behind the creature. There are many attacks for the rogue that do this. Check the skill tree.

[Badittude2you]

In my experience the rogue warrior question is often very dependant on how much you like pre planning. Rogues require alot of management, but a well managed rogue is always a threat. a plausible situation would be the rogue poisons his weapons, lays a trap, then lures his mark(s) in with a distraction or well placed poison arrow, then continues into combat through backstabbing or simple stabbing. Warriors usually have to have spur of the moment management, they get attacked, or attack something  then try to use their abilites to overcome the oppostion, taunting, using mighty blow, or pulling aggro so other party members may nuke from afar. The question of who is better is really mote, since it depends alot of the player and balancing. Of course in baldurs gate two my fighter rogue was pretty awesome.... steal stab and slash!

Modifié par Badittude2you, 27 octobre 2009 - 06:28 .

[Silver Sparkle]

Rogues do require micro management. Completely agree with you.



More so in DAO since there are too many choices.