Ce sujet est fermé
Grumpy Old Wizard wrote...
YOU are the one who brought up other games and said in DnD and Dragon Age the casters used weapons.
Good observation.
I'm not sure YOU understood the point. In most rpgs a high level caster does not fight with a weapon.
The point I was making was a very simple one. Pure casters are not defined by a class that never uses weapons. If your own view of this is so narrow that the use of any kind of weapon disallows pure caster status then I'm afraid the problem is one of your own making.
I've don't lots of playthroughs of Dragon Age, three were solo nightmare playthroughs with a mage. I assure you that as a high level caster I never used my staff for fighting.
You seem to be confusing your own preferences with the point at hand. The fact that you chose not to use a weapon in any of your playthroughs does not somehow alter the fact that DA:O mages use staffs as backup.
In most games a high level caster does not NEED a weapon. Sadly that is not the case in Mass Effect where weapons are much more powerful than powers.
You're conflating two different arguments here. I agree weapons pack a greater degree of DPS and flexibility than they do in other RPGs, but that's to be expected - it's a combat sci-fi RPG set in the future. Relegating weapons to the level they are in other RPGs wouldn't work. But this has nothing to do with 'NEEDING' weapons. There's nothing stopping you from playing the game as an Adept without weapons. It'll mean you're playing in a very contrived and slow way, but that's to be expected when you dogmatically reject a large part of the gameplay.
If your assertion is that you expect to be able to do this with no impact on your playing speed, then I'm afraid you're simply picking holes. There's no good reason to demand this.
Lol, I can't name any game where a high level wizard has to use a crossbow to shoot off protection so he can use his spells. I'm rather glad you brought up other games because they show the flaw in ME2's design with regard to casters very well.
Was that what I asked?
No it does not. Most of the videos purporting to show the power of biotics are actually demonstrating the power of weapons/ammo powers.
Have you actually watched those videos? I only ask because the vidoes in question generally depict Adepts shooting because it saves time. The actual heavy lifting is still done by powers, particularly with Bozorgmehr's videos.
The adept does not need his biotics. He can go through insanity never using a biotic power himself, just shooting. That is just sad. He is supposed to be the "biotic master", not a gimped soldier.
This is a circular argument. IF you try to play an Adept without his powers to prove some sort of point, then yes, you're going to be playing a gimped soldier. There's a very simple remedy for this, however: Don't try to play an Adept without their powers.
Pretty much any game. A fighter/mage will never be as powerful a caster as a pure mage with the same experience. A fighter mage has to split his stats and will have fewer and less powerful spells and use equipment that helps his fighting rather than spell-casting.
You didn't read my post properly. I'm not saying that a battlecaster will be a better caster than a pure caster. I said that a battlecaster will be a more powerful *overall character* than a pure caster. Hence it's not exactly a revelation to realise that an Adept that uses guns as well as biotics is a better character than one who purely uses biotics. This has been a common thing in RPGs for the last few years. Not really sure why it's news to you.
Retour en haut
