141 réponses à ce sujet

[Sappy69]

Emperor Mars wrote...

Considering the popularity of the Arcane Warrior, I was really surprised when it wasnt put into the game and just balanced...

There's also the possibility that Arcane Warrior was popular *because* it was the most broken, overpowered class in the game.  I know just how useful (or not) anecdotal evidence is, but a friend of mine played the AW/BM combo precisely because it's widely known as the most broken setup - he's the type that always goes straight for the most abusive class setup in the game.  It also had the unfortunate side effect of causing him to grow bored with DAO since it trivialized the entire game for him.

[Felfenix]

Frankly, with the way mage plays in DA2, I fail to see the need for Arcane Warrior. We have sword staves, can do surprising melee damage (if forced into that kind of thing), can pump up our defense high enough to tank, and unlike Arcane Warrior... still cast spells and use abilities. I never even saw Arcane Warrior as a balanced generalist or fighter/mage hybrid. You couldn't do any melee but auto attack. You just turned yourself into a really boring dumbed down warrior. And before someone says "But I played my arcane warrior with armor and a staff, not a gimp warrior." well you can still pump up cunning/defense, use buff spells, wear armor (if you stat for it) and cast spells. So I really don't see the point of Arcane Warrior. Not only is it pointless, too, but it blurred the lines between the classes, and Bioware is trying to make every class unique and special in DA2. Why play rogue or warrior if mage can imitate those classes?

Modifié par Felfenix, 27 février 2011 - 10:59 .

[Melness]

RPGamer13 wrote...

I can understand why it's not here:

One: Every class has specific weapons they equip.  An arcane warrior won't work in this case because you wouldn't be able to equip any of the melee weapons

Two: The class was awesome due to how overpowered it is, but I had no weapon skills to go with it and in a skill driven game that is a huge negative

Three: To cast the majority of spells, the mage had to put their weapon away and there was no indication of this in the descriptions.

Four: The specialization would have to be completely redesigned to improve it and would have to break the conventions of Dragon Age II

Disagree with lack of weapon skills on two because that's hardly relevant. Sure, you can't use Riposte, but you're still a mage and have Heal, Rejuvenate, Mass Rejuvenation, Death Hex, Misdirection Hex, Afliction Hex, Waking Bomb, Group Heal, Glyph of Warding, Paralysis, Neutralization (this one, I actually didn't use since it made things a tad bit too easy) and Repulsion were all spells that an Arcane Warrior Tank would cast for purposes of supporting and aggro.

Awakening even introduces the Battlemage specialization, which makes an Arcane Warrior a good damage dealer as well.

It was a cheesy build, but it didn't lack moves. Nor spellcasting potential.

[darklordpocky-san]

RPGamer13 wrote...

I can understand why it's not here:

One: Every class has specific weapons they equip.  An arcane warrior won't work in this case because you wouldn't be able to equip any of the melee weapons

Two: The class was awesome due to how overpowered it is, but I had no weapon skills to go with it and in a skill driven game that is a huge negative

Three: To cast the majority of spells, the mage had to put their weapon away and there was no indication of this in the descriptions.

Four: The specialization would have to be completely redesigned to improve it and would have to break the conventions of Dragon Age II

1. We kinda-sorta have a 'melee' bladed staff this time around.

2. They made the mistake of making the Arcane Warrior a Paladin/Tank. It's really the problem with mixing Mages and Clerics, you muddle the difference between offensive and defensive magic types, and the spec suffered a lot. Instead of being a traditional Fighter/Mage, it was an overpowered tank and potential nuker, when mixed with Blood Mage.

3. Mage Fighters usually are hampered in spell casting, and should be, since they gain balance with magic and melee to make up for a scrifice in magical potency.

4. This actually could have been worked around in a few ways: A) The standard build can become a Battlemaege, with enough points devoted to Str or Con, or A replacement spec designed to be more offensive than tankish could fit the lore a bit more. I actually was in favor of a replacement, rather than a rebuilding, for a while. . . then I heard that the Reavers are back. . . so lore is looking a bit comprimised.

[Suron]

AW was great if you had the self control not to abuse it's OP abilities.

after discovering it..I spec Wynne into SHealer/AWarrior..equip her with Wardens armor from Keep...a mace and a shield..preferably stuff built for stama/mana.

She's set up as the perfect Cleric. Heals, buffs..I do NOT use cheap things like shield and the toggles...

it's badass setting Wynne up as a Cleric. And in my almost 600hours (according to the lovely tracker in steam) I've put into the game Wynne is a cleric in EVERY play.

and it requires NO MODS...

[darklordpocky-san]

Felfenix wrote...

Frankly, with the way mage plays in DA2, I fail to see the need for Arcane Warrior. We have sword staves, can do surprising melee damage (if forced into that kind of thing), can pump up our defense high enough to tank, and unlike Arcane Warrior... still cast spells and use abilities. I never even saw Arcane Warrior as a balanced generalist or fighter/mage hybrid. You couldn't do any melee but auto attack. You just turned yourself into a really boring dumbed down warrior. And before someone says "But I played my arcane warrior with armor and a staff, not a gimp warrior." well you can still pump up cunning/defense, use buff spells, wear armor (if you stat for it) and cast spells. So I really don't see the point of Arcane Warrior. Not only is it pointless, too, but it blurred the lines between the classes, and Bioware is trying to make every class unique and special in DA2. Why play rogue or warrior if mage can imitate those classes?

The ideal Mage/Fighter or Mage/Rogue isn't going to be as good at melee or thieving as a their subsets, rather they're more versatile.

In a team, they work well at providing multiple kinds of help, but the bigger situations that need tanking, or back stabs, should be left to the specialists.

[Clonedzero]

well the force mage could perhaps have a talent that increases your melee capability with the staff, that'd be super neat actually. plus works with the concept of being a "force mage", i mean magically applying way more kinetic energy on your staff strike as it swings down makes total sense for a mage specialization that pretty much focuses on gravity and manipulating kinetic energy.

EDIT: sorry for the double post lol

Modifié par Clonedzero, 27 février 2011 - 11:20 .

[Clonedzero]

well the force mage could perhaps have a talent that increases your melee capability with the staff, that'd be super neat actually. plus works with the concept of being a "force mage", i mean magically applying way more kinetic energy on your staff strike as it swings down makes total sense for a mage specialization that pretty much focuses on gravity and manipulating kinetic energy.

[darklordpocky-san]

Clonedzero wrote...

well the force mage could perhaps have a talent that increases your melee capability with the staff, that'd be super neat actually. plus works with the concept of being a "force mage", i mean magically applying way more kinetic energy on your staff strike as it swings down makes total sense for a mage specialization that pretty much focuses on gravity and manipulating kinetic energy.

That'd be sweet

I guess the really are Jedi lol

[AngryFrozenWater]

darklordpocky-san wrote...

Felfenix wrote...

Frankly, with the way mage plays in DA2, I fail to see the need for Arcane Warrior. We have sword staves, can do surprising melee damage (if forced into that kind of thing), can pump up our defense high enough to tank, and unlike Arcane Warrior... still cast spells and use abilities. I never even saw Arcane Warrior as a balanced generalist or fighter/mage hybrid. You couldn't do any melee but auto attack. You just turned yourself into a really boring dumbed down warrior. And before someone says "But I played my arcane warrior with armor and a staff, not a gimp warrior." well you can still pump up cunning/defense, use buff spells, wear armor (if you stat for it) and cast spells. So I really don't see the point of Arcane Warrior. Not only is it pointless, too, but it blurred the lines between the classes, and Bioware is trying to make every class unique and special in DA2. Why play rogue or warrior if mage can imitate those classes?

The ideal Mage/Fighter or Mage/Rogue isn't going to be as good at melee or thieving as a their subsets, rather they're more versatile.

In a team, they work well at providing multiple kinds of help, but the bigger situations that need tanking, or back stabs, should be left to the specialists.

The arcane warrior was such a specialist. In Awakening you would give the AW some light armor with a dexterity buff to improve hitting and defense. Add 3 endurance runes to it to reduce fatigue (and for a mage that translates into mana). Give the AW the +4 to all attributes sword from Wade and his shield with the +20 Legion of the Death heraldry. Combined with some enchanted jewelry you'll have an insane amount of health and mana plus incredible spell power. The sword hits for about 450 damage. No staff required.

[Felfenix]

darklordpocky-san wrote...

Felfenix wrote...

Frankly, with the way mage plays in DA2, I fail to see the need for Arcane Warrior. We have sword staves, can do surprising melee damage (if forced into that kind of thing), can pump up our defense high enough to tank, and unlike Arcane Warrior... still cast spells and use abilities. I never even saw Arcane Warrior as a balanced generalist or fighter/mage hybrid. You couldn't do any melee but auto attack. You just turned yourself into a really boring dumbed down warrior. And before someone says "But I played my arcane warrior with armor and a staff, not a gimp warrior." well you can still pump up cunning/defense, use buff spells, wear armor (if you stat for it) and cast spells. So I really don't see the point of Arcane Warrior. Not only is it pointless, too, but it blurred the lines between the classes, and Bioware is trying to make every class unique and special in DA2. Why play rogue or warrior if mage can imitate those classes?

The ideal Mage/Fighter or Mage/Rogue isn't going to be as good at melee or thieving as a their subsets, rather they're more versatile.

In a team, they work well at providing multiple kinds of help, but the bigger situations that need tanking, or back stabs, should be left to the specialists.

What versatility would Arcane Warrior bring that's not already an option? You can already tank a little with the right build. You can already DPS, AOE, CC, etc. What is the mage lacking that the Arcane Warrior would give to make it any more of a jack of all trades?

Modifié par Felfenix, 27 février 2011 - 11:39 .

[darklordpocky-san]

Felfenix wrote...

darklordpocky-san wrote...

Felfenix wrote...

Frankly, with the way mage plays in DA2, I fail to see the need for Arcane Warrior. We have sword staves, can do surprising melee damage (if forced into that kind of thing), can pump up our defense high enough to tank, and unlike Arcane Warrior... still cast spells and use abilities. I never even saw Arcane Warrior as a balanced generalist or fighter/mage hybrid. You couldn't do any melee but auto attack. You just turned yourself into a really boring dumbed down warrior. And before someone says "But I played my arcane warrior with armor and a staff, not a gimp warrior." well you can still pump up cunning/defense, use buff spells, wear armor (if you stat for it) and cast spells. So I really don't see the point of Arcane Warrior. Not only is it pointless, too, but it blurred the lines between the classes, and Bioware is trying to make every class unique and special in DA2. Why play rogue or warrior if mage can imitate those classes?

The ideal Mage/Fighter or Mage/Rogue isn't going to be as good at melee or thieving as a their subsets, rather they're more versatile.

In a team, they work well at providing multiple kinds of help, but the bigger situations that need tanking, or back stabs, should be left to the specialists.

What versatility would Arcane Warrior bring that's not already an option? You can already tank a little with the right build. You can already DPS, AOE, CC, etc. What is the mage lacking that the Arcane Warrior would give to make it any more of a jack of all trades?

convienience really, just look at the reply above, the amount of work required to work around the system is staggering. In comparison, being a blood mage gives you immediant hp-mp swapped magic cost, spirit healers give you access to better healing, and shapeshifter (broken as it was) gave you unique magic. Arcane Warrior needed so much to be built into anything balanced, thanks to it's tank build, making it not a jack of all trades and master of none, but a tank (unless you have Blood Magic, then you were a tank and nuker).

Granted, you did have to work to get AW in the first game, and once you did get it, you could spend time building it how you wanted.

And again, I thought the AW needed work, something to give it that mixed spec feel, without the hassle of insane micro-management.

[mesmerizedish]

Maria Caliban wrote...

When my fighter can lob fireballs based off my strength score than your mage can wear armor based on your intelligence score.

Jealous...




What? Mages aren't OP. Who said that?




I am glib, because I'm just glib. But, I agree. I think an Arcane Warrior build should be (and is) possible. It just involves pumping up strength at the expense of other stats.

Modifié par ishmaeltheforsaken, 28 février 2011 - 12:00 .

[darklordpocky-san]

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

darklordpocky-san wrote...

Felfenix wrote...

Frankly, with the way mage plays in DA2, I fail to see the need for Arcane Warrior. We have sword staves, can do surprising melee damage (if forced into that kind of thing), can pump up our defense high enough to tank, and unlike Arcane Warrior... still cast spells and use abilities. I never even saw Arcane Warrior as a balanced generalist or fighter/mage hybrid. You couldn't do any melee but auto attack. You just turned yourself into a really boring dumbed down warrior. And before someone says "But I played my arcane warrior with armor and a staff, not a gimp warrior." well you can still pump up cunning/defense, use buff spells, wear armor (if you stat for it) and cast spells. So I really don't see the point of Arcane Warrior. Not only is it pointless, too, but it blurred the lines between the classes, and Bioware is trying to make every class unique and special in DA2. Why play rogue or warrior if mage can imitate those classes?

The ideal Mage/Fighter or Mage/Rogue isn't going to be as good at melee or thieving as a their subsets, rather they're more versatile.

In a team, they work well at providing multiple kinds of help, but the bigger situations that need tanking, or back stabs, should be left to the specialists.

The arcane warrior was such a specialist. In Awakening you would give the AW some light armor with a dexterity buff to improve hitting and defense. Add 3 endurance runes to it to reduce fatigue (and for a mage that translates into mana). Give the AW the +4 to all attributes sword from Wade and his shield with the +20 Legion of the Death heraldry. Combined with some enchanted jewelry you'll have an insane amount of health and mana plus incredible spell power. The sword hits for about 450 damage. No staff required.

that. . . that's some amount of work there. . .I wonder how long all that took

But again, the AW was broken, way too powerful for a Fighter/Mage build, and it was better than the Warrior or Mage standard builds.

[darklordpocky-san]

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

When my fighter can lob fireballs based off my strength score than your mage can wear armor based on your intelligence score.

Jealous...




What? Mages aren't OP. Who said that?




I am glib, because I'm just glib. But, I agree. I think an Arcane Warrior build should be (and is) possible. It just involves pumping up strength at the expense of other stats.

I hope so.

also, I find it funny that people call Mages overpowerd. . . that' their job; they're glass cannons

if Mages were squishy, and unable to rain hell on enemies, then they would be worthless

[Maria Caliban]

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

When my fighter can lob fireballs based off my strength score then your mage can wear armor based on your intelligence score.

Jealous...

I plan to play a mage* Hawke.

What? Mages aren't OP. Who said that?

I never said that mages were OP. Tank mages in a game where non-mage classes have no spells and mages are defined by their lack of armor are OP.

I am glib, because I'm just glib. But, I agree. I think an Arcane Warrior build should be (and is) possible. It just involves pumping up strength at the expense of other stats.

In general, I agree.


*mages suck

darklordpocky-san wrote...

I hope so.

also, I find it funny that people call Mages overpowerd. . . that' their job; they're glass cannons

if Mages were squishy, and unable to rain hell on enemies, then they would be worthless

In Dragon Age, yes. Though I'd suggest that in DA:O at least, mage as CC also had worth.

In general, you can do lots of stuff with a mage class. Glass cannon is simply one. You don't need mages to be squishy or to be damage dealers.

[mesmerizedish]

Maria Caliban wrote...

I plan to play a mage* Hawke.



*mages suck

Footnote of Necessity +3.

What? Mages aren't OP. Who said that?

I never said that mages were OP. Tank mages in a game where non-mage classes have no spells and mages are defined by their lack of armor are OP.

I was being ironic. I actually think mages are OP. I was being... evasive? I'm not sure *shrug*

I am glib, because I'm just glib. But, I agree. I think an Arcane Warrior build should be (and is) possible. It just involves pumping up strength at the expense of other stats.

In general, I agree.

Good. My opinions are facts, haven't you heard?

darklordpocky-san wrote...

also, I find it funny that people call Mages overpowerd. . . that' their job; they're glass cannons [smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/wondering.png[/smilie]

if Mages were squishy, and unable to rain hell on enemies, then they would be worthless

In general, I agree, but (judging only from the demo, mind you) my experience has been like the extent to which they're OP is beyond what's reasonable.

Modifié par ishmaeltheforsaken, 28 février 2011 - 12:23 .

[Saibh]

The fun with Arcane Warrior was being able to whack at things and cast spells. DAO did it clunky.

In DAII, you can whack at things and cast spells in a much more fluid and dynamic way. But all mages do it. Every class was revamped to be more balanced. Whole styles were removed (DW Warrior, Warrior Archer) for this. DAII mages already outdo DAO AW in terms of being melee and mystical. Any more and we'd be looking at someone who is literally a warrior with mage spells.

If you want to play that, what's the point of choosing classes anyway?

Modifié par Saibh, 28 février 2011 - 12:22 .

[Melness]

I never said that mages were OP. Tank mages in a game where non-mage classes have no spells and mages are defined by their lack of armor are OP.

What makes the arcane warrior is how broken he can get, not the fact that rogues and warriors may or may not have magical thingies.

Which they arguably do*, Templars, Reavers, Guardians, Spirit Warriors, Bards and Legionnaire Scouts are either blatanly magical or at least work like they are.

*kinda

If you want to play that, what's the point of choosing classes anyway?

You underestimate the POWER OF FLAVOR ® and call yourself a role-player?

Modifié par Melness, 28 février 2011 - 12:23 .

[mesmerizedish]

Saibh wrote...

The fun with Arcane Warrior was being able to whack at things and cast spells. DAO did it clunky.

In DAII, you can whack at things and cast spells in a much more fluid and dynamic way. But all mages do it. Every class was revamped to be more balanced. Whole styles were removed (DW Warrior, Warrior Archer) for this. DAII mages already outdo DAO AW in terms of being melee and mystical. Any more and we'd be looking at someone who is literally a warrior with mage spells.

If you want to play that, what's the point of choosing classes anyway?

Well, warrior armor was cooler looking than mage robes in Origins*




*This is, for serious, 85% of the reason I rolled arcane warrior in Origins. The other 15% is because bowties swords are cool.

Modifié par ishmaeltheforsaken, 28 février 2011 - 12:25 .

[Nonoru]

darklordpocky-san wrote...

Nonoru wrote...

Arcane warrior specialization was learned by a ancient elf soul(probably from the time of Arlathann) imprisoned in a flask.

How would you put this in a game where you're gonna stay in a human city most of the time ? Wouldn't fit well imo,but if in the future they do a game where you go in an ancient elf city, it would be quite nice.

again, Reavers required the blood of a High Dragon, and I'm not sure everyone goes about drinking Dragon blood, even if there are other dragon-worshipping cults.

and the Arcane Warrior is believed o be lost, which is like how everyone thought Eluvians were all broken, it's something that has yet to be proven in fact.

and what's so bad about having a replacement melee mage? I'm sure mages in this world have thought "hey, maybe I could live longer if I actually picked up a sword to stab people with?"

You didn't answer my question,though.

As for Reavers,better chances to come across a dragon than an Arlathann elf.
Chances are very low to find a way to learn Arcane magic.

I'm not telling this is a bad thing,i'm telling you that it wouldn't fit.Now Arcane warrior is a class coming from the elves,but noone said that humans couldn't create their own.But again it wouldn't fit(sorry),since i doubt mages are really "free" in a city like Kirkwall.Their circle is very strict.

[Saibh]

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

Well, warrior armor was cooler looking than mage robes in Origins*


*This is, for serious, 85% of the reason I rolled arcane warrior in Origins. The other 15% is because bowties swords are cool.

To be fair, we know mages can wear armor, sometimes.

[Achromatis]

While I want a spellsword or bard class, the AW was really really really boring to play.

[mesmerizedish]

Saibh wrote...

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

Well, warrior armor was cooler looking than mage robes in Origins*


*This is, for serious, 85% of the reason I rolled arcane warrior in Origins. The other 15% is because bowties swords are cool.

To be fair, we know mages can wear armor, sometimes.

Indeed, and once I got over the initial disappointment, I came to understand that AW's removal as a spec was for the best. Hell, the bladed-polearm look of some of the staves we've seen even makes up for not being able to use swords*.




*which will be rectified by mods

Modifié par ishmaeltheforsaken, 28 février 2011 - 12:33 .

[AkiKishi]

It was boring unless you liked switching weapons you mostly did pre buffing and auto attacked a lot.

Insanely OP insanely dull. Not really all that sorry to see it go.