452 réponses à ce sujet

[eweandwhosearmy]

*sigh*

Specs aren't really wowing me this time around.

I've kinda always wished for a rogue specialization equivalent to Blood Mage or Reaver.

Ah well. Still trying to decide if Rogue or Warrior's gonna be my first playthough. Defo mage on the second run, though.

[panamakira]

I always play 2H warrior but since I tried the rogue on DA2, I've been converted. They're fast and I love how they move around the battle easily. Yep, rogue it is for my first playthrough! Maybe mage for second then....

I like kicking my acid flasks ok?

Modifié par panamakira, 02 mars 2011 - 03:47 .

[Mightyg]

I actually suspect there are other specializations they haven't uncovered.

[Graunt]

Chris Priestly wrote...

Rogues. Many people think of them as merely something to bring along in the party to open locked doors or chests. Sure, they're a little sneaky, but when you could be a mighty two-handed warrior or fireball casting mage, who would want to be a rogue?

Rogues in Dragon Age 2 are far more than "keys to open locks". They are now dual wielding whirlwinds of death suddenly appearing behind opponents to thrust daggers deep into their backs. Rogues are archers who can literally make death rain from the skies with barrages of arrowed fury.

So if you want a cartwheeling dual wieder or a ranged assasssin, you need to consider Rogues. All that, and they also open locks. Let's see warriors or mages do all that.

That's typically what they've been in pretty much every "modern" RPG, so I'm not really sure who still only thinks of them as lock picking pansies.  This is especially true for anyone who has played World of Warcraft (which is a great many people).  They also look to be identical to DA:O Rogues other than approach options.  You also decided to make them "look better" than they really are by simply removing the dual-wield option from Warriors.

Specs aren't really wowing me this time around.

Both Assassination and Duellist were an obvious given.  The third, not so much, and if it ends up just being a watered down "Shadow", uh no thanks, zzzz.

Modifié par Graunt, 02 mars 2011 - 05:09 .

[Wissenschaft]

No, they completely change how the DW style works so it no longer makes sense on a Warrior. Thats the real reason they dropped it from warriors. DW style is all about speed and crits and thats not how the Warrior class works.

[Graunt]

Wissenschaft wrote...

No, they completely change how the DW style works so it no longer makes sense on a Warrior. Thats the real reason they dropped it from warriors. DW style is all about speed and crits and thats not how the Warrior class works.

Are you seriously trying to argue that Warriors did not also rely on this in Origins?  You could play as either someone that relied more on fast attacking auto attacks that were enhanced with passives, auras and gear OR one that used slower hitting weapons that relied more on cooldowns.  I'm not sure where you're getting your information from either, but nothing has been shown in the demo that would make what was true in the first game any less true in the sequel.  

On top of that it's pretty much irrelevant to what I said in the first place.  They changed (i.e. removed, doesn't matter) dual-wielding specifically to make Rogues more distinct and appealing compared to Warriors, because in the first game a Rogue was redundant other than for lockpicking and they took more damage.  If you're going to bother with "But none of the new Warrior abilities would function that well with dual-wielding", don't.  It's only proving my point.

This is also similar to how they make a Warrior "tank" appealing in the sequel: by drastically nerfing health potions and the default healing spell, requiring either a heavy investment into the Spirit Healer tree, or simply being forced to drag along a "proper" tank this time around since they too were redundant, but even more useless than Rogues in the first two games.

Modifié par Graunt, 02 mars 2011 - 05:29 .

[Zindydagum]

Rogue is always my favorite. I'm stoked.

[lazuli]

Graunt wrote...

That's typically what they've been in pretty much every "modern" RPG, so I'm not really sure who still only thinks of them as lock picking pansies.  This is especially true for anyone who has played World of Warcraft (which is a great many people).  They also look to be identical to DA:O Rogues other than approach options.  You also decided to make them "look better" than they really are by simply removing the dual-wield option from Warriors.

Specs aren't really wowing me this time around.

Both Assassination and Duellist were an obvious given.  The third, not so much, and if it ends up just being a watered down "Shadow", uh no thanks, zzzz.

Rogues got a lot of heat on the boards for being nothing but lockpickers and weak Warriors, especially before the patch that fixed dexterity came out.

Calling DA2 Rogues identical to DA:O Rogues, save for their approach options, is inaccurate.  Consult this thread.  Additionally, you make it seem as if approach options are unimportant.  The shuffle step problem in DA:O proves that this is not the case.

Modifié par lazuli, 02 mars 2011 - 06:06 .

[Graunt]

lazuli wrote... you make it seem as if approach options are unimportant.  The shuffle step problem in DA:O proves that this is not the case.

No I don't, all I said was that they were the same as before besides the approach option.  How is that in any way downplaying movement?  It's not, and it's also not limited to the Rogue class.  

I haven't read the link yet, but I wouldn't be suprised if it's a bunch of complaining about how you now have to press a button to get a backstab, instead of it being automatic through flanking.  You're still just pressing buttons just like you pressed buttons before, and you're still relying heavily on auto attacking exactly the same as you relied on auto attacking before.  If anything, it's simply less tedious since the positional requirement seems to have been removed, but backstab already puts you directly behind them anyway.

Oh, nevermind, the link is to the talents I've already looked at. They look practically identical.  It doesn't matter if certain abilities have different names, longer cooldowns or require another cooldown, there's nothing that will make the Rogue "feel" any different at all over the Origins Rogue.  All they did was remove some of the dead zone.  I really don't know what you're arguing about anyway, all I said was that the Rogue hasn't changed, and it hasn't, and they changed dual-wield talents and "functionality" just because it was the only way they could make anyone care about a melee Rogue over a Warrior.  If you want to dual-wield, you now have to play a Rogue, voila, now the Rogue is super awesome!

Modifié par Graunt, 02 mars 2011 - 06:20 .

[ItsFreakinJesus]

shinobigoomba wrote...

Alright so, until you become champion of Kirkwall and get the sweet looking champion armor, you have to put up with wearing those lame ass leather armors with those loin flap things?

I doubt it.  Armor works similar to the way it did in Origins.  And besides, those Xena skirts look fine on LadyHawke, and my Rogue will be Lady Hawke, so it works out for me. 

[SlayTheDragons]

do the specializations listed provide the same perks as in DAO and can we still get two specializations?

Modifié par SlayTheDragons, 02 mars 2011 - 06:20 .

[Graunt]

SlayTheDragons wrote...

do specializations listed provide the same perks as in DAO? and can we still get two specializations?

PC Gamer review person said he got a specialization at 7 and 14 and that he hit level 23 or so.  So it sounds like just two like in the first game.

[SlayTheDragons]

Graunt wrote...

SlayTheDragons wrote...

do specializations listed provide the same perks as in DAO? and can we still get two specializations?

PC Gamer review person said he got a specialization at 7 and 14 and that he hit level 23 or so.  So it sounds like just two like in the first game.

ah ic, i'm thinking of going with assassin and duelist then...did anyone find shadow to be a good spec in DAO?

[Lycidas]

Daniteh wrote...
(feel free to use my sig if u are playing a rogue too

Thank you I'll gladly do.

[Baelyn]

Graunt wrote...

lazuli wrote... you make it seem as if approach options are unimportant.  The shuffle step problem in DA:O proves that this is not the case.

No I don't, all I said was that they were the same as before besides the approach option.  How is that in any way downplaying movement?  It's not, and it's also not limited to the Rogue class.  

I haven't read the link yet, but I wouldn't be suprised if it's a bunch of complaining about how you now have to press a button to get a backstab, instead of it being automatic through flanking.  You're still just pressing buttons just like you pressed buttons before, and you're still relying heavily on auto attacking exactly the same as you relied on auto attacking before.  If anything, it's simply less tedious since the positional requirement seems to have been removed, but backstab already puts you directly behind them anyway.

Oh, nevermind, the link is to the talents I've already looked at. They look practically identical.  It doesn't matter if certain abilities have different names, longer cooldowns or require another cooldown, there's nothing that will make the Rogue "feel" any different at all over the Origins Rogue.  All they did was remove some of the dead zone.  I really don't know what you're arguing about anyway, all I said was that the Rogue hasn't changed, and it hasn't, and they changed dual-wield talents and "functionality" just because it was the only way they could make anyone care about a melee Rogue over a Warrior.  If you want to dual-wield, you now have to play a Rogue, voila, now the Rogue is super awesome!

Its honestly quite laughable that you are saying the DA2 rogue plays anything similar to the DA:O rogue. I won't undermine you by asking if you have played both as I am sure you have, but the fact that you say "You're still just pressing buttons just like you pressed buttons before"...isn't that every video game?

In DA2 the rogue class is all about movement and mobility. I had loads of fun stunning an entire group with a flask then jumping across the screen to attack an enemy just to do a backflip so I could jump on him again then teleporting behind him to get in some backstabs.

The DA:O rogue was making sure you had buffs up and being behind your target...nothing like what we have seen of the DA2 rogue.

I also fail to see how making the rogue more unique by taking DW away from warriors is bad. Homogenization is bad in RPGs....people pick a class for its unique qualties. Warriors and rogues both having DW and archery was a big turn off for me in the original Dragon Age....it makes sense since warriors have shields already and 2hnders that rogue should get DW and archery.

Modifié par Baelyn, 02 mars 2011 - 07:05 .

[Wheeler515]

So when they say "Armed with Duel Daggers" does that mean that daggers are the only weapon option for DW characters??? No main hand long swords? I really hope that is not the case....

[Addai]

Rogue was my 2nd favorite class after mage in Origins, but the changes lessen the appeal a lot.  The archer setup is good in that it's functional, finally!  The DW hamster on crack animations, no- can't play that.  I got a migraine just trying to follow that movement in the little intro.

IMO the changes were mostly about perception.  People who thought rogues were weak fighters just didn't know how to build a rogue.  Too bad the class had to be cartoonized for their sakes.

Don't like Isabela so it looks like Varric will be a staple in my party- which is not a bad thing.

[Lycidas]

Wheeler515 wrote...

So when they say "Armed with Duel Daggers" does that mean that daggers are the only weapon option for DW characters??? No main hand long swords? I really hope that is not the case....

Only daggers can be dual wielded AFAIK...makes sense too

[LPPrince]

Addai67 wrote...

Rogue was my 2nd favorite class after mage in Origins, but the changes lessen the appeal a lot.  The archer setup is good in that it's functional, finally!  The DW hamster on crack animations, no- can't play that.  I got a migraine just trying to follow that movement in the little intro.

IMO the changes were mostly about perception.  People who thought rogues were weak fighters just didn't know how to build a rogue.  Too bad the class had to be cartoonized for their sakes.

Don't like Isabela so it looks like Varric will be a staple in my party- which is not a bad thing.

What about Sebastian? He's the only other Rogue besides Hawke, Isabella, and Varric.

[A5ko]

If Warriors had retained their Dual Wielding ability I would of most likley have gone for that again. Due to them not having this, the Rogue will suffice (aside from the fact is is fun to play this time around also).

[Wissenschaft]

Graunt wrote...

Wissenschaft wrote...

No, they completely change how the DW style works so it no longer makes sense on a Warrior. Thats the real reason they dropped it from warriors. DW style is all about speed and crits and thats not how the Warrior class works.

Are you seriously trying to argue that Warriors did not also rely on this in Origins?  You could play as either someone that relied more on fast attacking auto attacks that were enhanced with passives, auras and gear OR one that used slower hitting weapons that relied more on cooldowns.  I'm not sure where you're getting your information from either, but nothing has been shown in the demo that would make what was true in the first game any less true in the sequel.  

I'm getting this infromation from the demo's talents. DW tree is focused on getting crits, boosting crits and crit chance is dex based which is a rogue primary stat now. Furthermore, theres moves such as backstab which would seem terribly out of place on a warrior.

Modifié par Wissenschaft, 02 mars 2011 - 07:45 .

[SlayTheDragons]

Graunt wrote...

Wissenschaft wrote...

No, they completely change how the DW style works so it no longer makes sense on a Warrior. Thats the real reason they dropped it from warriors. DW style is all about speed and crits and thats not how the Warrior class works.

Are you seriously trying to argue that Warriors did not also rely on this in Origins?  You could play as either someone that relied more on fast attacking auto attacks that were enhanced with passives, auras and gear OR one that used slower hitting weapons that relied more on cooldowns.  I'm not sure where you're getting your information from either, but nothing has been shown in the demo that would make what was true in the first game any less true in the sequel.  

On top of that it's pretty much irrelevant to what I said in the first place.  They changed (i.e. removed, doesn't matter) dual-wielding specifically to make Rogues more distinct and appealing compared to Warriors, because in the first game a Rogue was redundant other than for lockpicking and they took more damage.  If you're going to bother with "But none of the new Warrior abilities would function that well with dual-wielding", don't.  It's only proving my point.

This is also similar to how they make a Warrior "tank" appealing in the sequel: by drastically nerfing health potions and the default healing spell, requiring either a heavy investment into the Spirit Healer tree, or simply being forced to drag along a "proper" tank this time around since they too were redundant, but even more useless than Rogues in the first two games.

were the rogues in DAO able to land crit hits as much as the rogues in DA2? i never played DAO so all i have going for me is info on wiki(some info are suspect i know) it just seems to me that aside from improving mobility, they increased the amount of damage a rogue could do in DA2. is that the case? also, i like that they made the rogue the only dual wielding/archer class. it seems more fitting for the traits a rogue possesses.

[Lycidas]

Wissenschaft wrote...
crit chance is dex based which is a rogue primary stat now

Crit dmg is cunning based so I would not go as far as saying dex is the primary stat for Rogues. We'll have to see what build does what.

[Baelyn]

Lycidas wrote...

Wissenschaft wrote...
crit chance is dex based which is a rogue primary stat now

Crit dmg is cunning based so I would not go as far as saying dex is the primary stat for Rogues. We'll have to see what build does what.

This is misleading...Dexterity increase your crit CHANCE....Cunning increases your crit DAMAGE. So arguably rogues are getting the most damage per attribute as their primary damage stat also gives extra crit chance....where as say a mage's damage stat, magic, only gives magic damage and magic resistance.