Alice Alive wrote...
I keep hearing bits about DA3 being in Orlais, so wouldn't it be fabulous if they went in a Granado Espada direction? LOL Female mages wear ballgowns with lotsa cleavage and male mages wear suits with top hats and monocles~ Yessiree~
You want proof? Its called BETHANY, MERRIL, and the CHAMPION's ARMOR. Those aren't robes they're wearing, its freaking armor, quit closing your eyes and pretending not to see anything that doesn't conviently agree with your view of how things are suppose to work.Chaos_1001 wrote...
While the Dragon Age Universe does in fact allow for a bit flexibility. It still holds true to the original lore from ages past. For instance, A mage can wear a plate suit but has to..
A. Spend a lot of wasted attribute points in strength to equip it.
B. Gets no real benifit out of the statistics it gives. (IE increased magic ?)
Now as for the whole Dragon Age Lore thing you so eloquently keep bringing up..
Show me ( and everyone else here on this forum ) once and for all the "actual proof" of Dragon Age disreguarding the past lore . Here is the catch though..
It has to be an acredited source that BIoware / EA themselves has said outright either in a forum, a blog, or their main site(s) for the games themselves. A wikia is not an acredited source, someones blog is not an acredited source and a fan site is not an acredited source. Using any of the non-acredited sources is not applicable in any debate, institution of business or as a basis of fact even in a court of law.
In closing lets see the "proof" otherwise, everything is in fact your word vs the lore itself.
Again Happy Hunting
PS do not bring Arcane Warrior into this at all. It was not a feature in both games and therefore does not apply in this paticular "chat"
Conduit0 wrote...
You want proof? Its called BETHANY, MERRIL, and the CHAMPION's ARMOR. Those aren't robes they're wearing, its freaking armor, quit closing your eyes and pretending not to see anything that doesn't conviently agree with your view of how things are suppose to work.Chaos_1001 wrote...
While the Dragon Age Universe does in fact allow for a bit flexibility. It still holds true to the original lore from ages past. For instance, A mage can wear a plate suit but has to..
A. Spend a lot of wasted attribute points in strength to equip it.
B. Gets no real benifit out of the statistics it gives. (IE increased magic ?)
Now as for the whole Dragon Age Lore thing you so eloquently keep bringing up..
Show me ( and everyone else here on this forum ) once and for all the "actual proof" of Dragon Age disreguarding the past lore . Here is the catch though..
It has to be an acredited source that BIoware / EA themselves has said outright either in a forum, a blog, or their main site(s) for the games themselves. A wikia is not an acredited source, someones blog is not an acredited source and a fan site is not an acredited source. Using any of the non-acredited sources is not applicable in any debate, institution of business or as a basis of fact even in a court of law.
In closing lets see the "proof" otherwise, everything is in fact your word vs the lore itself.
Again Happy Hunting
PS do not bring Arcane Warrior into this at all. It was not a feature in both games and therefore does not apply in this paticular "chat"
Mage Hawke's Champion Armor, no robes here, its a mash up of plate armor, chainmail, and heavy leather. To top it off, he has a sword attached to his mage's staff, where does that fit into your lore? Oh wait, it doesn't.
And Bethany... Oh, oh my, thats no apron, she's wearing chainmail! Mages can't wear chainmail, I guess someone should tell Bethany to put down that staff and pick up a sword huh?
Then theres Merril, she's even worse, she's decked out in chainmail from the neck down with leather forearm and leg wrappings to boot! I guess no one told her she's actually supposed to be a blood rogue? We won't even mention Merril's post romance plate armor outfit, cause that would make her a blood warrior at that point.
I can further refute your claims by simply flipping the question around on you, at what point did Bioware ever state that they had any attention of following traditional fantasy lore within the Dragon Age world? I can answer that! They've never stated anything like that and so you can not simply assume that they follow your idea of fantasy lore.
But frankly I'm tired of your stuborn, "but thats the way its always been" argument. Its a logical fallacy to argue tradition for the sake of tradition alone and while offering no supporting facts as to why the tradition is even still valid within the given context.
Chaos_1001 wrote...
Links of proof the way I described or plainly put your argument does not hold water and you are indeed talking out your behind !
Modifié par hakwea, 29 mars 2011 - 02:21 .
hakwea wrote...
Chaos_1001 wrote...
Links of proof the way I described or plainly put your argument does not hold water and you are indeed talking out your behind !
The game itself is all the proof that is needed to show what the rules of the game's fantasy world are. The rules of dragonage clearly show in DA2, and DA:O that mages aren't restricted to robes and/or cloth-only. That is all the proof that is needed to counter any argument you make of DnD and Tolkien Rules being in effect in this fantasy setting.
And arcane warrior is indeed proof because it is a part of the lore of both games. But lets play it your way. Prove that mages are restricted to just cloth robes. You haven't provided any proof that mages are so restricted that meets your guideline of proof you want for showing that they aren't. So heres your chance to prove that they are following the same guidelines you are setting forth for everyone else.
Proof by your criteria, since its an screenshot from in-game and thus comes from Bioware themselves:
Merril is wearing Metal, Leather, and Cloth. If you don't trust the validity of my cropped screenshot. Load a save of Dragon age and go to merril's house and inspect her outfit yourself. I can gaurentee you the authenticity of my screenshot (her outfit changes to something different if you romance her)
Also Note the follow:
http://dragonage.bio...d/classes/mage/ shows a mage wearing metal and cloth. No robe.
http://dragonage.bio...racters/anders/ shows anders wearing leather and cloth, but the cloth is a robe.
One more:
Bought off the mage goods vendor in the gallows in act 3. Battle mage Armaments. A clearly non-cloth, non-robe armor designed by bioware for mages.
Chaos_1001 wrote...
Merrill's "outfit" is not a full chainmail suit. It is not a plate suit either. In fact it is a hybrid suit made of many components mostly favoring cloth. Take a very close look at it. Where is the bulk of the metal pieces you keep saying "breaks the lore all-together " ? Not in the chest or arms. Which again prooves me right on this.
Chaos_1001 wrote...
The problem with it is this, That particular piece of armor had no class in mind really. It was in fact only there to help players on a nightmare difficulty encounter which is also in the third act, The High Dragon. The entire team need buffed to teeth in fire resistance gear for that encounter. That was what that piece was made for.And yes a warrior or rogue coud have worn it. To further justify them wearing it is the player needs the following for that encounter on Nightmare difficulty..
Chaos_1001 wrote...
A. as close as you can get to 95% fire resist for each party member
B. lots and lots of potions lyrium and health ( which is more effective with 25+ magic attribute henceforth the requirement )
C. extra armor on your character to help with the adds that are very deadly in the last 25% of the encounter
D.
Very balanced statistics in stamina pool for non-mages ( to effectively
last longer in delivering your attacks on the mob(s) in that encounter
henceforth the 25 willpower requirement on that piece) .
How does proving that mages in Dragon age can wear metal and aren't resticted to cloth proves your point that they are? Merril invalidates your point that dragon age uses the classical fantasy restriction for mages.Chaos_1001 wrote...
The first item you mentioned your proof agreed with me, next point also agrees with me and the last point is a "special scenario" item tailored for one encounter which is not a "mage only" item at all.
Chaos_1001 wrote...
In closing be sure of your facts on your presentation. I can see you indeed put effort into your version of proof instead of pulling your ideas out of thin-air. On that note though also be sure of what you are talking about is indeed fact and not interpretation / opinion.
Modifié par hakwea, 29 mars 2011 - 05:09 .
hakwea wrote...
Chaos_1001 wrote...
Merrill's "outfit" is not a full chainmail suit. It is not a plate suit either. In fact it is a hybrid suit made of many components mostly favoring cloth. Take a very close look at it. Where is the bulk of the metal pieces you keep saying "breaks the lore all-together " ? Not in the chest or arms. Which again prooves me right on this.
Did you actually look at the image? 90% of her arm is covered in chain-mail. With a leather arm guard ontop of her fore arm. The only part of her arm that isn't covered in metal is the bend at the elbow. The chainmail also doesn't stop at her arm, it is a full suit. The green cloth is just a smock/poncho that sits over the chain mail.
The metal invalidates the reason for robes that you keep trying to say exists for Dragon age. Any metal does as well since that invalidates you stating mages have to wear robes due to "fantasy lore".Chaos_1001 wrote...
The problem with it is this, That particular piece of armor had no class in mind really. It was in fact only there to help players on a nightmare difficulty encounter which is also in the third act, The High Dragon. The entire team need buffed to teeth in fire resistance gear for that encounter. That was what that piece was made for.And yes a warrior or rogue coud have worn it. To further justify them wearing it is the player needs the following for that encounter on Nightmare difficulty..
Did you actually look at the images? The battle-mage armaments does not provide any fire resistence. It provides magic resistence, which is beneficial to most encounters not just one nightmare encounter. Also a warrior or rogue can't equip it because it requires 25 magic and 25 willpower in order to equip. While a warrior or rogue might have 25 willpower they certainly won't have 25 magic. That still doesn't stop the fact that it is a bioware created item that shows mages can wear Metal. It proves the point that Dragon age does not hold to the "magic users have to wear robes and no metal or leather".
And to meet the proof requirement, where is your proof that armor piece was made for everyone with no class in mind? Provide facts and not your opinion.Chaos_1001 wrote...
A. as close as you can get to 95% fire resist for each party member
B. lots and lots of potions lyrium and health ( which is more effective with 25+ magic attribute henceforth the requirement )
C. extra armor on your character to help with the adds that are very deadly in the last 25% of the encounter
D.
Very balanced statistics in stamina pool for non-mages ( to effectively
last longer in delivering your attacks on the mob(s) in that encounter
henceforth the 25 willpower requirement on that piece) .
Again you seem to not understand the mechanics of DA2. The suit provides magic resistence which would only help against magic fire attacks. It doesn't provide any inherent fire resistence. If the high dragon's fire isn't classified as magic that armor would provide 0% fire resistence.
Potions are not increased by the characters magic attribute, let alone a health potion doing such.
The piece of armor adds to defense, not armor. Defense allows you to "dodge" attacks. Armor provides mitigation to damage taken.
All items in DA2 that increase mana also increase stamina so your point is moot. Also it requires 25 magic not just 25 willpower so non-mages won't be using that armor. If we used the logic from your point D then mages indeed are meant for any armor in the game because even a warriors armor has "Very balanced staistics in mana pool" since anything that increases stamina (which warrior armor has) increases mana.How does proving that mages in Dragon age can wear metal and aren't resticted to cloth proves your point that they are? Merril invalidates your point that dragon age uses the classical fantasy restriction for mages.Chaos_1001 wrote...
The first item you mentioned your proof agreed with me, next point also agrees with me and the last point is a "special scenario" item tailored for one encounter which is not a "mage only" item at all.Chaos_1001 wrote...
In closing be sure of your facts on your presentation. I can see you indeed put effort into your version of proof instead of pulling your ideas out of thin-air. On that note though also be sure of what you are talking about is indeed fact and not interpretation / opinion.
Please provide facts for your side. You have provide Zero facts to back up any of your claims while dismissing everyone. You also don't seem to understand the mechanics of Dragon age 2 since you continue to post misinformation about the way they work. And you also seem to fail to grasp the english language since you think everything proves your point.
Everything you have posted in this thread is your ignorant opinion.
Modifié par Chaos_1001, 29 mars 2011 - 05:38 .
Modifié par Dark83, 29 mars 2011 - 06:24 .
Dark83 wrote...
Mages don't have to wear robes. They just do because it's easier to cast spells in lighter armor (as per the DA:O Codex entry on armor). Even in DA2, they don't have the strength and endurance to wander around in heavy armor - unless they train for it.
Nothing is stopping you from making your mage buff enough to wear armor. This is consistant with lore as well as reality - you want to wear heavy armor, you need to get in shape.
With regard to "D&D rules", D&D wizards haven't had to wear only robes for over a decade now.
I'm still more concerned about my lack of a pointy hat and staff with a knob on the end.
You are indeed awesome !
Oghren: So... mage, huh? What's it like?
Anders: To have all this power at my fingertips?
Oghren: No. To always have to wear a skirt? (Laughs)
Anders: Oh, you don't know the story behind the robes? You know how strict things are in the Circle, right? Of course you do. Well, the robes make quick trysts in the corner easy. No laces or buttons. You're done before the templars catch on.
Oghren: Really?
Anders: Just ask anyone.
Chaos_1001 wrote...
The only thing you have provided in your part of the debate here is a picture of Merrill . We addressed that. You disagreed with me a basically said I was full of it. I'm ok with a disagreement but what you are doing ,not so much. You are throwing a mixture of hatred and quasi game mechanics in my face to make yourself "appear intelligent" it quite honestly is not working.
Chaos_1001 wrote...
Here is an example of how "proof" is really delivered...
Magic attribute--
increases spellpowerby 1 for each point purchased
increases effectiveness of potions, poultices and salves
contributes to mental resistances
Directly quoted from none other than the strategy guide GO LOOK IT UP
Chaos_1001 wrote...
You showed a picture which in fact Bioware / EA never mentioned one damn time what it was actually made of in the first place. You are going with an assumption on that alone. The other points you honestly are completly full of bs. I gave you actual acredited proof of why you are in fact full of bs. You honestly have no clue as to how the game mechannics work in their entirety and "attempted" to use your lack of knowledge and arrogance to your advantage. It backfired big time.
Modifié par hakwea, 29 mars 2011 - 07:19 .
Modifié par Lumikki, 29 mars 2011 - 07:25 .
planed scaped wrote...
Tolkien forever changed the perception of Elves, Dwarves, Wizards and Orcs.
The Witcher got away from stereotypical Elves and Dwarves, Dragon Age got away from stereotypical Wizards.
Modifié par Medhia Nox, 29 mars 2011 - 07:44 .
Raanz wrote...
because when Tolkien penned The Hobbit (1937) and LotR he envisioned his mages with long flowing robes and long staffs. Other authors and creators just take that as a guideline and go with it.
I am on the side of no robes...give the mages a better wardrobe!
Medhia Nox wrote...
Mages wear robes because real world occultism is closer to religious worship than it is to the secular, fantasy science knock-off magic has become.
Robes are/were totally ceremonial in nearly all ritualistic forms of magic. Though they do come in various forms - from the heavy leather and fur "robes" of the Native American shaman, to the togas of Greek Thaumaturgists, to the full on, ornate robes of Taoist sorcerers.
Robes are a very functional form of clothing - easy to maintain and create. I also imagine that in many climates they were "over garments" in the colder months - but, in the warmer months they breathed well (that's just me trying to think through it - I have no idea if they were used for this reason).
Ultimately - it has nothing to do with "Tolkien". Ceremonial magicians throughout real world occult lore (and, honestly - many, many people throughout civilization in general) resorted to the use of robes out of a functionality in their practices.
Modifié par Raanz, 29 mars 2011 - 07:48 .
Medhia Nox wrote...
. (Kinda like Twilight is bastardizing vampires).
Modifié par planed scaped, 29 mars 2011 - 07:49 .
Medhia Nox wrote...
@Raanz - you may disagree with me all you like. The only thing Tolkien invented were orcs... and even they come from "Orcus" which was an obscure Roman god of the Underworld.
Robert E. Howard wrote Conan a few years before Tolkien - and his wizards wear robes too. They wear robes - because both Tolkien and Howard studied occultism of the real world.
Merlin wears robes in Arthurian legends. So does Moses (potentially a wizard). As do the magician-priests of Egypt (again, much more stylized than what we're used to) - and I already suggested some others.
The use of robes by "wise-men" is a nearly universal theme pre-dating Tolkien by thousands of years.
Retour en haut