173 réponses à ce sujet

[Sister Helen]

Cutlass Jack wrote...

There is this guy at Ostragar...a knight who stands directly across from the Ash Warrior guy...who's entire purpose in life is to tattle on you for failing a Pickpocket attempt. Even if he can't see it it, he mystically knows if you fail and leaps into action. Like the Terminator he can't be stopped or reasoned with.

... (snip) ...

I was really hoping I could fix the Tattle-Knight up with the Crazy-Elf from the Alienage who's entire purpose in life is to rat you out for killing the Arl's son. "IT WAS THEM!!!!"

I LOVED that scene with the crazy-elf lady who tattles on The Bride for killing the Arl's son.  It was so unexpected! What a jealous hag.

And the bonus was that it led to Duncan's ponderous pronouncement as they drag your companion away to jail that he will not conscript your buddy into the Wardens: "WE are not a charity organization." and "He's safer there."  Those lines gave me a whole new appreciation of the complexity of Duncan. 

Err, back on topic.  Yes, please allow pickpocketing and other skills for DA3. *cough

Modifié par Sister Helen, 11 juin 2011 - 03:10 .

[caridounette]

Skills do not have to be based on a lot of numbers. I know many ppl think skills arent used often enough and crafting slows the game. But having access to a few skills from a larger list gives opportunity is an easy way to create some background for a character. No need to invest multiple points ( are you specialized in crafting blue potions or red ones? ) or invent complex mechanisms for each skills. It could simply be on a yes/no basis.

For example if you took the potion crafing skill then you dont have to buy them. No gathering or complex crafting interface needed. Other skills could be linked to the story and let you change the outcome of some situations. A combat mastery feat could let you duel some one, survival could mean you manage to save a character lost in a forest.

Feat like 'combat mastery = 20% more dmg' arent bad but i dont think they bring that much to a game since we can select the difficulty setting we prefer. Its a very forgetable skill: drop your points in there and move on. On the other hand, linking skills to the story or to specific actions you can perform (ex: pickpocket) means getting something out of it. It fleashes out the character and makes playthroughsdiffrent from another which encourages replayability.

(hope my English is readable)

[Sidney]

Pasquale1234 wrote...
To me, it makes the characters seem more filled out, more well-rounded, more than simple combatants and mercenaries.  I rather liked the fact that the DA2 companions had lives outside of adventuring with Hawke.  And I really loved the campfire song Leliana sang in DAO - it brought home her characterization as a bard who had been trained in music, dance, theatre.... and gave more meaning to the Song of Valor buff.

For alll the "It fleshes them out" types no it really doesn't. It is more about what they do than who they are and the former has nothing to do with the latter. The fact that your mage knows alchemy doesn't change who is he or tell you anything about his personality or who they are anymore than "archer" does.

Still if "what they do" is what you are into let the game have to pick a bunch of non-combat background traits. Farmer, reader, whittler, musician, artist, athelete type things. Have them affect a conversation here and there or be needed for some sort of knowledge check in the game but not be silly things that affect stats in game. You get character depth w/o adding a broken game mechanism like more inventory and a lousy "crafting" mini-game.

[Foolsfolly]

This is directed at the OP.

Stealing - A lot of people with rogues have been complaining about the removal of this. So, why not just throw it back in? It doesn't even need any changes.

It needs a shorter cool down than it had in Origins.

I'm fine with any and all suggestions here as long as that talent that gave you more Tactics options stays out of future games. I like the DA2 route there where the character's level determines the amount of tactics.

[caridounette]

Sidney wrote...

For alll the "It fleshes them out" types no it really doesn't. It is more about what they do than who they are and the former has nothing to do with the latter. The fact that your mage knows alchemy doesn't change who is he or tell you anything about his personality or who they are anymore than "archer" does.

Still if "what they do" is what you are into let the game have to pick a bunch of non-combat background traits. Farmer, reader, whittler, musician, artist, athelete type things. Have them affect a conversation here and there or be needed for some sort of knowledge check in the game but not be silly things that affect stats in game. You get character depth w/o adding a broken game mechanism like more inventory and a lousy "crafting" mini-game.

Im right there with you with not needing more broken mechanisms and minigames. When i feel the need for a story driven experience i play a RPG (or action rpg). I understand at a time in gaming history there werent many mini-games and incluing them in bigger game was nice. Now we have facebook. But where i disagree is about 'what you do' not fleshing your background. I think choosing skills (story related ones, not +20%dmg) gives you a great opportunity to think on your character. For example if i select pickpocket, then i can determine (in my head of course) what sorts of moral my character would fallow... who would she steal from? why/how did she learn that skill? Of course simply picking the skill doesnt automatically give you a background (youre the one roleplaying after all). But it lets you choose parts of background that you want to have an influence on that character's future actions in the game.

[Pasquale1234]

Sidney wrote...

Pasquale1234 wrote...
To me, it makes the characters seem more filled out, more well-rounded, more than simple combatants and mercenaries.  I rather liked the fact that the DA2 companions had lives outside of adventuring with Hawke.  And I really loved the campfire song Leliana sang in DAO - it brought home her characterization as a bard who had been trained in music, dance, theatre.... and gave more meaning to the Song of Valor buff.

For alll the "It fleshes them out" types no it really doesn't. It is more about what they do than who they are and the former has nothing to do with the latter. The fact that your mage knows alchemy doesn't change who is he or tell you anything about his personality or who they are anymore than "archer" does.

Still if "what they do" is what you are into let the game have to pick a bunch of non-combat background traits. Farmer, reader, whittler, musician, artist, athelete type things. Have them affect a conversation here and there or be needed for some sort of knowledge check in the game but not be silly things that affect stats in game. You get character depth w/o adding a broken game mechanism like more inventory and a lousy "crafting" mini-game.

I disagree (obviously).  I feel that what you do says a lot about who you are, and vice-versa.  Knowledge checks in game could be interesting if well-done, although it would also place restrictions on party composition (you'd better have the companion with the knowledge needed for each quest - metagaming much?).  And how is that better than crafting skills?

As far as inventory goes, I would much rather have useful crafting items in my inventory than stacks of torn trousers and pouches of pebbles that serve no purpose whatsoever beyond selling them to merchants.

Don't want to make potions, poisons, traps, or apply upgrades to armor and weapons?  Then don't.  Sell the ingredients you collect and buy whatever finished products you want from vendors.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Ser Bard wrote...

I miss the days of a journal I could write in

I keep my own journal in a notebook beside the keyboard.

The in-game journals now are so laden with metagame information that I'm no longer willing the read them at all.  Though in DA2 that does produce some odd situations where I have no idea what to do next in a quest, and none of the characters associated with the quest will tell me, because the instructions have just magically appeared in my journal without me first learning about them

That makes no sense at all, and me refusing the read the journal at all really shows off these huge plot holes.

[Sidney]

Pasquale1234 wrote...
I disagree (obviously).  I feel that what you do says a lot about who you are, and vice-versa.  Knowledge checks in game could be interesting if well-done, although it would also place restrictions on party composition (you'd better have the companion with the knowledge needed for each quest - metagaming much?).  And how is that better than crafting skills?

As far as inventory goes, I would much rather have useful crafting items in my inventory than stacks of torn trousers and pouches of pebbles that serve no purpose whatsoever beyond selling them to merchants.

Don't want to make potions, poisons, traps, or apply upgrades to armor and weapons?  Then don't.  Sell the ingredients you collect and buy whatever finished products you want from vendors.

Well obviously you don't have to meta-game. Same thing I say about the paragon/rengade check in ME2 - you failed, so what. You character wasn't good enough to do that anymore than he was good enough to open a lock.

I actually never made potoins or any of that other crap in DAO. The boredom was overhwleming but the problem is when the game is designed they have to assume people will use those things so it affects balance and the economy of the game. Plus, in purely techical terms they have to build it and the opportunity costs of all these silly mini-games might be small but I'd rather have another set a companion dialog or a side quest than the joy of clicking piddling around with elfroot, distilling agents and flasks.

[ddv.rsa]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Ser Bard wrote...

I miss the days of a journal I could write in

I keep my own journal in a notebook beside the keyboard.

The in-game journals now are so laden with metagame information that I'm no longer willing the read them at all.  Though in DA2 that does produce some odd situations where I have no idea what to do next in a quest, and none of the characters associated with the quest will tell me, because the instructions have just magically appeared in my journal without me first learning about them

That makes no sense at all, and me refusing the read the journal at all really shows off these huge plot holes.

Wow, talk about old school. But that actually sounds like a pretty cool idea. When I get round to my 1.03 / nightmare run I'll try it out. Thanks, Sylvius.

[Huntress]

Tirfan wrote...

Crafting in DA2 was horrible - It wasn't great in Origins either but a bit better really.
My thought process regarding to DA2 crafting went a bit like this:

1) Hey, this is kind of cool, no more dragging millions of elfroot in limited inventory space
2) okay, some random npc crafts the things for me, but I still need the recipe, why?
3) Why is every recipe in the most random place possible?
4) Okay, it seems I can't craft this thing because I didn't go to a random place where I had nothing to do to find crafting resource x
5) I give up. I'll go without runes and consumables because I missed both the recipes and crafting resources for the things that would have had some use. I hate this sh*t.

DA2 improved crafting for me, i thought DAO crafting was/is tedious and DAA was/ is horrible to no end.

Answer:

1) thats good, you have more space in the limited inventory.
2)Because they can't go out and find it for you: use console command or get it in Emporium.
3)Thats call EXPLORATION, don't people like to explore any more?
4)You said, "Have nothing to do", what about finding the recipe?? is that not a good enough reason?.
5)Good more coins in you're bag, and you die faster.

[Tirfan]

Huntress wrote...

Tirfan wrote...

Crafting in DA2 was horrible - It wasn't great in Origins either but a bit better really.
My thought process regarding to DA2 crafting went a bit like this:

1) Hey, this is kind of cool, no more dragging millions of elfroot in limited inventory space
2) okay, some random npc crafts the things for me, but I still need the recipe, why?
3) Why is every recipe in the most random place possible?
4) Okay, it seems I can't craft this thing because I didn't go to a random place where I had nothing to do to find crafting resource x
5) I give up. I'll go without runes and consumables because I missed both the recipes and crafting resources for the things that would have had some use. I hate this sh*t.

DA2 improved crafting for me, i thought DAO crafting was/is tedious and DAA was/ is horrible to no end.

Answer:

1) thats good, you have more space in the limited inventory.
2)Because they can't go out and find it for you: use console command or get it in Emporium.
3)Thats call EXPLORATION, don't people like to explore any more?
4)You said, "Have nothing to do", what about finding the recipe?? is that not a good enough reason?.
5)Good more coins in you're bag, and you die faster.

Well, I wouldn't call it exploration as I had been in the places before in previous act and I have no quests or anything to do in the place and suddenly there spawns a crafting recipe which I didin't know about nor did I find because I didn't like visiting a random area I've already been to previously without a good reason. I certainly don't like going trough every area in the game in every act just to grind for resources/recipes. But the recipes just made me go insane. Because, well me needing to find the recipe just did not make any sense at all. If I recall correctly, basically every craftable I used in DA:O was a thing I could buy the recipe and resources to craft it. (and because I didn't use crafting to make money it was a compromise between craftables/gear, made it just so much more fun)

To me, forcing you to go to every damn cave for the millionth time in hunt for recipes and resources was just so much more tedious than crafting in DA:O ever was.

And the point 1 in my train of thought concerning the new crafting was that it wasn't all bad - or possibly that the inventory-system is kind of bad. Altough - I never really had problems with inventory space in DA:O, just a few occasions and I could remedy those by making a few consumables out of the stuff I had found - In my first playtrough where I didn't do crafting very much the resources cluttered my inventory until the point where I just decided to sell all of them - which still was a valid option.

[Foolsfolly]

I love the new crafting.

I don't have to run around comparing prices and buying all the different ingredients to make whatever I want.

I still have to buy/find things but it's no where near as much as before. The only thing I dislike is the pricing since there's only so much money in the game. Not that they could craft for free, you'd have unlimited health potions then. But I do miss grinding out Potent Lyrium Pots and selling them for profit.

Hawke needs to get revenue from the mine.

[Alex Kershaw]

Luke Barrett wrote...

Cutlass Jack wrote...
I can understand why they did the whole 'buy crafted items from list' thing they did this time, but not a fan of it.

Did you not like it or did you dislike it? The former is a negation of a positive, the latter is simply a negative. (ie. indifference vs. negativity)

The former for me. If Dragon Age: Origins had DA2's skill system, it would still be an incredible game. If DA2 had DAO's skill system, it would still be a mediocre game. Both systems worked. Still, there was no reason to remove DAO's system because it's clearly better than than the streamlined version in DA2, and it's not like people are going to suddenly stop playing CoD and start playing narrative games simply because the game was dumbed down. All it did was make the game a little bit less complex, and thus a tiny bit less enjoyable. Not a big deal, but I do have preference for DAO's system.

[NedPepper]

I'm going to throw my opinion in here. The only skills I missed were coercion and stealing.

Carrying around all those crafting agents was just a pain in Origins. I just ended up destroying them every time my inventory got full. I prefer the DA 2 method.

The only caveat is that if they can use crafting to make weapons or armor...that's got potential. But that could get complicated. But if crafting can be creative and fun...fine. But making salves or traps? No thanks.

[Firky]

caridounette wrote...
I understand at a time in gaming history there werent many mini-games and incluing them in bigger game was nice.

That's an interesting point. I never thought about it that way. I think the only minigame (if it counts) that I ever liked was Astro Chicken.

Slightly OT, but vaguelly related, what about "puzzles" in RPGs? I didn't like them in DAO, but I'm not sure why. They just felt like a chore when I was busy. (The one with crossing a magical bridge?) But I did like them in BG2. Like, spelling out Amaunator. (I didn't have to look that up because I spelled it with all of my companions feet so many times.)

On skills, how about something experience related? I'd pick something that boosted xp on higher levels anyway, over other skills.

[NedPepper]

I think think in DA 3, "crafting" should be done by vendors. I think every vendor should have their own specialty item, (kind of like Wade's Dragonscale Armor), with a list of items to collect. Whether it be a sword or a staff or amor or bows. Really, it depends on the vendor. That way, you are collecting crafting items and getting something distinct out of it.

The guy who sells mage items could make you a staff or robe. The shifty guy can make you a dagger or something rogue related. You get my point. It would give us cool, distinct items, but instead of just finding them in some random pot or chest, you have to find the materials to get them. If we're going to look for crafting materials, let's get something cool out of it.

[Icinix]

Of all the skills, I think coercion is the only one I really miss.

The new crafting works well, really well, but I still wouldn't mind having a character that can make potions when out in the field.

[Mr.House]

Icinix wrote...

Of all the skills, I think coercion is the only one I really miss.

The new crafting works well, really well, but I still wouldn't mind having a character that can make potions when out in the field.

And stealing.

[Icinix]

Mr.House wrote...

Icinix wrote...

Of all the skills, I think coercion is the only one I really miss.

The new crafting works well, really well, but I still wouldn't mind having a character that can make potions when out in the field.

And stealing.

*facepalm* and Stealing! Forgot about that!

[Atakuma]

Mr.House wrote...

Icinix wrote...

Of all the skills, I think coercion is the only one I really miss.

The new crafting works well, really well, but I still wouldn't mind having a character that can make potions when out in the field.

And stealing.

To me, stealing, has no appeal in a game like dragon age. I just don't see the point.

[Icinix]

Atakuma wrote...

Mr.House wrote...

Icinix wrote...

Of all the skills, I think coercion is the only one I really miss.

The new crafting works well, really well, but I still wouldn't mind having a character that can make potions when out in the field.

And stealing.

To me, stealing, has no appeal in a game like dragon age. I just don't see the point.

In DA2 - with the story, it may have been a moot skill.

In DAO, it was possible to spec a character as a master rogue / thief and get a pretty awesome set of side quests as well.  It also offset a characters physical weakness (in a sense) with a greater amout of coin and loot gathered from stealing.

That said though, the argument could be made about the validity of any of the skills - or even crafting if they went to a regenerating health / stamina level. *shrug* Things like that matter on the overal basis of the game.  If the game is designed as an unavoidable combat fest in one city, then very few of the skills (if any) matter.

[Mr.House]

Atakuma wrote...

Mr.House wrote...

Icinix wrote...

Of all the skills, I think coercion is the only one I really miss.

The new crafting works well, really well, but I still wouldn't mind having a character that can make potions when out in the field.

And stealing.

To me, stealing, has no appeal in a game like dragon age. I just don't see the point.

You got free money, crafting, gems and gifts. You could make profit and save money on crafting. That's what made stealing intresting.

[Serpieri Nei]

Icinix wrote...

Atakuma wrote...

Mr.House wrote...

Icinix wrote...

Of all the skills, I think coercion is the only one I really miss.

The new crafting works well, really well, but I still wouldn't mind having a character that can make potions when out in the field.

And stealing.

To me, stealing, has no appeal in a game like dragon age. I just don't see the point.

In DA2 - with the story, it may have been a moot skill.

In DAO, it was possible to spec a character as a master rogue / thief and get a pretty awesome set of side quests as well.  It also offset a characters physical weakness (in a sense) with a greater amout of coin and loot gathered from stealing.

That said though, the argument could be made about the validity of any of the skills - or even crafting if they went to a regenerating health / stamina level. *shrug* Things like that matter on the overal basis of the game.  If the game is designed as an unavoidable combat fest in one city, then very few of the skills (if any) matter.

Loved those sidequests - would be nice if they expanded on them like the ones found in Elder Scrolls.

[Rolenka]

I don't like having crafting come from the same resource pool (skill points) as things that help you directly in combat (like Combat Expertise). So as long as they fix that problem, I would have no issue with it.

But let me ask you: What would be gained by requiring party members to learn the skills? The only difference would be that you would have to A) Have one more screen in the level-up process, and switch to that party member whenever you wanted to craft an item from their specialty.

It sounds like an inconvenience with no gameplay benefit.

Now if you're talking about things like Stealing, is there an appreciable difference between calling it a "talent" and calling it a "skill?" Of course not. Leave it with the rogues.

Coercion is the only skill left. Even if you buy the notion that you should have to invest to experience the breadth of dialogue options, which may even be a popular view, what's the point of having 1 skill?

Modifié par Rolenka, 13 juin 2011 - 04:00 .