27 réponses à ce sujet

[Foolsfolly]

They have their places. I mean when I was younger I would roleplay Age of Empires, WarCraft, and StarCraft. Those are RTSs, people. I'd invent stories and play battles.

In RPGs I do roleplay... a lot. I have long on-going stories and characteristics that I keep in mind as I play.

At the same time, I'm the kind of guy who's totally down for pulling out a piece of paper and a calculator and plan character builds. For DA2, for example, I had a list of all Elemental damaging weapons in the game and when they could be reached and I planned on using those things as I built.

Whenever I start a new character in a RP game I always think of it on two fronts: Who do I want to play and How do I want to play. I want to do a Pro-Templar guy who's loss of family, friends, and home has disillusioned him. He believes in nothing but money and surviving. He keeps his friends distant out of fear of losing something later... which he constantly loses the few things he currently has. His romance will easily be Isabela since she too isn't looking for anything serious... but it eventually becomes serious and they find a fellowship together.

Good... that's good. I like that. I want to play that.

...now, what do I want to be. I want to be a sword and shield Reaver/Beserker. And I plan and build to make the best strongest and most capable sword and board guy around. It ALSO plays into the roleplaying since he's disillusioned and keeps no one close. He's made himself into a self-reliant wall able to take anything the world dishes at him alone.

So I don't see it as a "Either or" situation. I see it as both play equal parts in my playing. I don't understand why you wouldn't powergame. It makes the game more enjoyable, you're stronger, and you're playing at your fullest potential. Likewise, I don't see how anyone could play without roleplaying. Then again I roleplay everything, even the GTA games (they're fixed protagonists but they all have personalities and I maintain those as much as possible in the sandbox gameplay).

[Foolsfolly]

Zjarcal wrote...

esper wrote...

Considering that I have a blood mage that never usesed the sacrifice tequniche because she would never hurt her friends, I do make less than optimal choices.

Same here, never used that spell despite its obvious benefits. A similar situation to what I have with my Reaver. I came up with a backstory about how she became a Reaver against her will (kinapped and forced to drink the dragon's blood), so I only make use of the passive abilities of the spec, with the exception of Devour, which I use as a last resort, sort of rationalizing that if it's a life and death situation, my character would resort to her unwanted powers to save her life. But I never touch the other abilities.

I definitely roleplay, though I still leave room for a few liberties of course. The main issue is that since I play on nightmare difficulty, I need somewhat optimal builds if I don't want to get frustrated. So this means sometimes using equipment I wouldn't normally want to use (like axes or hammers for my 2H warrior, or some fugly armors that my character would rather not be seen with).

It was easier in DAO since the difficulty in that game (on nightmare) felt much easier to me so I could get away with a very suboptimal build, or with using a very unbalanced party. I remember my dalish run where I refused to use any equipment that wasn't dalish (or that at least had some elven backstory) and where I almost never had a warrior in my party.

At any rate, I will certainly give up XP or quests if they don't fit my character, I have no issue doing that.

Ok, that Reaver thing you just said... that's fantastic. I just want you to know that.

[eroeru]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Substantially...Altough I usually RP a version of myself (morals-wise) adapted to the setting.

Ditto, but also in terms of attitude (which is even more important in RPGs imo - cause in the end you're the good guy no-matter what your morals tell you - hence no real choice in overall morals).

And it would be awesome if a character with the same general background morally and attitude-wise would be able to say and do different things. Though I do agree that certain amount of "getting into" the character is possible in DA2, creating and enjoying this personality seems certainly more restricted.

Though the realistically all-important question remains: how much work can a company afford to put into it...

Edit: by attitude I mean the "color" of the answers - in DA2 the only one that didn't seem stupid to me was the blue one - and I would have actually enjoyed the dialogue if I'd been able to look more into the options than simply pressing "1" on the keyboard all the time over and over...

Modifié par eroeru, 05 novembre 2011 - 09:50 .