46 réponses à ce sujet

[RinpocheSchnozberry]

ladyshamen wrote...

RinpocheSchnozberry, I too joined! No more skirts!!!

Excellent, excellent!  BioWare can no longer put us in spangled trashbags and concider us gear complete.

[The Baconer]

I'd prefer it if mage gear sets were composed of light armor. Mages having to wear robes is a tired old trope that needs to be put out of commission.

[CuriousArtemis]

RinpocheSchnozberry wrote...

Check out my sig. We are legion. We are endless. We're something like a couple dozen.

I joined!  Love it   All those robes strolling about through Hightown and Lowtown must make it awfully easy for the templars to find the mages, too...

[Arthur Cousland]

You'd think that the "robes" would be easy to spot, and yet Hawke or Bethany have to make their hand glow to prove themselves a mage to people (Feynriel, Vincento, etc.). Why would anyone in Kirkwall, of all places, pretend to be a mage if they weren't?

[Jessihatt]

I hate rogue armour in DA2, but I think mages should try and disguise themselves as such.
So mages should wear leather armour I think, or at least travel clothes with a cloak or whatnot if you want that mystical air about it.

I thought it was quite annoying you could walk in plain view of everyone as a mage and no one cared because you had money -- how come noble children are taken? Connor Guerrin was taken and Ferelden is a lot more relaxed than any other circle we've heard about.

[PsychaDurmont]

CommanderJessica wrote...

I thought it was quite annoying you could walk in plain view of everyone as a mage and no one cared because you had money

They remind me of the art cartoons about templars talking to hawk about "if you see any mages let us know"  He nods then vanishes infront of them with them only shrugging it off.  

The fact that they are also walking around with this HUGE mages staff and casting in front of templars everywhere and only a select few notice and shortly afterward they conviently forget, just kind of broke the feel of fear for mages in that game.  

If mages are to be "in hiding" let them wear everyday clothing, and not be walking around with their staff attached to their backs!  Mages should (unless they are specifically circle mages) be able to wear anything that does not hinder their magic.

I would also like to se that mages arent FORCED to have staffs.  They can use daggers, and the like with magic running through the instruments as well as their own hands.

Edit:  Captioned the wrong quote.  sorry

Modifié par PsychaDurmont, 25 décembre 2011 - 10:52 .

[Fox In The Box]

I fully support mage pants. Forcing an enire group of innocent people to wear dresses just because how they were born is simply unethical.

RinpocheSchnozberry wrote...

Check out my sig. We are legion. We are endless. We're something like a couple dozen.

I'm already a part of the legion. You are a true champion of justice.

[Zanallen]

PsychaDurmont wrote...

They remind me of the art cartoons about templars talking to hawk about "if you see any mages let us know"  He nods then vanishes infront of them with them only shrugging it off.  

The fact that they are also walking around with this HUGE mages staff and casting in front of templars everywhere and only a select few notice and shortly afterward they conviently forget, just kind of broke the feel of fear for mages in that game.  

If mages are to be "in hiding" let them wear everyday clothing, and not be walking around with their staff attached to their backs!  Mages should (unless they are specifically circle mages) be able to wear anything that does not hinder their magic.

I would also like to se that mages arent FORCED to have staffs.  They can use daggers, and the like with magic running through the instruments as well as their own hands.

Edit:  Captioned the wrong quote.  sorry

I always figured that a lot of people were robes in Thedas, not just mages. We already have members of the Chantry. I figure other people probably wear them as well. As for the staves, at least in DA2 they often had blades of some sort and could be mistaken for polearms. Of course, the real problem (With both games) is that we run into far too many enemy mages. Mages are already supposed to be a minority and the majority of those are supposed to be in the Circles, with the Qunari or in Tevinter. So where is every bandit group getting access to magical fire power?

[andar91]

Zanallen wrote...

PsychaDurmont wrote...

They remind me of the art cartoons about templars talking to hawk about "if you see any mages let us know"  He nods then vanishes infront of them with them only shrugging it off.  

The fact that they are also walking around with this HUGE mages staff and casting in front of templars everywhere and only a select few notice and shortly afterward they conviently forget, just kind of broke the feel of fear for mages in that game.  

If mages are to be "in hiding" let them wear everyday clothing, and not be walking around with their staff attached to their backs!  Mages should (unless they are specifically circle mages) be able to wear anything that does not hinder their magic.

I would also like to se that mages arent FORCED to have staffs.  They can use daggers, and the like with magic running through the instruments as well as their own hands.

Edit:  Captioned the wrong quote.  sorry

I always figured that a lot of people were robes in Thedas, not just mages. We already have members of the Chantry. I figure other people probably wear them as well. As for the staves, at least in DA2 they often had blades of some sort and could be mistaken for polearms. Of course, the real problem (With both games) is that we run into far too many enemy mages. Mages are already supposed to be a minority and the majority of those are supposed to be in the Circles, with the Qunari or in Tevinter. So where is every bandit group getting access to magical fire power?

I always kind off turned the other cheek on that one because I think it adds intrest to encounters, but I know what you mean (in reference to mages being in so many encounters). Granted, Kirkwall had a higher than usual population of apostates. Also, the mages working with slavers were likely Tevinter mages which makes a certain amount of sense. Even circle mages could potentially be used as mercenaries-I think I heard somewhere about mages fighting. Didn't Wynne mention fighting stragglers of darkspawn? So while the numbers are maybe a bit high, I don't necessarily think it's THAT much of a stretch to be seeing mages as enemies.

[ladyshamen]

Being a mage in Kirkwall:

[Fast Jimmy]

andar91 wrote...

I always kind off turned the other cheek on that one because I think it adds intrest to encounters, but I know what you mean (in reference to mages being in so many encounters).

From early interviews I remember, this was a large reason for choosing the Mage/Templar conflict as the focus for DA2. They realized that having mages supposedly only in the Circles would mean it would be silly to have them in random encounters. So they created a way to allow all the mages in the Circle to run free, hence the Circles rebelling against the Chantry.

Which makes sense... but I don't see why it needed to be the primary focus of DA2. That is something that can happen as a side effect of the main plot, not BE the main plot. At least from my perspective. There was so much they could have done with Kirkwall and its lore that would have been a better ending than the Orsino/Meredith pissing contest.

[PrinceLionheart]

Considering Mages are going to be in War with the Templars, I'd say stuff like the Champion's Armor and stuff like what Hawke war in the Prologue/Act I.

[Ghost_Nappa]

I don't know if this helps for the option of mage clothing, but I used to be addicted to this game and the clothing options they had for mages, atleast the male version, had me head over heels in love with some bits design. (But if I had a choice I be soo rocking that SCH male look for every mage I play as.)

http://images3.wikia...Attire-Full.PNG
http://images3.wikia...Attire-Full.png
http://images4.wikia...s_Armor_Set.JPG
http://images.wikia..../b3/EAF_RDM.png
http://images2.wikia...4/49/BLUAF2.png
http://images2.wikia...pyrean.jpg(This one I hate the boots)
http://images3.wikia...MN_Empyrean.jpg
http://images4.wikia.../47/Eaf_sch.png

Ahhhh old love/obsessions

[jlb524]

I support mage pants.

[KylieDog]

I'd like the option to pick items that are equipped and mark them as visible or not. In addition to this a second equipment menu where you can equip items and they have no effect AT ALL except for visuals would be welcomed.

To imagine this set-up in DA Origins, you could have Morrigan using some new staff and ugly robes, but de-select the robes as visible, then in the visual only menu add her default clothing.

As a result you get stats from staff and robe but visually see staff and default clothing. I've seen a few MMORPGs use such a system and it is very pleasant, you get to be equipped good without looking ugly/stupid.

Also the visual only menu should not enforce stat restrictions, so heavy armour on a mage with no strength...fine, visually only of course.

[jlb524]

KylieDog wrote...

I'd like the option to pick items that are equipped and mark them as visible or not. In addition to this a second equipment menu where you can equip items and they have no effect AT ALL except for visuals would be welcomed.

To imagine this set-up in DA Origins, you could have Morrigan using some new staff and ugly robes, but de-select the robes as visible, then in the visual only menu add her default clothing.

As a result you get stats from staff and robe but visually see staff and default clothing. I've seen a few MMORPGs use such a system and it is very pleasant, you get to be equipped good without looking ugly/stupid.

Also the visual only menu should not enforce stat restrictions, so heavy armour on a mage with no strength...fine, visually only of course.

They kind of do this with helmets already.

How would that apply to the PC who doesn't have default clothing (besides underwear I guess)?

If I think all the mage robes are ugly, I don't want to walk around in my under-clothes XD

[KylieDog]

jlb524 wrote...

KylieDog wrote...

I'd like the option to pick items that are equipped and mark them as visible or not. In addition to this a second equipment menu where you can equip items and they have no effect AT ALL except for visuals would be welcomed.

To imagine this set-up in DA Origins, you could have Morrigan using some new staff and ugly robes, but de-select the robes as visible, then in the visual only menu add her default clothing.

As a result you get stats from staff and robe but visually see staff and default clothing. I've seen a few MMORPGs use such a system and it is very pleasant, you get to be equipped good without looking ugly/stupid.

Also the visual only menu should not enforce stat restrictions, so heavy armour on a mage with no strength...fine, visually only of course.

They kind of do this with helmets already.

How would that apply to the PC who doesn't have default clothing (besides underwear I guess)?

If I think all the mage robes are ugly, I don't want to walk around in my under-clothes XD

In visual only menu you could put anything you wanted.

[LordKinoda]

Thread necromancy ! Sorry, I ran into this while searching for some new robes to wear in my current playthrough and I just want to add my assent.

NO MORE ROBES ! At least not in the 'dress' like form. They just don't work well with regards to animations. Sticking to the character's legs when they run, it' just awkward and silly looking.

Pants with the flapping tabards or tails are cool though ( ala Fugitive's Mantle). Give us a very huge selection to choose from. I know they said they're going to give each companion in DA3 unique armor again right and just upgrade it ? Something like that. That should hopefully free up much more time to create tons of unique pieces for the player character to wear. Don't leave us mage lover's in the dark BW, we want as many unique and cool looking pieces as you can give us that are not essentially dresses.

Okay I'm done now ;p