99 réponses à ce sujet

[Madcat 124]

 Is anyone actually in favour of this? I certainly hope that they take the restrictions out of the next game, or at least make it how it was in DA:O. Who else is with me?

*EDIT* I meant class restrictions...

Modifié par Madcat 124, 03 février 2012 - 12:10 .

[chunkyman]

We can hope, but that's just setting yourself up for disappointment. We will likely be forced into using the weapons considered standard with the arch-type. Only thieves can use daggers, only warriors can use shields, etc.

[Forst1999]

The weapon restrictions as in "only thieves can use daggers, only warriors use sword & shield etc." are fine. As skills are closely tied to weapons in DA, this restrictions are important to maintain balance.
But i hate things like "42 str. required to use this armor". It just is extremely unlogical that you can wear a bad platemail without much strength, but need lots for a better one. It's better armor, not two suits of armor worn together.

[chunkyman]

Trying to balance a game by stripping out customization is hardly a beneficial design choice.

[Madcat 124]

Forst1999 wrote...

The weapon restrictions as in "only thieves can use daggers, only warriors use sword & shield etc." are fine. As skills are closely tied to weapons in DA, this restrictions are important to maintain balance.
But i hate things like "42 str. required to use this armor". It just is extremely unlogical that you can wear a bad platemail without much strength, but need lots for a better one. It's better armor, not two suits of armor worn together.

To me it's the opposite. The restirictions for weapons and armor should not be there, but the skills that might advance a certain weapon proficiency should still be there. Maybe being more universal. The stat thing just makes sense. Some armors are heavier than others and such.

[Forst1999]

chunkyman wrote...

Trying to balance a game by stripping out customization is hardly a beneficial design choice.

But as DA is a class-based game, distinction between classes is important. So i think that stripping this piece of customization is beneficial to the game.

Madcat 124 wrote...

The stat thing just makes sense. Some armors are heavier than others and such.

But the requirements don't go up with weight of the armor, but with quality. Armor doesn't get only better because it's made of more steel, but also because of better workmanship and enchantments.  And removing this restriction would allow us to spend our attribute points more freely (ok, the last patch made this a smaller problem, at least the secondary attribute requirements are so low they are ignorable now).

[seraphymon]

alot ton of them are class based. imo weapon restrictions as to the extreme DA2 took it was wrong.

[HiroVoid]

What's so important about maintaing balance? It's not like this is a multi-player game where a person would be overpowered when beating other players.

[Kidd]

Weapon restrictions are very arbitrary the way they are designed now, seeing as they're based in the imho very faulty attribute system DA has. At level 1, your character may have 15 Strength, 10 Dexterity and 15 Cunning. Now that's a strong and intelligent character right there, no? Isn't very agile though, but hey who needs agility when you can sweet talk your way out of things, outsmart people or impale them on your two hander any way?

Now let's hop forward quite a few levels. The same character now has 60 Strength, 10 Dexterity and 15 Cunning. Excuse me for saying this, but is your character now -four- times as strong as before, four times as strong as they are intelligent, etc? Suddenly, the Dexterity and Cunning scores seem incredibly similar - both are in context "very low." But when you created your character, she was smart -and- strong. Somehow you end up seeming dumber than ever the further you progress into the game ("the numbers show percentual ability"), or you actually become capable of wrestling two ogres at once ("the numbers have definitive meaning") - that's two different perspectives, I can't see any other one, and they're both quite silly.

Even dumber is when you need those 60 Strength to carry that new sword you found. Really, is the sword so heavy you need to be -four times- as strong as was physically possible for your warrior to be when starting out to make proper use of it? I can imagine some materials being heavier than others, but please. Instead of wearing that dragonbone longsword in close quarters, I'd rather take a 18" iron sword (that's a 5.5metres of sword, fellow Europeans!) , plummet deep into the fray and spin around the battlefield killing everything around me in seconds.

Was that spinning attack with a blade three times my height too "over-the-top action anime"? I agree, but it's what the game mechanics imply I should be capable of.

EDIT: Clarifications =)

Modifié par KiddDaBeauty, 02 février 2012 - 10:31 .

[MagmaSaiyan]

im kinda half and half. one point is i no longer have to worry about keeping armor until they finally meet the requirements(weapons,armor) but now i have a bunch of armor and weapons that dont get used, and just sold for money, which in this game isnt bad considering smaller capacity and less money

[Madcat 124]

Just to get it straight, I was talking about class restrictions. Should have made that clearer.

[Rawgrim]

I want the restrictions to be removed. I want my rogue to be able to wield a huge axe, if I want him to. It doesn`t make sense that a character can`t even lift an axe just because he steals for a living.

[deatharmonic]

I am vehemently against the current class restrictions in DA2, I think for those who prefer it you can stick to your one class even if the restrictions were removed. I find it absurd that my rogue is unable to use another sword as well as a dagger because of 'balancing', my rogue in DA2 was JUST as powerful with two daggers.

[yuncas]

class restrictions are a no go for me. If I want a robed warrior, a heavily armored mage, or a thief that fights with a claymore and am willing to accept the horrible gimping that accompanies said choices why sould I not be able to do so?

[chunkyman]

yuncas wrote...

class restrictions are a no go for me. If I want a robed warrior, a heavily armored mage, or a thief that fights with a claymore and am willing to accept the horrible gimping that accompanies said choices why sould I not be able to do so?

lol, I like how you can't even fight with your hands in DA2. It is a physical impossibility to not have a weapon in that game. 

[Yrkoon]

yuncas wrote...

class restrictions are a no go for me. If I want a robed warrior, a heavily armored mage, or a thief that fights with a claymore and am willing to accept the horrible gimping that accompanies said choices why sould I not be able to do so?

^This.

And I can't *believe* there are people actually saying that a huge and glaring example of  a player agency restriction in an RPG is  "ok", or "fine".  The Hell it is.

YES, my warrior should be able to Dual wield, and as a warrior, he should be the *best* at it too.

YES, my rogue should be able to use a longsword.  Why the hell not?

YES, my mage should be able to use Bows to complement his  ranged spells.

Ditto with armor.  Warriors should be able to put on any armor type they wish.  And so should thieves and mages.  If the player is willing to suffer the penalties to  his/her skills, then that  should be the player's choice to make.

Modifié par Yrkoon, 05 février 2012 - 08:59 .

[Yrkoon]

Forst1999 wrote...

But as DA is a class-based game, distinction between classes is important. So i think that stripping this piece of customization is beneficial to the game.

class distinctions are vitally important, yes.  Which is why no one here is asking that Warriors be able to cast spells, or mages  be able to backstab, Or Rogues be able to  take warrior-specific  weapon talents

But there's a Huge difference between distinguishing between classes, and choking all meaningful  customization choice from the player the moment he decides to choose a class in the character creator.  There's some  things you simply shouldn't strip away from the player in an RPG

Modifié par Yrkoon, 05 février 2012 - 08:40 .

[nightscrawl]

Madcat 124 wrote...

 Is anyone actually in favour of this? I certainly hope that they take the restrictions out of the next game, or at least make it how it was in DA:O. Who else is with me?

*EDIT* I meant class restrictions...

I think having such restrictions on gear is a little too newbie friendly.

I can understand that a new person might not understand why their warrior should use a sword with Str instead of a dagger with Dex/Cun, even though they just got the new dagger off their latest boss kill and it has better overall weapon damage (for a dagger). However, I think a lot of those type of problems can be taken care of through an (optional) tutorial process for new players. Then after that point, if a person wants to have a rogue wear a robe with Magic on it and screw themselves over in damage for aesthetic or RP reasons, why should Bioware care about that? It's not as if this is an MMO where we have to worry about jerk players stealing other class' gear.

[shumworld]

The whole class restriction issue wouldn't be a problem if it weren't for the fact that Hawke is the only character to customize with these armors. Like if I am a Mage, I can't buy armor and what it looks like because I'm not a warrior.

[esper]

Da is a class based game thus it must have class restriction, and I like that they are made clear cut when that is the case.
Sure, games with fluid class-systems are fun, but I also like the classes and I don't think everything must be the same.
Also there is a very, clear lore reason that you cannot shift between being a warrior and a mage.

[Wulfram]

Give my warriors the ability to use bows and I won't complain too much.

[chunkyman]

simfamSP wrote...

I hope they get rid of the class system alltogether.

At a minimum, you would need a mage class and non-mage class. This is because the abiity to use magic is based off genetics, not training. Non-mages should never be able to train their magic abilities, so some sort of class distinction is needed.

[Davillo]

I think they should just scrap the franchise, stop all work on DA2 Content, (They probably already did). Stop DA3 development, just kill the franchise and start a new one. D the franchise is already dead.

[TEWR]

Madcat 124 wrote...

 Is anyone actually in favour of this? I certainly hope that they take the restrictions out of the next game, or at least make it how it was in DA:O. Who else is with me?

*EDIT* I meant class restrictions...

I'm in favor of:

1) Warriors should be allowed to dual wield, wield a Sword and Shield, wield just a longsword/dagger, wield a Greatsword/Battleaxe/Maul, fight with their fists, or use a bow. There's no reason why they should be restricted into just being S&S or 2H. 

2) Rogues should be able to use bows or dual wield daggers or swords.

3) I'm fine with Mages using only staves, but if Arcane Warrior ever presents itself again then the S&S option needs to come back. And I'd be on board with them being able to be Archers. Perhaps Archers at a disadvantage because they've never wielded a bow before, but nevertheless archers.

I mean really, I miss beating the crap out of people with my fists. In DAII I remove my character's weapon only to see..... a magical weapon appear out of nowhere!

"Aveline, give me your sword."
"Okay Hawke"
"Aveline! Where the hell did you get that sword from? I told you no swords!"

Modifié par The Ethereal Writer Redux, 05 février 2012 - 09:00 .