17 réponses à ce sujet

[RVallant]

I've been planning ahead for multiple playthroughs of the game =) So I was curious as to what everyone thought were interesting class/race combinations based on the origin story that they've played so far.

I've written down a few so far that seem to make sense to me for example;

Human Noble Warrior (Tank or DPS) - Seems to make sense to me, especially due to the classic sword/shield combo side-quest you can embark on related to the family. Plus they get Shield Bash. I'm currently running through a male-weapon and shield tank warrior at the moment. Plenty of fun thus far.

Dalish Elf Warrior (ranged Dps) - I admit I only put this down as they get Pinning Shot (I think) as an automatic choice. I intend to run through with one of these sometime down the line.

As I've not yet played through all the origin stories I can't really label every choice thus far but these are the ones I think seem to fit so far:

Dwarf Commoner Rogue - Makes sense to me if they origin is what I expect it to be like.
Dwarf Noble Warrior - Kind of the same reasoning as the human noble origin specifically the free skill.
Elf/Human Magi - no real other choice.

That leaves City Elf really...

But regardless, what do you all think? Note I'm not asking what class is the best etc etc, I know everything is doable, everything works some better than others. I'm asking your opinion on what class-role do you think fits with each origin's background? =)

Many regards!

-Rob

[GlassRain]

Not really sure how to respond to this. On one hand you say not to mention which is the "best" but in your argument you mention the predetermined skills and abilities.



To answer your question of what seems to best suit the role of the origins they suit both rogue and warrior pretty well. Personally, I love warriors so in my eyes all the origins make for cool warrior backgrounds. The noble human knight, the deadly dalish archer, the vengeful city elf scrapper, the honorable dwarven warlord or the violent common thug. Could just as easily apply your own thoughts to the rogue side of things.

[TreasonWall]

I think rogue would go best with City Elf, considering that you practically escape & become an assassin.

[RVallant]

GlassRain wrote...

Not really sure how to respond to this. On one hand you say not to mention which is the "best" but in your argument you mention the predetermined skills and abilities.

To answer your question of what seems to best suit the role of the origins they suit both rogue and warrior pretty well. Personally, I love warriors so in my eyes all the origins make for cool warrior backgrounds. The noble human knight, the deadly dalish archer, the vengeful city elf scrapper, the honorable dwarven warlord or the violent common thug. Could just as easily apply your own thoughts to the rogue side of things.

Ah good point. I meant those free abilities seem to fit in with the class archtype. Which, makes sense to me but wouldn't stop me going to make a human noble rogue for example. Not sure if I'm explaining myself very clearly though

[GlassRain]

TreasonWall wrote...

I think rogue would go best with City Elf, considering that you practically escape & become an assassin.

Don't know how your city elf play through went but I'm pretty sure I slaughtered everything moving in my bloodlust. Not very cloak and dagger if you ask me

Back to the topic however, my play throughs have rarely stuck with the static talent point. My human noble and dwarf noble fighters were both 2handed specialists. Still I wish they hadn't deadlocked your skill/talent picks based on background. Takes a bit out of the "character creation" side and for perfectionists like me, adds a glaring waste of a skill/talent that gnaws at me.

[Loc'n'lol]

City elf warrior is the only one that makes little sense.



Human noble rogue ? Sure, that's exactly what Rendon Howe is. Couldn't make a better example.

Dwarf noble rogue might be a little trickier, considering you're supposed to be a military commander, but it's not outside of the realm of posibilities. See above.

Dwarf commoner warrior ? Sure why not. You're a thug, a brute. Your job is to intimidate people for a crime lord, it seems perfectly reasonable, though you'd like the formal training of a warrior.

As for the Dalish... well, there's little difference between an archer warrior and an archer rogue anyway. Regardless, being an archer seems to be the logical choice.

[Nazo]

My dwarf noble rogue is of the bored/rebellious princess variety, with a touch of kleptomania and some natural skills at undoing locks and sneaking around. Some basic weapons training corrupted with lessons learned while sneaking around on the streets. So ... that can work as a combo.

[Rugaru]

Dwarf noble rogue seems kind of logical in my mind, the political situation in dwarf society seems to set the dwarf noble up to be able to be the silver tounged devil and the fact that he gets betrayed by an even bigger weasel pushes him even farther down that road, of course you can also go the other way with it and say he got manipulated cause he was too much a "noble warrior" and then his drive is for revenge...



My dwarf casteless was a warrior class, he was a thug with the biggest weapon he could find so...

[kormesios]

Human noble rogue seems a little weak to me. I know Howe is spec'd that way, but it's just a bit of a stretch to make it go with your character. Especially since the dialog seems to slant pretty heavily towards your "combat" skills, which presumably doesn't get talked about in the upper class because you learned to throw sand in someone's face. Does the dialog change much if you change classes?



I did City Elf rogue in my first (only complete) play through, and even that seemed a bit tough--the community was tight knit, despite being poor. Even petty crime would've been tough. Once I hit the road, though, the class choice feels natural enough.



Either one, of course, is quite playable with a little imagination, but I don't think the game supports those choices seamlessly.

[Bullets McDeath]

I am currently playing a Human Noble Rogue, but he's specced for stealth and dual weilding, not stealing. So he's pretty warrior-ish, he just relies on quick thinking and skill over brute force.



The only thing I noticed differently in the dialogue options (vs Human Noble Warrior) was that Dairren didn't mention dueling me and losing.

[Rugaru]

I have a question that may or may not be relevant...



Why is it that rogues are always thought of as "criminal"? Yes I understand that they are the ones that always get stealing and such in most games but...you can be a rogue "class" and not be a criminal. If you want a char that uses tactics other than toe-to-toe fighting it seems that you usually get stuck with the criminal class...

And like I said my casteless was the one I thought of as the "criminal" being a thug, even though he fit into the warrior class. My noble was the rogue class not because he was a criminal but rather because of the political maneuvering needed.



However I have noticed in many games not just DA:O that the rogues always get pinned as criminal and warriors get pinned as "upstanding" and just wondering why that is?

[kormesios]

Couldar wrote...

I have a question that may or may not be relevant...

Why is it that rogues are always thought of as "criminal"? Yes I understand that they are the ones that always get stealing and such in most games but...you can be a rogue "class" and not be a criminal. If you want a char that uses tactics other than toe-to-toe fighting it seems that you usually get stuck with the criminal class...
And like I said my casteless was the one I thought of as the "criminal" being a thug, even though he fit into the warrior class. My noble was the rogue class not because he was a criminal but rather because of the political maneuvering needed.

However I have noticed in many games not just DA:O that the rogues always get pinned as criminal and warriors get pinned as "upstanding" and just wondering why that is?

For me:

1) The word rogue in English usage means criminal, outlaw, dishonarable, etc.  While it can be used metaphorically to mean "rebel", that is its plain meaning.  It has nothing to do with being good at political maneuvering, except in cRPGs, where it's linked to the "persuasion" skill.

2) For me, it's hard to role-play a character who has lock picking or pick pocketing abilities but is non-criminal.  Possible (Sherlock Holmes was a competent lockpick) but difficult.

3) In most games, and including DA, doing rogue-specific quests means consorting with criminals.

I ranted about that word in one thread, pre-release, and will try to avoid getting dragged in to another rant.  I'd personally prefer "scout" or "swashbuckler" or "agent" as character archetypes for the non-criminal rogue type, but these have their own problems, and (except maybe scout) would be worse in a three class game like DA.

Modifié par kormesios, 26 novembre 2009 - 02:09 .

[Rugaru]

Yes I'm not trying to get into a rant or hijack the thread really, it just seemed relevant to the OP.

I guess what I'm really saying is that the class names pigeon hole a lot of players into choosing their roles, And that I would prefer a different way to label a class that avoids this problem.

Just trying to point out that if you want to play "the good guy" you can be a rogue or if you want to be "criminal" you don't have to exclude warrior.

Modifié par Couldar, 26 novembre 2009 - 02:20 .

[kormesios]

Couldar wrote...
Just trying to point out that if you want to play "the good guy" you can be a rogue or if you want to be "criminal" you don't have to exclude warrior.

True enough.  The only "real" RPG problem for me is the lockpicking skills (which are linked to trap setting).

If you focus on combat skills, the issue is purely semantic, and can be ignored.  Though at the cost of some gameplay.

[Rugaru]

Well from an RPG point of view if you are playing the "do-gooder" would you let a member of your party pick every bodies locks and steal from everyone?

[Spazmodian]

kormesios wrote...

Couldar wrote...
Just trying to point out that if you want to play "the good guy" you can be a rogue or if you want to be "criminal" you don't have to exclude warrior.

True enough.  The only "real" RPG problem for me is the lockpicking skills (which are linked to trap setting).

If you focus on combat skills, the issue is purely semantic, and can be ignored.  Though at the cost of some gameplay.

I think you're simply being obtuse.  Rogues do not have any skill called 'lock-picking.'  The entire line which helps with it refers to the manipulation of mechanical things and can be ignored entirely and the character can open locks through cunning alone.  As well there is no link between the talent line for detecting and disarming traps and the skill line for building and setting traps.  Mages can build and set traps if they so desire.

[Inarai]

Alignment time!

Anyone who's played DnD before 4th edition knows they had two alignment spectrums: Good-Evil, and Law-Chaos. But the two had nothing to do with each other. You could have absolutely no respect for the law, and still be the good guy. In fact, only Lawful Good characters ave a pseudo-inherent respect for the law(Really, they only have to adhere to *something*).

That said... A Lawful Good theivin' rogue(You can make rogues who never touch stealing, lockpicking, or stealth), in context of this game, is sort of a special ops sort of person - the skills to get in behind enemy lines, do some damage, get the information, kill a target, free some prisoners, etc. They're less known entirely because if they do it right, people don't know. Another route to go is the finesse fighter, as much a straight up combatant as the warrior, but generally more about being quick of mind and body than having a strong arm.

But really, a Good rogue is just less likely to follow some proscribed code or set of laws - they still do the right thing, they just do it differently.

Modifié par Inarai, 26 novembre 2009 - 09:17 .

[Kalcalan]

Alignment isn't really relevant in DA but that's an interesting post.



I've picked a Rogue City Elf and it worked rather well as it actually made a lot of sense going through the game that way. Doesn't have to be a Warrior. I for one don't see where that character would have got much training as a Warrior or fighting experience whereas I could definitely picture him learning to cut purses, pilfer and do chores.



Now I'm playing a Commoner Dwarf Warrior and it works really well. My first choice would have been a Rogue but I wanted a change and the origin story works very well for a Warrior. The Proving is a very nice place for your character to move from common thug to real fighter.