2816 réponses à ce sujet

[Sylvius the Mad]

esper wrote...

The playable characther would still have to be a mage for that to work, because lorewise you can't not stop being a mage if you have magic in da it is just not possible, and it would still be beyond weird, because it seems that there are no societies in da that really train mages in non-magical combat.

An apostate doesn't need top practice magic.  An apostate doesn't need to announce that he's a mage.

Any random warrior could be a mage who is just keeping his mage-ness secret.

[the_one_54321]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

esper wrote...
The playable characther would still have to be a mage for that to work, because lorewise you can't not stop being a mage if you have magic in da it is just not possible, and it would still be beyond weird, because it seems that there are no societies in da that really train mages in non-magical combat.

An apostate doesn't need top practice magic.  An apostate doesn't need to announce that he's a mage.

Any random warrior could be a mage who is just keeping his mage-ness secret.

But once you use magic, you have to be labelled as a mage.

And that's another big point. Using magic in public should be a big deal. There's supposed to be some kind of uprising going on, after all.

[LPPrince]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

esper wrote...

The playable characther would still have to be a mage for that to work, because lorewise you can't not stop being a mage if you have magic in da it is just not possible, and it would still be beyond weird, because it seems that there are no societies in da that really train mages in non-magical combat.

An apostate doesn't need top practice magic.  An apostate doesn't need to announce that he's a mage.

Any random warrior could be a mage who is just keeping his mage-ness secret.

This. Exactly.

If you don't use magic, no one needs to know you're an apostate.

If you DO use magic, people might notice. Probably not though, if you don't do it very often.

But if you're parading around killing everyone with ice shards, earthquakes, and prisons of darkness, people are gonna scream, "APOSTATE!"

[LPPrince]

the_one_54321 wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

esper wrote...
The playable characther would still have to be a mage for that to work, because lorewise you can't not stop being a mage if you have magic in da it is just not possible, and it would still be beyond weird, because it seems that there are no societies in da that really train mages in non-magical combat.

An apostate doesn't need top practice magic.  An apostate doesn't need to announce that he's a mage.

Any random warrior could be a mage who is just keeping his mage-ness secret.

But once you use magic, you have to be labelled as a mage.

And that's another big point. Using magic in public should be a big deal. There's supposed to be some kind of uprising going on, after all.

If you have the ability to use magic AT ALL you'd be labelled a mage.

The interesting bit would be if the player kept it secret or not. And how that would affect the Mage Uprising.

[the_one_54321]

LPPrince wrote...
But if you're parading around killing everyone with ice shards, earthquakes, and prisons of darkness, people are gonna scream, "APOSTATE!"

Or they might just stand around watching, as though nothing out of the ordinary was going on. <_<

[LPPrince]

Speaking about the Mage Uprising,

am I the only one who found the Blight more compelling?

Maybe that's just me, but The Circle Tower plot back in DAO was probably the subplot I invested the least into. Even if The Fade segment WASN'T in there I still don't think I'd of cared terribly much.

Of course, now its a big deal so there's no going around that, but I think I still want another big bad or some other storyline taking the forefront while the mage uprising takes place.

[esper]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

esper wrote...

The playable characther would still have to be a mage for that to work, because lorewise you can't not stop being a mage if you have magic in da it is just not possible, and it would still be beyond weird, because it seems that there are no societies in da that really train mages in non-magical combat.

An apostate doesn't need top practice magic.  An apostate doesn't need to announce that he's a mage.

Any random warrior could be a mage who is just keeping his mage-ness secret.

But you would still be seen as a mage, demons, other mages and templars (perhaps the last one that is not clear) might even sense it. And also the chance that you would be trained in anything else would be non-existitant since nobody would train you in it, and as an apostate you would have had a family or mentor who would have trained you in the magic or it would have been discovered because of the way magic show itself and the chance that they would let you run of an train non-magic combat and risk your exposure would be really low. It just doesn't make sense and creates a special snpwflake playable characther beyond what a player charachter already is compared to the rest of Thedas, making the player characther unbelieable and even more unrealistic than the plot-shield player characthers already have.

[LPPrince]

the_one_54321 wrote...

LPPrince wrote...
But if you're parading around killing everyone with ice shards, earthquakes, and prisons of darkness, people are gonna scream, "APOSTATE!"

Or they might just stand around watching, as though nothing out of the ordinary was going on. <_<

That's one thing from DA2 that needs to die in an elemental fire, but with Mr. Darrah already stating that even he found that as something that needs to be corrected, we hopefully don't need to worry about that.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Wulfram wrote...

Also, this is a party based game.  Enforced specialised roles creates more interesting tactics than you'd get by having the party full off Fighter-Mage-Rogues who can each do everything themselves.

Did DAO suffer from having limited differentiation between Warrior and Rogue?

I don't think so.  In fact, I think that made the game richer, as you then had access to a wider array of tactical deployments.

I agree the mage/non-mage distinction in Thedas is important, but the Warrior/Rogue distinction is entirely pointless.

[Statulos]

LPPrince wrote...

Actually, why have classes at all for the main characters?

Why not just let us pick and choose between abilities and attacks from all three trees so we can "create" our own class?

It would work similar to Skyrim or Kingdoms of Amalur- You're not an outset warrior, mage, or rogue- you're whatever you want to be.

The game can even have a system in place to change dialogue based on your abilities-

If you have a majority of certain abilities, the game will make note of it and you'll hear in dialogue how, (example name being The Warden)

"The Warden prefers to use the sword. I've seen her swing it beautifully."

"The Warden is a fine shot. Arrows fly from her body faster than the eye can see."

"The Warden wields a mighty hammer. I would not get in her way."

"The Warden is a mage. Apostate maybe, be wary."

"The Warden uses short blades. Maker forbid she gets behind you in combat."

etc etc

As much as I like the idea in terms of gameplay, it feels relatively conflicting with the background and lore of the game.

Mages are born that way and they need a very nice amount of time to control what they do and not get consumed by the things from the Fade.

That means, doing the acrobatic stuff of a rogue or getting the training needed to be proficient with weapons means less time to control magic.

In the end, a jack of all trades that includes magic seems not too plausible in terms of lore.

[the_one_54321]

LPPrince wrote...
am I the only one who found the Blight more compelling?

Maybe that's just me, but The Circle Tower plot back in DAO was probably the subplot I invested the least into.

The blight made me a hero. A mage war will make me a chooser of sides. Unless they actually illustrate how dangerous mages are to average people. I don't know exactly how well that could go over, though. I'm skeptical such a story line would survive deep scruitiny.

At the crux of the issue must be the fact that there is no reason for mages to want to cooperate, and no reason for average people to treat mages like humans. Any compelling story would revovle around the choice of the hero and his/her path to resolution of the conflict, whether by force, or compelling diplomacy, or some combination of the two.

[Sylvius the Mad]

LPPrince wrote...

Speaking about the Mage Uprising,

am I the only one who found the Blight more compelling?

I found the Blight story made a better backdrop.

To me, the important story in a roleplaying game is the story I create myself through my character's motives and actions.  The Blight was an excellent launching point for that.

The Mage Uprising was probably more relevant to my character, so that could have been very good, except my character wasn't actually allowed to take part in it.

Honestly, if they were to do DA2 again, I'd suggest that the PC should be Anders, not Hawke.  Depending on your position on the conflict, Anders is either the protagonist or the antagonist in DA2's story.  Hawke doesn't really matter.

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 21 mars 2012 - 04:13 .

[LPPrince]

esper wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

esper wrote...

The playable characther would still have to be a mage for that to work, because lorewise you can't not stop being a mage if you have magic in da it is just not possible, and it would still be beyond weird, because it seems that there are no societies in da that really train mages in non-magical combat.

An apostate doesn't need top practice magic.  An apostate doesn't need to announce that he's a mage.

Any random warrior could be a mage who is just keeping his mage-ness secret.

But you would still be seen as a mage, demons, other mages and templars (perhaps the last one that is not clear) might even sense it.

They wouldn't have to implement any "demon trying to seize you" thing. They didn't in DA2 or DAO.

esper wrote...

And also the chance that you would be trained in anything else would be non-existitant since nobody would train you in it, and as an apostate you would have had a family or mentor who would have trained you in the magic or it would have been discovered because of the way magic show itself and the chance that they would let you run of an train non-magic combat and risk your exposure would be really low.

How can you say no one would train you in non magical combat? The writers could incredibly easily come up with a character or a society who does such a thing.

esper wrote...

It just doesn't make sense and creates a special snpwflake playable characther beyond what a player charachter already is compared to the rest of Thedas, making the player characther unbelieable and even more unrealistic than the plot-shield player characthers already have.

Perhaps most players WANT the main character to be "special snowflakes". We don't know that, of course, but its worth putting on the table.

[Sylvius the Mad]

the_one_54321 wrote...

At the crux of the issue must be the fact that there is no reason for mages to want to cooperate, and no reason for average people to treat mages like humans. Any compelling story would revovle around the choice of the hero and his/her path to resolution of the conflict, whether by force, or compelling diplomacy, or some combination of the two.

I completely agree.  I see no reason why non-mages would see mages as anything other than nightmare monsters, and I see no reason why mages would see non-mages as anything other than lesser creatures unworthy of concern.

[the_one_54321]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

the_one_54321 wrote...
At the crux of the issue must be the fact that there is no reason for mages to want to cooperate, and no reason for average people to treat mages like humans. Any compelling story would revovle around the choice of the hero and his/her path to resolution of the conflict, whether by force, or compelling diplomacy, or some combination of the two.

I completely agree.  I see no reason why non-mages would see mages as anything other than nightmare monsters, and I see no reason why mages would see non-mages as anything other than lesser creatures unworthy of concern.

And thus a dimplomatic route would involve convincing both sides to alter their ideals. Othewise, the only option is conquest.

[Kavatica]

LPPrince wrote...

Perhaps most players WANT the main character to be "special snowflakes". We don't know that, of course, but its worth putting on the table.

Only if she is a special snowflake that also kicks serious ass.

[LPPrince]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

LPPrince wrote...

Speaking about the Mage Uprising,

am I the only one who found the Blight more compelling?

I found the Blight story made a better backdrop.

To me, the important story in a roleplaying game is the story I create myself through my character's motives and actions.  The Blight was an excellent launching point for that.

The Mage Uprising was probably more relevant to my character, so that could have been very good, except my character wasn't actually allowed to take part in it.

Honestly, if they were to do DA2 again, I'd suggest that the PC should be Anders, not Hawke.  Depending on your position on the conflict, Anders is either the protagonist or the antagonist in DA2's story.  Hawke doesn't really matter.

Yeah, for example I never play mages. I play warriors and rogues.

The mage uprising isn't something I want to be terribly involved in. I want another grand plot that threatens the whole of the land, but something that affects everyone in some way, not just putting a huge focus on mages.

[Sylvius the Mad]

LPPrince wrote...

esper wrote...

It just doesn't make sense and creates a special snpwflake playable characther beyond what a player charachter already is compared to the rest of Thedas, making the player characther unbelieable and even more unrealistic than the plot-shield player characthers already have.

Perhaps most players WANT the main character to be "special snowflakes". We don't know that, of course, but its worth putting on the table.

Esper's right.  The special snowflake character is a problem.  The same game mechanics should apply to every single creature in the game.

Setting the game in Tevinter might work, though, in allowing a classless system.

[LPPrince]

Kavatica wrote...

LPPrince wrote...

Perhaps most players WANT the main character to be "special snowflakes". We don't know that, of course, but its worth putting on the table.

Only if she is a special snowflake that also kicks serious ass.

Agreed. Wholeheartedly agreed.

[the_one_54321]

LPPrince wrote...
The mage uprising isn't something I want to be terribly involved in. I want another grand plot that threatens the whole of the land, but something that affects everyone in some way, not just putting a huge focus on mages.

The mage uprising could become quite a grand plot once it escalates to "Welcome to the New Tevinter Imperium, human slave scum."

[Sylvius the Mad]

the_one_54321 wrote...

And thus a dimplomatic route would involve convincing both sides to alter their ideals.

If that worked, I would lose respect for both sides.

I value strength of conviction.  If I were playing a game of this sort, I would be annoyed that I was forced to find that compromise, rather than just taking a side and eradicating the other.

[Dave of Canada]

LPPrince wrote...

Speaking about the Mage Uprising,

am I the only one who found the Blight more compelling?

It has potential provided it's done well, introduce mage sympathetic nobles who seek to abuse mages for their own ends and those who seek favor with the Templar Inquisition to benefit themselves once the status-quo is restored and you've got some political drama.

Add in Templar brutality (kill an entire village off the assumption that they're providing supplies to the apostates), questionable magic (Templar / Peasants are turned into abominations and sent in as shocktroopers) and the idealism of everything working out fine from both sides and you've got some fun there.

Going into an Orlesian ballroom where the nobles are gathering and finding out that mage-sympathetic lords snuck in a few blood mages in an effort to slay all pro-Chantry/Templar nobles would be fun.

Just afraid it'll turn into Dragon Age 2's ending where everybody is unreasonable and possessed or there's going to be a third choice where everybody lives happily ever after, I hope people stick to one side and feel uncomfortable with the lengths that one side is doing for victory. You stay with them or change sides based on your ideals.

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 21 mars 2012 - 04:23 .

[the_one_54321]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

the_one_54321 wrote...
And thus a dimplomatic route would involve convincing both sides to alter their ideals.

If that worked, I would lose respect for both sides.

I value strength of conviction.  If I were playing a game of this sort, I would be annoyed that I was forced to find that compromise, rather than just taking a side and eradicating the other.

Whose to say that you don't have both paths available to you?
Nothing wrong with seeking a path of mutually guaranteed peace. But if you don't want to seek peace, then you seek military vicotry.

The availability of truly world altering choices has a lot of potential in this. You can seek conquest for the mages, subjugation for the mages, or a peaceful coexistence.

Modifié par the_one_54321, 21 mars 2012 - 04:24 .

[Kavatica]

Dave of Canada wrote...

LPPrince wrote...

Speaking about the Mage Uprising,

am I the only one who found the Blight more compelling?

It has potential provided it's done well, introduce mage sympathetic nobles who seek to abuse mages for their own ends and those who seek favor with the Templar Inquisition to benefit themselves once the status-quo is restored and you've got some political drama.

Add in Templar brutality (kill an entire village off the assumption that they're providing supplies to the apostates), questionable magic (Templar / Peasants are turned into abominations and sent in as shocktroopers) and the idealism of everything working out fine from both sides and you've got some fun there.

Going into an Orlesian ballroom where the nobles are gathering and finding out that mage-sympathetic lords snuck in a few blood mages in an effort to slay all pro-Chantry/Templar nobles would be fun.

Just afraid it'll turn into Dragon Age 2's ending where everybody is unreasonable and possessed.

Interesting ideas. I think with the events of DA2 starting a massive mage rebellion across Thedas, this is going to have to at least be mentioned and present in the background world of the game. But I am hoping this plot does not take center stage. Since, well, been there done that.

[LPPrince]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

LPPrince wrote...

Perhaps most players WANT the main character to be "special snowflakes". We don't know that, of course, but its worth putting on the table.

Esper's right.  The special snowflake character is a problem.  The same game mechanics should apply to every single creature in the game.

Setting the game in Tevinter might work, though, in allowing a classless system.

By the way, I like the Tevinter idea. It WOULD work there.

But-

Doesn't each character have their own choice as to what they wield? What they specialize in?

I feel like I'm seeing it in a 50/50 gameplay/story way, where obviously a squadmate character chose to be who they are(warrior, rogue) or chose to show off their inherent abilities(mage), so why shouldn't we be able to mix and match?

Plus, if the Mage Uprising is so important, why not write it so that the main character is a character with magical abilities who trained in them to avoid becoming an abomination, but when the game starts, can choose whether to take advantage of their powers or not?

You know, kinda like how Bethany said she didn't really show off her magic and had to keep quiet about it?

So basically you'd be talented with magic anyway, you just wouldn't have to actually use it.

But if you do, people notice. I think that dynamic would fit well if the Mage Uprising remains to be an important segment in the games.