220 réponses à ce sujet

[Bluto Blutarskyx]

Brunopolis wrote...

Then it only stands to reason that Rogues and Warriors be combined into one class as well.

I think the big problem with Dragon Age Origins is how Mages and Clerics were combined into one class yet Rogues and Warriors were left apart.  It makes Mages far more multi-purpose because the other two classes really should have been one to begin with.  Also, it's clear this is the case because while Mages have their own completely unique story/skill options Warriors and Rogues tend to share almost ALL of them between each other.

As a side-bonus it would help balance the game as the warrior/rogue combo would probably be as versatile as mages.  Obviously, this cannot be done with this game as it's already been decided but for a sequel it would be an interesting thought.  The other option, splitting mages and clerics into seperate classes, would probably take far more work.

i think with all the flak this game is getting on the gay sex scenes, they don't need more flak from critics by having a seperate class of chantry followers that have the "pedophile" passive ability.

besides, the texture mapping of having "smaller" individuals in the scenes would be difficult to do. and if they didn't include that aspect of a chantry follower, then basically all they are is a mage that heals.

so thats what they did.

[JaegerBane]

Brunopolis wrote...
Ummm..Dragon Age is considered to be the "spiritual successor" of Baldur's Gate which is a D & D game.  The developers say it right there.  So you could say I was partially right.  Seriously, a company that has made countless RPG's based on the D&D system say they are going to make a spiritual successor to an RPG that is set in the D&D universe.  So I said they are purely basing the game off of D&D.  Maybe my use of "purely" was a bit too strong but it's evident where they got most of their inspirations from.

I'm not really sure what point you're trying to make here. The term 'spiritual successor' has never meant the game is supposed to play in exactly the same way. Supreme Commander is the spiritual successor of Total Annihilation.  Bioshock is the same to System Shock 2. All it actually means is that it follows in the same vein - to use that to claim it's must be based on DnD - something that Baldur's Gate just happened to be based on, but wasn't actually the game itself - is just an unfounded assumption that has no relevance to what is being discussed here.

And not to be blunt, but you were told straight up by one of the developers that you were making things up. So frankly, I'm not sure why you're even defending it. Your assumption, nothing more.

If it barks like a dog and walks like a dog then what is it?

Something that looks and sounds like a dog. My girlfriend has an Ipod accessory that does the same. It's made of plastic. I'm sorry, but your above logic is so simplistic it doesn't make any sense. As I said before, not far off saying all dogs have four legs, so my chair must be a dog.

By the way, balance is an issue in single player games.  One key balancing issue with single player games is making sure it stays a challenge.  Due to the imbalance with caster/non-caster classes the game has trouble maintaining a proper challenge. 

True, but it has nowhere near the grave importance you attached to it. If the mages are overpowered then stone the crows, but it doesn't actually mean that you're getting shortchanged in the same way the situation under MMO conditions would.

Ultimately, if you prefer playing mages, just play a mage. Don't harp on about how rogues are not as powerful. If you hate rogues so much then you shouldn't be playing them.

If there's one thing that I can agree with is that maybe the idea of combining warriors and rogues itself is a bad idea and won't resolve any sort of balance issue regarding class variety.    However, as the game is right now, mages are the "everything" class and vary considerably from the rogue/warrior classes which are quite similar and share half their skills.

Mages have always been the 'everything' class. That's kind of the point behind magic. It allows you to do things that you couldn't physically do by yourself. Historically this has meant that mages are the ones who lack skills and HP, which is the case here. The fact magic in DA:O is so powerful is partially a lore issue and partially a result of the archetypical RPG party concept of warriors holding back enemies, rogues disarming traps, picking locks and being generally sneaky, and mages functioning as squad support.

Ultimately, it seems you have a problem with the archetype. Mages in DnD were severely underpowered thanks to the per-day concept, but it was only ever a real issue in cRPGs where you rarely go without a fight for longer than 10 mins.

[SheffSteel]

Forgive me for jumping in after reading less than half of the total thread...

I don't see a good reason for splitting Mages into two classes. There is only one magic system in this game world (the combination of "witchcraft" and blood magic not being substantial enough, in my opinion, to justify its own class) and the gameplay arguments seem rather weak in the absence of something lore-based.

On the other hand, there seems to be plenty of justification for combining Rogues and Warriors into what would become, effectively, a classless rules system for non magic users. Characters would then be able to decide whether to invest in combat or non-combat skills/talents, assuming that a fair balance is possible between the two.

[Faerell Gustani]

SheffSteel wrote...

Forgive me for jumping in after reading less than half of the total thread...

I don't see a good reason for splitting Mages into two classes. There is only one magic system in this game world (the combination of "witchcraft" and blood magic not being substantial enough, in my opinion, to justify its own class) and the gameplay arguments seem rather weak in the absence of something lore-based.

On the other hand, there seems to be plenty of justification for combining Rogues and Warriors into what would become, effectively, a classless rules system for non magic users. Characters would then be able to decide whether to invest in combat or non-combat skills/talents, assuming that a fair balance is possible between the two.

Suffice to say, you're in agreement with me.
I don't think any of them NEED to be merged or split per say, but I do believe that merging them grants a power boost in the way of versatility, while splitting them forced specalizations and has less customization and thus less potential power.
So, if one is split, then both should be split, and if one is merged, then the others should be merged.
Going half way just increases the power gap.

Since there are no "clerics" in the game and they've been merged into mages, then that just leaves the merging of the Rogue/Warrior for balance.
The one problem I see still is that weapon choice locks a rogue/warrior's talents and reduces options dramatically.  The inability to cherry pick all of the CC abilities to create a CC melee combatant versus the mage's ability to do so is another cause of the power gap.

Modifié par Faerell Gustani, 07 décembre 2009 - 06:50 .

[Darpaek]

There's lots of good classless PnP RPG systems out there. I've spent more time that I wanna admit playing WEG Star Wars or WoD.

[Faerell Gustani]

Most PnP RPGs are classless. D&D is class based because it has its roots in miniature warfare games. Similarly Warhammer is also a class based game.



Anything from White Wolf (World of Darkness) is classless. AEG games (L5r, 7th Sea) are classless. Deadlands/Savage Worlds also classless.

[SheffSteel]

The problem with suggesting a classless rules system is that people tend to think of things like Oblivion and shudder.

[Darpaek]

Okay, I'm dumb. It's been a long time since I slogged thru an elder scrolls game - aren't there classes?



I seem to recall making a custom class (with a mod?). I dunno.

[robertthebard]

The problem with a classless rules system is that this game was never billed to be one. Everything I read prior to release laid out exactly how the classes were going to be, and lo and behold, when I bought it, they were just like I was led to believe they would be. Breaking the game to suit a minority of players that can't seem to figure out how to build an effective rogue to take with them solves nothing.

Spelling...

Modifié par robertthebard, 07 décembre 2009 - 08:15 .

[robertthebard]

Georg Zoeller wrote...

Eh no. We never said that, because it is absolutely not true.

Brunopolis wrote...

2. This game is supposedly inspired purely from D&D. The game designers even said this.

Owned.

[Darpaek]

That's coo... but if you're gonna design your own class-based system from scratch, go all out! Do it "right" as per whatever your vision of a class-based system should be.



This game has all the class diversity of Quest for Glory. I know they were aiming for a retro feel... but come on. Even PoolRad had 4. =D

[ChickenDownUnder]

Good to see I have nothing to fear from tomatoes.

Darpaek wrote...

Okay, I'm dumb. It's been a long time since I slogged thru an elder scrolls game - aren't there classes?

I seem to recall making a custom class (with a mod?). I dunno.

Oblivion is set up with the understanding that before your character had been in jail, they had been/done something with themselves to get a small boost in various stats. Some of those stat combinations are already labled in the game, that you can assign at level 1, with also there being the option to be able to choose which stats you want a small boost in as well as setting a custom "class" name for yourself. And even if you do pick any of the pregenerated combos, you can still invest points into other abilities, its just meant you didn't get the initial boost.

A mage could still learn how to lockpick, a rogue could still invest points in healing spells, and so on. Balance was maintained by only getting so many points to use each level up, so while a rogue could also heal, he wouldn't be as good at stealth as a character he poured all his points into it. How a character progressed was entirely up to the player.

Modifié par ChickenDownUnder, 07 décembre 2009 - 09:53 .

[MarloMarlo]

Jassper wrote...
I personally feel that it just destroys the fantasy role play aspect of gaming.

classes merely affect how some of the numbers (and non-number abilities) go around on a spreadsheet. If you're so concerned about role playing, then concern yourself with role playing.

Jassper wrote...
Once you have it whittled down to just 2 base class types it won't be long until someone wants to combine them as well, enacting the same arguments - "why can't a warrior learn to cast spells?"

Oh look, a slippery slope fallacy. One that's easily explained away by the mere fact that you're either born with the ability to use magic in DA or you're not. And if you are, you get sent away to a tower by Templars to learn magic.

Jassper wrote...
And I still stand behind the fact that there is a huge distinction between Warriors and Rogues, regardless of someone trying to make it sound and if I don't know what I am talking about.

And that person's name was Jassper, who had only his mere insistance to back up his claims of being an authority on rogues.

[Kaosgirl]

[quote]MarloMarlo wrote...

[quote]Kaosgirl wrote...
And climbing walls, and bartering with crooked merchants, and conning the naive nobility, and interrogating captured prisoners...

Though I guess for a mindless hack&slasher none of that's relevant.  Hence the bone of backstabbing and dirty-fighting.[/quote]
Hey now, in a video game, bartering and climbing are just as mindless as hacking and slashing. You're still merely making a decision to defer to a spreadsheet to determine success.[/quote]

Such a very shallow outlook, though it is somewhat justified by video games generally catering to the hack-and-slash model, where everything is ultimately about the fight.
Which is why a character who's archetype is about getting the reward by means other than hacking and slashing his way through mobs is so rarely viable; and instead we get a class that's just an alternate-style warrior with lockpicking thrown on.

[quote]MarloMarlo wrote...
[quote]Kaosgirl wrote...
Time spent progressing in one field of study is time not spent progressing in another. Logically, someone who focuses on out-of-combat utility should be increasing his martial prowess at a much slower rate than someone who focuses on martial prowess...
(At least until one hits the point of diminishing returns, but that's a whole other argument entirely.)[/quote]
Progressing in one field of study doesn't bar you from another. Learning how to pick a lock doesn't make you unable to learn how to use a sword, or make it harder for you to learn to use a sword any more than singing makes it harder for you to learn math. This is true in real life and, more importantly, in the game.[/quote]

And I never said otherwise.
What I said is that the guy who takes some time learning how to pick a lock isn't going to be as good at swinging a sword as the guy who devoted his time entirely to swordplay (all other things being equal.)

Don't believe me?  Put an amateur boxer in the ring with a professional of the same age as him.  See who wins.

[quote]MarloMarlo wrote...
[quote]Kaosgirl wrote...
Or we could make it less combat-heavy and give the skill-monkey something to do that fits who he is instead of just cramming him into the role of glass-jaw DPS fighter...[/quote]
We could -- or, BioWare could -- but that's not the game Dragon Age is. And this topic is about combining the two classes in Dragon Age, not combining them in every game with rogues and warriors as separate classes.
[/quote]

But that's not the game Dragon Age is either.  Once you start talking about changing things, other changes become open for discussion as well.

[quote]MarloMarlo wrote...
[quote]Kaosgirl wrote...
Hey, way to miss the point.[/quote]
No. Even within the options given to rogues, it'll either be specialized as a dual weilder or an archer. Giving them the option to learn shield or 2 handed weapon skills doesn't eliminate the need to specialize because the game still limits progression through a limited number of attribute points, skills, talents/spells learned per level.[/quote]

The fact that you think this is even proof that you didn't miss my point just acts as further confirmation that you really did.  

[quote]MarloMarlo wrote...
[quote]Kaosgirl wrote...
It depends on how it's done, really.[/quote]
Well, I don't think anyone's arguing to combine rogues and warriors and also give them twice as many points to spend.[/quote]

I don't think anyone's really given any kind of idea on how how they'd combine the two.  
Are you just going to merge the talent trees, and then give the combined class Rogue skill points & warrior HP?  Is there going to be some 'pruning' and combining of talents done to give them a talent tree of comparable size to the mages?  Or is it going to be a complete rewrite from the ground up?


[quote]MarloMarlo wrote...
[quote]Kaosgirl wrote...
Proof plox?[/quote]
The burden of proof was yours first. But I'll give you what you want, anyway, since you earn it later:
 
Nothing about the Fade is divine. Spirits are there. Some are bad, some are good. When you dream, that's where you go. That's the Fade.[/quote]

The Dragon Age wiki gives it numerous religious references.  It is where the Maker once resided, according to the Chantry, and the realm we all pass through when we die.  Elven lore carries similar ideas.  

All that really makes it different from a D&D divine realm is confirmation of the religious attributions.  

[quote]MarloMarlo wrote...
DnD, on the other hand, has actual gods and realms that are actually divine.[/quote]

In some settings, but not in all.  Dark Sun had none that I could recall - clerics drew their power from the elemental planes instead.  

[quote]MarloMarlo wrote...
[quote]Kaosgirl wrote...
3E D&D clerics weren't necessarily getting their powers from any gods either - though people who were still stuck in habits from the previous versions often missed that little detail.  Even in 2e, the Dark Sun setting more or less dispensed with the gods and had Clerics being powered by the Elemental planes.[/quote]
Fine, according to 3E, clerics don't have to be granted their spells by a god and I missed the fine print or something else that isn't any more excusable.[/quote]

I don't quite get what you're trying to say there.  What isn't any more excusable - the notion of divine magic involving atheistic religions?

[Kaosgirl]

MarloMarlo wrote...

Jassper wrote...
Once you have it whittled down to just 2 base class types it won't be long until someone wants to combine them as well, enacting the same arguments - "why can't a warrior learn to cast spells?"

Oh look, a slippery slope fallacy. One that's easily explained away by the mere fact that you're either born with the ability to use magic in DA or you're not. And if you are, you get sent away to a tower by Templars to learn magic.

Except...  the Templars themselves have magic-like abilities (though focused on countering more traditional magic,) which the lore explains as being gained from consuming lyrium.  And there are wilder mages and 'apostates' who managed to avoid being sent to a tower or arranged an escape from it in some way.

And we can also look at the idea from the opposite direction instead, if you prefer:  why can't a mage learn to backstab or hit someone in the face with a shield?

[Ibian]

Bruno makes a lot of sense. CID-78 makes even more. Strict class separation is not necessary for a balanced game, it would be better if we could pick and choose from all the abilities in the game to make exactly what we want. Keep the origin stories, no problems there, but give us choice.

Modifié par Ibian, 08 décembre 2009 - 02:24 .

[Kaosgirl]

Darpaek wrote...

Okay, I'm dumb. It's been a long time since I slogged thru an elder scrolls game - aren't there classes?

Sort of.
In Oblivion, the classes give minor boosts to related attributes and have primary skills that determine when you level up.  You get a boost in starting proficiency in your primary skills as well.  
But you can train any skill you want, and generally speaking your choice of race and star-sign are going to be more relevant than what 'class' you start as in the long run.

Darpaek wrote...
I seem to recall making a custom class (with a mod?). I dunno.

When it comes time to pick a class in Oblivion, you can either choose one of the pre-mades or design your own.
This is usually a good idea, Oblivion's levelling system is twitchy and most of the pre-made classes don't work very well with it.  You're actually better off making a custom class and picking primary skills that you almost never use.  That way you can either avoid levelling while maxing your relevant skills (and avoid the level-scaling issues entirely) or train your skills so that you only qualify for a level after you've maxed out your potential bonuses (so that you can keep up with or gain an edge on the level-scaling.)

Or use some of the mods that tweak the levelling so you don't have to screw around in order to remain competitive with the scaling encounters.

SheffSteel wrote...

The problem with suggesting a classless rules system is that people tend to think of things like Oblivion and shudder.

I tend to think of Ultima Online instead.  Or GURPs.

Modifié par Kaosgirl, 08 décembre 2009 - 02:29 .

[Ibian]

Also, people seem to be forgetting that in DA, mages get their magic from the Fade. From the Seat of the Maker. From God. There is no problem with adding clerics to the game, lorewise, at all.

[addiction21]

I would like to say something...

[Kaosgirl]

Seifz wrote...

Kaosgirl wrote...

MarloMarlo wrote...
"Technically," there's no evidence of the Maker's existance, unlike the verifiable and recognizable presence of the gods in DnD; nor would it matter since the Maker isn't even granting mages the power to cast spells.

3E D&D clerics weren't necessarily getting their powers from any gods either - though people who were still stuck in habits from the previous versions often missed that little detail.  Even in 2e, the Dark Sun setting more or less dispensed with the gods and had Clerics being powered by the Elemental planes.  

Real, verifiable and recognizable Gods aren't essential to the Cleric. The only consistent things that differentiate them from mages are:
Being subject to a religious-based hierarchy.  (Chantry bosses the Circle around:  check.)
Channelling their power from elsewhere.  (DA:O Mages draw power from the Fade: check.)

(Edited to fix quotation attributions.)

My D&D 3.5e books say that you're incorrect.  Indeed, Clerics must pray for their spells each day and that their power is granted by the god that they champion.

My D&D 3e books are back in Edmonton, while I'm in Calgary.  But looking at the SRD, which is available online, I get the following line:

"If a cleric is not devoted to a particular deity, he still selects two domains to represent his spiritual inclinations and abilities. The restriction on alignment domains still applies."

Clerics do not need to worship specific deities.  This would technically apply in Greyhawk as well, since it was the 'default setting' of the core rules.

[Malevolence65]

OP does have a point. Mages got too much attention in the production of this game.

[Ibian]

Real life example: My dad is an archaeologist. He has made the blueprints for every house he has lived in for the past 25 years, and he is working on another one for when my folks move in the coming year. He also builds part of it himself, because it takes too long to build it all without help.

He is also a painter. A rather good one, compared to most modern "art" i see in public buildings and most peoples homes, at that.

So what class is he? A treasure hunter, an architect, a carpenter or an artist?

The notion that classes make any kind of sense is complete nonsense. There is nothing that prevents a Zen Buddhist from also being a skilled singer and a video game master.

Modifié par Ibian, 08 décembre 2009 - 03:31 .

[Darpaek]

Can he use a bullwhip? Does he own a Webley or a fedora?



If not - I wanna hear a story about griffins.

[Ibian]

Well, he also collects, trades in, and restores antiques. One of them had what looks like gryphs on it. He didnt know what those were until i told him, but then it all made sense cause they looked a bit odd for cows. Does that count?

[Darpaek]

What kinda of archeologist doesn't know what a griffin is? No wonder he builds houses for a living...