31 réponses à ce sujet

[Realmzmaster]

If warriors are going to be able to bash open a chest or door then any breakable contents in the chest should have a very high possibility of breaking (say 95%) or all breakable contents do break. This will keep gamers from reloading. The choice of not bringing a rogue should have consequences. The wizard spell should not be knock but melt lock. There would be a high possibility of fusing the lock on the chest or door shut. The chest could still be bashed open by the warrior but the probability of breakage would occur.

Or if a spell like knock is used then the possibility of breaking the contents happens but to a lesser degree than the warrior say (75%). and the spell would be tied to the caster level and intelligence. The level and intelligence would allow the caster to open tougher locks and slowly lower the level of breakage.

[berelinde]

Mike_Neel wrote...

If every class can open a lock then the rogue class lose their viability in companion choice and class selection.

I guess you could argue that if you don't like it don't take the perk/skill or whatever it would be, but still.
I like how Dragon Age still has classes as opposed to be able to play the every man capable of doing everything.

Back in the old days, rogues were good at theify things, mages were good at magic (and they had a knock spell), and warriors were good at fighting.

Now, rogues are still good at theify things (although they have lost the ability to pick pockets), rogues are better at fighting than the warriors, and a lot of rogue special abilities look an awful lot like mage spells. They could stand a good deal of nerfing before they became unattractive as a player class. In fact, one might even argue that rogues are now so ridiculously overpowered that nerfing them a bit would make them *more* attractive as a player class.

If I were in charge, rogues would get back their pickpocketing skill (and it would be restricted to rogues), warriors would regain their fighting edge, displacing rogues as the damage-dealer of choice, and be able to bash locks, and mages would once again have access to the time-honored Knock spell.

[The Elder King]

berelinde wrote...

Back in the old days, rogues were good at theify things, mages were good at magic (and they had a knock spell), and warriors were good at fighting.

Now, rogues are still good at theify things (although they have lost the ability to pick pockets), rogues are better at fighting than the warriors, and a lot of rogue special abilities look an awful lot like mage spells. They could stand a good deal of nerfing before they became unattractive as a player class. In fact, one might even argue that rogues are now so ridiculously overpowered that nerfing them a bit would make them *more* attractive as a player class.

If I were in charge, rogues would get back their pickpocketing skill (and it would be restricted to rogues), warriors would regain their fighting edge, displacing rogues as the damage-dealer of choice, and be able to bash locks, and mages would once again have access to the time-honored Knock spell.

I agree with you. Though I don't care how much powerful the rogues are in DA2, I'm not going to play as one with those animations. The warriors's animations were bad too, but the rogue's were ridicolous in my opinion.

[OH-UP-THIS!]

OP, just a straight forward unflinching NO.

Just not have locks on any box/trunk. you're going to sell most of it anyway.

[jazzy B 3]

If the rogue class relies on lockpicking as it's sole validating element, I'd say that it is not a valid class. All classes should have some combat and some utility benefits. If anything, I think that is where they did something right with DAII, making the rogue a dedicated single target slayer. It certainly makes the class a more useful contributor.

[Mike_Neel]

I liked the over the top animations for the rogues in DAII, but I can live with the thought that i'm probably the only one who does.

I don't like em for warriors stomping around in full armor with a huge broad sword or a sword and shield. But with rogues it's cool seeing them roll around on the ground back flipping out of they way, dropping into stealth and slicing open their backs with a million little cuts. It's the one class where I approve of the over the top ninja animations.

[ScotGaymer]

Realmzmaster wrote...

If warriors are going to be able to bash open a chest or door then any breakable contents in the chest should have a very high possibility of breaking (say 95%) or all breakable contents do break. This will keep gamers from reloading. The choice of not bringing a rogue should have consequences. The wizard spell should not be knock but melt lock. There would be a high possibility of fusing the lock on the chest or door shut. The chest could still be bashed open by the warrior but the probability of breakage would occur.

Or if a spell like knock is used then the possibility of breaking the contents happens but to a lesser degree than the warrior say (75%). and the spell would be tied to the caster level and intelligence. The level and intelligence would allow the caster to open tougher locks and slowly lower the level of breakage.

This was the general point I was making but I don't agree that it should be THAT difficult. Maybe like 50/50 chance for mages and 60/40 for warriors?

Mike_Neel wrote...

I liked the over the top animations for
the rogues in DAII, but I can live with the thought that i'm probably
the only one who does.

I don't like em for warriors stomping
around in full armor with a huge broad sword or a sword and shield. But
with rogues it's cool seeing them roll around on the ground back
flipping out of they way, dropping into stealth and slicing open their
backs with a million little cuts. It's the one class where I approve of
the over the top ninja animations.

What?

Modifié par FitScotGaymer, 16 avril 2012 - 11:55 .