33 réponses à ce sujet

[Biotic_Warlock]

To make it less complicated it is all based on Dragon Age 2 power trees to get a sense of how each multi-class would work.


Warrior-Mage:
-No armour
-Can use any weapon.
-Can use Shields
-Power Trees available: 2h Weapon, Defender, Warmonger, Elemental magic, Creation Magic, Arcane Magic.
-Specs available: Fallen Templar, Spirit Warrior, Arcane warrior (nerfed), Spirit Healer.

Warrior-Rogue
-Heavy Armour
-Can use any weapon except 2h
-Can use crossbows with same bonuses and factors as bows.
-Can use Shields
-Can dual wield any one handed weapon combo.
-Cannot stealth
-Weaker backstab (attack from behind bonus)
-Power Trees available: Sword and Shield, Vanguard, Battlemaster, Dual-Wield (nerfed),Sabotage, Specialist
Specs available: Reaver, Beserker, Duelist, Ranger

Rogue-Mage
-Light Armour
-Can use any one handed light weapon (dagger/mace).
-Can dual wield.
-Can stealth
-Weaker backstab
-Can use bows
-Power Trees availabe: Scoundrel, Subterfuge, Archery (nerfed), Primal magic, Entropy Magic, Spirit Magic
Specs available: Shadow, Bard, Blood-Mage, Force-Mage



Pure classes (just to clarify and balance the spec numbers):

Rogues:
Trees: Dual-Wield (un-nerfed), Archery (un-nerfed), Scoundrel, Specialist, Subterfuge, Sabotage.
Specs: Assassin, Bard, Shadow, Duelist

Mage:
Trees: Primal, Elemental, Creation, Spirit, Arcane, Entropy
Specs: Shapeshifter, Blood-mage, Spirit Healer, Force-Mage

Warrior:
Trees: Sword and Shield, 2H weapon, Vanguard, Battlemaster, Warmonger, Defender
Specs: Champion, Beserker, Reaver, Templar (Fallen templar is very slightly different).



Balance suggestions:
-Stats do not affect weapon or attack damage. Stats increase accuracy for their relevant attack, but damage and accuracy mainly dependant on level. Strengh increases fortitude, dex increases critical chance, magic increases magic resistance and power, willpower increases mental resistance and stamina, cunning increases defence and lockpicking/trap skills.
-Above changes allow any build to be equally as viable in terms of main combat (excluding skills).
-Full Friendly fire on normal (or core-rules) difficulty.

Modifié par Biotic_Warlock, 29 août 2012 - 12:25 .

[Spirit Keeper]

Sir, I say sir! You are a genius!

[wsandista]

Why don't they let us pick what ability trees we want at character creation? That way we could have custom classes. Also, equipment should have stat requirements only, not class or level.

Modifié par wsandista, 29 août 2012 - 02:37 .

[Adugan]

How could there be spoilers in here if its a suggestion?

[cindercatz]

My choice would be to go back to Origins' stat system, where I could basically build any character I wanted from the available stat trees and use any equipment I designed my character to use. Definitely don't nerf any weapon trees, because then you're favoring one available weapon set over the other within the same class, which defeats the purpose of having that weapon tree available in the first place.

No pure, basic build should have any advatage over the hybrid builds, they should just have different available skill trees if anything.

edit: Also, bring back lock-on animations and auto-dodge, just have faster smoother animation to go with it. And bring back finishers. No more giant health bars. No more relying on two stats to do everything your class needs. No more reliance on resistance for everything under the sun (unless you build a warrior class tank build of your own choosing).

Modifié par cindercatz, 29 août 2012 - 07:29 .

[Biotic_Warlock]

Adugan wrote...

How could there be spoilers in here if its a suggestion?

Hmm... probably not... may have been carried away with the notion of a "No spoiler" zone.

wsandista wrote...

Why don't they let us pick what ability
trees we want at character creation? That way we could have custom
classes. Also, equipment should have stat requirements only, not class
or level.

If we had free choice we could start choosing dual-wielding powers (like in Origin) whilst also being warrior tanks. Dual-wielding overshadowed two-handed and one-handed by a large amount (since shields powers didn't really give many bonuses except knockdown resistances). I think a balance between classes is important; rogues being dps against one target but being more squishy (in DA2 they were much squishier than warriors compared to in DAO).

cindercatz wrote...
edit: Also, bring back lock-on animations
and auto-dodge, just have faster smoother animation to go with it. And
bring back finishers. No more giant health bars. No more relying on two
stats to do everything your class needs. No more reliance on resistance
for everything under the sun (unless you build a warrior class tank
build of your own choosing).

That's what i kinda meant when i talked about balancing stats so they give other combat bonuses, but do not directly affect damage or attack rating (as much). Maybe enough so that you need a high strengh to have a good accuracy with some extra damage on top, but not as much emphasis so characters can donate points to stats which give useful bonuses (like dexterity in DA2 was handy for my beserker, but strengh was too important to miss points in).

Modifié par Biotic_Warlock, 29 août 2012 - 12:34 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

Do away with stupid classes altogether. Have mage and non-mage. Everything else - every skill or talent is up to player choice.

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

Don't like the idea of dual-classing in a game with only three main classes. Would infinitely prefer Ability Trees that branch into General Abilities everyone can use, class Trees for each class and Specialised Trees for specific Specializations. Similar to Origins, but not split into combat/non-combat.

Mages ought to take a crack at learning swordsmanship if they have the relevant Attributes to fill out the Melee Ability Tree.

Forget item/equipment restrictions based on classes. Don't make it Attribute based either.

Tie it all into Ability Trees and Specialisations. Through class and Specialization Trees, encourage playstyles that fit the archetype (i.e Ranger spec gets bonus stats/abilities with Bows), but don't lock out possibilities for non-conventional builds whatsoever.

Modifié par CrustyBot, 29 août 2012 - 01:30 .

[MichaelStuart]

I would prefer to build my own classes by picking skills.

[Dragoonlordz]

Set class system makes sense for companions in a role playing sense when the game is based on taking control of a character that has existed for a long time prior to start playing. They existed prior to your picking them up, they have a history and way of training prior to your meeting them and it influences who they are and how it is reflected possibly in thier quests which relate to their pasts plus the weapons they use when you met them. However it all depends on the game and how much leaway is given to alter that past.

I like however to choose what they use, what skills they have and what they wear so while it makes some sense in RP perspective having set classes on characters, I am not saying I prefer set classes over freedom to change it. One thing I also like is class having an impact on story and dialogue, perception by other characters or NPC's and different classes reflected in being shown in game via such. The opposite such as Fallout 3 did the other method which is allowing you to create the character from birth and decide how they developed which allows the freedom to alter it all but as a consequence your attributes had no effect on plot or narrative.

It all comes down to how much impact classes have on story and the game itself. For example set classes did not work in DA2 as in gameplay itself noone notices you spamming spells even though they were hunting mages while at the same time condradictory with story which did recognise for example Bethany being mage plot played to this. So like said all comes down to the individual game whether works or not and either system could work if enough effort is put into it to make it work.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 29 août 2012 - 10:16 .

[ray.mitch7410]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Set class system makes sense for companions in a role playing sense when the game is based on taking control of a character that has existed for a long time prior to start playing. They existed prior to your picking them up, they have a history and way of training prior to your meeting them and it influences who they are and how it is reflected possibly in thier quests which relate to their pasts plus the weapons they use when you met them. However it all depends on the game and how much leaway is given to alter that past.

I like however to choose what they use, what skills they have and what they wear so while it makes some sense in RP perspective having set classes on characters, I am not saying I prefer set classes over freedom to change it. One thing I also like is class having an impact on story and dialogue, perception by other characters or NPC's and different classes reflected in being shown in game via such. The opposite such as Fallout 3 did the other method which is allowing you to create the character from birth and decide how they developed which allows the freedom to alter it all but as a consequence your attributes had no effect on plot or narrative.

It all comes down to how much impact classes have on story and the game itself. For example set classes did not work in DA2 as in gameplay itself noone notices you spamming spells even though they were hunting mages while at the same time condradictory with story which did recognise for example Bethany being mage plot played to this. So like said all comes down to the individual game whether works or not and either system could work if enough effort is put into it to make it work.

Being able to pick your skill trees does nothing to impede "taking control of a character that has existed for a long time prior to start playing". It has no more of an impact than being able to choose what class Hawke is. The difference is being mage/non-mage, and the game could easily check for that. Take any spell tree and you're considered a mage.

That was also the only difference in DAO. There is no difference between a human noble rogue, and a human noble warrior story-wise. The mage though, had a completely different backstory.  Outside of being a mage, your race and social standing had the biggest impact.

If they did want to make it so classes have a bigger impact in story, then the game could just check for what you have the most points into. I doubt they'll go that way though, if DAO and DA2 are any indication.

[withneelandi]

I'm starting to hate the idea of rigid "classes" more and more.

Da2's class system didn't feel flexible at all, and after a play through as a rougue/mage and warrior I didn't really feel there was much experiementing to be done.

In contrast i've had much more fun recently with RPG's that level up a character based on the way i'm playing it and that have reak scope for hybrid classes, origins had a bit of that, not huge amounts but even the existence of Arcane Warriors, Dual Weapon warriors or sub classes like Rangers helped.

I think it'd be far more fun in da3 if we could literally do what we wanted, a two handed warrior with healing magic? Yup, A Mage that specialises in lock picking and trap detection? Why not? A warrior who uses Bows?

Its nice to play an RPG for the first time and think, "crikey, I can bascially play this game however I want, I can't wait to try playing through again differently and see how things change" not "yeh, however I do this its still basically going to feel the same".

Less rigid classes = lots of replay related fun.

This doesn't even have to be complicated, imagine the Oblivion leveling system but with your stats auto allocated based on what skills the character is using the most. Total flexibilty zero stat related casual gamer alienation (You could even put the option to manually assign stats for RPG regulars).

[Dragoonlordz]

ray.mitch7410 wrote...

Being able to pick your skill trees does nothing to impede "taking control of a character that has existed for a long time prior to start playing". It has no more of an impact than being able to choose what class Hawke is. The difference is being mage/non-mage, and the game could easily check for that. Take any spell tree and you're considered a mage.

That was also the only difference in DAO. There is no difference between a human noble rogue, and a human noble warrior story-wise. The mage though, had a completely different backstory.  Outside of being a mage, your race and social standing had the biggest impact.

If they did want to make it so classes have a bigger impact in story, then the game could just check for what you have the most points into. I doubt they'll go that way though, if DAO and DA2 are any indication.

That cannot work though... Lets give some examples, you put points into spell trees the game thinks you are a mage and it is reflected as impact via dialogue and NPC perception of you of which half way through you put more points into another class tree then all of a sudden the first part makes no sense as you get treated in a different way to what started out as and prior to tipping point skill tree wise. With a set class of which allowed freedom to allocate specialisations within that class, the game throughout will react to you as that class and not switch to and from which makes little sense from narrative aspect.

Like I said I like choosing what I want to be, altering and fiddling with it skill wise and allowing for a lot of customisation of skill trees. Especially when they have great impact not just on combat but methods of completing quests or finding secrets, crafting or out of combat skills in general. But I have to offset that with the fact I also like and want the game to react to the class your character is from a narrative standpoint. Multiclassing as opposed to multiple specialisations within a set class again has the issues of the game story and interactions I feel cannot adequatly react to them. Now maybe they could program a way for it to react better but I cannot see them being able to do it justice or well enough if you can be any class at any time during the game.

Having a set class at the start ties in to the character having a background and a past which narrative and dialogue can use to make the quests and game tailored to more differences between playthroughs from a narrative perspective in a way that makes sense for roleplaying characters that pre-exist. Unlike Fallout 3 all the characters in DA with exception of the main protaganist all have their own backstories and histories which allow for tailored companion quests. It would make no sense to have fenris as a multiclass being warrior and mage when he is anti-mage from narrative standpoint etc. Characters have their pasts and preset classes work well with this element and allow for a more cohesive story with greater impact of those classes on the quests and narrative.

Customisation however has been a stable backbone of RPG's as one of the major elements that defines the genre for a very long time. The ability to allocate points in skills or talents, their effect on the world and story not just combat alone means a system has to be in place in the game to allow for diversity between classes and skill trees. Difference in specialisations and talents, spells and skills. You can still have a distinct impact of being a specialisation within a set class system within the story itself reflected in dialogue and plot via individual quests but it does not work as well when not within the confines of a set class. This would not work well with higgledy piggledy method of no set classes upon which even if can refine and customise (imho) the story will not be able to react adequatly to that.

So for myself I would like set class types with vast impact on narrative and plot, from quests to backstory plus interactions. I would like a wide variety of spells, skills and  player chosen refinements in those classes which include non combat skills and talents too. I would like attributes aswell. While I also like how Fallout 3 gave you much more control and from birth decided as much as possible all the way through childhood in the shelter to adulthood more choices. As shown with Fallout 3 what will happen and can only happen (imho) is a no plot impact when their is no set class. The only impact is basically headcanon and not shown in game through plot interactions.You have to remember DA titles are party based RPG's and a lot of the game relies on your companions histories and pasts. You give them random allocation pick'n mix style multiclassing it just won't work I think.

I want set primary class typically which is rogue, warrior, mage etc.. With vast array of specialisations and skills within those classes for the player to fiddle with and of which can alter how complete quests, crafting, combat and dialogue but for the set primary class to exist of which player can choose and of which that class has the biggest impact on interactions. Specialisations and abilities adding to the variety in things you can do and how you go about doing them shown with different results for how you went about it as a bonus to the former narrative impact of the set class. This is just my opinion, what makes most sense to me and what I think I might enjoy most. Multiclass not only would make no sense and not work in DA it would also be lore breaking (imho). So keep set class but allow multiple specialisations. Bring back out of combat skills and make it so the game allows for branching not only in dialogue impact but method for completing quests. Multiple ways to complete using multiple talents or skills not just dialogue however keep set classes for all the reasons I stated above.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 30 août 2012 - 01:44 .

[Biotic_Warlock]

withneelandi wrote...
Da2's class system didn't feel flexible at all, and after a play through as a rougue/mage and warrior I didn't really feel there was much experiementing to be done.
 

I agree; in DA2 classes were very 2 dimentional. <_<

I kinda see where people are going with the Skyrim-Esque idea (choosing skills to train in).
However i think DA uses classes and restrictions as an attempt to be similar to D&D (although the restrictions are worse than in second edition).

Warrior/Rogue/Mage is  like the simplest you can go. I wouldn't agree with there being too much flexibility (a templar/mage is something i would not want to see (except fallen templar as i mentioned above). The DA2 system was far too restricted and DAO had too many flaws in balance.

Modifié par Biotic_Warlock, 30 août 2012 - 02:38 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Set class system makes sense for companions in a role playing sense when the game is based on taking control of a character that has existed for a long time prior to start playing. They existed prior to your picking them up, they have a history and way of training prior to your meeting them and it influences who they are and how it is reflected possibly in thier quests which relate to their pasts plus the weapons they use when you met them. However it all depends on the game and how much leaway is given to alter that past.

Duh! Starting attributes and skills for party NPC's kinda do that alredy.
It's like a starting class without it being explicitly a starting class.

Even in games wihout classes you can create "pure" classes with carefull skill/perk/feat/attribute selection

****
And it's exactly freedom and immersion why I want to get rid of the rigid systems in place. They do not really help. They add reallx nothing.
Roleplay/fluff-wise there really are only 2 major groups on people - mages and non-mages. You are either born with magical talent or not. Everything else is mellable.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Dragoonlordz wrote...
That cannot work though... Lets give some examples, you put points into spell trees the game thinks you are a mage and it is reflected as impact via dialogue and NPC perception of you of which half way through you put more points into another class tree then all of a sudden the first part makes no sense as you get treated in a different way to what started out as and prior to tipping point skill tree wise. With a set class of which allowed freedom to allocate specialisations within that class, the game throughout will react to you as that class and not switch to and from which makes little sense from narrative aspect.

Not really. classes are not well defined not even in the real world.
And in the world of DA, you either are a mage or not. There is no in-between.
Your fighter can't suddenly develop magical powers.

Every NPC or character is either born with magical pwoers or not. If he is, he wil be treated as a mage. Simple.

In other words, DA should only have two broad classes - mage and non-mage. Everything else is window dressing anyway.

Modifié par Lotion Soronnar, 30 août 2012 - 06:24 .

[Dragoonlordz]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...
That cannot work though... Lets give some examples, you put points into spell trees the game thinks you are a mage and it is reflected as impact via dialogue and NPC perception of you of which half way through you put more points into another class tree then all of a sudden the first part makes no sense as you get treated in a different way to what started out as and prior to tipping point skill tree wise. With a set class of which allowed freedom to allocate specialisations within that class, the game throughout will react to you as that class and not switch to and from which makes little sense from narrative aspect.

Not really. classes are not well defined not even in the real world.
And in the world of DA, you either are a mage or not. There is no in-between.
Your fighter can't suddenly develop magical powers.

Every NPC or character is either born with magical pwoers or not. If he is, he wil be treated as a mage. Simple.

In other words, DA should only have two broad classes - mage and non-mage. Everything else is window dressing anyway.

I explained why I want set classes in the following five paragraphs you never bothered to respond to. I have said my piece and that is my stance and shall remain so, it is my opinion of what I would like and does not require other people to agree with me in order to be what I would like to see happen or why.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 30 août 2012 - 09:39 .

[ray.mitch7410]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

That cannot work though... Lets give some examples, you put points into spell trees the game thinks you are a mage and it is reflected as impact via dialogue and NPC perception of you of which half way through you put more points into another class tree then all of a sudden the first part makes no sense as you get treated in a different way to what started out as and prior to tipping point skill tree wise. With a set class of which allowed freedom to allocate specialisations within that class, the game throughout will react to you as that class and not switch to and from which makes little sense from narrative aspect.

Of course it can work, that's not even up for debate. See? I can make comments than I don't substantiate too!

Also, why WOULDN'T you be treated differently as your character changes? People who know me, know that I'm an BJJ practitioner. Then I joined the Air Force and became a meteorologist. Guess what? They treated me differently! As you change and grow as a person, people's reactions to you also change. Guess what happened when I started studying to be an engineer?

Depending who I talk to, their emphasis will be on different things. MMA fans/practiioners talk to me about MMA and martial arts in general. Other people who happen to be engineers talk to me regarding engineering topics. Most engineers to not talk to me about MMA, and most MMA fans/practitioners don't talk to me about engineering. People talk about what is most relevant to them.

Let's say I'm a mage in game. I meet a theif. He thinks I'm a bookworm. Later on I've put points into stealth/cunning/whatever. He can then remark on how my magic complements my theif skills. Or just simply admire or comment on my thief skills (as this is more relevant to him). Why shouldn't his reaction to me change?

A templar wouldn't care. To him, I'd always be a mage. Similar to how a racist person might always see me as Hispanic, regardless of being half white, regardless of my actual accomplishments.

In the game, an NPCs reaction would change or not change as needed. Templars would only do a MAGE - NON MAGE check, and everyone else can do a check on CUN/STR/CON etc.

Easy.

Dragoonlordz wrote... 

Like I said I like choosing what I want to be, altering and fiddling with it skill wise and allowing for a lot of customisation of skill trees. Especially when they have great impact not just on combat but methods of completing quests or finding secrets, crafting or out of combat skills in general. But I have to offset that with the fact I also like and want the game to react to the class your character is from a narrative standpoint. Multiclassing as opposed to multiple specialisations within a set class again has the issues of the game story and interactions I feel cannot adequatly react to them. Now maybe they could program a way for it to react better but I cannot see them being able to do it justice or well enough if you can be any class at any time during the game.

Okay, so you have a small imagination and can see them being capable of doing it.

That's nice.

Please show me specific examples in DAO or DA2 where being multiclass or not having a class would have ruined the way the game reacted to you. Thanks.

Dragoonlordz wrote... 

Having a set class at the start ties in to the character having a background and a past which narrative and dialogue can use to make the quests and game tailored to more differences between playthroughs from a narrative perspective in a way that makes sense for roleplaying characters that pre-exist. Unlike Fallout 3 all the characters in DA with exception of the main protaganist all have their own backstories and histories which allow for tailored companion quests. It would make no sense to have fenris as a multiclass being warrior and mage when he is anti-mage from narrative standpoint etc. Characters have their pasts and preset classes work well with this element and allow for a more cohesive story with greater impact of those classes on the quests and narrative.

In DA you're either a mage, or not a mage. So it wouldn't make sense to allow Fenris to suddenly be a mage, and no one has asked for that. However, what is keeping him from learning how to pick locks? Maybe he thinks it's a useful skill and asks Varric to show him. How would Fenris being able to pick locks negatively impact the story?

It wouldn't.

The only distinction you might have to make in origin between classes is for the mage. As I said, you're either born a mage or you're not. It functions more like a race than a class.

Again, please show me where my mage Hawke (or Fenris) "multiclassing" and learning how to pick locks would negatively impact the story. 

Dragoonlordz wrote... 

Customisation however has been a stable backbone of RPG's as one of the major elements that defines the genre for a very long time. The ability to allocate points in skills or talents, their effect on the world and story not just combat alone means a system has to be in place in the game to allow for diversity between classes and skill trees. Difference in specialisations and talents, spells and skills. You can still have a distinct impact of being a specialisation within a set class system within the story itself reflected in dialogue and plot via individual quests but it does not work as well when not within the confines of a set class. This would not work well with higgledy piggledy method of no set classes upon which even if can refine and customise (imho) the story will not be able to react adequatly to that.

The same unsubstantiated claim again? Once again, my mage Hawke learning stealth or lock picking would not have impacted the story in any way.

Dragoonlordz wrote... 

So for myself I would like set class types with vast impact on narrative and plot, from quests to backstory plus interactions. I would like a wide variety of spells, skills and  player chosen refinements in those classes which include non combat skills and talents too. I would like attributes aswell. While I also like how Fallout 3 gave you much more control and from birth decided as much as possible all the way through childhood in the shelter to adulthood more choices. As shown with Fallout 3 what will happen and can only happen (imho) is a no plot impact when their is no set class. The only impact is basically headcanon and not shown in game through plot interactions.You have to remember DA titles are party based RPG's and a lot of the game relies on your companions histories and pasts. You give them random allocation pick'n mix style multiclassing it just won't work I think.

Your myopic viewpoint is getting tiring dude.

You could easily have NPCs react to specific stats, or your investment into certain skill trees. Also, there was no plot impact between being a human warrior VS human rogue in DA. The only distinction was if you were a mage.

Your last two sentences are painfully irrelevant. How would Wynne learning to pick locks remove the reliance on my companion's histories and pasts? You get them with set initial stats, stats they gained from their past and history. Now that they are with me, why are they unable to learn how to pick locks?

Dragoonlordz wrote...  

I want set primary class typically which is rogue, warrior, mage etc.. With vast array of specialisations and skills within those classes for the player to fiddle with and of which can alter how complete quests, crafting, combat and dialogue but for the set primary class to exist of which player can choose and of which that class has the biggest impact on interactions. Specialisations and abilities adding to the variety in things you can do and how you go about doing them shown with different results for how you went about it as a bonus to the former narrative impact of the set class. This is just my opinion, what makes most sense to me and what I think I might enjoy most. Multiclass not only would make no sense and not work in DA it would also be lore breaking (imho). So keep set class but allow multiple specialisations. Bring back out of combat skills and make it so the game allows for branching not only in dialogue impact but method for completing quests. Multiple ways to complete using multiple talents or skills not just dialogue however keep set classes for all the reasons I stated above.

I don't want set primary classes. I want a vast array of specialisations and skills that I can fiddle with an alter how to complete quests.

Again, there was no distinction between a Human Noble Warrior and a Human Noble Rogue. NONE! This invalidates everything you've spoken about! What you claim to enjoy most in the DA series didn't even  ****ing exist! The only exception was being mage/non-mage.

[Dragoonlordz]

ray.mitch7410 wrote...
-snipped to remove silly quote pyramids-

Are you seriously suggesting reaction change linked to specific stats and skill combinations? So what happens if you have equal points in two attributes that can each prompt a reaction change? Reaction change is better handled through gender/race/class/persona and lastly quests that have multiple ways of completing which can already be utilised by companion with the skill or self with it instead (party based game not solo one do I need to remind you). They do not contradict each other when they are set in which you are not male and female, not human and elf, not mage and warrior, not happy and sad or angry and friendly, either picked the lock of the door or kicked it down. They are easier to use for narrative cohesion and responses.

Just because they did not have much in way of reactions to class in the past title does not mean they cannot have such in the next, in fact it is hypocritical to berate such a point of view when you turn around and ask for something that also was not in previous titles meaning multiclasses of which does not mean what you think it does. You still had set classes in DAO, you merely had multiple specialisations and less restrictions.

Your asking for freedom to choose who is a caster via multiclasses yet you admit it won't work because would not make sense narrative wise for some characters to be such... Mage is not a race in DA so why would it start being one now? It cannot be a race all of a sudden out of the blue because it goes against all previous game lore so your point makes no sense. Especially given so much of your reply is based on show examples of x being done in the past to justify why should be done in future when never has mage been described in any DA title as a race. In fact you advocate preset classes yourself in your own argument, born a mage or not => born a mage => born. In other words you cannot pick spell tree for characters half way through.

Do you even know the difference between out of combat skills, specialisations, abilities and the meaning of the word class? Being a mage Hawke is a set class something in your own words born as, not chooses half way through game. DA has always been a party based game not a solo one like Skyrim as example and DA is not just about you and Hawke etc. The other companions have their own preset pasts.

By your own words it would make no sense for Fenris to be a mage but you want the ability to choose whether is or not by removing set classes? What do you think would be the impact on story if given you another example Bethany was not a mage class? How would the story make sense when the actual narrative has templars come to collect one of your companions aka her for being found out is a mage? Well in your method she doesn't have to be one because there is no set classes, it breaks the story.

What you seem to want is firstly hero picks gender then hero picks actual race which is human, elf or dwarf etc. You also want another option of mage or non mage class and after that you want freedom to alter your character 100% attributes and skills, abilities with no set restrictions? You also want this for your companions I assume to be a set mage class or non mage for each? What you want is not multiclassing it is in fact just less restrictions on the already set classes. Picking locks is not a class, it is a skill, stealth is not a class it is a skill.

In the past classes had restrictions on what 'skills' could use but you appear to be not understanding the nature of what I said or what you even want. Set class should have bonus to certain abilities and I am not saying a class cannot learn pick lock or stealth however it should restrict whether a caster or not and rely on bonuses to those non magic skills dependant on class. That classes should have a greater impact on narrative too. That is what I am saying. What your saying is... well you don't even realise for yourself that you merely want less restrictions on set classes and not multiclassing in the first place.

Your repeating yourself over and over I assume trying to convince yourself rather than me of your standpoint. I am beginning to question your intelligence on a grand scale. In fact go look up what the words skills, classes, abilities and specialisations mean. You mention picking spell tree's reflected in game during gameplay long after has started at any point in fact and also go on about how your either born a mage or not. I think you do not know what you want or what your saying.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 31 août 2012 - 01:32 .

[ray.mitch7410]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

ray.mitch7410 wrote...
-snipped to remove silly quote pyramids-

To be fair, you b1tched at someone for not addressing every single point you made.

So there you go.

Dragoonlordz wrote... 

Are you seriously suggesting reaction change linked to specific stats and skill combinations? So what happens if you have equal points in two attributes that can each prompt a reaction change? Reaction change is better handled through gender/race/class/persona and lastly quests that have multiple ways of completing which can already be utilised by companion with the skill or self with it instead (party based game not solo one do I need to remind you). They do not contradict each other when they are set in which you are not male and female, not human and elf, not mage and warrior, not happy and sad or angry and friendly, either picked the lock of the door or kicked it down. They are easier to use for narrative cohesion and responses.

Are you seriously admiting that you're not capable of coming with a solution for that? If they have equal points, then make their comment random, or give priority to the stat that is most relevant to the NPC. For example, in my previous post with the mage-rogue interaction, if my MAG and CUN are tied, give priority to CUN since that's most relevant to the rogue. Or ONLY have threshholds for CUN to promt a change. So many ways you could handle this.

Guess what buddy? I'm probably not going to take all the poison making/herbalism/trap making/lock picking skills myself! A classless system wouldn't prevent me or you from utilizing party members to complete quests in a variety of ways.

A classless system also doesn't interfere with yet another unsubstantiated assertion you make.

"
Reaction change is better handled through gender/race/class/persona "

Oh noes! One of the criteria for your unsubstantiated claim isn't included in a classless game! Oh wait, you could just have the NPCs care about a specific attribute. Like a Rogue NPC only caring about how cunning you were, or if you need stealth for a particular quest then they could make it so he only remarks on how advanced your stealth skill is.

Really not that hard kid.

Dragoonlordz wrote... 

Just because they did not have much in way of reactions to class in the past title does not mean they cannot have such in the next, in fact it is hypocritical to berate such a point of view when you turn around and ask for something that also was not in previous titles meaning multiclasses of which does not mean what you think it does. You still had set classes in DAO, you merely had multiple specialisations and less restrictions.

Ah,  putting words in my mouth so you can call me a hypocrite? That's nice.

I never berated you for asking to have something that wasn't in a previous title. In fact, I'm in favor of what you're proposing. However, I asked you to substantiate where not having a class would be an issue. Personally I loved DAO's story, and didn't see my class having a huge impact one way or the other. Especially with a Warrior-Rogue comparison.

Dragoonlordz wrote...  

Your asking for freedom to choose who is a caster via multiclasses yet you admit it won't work because would not make sense narrative wise for some characters to be such... Mage is not a race in DA so why would it start being one now? It cannot be a race all of a sudden out of the blue because it goes against all previous game lore so your point makes no sense. Especially given so much of your reply is based on show examples of x being done in the past to justify why should be done in future when never has mage been described in any DA title as a race. In fact you advocate preset classes yourself in your own argument, born a mage or not => born a mage => born. In other words you cannot pick spell tree for characters half way through.

DA already essentially treats mages as a race. You're either born a mage or you're not. The same way you're either born as a certain race or not. It wouldn't actually be a race, you'd simply select whether or not your character is a mage or not... like you already do. So yes, given the way magic works in the lore, this would be the one exception to having a sort of "class". Really the only difference between a rogue and a warrior is how they choose to train. The difference between a Mage and a non-mage is decided entirely at birth... kind of similar to how your race is...

Dragoonlordz wrote...  

Do you even know the difference between out of combat skills, specialisations, abilities and the meaning of the word class? Being a mage Hawke is a set class something in your own words born as, not chooses half way through game. DA has always been a party based game not a solo one like Skyrim as example and DA is not just about you and Hawke etc. The other companions have their own preset pasts.

By your own words it would make no sense for Fenris to be a mage but you want the ability to choose whether is or not by removing set classes? What do you think would be the impact on story if given you another example Bethany was not a mage class? How would the story make sense when the actual narrative has templars come to collect one of your companions aka her for being found out is a mage? Well in your method she doesn't have to be one because there is no set classes, it breaks the story.

What are you on about? I never suggested a shift from Mage to Non-mage or vice versa. You're grasping at straws now. That's the only exception I've made and that's due to the lore. Magic in this game is something you're born with, you can't train for it.

Dragoonlordz wrote...  

What you seem to want is firstly hero picks gender then hero picks actual race which is human, elf or dwarf etc. You also want another option of mage or non mage class and after that you want freedom to alter your character 100% attributes and skills, abilities with no set restrictions? You also want this for your companions I assume to be a set mage class or non mage for each? What you want is not multiclassing it is in fact just less restrictions on the already set classes. Picking locks is not a class, it is a skill, stealth is not a class it is a skill.

lol, what I want is NO classes. Aside from the previously mentioned lore restriction for being a mage. Yes, I want companions to be set Mage/Non-mage, like they already are. Lelliana was never a mage as per the lore, she never could be. Again, in DA, being a mage functions more like a secondary race.

Dragoonlordz wrote...  

In the past classes had restrictions on what 'skills' could use but you appear to be not understanding the nature of what I said or what you even want. Set class should have bonus to certain abilities and I am not saying a class cannot learn pick lock or stealth however it should restrict whether a caster or not and rely on bonuses to those non magic skills dependant on class. That classes should have a greater impact on narrative too. That is what I am saying. What your saying is... well you don't even realise for yourself that you merely want less restrictions on set classes and not multiclassing in the first place.

At least you have a modicum of reading comprehension... it allows you to realize I don't want multiclassing, but apprently it not good enough for you to realize I never said I wanted that. If I did, I apologize, I mispoke.

Quote me in your response if I did indeed claim to want "multiclassing" as per your definition.

Dragoonlordz wrote...  

Your repeating yourself over and over I assume trying to convince yourself rather than me of your standpoint. I am beginning to question your intelligence on a grand scale. In fact go look up what the words skills, classes, abilities and specialisations mean. You mention picking spell tree's reflected in game during gameplay long after has started at any point in fact and also go on about how your either born a mage or not. I think you do not know what you want or what your saying.

I repeated myself over and over because I was addressing your unsubstantiated claims over and over.

Nice try though.

The rest of your paragraph has no substance. Try adding some and I'll be happy to address it. Thanks.

[varteral6162]

the class system in Neverwineter Nights was a lot better due to a wider selection of classes and multiclassing.

[Biotic_Warlock]

varteral6162 wrote...

the class system in Neverwineter Nights was a lot better due to a wider selection of classes and multiclassing.

True, but i think DA was Bioware trying to invent its own style of gameplay other than D&D; 4th edition would be fun i guess, albeit i never understood how it worked.

FemaleMageFan wrote...

In dragon age it is different.
classes react to the world in certain ways. I would rather have a system
that has set classes with deeper skill trees

Do you mean like long skill trees with lots of powers and passives and upgrades (like in Dungeon Seige 2)?

Modifié par Biotic_Warlock, 01 septembre 2012 - 03:44 .

[Ryllen Laerth Kriel]

I like your ideas OP, and I've been asking Bioware to give us multiclass talents and abilities since the development of DA:O. I don't think they care to do so though, since DA:O had alot of restrictions and DA 2 made them worse on class architypes becoming far more restrictive in skills available and item useage. Sadly, instead of making classes more unique through adding more unique skills, DA 2 adopted the mentality that restrictions should make classes more unique. With a short deadline like DA 2 had, perhaps it made sense because it requires less work just to make classes unique by restriction instead of unique by added abilities.

[cindercatz]

On the multiclass thing:

I think it's helpful in terms of the narrative to have starting classes, because it allows your character to have more of a defined place in the world, which allows for differing player character perspectives, which is huge. Along with that, you could (and hopefully we will as it's a defining DA thing for me) get origins that make use of and tie into whatever your starting class is. But from that point on, within the mage/non-mage restriction, allow the character to be highly customized.

So you get origins and divergent story with set races and classes (including mage/non-mage destinction), but if story is the main reason for classes (and it is, really), then make those classes unique to the origin. Then provide maximum flexibility within each class. Like a rogue origin (maybe a Chantry agent, an assassin, or an urchin, etc.) would get certain class bonuses at character creation as well, and you'd get a unique skill tree to go along with your origin, but otherwise you have complete freedom to build your class as you prefer. Maybe also choose whatever weapon you like, etc., at character creation.

The the class exists, your race exists, and they create divergent story branching (or rooting in the case of origins), but otherwise you can learn whatever non-combat skills you choose, and the combat skill trees allow for whatever playstyle you want to build within every class. So maybe you are a rogue, but you're not a dps machine or a backstabber. Maybe you're just highly agile and efficient. Maybe you can be the frontline fighter, but you do it through a different build than a warrior tank would. Maybe you're a mage, but you specialize in hand to hand, and you work on your cunning so that you're just as effective a manipulator as a classic rogue is supposed to be.

Those are the kinds of things I did in DA:O anyway. I just think the classes should be more story focussed, and otherwise provide maximum flexibility and customization. I personally think DA, being far more about story and story replay than Elder Scrolls or Fallout, etc., needs its classes, but those classes need to be more about branching story and less about funnelling you into a particular playstyle. That's where DA2 went off the rails. Being able to build your character a multitude of ways enhances replayability. Highly branching class/race/origin specific storytelling enhances replayability. And each of those, with all the possibilities in your head as a player and all the choices you can make that add up to new experiences in overall gameplay, make the whole thing more fun. Have the set classes (along with race/origin selection), but do away with all the unnecessary restriction.