91 réponses à ce sujet

[Dintonta]

Atalanta wrote...

motomotogirl wrote...

I think class is silly, or at least they should have different names. A mage I can understand; that person literally has "special powers" at her behest. But a fighter is a fighter. I mean someone who has combat training should be capable of wielding a variety of weapons. Why can the "warrior" succesfully wield a two-handed sword as well as a sword and shield, but not two daggers? Or a bow? What makes a person capable of wielding two daggers equally capable of wielding a bow? Furthermore, why can one person disarm traps and another can't?

So I don't get this class thing, though I understand is a big staple of the RPG. But I think if you look at it objectively, you will see that it is quite silly.

I think instead a person should be either a mage or not a mage.

From there, you choose how to upgrade your person: Does he wield a sword? Staff? Bow? Maybe he starts off with one but gradually learns a second throughout the game.

Just some ideas.

The archetype of fighter-thief-mage-cleric is just something that works well in tactical games. I know I am probably oversimplifying it , but think of it like rock-paper-scissors. If your character is a warrior-type who is fighing a rogue-type, and the rogue throws down some traps and uses mobility to get out of the warrior's range, you've got to resort to playing tactically in order to win. If your warrior also knows how to disarm traps, can move quickly across the battlefield while dodging attacks, all while wearing heavy plate and being able to take lots of incoming damage, it's not much of a tactical battle as much as a facestomp of the poor enemy rogue who is only running around in leather. The checks and balances make for much more interesting combat, in my opinion.

A good point, but since skills themselves could also imply some inner restrictions (like wearing heavy armor making stealth impossible, or DW requiring to focus on DEX while TH is based on STR), those would be probably enough to keep the tactical balance you mentionned (a gamer who makes choices in favor of a specific build already restricts herself by not choosing the other branches during the limited time of a game.)

[Auintus]

Set classes. I consider it part of the DA experience.

[FutharkTomahawk]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

DAO's set classes were done fairly well. Each class has clearly delineated boundaries, but each member of that class was free to wander anywhere at all within those boundaries.

I'll second this motion for a class system that's relatively open and allows for a good deal of customization within each class.

[Atalanta]

Dintonta wrote...
A good point, but since skills themselves could also imply some inner restrictions (like wearing heavy armor making stealth impossible, or DW requiring to focus on DEX while TH is based on STR), those would be probably enough to keep the tactical balance you mentionned (a gamer who makes choices in favor of a specific build already restricts herself by not choosing the other branches during the limited time of a game.)

What, you're telling me a warrior couldn't sneak around in some clanky plate armor? 

I prefer set classes that have branching paths, allowing you a path with either more utility, survivability, damage output, etc, depending on how you like to play. That's usually enough diversity to keep me interested on secondary playthroughs, even if I were to pick the same class again.

Edit: I'm really struggling with spelling and grammar today, sheesh.

Modifié par Atalanta, 28 septembre 2012 - 09:43 .

[Herr Uhl]

Prefer classless systems, but they're notoriously hard to balance, and they'd be hard to motivate lore-wise in the DA universe.

[Abraham_uk]

hawkens982 wrote...

Custom classes please. But if its only set classes, at least give us the option to use more weapon types for each class.

I love creating my own class.

[Mr Fixit]

Herr Uhl wrote...

Prefer classless systems, but they're notoriously hard to balance

Which shouldn't be a priority in a single-player game anyway. With DA3, due to EA Prime Directive, likely to have a multiplayer component, things would be more difficult, I agree.

I believe DA should have had a classless system from the outset. Having in mind the importance of magic in the lore, a classless system would present a much better opportunity to portray mages and their standing in Thedas society. They're not just this narrowly delineated class representing a game mechanic, they are a whole group of people, persecuted and tightly controlled because of something they were born with.

In my opinion, it would be more interesting, and more in tune with the basic tenets of Dragon Age lore, if 'magic-born' were some kind of subsystem that could be grafted to any character build. 

Modifié par Mr Fixit, 28 septembre 2012 - 09:59 .

[Atalanta]

Mr Fixit wrote...
I believe DA should have had a classless system from the outset. Having in mind the importance of magic in the lore, a classless system would present a much better opportunity to portray mages and their standing in Thedas society. They're not just this narrowly delineated class representing a game mechanic, they are a whole group of people, persecuted and tightly controlled because of something they were born with.

In my opinion, it would be more interesting, and more in tune with the basic tenets of Dragon Age lore, if 'magic-born' were some kind of subsystem that could be grafted to any character build. 

That's interesting, I didn't think of it that way.

I believe that demons can grant powers in the DA universe (a la the Reaver class in DA:O). I suppose other, more benevolent beings could do the same with non-mages too.

Modifié par Atalanta, 28 septembre 2012 - 10:06 .

[Dr. wonderful]

You know what? I want to watch the world burn.

Custom classes, please.

[Herr Uhl]

Atalanta wrote...

I believe that demons can grant powers in the DA universe (a la the Reaver class in DA:O). I suppose other, more benevolent beings could do the same with non-mages too.

Like this sub-class?

[Mr Fixit]

Atalanta wrote...

Mr Fixit wrote...
I believe DA should have had a classless system from the outset. Having in mind the importance of magic in the lore, a classless system would present a much better opportunity to portray mages and their standing in Thedas society. They're not just this narrowly delineated class representing a game mechanic, they are a whole group of people, persecuted and tightly controlled because of something they were born with.

In my opinion, it would be more interesting, and more in tune with the basic tenets of Dragon Age lore, if 'magic-born' were some kind of subsystem that could be grafted to any character build. 

That's interesting, I didn't think of it that way.

I believe that demons can grant powers in the DA universe (a la the Reaver class in DA:O). I suppose other, more benevolent beings could do the same with non-mages too.

I think you misunderstood me. In my proposal, only 'mages' would be capable of having magic. Nothing changes on that front. Ordinary people still wouldn't have access to it. However, without having this rock-solid thing called "mage class", a whole new segment of gameplay would open up. Devs already tried loosening the restriction a bit in DAO with arcane warrior. In a classless system, anyone (born with this gift/curse, of course) could be a "mage", i.e. have magical abilities, whether they are "warriors", "rogues" or whatever other build players come up with within bounds set up by the character creation system.

Modifié par Mr Fixit, 28 septembre 2012 - 10:20 .

[Icinix]

Prefer custom classes - but don't mind set classes if they're not radically set.

If a character class is to locked in - you can get an hour into the game and realise you're not playing the way you might enjoy the most - allowing a broader level of customisation helps negate that.

[Atalanta]

Herr Uhl wrote...

Atalanta wrote...

I believe that demons can grant powers in the DA universe (a la the Reaver class in DA:O). I suppose other, more benevolent beings could do the same with non-mages too.

Like this sub-class?

Ah yeah, I forgot about that. Thanks. 

[Atalanta]

Mr Fixit wrote...
I think you misunderstood me. In my proposal, only 'mages' would be capable of having magic. Nothing changes on that front. Ordinary people still wouldn't have access to it. However, without having this rock-solid thing called "mage class", a whole new segment of gameplay would open up. Devs already tried loosening the restriction a bit in DAO with arcane warrior. In a classless system, anyone (born with this gift/curse, of course) could be a "mage", i.e. have magical abilities, whether they are "warriors", "rogues" or whatever other build players come up with within bounds set up by the character creation system.

Sorry, the second part of my post wasn't directed at you. I just sort of went off on a tangent, haha.

[Mr Fixit]

As I recall, on several occasions devs said that they hadn't been prepared to make a ton of extra content for mage Hawke, something game's story in all honesty required. Although I don't agree with their decision, it is understandable. They weren't willing to create a significant asymmetry by leaving the other two classes with less content.

By having a classless system with a magical subsytem in DA2, each Hawke could have been at least partly a 'mage', providing BioWare with an opportunity to truly tailor the 'Kirkwall experience' to the PC.

Modifié par Mr Fixit, 28 septembre 2012 - 10:35 .

[TMZuk]

classless! If not that, then custom. If they stick to DA2 classes, I'm done with the franchise.

[Sable Rhapsody]

I liked custom classes in Skyrim, but honestly I don't think it'll work for Dragon Age. Lore is the first problem when it comes to mixing classes. There's no such thing as a hybrid mage in Dragon Age. I could see custom classes for non-magic users, but allowing custom classes for some playstyles while restricting others sounds like a nerd rage explosion waiting ot happen.

[Mr Fixit]

franciscoamell wrote...

Mr Fixit wrote...

As I recall, on several occasions devs said that they hadn't been prepared to make a ton of extra content for mage Hawke, something game's story in all honesty required. Although I don't agree with their decision, it is understandable. They weren't willing to create a significant asymmetry by leaving the other two classes with less content.

By having a classless system with a magical subsytem in DA2, each Hawke could have been at least partly a 'mage', providing BioWare with an opportunity to truly tailor the 'Kirkwall experience' to the PC.

I wouldn't like it if they made being a mage canon, it would kill some of the replayability.

Again, not sure if you understood.

You'd still play whatever "class" you want.

[Mr Fixit]

sjpelkessjpeler wrote...

If there is a skill tree for the PC that would provide in that (gaining certain 'magical' abbilities) would that be an option? There would still be classes but the class of the pc had a little extra so to speak. Weapons provide for having fire magic for example for a non magic class.

Did not read through the whole thread so hope I did not take things out of context here..

Hmm... there were some 'suspicious' specialisations in Awakening...

Since we obviously have a class-based system in DA, something along those line you just mentioned would be welcome. It would be in the best interest of both story and gameplay if BioWare found some way to 'diversify' magic and let it play a role in the DA lore without handcuffing PCs or NPCs to mage class.

[Realmzmaster]

I prefer set classes with customization. I have found by watching other gamers that no matter how classless the system most builds still enter around warrior, rogue and mage. Even in a classless system all you have is variations on the standard three which can be accommodated with more customization in the class.

One poster stated if a warrior has combat training the warrior should be able to wield a two handed sword or sword and shield. I agree with that to a point. The point is that the warrior will not be equally as good with each one.
If the warrior mainly uses a sword and shield in combat it will be quite different if the warrior picks up a two handed weapon. Blocking and parrying with a sword and shield is far different than blocking and parrying with a two handed weapon it requires a different skill set. Just like blocking and parrying with dual weapons is different.
That is why most warriors pick a weapon style and master it. Even within the sword and shield style there are differences depending on the sword used and size of the shield.

DA2 actually allows Hawke to learn both styles equally: Sword and shield and two handed which is fine for a fantasy game, but not necessarily realistic.

Dual classes and multi classing could be possible if a gamer wishes to build a jack of all trades character who is a master at none of it.