108 réponses à ce sujet

[Richado_Ninja]

Arcane warrior should be brought back. It brings mages from the sidelines and gives them a chance to get into the fray making them as useful as any warrior or rogue, if not even more. If it is brought I believe a well thought out talent tree should be made giving the mage sustained abilities and activated spells. I'd take the arcane warrior over the force mage any day. and for y'all that are worried about it having to be introduced in some kind of way. Why not let the main character go on a quest to some ancient elven society that preserves their practices like shapeshifting and training on how to be an arcane warrior.

[ZeroCrewX]

Richado_Ninja wrote...

Arcane warrior should be brought back. It brings mages from the sidelines and gives them a chance to get into the fray making them as useful as any warrior or rogue, if not even more. If it is brought I believe a well thought out talent tree should be made giving the mage sustained abilities and activated spells. I'd take the arcane warrior over the force mage any day. and for y'all that are worried about it having to be introduced in some kind of way. Why not let the main character go on a quest to some ancient elven society that preserves their practices like shapeshifting and training on how to be an arcane warrior.

Dude a mage in DA2 can lay waste to anything even on nightmare with considerably less effort than a warrior or rogue... I'd say that's useful

That said, I support this notion that specializations can be more diverse and deep in contrast to both games.

[74 Wrex]

Bring Back Arcane Warrior!!!!!!!!!

[H. Birdman]

It doesn't have to be overpowered. You could easily reduce the passive defensive abilities, etc. It's just a question of striking the right balance.

That said, I don't think "It's overpowered" is a legit reason to keep it out. Make it a late game specialization. Make it really hard to unlock. Or don't. This is a single player game. If somebody wants to be an overpowered demigod--and many RPG players do--that's their business. Just make the choice clear and let players decide.

[74 Wrex]

It doesn't matter if it is overpowered or not
BRING IT BACK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Beliar86]

I always used AW on wynne or healer wardens, and on Awakening Anders. It had the benefit of healer could take a few potshots/aoe and also be stylin at the cost of some stats.

Worth the spec just to get rid of those robes, man

[andy6915]

AW is definitely not something only the Warden knows about. Reason being that there is AW enemy on the Sacred Ashes quest, the guy who drops the Spellweaver long sword that only AW's can equip. He also very obviously uses combat magic with fade shroud because he goes completely white and see through after casting a spell. So that's at least one other guy besides the Warden who somehow obtained that specialization. Yes, that's only one guy in a game with probably 2,000 enemies... But it still proves that the specialization does still exist in the world and that a few lucky people have it besides our party's mages.

I bring this up to prove that there are certainly ways you could get it that is in-line with the lore. I mean, that enemy AW had to get it from somewhere and I highly doubt it was from the same Elven ruins you got yours from.

[Eternal Phoenix]

I agree with the handsome sexy OP. DA3 needs the Arcane Warrior spec back. Doesn't matter if it's over-powered because the rogue in DA2 was overpowered with its 150% backstab chance. If need be, they could just provide the necessary balance to the spec or even re-do it so it truly stands out.

Allowing mages to equip melee weapons and use them would only provide further customization for the class. Strength/dexterity should still be required to equip armor that isn't for them however. What's more, the melee attacks of the AW should be "magical" if you catch my drift and stand out from the attacks of the warriors and rogues. They would inflict more elemental damage than physical damage meaning you wouldn't just be a warrior who can cast spells. There'd actually still be a use for proper warriors who would naturally play as the tank or major damage dealer.

Well that's how I envision a remake of the Arcane Warrior which I hope makes it into DA3.

Modifié par Elton John is dead, 27 janvier 2013 - 02:13 .

[Serillen]

 Never really could get into arcane warrior in DA:O because I tend to prefer straight up casters to spellswords so battlemage, blood mage and keeper fit me considerably better than arcane warrior. Plus I always felt spirit warrior made for a better spellsword than arcane warrior did. I don't have a problem with it being brought back for 3, I'm sure they can find a lore reason to do so and it would be interesting to see how the spec will be adapted to the DA2 style of talent trees. I definately would prefer it over blood mage and spirit healer making another return thats for sure 

[andy6915]

@Elton John is dead

Elemental damage, huh? Like AW specific weapons like Spellweaver, which had a permanent lightning enchant? Because that's pretty much what it sounds like you want. I agree that having an element on the sword certainly helps the AW feel more like a mage somehow. Not pure elemental though, non physical damage=no blood gets on your character... And I hate that.

[Marbazoid]

The biggest issue I had with Arcane Warrior was that it allowed you to circumvent the restrictions of your class, giving you all the perks of being a warrior and mage combined. Warriors and rogues were not given this opportunity.

I would much rather armour and weapon types be unrestricted (with a fatigue system) to allow this diversity, as opposed to restricting it arbitrarily to a specialisation of one of the classes.

[Thibax]

I want all specializations back.
Everybody will be happy

[astreqwerty]

I cant stress enough how much I loved AW...bring it back bioware!!also who says what is broken and what is not in a single player RPG game? If I manage to create an OP character then kudos to me..Plus bioware can always mend a broken spec with a patch or two or even before the release of the game. I just love the idea of a meele mage that can actually take a hit or 2

[B3NGU1N]

Perhaps if it focused less on being a warrior, and more on being a close quarters mage. For example, fast casting spells, lots of AoE spells that are quick, lots of knockback too. as opposed to just being a high damage, high constitution spellcaster.

Maybe make it so you can't were massive armour, but a special "heavy mage armour" that doesnt offer massive amounts of health or defense, but a 100% increase on recharge speed of arcane warrior spells. So you can be a badass but not a tank. a force to be reckoned with but one that you have to think about deploying.

[Subject Alpha]

AW was my favourite specialization in Origins, I would appreciate its return.

[Sideria]

Why the phylactery should be the only legacy for this discipline ?
After all in DAO, we can fight at least two arcanne warrior NPC, the cultist overseer who drop spellweaver, and a elf in Ozrammar Proving (third informal fight)
It's very likely that some keeper know it or that the tevinter imperium has some record or book to teach it.

[andar91]

I don't think it needs to be a specialization. Just make a staff tree with melee/staff-based spells and passives, and maybe a Combat Magic sustained ability. I like to picture it coating your mage in a glowing suit of armor (sort of like Rock Armor only more armor-ish and you staff turning into a luminescent glaive.

Problem with specializations is they've said they want them to have more impact on the story. That makes sense for things like Blood Mage or Templar, but something like Force Mage or Arcane Warrior is so much more generic. I'm not sure how they're gonna do it.

[uzivatel]

The Arcane Warrior...
It was such a nice concept in DAO - a mage who wears an actual armor, can join the fighters in the frontlines and gets close enough to the enemy to effectively use some of the short range spell.
The gameplay however was not that great to put it mildly. There was no way to make the enemy attack the mage, the chance to hit was poor and there were no weapon based "spells".
Its somewhat ironic the class was absent from DA2, which would be much better fit considering its combat and RPG system. Then again mages in DA2 were cool even without armor and sword.

[Addai]

They don't need arcane warrior spec to accomplish the same thing if they allow people to play an apostate background. Much more natural to just allow people to build a battlemage or spellsword as someone who trained in both weapons and magic. For Circle mages not a possibility, but it's very conceivable someone living in a village somewhere trained in weapons and learned a little magic on the side if they have that capability. It can be balanced if their spellcraft is appropriately weak.

Modifié par Addai67, 27 janvier 2013 - 08:35 .

[JaegerBane]

Hanz54321 wrote...

Story-wise, the Mage Warden, Wynne, and or Morrigan were the only 3 Arcane warriors left in Thedas after finding the phylactery.

Morrigan disappeared.

Wynne was helping Shale or chasing down Ines then going to Cumberland to try to stop the war. No mages being taught there.

The Warden concievably could have taught other Warden mages the discipline, but it seems unlikely. Even if he/she did, would the Wardens let it leave their order?

I'm over rationalizing. In terms of lore I think AW should go away because it died/dissappeared with those 3 mages.

Lore doesn't function as an obstacle to bring back the AW specialisation. You managed to find an AW amongst a band of dragon-worshipping loonies up in the mountains, so the idea that it can never appear ever again is a little silly.

But that's assuming we use only the existing lore. There's nothing stopping the writers from simply *writing* a new location for the player to get the AW spec. It's really not something insurmountable.

In terms of game design - it was a dumb class IMO. If a player wants to warrior, then warrior. If a player wants to mage, then mage.

You've clearly misunderstood the point behind the class. One didn't pick it to try to make one class play like another, one picked it to play a bit of both. Your above logic isn't going to help a player who wants to fight and cast spells.

[JaegerBane]

uzivatel wrote...
The gameplay however was not that great to put it mildly. There was no way to make the enemy attack the mage, the chance to hit was poor and there were no weapon based "spells".

Tbh the gameplay was what you made it. In reality the only issue with it was that the game had a pointless concept of certain spells being able to cast with a weapon in hand, but some not. Roll the armed spellcasting mod and the class plays just great.

Frankly, I'd argue quite a few of the Mage's repertoire of spells didn't really work unless you were an Arcane Warrior (Miasma, Cleansing Aura, Stoic etc)

Modifié par JaegerBane, 27 janvier 2013 - 09:03 .

[Addai]

Hanz54321 wrote...

In terms of game design - it was a dumb class IMO. If a player wants to warrior, then warrior. If a player wants to mage, then mage.

  Hybrid classes are a staple of other fantasy settings.  Obviously the DA devs agree with you since they talked about these being a "problem" that had to be fixed in DA2, rather than leaving it up to the player to build their own cross classes.  It's no dumber than having warriors or rogues have abilities that border on supernatural but give no lore explanation for how they can do that stuff.

If given the opportunity, spellswords are always my first pick.  The idea that mages can't wear armor is what sounds dumb to me.  The trick is to implement it better, so that the spellsword has spells that complement swordfighting (or axe fighting or whatever) and aren't as powerful in spellcraft as straight mages.

[Silas7]

Addai67 wrote...

Hanz54321 wrote...

In terms of game design - it was a dumb class IMO. If a player wants to warrior, then warrior. If a player wants to mage, then mage.

  Hybrid classes are a staple of other fantasy settings.  Obviously the DA devs agree with you since they talked about these being a "problem" that had to be fixed in DA2, rather than leaving it up to the player to build their own cross classes.  It's no dumber than having warriors or rogues have abilities that border on supernatural but give no lore explanation for how they can do that stuff.

If given the opportunity, spellswords are always my first pick.  The idea that mages can't wear armor is what sounds dumb to me.  The trick is to implement it better, so that the spellsword has spells that complement swordfighting (or axe fighting or whatever) and aren't as powerful in spellcraft as straight mages.

Thank you. Hope that warriors regain the lost knowledge of TWF and bow training.

[Stella-Arc]

I love the Arcane Warrior spec. I'm going to play as a mage in DAIII and I hope I get to learn that specialization. Of course, it would be cooler if there was a quest where I can learn it.