51 réponses à ce sujet

[katanakage]

 I've seen threads pop up about what class people want to play first, and skills in which class people want brought back.  And it got me to thinking about whether or not its even necessary for a class distinction at all... 

Now what I mean is why should I even bother with picking a class?

Why not pick and choose from each?

How awesome would it have been in DA2 to have a two handed warrior cast a "Cone of Cold" spell freezing the enemies in front of him/her; then finish with a "Whirlwind"?

Now I know that's not the best example because it was a cross class combo, but it would have looked pretty bad ass.

Or how about a mage casting the "Back-to-Back" rogue skill to render healing aid to an injured companion?

Just a little food for thought.  Would anyone else like this idea or am I alone on this one?


Mage getting rushed by an enemy...

*Poof* backstab and snarky one liner....   Epic

Modifié par katanakage, 24 octobre 2012 - 03:06 .

[MillKill]

classless systems have their advantages, but they tend to be a nightmare to balance.

[silentassassin264]

I would love a classless system but it would probably be an animators nightmare.

[wsandista]

Here I thought that this would be something about nobles and commoners. It is a bit shocking to see people talking about mechanics and not romances on the BSN.

[katanakage]

silentassassin264 wrote...

I would love a classless system but it would probably be an animators nightmare.

I don't really think this would be the case because its all already animated.

The command coding (which I know nothing about) might be a little tricky with the extra variables, but these guys are smart. I'm sure they could figure out something.

[MillKill]

wsandista wrote...

Here I thought that this would be something about nobles and commoners. It is a bit shocking to see people talking about mechanics and not romances on the BSN.

I'm sure this will turn into a romance thread soon enough. 

[Dhiro]

A classless system is nice... but would also mean that the character would always be a mage, lore-wise. I mean, a mage can learn how to swing a sword, but a rogue can never learn how to use Winter's Grasp.

[katanakage]

MillKill wrote...

classless systems have their advantages, but they tend to be a nightmare to balance.

I think every game will always have a build that is superior to all others... Balance is an illusion. 

[Dhiro]

MillKill wrote...

wsandista wrote...

Here I thought that this would be something about nobles and commoners. It is a bit shocking to see people talking about mechanics and not romances on the BSN.

I'm sure this will turn into a romance thread soon enough. 

Cone of Cold and Back-to-Back are my OTP. Don't interfere with my passions.

[Direwolf0294]

classless system for the PC but set classes for your companions could work without screwing up balance too much.

[Auintus]

MillKill wrote...

wsandista wrote...

Here I thought that this would be something about nobles and commoners. It is a bit shocking to see people talking about mechanics and not romances on the BSN.

I'm sure this will turn into a romance thread soon enough. 

NO, stop it. You'll jinx it.
I actually consider the definitive classes to be part of the DA system. Also, with classes and specs probably gaining more recognition in DA3, it would make more sense that way. You can't justify a warrior suddenly developing magical talents. At least, I don't think you can not in the DA universe.

[silentassassin264]

katanakage wrote...

silentassassin264 wrote...

I would love a classless system but it would probably be an animators nightmare.

I don't really think this would be the case because its all already animated.

The command coding (which I know nothing about) might be a little tricky with the extra variables, but these guys are smart. I'm sure they could figure out something.

I am pretty sure they wouldn't already have a backstab animation for holding a greatsword or staff, or casting fireballs with a sword and shield, etc. etc.  They would have to animate for all of that because if they made it that you had to have X equipped to cast Y, it would just get frustratingly annoying to have to keep on switching out weapons and you would more than likely only use a certain rogue, warrior, or mage playstyle anyway.

[wsandista]

katanakage wrote...

MillKill wrote...

classless systems have their advantages, but they tend to be a nightmare to balance.

I think every game will always have a build that is superior to all others... Balance is an illusion. 

Not really. A good game will always have people arguing over which build is the best because there are quite a few viable options. A bad game will have one build(per class if there are classes) that is extremely optimal and all others will not be able to compete at all.

[Xx_DeBoe_xX]

This is one of the few games I enjoy set classes. I always do my first play through as a mage and whether it be not being able to be king in the first one, or having Templars ask you to hunt down apostates in the second, these moments really make me mad, and I think that's good and makes the game seem more realistic, it also makes me naturally resent Templars or other peopl in the game giving me a stronger connection to my character.

[katanakage]

Dhiro wrote...

A classless system is nice... but would also mean that the character would always be a mage, lore-wise. I mean, a mage can learn how to swing a sword, but a rogue can never learn how to use Winter's Grasp.

Well, thats kind of the nice thing about DA3. It isn't finished. Its about will add a whole lot of new things to the lore.  I don't know how they could get around that I'm not a writer, but I'm sure they could think of something.

And then you could just look at it like Blood Magic.  I could cast sacrifice on a companion right in front a templar and they wouldn't say a word.  Its just something you could do.  It was just a possibility while being a mage.

[MillKill]

katanakage wrote...

MillKill wrote...

classless systems have their advantages, but they tend to be a nightmare to balance.

I think every game will always have a build that is superior to all others... Balance is an illusion. 

Perfect balance is nigh-impossible, but a system that creates characters of very similar degrees of utility and power are still very feasible. 

The closest we've had to a hybrid class is the Arcane Warrior from Origins. It also resulted in some of the most overpowered chararachers I've ever seen. They weren't fun to play because they made Nightmare into easy mode. Other character builds became less fun because they were all weak compared to the AW. Now think about far more hybrid character types and the super-builds that will follow.

I'd rather have several relatively balanced classes than a system that creates more monstrosities like the AW.

Modifié par MillKill, 24 octobre 2012 - 03:28 .

[TsaiMeLemoni]

Dhiro wrote...

A classless system is nice... but would also mean that the character would always be a mage, lore-wise. I mean, a mage can learn how to swing a sword, but a rogue can never learn how to use Winter's Grasp.

This would essentially be my problem too. Would all the people complaining about lack of choices due to being stuck as a human protag be fine with always being a mage? Having distinct classes also increases replayability imo. In Skyrim, no matter what I try to start as, I always revert to a sneaking archer because it's what I am comfortable with. In games like DA and ME, I can be adventerous and choose a new class, and then have to deal with that choice for the rest of the playthrough.

I think classless systems work better in games like Skyrim or Fallout where there's not near as much emphasis on story, and your character is a blank slate each time you start the game. Would it look cool to have this? Probably, but that's not worth it imo.

[Realmzmaster]

That means that every PC would technically be a mage. The lore states that only mages have the ability to wield magic. I have no problem with the PC being classless but not every companion. That would cause serious balance problems. You could effectively make every companion a mage Basically you would have mage-rogue, mage-warrior, mage. I could effectively give every companion a heal and haste spell.

But if that is the case then the enemy should have the same ability.

[katanakage]

wsandista wrote...

Not really. A good game will always have people arguing over which build is the best because there are quite a few viable options. A bad game will have one build(per class if there are classes) that is extremely optimal and all others will not be able to compete at all.

I find those arguments funny because its people telling others that their build is the best.  They'll spout off DPS and other nonsense, and someone will disagree.  I find most differences to be minimal in general; it all boils down to preference and play style.

[katanakage]

Realmzmaster wrote...

That means that every PC would technically be a mage. The lore states that only mages have the ability to wield magic. I have no problem with the PC being classless but not every companion. That would cause serious balance problems. You could effectively make every companion a mage Basically you would have mage-rogue, mage-warrior, mage. I could effectively give every companion a heal and haste spell.

But if that is the case then the enemy should have the same ability.

I guess Meredith was using smoke and mirrors to make those statues attack me 

[Dhiro]

katanakage wrote...

Realmzmaster wrote...

That means that every PC would technically be a mage. The lore states that only mages have the ability to wield magic. I have no problem with the PC being classless but not every companion. That would cause serious balance problems. You could effectively make every companion a mage Basically you would have mage-rogue, mage-warrior, mage. I could effectively give every companion a heal and haste spell.

But if that is the case then the enemy should have the same ability.

I guess Meredith was using smoke and mirrors to make those statues attack me 

That wasn't her own doing as much as the lyrium sword, and we know what using it got her in the end

[wsandista]

katanakage wrote...

wsandista wrote...

Not really. A good game will always have people arguing over which build is the best because there are quite a few viable options. A bad game will have one build(per class if there are classes) that is extremely optimal and all others will not be able to compete at all.

I find those arguments funny because its people telling others that their build is the best.  They'll spout off DPS and other nonsense, and someone will disagree.  I find most differences to be minimal in general; it all boils down to preference and play style.

They do get a bit.....heated. A good game should allow many viable options in creating the character though.

[silentassassin264]

Well Varric assured us he could control it and he did. Just make the PC immune to lyrium insanity like how PC Hawke (not sibling) was immune the darkspawn taint and could bathe in darkspawn blood and drink from it from a silver chalice and still not get the blight disease. Give Inquisitor PC a pendant of raw lyrium and let them cast like a mage.

Or just make the PC a mage lorewise regardless. I have no problem with that and would give the devs less of a problem if the PC was always a mage.

[katanakage]

@Dhiro

Its still a possibility. (and my only point other than Holy Smite looks like a spell when cast)