36 réponses à ce sujet

[Giltspur]

It depends on the lock I think.

A door in a house?  You should be able to kick it down.
A bank safe (or some DA equivalent to a complicated mechanical defense system that's resistant to brute force)?  You shouldn't be able to kick that down.  That should require something like lockpicking.  Maybe magic but that's debatable as DAO magic doesn't seem as diverse as D&D magic.

[Eveangaline]

except since people will just re-load if the stuff breaks, this is essentially the same as just giving other classes a perfectly working lockpick.

[Pedrak]

Ser Bard wrote...

I'm in favour of this- let mages blow stuff up and warriors bash things with a chance of destroying the loot or making the treasure room door unpassable. The risk free way is to use a rogue and they could have a chance at opening a lock above their skill level.

Traps should remain a rogue exclusive skill.

plus

Giltspur wrote...

It depends on the lock I think.

A door in a house?  You should be able to kick it down.
A bank safe (or some DA equivalent to a complicated mechanical defense system that's resistant to brute force)?  You shouldn't be able to kick that down.  That should require something like lockpicking.  

Modifié par Pedrak, 31 octobre 2012 - 07:16 .

[Fishy]

Destroying a chest or a door with a sword ...

1 : Make your weapons worn out faster when you use it against the enviroonment (BTW are you guy adding breakable environment ? ) . It's would be sweet to sswing your weapons and that table in the way goes boom.

2: Reveal your position. Let's be honest.. If you smash that Iron door with a big ass 2 hand hammer.. Everyone in a 500 M radius will hear you.

BOOM BOOM BOOM. AH don't worry pals .. - It's just me breaking inside that castle
Castle owner - Oh well .. i did not hear anything !

3: Have a chance of destroying the item inside. ( A cup of glass is a little more fragile than a hammer)

4: A steel door for exemple worn out item more quickly than a wood door with a sword ... But a Hammer do it faster than a sword. Than hammer make more noise and has a greater chance  of breaking stuff inside a little lockbox.

Yeah it's a little too much sophisticated mebe. I mean i know iyou're making a thief game but, you guy can impress us.

Modifié par Suprez30, 31 octobre 2012 - 07:30 .

[MillKill]

Eveangaline wrote...

except since people will just re-load if the stuff breaks, this is essentially the same as just giving other classes a perfectly working lockpick.

Exactly. Stand-alone randomized skill check+ Reloading= Feature that serves only to waste time and frustrate players.

[Sable Rhapsody]

The lock bash mod for DA:O is a simple but IMO reasonable version of this. If you lock bash as a non-rogue, you'll probably break anything fragile in the container (flasks, reagents, etc.), but you'll still get a decent portion of the stuff. Lock bash does not work on traps--you still need a rogue to disarm those.

It's handy for people like me who don't always want that perfect party composition but have an insatiable need to loot shinies

[Bernhardtbr]

Giltspur wrote...

It depends on the lock I think.

A door in a house?  You should be able to kick it down.
A bank safe (or some DA equivalent to a complicated mechanical defense system that's resistant to brute force)?  You shouldn't be able to kick that down.  That should require something like lockpicking.  Maybe magic but that's debatable as DAO magic doesn't seem as diverse as D&D magic.

This is a good point. In a world with magic, why rely only on locks if you can put glyphs that will give curses and make all other kind of bad stuff happen? Like... the chest exploding and killing everyone? 

[KainD]

I actually wrote "Brake" instead of break, and Neverwiner. FML XD

[Arppis]

Bernhardtbr wrote...

Doing that implies in a high chance of rogues becoming useless or UP.

If breaking chests is possible there should be a chance to break the items inside it as well.

Nope, they are still only ones who can detect traps and such. Plus, I am tired of dragging a rogue with me just because I need few locks open.

[Endurium]

I'll add my vote; didn't appreciate being locked out of several rooms in *my family's estate* when I rolled a human noble warrior in DAO. Quickly resorted to the console and fixed that oversight with a few extra talents.

[Bernhardtbr]

Arppis wrote...

Nope, they are still only ones who can detect traps and such. Plus, I am tired of dragging a rogue with me just because I need few locks open.

I am tired of dragging a warrior with me just because I need a guy with heavy armor to draw fire.

I am tired of dragging a mage with me just because I need a guy to heal me.

See what I did here? You won´t die just because you can´t pick a lock. You can play entire DA without a rogue. It won´t make such a huge difference. You didn´t choose that class, then accept the fact you will lose some abilities. Just as having a guy making potiona is much less efficient than using free mana to heal, breaking a chest should be much less efficient than breaking a lock. Period.

[Serillen]

 Honestly items having a chance to break when you smash a lock doesnt make any sense whatsoever unless youre talking about things like figurines or small valuables. Just think, if a sword or piece of armor breaks while you're smashing the container its inside how would that weapon or armor hold up during combat 

Edit: I actually am fine with rogues being the only ones who can open chests, but in DA2 it was merely an additonal function of the cunning stat so its not like it took anything away from the character to get the ability like in DAO.

Modifié par Serillen, 31 octobre 2012 - 10:02 .