41 réponses à ce sujet

[KNIGHTMARE170]

 I was wondering if this could be implamented. Imagine if you are a reaver and companions or other characters mention that you like to munch on souls, or being an assassin or blood mage and people taking notice. 

[Heimdall]

They've mentioned this as a goal of theirs, yes

[Foolsfolly]

Lord Aesir wrote...

They've mentioned this as a goal of theirs, yes

As an actual part of the plot or just the specialization opening up certain dialogues or getting checked for NPC dialogue?

The two are rather different. One's mostly cosmetic and the other's part of the plot.

[Iosev]

I sort of think that specialization and background choice should be implemented together. Specifically, when you choose a background, you could also be choosing a particular specialization. For example, one of the warrior backgrounds could be a templar background, that not only sets your specialization, but gives the player detailed information on how you acquired your training.

In this manner, I think that your specialization could be tied to the plot, both superficially (through dialogue), as well as deeply (through quests).

Modifié par arcelonious, 14 novembre 2012 - 09:32 .

[Heimdall]

Foolsfolly wrote...

Lord Aesir wrote...

They've mentioned this as a goal of theirs, yes

As an actual part of the plot or just the specialization opening up certain dialogues or getting checked for NPC dialogue?

The two are rather different. One's mostly cosmetic and the other's part of the plot.

Unsure, though apparently there will be in game reasons for getting particular specializations as there was in DA:O.  Even if part of the plot, the changes would likely not be drastic though. 

[KNIGHTMARE170]

Ok, I suppose what I was thinking of was a cosmetic addition. Perhaps as part of the plot the Templars wouldn't negotiate or work with you if you where a blood mage or reaver, and mages would be more hesitant and untrustworthy if you snort lyrium like a templar. Either way, it would be a cool change, giving even more reason to pick or not pick a specialization.

[Wulfram]

My main concern would be that there may not be a specialisation that really fits my character if it's made a plot point.

For example my Warriors tend to be rather too disciplined for Reavers or Berserkers, but not mage-hatey enough to be Templars.

Though being a Blood Mage does need to have a major impact if they include that specialisation.

[KNIGHTMARE170]

In Origins, I would love to get in room full or templars or when you are surrounded by people and use dark subsistence
it would be cool if people would freak out at that or even try to kill you for it

[Heimdall]

Wulfram wrote...

My main concern would be that there may not be a specialisation that really fits my character if it's made a plot point.

For example my Warriors tend to be rather too disciplined for Reavers or Berserkers, but not mage-hatey enough to be Templars.

Though being a Blood Mage does need to have a major impact if they include that specialisation.

I believe they mentioned character reacting much more if your character is a blood Mage as an example.

[The Elder King]

Wulfram wrote...

My main concern would be that there may not be a specialisation that really fits my character if it's made a plot point.

For example my Warriors tend to be rather too disciplined for Reavers or Berserkers, but not mage-hatey enough to be Templars.

Though being a Blood Mage does need to have a major impact if they include that specialisation.

My warrior PC aren't templars because they hate mages. They became templars because of their abilities and protection against magic.

[Sable Rhapsody]

arcelonious wrote...

I sort of think that specialization and background choice should be implemented together. Specifically, when you choose a background, you could also be choosing a particular specialization. For example, one of the warrior backgrounds could be a templar background, that not only sets your specialization, but gives the player detailed information on how you acquired your training.

In this manner, I think that your specialization could be tied to the plot, both superficially (through dialogue), as well as deeply (through quests).

It's a good idea, though there are gameplay pitfalls.  I know with my DA:O characters, I picked specializations after I'd gotten a good feel for how the character played.  Mechanics were a consideration, not just roleplaying, and picking a specialization before getting a feel for the class in the new engine could be a problem.

Not to mention, what about respeccing?  Is that just gonna be handwaved?  I remember having to respec my Warrior after running into the infamous Reaver damage bug.

[Wulfram]

hhh89 wrote...

My warrior PC aren't templars because they hate mages. They became templars because of their abilities and protection against magic.

Yeah, that's what I do too.

But if they decide to integrate the specialisations more into the plot, I worry that would no longer be possible.  You might have to complete quests for the Templars or something to get the training.

[n7stormrunner]

now now not all templars are magehaters most not all... who says reavers aren't disciplined... or berserkers for that matter

[KNIGHTMARE170]

Oghren isn't all that disciplined (although the ash warriors are), and the guy who teaches you how to be a reaver in Origins is a mad dragon cultist. They are both pretty chaotic, and in reality learning these things would more than likely change how people perceive you and may alter your personality.

[Iosev]

Sable Rhapsody wrote...

arcelonious wrote...

I sort of think that specialization and background choice should be implemented together. Specifically, when you choose a background, you could also be choosing a particular specialization. For example, one of the warrior backgrounds could be a templar background, that not only sets your specialization, but gives the player detailed information on how you acquired your training.

In this manner, I think that your specialization could be tied to the plot, both superficially (through dialogue), as well as deeply (through quests).

It's a good idea, though there are gameplay pitfalls.  I know with my DA:O characters, I picked specializations after I'd gotten a good feel for how the character played.  Mechanics were a consideration, not just roleplaying, and picking a specialization before getting a feel for the class in the new engine could be a problem.

Not to mention, what about respeccing?  Is that just gonna be handwaved?  I remember having to respec my Warrior after running into the infamous Reaver damage bug.

I agree that there are gameplay concerns like the ones that you mentioned, but I personally think that it is an inevitable trade-off if we want specializations to have more of an impact on dialogue and plot.  For example, respecializing might make it difficult for the game to track your specialization (e.g., one NPC might recognize you as a blood mage in the early part of the game, but after you respec, a NPC might recognize you as a spirit healer instead, possibly creating continuity errors in your playthrough).

I guess it comes down to what is more important to you.  For me, I'm willing to lose some of the gameplay benefits (e.g., respecialization, more than one specialization, etc.), if it means that I'll have a much more enriched experience with a specialization.

Modifié par arcelonious, 14 novembre 2012 - 11:01 .

[Wulfram]

Berserkers are, well, berserk. Reavers have loads of talents called "frenzy".

[KNIGHTMARE170]

It made absolutely no sense in DA2 how you could be a blood mage and be champion. Being an apostate is one thing, but doing blood magic in front of templars and them not doing anything removed a lot of the immersion. I think it would work better if Bioware DID make it more restrictive if you chose to do these things. Mybe they should just get rid of respecing all together.

Modifié par KNIGHTMARE170, 14 novembre 2012 - 10:43 .

[Sable Rhapsody]

arcelonious wrote...

I agree that there are gameplay concerns like the ones that you mentioned, but I personally think that it is an inevitable trade-off if we want specializations to have more more of an impact on dialogue and plot.  For example, respecializing might make it difficult for the game to track your specialization (e.g., one NPC might recognize you as a blood mage in the early part of the game, but after you respec, a NPC might recognize you as a spirit healer instead, possibly creating continuity errors in  your playthrough).

That's a good point.  I just hope if they do "lock in" specializations for the sake of plot, they also iron out all the gameplay bugs related to them.  The specializations in DA2 (at least for Warrior and Mage) were well-balanced enough where even if one felt OP, the others didn't feel useless.  But the bugs can sometimes be a game-killer, and not being able to respec would then be a significant problem.

[The Elder King]

Wulfram wrote...

hhh89 wrote...

My warrior PC aren't templars because they hate mages. They became templars because of their abilities and protection against magic.

Yeah, that's what I do too.

But if they decide to integrate the specialisations more into the plot, I worry that would no longer be possible.  You might have to complete quests for the Templars or something to get the training.

The requirements for learning the templars's abilities are lyrium (which I hope they'll bring up as necessary for the spec, meaning your PC has to start assuming lyrium) and someone with templars's abilities to teach you, which could be a former templar, or a templar in your party (Cullen?).
Not every templars wll be on the templar's side. Some will side with the Chantry. Some could even side with the mages, or being indipendant. I doubt that even if they'll make the specializations integrated with the plot (or having more relevance in the game), they'll force the PC to side with the faction that could provide the specialization.

[Iosev]

Sable Rhapsody wrote...

arcelonious wrote...

I agree that there are gameplay concerns like the ones that you mentioned, but I personally think that it is an inevitable trade-off if we want specializations to have more more of an impact on dialogue and plot.  For example, respecializing might make it difficult for the game to track your specialization (e.g., one NPC might recognize you as a blood mage in the early part of the game, but after you respec, a NPC might recognize you as a spirit healer instead, possibly creating continuity errors in  your playthrough).

That's a good point.  I just hope if they do "lock in" specializations for the sake of plot, they also iron out all the gameplay bugs related to them.  The specializations in DA2 (at least for Warrior and Mage) were well-balanced enough where even if one felt OP, the others didn't feel useless.  But the bugs can sometimes be a game-killer, and not being able to respec would then be a significant problem.

Yes, I agree, it's always good to have the specializations be balanced and equally desirable, especially if we're only going to have one that we cannot change. 

[n7stormrunner]

chaotic =\\= undiscipined.

oghren being undiscpined lead to him being next best thing to kicked out of the warrior caste probably not but so common.

the guy who teachs you to be a reaver is more reasonable then most non retired, non mook templars he even in his way tries to help redeem yourself compare that to the templars in 2 he seems sane and friendly just don't insult his god... and he doesn't just try to kill you. so crazy dragon cultist he may be but he is a disciplined crazy dragon cultist

[Sable Rhapsody]

n7stormrunner wrote...
 sane and friendly

Never though I'd see those words used to describe the dragon cultists 

But I agree with the gist of what you're saying.  Berserker and Reaver need not be ax-murder-crazy specializations, nor should you have to roleplay like that if the specializations are more tied to plot.

[KNIGHTMARE170]

n7stormrunner wrote...

chaotic == undiscipined.

oghren being undiscpined lead to him being next best thing to kicked out of the warrior caste probably not but so common.

the guy who teachs you to be a reaver is more reasonable then most non retired, non mook templars he even in his way tries to help redeem yourself compare that to the templars in 2 he seems sane and friendly just don't insult his god... and he doesn't just try to kill you. so crazy dragon cultist he may be but he is a disciplined crazy dragon cultist

I see your point, but the whole reaver thing is a bit crazy if you think about it. The Templars would just view this as a new form of malificarum, and would no doubt subjigate it. I mean, its using your blood to EAT peopls souls. The very nature of it is chaotic and destroctive, and acquiring such powers can lead to some great character role play.

[Jonata]

If I remember well being a Blood Mage was actually a pretty big deal in Origins. Not only you had to bargain with the demon to get it, but Wynne almost freaked out about it after Broken Circle.

I would like to see something like that again, it was pretty cool since the cutscene also officially justified the use of Blood Magic by the Wardens, and I was since then able to play my "good" Blood Mage without asking myself if I was meta-gaming too much.

[Sable Rhapsody]

KNIGHTMARE170 wrote...
I see your point, but the whole reaver thing is a bit crazy if you think about it. The Templars would just view this as a new form of malificarum, and would no doubt subjigate it. I mean, its using your blood to EAT peopls souls. The very nature of it is chaotic and destroctive, and acquiring such powers can lead to some great character role play.

It was my impression that Reaver "magic" for lack of a better word to use, is poorly understood, and not something the Templars might immediately recognize as forbidden.

Of course, given how oblivious they were to the maleficar Champion in their midst during my playthrough, I'm sure you could have your protagonist dance in front of them naked, covered in blood, and wearing nothing but a tea cozy and they STILL wouldn't notice a damned thing.