Is that a problem?
Ya. Everytime someone says we should let lockpicking be a open skill, there's all this uproar about class distinction and compensating the Rogue for losing an ability by giving them spells. I'm just standing up for warriors - poor guys have been bleeding for years and no one's given any mind. How about we get rid of the rogue class and just let lockpicking be a pickable talent for STR or DEX based warriors? 
Ya. Everytime someone says we should let lockpicking be a open skill, there's all this uproar about class distinction and compensating the Rogue for losing an ability by giving them spells. I'm just standing up for warriors - poor guys have been bleeding for years and no one's given any mind. How about we get rid of the rogue class and just let lockpicking be a pickable talent for STR or DEX based warriors?
We should give warriors the ability to heal and crowd control as well and just get rid of mages too. 
It would make sense for warriors to be able to use all weapon types (like in origins) as they are the masters of combat. Rogues make up for only being able to use two weapon types with their plethora of skills and their ability to stealth/open locks. It's pretty balanced in that respect
We should give warriors the ability to heal and crowd control as well and just get rid of mages too.
Glad you're on board! It's time to take back the Warrior! 
It would make sense for warriors to be able to use all weapon types (like in origins) as they are the masters of combat. Rogues make up for only being able to use two weapon types with their plethora of skills and their ability to stealth/open locks. It's pretty balanced in that respect
Yes, i agree completely. In the way it is, you can play warrior only if you want to tank.....or in the rare occasions to make a 2h warrior, which is dealing even less damage than rogue. If you want unique inquisitior with ability that your companions do not posses ( two swords at the same time) you are out of luck. In witcher series geralt is unique cause have signs, he is beastslayer with two different type of swords and does alchemy. In Inquisition your protagonist is like everyone else with the same abilities except glowing hands.
Yes, i agree completely. In the way it is, you can play warrior only if you want to tank.....or in the rare occasions to make a 2h warrior, which is dealing even less damage than rogue. If you want unique inquisitior with ability that your companions do not posses ( two swords at the same time) you are out of luck. In witcher series geralt is unique cause have signs, he is beastslayer with two different type of swords and does alchemy. In Inquisition your protagonist is like everyone else with the same abilities except glowing hands.
The PC not being unique from the rest of the companions is pretty much a staple of every party-based RPG.
Even when you must have the same combat style as Cassandra ? Isn't that a little odd ? If there was dual wielding swords it would be available for companions but after respec, by default Cassandra is tank, so is Grey Warden and Iron Bull is 2h. Why the Inquisitor should be the 4th person with the same abilities ? Is it that bad to have a third option ?
well is not the point of a RPG to play something as close as what you want to play?
Even if the TW rogue and TW warrior will do the same thing save for the level of armor and level of stealth and so what...
I would go even further that build option, i would like in play versatility and for a warrior using all weapons/combat style is an easy way to achieve it
as long as we have, classes based on what they can use as opposed as what they can do meaningfully and how they do it. The warrior and the rogue class with restrict each other.
phil
True....Moreso the first game of the series did this. And it was 5 years ago. The games are going on the decline in terms of melee combat. ( excluding DA2 ofc, after all it is a 1 year school project).
After months without success in getting an answer, maybe i will finally get it when reviews start flooding the internet. Till then i am reading about collector's edition, money, box art, money, money, you run whole inquisition, ea, money, the game is open world....etc..
I love how they rather repeat themselves 100 times, than providing a small chunk of info about the gameplay. The only thing we know about it is that we will have 3 specializaitons and we saw some pre-apha demo. Oh and you can roll, like someone wanted this. Maybe 2 days before release, they will actually look up to what people are interested in. At least for DA4 keep the bows for example and dont cut them like dual wielding. At that rate, in DA5 you will choose between two handed sword and mage staff with two distinctive classes.
I remember ME2 having not more than 16 weapons total, and ME3 had around 100. This is how sequels should work. Also i dont remember ME3 cutting shotguns, because they lack time and resources to do them. If a fan asked the developers if there were shotguns in ME3 4 months prior release, he will het an answer in couple of seconds, that there will be big variety of shotguns with attachments and so on. If you ask Bioware right now if you can wield two swords they will just ignore you or tell you it is hard to do and not speaking of that soon.
The way you go on about it, saying that you are going to pirate the game should be your answer to that.
We dont know anything about the gameplay mechanics aside from limited healing. Perhaps as it comes close to release they will announce what a class can and cannot do,
No update right ?
You need to let this go now. It's just unhealthy.
Yes, i agree completely. In the way it is, you can play warrior only if you want to tank.....or in the rare occasions to make a 2h warrior, which is dealing even less damage than rogue. If you want unique inquisitior with ability that your companions do not posses ( two swords at the same time) you are out of luck. In witcher series geralt is unique cause have signs, he is beastslayer with two different type of swords and does alchemy. In Inquisition your protagonist is like everyone else with the same abilities except glowing hands.
I would say being able to rip open portals to the Fade is fairly unique. whos to say we don't get abilities to represent that?
I would say being able to rip open portals to the Fade is fairly unique. whos to say we don't get abilities to represent that?
I suspect it will be a mage thing only. And Rift specialization exclusive. If you go for melee, you are just the next one in the party with no uniqueness whatsoever.
I suspect it will be a mage thing only. And Rift specialization exclusive. If you go for melee, you are just the next one in the party with no uniqueness whatsoever.
Except for the fact you can close fade portals with your glowing green hand.
Except for the fact you can close fade portals with your glowing green hand.
True, yet it is not exactly fighting mechanic or useful when you are surrounded by enemies. Especially if they are dragons.
True, yet it is not exactly fighting mechanic or useful when you are surrounded by enemies. Especially if they are dragons.
Actually it is useful...because the only reason you have followers like Cassandra and Varric (Who've killed Dragons) is because of that power.
Actually it is useful...because the only reason you have followers like Cassandra and Varric (Who've killed Dragons) is because of that power.
For the third time, i am talking about the gameplay, not the plot elements or the story. I understand you are lawyer at heart but at least try to understand my point.
For the third time, i am talking about the gameplay, not the plot elements or the story. I understand you are lawyer at heart but at least try to understand my point.
most of the companions will have their own some what unique specialization and we will probably have access to a specialization that they don't have. you don't have to have the PC be a "special snowflake" for the to be gameplay diversity.
I suspect it will be a mage thing only. And Rift specialization exclusive. If you go for melee, you are just the next one in the party with no uniqueness whatsoever.
That is absolute nonsense. Just as with any class/archetype you have three specializations. With your reasoning there is nothing unique about the Mage either because they can only wield one actual weapon, a staff. It seems you completely discount that because you want to see a dual wielding warrior but that doesn't make your argument any stronger.
That is absolute nonsense. Just as with any class/archetype you have three specializations. With your reasoning there is nothing unique about the Mage either because they can only wield one actual weapon, a staff. It seems you completely discount that because you want to see a dual wielding warrior but that doesn't make your argument any stronger.
Mages do not fight with their staffs. They use various type of magic. Melee characters use different slashes, thrusts and pirouettes. Mages by default are more versatile because there is much more imagination in their skills. This is why limiting the available combat stances/fighting styles by neglecting dual wielded swords, spears and throwing knifes for example cripple the balance so much, that i will be hardly surprised if 75% players play mage or at best - archer.
Give me a reason to play warrior if i am not fan of tanking. Two handed sword fighting style is even slower than sword/shield combo and the only difference is slight damage increase/with less protecion. Dual wielded warrior will be damage dealer with decent armour/decent attack speed without the need to do rolls, pirouettes, backstabs, stealth and all that crazy jumping that rogues do.
To sum it up....currently the game lacks face to face melee damage dealer who is not going for the backstab and fighting with kitchen utensils. And two handed warrior is not fulfilling this role because:
1. Too slow because of heavy armour and heavy weapons > not enough dps
2. If you equip him with some kind of faster 2h weapon and less armour > dies quickly, even less effective than rogue.
3. Hitting stuff with big hammers is not everyone's cup of tea.
Also i assume:
Cassandra by default tank sword and shield/specialization champion/templar
Iron Bull by default 2hander/ specialization reaver
Grey Warden by default tank sword and shield / specialization champion.
If i want to be a warrior i must be copy/paste to one of the guys above.
I liked the staff fighting with mages in DA2. Much better than the stand and cast of DA:o with no crits.
I liked the staff fighting with mages in DA2. Much better than the stand and cast of DA:o with no crits.
Too bad it is useful only on easy difficulty.
For the third time, i am talking about the gameplay, not the plot elements or the story. I understand you are lawyer at heart but at least try to understand my point.
I do understand your point, I just think you're wrong.
Give me a reason to play warrior if i am not fan of tanking.
Here's the difference between you and me, I see my character as part of a team and not an individual. I know I will be taking others into battle along side me and I know that a balanced party can be far more effective than a singular individual.
As far as giving you a reason to play a warrior, Templar Specialization. When I play DA:O and DA 2 as a warrior that tends to be my preferred choice. It allows me to negate the advantages of Mages and creatures of the Fade.
Retour en haut