DragonKingReborn wrote...
I think I'm ok without it, to be honest. Lore-wise it was an Elven spec that disappeared centuries ago. How would the Inquisitor learn it? Game-wise, it is a no win for bioware. In Origins it was way overpowered, but if they clip its power people will likely bellow "they've nerfed my arcane warrior!" From their p.o.v. it's probably not worth it. Besides, an earlier comment about specs was that they'd be tied more to the plot. I suspect that, if that happens, every spec added will add significant work for potentially little gain.
Likely you'd find such a thing, much like the Warden on DA:O did.
As for nerfing, the answer is, "Don't" . . . as for overpowered, single player games really shouldn't be prone to the balancing of classes in the first place. The Mage in DA:O really didn't need their party members, save when the story or a quest absolutely required you have some character, or another, with you. This wasn't game breaking though, it felt quite right, the Mage really should just feel that powerful. There was a reason they were considered dangerous.
The same thing occurred in DA2, several ways of building a mage wholly let you solo the game, unless the story or a quest absolutely required you have a character with you. In neither case was the power of the mage as a class a detriment. As such the power of the Arcane Warrior was no more an issue, in my mind.
Then again, I go by the idea of class as difficulty, rather than difficulty setting as difficulty. A mage should just be more powerful than a Rogue or Warrior. The end. Nothing has ever swayed me otherwise, and I've always found a way to challenge myself even with a powerful class, such as soloing encounters not typically soloable.