89 réponses à ce sujet

[Fetunche]

Yes unlock spells and lock bash for warriors means I don't have to drag along characters I don't want just to unlock stuff. People have their favourite classes and will play them whether the game is balanced or not. In da2 rogues were the most OP, rogue equipped with a dlc bow easiest play through ever.

[ladyiolanthe]

I like having to think tactically about how to use all my party members to the best advantage in order to keep everyone safe. The warrior class in both DA:O and DAII was set up with talents to draw melee combat away from the physically weaker party members so they can continue casting spells or backstabbing enemies. That's how I've addressed the problem you mention here.

[AresKeith]

LorDC wrote...

I don't understand what the thread is about. Mages with blades? DAO had arcane warriors. Why don't we see many such mages? Because of the balancing issues. Lore reason is that templars prohibit mages to train in martial arts.

Hopefully with the setting in DA:I well see more Arcane Warriors now

Along with the Mage Inquisitor having the Arcane Warrior spec

[ladyiolanthe]

Even though I gave the Arcane Warrior specialization to my mages in DA:O, I never actually used it! I found they were much more effective being mages. By the time I had the specialization, I had sold most of the lower tier armour and weapons that had strength and dexterity minimums that my mages could actually handle. The problem with the Arcane Warrior, I found, was that you'd have to stop putting points into magic and willpower attributes, and start putting them into dexterity and strength, the end result being you have someone who is neither a powerful mage nor an effective melee fighter. :/

Modifié par ladyiolanthe, 04 août 2013 - 04:20 .

[AresKeith]

ladyiolanthe wrote...

Even though I gave the Arcane Warrior specialization to my mages in DA:O, I never actually used it! I found they were much more effective being mages. By the time I had the specialization, I had sold most of the lower tier armour and weapons that had strength and dexterity minimums that my mages could actually handle. The problem with the Arcane Warrior, I found, was that you'd have to stop putting points into magic and willpower attributes, and start putting them into dexterity and strength, the end result being you have someone who is neither a powerful mage nor an effective melee fighter. :/

I think that was mainly meant for the PC instead the companions

Still think Mage Hawke should've had it too

[Mark of the Dragon]

I like what they did with mages in DA2. I have never really liked mage classes until I played DA2. While the spells themselves could be better I liked the way combat was handled. You could stay back from the combat and unleash devastating spells or you could jump into the fray and use you staff for melee combat.

That combat made me thoroughly enjoy the mage class and I hope it returns in DAI. As long as they do that I don’t personally need or want any special blade for combat.

However, if they bring back the arcane warrior class it would be cool to have a blade like you are talking about. I personally enjoyed this class in DAO. It would be cool to have a weapon that is representative of both the warrior and mage class.

Modifié par Mark of the Dragon, 04 août 2013 - 05:25 .

[9TailsFox]

ladyiolanthe wrote...

Even though I gave the Arcane Warrior specialization to my mages in DA:O, I never actually used it! I found they were much more effective being mages. By the time I had the specialization, I had sold most of the lower tier armour and weapons that had strength and dexterity minimums that my mages could actually handle. The problem with the Arcane Warrior, I found, was that you'd have to stop putting points into magic and willpower attributes, and start putting them into dexterity and strength, the end result being you have someone who is neither a powerful mage nor an effective melee fighter. :/

 You don't have to put points into strength and dexterity. what's the point of arcane warrior your damage is calculated using your magic attribute instead of strength.

[andy6915]

9TailsFox wrote...

ladyiolanthe wrote...

Even though I gave the Arcane Warrior specialization to my mages in DA:O, I never actually used it! I found they were much more effective being mages. By the time I had the specialization, I had sold most of the lower tier armour and weapons that had strength and dexterity minimums that my mages could actually handle. The problem with the Arcane Warrior, I found, was that you'd have to stop putting points into magic and willpower attributes, and start putting them into dexterity and strength, the end result being you have someone who is neither a powerful mage nor an effective melee fighter. :/

 You don't have to put points into strength and dexterity. what's the point of arcane warrior your damage is calculated using your magic attribute instead of strength.

Seriously, that guy had no clue what he was doing and clearly didn't read what the AW talents he was buying even said about them. An AW shouldn't have more then the starting strength and dexterity they started with, even by the final battle.

Modifié par andy69156915, 04 août 2013 - 05:56 .

[Tvorceskiy]

Having a knife on hand is something typical for the time period DA is based around. A lot of people would carry a short knife with them; to cut plants, defend themselves, cutting meat, etc etc.

[ladyiolanthe]

andy69156915 wrote...

9TailsFox wrote...

ladyiolanthe wrote...

Even though I gave the Arcane Warrior specialization to my mages in DA:O, I never actually used it! I found they were much more effective being mages. By the time I had the specialization, I had sold most of the lower tier armour and weapons that had strength and dexterity minimums that my mages could actually handle. The problem with the Arcane Warrior, I found, was that you'd have to stop putting points into magic and willpower attributes, and start putting them into dexterity and strength, the end result being you have someone who is neither a powerful mage nor an effective melee fighter. :/

 You don't have to put points into strength and dexterity. what's the point of arcane warrior your damage is calculated using your magic attribute instead of strength.

Seriously, that guy had no clue what he was doing and clearly didn't read what the AW talents he was buying even said about them. An AW shouldn't have more then the starting strength and dexterity they started with, even by the final battle.

You're assuming rather a lot about me. I'm not sure that you read what my post even said on the matter. If I made a mistake, it was in choosing not to buy back crappy low-tier weapons and armour in order to equip my arcane warriors. A lot of weapons have strength and dexterity minimums that my mages' starting strength and dexterity prevented them from using. I wasn't certain that the trade-off in loss of damage, critical chances, armour penetration, etc. would make up for using the arcane warrior specialization's use of the magic attribute to calculate damage. So I upped strength and dexterity to try to equip them with better gear.

If you found the trade-off was worth it, please let me know! I'd be happy to hear how well your arcane warriors worked for you.

[MisanthropePrime]

Mages carry knives because they're useful. You can't cut your dinner with a staff. I've tried.

[ladyiolanthe]

Filament wrote...

Arcane warriors can also use magic to waive the strength requirements of weapons and armor. You don't need to up it for any reason.

It's shapeshifter that stupidly has to worry about strength to be effective.

That's interesting, because I remember not being able to equip certain gear on my arcane warriors. I'll have to look into it further. Thanks!

[TheKomandorShepard]

ladyiolanthe wrote...

Filament wrote...

Arcane warriors can also use magic to waive the strength requirements of weapons and armor. You don't need to up it for any reason.

It's shapeshifter that stupidly has to worry about strength to be effective.

That's interesting, because I remember not being able to equip certain gear on my arcane warriors. I'll have to look into it further. Thanks!

Because maybe you don't put point in first arcane warrior ability for example you have armor or weapon that requires 52 strength if you have http://dragonage.wik...ki/Combat_Magic this instead you will need 52 magic but it don't work on items what require dexterity.

[Twisted Path]

Having a special animation where mages use magic to kill people instead of the Murder Knife would be a nice bonus. Maybe a quick brutal telekinetic crush or something. It got especially goofy in Origins when a mage character can execute Lohgain and the Arch Demon with a gigantic two-handed sword.

It would also have been nice if as a mage you could wear more magically enhanced regular guy/gal cloths instead of robes that scream "I am a MAGE." Especially in Dragon Age 2 where you're supposedly playing a secret apostate. In DA2 I ended up wearing the starting outfit up until I got the Robes of the Notorious Pirate (which looks like a rogue outfit,) because all the other mage upgrades I found looked like goofy bathrobes.

I'm fine with mages not wearing armor (functioning in heavy armor does take some pretty specialized training,) but being able to wear some commoner or noble clothes to blend in would have been nice.

Modifié par Twisted Path, 04 août 2013 - 07:27 .

[Boycott Bioware]

Then what's the point of having other classes if Mage can do it all? Why don't they throw in a unlock spell as well and no one needs to play rogue anymore either.

Other classes may have their own specialty. Templar is an anti-Mage, so explore anti magic mechanic to balance it. Assassins, their job is to kill, surely they know how to handle super battlemage, that must involve advance form combat mechanic, such as stealth.

It is up to the game designers to creatively design the combat mechanic, if it is like DA2 than it rigid and stiff. Skyrim is rigid and stiff too and now they only focus on damage, damage and damage...There are many more can be explored.

Even the simple game Warcraft 3 based DotA have interesting combat mechanic that heavily focus on synergy of skills and synergy of party members.

Modifié par Qistina, 04 août 2013 - 09:49 .

[Eternal Phoenix]

"We don't want Arcane Warrior back because it was OP."

So was any mage who was using destructive magic. The mage is way over-powered in both Origins and DA2 without melee abilities. Saying the AW shouldn't return because of over-balance is a poor excuse. Bioware can fix it and then we can have a mage who not only has some experience with melee but can wield heavy armor too.

Is it so hard to believe a mage can pick up a sword? It doesn't mean they'll have the skills of the warrior just because they can swing the sword. Adding weapon and build restrictions doesn't make the game "hardcore" it actually makes it dumbed down when there are too few class builds. Origins had several builds for the warrior (two handed, archer, sword and shield, dual wielding, magical spirit warrior) not to mention you could create a sword and shield warrior who focused on singular damage and taunting enemies and another on defense. Meanwhile you could create a two handed who would try to distract enemies or another who could hit multiple targets. That's ignoring specs like Guardian and Champion which led to the warrior focusing *solely* on the defense and buffing of allies.

With DA2 you get two options for each class. That's hardly "hardcore" is it? Yeah the warrior gets some specs for buffing allies or focusing on more damage but at heart the warrior is forced into a pre-determined role in DA2 and you can't dual wield. Meanwhile the rogue also loses the ability to dual wield two swords and can't even equip a sword. Isabella was a duelist in Origins and suddenly she's using daggers? What? Someone who duels uses a sword but is more dexterous with it. Add that back.

Modifié par Elton John is dead, 04 août 2013 - 09:48 .

[AresKeith]

I feel there should be Arcane Warriors in DA:I along with the Inquisitor having that Spec also

[Ziggeh]

Elton John is dead wrote...
Adding weapon and build restrictions doesn't make the game "hardcore" it actually makes it dumbed down when there are too few class builds.

It makes the classes more distinct and defined. They wanted you to make discrete decisions between roles.

[Khayness]

andy69156915 wrote...

Then let's just get rid of classes and just make you into a physical god who can do everything and anything. Much more hardcore and fun, right?

Divine Divinity pulled it off.

You can pick any class skills, the only real difference was in getting attributes from stat points.

And ironically, it's hardcore, fun, and you also become a god (sorta).

[cjones91]

Ziggeh wrote...

Elton John is dead wrote...
Adding weapon and build restrictions doesn't make the game "hardcore" it actually makes it dumbed down when there are too few class builds.

It makes the classes more distinct and defined. They wanted you to make discrete decisions between roles.

How does restricting weapons and builds make classes more destinct and defined?If a Warrior can't use all of the weapon types then you just have a gimped class,same thing with rogues and mages if you remove certain builds then you are basically gimping all the classes.

[Abraham_uk]

Darth Brotarian wrote...

Mages really need to learn to use their staffs better, like gandalf does.

Gandalf uses swords too.

[Wulfram]

Elton John is dead wrote...

"We don't want Arcane Warrior back because it was OP."

So was any mage who was using destructive magic. The mage is way over-powered in both Origins and DA2 without melee abilities. Saying the AW shouldn't return because of over-balance is a poor excuse. Bioware can fix it and then we can have a mage who not only has some experience with melee but can wield heavy armor too.

The problem with AW wasn't just that it was over-powered, but that it was overpowered in a really boring way.  Being invincible and autoattacking everything is rubbish.

That's fixable, though I don't think it's so easy without some major tweaks to the concept.  But really, why take as a base such a rubbish class?  Even if you want a mage with a sword class, you're better off starting afresh - it's not like the name is even much good.

Is it so hard to believe a mage can pick up a sword? It doesn't mean they'll have the skills of the warrior just because they can swing the sword.

If they're not good with the weapon, it's a waste of resources to make it possible.  I'd rather focus on stuff they're actually good at.

Adding weapon and build restrictions doesn't make the game "hardcore" it actually makes it dumbed down when there are too few class builds. Origins had several builds for the warrior (two handed, archer, sword and shield, dual wielding, magical spirit warrior) not to mention you could create a sword and shield warrior who focused on singular damage and taunting enemies and another on defense. Meanwhile you could create a two handed who would try to distract enemies or another who could hit multiple targets. That's ignoring specs like Guardian and Champion which led to the warrior focusing *solely* on the defense and buffing of allies.

With DA2 you get two options for each class. That's hardly "hardcore" is it? Yeah the warrior gets some specs for buffing allies or focusing on more damage but at heart the warrior is forced into a pre-determined role in DA2 and you can't dual wield. Meanwhile the rogue also loses the ability to dual wield two swords and can't even equip a sword. Isabella was a duelist in Origins and suddenly she's using daggers? What? Someone who duels uses a sword but is more dexterous with it. Add that back.

I found DA2 had more build variety than DA:O as far as talents went, for non-mages.  DA:O tended to be stuck dumping points in whatever weapon you took - there was some variation in the order, or you might mix in some bow talents maybe, but you're going to end up with most of them.  And of course there was massive crossover with rogues.

I don't know, maybe DA:A had more variety since you seem to be talking about that.  I didn't play around with that much, since combat was devoid of challenge anyway.

DA:O had more attribute variety, but I think attributes are tedious rubbish anyway.