54 réponses à ce sujet

[ScarMK]

JWvonGoethe wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

I think I should be able to gut Zevran and still become an assassin after I unlock it the first time.

Well, I can sort of see what you mean there - it is a little unfair to be locked out of being an assassin simply because your character assassinated someone. 
 
But then, I would say that was a design problem specific to that particular specialisation - and it's a problem that still existed on first playthroughs of DA:O, regardless of the fact that specialisations could be permanently unlocked on subsequent playthroughs.

So, I'll stick by my opinion that specialisations shouldn't stay unlocked for every playthrough, but I suspect DA:I is going to do something different with them that will kind of render my view irrelevant.

I like the way Origins did it, since them being unlocked in next playthroughs allows you to headcanon how they learned it, if they did so in a different way.

[jones0901]

story driven specializations. there are so many great factions and groups in the DA universe that would be unique, lore friendly specializations that meshed well the gameplay elements. You want a pet? Become an Ash Warrior or a mage who controls a Golem. want to be an assassin, find a Crow.

[DarthLaxian]

Shadobald wrote...

I like the DA:O way where you had to unlock them in-game. I think it is more fun that way.

i liked this way, too - i would only hate it, if you had to make "bad" choices again (like the sacred ashes thing - you lost a companion over that!!!) in order to get them or if you have to wait a very long time for certain specialisations (like getting a very good one when you are almost done with the game...i would want to get them in the first third of the game (to get the most out of them, even more, if the - as promised - do have an impact on the story) and i would want to retain them for a second play-through again (meaning i don't have to re-do those quests if i don't want to - i still can for EXP and loot of course)

oh and one thing: i don't want companions locked into theirs (or, if they are - like in origins - i at least want to be able to give them a second one (that was badly handled in DA2 with the only "good" healer being Anders (he sometimes is really annoying - and i kind of understand the guy (i would probably be similar to him, if i was locked up just for being born like i am)))

greetings LAX
ps: has it been confirmed how many specialisations the PC (and companions) can have already? (one would be a tad bit limited IMHO)
pps: oh and something else - i would want the specialisations to be more then say 3 spells...more like the schools of magic in origins (spirit, creation, primal, entropy etc.) - meaning a blood-mage may have more things he can do, a spirit-healer might have different heal-spells for different situations etc.

[Nerdage]

Depends how much they're actually referenced in the rest of the game. If I get to intimidate mages by showing off my templar abilities, do some fancy sleight of hand as a shadow to con people and that sort of thing throughout the game (wherever appropriate) then that's plenty on its own; just unlocking them by level is fine. That would be my first choice.

If it's just one or two token remarks, or if the only distinction the game makes is "blood mage: yes or no" then unlocking them from quests would probably be better, but not main story quests like DAO, quests which are actually about learning the specialization.

Modifié par nerdage, 29 août 2013 - 10:06 .

[Maverick827]

Story unlock, no global unlock, but the "story" part has to make sense.

[LinksOcarina]

Tying them to the story makes them problematic. See Arcane Warrior as the primary example, something that made it special, only to be completely screwed because of how its presented as something so rare only five people in Ferelden can be one because...why not?

Honestly, just keep them a mechanic. No need for a reason why, make the specializations the little flavor text that gives your character extra flair and abilities.

[In Exile]

LinksOcarina wrote...

Tying them to the story makes them problematic. See Arcane Warrior as the primary example, something that made it special, only to be completely screwed because of how its presented as something so rare only five people in Ferelden can be one because...why not?

Honestly, just keep them a mechanic. No need for a reason why, make the specializations the little flavor text that gives your character extra flair and abilities.

Except that the specializations sometimes not make any plot sense, like BM. 

[Fast Jimmy]

LinksOcarina wrote...

Tying them to the story makes them problematic. See Arcane Warrior as the primary example, something that made it special, only to be completely screwed because of how its presented as something so rare only five people in Ferelden can be one because...why not?

Honestly, just keep them a mechanic. No need for a reason why, make the specializations the little flavor text that gives your character extra flair and abilities.

It doesn't have to be like that, though. 

What if the decisions you make could affect your specialization? For instance, let's say that the Warrior spec was given in the Circle of the Magi questline in DA:O. If you sided with the Templars, it unlocks dialogue that has the Templars train you as "one of their own." If you sided with the Mages, they teach the warrior a combination of blood magic and fighting, like the Reaver spec. 

It could be not impossible for the knowledge of a Reaver-like character to exist (aside from drinking the blood of a worshipped dragon god - that makes such a thing a little silly lore wise, not to mention making no sense for how your other warrior companions who weren't with you could suddenly learn these abilities as well). And, of course, Templars are as common as the common cold in Thedas.

I like the idea of story-based specializations. They don't need to be rare as the day is long... the world is full of assassins and templars... they just need to be something that can help you. I'd like that better than "MAN! I just slaughtered my 678th bandit... NOW I KNOW HOW TO BE A SHAPESHIFTER!" 

Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 29 août 2013 - 11:11 .

[Lee80]

I think at one point they said something about only being able to take one specialization per character this time around. so it could be easy enough to set it up where you have to choose a specialization path for your character at some point in the story (thus making unlocks pointless).

I've just always assumed that would be how it would work in this game anyway. Though I too do enjoy the origin's unlock system, so it would be pretty neat to see it back.

[MakutaDax]

Kuroi Kishin wrote...

I prefer choosing one specialization only, at the start of the game, and have it working like a backround/origin of a sort.

It will have lore, but you won't be unlocking it for a later level.

If they implement specializations from the first level, that is. If not, then unlocking is fine.

I agree. If specs are going to have a stronger impact on the story, then I think it would make sense for us to start off with the one we want at the beginning. This would also offer them the ability to flesh the specs out and pump them up a bit simply due to the fact that you're only ever going to have that one spec.

As far as unlocking them through the story, I really didn't care for that method purely because it forced my character to complete certain quests in a certain order. When I wanted my mage to unlock Blood Mage, I had to do Redcliffe first so that I wouldn't risk going beyond level 7 and having to either choose a different first spec or hold off on using valuable spell points until I did unlock Blood Mage.

I suppose unlocking the specs through a special quest that is available to you from the beginning might help with this. At least then you can unlock a spec, through a story event, at any time you choose.

[DarthSideus2]

AleshCZ wrote...

I prefer unlocking by story progress. And for the love of god, don't make the class accessible for all games after it is first unlocked - only for the one where you actually do the associated quest. Also, more ways for unlocking the classes would be nice.

I agree. I would also like class specific side missions that can unlock special abilities/powers/armors/weopons.

[Ecmoose]

AleshCZ wrote...

I prefer unlocking by story progress. And for the love of god, don't make the class accessible for all games after it is first unlocked - only for the one where you actually do the associated quest. Also, more ways for unlocking the classes would be nice.

I actually liked that method. Because then you could play a Grey Warden Templar without being required to make nice with Alistair in another playthrough. I think as long as you've unlocked something, it should be universal to your account.

[iOnlySignIn]

Story. But

- The story should be playable in a variety of different orders.

- Specializations must be balanced against each other. Unlike say, Reaver > All.

[The Six Path of Pain]

I loved the way DA:O handled the Specs, more of that please

[Jackums]

Story.

[DarthLaxian]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

Tying them to the story makes them problematic. See Arcane Warrior as the primary example, something that made it special, only to be completely screwed because of how its presented as something so rare only five people in Ferelden can be one because...why not?

Honestly, just keep them a mechanic. No need for a reason why, make the specializations the little flavor text that gives your character extra flair and abilities.

It doesn't have to be like that, though. 

What if the decisions you make could affect your specialization? For instance, let's say that the Warrior spec was given in the Circle of the Magi questline in DA:O. If you sided with the Templars, it unlocks dialogue that has the Templars train you as "one of their own." If you sided with the Mages, they teach the warrior a combination of blood magic and fighting, like the Reaver spec. 

It could be not impossible for the knowledge of a Reaver-like character to exist (aside from drinking the blood of a worshipped dragon god - that makes such a thing a little silly lore wise, not to mention making no sense for how your other warrior companions who weren't with you could suddenly learn these abilities as well). And, of course, Templars are as common as the common cold in Thedas.

I like the idea of story-based specializations. They don't need to be rare as the day is long... the world is full of assassins and templars... they just need to be something that can help you. I'd like that better than "MAN! I just slaughtered my 678th bandit... NOW I KNOW HOW TO BE A SHAPESHIFTER!" 

that's what i am afraid of:

chosing sides gives you specialisations (or not)...because knowing myself, i can't chose certain sides (i don't much "role-play" as i do "self-insert" meaning i don't go the other way (at least if i regard the rewards of joining one side (if i have to) worsen then joining the other (meaning like the broken-circle quest in DA:O - i can never side with the templars as they demand i kill all the mages, which i just can't do or killing one of the sides in the dalish/werewolf fight (i reconciled them on first try without looking it up and i never did it otherwise!))

greetings LAX

[Rolling Flame]

Story.

[Fetunche]

Buy/ read a book, specialisation learned.

[Crevasse]

Kuroi Kishin wrote...

I prefer choosing one specialization only, at the start of the game, and have it working like a backround/origin of a sort.

It will have lore, but you won't be unlocking it for a later level.

If they implement specializations from the first level, that is. If not, then unlocking is fine.

Interesting idea. Maybe once you hit the level required for a specialisation a quest automatically pops up that involves direction too that specialisation chosen at the begining.

I prefer story, but it felt 'unsynched' to leveling in DAO. If they could find a way to balance the unlock level and story unlock it would be awesome.

Modifié par Crevasse, 30 août 2013 - 03:50 .

[Thomas Andresen]

The way I've interpreted what little I've heard, choosing a specialization is more likely to be a choice within the narrative, rather than a box you tick while leveling up.

[DooomCookie]

Mixing up gameplay and story is always great. I liked the DA:O system, save for how they were tied to the whole game, so you could reload. The side quest thing sounds good.

[Thomas Andresen]

As I understand it, they want your specialization to not be an arbitrary choice like it has been in previous games(i.e. ticking off a box during levelup), because arbitrary choices are a lot harder to account for in the narrative.

But until we have an official word on it, and I am sure we will have that well before the release, we can only guess.

[Sharn01]

I would personally rather start with the specialization at character creation and have it reflected as part of your class during the story when appropriate.

[JJDXB]

Story unlock.

Expanding on that, I think story unlocks should be used to teach you how to use weapons/techniques you won't have been trained in for your class.  For example :

Mage: Can unlock sword and shield, dual wielding
Warrior: Can unlock dual wielding and archery
Rogue: Can unlock sword and shield and two-handed

You'll still be able to use those weapons, but you'll suffer penalties for attack chance and damage.  To remove these penalties, you'll have to talk to somebody to train you, maybe in your party, but you won't have access to the skill tree that a dedicated warrior/rogue will (much like in DA:O).  My biggest frustration with DA2 was how they limited weapons and armor.  Obviously there have to be differences between classes, especially between warrior and rogue (for otherwise, they'd be more or less the same), so skill trees should remain class-specific.