335 réponses à ce sujet

[Br3admax]

AresKeith wrote...

Darth Brotarian wrote...

Warriors should have sword and shield, two handed, dual wielding and archery.

Rogues should have dual daggers, one handed swords, archery, and bombs.

But Sickle and chain 

[Ryzaki]

KOHAKU

Oh man now I'm sad.

D:

[spirosz]

EntropicAngel wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

Hybrid mage/rogue would be the most hilariously broken class ever.

Yeah, I need this nao.

[Mr.House]

I once modded my save and had my Warden as all three classes. I broke that save.

[Ryzaki]

Mr.House wrote...

I once modded my save and had my Warden as all three classes. I broke that save.

I never mixed any classes most I did was make it so the 2HD weapon swing was a decent speed instead of that god awful slog.

Edit: In DA2 though better mages Xtreme all the way.

Edit2: And my rogues are still more powerful. Ha. So damn broken.

Modifié par Ryzaki, 27 septembre 2013 - 02:42 .

[Mr.House]

Ryzaki wrote...

Mr.House wrote...

I once modded my save and had my Warden as all three classes. I broke that save.

I never mixed any classes most I did was make it so the 2HD weapon swing was a decent speed instead of that god awful slog.

Edit: In DA2 though better mages Xtreme all the way.

Edit2: And my rogues are still more powerful. Ha. So damn broken.

Animation speed mod in DAO is a must.

[Ryzaki]

Mr.House wrote...
Animation speed mod in DAO is a must.

Yeah that original 2HD swing drove me crazy.

EntropicAngel wrote...

No way. Mages in DA ][ were like a normal class, not the "glass cannons" of DA:O. That was better, imo.

True I just like throwing spells everywhere. :P Plus bloodmagic sucks a little less.

[Br3admax]

EntropicAngel wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

Edit: In DA2 though better mages Xtreme all the way.

No way. Mages in DA ][ were like a normal class, not the "glass cannons" of DA:O. That was better, imo.

I used the Staff of Parthalan the entire game. Mages were boss. 

Modifié par Br3ad, 27 septembre 2013 - 02:51 .

[Azaron Nightblade]

Darth Brotarian wrote...

You didn't read what was said, this is someone who completed their college work, and had a job in the aerospace industry for several years, probably enough to pay off their student loans, and decided to take a career teaching others. It was posted as a defense for plantiff's stupidity about a surgeon going into flipping burgers and being skilled in both, which is pretty damn stupid are far as analogies go.

My mistake.
In that case, yeah - I agree that no doctor or other highly trained professional would ever settle for something like McDonald's, even if they did need money I'm sure they'd have better options available.

[Skaden]

I totally support the return of dual wield warriors, the restrictions imposed in DA2 were arbitrary and tiresome. I don`t understand the decision to cut the warrior's combat tree in half for the sake of placating rogues, who had plenty of their own tricks, just not as many direct weapon styles. When it comes down to it, DAO set a good precedent, let players play the character that they want to play, even if that doesn't fit into the boring traditional mold of warriors either being sword n board knights or 2h wielding berserkers. Besides, from a lore perspective it makes sense, warriors should be proficient in all forms of war, even in DA2 look at the Arishok, we're supposed to believe he was a rogue?

[andy6915]

I remember a couple posts a made a long way back on dual wielding warriors.

andy69156915 wrote...

EntropicAngel wrote...

And for the topic, I want to see dual-wieling longswords again. I don't like the implication that my...weapon master, agile fighter, whatever, can't use two at once.

renjility wrote...

Dual-wielding warriors should return. There was another thread about that specifically some time ago, in which it was suggested that dual-wielding warriors focused more on damaging multiple enemies simultaneously as opposed to rogues' high single-target damage.

I agree with you both, and I think your ideas combined would be best.

Warrior dual wielders should not be able to use daggers, just as rogues can't use swords. So a dual wield warrior should use daul swords instead of daul daggers. And thanks to the extra reach of swords compared to daggers, their skills and attacks should be able to hit multiple enemies at once, but with less damage to individual targets (like two-handed weapons with how they do less damage per hit to individual enemies then sword-and-sheild weapons in DA2).

andy69156915 wrote...
Now the question about what the point was in dual-wield warriors? That's a different matter. Their "role" was
filled much better by rogues, and a warrior using that weapon type was a warrior trying to do a rogues job... And not doing a very good job of it. DW warriors honestly had no real role, and the role they had rogues
did far better. Also, they made rogues feel less unique because warriors could steal their only melee weapon style and imitate them. Bioware agreed, which is why they took that weapon type out of the warrior class. If they bring that weapon type back for warriors in a future DA, they need to somehow make it distinct from rogue dual wielding.

I still think that. Dual wielding warriors should come back, but they should be distinct from rogue dual wielders.

[ramnozack]

And I want Arcane Warrior back, but Bioware wants to keep "diversity between classes" so they dont have to make more animations.

[Cainhurst Crow]

If bioware is making armor available to all classes, which I heard was the plan, than arcane warrior loses 100% appeal to me. The only reason I wanted arcane warrior in the first place was so I could wear heavy armor that looked cool while throwing out massive spells. If I can do that in the next game, that's good enough to arcane warrior to me.

[draken-heart]

You need to be somewhat Agile/dexterous with two weapons, as you cannot put your full wait into both at the same time. That seems to be more DA Rogue than DA Warrior, I think.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Please BioWare, remove ALL sensless items restrictions - anyone can use anything as long as they have the attributes for it.

Also, no level requirements. They are just utterly and compeltely stupid.

[Grand Admiral Cheesecake]

M'kay none of the above is important anymore.

From now on everything is all about Companion Cube Waifus/Husbandos.

[IndomitusRex]

draken-heart wrote...

You need to be somewhat Agile/dexterous with two weapons, as you cannot put your full wait into both at the same time. That seems to be more DA Rogue than DA Warrior, I think.

When you're swinging a pair of axes I think muscle is a lot more important than agility or adroitness.  Control comes from the strength to hold a weapon surely; having the dexterity to thread a needle on your first try is secondary.  And for any pseudo-historical naysayers, there are accounts of warriors dual-wielding axes throughout history from Norway to China.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

David7204 wrote...

If you google 'Homeless man with Ph.D,' I'm sure something would come up.

That's what happens when you get a Ph.D in 'Expressive Art'. I doubt they ended up that way by choice.

[Jorji Costava]

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

David7204 wrote...

If you google 'Homeless man with Ph.D,' I'm sure something would come up.

That's what happens when you get a Ph.D in 'Expressive Art'. I doubt they ended up that way by choice.

This kind of thing is actually way more common than you might think, and not just for people with PhD's in expressive art or other obscure subjects.

http://chronicle.com...hool-to/131795/

http://www.post-gaze...adjunct-703773/

[draken-heart]

IndomitusRex wrote...

draken-heart wrote...

You need to be somewhat Agile/dexterous with two weapons, as you cannot put your full wait into both at the same time. That seems to be more DA Rogue than DA Warrior, I think.

When you're swinging a pair of axes I think muscle is a lot more important than agility or adroitness.  Control comes from the strength to hold a weapon surely; having the dexterity to thread a needle on your first try is secondary.  And for any pseudo-historical naysayers, there are accounts of warriors dual-wielding axes throughout history from Norway to China.

Fantasy=/=history. In every D&D-based game I have played, there are very few, if any duel wielding warriors, as the "feats" required Dex. Best to think of it in FANTASY terms and not HISTORICAL terms.

IF dual wielding warriors were to make an appearance, to make it totally accurate, the second weapon should have to be use 100% defensively, making it a shield, in essence. Would that work?

Besides, I think it is rare for axes to be used duel wielding, as the martial arts (both european and japanese) seem to use swords and daggers mainly.

Modifié par draken-heart, 27 septembre 2013 - 05:21 .

[Phoenix_Fyre]

Thiiiiiiis

My 1st warden is my CE DW Warrior and I loved her to bits. Wanna bring back the elf love and dw love in DA:I

[philippe willaume]

well a long two handed weapon will always be better than dual-wield. So it does not really need to be that accurate or realistic.
basically, with a longer two handed weapon you have a greater reach, so much more control on the tip, that you can go around any single handed parrry/deflection block or counter by cutting the fore arm.

it kind of the notion that somehow precision and nimbleness is a viable option against plate.
it is a fantasy game, so as long as it is pseudo-realistic it is fine.

I think there was a few saga where it is said that you might as well use a sword and an axe rather than either with a shield. (Njarl and Cormac sagas)
but usually all the saga agrees that going shield-less sucks

i am not going to play one but i don't mind Two single handed sword warriors.

that being said yes it would be nice to have a buckler as secondary weapon,

phil