335 réponses à ce sujet

[Plaintiff]

Ryzaki wrote...

Considering rogues and mages can already fight at a range why would they need another tree?

Because warriors are getting one. The nature of the specific tree in question is irrelevent. I want every class to have the same number of skills. If any class gets an extra skill tree of any kind, then the other classes should as well.

Warriors do not need to fight at range, there's no reason why their role should not be purely a melee one, except that you, personally, want it. Other people don't care. In fact, this thread is supposed to be about warriors getting dual-wielding specifically.

[Ryzaki]

Steelcan wrote...
Its pretty good, if you liked Last Airbender I can't recommend it enough.

Got it

The Mad Hanar wrote...

Yeah, that ^

I wish I still had a TV.  I wonder if I can watch the episodes on hulu or something.

@Plantiff: *shrugs* Tired of saying the same arguements over and over again with you. You want what you want and I want what I want. And yeah I want both archery and DWWs. Ah well. Worse comes to worse I can hopefully get a mod for it.

Modifié par Ryzaki, 27 septembre 2013 - 01:22 .

[AresKeith]

Plaintiff wrote...

Because warriors are getting one. The nature of the specific tree in question is irrelevent. I want every class to have the same number of skills. If any class gets an extra skill tree of any kind, then the other classes should as well.

Why?

[Plaintiff]

The Mad Hanar wrote...
Except for the fact that they have a completely different style of fighting than warriors.

That doesn't make it any less arbitrary. The term "rogue" in the actual English language has nothing to do with fighting style.

'Warrior' and 'rogue' are not mutually exclusive terms except in terms of RPG mechanics. The actual characters within the game do not recognise the distinction at all, ever.

[Steelcan]

Ryzaki wrote...

Steelcan wrote...
Its pretty good, if you liked Last Airbender I can't recommend it enough.

Got it

The Mad Hanar wrote...

Yeah, that ^

I wish I still had a TV.  I wonder if I can watch the episodes on hulu or something.

not the link you are looking for


has them all, and updates after each new one within a day or two

Modifié par Steelcan, 27 septembre 2013 - 01:27 .

[Plaintiff]

AresKeith wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Because warriors are getting one. The nature of the specific tree in question is irrelevent. I want every class to have the same number of skills. If any class gets an extra skill tree of any kind, then the other classes should as well.

Why?

Because I want it that way. I want every class to have equal development options, because I want to try them all.

And frankly, why not? Why should one class be given extra skills? And why should that specific class be warriors?

[Steelcan]

Plaintiff wrote...

The Mad Hanar wrote...
Except for the fact that they have a completely different style of fighting than warriors.

That doesn't make it any less arbitrary. The term "rogue" in the actual English language has nothing to do with fighting style.

'Warrior' and 'rogue' are not mutually exclusive terms except in terms of RPG mechanics. The actual characters within the game do not recognise the distinction at all, ever.

[Ryzaki]

Steelcan wrote...

has them all, and updates after each new one within a day or two

Yeeesss. Thank you bookmarked. Edit: XD not the droids indeed.

The Mad Hanar wrote...

I think they are all streamable on Nick's website, IIRC.

Ah kk


...so they don't recognize the distinction...but when they teach you a specialization they act differently but they're somehow not recognizing distinction when they do this...*brain explodes*

Modifié par Ryzaki, 27 septembre 2013 - 01:29 .

[ScarMK]

Plaintiff wrote...

Because I want it that way. I want every class to have equal development options, because I want to try them all.

And frankly, why not? Why should one class be given extra skills? And why should that specific class be warriors?

We have reached the root of every Plaintiff argument.

[Br3admax]

Steelcan wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

The Mad Hanar wrote...
Except for the fact that they have a completely different style of fighting than warriors.

That doesn't make it any less arbitrary. The term "rogue" in the actual English language has nothing to do with fighting style.

'Warrior' and 'rogue' are not mutually exclusive terms except in terms of RPG mechanics. The actual characters within the game do not recognise the distinction at all, ever.

Does the Legend of Korra have the answers to all of life's questions? 

[AresKeith]

ScarMK wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Because I want it that way. I want every class to have equal development options, because I want to try them all.

And frankly, why not? Why should one class be given extra skills? And why should that specific class be warriors?

We have reached the root of every Plaintiff argument.

Indeed, it's not about equality it's about that bolded part right there

[Steelcan]

Br3ad wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

The Mad Hanar wrote...
Except for the fact that they have a completely different style of fighting than warriors.

That doesn't make it any less arbitrary. The term "rogue" in the actual English language has nothing to do with fighting style.

'Warrior' and 'rogue' are not mutually exclusive terms except in terms of RPG mechanics. The actual characters within the game do not recognise the distinction at all, ever.

Does the Legend of Korra have the answers to all of life's questions? 

[Br3admax]

Plaintiff wrote...

The Mad Hanar wrote...
Except for the fact that they have a completely different style of fighting than warriors.

That doesn't make it any less arbitrary. The term "rogue" in the actual English language has nothing to do with fighting style.

'Warrior' and 'rogue' are not mutually exclusive terms except in terms of RPG mechanics. The actual characters within the game do not recognise the distinction at all, ever.

Have you played MotA or the HN origin? It certainly doesn't sound like it.


Also, to quote, 
Isabela:" I would never... well, yes. I would. But there's only room for one backstabbing rogue in this party, elf."
"She likes rogues. Rivaini rogues especially."

I think in game characters might know just a little more about themselves than you. 

[Plaintiff]

ScarMK wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Because I want it that way. I want every class to have equal development options, because I want to try them all.

And frankly, why not? Why should one class be given extra skills? And why should that specific class be warriors?

We have reached the root of every Plaintiff argument.

Herp derp. As opposed to everyone else's arguments, which are based on... what?

[Steelcan]

AresKeith wrote...

ScarMK wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Because I want it that way. I want every class to have equal development options, because I want to try them all.

And frankly, why not? Why should one class be given extra skills? And why should that specific class be warriors?

We have reached the root of every Plaintiff argument.

Indeed, it's not about equality it's about that bolded part right there

but......

[Plaintiff]

Br3ad wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

The Mad Hanar wrote...
Except for the fact that they have a completely different style of fighting than warriors.

That doesn't make it any less arbitrary. The term "rogue" in the actual English language has nothing to do with fighting style.

'Warrior' and 'rogue' are not mutually exclusive terms except in terms of RPG mechanics. The actual characters within the game do not recognise the distinction at all, ever.

Have you played MotA or the HN origin? It certainly doesn't sound like it.


Also, to quote, 
Isabela:" I would never... well, yes. I would. But there's only room for one backstabbing rogue in this party, elf."
"She likes rogues. Rivaini rogues especially."

I think in game characters might know just a little more about themselves than you. 

"Rogue" means "dishonest person". Isabela is acknowledging her own dishonesty, nothing else. You read deeper meaning into it because you have access to metagame information that she does not.

[Mr.House]

Plaintiff wrote...

The Mad Hanar wrote...
Except for the fact that they have a completely different style of fighting than warriors.

That doesn't make it any less arbitrary. The term "rogue" in the actual English language has nothing to do with fighting style.

'Warrior' and 'rogue' are not mutually exclusive terms except in terms of RPG mechanics. The actual characters within the game do not recognise the distinction at all, ever.

Cleary never played MoA or HN origin in DAO. Plantiff is just arguinig fort he sake of arguining and only cares for himself.

[Plaintiff]

AresKeith wrote...

ScarMK wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Because I want it that way. I want every class to have equal development options, because I want to try them all.

And frankly, why not? Why should one class be given extra skills? And why should that specific class be warriors?

We have reached the root of every Plaintiff argument.

Indeed, it's not about equality it's about that bolded part right there

It's absolutely about equality. I want things to be equal.

That my wants happen to be more equal than yours is mere coincidence.

[Br3admax]

Plaintiff wrote...

Br3ad wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

The Mad Hanar wrote...
Except for the fact that they have a completely different style of fighting than warriors.

That doesn't make it any less arbitrary. The term "rogue" in the actual English language has nothing to do with fighting style.

'Warrior' and 'rogue' are not mutually exclusive terms except in terms of RPG mechanics. The actual characters within the game do not recognise the distinction at all, ever.

Have you played MotA or the HN origin? It certainly doesn't sound like it.


Also, to quote, 
Isabela:" I would never... well, yes. I would. But there's only room for one backstabbing rogue in this party, elf."
"She likes rogues. Rivaini rogues especially."

I think in game characters might know just a little more about themselves than you. 

"Rogue" means "dishonest person". Isabela is acknowledging her own dishonesty, nothing else. You read deeper meaning into it because you have access to metagame information that she does not.

Just stop talking. You clearly haven't looked up either dialogues and really need to just stop talking. Especially considering the Human Noble Origin. 

[Mr.House]

Plaintiff wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

ScarMK wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Because I want it that way. I want every class to have equal development options, because I want to try them all.

And frankly, why not? Why should one class be given extra skills? And why should that specific class be warriors?

We have reached the root of every Plaintiff argument.

Indeed, it's not about equality it's about that bolded part right there

It's absolutely about equality. I want things to be equal.

That my wants happen to be more equal than yours is mere coincidence.

There not equal in DA2, they where in DAO. You just don'tl ike how it was in DAO. It's simply about oyu, like every argument you have.

Modifié par Mr.House, 27 septembre 2013 - 01:35 .

[Steelcan]

Plaintiff wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

ScarMK wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Because I want it that way. I want every class to have equal development options, because I want to try them all.

And frankly, why not? Why should one class be given extra skills? And why should that specific class be warriors?

We have reached the root of every Plaintiff argument.

Indeed, it's not about equality it's about that bolded part right there

It's absolutely about equality. I want things to be equal.

That my wants happen to be more equal than yours is mere coincidence.

No I'm more equal

[Ryzaki]

Br3ad wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Br3ad wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

The Mad Hanar wrote...
Except for the fact that they have a completely different style of fighting than warriors.

That doesn't make it any less arbitrary. The term "rogue" in the actual English language has nothing to do with fighting style.

'Warrior' and 'rogue' are not mutually exclusive terms except in terms of RPG mechanics. The actual characters within the game do not recognise the distinction at all, ever.

Have you played MotA or the HN origin? It certainly doesn't sound like it.


Also, to quote, 
Isabela:" I would never... well, yes. I would. But there's only room for one backstabbing rogue in this party, elf."
"She likes rogues. Rivaini rogues especially."

I think in game characters might know just a little more about themselves than you. 

"Rogue" means "dishonest person". Isabela is acknowledging her own dishonesty, nothing else. You read deeper meaning into it because you have access to metagame information that she does not.

Just stop talking. You clearly haven't looked up either dialogues and really need to just stop talking. Especially considering the Human Noble Origin. 

What does she say in the HN origin? I know there's a difference (the rogue mentions knives and thieving while the warrior mentions swords or what not) but it's been a while since I played that origin. Last one I did was mage.

[Br3admax]

Plaintiff wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

ScarMK wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Because I want it that way. I want every class to have equal development options, because I want to try them all.

And frankly, why not? Why should one class be given extra skills? And why should that specific class be warriors?

We have reached the root of every Plaintiff argument.

Indeed, it's not about equality it's about that bolded part right there

It's absolutely about equality. I want things to be equal.

That my wants happen to be more equal than yours is mere coincidence.

Yes, Master Plantiff, sir.