138 réponses à ce sujet

[Eternal Phoenix]

Classes were unique without weapon restrictions simply by their abilities, skill trees and specs. They didn't need weapon restrictions to emphasize their individuality and it took away a level of freedom in customization. Armor in Dragon Age 2 was statistic based and we could give our mage heavy armor if we gave them enough strength but weapons were statistic and class based which didn't make sense. Why allow any class to wear any armor if they have the statistics but not use a weapon if they have the statistics? We should be free to give our mage or rogue a sword.

"It makes no logical sense."

Yes it does. The mage with the sword would simply lack the melee abilities of the warrior so the warrior would still always come out top. The mage, however, would have just as powerful melee attacks at the sacrifice of the magical benefits of the staff. This means the mage could still cast their spells from a distance but then engage in melee combat if an enemy gets to close and they'd do more damage than they would with a staff. 

It's a sacrifice and a fair valid build so why restrict this if the player is willing to invest in strength and lose some benefits of being a mage for increased melee damage for better personal defense? As for the rogue: the sword worked well for them in Origins so I don't see why it needed to be removed. Obviously now it could mean an entire skill tree would need to be built around a rogue who wields a sword but it's viable and would still come out being unqiue.

Or better yet. Allow mages to dual wield a sword with a staff.

Tevinter mages are armored and wield swords...



So this is also a valid part of lore.

But here I am creating this topic and maybe Bioware have already removed weapon restrictions (maybe with the exception of the staff as rogues and warriors can't cast spells).

[Asdrubael Vect]

yes, swords and heavy armors for mages

open chests and doors for everyone

Templars for rogues

Reavers for everyone

Modifié par Dark Korsar, 09 décembre 2013 - 06:32 .

[Giga Drill BREAKER]

pfft they should add armour restrictions, not remove weapon restrictions, if you are not strong enough to wear a piece of armour you shouldn't be wearing it.

[Laughing_Man]

Regarding swords for Mages and Rogues, by all means, I want to see it.
Rogues use those "daggers" which are more like a machete or a short sword anyway.

And a sword wielding mage will simply have different basic attacks, think short range arcs of fire rather than bolts from a staff, a blast of force instead of a shield bash, etc. (abilities that fit both the new theme of a close range mage, and take notes from the Warrior and the original Mage class.)

[Spectre slayer]

They did remove them to a degree, most of the weapons will be class restricted but we have some leeway with the mages since they confirmed we can wear heavy armour and hinted at an melee mage specialization in one of the podcasts though I don't remember which one exactly.

I do remember someone asking them can I be a paldin type mage that beats up enemies with a sword in which they replied probably.

As for rogues useing swords I guess that's a maybe though I don't see why not, but I guess we'll have to wait and see.

[Rolling Flame]

You know, I think these threads should be re-titled, "Remove weapon restrictions for mages". You don't hear many calling for warriors and rogues to be able to use a staff.

[Anomaly-]

DinoSteve wrote...

... if you are not strong enough to wear a piece of armour you shouldn't be wearing it.

Agreed, but that should be determined by your strength attribute, not your class.

[Asdrubael Vect]

Rolling Flame wrote...

You know, I think these threads should be re-titled, "Remove weapon restrictions for mages". You don't hear many calling for warriors and rogues to be able to use a staff.

and what they will do with staffs?))) cast magic?)))...no they cant they are no mages....and why rogue can posibly need a staff?, they are agile and sneaky type of warrior so they not need any heavy weapons as hammers, two-handed axes and swords...they cant do their acrobatic stuff with these weapons

Modifié par Dark Korsar, 09 décembre 2013 - 08:08 .

[Eternal Phoenix]

Dark Korsar wrote...

yes, swords and heavy armors for mages

open chests and doors for everyone

Templars for rogues

Reavers for everyone

Yes, heavy armors for mages already existed in DA2.

Yes, warriors can now bash doors open in Inquisition.

There were templar rogues in DA2 but they inaccessible to the player class.



What part of "specs, skill trees and abilities make each class special as opposed to weapons" didn't you understand friend? I don't want all classes being the same and removing weapon restrictions doesn't make all the classes the same. Origins was testament to that, also Dragon's Dogma where several classes shared weapon categories but used them differently (i.e an assassin was more dexterious with the longsword and had powerful counter attacks with it whereas the fighter was your typical fighter favoring strong direct attacks with it) so it's possible.

Rolling Flame wrote...

You know, I think these threads should be re-titled, "Remove weapon restrictions for mages". You don't hear many calling for warriors and rogues to be able to use a staff.

Well I also want swords back for rogues...

I guess some weapon restrictions make sense (i.e staffs only for mages as rogues and warriors can't cast spells and using a bow requires real training whereas swinging a sword can be done by anyone with arms) but I don't see why the longsword can't be a universal weapon.

Spectre slayer wrote...

They did remove them to a degree, most of the weapons will be class restricted but we have some leeway with the mages since they confirmed we can wear heavy armour and hinted at an melee mage specialization in one of the podcasts though I don't remember which one exactly. 

I do remember someone asking them can I be a paldin type mage that beats up enemies with a sword in which they replied probably.

As for rogues useing swords I guess that's a maybe though I don't see why not, but I guess we'll have to wait and see.

This makes me happy if it's true. Now if we can only get swords back for rogues... (which we probably already have)

Modifié par Elton John is dead, 09 décembre 2013 - 08:59 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

I'm all for removign all fake/arbitrary restrictions on all classes.

As long as one meets a few basic requirements, one should be able to use any weapon.

Sure, a mage will never be as a good with a sword as a warrior, but I still want to swing one, even if with a penalty. And a warrior could bash heads open with a quaterstaff if he wanted to just fine.

[Rolling Flame]

Elton John is dead wrote...

I guess some weapon restrictions make sense (i.e staffs only for mages as rogues and warriors can't cast spells and using a bow requires real training whereas swinging a sword can be done by anyone with arms) but I don't see why the longsword can't be a universal weapon.

True enough, but balance could be tricky. Mages by their very nature are overpowered, and letting them use both magic and melee weapons without many restrictions would make them moreso. On the flip side, you don't want to take away too much magic, because they'll become wannabe warriors.  How much do you limit their ability to cast spells, and how effective do make them at melee combat?

[Eternal Phoenix]

Rolling Flame wrote...

Elton John is dead wrote...

I guess some weapon restrictions make sense (i.e staffs only for mages as rogues and warriors can't cast spells and using a bow requires real training whereas swinging a sword can be done by anyone with arms) but I don't see why the longsword can't be a universal weapon.

True enough, but balance could be tricky. Mages by their very nature are overpowered, and letting them use both magic and melee weapons without many restrictions would make them moreso. On the flip side, you don't want to take away too much magic, because they'll become wannabe warriors.  How much do you limit their ability to cast spells, and how effective do make them at melee combat?

As effective as they were in Origins with melee weapons which means weaker compared to the warrior. It will all depend on how much you invest in strength but a mage could never acquire the passive abilities of the warrior or the general attack abilities meaning they'd never become overpowered as a melee build.

Allowing the mage to wield a sword in one hand with a staff for melee attacks can be done too. War in The North was a fine example of this with the mage character who had to unlock the skill which in turn increased the damage of her melee attacks (but she would never become as powerful as the Ranger or dwarf in terms of melee attacks).

[Vulpe]

I agree, to a certain extend. For example I don't see a warrior using a staff, so if they don't make a polearm/spear skill tree for them, I don't think they (or the rogues) shout be able to use them. The same for mages and bows.It's pretty hard to learn how to use a bow, so mages and bows doesn't seem plausble.

As for the rest...why not ? They should put restrictions like in DA:O and everything is set.

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

I agree with this Idea, but..
I'm a skinny mage and I can fight with this?



lolno

What about spell failure? If you wear a heavy armor and wield a heavy weapon it is over 50% chance that your spell fails.

[BouncyFrag]

Make it more flexible than DA2 but not as open as it was in DAO. I like fiddling around with unconventional party setups for additional replay value. Throw in a well-crafted NG+ system and I'm a happy panda.

[Rolling Flame]

Elton John is dead wrote...

As effective as they were in Origins with melee weapons which means weaker compared to the warrior. It will all depend on how much you invest in strength but a mage could never acquire the passive abilities of the warrior or the general attack abilities meaning they'd never become overpowered as a melee build.

Allowing the mage to wield a sword in one hand with a staff for melee attacks can be done too. War in The North was a fine example of this with the mage character who had to unlock the skill which in turn increased the damage of her melee attacks (but she would never become as powerful as the Ranger or dwarf in terms of melee attacks).

I found that, in a very brief Arcane Warrior build (found that class to be a bit dull) that accuracy was a major issue, with about half the swings not connecting. This, of course, didn't matter as Shimmering Shield stopped everything from doing meaningful damage.

I'm certainly not against the idea; I'd just like a melee mage to be balanced and a little more dynamic this time around.

Modifié par Rolling Flame, 09 décembre 2013 - 10:07 .

[Vulpe]

Kaiser Arian wrote...

I agree with this Idea, but..
I'm a skinny mage and I can fight with this?



lolno

What about spell failure? If you wear a heavy armor and wield a heavy weapon it is over 50% chance that your spell fails.

They should make it like in ME3. Increase the amount of time a spell needs to recharge depending on your armor.

[snackrat]

Probably didn't help that attack power in DAE was discerned by your stats, not your gear. So if you used mods so you could equip any weapon, a mage's sword ability was still determined by magic and a warrior's archery by strength and a rogue's casting by dexterity. DAO had these tied to the gear instead.

[wizardryforever]

Honestly, it annoyed me that my warrior couldn't use a bow or dual wield in DA2, or that my rogue had to use two daggers instead of a longsword and dagger combo or two longswords with appropriate penalties.  I never really had a problem with my mages not being able to use armor and weapons, though.  Magic was more than enough in almost all cases, especially since there are already several spells designed to increase the survivability of mages.

[Wulfram]

I don't see the point in spending a whole bunch of animation resources on something that's not going to be effective. And I wouldn't want mages to be as effective as other classes in using melee weapons.

[The Elder King]

Kaiser Arian wrote...

I agree with this Idea, but..
I'm a skinny mage and I can fight with this?
lolno

What about spell failure? If you wear a heavy armor and wield a heavy weapon it is over 50% chance that your spell fails.

Considering that both the mage Warden and mage Hakwe have a well-built body (on the same level of warriors), I don't see the problem. 
As for penalties, there is the possibility they'll implement some, to balance the fact that mages gain a lot in defense. Though it should be noted that mages can wear rogue armours too. 

Modifié par hhh89, 09 décembre 2013 - 11:25 .

[Nharia1]

Kaiser Arian wrote...

I agree with this Idea, but..
I'm a skinny mage and I can fight with this?



lolno

What about spell failure? If you wear a heavy armor and wield a heavy weapon it is over 50% chance that your spell fails.

I think if they let mages wear heavy armor there should be a chance for spell failure, but it should increase with how heavy the armor is. Like light armor, ie leather and chainmail should be about 10-15% chance. Medium half plate and such would be about 20~30% maybe? anything heavier would be at 40 and above. with an upper limit of 50% chance of spell failure. though there would have to be some stipulation for when someone casts a sustained spell it should have a greater chace to suceed than a 'regular' spell would. kinda like in standard DnD. OoO

On a side note, that looks like one of the double axes fron NWN....

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

^
Yes, it's a double axe from NWN. It would be realistic if it needed Strength Prerequisite (like +14 Strength) not just base attack bonus.

[jncicesp]

I like that you need certain stats for using or wearing things but I think id just laugh if anyone can pick up any weapon and be good with it,
maybe a mage who doesn't have anything else to do then practice using a sword and magic to the point both are effective in combat.

I really wouldn't trust the person who does that

[Eurypterid]

I'd be all for the removal of weapon restrictions. I like the game to have some kind of internal logic that makes sense, and restricting someone from picking up a sword just because they happen to be a mage makes no sense to me at all. Tie the weapons to ability scores, which at least makes a bit more sense, and impose penalties and restrictions if you're using specific weapons that are 'outside' your class and I see no problems with that (other than the extra work to animate this stuff. But if that were no object, then relax the restrictions).