164 réponses à ce sujet

[Naesaki]

Mirrman70 wrote...

why do people want whips? they are the most inefficient tools for killing someone ever. especially if said someone is clad head to toe in heavy armor.

maybe they are all into dominatrix's or they are all Quistis Trepe fans xD

[CybAnt1]

why do people want whips?

1) BDSM fetish.
2) Hoping for a 5th Indiana Jones movie. 
3) Did you see the 30 foot long flaming one carried by the Balrog in LOTR?
BADASS!

4) Dunno. 

[JoltDealer]

Gregolian wrote...
The brass knuckle knife things that the Ray Winstone portray of Bors used in that ill-fated King Arthur movie.  Would be great for a combat heavy close range rogue.

Those would be trench knives I believe, and yes, I'd love to see those too.

Honestly, I want more bladed staves.  Bring the Arcane Warrior back!  We have more action-oriented mages, why not bring back the most action-oriented class?

[TK514]

Mirrman70 wrote...

why do people want whips? they are the most inefficient tools for killing someone ever. especially if said someone is clad head to toe in heavy armor.

in my case, it was an unexplained (and thus ineffective) joke.

[In Exile]

CybAnt1 wrote...
I've proposed making the Archer its own class, separate from warrior OR rogue, so that it isn't a specialization of either. It in turn could have specializations like ranger (animal companions), arcane archer (uses enchanted arrows), sniper, etc.

That's a cool idea, but then what do you do with rogues? What's left fo rthem?

OK, can't help it, but as a big fan of Bard's Tale, would love to see bards as their own class, NOT a rogue spec, with songs that can buff, debuff, possibly do other things. Plus they get to use special magically enchanted musical instruments that, well, do stuff. They could bring back the bard as a rogue spec and still do this, but maybe not without doing a major reworking of specialization ability trees....

Bards just seem nonsesnical to me. It's so absurd that a person basically undulating could have any magical effect... it's just impossible to take seriously. Might as well just bring in the Dancer class from Fire Emblem. 

[CybAnt1]

That's a cool idea, but then what do you do with rogues? What's left fo rthem?

Poison, backstabbing, stealth, assassination, skills, trap making/laying, duelist/swashbuckling for those so inclined to go toe-to-toe, dodging/evasion, trickery, sabotage, being a scoundrel, deception and subterfuge. 

BTW, I get that many rogues would prefer to at least often strike from afar, and I could see them doing this with throwing knives, throwing stars/shuriken, blowguns, poisoned darts, etc. 

Don't get why somehow they have become the archers. I'm not saying they shouldn't fire bows. Can't see why now they must always be the ones who are best at it. There are lots of people on the forums saying there should be archer ability trees, perhaps even archer-specs, for both warriors and rogues. My idea is split the difference and make it its own class. 

As for bards, well, it's all a matter of taste. In the real world, all playing a lute, lyre, or mandolin should get you is at best a couple coins in your cup. But, in fantasy worlds where waving your hands and chanting gibberish shoot massive fireballs at your enemies, I guess strumming your lyre can make your allies hit more accurately or for more damage. They equally make as little sense, but ... fantasy. Now, I know the extra lore problem that's coming, and so I would say maybe the bard uses lyrium-infused musical instruments that are enchanted, and that's the source of their power. 

P.S. I'm not asking for anything that wasn't already there as a specialization in DAO, just ... make it a class, give it more than 4 abilities/talents. 

You tell me: how were Leliana and other rogue-bards able to do the Song of Valor, Song of Distraction, Song of Courage, or Captivating Song in DA:O? However they did it then, I want the Bard class to be able do do it now, and more of it. 

Modifié par CybAnt1, 23 janvier 2014 - 03:13 .

[Hrungr]

Love this style sword from LotR...




And although I'm sure it'd make animators break down and cry - flails!




And as a big fan of pattern-welded/damascus/wootz steel, it'd be a nice touch if they added it, even if it were only for higher-end blades.

[Hellion Rex]

TK514 wrote...

Mirrman70 wrote...

why do people want whips? they are the most inefficient tools for killing someone ever. especially if said someone is clad head to toe in heavy armor.

in my case, it was an unexplained (and thus ineffective) joke.

I got the joke...  

Modifié par eluvianix, 23 janvier 2014 - 03:47 .

[CybAnt1]

I think I was dismissive to that concept the first time around, but it's mostly because a tinkerer in DA should not be building droids, airplanes, pistols, like in some - most - other 'near'-fantasy games where they appear. Or at least go all explicit like Arcanum, and make it a world where technology and magic are colliding.

I mean, I was playing King's Bounty: Warriors of the North a while back, and the tinkerer dwarf unit is able to build DROIDS. WTH? A fantasy game with C3PO and R2D2?

Here's what I could see: a tinkerer class that has the following kinds of talents:

a) best at repairing armor and weapon damage (of course, first that has to be there)
best at crafting (of course, you've got to de-outsource crafting back to the PC)
c) could enhance many kinds of weapons - like crossbows, make them repeating a la Bianca
d) they would be the trap makers that were best at it
e) could utilize the Qunari tech we know about, like cannons, and poison gasses.
f) could do some interesting 'alchemical' stuff - acids that eat away at armor, for example?

Class or rogue spec, the tinkerer could go either way.

[Bayonet Hipshot]

I want Avatar specialization for mages goddamit ! Earth, Air, Fire / Lightning, Water/Ice... & no Avatar badassery...

[KC_Prototype]

For DA4, i want the ability to play as the OGB. Like, if your world state has the OGB, then if you play as a Human in DA4 , you get the OGB's background.

[AppealToReason]

Yu-Gi-oh cards for mages
Vegetable peelers for rogues
2x4's for warriors

[killswitch423]

Weapons?

For warrior: Crossbows and Polearms, Halberds, etc.

For rogue: Whips, Katars, Rapiers

For mage: Summoned ethereal weaponry, Quarterstaves

[10K]

 Dagger throwing, for those times you just want to give you bow a rest. 

[Lolomlas]

I want to see polearms, spears and such.

[Barrendall]

Mirrman70 wrote...

why do people want whips? they are the most inefficient tools for killing someone ever. especially if said someone is clad head to toe in heavy armor.

From watching the demo it looks like the warrior class has a chain/whip in their arsenal to pull mobs to them within melee range.  I agree they aren't intended to be used as killing weapons however.

[Wolf]

Thanks for the replying guys!

Glad to see people so eager 

I'm a big fan of whips, myself. Maybe not as a main weapon but filling the slot of the second daggers for rogues where you have a dagger or shortsword equipped and use the whip to disarm/unbalance the opponent.

Could even make Rogues more acrobatic if used outside of combat as a tool. Maybe to reach tall heights Indianna Jones-style?

I also want more weapons in the style of polearms for melee-based mages, maybe have a specialization that lets us go all Avatar on enemies  

Modifié par Gaiden96, 23 janvier 2014 - 12:48 .

[Wolf]

KC_Prototype wrote...

For DA4, i want the ability to play as the OGB. Like, if your world state has the OGB, then if you play as a Human in DA4 , you get the OGB's background.

I think it could be interesting, but considering he's a human male it would probably be very restrictive. So much so that's it's unlikely.

But please, stay on topic.

[Nuloen]

Mirrman70 wrote...

why do people want whips? they are the most inefficient tools for killing someone ever. especially if said someone is clad head to toe in heavy armor.

dont tell me this cannot do any damage:)(castelvania)

Modifié par Nuloen, 24 janvier 2014 - 05:45 .

[Mirrman70]

Again in a more "realistic" game (and I use that term loosely) wear weapons seem to all be based off of real world weapons, the whip is an unwanted edition for me. it would be an annoyance at best to someone in full plate armor and they need to be fairly accurate with snap because just swinging it around is pretty much just hitting someone with a heavy rope. not to mention how horribly stupid it would be to use a whip in a small space where enemies could easily be up in your face. the whole chain grapple thing to me seen in the demo video is kind of lame to. the warrior class they have is pretty much focuses entirely on close combat and it seems to me that giving him a rush attack or a roll would make for more fluid gameplay.

[n7stormrunner]

Mirrman70 wrote...

Again in a more "realistic" game (and I use that term loosely) wear weapons seem to all be based off of real world weapons, the whip is an unwanted edition for me. it would be an annoyance at best to someone in full plate armor and they need to be fairly accurate with snap because just swinging it around is pretty much just hitting someone with a heavy rope. not to mention how horribly stupid it would be to use a whip in a small space where enemies could easily be up in your face. the whole chain grapple thing to me seen in the demo video is kind of lame to. the warrior class they have is pretty much focuses entirely on close combat and it seems to me that giving him a rush attack or a roll would make for more fluid gameplay.

there is a roll. and people whine about it not being realistic.. in a fantasy game. I'm fairly sure they say the same thing about rushs too. I'm still trying to find the warrior back flip in da 2 they keep talking about.

[Mirrman70]

its more realistic than a chain coming out of nowhere. my point is why give a close combat class the ability to physically pull enemies closer? it seems to me that they are only trying to make it easier for players who rarely play a warrior class. just like how I felt that arcane warrior was a way to make it easier for people who don't play as mages often. if they are going to give a warrior options outside of close combat than I want them to allow warriors to be a fully capable ranged spec again. gimme that crossbow.

[n7stormrunner]

Mirrman70 wrote...

its more realistic than a chain coming out of nowhere. my point is why give a close combat class the ability to physically pull enemies closer? it seems to me that they are only trying to make it easier for players who rarely play a warrior class. just like how I felt that arcane warrior was a way to make it easier for people who don't play as mages often. if they are going to give a warrior options outside of close combat than I want them to allow warriors to be a fully capable ranged spec again. gimme that crossbow.

I actually agree it would be better to give them range combat again. I'm not sure why they took it awake in the first place, I also want my duel wielding warriors back.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

Mirrman70 wrote...

its more realistic than a chain coming out of nowhere. my point is why give a close combat class the ability to physically pull enemies closer? it seems to me that they are only trying to make it easier for players who rarely play a warrior class. just like how I felt that arcane warrior was a way to make it easier for people who don't play as mages often. if they are going to give a warrior options outside of close combat than I want them to allow warriors to be a fully capable ranged spec again. gimme that crossbow.

But that makes perfect sense. Why wouldn't a warrior, which are close-ranged specialiosts, have a tool to bring their enemies into their range?