190 réponses à ce sujet

[Fast Jimmy]

There would be joy in some corners of the forum and gnashing of teeth in other corners. The idea may not go over well. I myself would have no problem with the idea. I think Fast Jimmy and Sylvius the Mad would agree, but I will not speak for them.

 

I like turn based, but I fully believe that the concept of everyone getting a turn does not make sense. Or, if so, then many actions taking multiple turns to execute (or, conversely, allowing certain character builds to do multiple actions a turn). 

 

Having a system where each enemy and character goes back and forth hitting each other is pretty limiting.

[wcholcombe]

I will agree the gear is extremely limited in the games.  You don't truly have a lot of improving yourself by upgrading equipment simply because there isn't that much variety to it truly. Especially in DA2.

[Mansse]

While classless systems are fun, the restrictions of class matters less in a party based game. For PnP however, I think classless is the better option.

[Chiramu]

Like a talent tree similar to Diablo 2? Or a system closer to the Elder Scrolls series? It would be nice to make a tank that wasn't labelled as a tank, or a healer that didn't run out of mana every two seconds if you want to dps on it. 

 

Skill systems are hard. How could they possibly change it to something that would keep the flavour of Dragon Age?

[Rainbow Wyvern]

I like my RPGs to be simple when it comes to stats n' combat, though of course not many would agree. That's why DA2's simpler way was much more appealing then Origins. Having to manage a bunch of stats on my characters would be obnoxious, and detract from the rest of my gaming experience. Not to mention... I don't think it'd fit in with Dragon Age's style.

And if the game became turn-based I'd probably not play it, to be perfectly honest. I cannot stand turn-based, makes everything feel slow and clunky. I haven't finished the KOTOR games because of this.

[eyezonlyii]

Like a talent tree similar to Diablo 2? Or a system closer to the Elder Scrolls series? It would be nice to make a tank that wasn't labelled as a tank, or a healer that didn't run out of mana every two seconds if you want to dps on it. 

 

Skill systems are hard. How could they possibly change it to something that would keep the flavour of Dragon Age?

 

maybe they could make the specializations themselves into classes using two stats as the primary boosters for that class?

 

for example:

Beserker: STR and WILL

Templar/Reaver: STR and MAG

Guardian+Champion (should be one spec imo): STR and CON

 

and so on...

[Rann]

I'd be happy with a ruleset/skillset/etc somewhere between DA:O and DA2, though leaning more towards the former.

[CybAnt1]

I like my RPGs to be simple when it comes to stats n' combat, though of course not many would agree. That's why DA2's simpler way was much more appealing then Origins. Having to manage a bunch of stats on my characters would be obnoxious, and detract from the rest of my gaming experience. Not to mention... I don't think it'd fit in with Dragon Age's style.

And if the game became turn-based I'd probably not play it, to be perfectly honest. I cannot stand turn-based, makes everything feel slow and clunky. I haven't finished the KOTOR games because of this.

 

KOTOR's not a turn-based game. It's real-time with pause. 

[Rainbow Wyvern]

KOTOR's not a turn-based game. It's real-time with pause. 

Hmph, seemed turn-based to me. Been awhile since I last played. 

[CybAnt1]

Hmph, seemed turn-based to me. Been awhile since I last played. 

 

It depends on what you mean. True turn-based games will patiently wait till you take your turn, before letting the opponent have theirs. If you get up from your computer for 5 minutes, it will still sit there and wait till you take your turn.

 

It is true that KOTOR, like BG2, uses virtual "turns" that last like a few seconds or so, but if you don't utilize your turn, the opponent will not wait until it takes theirs. 

 

If you get up from KOTOR without pausing, creatures/enemies most definitely will finish you off. 

[vania z]

KOTOR's not a turn-based game. It's real-time with pause. 

Really? I thought it used d20, which is turn based. Real time, but turn based. 

[vania z]

 

 

It is true that KOTOR, like BG2, uses virtual "turns" that last like a few seconds or so, but if you don't utilize your turn, the opponent will not wait until it takes theirs. 

 

 

6 seconds, to be exact. 

[CybAnt1]

D & D on the tabletop is also turn-based, but Bioware's RPGs based on it (BG series, NWN) have been RTWP. 

[Kileyan]

I'd love a little more complexity in classes but at the very least I'd like more gear to play with.

 

I'm not expecting a loot pinnata game like a Diablo style game, but I would like Bioware put a lot more effort into itemization. I like exploring every area, finding all hidden things. It would be much more rewarding if the items I found were interesting. I remember an old AD&D magical compendium bound in faux leather. I could read that thing for hours just for the lore on the items, its powers, its history, how it maybe even changed history by something one if its previous owners did.

 

I'd like to find items that really change how you can play once you find them, more varied armor than the token tier set of armor each act. I know Dragon Age is trying to be more of a low fantasy type game, but I think the itemization could still use some (a lot) of work.

[CybAnt1]

One thing that disappoints me is that items in the DA game world don't DO anything. By that, I mean, they carry all kinds of modifiers you get for equipping them, but they don't actually have abilities that you can use. (I'm talking about stuff other than potions or tomes, and staves which are basically elementally-based ranged weapons.) 

 

There are no wands that polymorph people or fire magic missiles, no bardic instruments that cause fear or charm your enemies, no scrolls you can read to get protection from magical attacks, no orbs that drain life energy from enemies, etc.

 

I would love something like a ring of spell turning, that actually reflects spells cast at the wearer. Yes, I did love those kinds of items in D & D.

[Nightdragon8]

you know it sounds like to me you want the game to turn into a spectial fighter like Dark Souls or Darksiders.

 

Because otherwise its going to alot like DA:O And more like WoW only you don't have to deal with Douche bags.

[Maiden Crowe]

Perhaps the Veil sundering changes the fundamental fabric of Thedas, and now our characters will use THAC0 to hit things!

On a serious note, DAs rule set does lack personality.

 

Personally I don't mind the THAC0 system, of course I am sure there are better methods of determining hit chance however I do like how the system used in D&D lent itself more to builds and tactics that focus more on lowering the chance of injury and negating damage altogether rather than just pumping points into health and damage resistance allowing characters to soak it up instead.

 

 

 

I think any RPG that offers noncombat activities also has to have noncombat skills. Noncombat activities disappeared in DA2 (well, except for lock picking doors and chests, or disarming traps, but the latter is really a combat activity) and the few that remained were simply based off your Cunning score. I think this game is bringing back both noncombat activities - and Exploration skills. Which to me is good. Games need them. 

 

I hope with the return of skills comes the return of the "linguistic"/"communicative" ones. There are pros and cons to the inclusion of Persuade, Intimidate, Coercion, etc., etc. I tend to think the pros outweigh the cons. 

 

Depends what you mean by non-combat abilities as this is where a lot of needless complexity for the sake of complexity can arise, I mean nobody wants to invest all their points into Animal Husbandry and find out that they need an equal amount of points invested in Flower Arranging and Sports Trivia in order to progress.

 

As for linguistic and diplomatic skills like Persuasion/Intimidate ect I am dead against these skills as I feel any persuasion aspect of the game should be more about the player's ability to take in and process information and use it to get the upper hand in conversation rather than dump a bunch of points into persuasion a select the highlighted response to win.

 

 

Complexity for the sake of it is stupid.

 

I could not agree more however any good ruleset is going to need a certain amount of complexity and flexibility if they want varied character build options and an emphasis on tactics, the ruleset in Dragon Age however has been simplified to the point where you almost have to wonder why they even bother allowing builds or have a leveling system at all.

 

 

As mentioned, I would enjoy a classless skill-based system like GURPS. And I'm a big fan of stats - they give us more options in building our characters. Simpler is definitely not the way to go.

 

I have no idea what GURPS is, anyone care to explain?

 

 

you know it sounds like to me you want the game to turn into a spectial fighter like Dark Souls or Darksiders.

 

Because otherwise its going to alot like DA:O And more like WoW only you don't have to deal with Douche bags.

 

I have no idea what "spectial" means but I do like Dark Souls, I mean you know you aren't doing your job right when an action RPG has more character build and tactical depth than your supposed "tactical party based RPG".

[metatheurgist]

GURPS - Generic Universal Roleplaying System

[CybAnt1]

Depends what you mean by non-combat abilities as this is where a lot of needless complexity for the sake of complexity can arise, I mean nobody wants to invest all their points into Animal Husbandry and find out that they need an equal amount of points invested in Flower Arranging and Sports Trivia in order to progress. (1)

 

 

As for linguistic and diplomatic skills like Persuasion/Intimidate ect I am dead against these skills as I feel any persuasion aspect of the game should be more about the player's ability to take in and process information and use it to get the upper hand in conversation rather than dump a bunch of points into persuasion a select the highlighted response to win. (2)

 

 

I could not agree more however any good ruleset is going to need a certain amount of complexity and flexibility if they want varied character build options and an emphasis on tactics, the ruleset in Dragon Age however has been simplified to the point where you almost have to wonder why they even bother allowing builds or have a leveling system at all. (3)

 

 

 

(1) Well, your point is taken. Skills don't have to be mandatory, but they can be "useful". Take the Survival skill in DAO. It let you know if enemies were nearby, and got better at this as you skilled it up. Now the thing is, you could play with it or without it, but it could affect your play. I think that's a good way to implement skills in a CRPG. Of course, that made Survival technically a combat skill. My guess is, Exploration Skills will be ones that work the same way, in regard to ... exploring. 

 

(2) Your point is taken, and I would love to prevail conversationally by my choice of words, but as we both know, in DA2 and then now in DAI, we are no longer choosing our (entire) words. 

 

(3) Interesting point for once, MC. I do remember there was a Character Build section for the DAO and for DA2 forums, and it definitely did seem to me that the one for DAO was a lot more active and populated. I guess for some people the ins and outs of building a character stat/skill-wise are needless complexity, but for some of us in the Grognard Caucus, there's the soul of an RPG. 

[durasteel]

I have to take a contrary position: the absolute last thing I want is more complexity in the rules that I have to manage.

 

When I play a BioWare game, I get into the characters, the story, exploring the world, etc. When I have to go into a level-up screen, it takes me out of all that. When I have to micromanage a party in combat with trash mobs, it takes me out of that. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for challenging boss fight that take some effort, but the trash mobs should go down to basic button mashing.

 

I remember more than a year of forum debate before SWTOR came out with people insisting that gameplay had to trump lore and story elements. I say that's crap. I need gameplay to provide structure to my experience of the story, but the last thing I would want is to have to take more time to futz around with my stats, or figure out whether the +crit is better than the +hit. That's tedious crap, to me.

 

More variety in equipment is good, I'll agree with that. If we get enough variety in gear, it seems inevitable that we'll reach a critical mass where, statistically, it can't all look bad.

[LPPrince]

I have to take a contrary position: the absolute last thing I want is more complexity in the rules that I have to manage.

 

When I play a BioWare game, I get into the characters, the story, exploring the world, etc. When I have to go into a level-up screen, it takes me out of all that. When I have to micromanage a party in combat with trash mobs, it takes me out of that. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for challenging boss fight that take some effort, but the trash mobs should go down to basic button mashing.

 

I remember more than a year of forum debate before SWTOR came out with people insisting that gameplay had to trump lore and story elements. I say that's crap. I need gameplay to provide structure to my experience of the story, but the last thing I would want is to have to take more time to futz around with my stats, or figure out whether the +crit is better than the +hit. That's tedious crap, to me.

 

More variety in equipment is good, I'll agree with that. If we get enough variety in gear, it seems inevitable that we'll reach a critical mass where, statistically, it can't all look bad.

 

While I put more stock in story than gameplay too, do understand there are those out there that feel the opposite, and wish that gameplay would be designed in a way most enjoyable to them, even if its not completely aligning with the story presented to move from gameplay segment to gameplay segment.

[LPPrince]

Though in this case, I will agree- I think I'd enjoy Dragon Age a little more than I do now if it had a more complex ruleset.

 

DAO gave me the illusion of it being sorta complex(but not really).

 

DA2 made it feel way too basic though.

[OdanUrr]

I am talking more variety in classes and weapons, more complexity in character building than just ballooning your classes main stat and more complexity in battle tactics. I mean Bioware loves to talk about how you can "think like a general" but it seems a little disingenuous when they show gameplay footage where they send all their dooooooooods to attack a heavy shield troop head on.

 

Am I the only one who finds character building, gear selection and tactics in the Dragon Age series really stale and simplistic?

 

Well, the problem with your idea, fine as I may be with it (unless you bring back D&D rules in which case, no, thank you), is that it will undoubtedly limit your target audience. If the game becomes too complex to the point it is no longer enjoyable (except by some small, hardcore, fanbase), then that's the proverbial IT for the franchise.

[CybAnt1]

As I keep pointing out, Dragon Age is both a CRPG, and a tabletop game. However, it's one of the rare cases where the tabletop is a spinoff of the computer game, and NOT the other way around. Green Ronin has been given the license to do the PnP game.

 

http://greenronin.com/dragon_age/

 

Two things I would note. They have to be careful about dumping too many rules & mechanics, because I think the tabletop and CRPG systems can't diverge from each other too much. They did definitely seek to streamline additionally in DA2, though. 

 

The other is that, personally, were I still tabletop gaming, I wouldn't play Dragon Age as a tabletop game. IMHO, for whatever reasons they've decided to streamline from day one in DAO, to make it a more "accessible" CRPG, makes it work less well as a tabletop game, which do tend to be stat and mechanics heavy. (Though there are a few recent games that try to eschew that traditional approach, I will admit.)

 

Green Ronin also did something silly that few fans understand. The first set of rules only covered levels 1-5. Then they did another set for 6-10. And finally for 11-20. That seems kind of odd and awkward. 

 

BTW, there was a day when I played CRPGs only for the gameplay. That was up until Fallout came out. Now I play them for both gameplay and story, and I kind of like to see both done well. It's never been an either/or thing for me; I want to enjoy both. (I guess that's why I've been nattering about both the dialogue and combat systems.) Also, fiddling with the "geeky" parts of the gameplay never really make me feel like I'm losing my connection with the story/RP aspects, but then, again, that's me, because to me this has always been part of RPGing: one half is rolling dice and looking at tables and arguing with your DM about outcomes, the other half is seeing if your parley with the fire giants will let you move through their lands unharmed, or not. 

[ames4u]

Yes. I find it rather disappointing how pitiful the skill set for archers is in DA2 in comparison to DAO/A.

The way they chucked out classes instead of rejigging them to give them balance seemed like such a

waste of potential-not to mention the bonus' you could get from Awakening that could expand the mana,

or stamina of a given individual if you sank points into it. Then we hit DA2 and they chucked all that progress

straight out the window.

 

I'd like to see more diverse classes that can play off others and build upon it. Having more context would

be really handy. Or having certain skills set the bar for the next potential class to be unlocked.