227 réponses à ce sujet

[Lotion Soronarr]

I didn't say anything about total immunity. If people want a better understanding of the blood mage "experience", I don't see how condensing it to just another stat or dice-roll would make it any less cheap or video-gamey than it already is.

 

 

Well, for one, possession would actually exit as something that affects the player. That alone makes a far more complete experience.

 

 

As for making a game "non-gamey"... I dunno. Do you have better ideas?

How do you model temptation and corruption? How do you model a mental struggle? You can't really.

 

 

As I said, I think the true extent of the power (and thus the consequences) should be governed by the player. After all, wouldn't the supposition that "the power of Blood Magic corrupts" carry more gravity if you, the player, were to prove it correct through your own actions?

 

Makes no sense.

Blood magic either gives you power or it does not.

 

Unless you refer to things like the power depending on how much you use it (of how painful someones death is?)

 

What the player needs is opportunity to use it.

Lots of opportunities...especially to use it for small and simple stuff.

 

 

 

 

Lotion Soronarr, nothing you suggested follows the canon of blood magic, and is more about being a mage in general. And since the devs have stated in the past how shitty the possession mechanic was in their alpha builds of previous dragon age games, I doubt we'll see it incorporated.

 

And how does that conflict anything I say?

The player as a mage - especially a blood mage - is never REALLY tempted.

He never has to face the trails and hardships a real mage faces.

He's never given enough opportunities to use/abuse his powers.

 

[Xilizhra]

Because demons only try to posses mages during summoning, right?

 

Leave it to Xil to completely ignore/handwave the dangers of magic.

Or in zones of remarkably thin Veil.

 

I could see a situation where party mages were targets of possession when trying to close the Veil tears... assuming that having a mage in one's party was mandatory for dealing with that.

[The Baconer]

Well, for one, possession would actually exit as something that affects the player. That alone makes a far more complete experience.

 

It would, but if it's in the form of a simple dice-roll, the consequence being an inconvenient reload, what's the point? That doesn't make it an "experience", it just becomes something that's "there".

 

As for making a game "non-gamey"... I dunno. Do you have better ideas?

 

Fore possession? Yes... but it's kind of hard for me to thoroughly explain at the moment. I need to work out the details.

 

How do you model temptation and corruption? How do you model a mental struggle? You can't really.

 

Simple. Don't try to model or emulate it, make the player experience it.

 

 

Makes no sense.

Blood magic either gives you power or it does not.

 

Unless you refer to things like the power depending on how much you use it (of how painful someones death is?)

 

What the player needs is opportunity to use it.

Lots of opportunities...especially to use it for small and simple stuff.

 

I'm saying that in order to take full advantage of what Blood Magic offers, the player should have to make more questionable decisions (that can occasionally have story-related consequences), in which they'll have to continuously ask themselves, "can I justify this?"

[Seival]

I think that blood magic should have some positive applications.

 

An example from another game with mind-control abilities at your disposal. In Beyond: Two Souls you can save life of a character by mind-controlling him. How? The character is in a burning house, cut off from the way to escape by fire and large rift on the floor. He has to jump to save himself, but afraid to do so. You can mind-control him to force him to jump, and survive.

[Cainhurst Crow]

Shouldn't temptation and corruption be something left up to players role-playing and not something that comes from a dice roll? I mean, it makes it almost sound like a crappy final fantasy random encounter mechanic, that can activate at any time without warning on or off mission, and just causes instadeath based on a RNG, and anyone whose played the mass effect 3 multiplayer knows how much those suck.

Maybe have some other dialogue options and choices in the wheel that uses blood magic to resolve issues, that can operate in a similar manner to a morality meter in ME that can eventually start greying out other options and such if you keep picking it. There doesnt new to be a "you suck at picking specializations" tax on playing blood mages to convey that there is a dark nature to it.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Or in zones of remarkably thin Veil.

 

I could see a situation where party mages were targets of possession when trying to close the Veil tears... assuming that having a mage in one's party was mandatory for dealing with that.

 

Which reduces the entire danger to nothing more than another fight - another problem easily dealt with by bashing something on the head with a stick.

 

And that was partially my point.

 

 

*******

 

 

It would, but if it's in the form of a simple dice-roll, the consequence being an inconvenient reload, what's the point? That doesn't make it an "experience", it just becomes something that's "there".

 

It does make it an experience.

Technicly, you could have different outcomes depending on the roll.

 

But I wonder, how does that differ from regular D&D and anything that is chance based?

 

Rolled a critical miss 3 times in a row? You dead. Reload. We must not let that happen either then, right? If "inconvenient reload" is a criteria for removing things, then the possiblity of failure at anything should be removed completely.

 

 

 

How do you model temptation and corruption? How do you model a mental struggle? You can't really.

[Xilizhra]

Which reduces the entire danger to nothing more than another fight - another problem easily dealt with by bashing something on the head with a stick.

 

And that was partially my point.

It'll either be fighting or dialogue. Which do you prefer?

 

Rolled a critical miss 3 times in a row? You dead. Reload. We must not let that happen either then, right? If "inconvenient reload" is a criteria for removing things, then the possiblity of failure at anything should be removed completely.

Not only is that not "regular D&D," D&D isn't the same game. Aside from critical hit chances, very little in Dragon Age is based on chance, and a single critical hit won't make or break a fight... and you can't "critical miss" in this game. A single instance of random chance making you reload is not something the series has ever indulged in, and I don't think it should suddenly switch to that.

 

Simple. Don't try to model or emulate it, make the player experience it.

 

Big words.

How do you intend to do that?

 

How would you make me experience the whisperings and seduction of demons?

Or the mental struggle to retain sanity?

The former, audio. The latter, whatever mechanic that ensures that nonmages never get PTSD or anything.

[Lotion Soronarr]

It'll either be fighting or dialogue. Which do you prefer?   NEITHER. THEY BOTH SUCK AT DOING THE PROBLEM JUSTICE

 

 

 

Not only is that not "regular D&D," D&D isn't the same game. Aside from critical hit chances, very little in Dragon Age is based on chance, and a single critical hit won't make or break a fight... and you can't "critical miss" in this game. A single instance of random chance making you reload is not something the series has ever indulged in, and I don't think it should suddenly switch to that.

 

A RUN OF BAD LUCK IS A NORMAL THING. WHAT IF AN ENEMY LANDS 10 CRITICAL HITS IN A ROW?

LIKE I SAID BEFORE - RELOADING IS NO CRITERIA, SINCE MANY THINGS CAN LEAD TO RELOADING.

HOW ABOUT THE CONVERSATION NOT GOING WHERE YOU WANTED, AND YOU RELOADED?

 

 

The former, audio. The latter, whatever mechanic that ensures that nonmages never get PTSD or anything.

 

SUCKS.

THE PLAYER (OR PC) CANNOT BE TEMPTED AND CANNOT EXPERIENCE THE DANGERS OF MAGIC IN ANY MEANINGFUL FASHION

 

^^

see above

[Xilizhra]

NEITHER. THEY BOTH SUCK AT DOING THE PROBLEM JUSTICE

Then... what? Card game?

 

A RUN OF BAD LUCK IS A NORMAL THING. WHAT IF AN ENEMY LANDS 10 CRITICAL HITS IN A ROW?

LIKE I SAID BEFORE - RELOADING IS NO CRITERIA, SINCE MANY THINGS CAN LEAD TO RELOADING.

HOW ABOUT THE CONVERSATION NOT GOING WHERE YOU WANTED, AND YOU RELOADED?

That's literally never happened to me, or if it did, I didn't notice. I play on Hard regularly and almost never have to reload... and if I do, I know that I need to refine my tactics, not just leave it up to chance, which is just plain stupid. Ditto for reloading a conversation, where you know you need to make a different decision; again, it's not based on chance.

 

SUCKS.

THE PLAYER (OR PC) CANNOT BE TEMPTED AND CANNOT EXPERIENCE THE DANGERS OF MAGIC IN ANY MEANINGFUL FASHION

Well, you could have Morinth-esque choices if you want.

[Lotion Soronarr]

1) Dunno. What I proposed is the closest to how it should work in the lore. Like I said - there's no perfect way to do it.

 

 

2) Chance and luck are part of life. I don't see a problem with chance, especially since you can shift it in your favor.

Neither do I see a problem with occasionally reloading.

 

 

3) Morinth-esque choice?

[The Baconer]

It does make it an experience.

Technicly, you could have different outcomes depending on the roll.

 

But I wonder, how does that differ from regular D&D and anything that is chance based?

 

Dragon Age is not D&D.

 

And I think the chance to fail, say, lockpicking or persuasion differs a lot from *you entered x area, now let's roll to see if you randomly die*

 

 

Rolled a critical miss 3 times in a row? You dead. Reload. We must not let that happen either then, right? If "inconvenient reload" is a criteria for removing things, then the possiblity of failure at anything should be removed completely.

 

Total strawman. That would also be assuming that the features you're discussing were removed, as opposed to just never making it to the stage of implementation.

 

Big words.

How do you intend to do that?

 

Do you persuade a potential, critical ally to assist the Inquisition, or do you just take a shortcut and use mind control? Can you rationalize that? Would that be the last time, or would you use it on the next person, or the next? When you get called out for it, can you still hold the position that you're using Blood Magic ethically?

 

 

How would you make me experience the whisperings and seduction of demons?

Or the mental struggle to retain sanity?

 

Perhaps you encounter and converse with a friendly NPC throughout the course of the game. Perhaps, at some point later on, they make a seemingly mundane or otherwise not-entirely-suspicious offer. You accept it, they provide you with some benefit, and life goes on. Maybe you don't understand the full implications of what you've agreed to until it's too late. You could have the chance afterwards to ask around, maybe get some history on this NPC, but nobody knows what you're talking about.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Dragon Age is not D&D.

 

And I think the chance to fail, say, lockpicking or persuasion differs a lot from *you entered x area, now let's roll to see if you randomly die*

 

Doesn't matter that it's not D&D.

 

And no, it doesn't differ a lot, especially since I never mentioned instant death. Think of it more like the "Perils of the Warp" from 40K.

 

 

 

 

Total strawman. That would also be assuming that the features you're discussing were removed, as opposed to just never making it to the stage of implementation.

 

It's not. The point of comparison is reloading and game design, not weather the features currently exist or not.

 

 

Do you persuade a potential, critical ally to assist the Inquisition, or do you just take a shortcut and use mind control? Can you rationalize that? Would that be the last time, or would you use it on the next person, or the next? When you get called out for it, can you still hold the position that you're using Blood Magic ethically?

 

That's still just scratching the surface.

 

 

Perhaps you encounter and converse with a friendly NPC throughout the course of the game. Perhaps, at some point later on, they make a seemingly mundane or otherwise not-entirely-suspicious offer. You accept it, they provide you with some benefit, and life goes on. Maybe you don't understand the full implications of what you've agreed to until it's too late. You could have the chance afterwards to ask around, maybe get some history on this NPC, but nobody knows what you're talking about.

 

That's just "invisible/imaginary people".

That in no way does justice to a mental struggle.

In a few instances where games try to do mental struggle, they do it as a battle in the mindscape. So your combat-focused and well equipped character breezes trough it. I have yet to see a single game do it well.

[The Baconer]

Doesn't matter that it's not D&D.

 

And no, it doesn't differ a lot, especially since I never mentioned instant death. Think of it more like the "Perils of the Warp" from 40K.

 

Failing a save-roll on possession is no different from an instant death. I can get behind being occasionally afflicted with magical status effects, but possession should not be one of them.

 

It's not. The point of comparison is reloading and game design, not weather the features currently exist or not.

 

Yes, taking "Random death-rolls that can lead to a forced reload would be a dumb feature that no one would actually enjoy" and construing that as "the possiblity of failure at anything should be removed completely" is a strawman.

 

 

That's still just scratching the surface.

 

Right, that's only a single example of a way we can play with temptation in a more organic manner.

 

That's just "invisible/imaginary people".

That in no way does justice to a mental struggle.

In a few instances where games try to do mental struggle, they do it as a battle in the mindscape. So your combat-focused and well equipped character breezes trough it. I have yet to see a single game do it well.

 

It's supposed to illustrate how demons, especially the more powerful and thus intelligent varieties, do not always approach possession as a 1 on 1 MANFIGHT IN THE ASTRAL REALM, and their bargains do not always take the form of "I'll do this cool thing for you if you just, you know, give me full control of your body". Making the player question what is or isn't real, or presenting them with a situation where even they can be fooled, will give them a better understanding of why possession is a constant threat, even for extremely powerful and vigilant mages like the PC always is.

 

As for ongoing mental struggle... I dunno. It would probably require a lot of content being devoted to just the mage class, or even a single specialization of that class. If it allowed them to produce an accurate and cool experience, I wouldn't be against that, but I can see why Bioware would probably choose not to.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Failing a save-roll on possession is no different from an instant death. I can get behind being occasionally afflicted with magical status effects, but possession should not be one of them.

 

It should. It would be unlikely to happen, even without precautions,but it should be there.

The PC has many, many immunities and plot shields - far too many of them.

 

 

Yes, taking "Random death-rolls that can lead to a forced reload would be a dumb feature that no one would actually enjoy" and construing that as "the possiblity of failure at anything should be removed completely" is a strawman.

 

I don't enjoy many features in many games, so it is not only subjective, but irrelevant.

If something exist for a reason (like providing atmosphere, or guiding a story), then it should be there.

 

As for ongoing mental struggle... I dunno. It would probably require a lot of content being devoted to just the mage class, or even a single specialization of that class. If it allowed them to produce an accurate and cool experience, I wouldn't be against that, but I can see why Bioware would probably choose not to.

 

Precisely why you'll never see a mage - especially a bloodmage - done properly. It should basicly be a game only about them.

 

^^

[Cainhurst Crow]

Lotion, why do you have a raging hard on for trashing and gimping blood magic? And why do you insist it should be bound to a completely different ruleset then every other class in the game?

[Rainbow Wyvern]

Why everyone feels the need to put a metric ton of lore-breaking restrictions on blood magic, is a mystery I don't believe I will ever solve.

[Cainhurst Crow]

Why everyone feels the need to put a metric ton of lore-breaking restrictions on blood magic, is a mystery I don't believe I will ever solve.

 

I think the mentality goes "I hate mages and want them punished but I can't do that, so I'll go after a consolation prize of making one of their classes instead and get more support".

 

To be honest it's the same principle as in politics, when provisions get added into bills that had nothing to do with the initial bill, because they know it wouldn't pass on its own.

[Roninbarista]

Nah. Mages are awesome.

What additional displays of power would y'all like to see with the class? Or even some cool finishes to effects?

[Cainhurst Crow]

Blood wound and Blood control are both pretty good imo. Blood sacrifice would be cool if it could be used against enemies as well as allies. Outside of that, it pretty much covers all the basis for blood magic. Maybe find a way to use mana in some way instead of having it just sit there would be cool.

[The Baconer]

It should. It would be unlikely to happen, even without precautions,but it should be there.

 

Perhaps according to the lore, but this is a game at the end of the day. Trying to accommodate features just for the sake of realism doesn't mean it would be an improvement.

 

I don't enjoy many features in many games, so it is not only subjective, but irrelevant.

 

In this case, no it isn't. The fact that almost no one would enjoy a feature like that is the reason it hasn't been already implemented, and won't be implemented later.

 

If something exist for a reason (like providing atmosphere, or guiding a story), then it should be there.

 

"It" being in the game isn't the issue here, only how "it" should be represented.

[Cainhurst Crow]

To be honest the entire crux of his argument and true motivation behind this was already posted.

 

"The PC has many, many immunities and plot shields - far too many of them."

 

Pretty much he's trying to retroactively nerf the PC.

[Xilizhra]

1) Dunno. What I proposed is the closest to how it should work in the lore. Like I said - there's no perfect way to do it.

 

 

2) Chance and luck are part of life. I don't see a problem with chance, especially since you can shift it in your favor.

Neither do I see a problem with occasionally reloading.

 

 

3) Morinth-esque choice?

1. It's not. You're just making things up.

 

2. Brave words from someone who would never play the class. I daresay that you should playtest it first before making such declarations.

 

3. A dialogue option you can take to get a nonstandard game over, if that's what tickles your fancy.

[Cainhurst Crow]

You know whats missing from this game? Diseases.

Lets have a random dice roll every time we travel somewhere on the map of getting dysentery or pneumonia and dying. It's not inconvenient or railroading cause remember, chances are part of life and the players shouldn't have plot armor against automatic death.

[Lluthren]

I don't want all the extra specialization and extra effect stuff, I just want my followers to notice my blood magic and do something. I DA2 I was so scared about learning blood magic because I expected Fenris and/or Anders to go crazy and get mad at me and blood magic looked pretty pathetic compared to some other specializations. Then when I got the blood mage specialization I felt so disappointed when nothing, absolutely nothing, happened. I reloaded my game and never learned blood magic again.

 

Maybe it locks you out of a few quests or makes it more difficult to get or finish some quests, in turn it should also open doors to new quests that fit the specialization.

 

Also No other specializations have consequences that effect other skills, why should blood magic when it is essentially just blood bending and using blood as mana?

When I become spirit healer, I'm not locked out of the use of very aggressive magic, that would be stupid. Much too extreme.

 

I don't mind if some healing potions are slightly less effective, I usually protect my mage well enough, but that's already done when blood magic is active and that's good enough. 

 

 

But a blood mage fighting with blood magic should be selfish imo.

 

Jowan and Merril weren't like that. They were rather nice, also a little silly. Grey wardens had blood mages in their ranks too.

As Blood mage warden I decided to be a spirit healer too after getting blood magic, I used my Warden's own blood to heal team members when my mana was low. For some reason you didn't even have to do anything evil to learn it in my DAO game.

 

I think knowing blood magic is not inherently evil, it is just the way people usually get it that is bad. I could see why one would think that all blood mages should be evil, seeing as most blood mages are either trying to kill you, worship demons and/or are tevinter magisters/slave owners.