157 réponses à ce sujet

[Icy Magebane]

Why?

Each character must be created within the rules of the universe in question.  For example, no character in Dragon Age should be allowed to use heat vision, as this is an alien ability with no basis in lore.  No "mundane" should be allowed to use magic, as this violates the basic premise that magic uses and non-magic users are fundamentally distinct.  No one who with extremely low dexterity should be able to utilize daggers effectively, as this violates the basic premise of attributes.  Without restrictions, lore is meaningless and the distinction between possible and impossible is removed.

 

In order to create an internally consistent and realistic world, careful restrictions and balancing must be applied to any classless system.  Creating OP characters should not be a simple matter, as exceptional soldiers and scholars are by definition rare.  IMO it's best to exclude that possibility during character creation...  I have no objection, however, to creating characters with specific, pre-determined negative traits (allowing the player to refuse to spend all initial attribute points and/or skill points is also fine).

[Sylvius the Mad]

Okay, yes, those sorts of restrictions are important and valuable.

But restricting weapons by class or combat roles by class does not serve that interest.

Furthermore, as long as skill points are available only in a limited quantity, I don't see how allowing cross-class ability selection threatens balance. A dedicated melee character would be way ahead of the hybrid characters in terms of melee effectiveness.

[Icy Magebane]

Okay, yes, those sorts of restrictions are important and valuable.

But restricting weapons by class or combat roles by class does not serve that interest.

Furthermore, as long as skill points are available only in a limited quantity, I don't see how allowing cross-class ability selection threatens balance. A dedicated melee character would be way ahead of the hybrid characters in terms of melee effectiveness.

Well, for one thing, the current game mechanics don't support this kind of flexibility.  Do you realize how overpowered a character becomes when they can do cross-class-combos by themselves?  If you were apply this to DA2, all you'd have to do to break the game is select sword and shield, and primal or blood magic.  This is why I say that the game would have to be designed from the ground up with a classless system in mind... you can't add it to Dragon Age in the series' current form unless you first lay down some rules about what can be learned by whom.  The CCC system might need to be removed entirely for this to work.

 

Edit:  There is also the issue of being able to draw from both mana and stamina to fuel abilities... that right there is a big hurdle to overcome, as both are governed by willpower.  You'd need to redesign attributes too...

[philippe willaume]

well classless or classes does not really makes that much a difference as a far as overpowering is concerned. 

DA:2 was class based and it is was very easy to be over or under powered.

and that goes as well for versatility, you have classless game that turn out to be very limiting and you have class based game that are very versatile in how you can shape you characters and companion. DA:0 was a very good example of that. 

 

The point of being able to use with a modicum of efficiency talents that does depend of you class/directing attribute is that  I gives you in game versatility and more control in how you develop your char. IE what role you chose to play.

 

 

PS Historically speaking training either training with long sword or wrestling were the foundation for all weapons that a knight could use with and without Armour and the does include dagger to pole axes. So really training in one weapon preventing you  knowing another just as well is nothing more that late Tokugawa area Samurai answer to  I need to find a way to earn dinner.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Well, for one thing, the current game mechanics don't support this kind of flexibility. Do you realize how overpowered a character becomes when they can do cross-class-combos by themselves? If you were apply this to DA2, all you'd have to do to break the game is select sword and shield, and primal or blood magic.

How would that break the game? That would be just like how the spell combos in DAO worked, amd something I actually requested on its own just to avoid the arbitrary cross-class requirement.

Since the player can control multiple characters at once anyway, what's the harm in concentrating those abilities in a single character?

This is why I say that the game would have to be designed from the ground up with a classless system in mind... you can't add it to Dragon Age in the series' current form unless you first lay down some rules about what can be learned by whom. The CCC system might need to be removed entirely for this to work.

Obviously you'd design the game's mechanics around it, just as they're currently designed around its absence.

But the combo system isn't, in and of itself, a problem.

Edit: There is also the issue of being able to draw from both mana and stamina to fuel abilities... that right there is a big hurdle to overcome, as both are governed by willpower. You'd need to redesign attributes too...

No, you could solve this by having longer talent trees (though tying Stamina to Constitution would also work). As a character advanced, choosing more advanced abilities would preclude him from choosing a broader base of abilities. Just as in the first two games there was a tradeoff between learning whole chains of one type of abilities or just the beginning of several types.

If a DAO Warrior wanted to learn 2H talents and S&B talents and Archery talents, he couldn't max out all if them. I had a Dwarf Noble who was primarily a dagger&shield fighter, but he also learned Pommel Strike in order to have an extra ability he could use to break up Overwhelm, and since he inly swapped to 2H just for that, it was never on cooldown. But, as a result he had one fewer Shield talent than he otherwise would have at every stage of the game.

If MageHawke takes a little bit from each school of magic, he won't be as effective at any of them.

So what's the problem?

[philippe willaume]

Each character must be created within the rules of the universe in question.  For example, no character in Dragon Age should be allowed to use heat vision, as this is an alien ability with no basis in lore.  No "mundane" should be allowed to use magic, as this violates the basic premise that magic uses and non-magic users are fundamentally distinct.  No one who with extremely low dexterity should be able to utilize daggers effectively, as this violates the basic premise of attributes.  Without restrictions, lore is meaningless and the distinction between possible and impossible is removed.

 

In order to create an internally consistent and realistic world, careful restrictions and balancing must be applied to any classless system.  Creating OP characters should not be a simple matter, as exceptional soldiers and scholars are by definition rare.  IMO it's best to exclude that possibility during character creation...  I have no objection, however, to creating characters with specific, pre-determined negative traits (allowing the player to refuse to spend all initial attribute points and/or skill points is also fine).

but you are talking about restriction based on lore not arbitrarily based on whatever arbitrary class/function.

in DA, at least so far, you cant use magic if you are not gifted. So Mage is a special class.

in the same vein, if we assume that Orlay woks like 15th century France, full plate should only be accessible to nobles or a specific class professional men at arms, so you could have a class of Chevalier which would then be different from a warrior class.

 

but that is not quite the same as arbitrary total restriction or game system that for all intend makes a concept so unpractical that it is equivalent to a restriction.

It is perfectly fine that the rogue class has a special way of using dagger that can't be matched by any other class however it completely sucks not be able to use a dagger if you do are not a rogue or have enough in the directing attribute to make it viable.

 

the point i am getting at is that most of the people who wants a two weapons warrior are not after the DPS of dual wielding with the lasting power of a tank. They are after character concepts.

It is not that complicated to come up with a system that preserves the class "uniqueness/superiority" and yes gives other class a viable/usable alternative flavor.

 

phil

[Icy Magebane]

How would that break the game? That would be just like how the spell combos in DAO worked, amd something I actually requested on its own just to avoid the arbitrary cross-class requirement.

The DA:O spell combinations were not nearly as powerful as CCC's, except maybe Shattering, and for the most part they were more than simple spike damage attacks.  If you need proof that this breaks DA2, you can modify a DA2 mage with a save editor to test this for yourself.  The ability for a single character to stagger multiple enemies and then immediately use chain lightning on them is completely overpowered.  Now maybe that's just a matter of what side-effects "stagger" has or how much damage the combo itself causes, but the combo system would need some serious revisions for this to be balanced...

 

Since the player can control multiple characters at once anyway, what's the harm in concentrating those abilities in a single character?

The fact that a single character now has the ability to stagger and then kill multiple enemies within seconds, without the aid of allies, ruins party dynamics and marginalizes the followers.  This isn't even an advanced combo... it's something you can access after only a few levels.  If every character is able to take advantage of these "single class combos," then you might as well just save some time and drop the difficulty level as low as it will go.

 

Obviously you'd design the game's mechanics around it, just as they're currently designed around its absence.

This is true.  It's also the reason I said, "the balancing process for attributes, armor types, weapon skills, and spells would need to be very in depth."

 

Keep in mind, I am not disagreeing to a classless system outright, I am merely in favor of a custom class option rather than allowing full access to every ability from start to finish.  Along those lines, spells, skills, armor, weapons, and even attributes need to be designed so that the custom class can't just grab a few low level abilities that happen to mesh well and dominate for the entire game.

 

But the combo system isn't, in and of itself, a problem.

It would need to be completely revamped, or most likely scrapped, in order to be used in a fully classless system...  A combo system might be feasible, but not the one we currently have.

 

No, you could solve this by having longer talent trees (though tying Stamina to Constitution would also work).

I think you may have misinterpreted my objection.  Spells and weapon skill both drawing from a single power source completely violates established lore (what each attribute does can be considered part of the lore... they represent the physiology of this planet's inhabitants).  A mage who was also skilled in two handed weapons would need a mana and stamina bar, they couldn't, for example, expend mana to use Scythe.

 

If a DAO Warrior wanted to learn 2H talents and S&B talents and Archery talents, he couldn't max out all if them. I had a Dwarf Noble who was primarily a dagger&shield fighter, but he also learned Pommel Strike in order to have an extra ability he could use to break up Overwhelm, and since he inly swapped to 2H just for that, it was never on cooldown. But, as a result he had one fewer Shield talent than he otherwise would have at every stage of the game.

I don't have a problem with this as long as you don't attempt to add spells or dual weapon talents to this character.  IMO a character's starting class is a reflection of their training, and thus should not be so flexible that they can easily learn to use previously untouched weapons.  This limitation needs to be in place because it takes time to master the use of weapons, and I don't see how it would be possible to become proficient in all weapon styles over the course of a single game.

 

but that is not quite the same as arbitrary total restriction or game system that for all intend makes a concept so unpractical that it is equivalent to a restriction.

It is perfectly fine that the rogue class has a special way of using dagger that can't be matched by any other class however it completely sucks not be able to use a dagger if you do are not a rogue or have enough in the directing attribute to make it viable.

 

the point i am getting at is that most of the people who wants a two weapons warrior are not after the DPS of dual wielding with the lasting power of a tank. They are after character concepts.

It is not that complicated to come up with a system that preserves the class "uniqueness/superiority" and yes gives other class a viable/usable alternative flavor.

I am opposed to a classless system, not a custom class option.  Unless careful considerations are made, and some kind of limits put in place from the start, it might become  too easy to make OP characters as the game progresses.  It can't be a total free for all, and IMO it can't be something that gets changed halfway through the game when you decide you want to start incorporating crossbows...

[metatheurgist]

Yeah, we could do that, but unless we're going to overhaul everything related to abilities/talents/skills, that would just be stupid.

I don't see how that'd be necessary. It all still works the same way. There are still prerequisite stats, there are still prerequisite talents, some talents work better with certain stats. The only difference is there is now one talent you can only pick at first level. Nothing else has to change.

[Icy Magebane]

Why not?

I think I've explained my position in enough detail.

[Sylvius the Mad]

The fact that a single character now has the ability to stagger and then kill multiple enemies within seconds, without the aid of allies, ruins party dynamics and marginalizes the followers.

There's nothing stopping a follower from doing this.  The rules should treat all of the characters equally.

 

I didn't realise the CCCs were truly that powerful.  I never intentionally utilised one (I played DA2 on hard with FF enabled), though I did get the achievement fairly early on, so I must have triggered one accidentally.

 

I am certainly not suggesting that we should simply drop a radical change of this sort into an existing game and expecting it to work just fine.  I'm talking about how to plan a brand new game from the ground up, and I think classes are a bad idea.

This limitation needs to be in place because it takes time to master the use of weapons, and I don't see how it would be possible to become proficient in all weapon styles over the course of a single game.

 

That's easy.  Just have all improvement in a weapon tied to skill or talent advancement, rather than character level.

 

Character level isn't really a concept that needs to exist.

[Icy Magebane]

I didn't realise the CCCs were truly that powerful.  I never intentionally utilised one (I played DA2 on hard with FF enabled), though I did get the achievement fairly early on, so I must have triggered one accidentally.

Yeah, I used to fool around with the character editor a lot and some skill combinations just took all the fun out the game when you put them on one person... lol... some of them were pretty fun though.  It's just a matter of resisting the temptation to go overboard.  Well, for me at least.

 

That's easy.  Just have all improvement in a weapon tied to skill or talent advancement, rather than character level.

Are you essentially just in favor of the Skyrim system?

 

Character level isn't really a concept that needs to exist.

So when does the character gain skill/spell points?  When, if ever, do you gain hp?  What about attributes?

[Icy Magebane]

You never explain what's wrong with an OP character.

 

Creating OP characters should not be a simple matter, as exceptional soldiers and scholars are by definition rare.  IMO it's best to exclude that possibility during character creation...

That's pretty much it.  If you want to start off OP, you can enable god mode or play on very easy difficulty.  That shouldn't be part of the standard class creation system... IMO.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Are you essentially just in favor of the Skyrim system?

The earlier TES games were better for this (since the characters didn't all start the same - you did get some starting abilities based on your background beyond just racial differences), but even the TES games are too tied up in levels.  The broken scaling system in Oblivion makes this clear.

 

So when does the character gain skill/spell points?  When, if ever, do you gain hp?  What about attributes?

I want character level not to have a direct material effect on gameplay.  It shouldn't automatically increase your attack score, or your HP, or your attributes.

 

All of those should be purchased with skill points, which can be assigned as they are earned.  Really, if we scrap the level concept, we can just spend XP buying skills and abilities.  Why have skill points when we already have experience points?  You earn XP, and then you spend XP buying and improving abilities, and increasing your HP, and raising your stats.

[Icy Magebane]

That's not a "what's wrong" at all. But okay.

 

I personally like having OP characters. Characters like a dual-wielding rogue or an arcane warrior, who's made of glass in the beginning but is near unstoppable later on. I've yet to encounter an argument against it

But I was only talking about class creation, not what happens afterward...  Most of what I'm saying is just related to the idea of a custom class that you create in the beginning.  I am in favor of that rather than having access to all weapon, spell, and skill trees for the entire game (a fully classless system).  I don't have a problem with the character becoming OP over the course of the game.

[Icy Magebane]

The earlier TES games were better for this (since the characters didn't all start the same - you did get some starting abilities based on your background beyond just racial differences), but even the TES games are too tied up in levels.  The broken scaling system in Oblivion makes this clear.

 

I want character level not to have a direct material effect on gameplay.  It shouldn't automatically increase your attack score, or your HP, or your attributes.

 

All of those should be purchased with skill points, which can be assigned as they are earned.  Really, if we scrap the level concept, we can just spend XP buying skills and abilities.  Why have skill points when we already have experience points?  You earn XP, and then you spend XP buying and improving abilities, and increasing your HP, and raising your stats.

Okay, let's say that you made a game based on this idea.  If you don't start off with a class, how do you justify mastering the use of multiple weapon types and schools of magic over the course of an adventure?  A class gives you a basis for knowledge, and a justification for being able to advance along a certain path... I can clearly envision a training regiment that allowed the character to become skilled in the basics of spirit magic, bows, and shortswords.  However, classless characters start without the formal training to justify, IMO, learning and becoming skilled in all weapons and spell types... games don't typically span the course of decades.

 

 

Alright. I kind of get what you're saying. You're talking about an immediate OP character? That's understandable.

 

Though I would still prefer access to all weapons, or all weapons within lore (obviously no staff for non-mages).

If that was possible, would there be any reason to ever play as a non-mage?  Mages would have access to all magic and weapon talents, and can cast spells with mana or utilize weapon talents using stamina.  You gain nothing by choosing a non-mage.  The system would inherently be unbalanced.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Okay, let's say that you made a game based on this idea.  If you don't start off with a class, how do you justify mastering the use of multiple weapon types and schools of magic over the course of an adventure?  A class gives you a basis for knowledge, and a justification for being able to advance along a certain path... I can clearly envision a training regiment that allowed the character to become skilled in the basics of spirit magic, bows, and shortswords.  However, classless characters start without the formal training to justify, IMO, learning and becoming skilled in all weapons and spell types... games don't typically span the course of decades.

The player can justify it however he wants.  It's not my job to tell him how to play.

 

And who says he can master multiple anything?  I'd design the game so you had to specialise in order to master even a single weapon type, or even a single combat style with that weapon type.

 

And what constitutes "over the course of an adventure"?  To get from level 1 to the max should take several years in-game.  Probably over multiple games.

If that was possible, would there be any reason to ever play as a non-mage?  Mages would have access to all magic and weapon talents, and can cast spells with mana or utilize weapon talents using stamina.  You gain nothing by choosing a non-mage.  The system would inherently be unbalanced.

Make the magic ability really expensive, and only selectable at level 1.  So by choosing a mage, you're making a character who will necessarily be less good at learning a wide variety of things, and have much lower survivability at low levels.

 

You can even explain this in the lore - it takes lots of attention and focus to learn to control magic abilities and not either die or get possessed (look at Connor), so if you've done that, then you haven't had the time necessary to learn other skills.  if you want to learn now, that's fine, but you'll be behind (possibly way behind).

 

I'd also like to make archery expensive (as its the only non-magical way to do damage at range), though learning it wouldn't be limited to level 1.

[danielkx]

The earlier TES games were better for this (since the characters didn't all start the same - you did get some starting abilities based on your background beyond just racial differences), but even the TES games are too tied up in levels.  The broken scaling system in Oblivion makes this clear.

 

I want character level not to have a direct material effect on gameplay.  It shouldn't automatically increase your attack score, or your HP, or your attributes.

 

All of those should be purchased with skill points, which can be assigned as they are earned.  Really, if we scrap the level concept, we can just spend XP buying skills and abilities.  Why have skill points when we already have experience points?  You earn XP, and then you spend XP buying and improving abilities, and increasing your HP, and raising your stats.

 

I said this in another thread, Drakensang does something similar to this. Although there are classes, character level affects very little in regards to gameplay.

[Icy Magebane]

And who says he can master multiple anything?  I'd design the game so you had to specialise in order to master even a single weapon type, or even a single combat style with that weapon type.

 

And what constitutes "over the course of an adventure"?  To get from level 1 to the max should take several years in-game.  Probably over multiple games.

 

 

Make the magic ability really expensive, and only selectable at level 1.  So by choosing a mage, you're making a character who will necessarily be less good at learning a wide variety of things, and have much lower survivability at low levels.

 

You can even explain this in the lore - it takes lots of attention and focus to learn to control magic abilities and not either die or get possessed (look at Connor), so if you've done that, then you haven't had the time necessary to learn other skills.  if you want to learn now, that's fine, but you'll be behind (possibly way behind).

 

I'd also like to make archery expensive (as its the only non-magical way to do damage at range), though learning it wouldn't be limited to level 1.

I dunno... seems to me that you're going out of your way to set up rules so as not to make the character start off OP... hm... that sounds familiar... now, where might I have heard that...?

 

TBH I'm not even sure if we disagree at this point...  if the leveling did span the course of years, then I have no objection to the character eventually learning to use any weapon skill they wished to.  That's more than enough time to practice.  Most games that I've played, however, don't cover that much time.  In TES, you can easily become a master of archery, alteration, and block over the course of a few weeks.  IMO that's unacceptable.

 

So okay, I'll grant you that it's okay to be able to learn any spell or skill... but only in a realistic time frame.  If the game can't give me that, there's no way I want to see a fully classless system.  (And "realistic" is usually a long time... prodigies are rare.  Maybe you could use that as an expensive trait in character creation, but normal people don't master the use of weapons over the course of a couple weeks.)

[Icy Magebane]

Sylvius gives a good reason, but I would say just the specialization. I want to play a rogue that dual-wields longswords, can't hit the side of the barn initially, but winds up with enough Dex to dodge every physical attack and always do damage. I wouldn't necessarily be able to do this if I focused on magic too.

You wouldn't be tempted to just pick mage as the basis but only add one point to learn fireball?  I mean...  you get a decent ranged attack that doesn't use stamina.  It's practically a freebee.