Glad to see my fav warrior spec. is back Templar. Sad that Spirit healer is gone. But wait til get my hands on game b4 i form my judgement.
I do hope we only choose one spec. I always picked my fav for that class and kind ignored the other one. I want bigger impact on gameplay.
Weapon restrictions are still in
Really, they said that? Nooooooo 
Getting so sick of the stereotypical stick twirling mages. My character is still has hands, there shouldn't be anything physically stopping my character from picking up a weapon with them.
Well, I don't know I don't see as to how they would function I need to see it to get a better idea. Especially the Knight Enchanter and Necromancer, and am not just saying that as a excuses to see more gameplay footage or more description on this game, no.
Really, they said that? Nooooooo
Getting so sick of the stereotypical stick twirling mages. My character is still has hands, there shouldn't be anything physically stopping my character from picking up a weapon with them.
In the crafting panel a little while back. They said weapon restrictions would still be in, but when someone asked about mages using swords they said there may be somewhat of an exception, I'm now assuming they were talking about the knight enchanter.
I just can't see how traps will work without basically kiting, though someone did make a good point about pushing/pulling to trigger them - that could actually make for really fun gameplay!
I'm glad to see Reaver and Templar returning, and if Knight Enchanter is just a human version of Arcane Warrior, I'm all for that... too bad about Blood Mage, but I understand that it could cause problems with the narrative, since it's supposed to be an illegal form of magic. Excluding straight retcons, anything that lessens the gap between lore and gameplay is a good idea in my book. Necromancer seems like it should appeal to a lot of people, so that's good... Rift Mage is too vague to comment on.
I'm not at all excited about the rogue specializations... they seem kind of basic. Nothing fresh or exotic that I can see, but you never know. Artificer might be a decent trickster class, but Assassin just feels stale (not just in DA... the genre is over-saturated with assassins). I'm guessing Tempest is a more agile rogue? Meh...
In the crafting panel a little while back. They said weapon restrictions would still be in, but when someone asked about mages using swords they said there may be somewhat of an exception, I'm now assuming they were talking about the knight enchanter.
I'm glad to see Reaver and Templar returning, and if Knight Enchanter is just a human version of Arcane Warrior, I'm all for that... too bad about Blood Mage, but I understand that it could cause problems with the narrative, since it's supposed to be an illegal form of magic. Excluding straight retcons, anything that lessens the gap between lore and gameplay is a good idea in my book. Necromancer seems like it should appeal to a lot of people, so that's good... Rift Mage is too vague to comment on.
I'm not at all excited about the rogue specializations... they seem kind of basic. Nothing fresh or exotic that I can see, but you never know. Artificer might be a decent trickster class, but Assassin just feels stale (not just in DA... the genre is over-saturated with assassins). I'm guessing Tempest is a more agile rogue? Meh...
Blood Magic is deemed illegal by the Chantry I believe and punishment is enforced by the Templars. However those two groups have parted ways. Other than that, The Inquisition and by extension The Inquisitor (just like the Grey Wardens) are above the law and are allies to no particular faction except there own. Grey Warden mages are free to use blood magic so I'd guess Inquisition mages would be allowed to do the same.
These are my thoughts on the issue.
@SovereignSRV - Blood magic is considered taboo by the majority of people on Thedas, from peasant to noble... the Chantry has had a thousand years to make that a deeply ingrained part of culture in almost every nation, regardless of whether that was right or wrong. So even if you don't have the Chantry and Templars directly involved in overseeing the Inquisition, the use of blood magic would still cast the group in a very negative light once word began to spread. Then, logically, the story should change for the player... but then content gets locked off and Bioware would need to develop a separate side-story to explain things... it just seems like it would get messy or we get a repeat of DA2 with apostates running wild in Kirkwall while the Templars sit there because it's not in the script for them to arrest the party, and Cullen flat out saying to a mage Hawke that "mages aren't like us," even after having seen him or her casting spells. Which is a whole different kind of messy...
As much as I liked blood magic, I am not terribly upset at its loss if it means a more coherent story and less "wtf" moments.
Edit: Also, I see people mention the Grey Wardens' use of blood magic pretty often, but how common is that knowledge to the citizens of Thedas? I'm guessing it's not something they talk about or flaunt publically... I'm not 100% sure though...
@SovereignSRV - Blood magic is considered taboo by the majority of people on Thedas, from peasant to noble... the Chantry has had a thousand years to make that a deeply ingrained part of culture in almost every nation, regardless of whether that was right or wrong. So even if you don't have the Chantry and Templars directly involved in overseeing the Inquisition, the use of blood magic would still cast the group in a very negative light once word began to spread. Then, logically, the story should change for the player... but then content gets locked off and Bioware would need to develop a separate side-story to explain things... it just seems like it would get messy or we get a repeat of DA2 with apostates running wild in Kirkwall while the Templars sit there because it's not in the script for them to arrest the party, and Cullen flat out saying to a mage Hawke that "mages aren't like us," even after having seen him or her casting spells. Which is a whole different kind of messy...
As much as I liked blood magic, I am not terribly upset at its loss if it means a more coherent story and less "wtf" moments.
Edit: Also, I see people mention the Grey Wardens' use of blood magic pretty often, but how common is that knowledge to the citizens of Thedas? I'm guessing it's not something they talk about or flaunt publically... I'm not 100% sure though...
But is that really different from the Inquisitor using magic in front of the templars in DA:I, or any citizen for than matter. You could do the same in DA:O as well. There is a whole mage vs. templar war going on, why should Blood Magic makes thing fathoms more complicated than being a mage already is? Besides, the Inquisitor is the only person capable of closing the veil tears, I don't think people would have much room to object to the Inquisitors methods.
Honestly pretty sad to see no shapeshifter class. Hopefully there's at least the SetAppearance console command cause that is the next best thing. I'm also hoping that the rift mage is essentially a blood mage. We know that the rift is essentially an opening to the fade and blood mages work with the fade, so it could be.
Honestly pretty sad to see no shapeshifter class. Hopefully there's at least the SetAppearance console command cause that is the next best thing. I'm also hoping that the rift mage is essentially a blood mage. We know that the rift is essentially an opening to the fade and blood mages work with the fade, so it could be.
Just have your character stand there in combat, practise the art of transforming into a dead person ;D
That doesn't sound quite as fun.
I would love to have a red Templar spec, if it wasn't story breaking.
That doesn't sound quite as fun.
I would love to have a red Templar spec, if it wasn't story breaking.
Warrior specialisations: Champion, Reaver, Lumpy red rock monster.
To me, those specialisations always felt a bit... lame.
I mean, in general they came up with another set of combat-skills and nothing else. No further interaction-abilities outside combat, no new equipment like armors or weapons only useable with that specialisation... no real change in the way, the class feels and plays - making some specialisations in the past obsolete.
For Example the shapeshifter. At first i thought it's cool ans useful.. like "oh, my tank is down! i need someone to take his place... oh yeah, the bear-form".
But in actual game, changing took too long and most of the time other spells were just more effective.
Looking back, i think it could have been better, turning the shapeshifter-specialisation in some kind of druid-class. A class, that can't use weapons and heavy armors and thus has to rely on his transformations -which happen instant. He may as well be able to change parts of his body individual... like lizardscales for body-armor and your arms become paws or claws for attacking... and the combat skills depend on which shiftings are active.
But back to the topic: Concerning the specialisations already announced in Inquisition... some sound quite familiar(oh, we get the arcane warrior back) and some fresh and new... but in general i'm still not too exited.
I still don't think it is gone be completely like arcane warrior.
But is that really different from the Inquisitor using magic in front of the templars in DA:I, or any citizen for than matter. You could do the same in DA:O as well. There is a whole mage vs. templar war going on, why should Blood Magic makes thing fathoms more complicated than being a mage already is? Besides, the Inquisitor is the only person capable of closing the veil tears, I don't think people would have much room to object to the Inquisitors methods.
It's just that blood magic is an illegal form of magic in every nation other than Tevinter, so most people who witness or know about it would have a problem with the caster... I don't think the people of Thedas are really that open-minded or pragmatic in this regard. It's different if the Inquisitor is a normal mage... the people might be wary or not like him/her for whatever reason, but there's no innate hostility like when one encounters a blood mage, a type of mage that they've been culturally conditioned to vilify. Again, whether that's right or wrong isn't the issue. The fact that there is a powerful cultural bias against blood mages means that a random person who encounters one is very likely to express disdain for the mage, report them to the authorities, flee, or even become hostile. If none of this occurs, a gap is created between what the game shows and what the lore us, weakening the narrative overall... This is basically why I think Blood Mage requires extra attention that the devs simply do not seem to want to put into the game. I'd rather the experience be seemless than have something this integral to the lore be ignored yet again.
As for the Inquisitor's unique ability to close veil tears... tbh, I think that at some point the people would have to decide that the cure is worse than the disease. Not that this would automatically happen should they start using blood magic, but there has to be some limit to what people are going to tolerate before they decide to figure out a different way to end the crisis... It probably makes sense to research other options anyway, since if the Inquisitor dies on a mission, they're screwed without a backup plan. (this isn't really related to blood magic but just the overall idea that the Inquisitor can do anything they want and people have to just tolerate it... for example, civilian killing sprees and other psychotic behaviors that have been listed in other threads..)
I'm most excited for:
Champion: I plan to play as a "Rally the Troops" type Qunari warrior on one save.
Necromage: love the opportunity for playing as a hero with dark magical powers.
Knight Enchanter: anyone who played Arcane Warrior in DA:O should understand.
Assassin: both my canon Warden and Hawke were assassin rogues.
Looking back, i think it could have been better, turning the shapeshifter-specialisation in some kind of druid-class. A class, that can't use weapons and heavy armors and thus has to rely on his transformations -which happen instant. He may as well be able to change parts of his body individual... like lizardscales for body-armor and your arms become paws or claws for attacking... and the combat skills depend on which shiftings are active.
Your weapons and armor carried over to your shifted forms. It was mostly defensive enchantments that transferred though.
Going maximum on the cynicism here, specializations broken down into the standard DPS, Support, Tank roles.
Tanks: Champion, Knight Enchanter, Tempest
DPS: Reaver, Necromancer, Assassin
Support: Rift Mage, Templar, Artificer
Regardless, I'm playing as a ranged assassin.
Champion has clearly absorbed the Guardian spec based on the description. That could also mean that Templar has absorbed elements of Spirit Warrior and Reaver has absorbed elements of Berserker, which all had their similarities to begin with. I am wondering if we're going to see more of the classic spec abilities melded into the 3 specs. Knight Enchanter being AW/BtM, Rift Mage being more FM/K (Solas is an elf, after all), Necromancer picking up where the Walking Dead spirit spell and shapeshifter utility left off in DA:O.
Lack of Spirit Healer to me suggests that they're trying to avoid pushing the player into one spec or companion, which makes me also think that spec may not be tied to combat role. All three Warrior specs could (in theory) be perfectly competent tanks, with Reaver being particularly good at smaller and more numerous opponents, Champion being your general protection knight, and Templar being the mage-killer.
Then again, they may go with split for offense/defense/utility split, leaving core roles within the class but effectively pushing players away from it due to balance of abilities. Champion would be the most defensive, Templar would be a mix (more utility-focused), and Reaver would focus on damage. Mage has what seems to be a defensive Knight Enchanter and a nuker Rift Mage, with a Necromancer as your utility role. Alternatively, Knight Enchanter could end up in the middle, with Necromancer being the defensive choice using HP tank corpse fodder to prevent damage to your own. Artificer seems pretty defensive in nature, laying traps and distracting opponents, and assassin is necessarily offensive, so Tempest could be your middle ground. However, Tempest might also be your defensive duelist, with Artificer as a utility role. Need more info on Tempest and Necro, I think.
So, feedback:
1) I am pleased with the return of mage-warrior hybrid. Hopefully not so overpowered this time around.
2) Return of Animate Dead line from Origins as a spec is pretty cool, but it's also raises some serious questions about balance along with Artificer. The Animate Dead line contained Death Syphon as well as Animate Dead, both of which have the potential to trivialize the grind-down-the-party design proposed in previous gameplay videos. Dead bodies mean you don't need healing poultices, and if there's mana recovery to go with it, then you can bring a Necromancer and never need. Similarly with Artificer, traps which cost resources to use aren't likely to be popular (why effectively guarantee resource drain?), but they prevent damage to your characters. If they don't require materials, they could act similarly to Necromancer and prolong your battlefield time considerably.
3) Templar/Reaver dichotomy is a bit obvious, but the Champion spec feels too vanilla as a point of comparison. I hope Templar and Reaver are pretty exotic to balance out the functional-but-dull Champion.
4) Rogues with traps is nice and all, but unless Tempest shows up with some great affinity for the wind and elvish trickery, rogues are getting comparatively grounded lore and function compared to the others. Templars abuse lyrium to become faux-mages, ultimately becoming addled addicts as a result. Reavers call upon the power of blood like blood mages. Mages are mages, et cetera, et cetera. Rogues are just kinda Average Joes who stab people and lay traps. Not that it's ineffective, but it just seems to me that at least one rogue spec should be at least a bit novel. Maybe Tempest fits the bill -- wait and see, I guess.
5) Artificer focusing on traps is dangerous. They had better have the ability to throw those traps and not need resources to use them, or the mere hassle of using the spec is going to crush it in a hurry.
*snip*
I agree with pretty much everything you said, especially about the KE, Templar, and Tempest. I have been saying that I hope all three classes get a spec that allows them to quasi multi class. Knight Enchanter seems to fill that role for mages, and I hope it also mixes in some battlemage-like heavy dps close range spells to mix in with close combat. I am also hoping Templar gets a little bit more in the way of ranged semi-magical attacks that deal spirit damage to give it give warriors both a ranged option and to expand the limits of the class a bit. My hope for Tempest is to be able to dual wield swords, giving it a bit more reach and giving back that DAO dual wield warrior feel, and have abilities that allow you to get a bit of melee AOE as well. I do hope that the specs are balanced though.
Guest_Caladin_*
loved reaver/berserker combo in DA2 so bit sad berserker no there but all good tbh, i try everything out without a doubt
I just started a new playthough of DAO and DA2 with a Spirit Healer Hawke. Then I got to thinking about it and I realised that Spirit Healer isn't a specialisation (that we know of so far). So unless Rift Mage is the new spirit healer as it were, than it's kind of a shame. I'm a massive stickler for consistency so the fact that none of the mage specialisations are ones from DAO or DA2 means i'm already getting fidgety. Hopefully it's not what i'm thinking:
Rift Mage: Damage
Knight-Enchanter: Melee Mage (actually i'm okay with this)
Necromancer: Summoner
Hopefully Rift Mage is the healer to replace Spirit Healer, Knight-Enchanter is the melee and Necromancer is the replacement for Blood Magic. Because if all 3 are just damage/damage/damage then that will be boring. Summoning as a necromancer seems kind of limited/limiting and not having any obvious healer specialisation like the SH from DAO and 2 seems a shame for people who like to play as support, healers etc. I, as someone who loves to be up in the enemies face with lightning, is actually having a blast playing as a Spirit Healer. The Creation tree just isn't enough in my opinion.
Retour en haut