123 réponses à ce sujet

[Aaleel]

Only way I can play a mage job is if its some type of hybrid like Arcane Warrior from DA:O.  I think Mystic Knight from Dragon's Dogma is my favorite though, that job is fun to play and versatile.

 

As far as the animations, the melee in DA2 when the enemy got close weren't horrible.  But the twirling of the staff, sticking it behind the back and all the other unnecessary moves just to shoot a projectile was over the top to me.  If I want to shoot a projectile at something I'll just point my staff at it.

[Schreckstoff]

R.A.Salvatore right? I read the book you're referring to and I liked that fighter elf girl. Would you happen to know the story behind her weapon and how she aquired it? It's the one thing that I feel the writer should have included because she feels incomplete without that information.

 

OT: I'm sick and tired of mages being pigeon holed into robe wearing staff wielders. In every game I can think of this is the case. Why? Is there a lore/gameplay/gamedesign explanation?

Yes, I also liked Danifae though didn't very much like the later development. I believe Danifae took Kozah's Needle from one of her unfortunate suitors but I'll ask the guys on candlekeep if they know anything as the Wiki doesn't mention anything.

[Adhin]

@JSlither: Only in DnD can I think of any RPG/world explaining why mages are often in robe/clothing instead of armor. They have an entire mechanic around it that can be sidestepped with a certain metamagic feat (or 2). In that, at least, it's because every spell requires a set amount of things to happen, generally speaking words and complex hand motions that can be easily fudged up if your in armor. Cleric spells don't have as complex or have no real hand motions, some mage spells don't have the vocal or the hand/arm motions at all. And there are feat's that allow you to ignore said component, still casting, silent casting. Epic level's have permanent version of these covering 3 spell tiers each so if you got high enough, and spent the perks your mage wouldn't have to move or speak to cast a spell heh.

 

As for Dragon Age? no reason at all really, Its... I dunno. They have no lore or reasoning behind it, Mages do **** because they will it to happen, they're like a mix of Psions and ritual Mages from other stuff. DAO just had requirements involved for waring armor and if you wanted to 'use' the armor (which had no negative impact on your casting) you had to have the strength. Which meant you where a weaker mage for not spending those points in magic stats. DA2 they pigeon holed the balls out of everyone like we where back in the goddamn 70's. And DAI seems to go back to letting us ware full plate on every class if we choose to.

[Schreckstoff]

@JSlither: Only in DnD can I think of any RPG/world explaining why mages are often in robe/clothing instead of armor. They have an entire mechanic around it that can be sidestepped with a certain metamagic feat (or 2). In that, at least, it's because every spell requires a set amount of things to happen, generally speaking words and complex hand motions that can be easily fudged up if your in armor. Cleric spells don't have as complex or have no real hand motions, some mage spells don't have the vocal or the hand/arm motions at all. And there are feat's that allow you to ignore said component, still casting, silent casting. Epic level's have permanent version of these covering 3 spell tiers each so if you got high enough, and spent the perks your mage wouldn't have to move or speak to cast a spell heh.

As for Dragon Age? no reason at all really, Its... I dunno. They have no lore or reasoning behind it, Mages do **** because they will it to happen, they're like a mix of Psions and ritual Mages from other stuff. DAO just had requirements involved for waring armor and if you wanted to 'use' the armor (which had no negative impact on your casting) you had to have the strength. Which meant you where a weaker mage for not spending those points in magic stats. DA2 they pigeon holed the balls out of everyone like we where back in the goddamn 70's. And DAI seems to go back to letting us ware full plate on every class if we choose to.

In DnD the robes also serve as walking cabinets with secret magical compartments storing the various ingredients necessary for spellcasting.

In DAO the fatigue system was pretty great but mages draw their power from the fade. There's a ton of fantasy stories were mages draw their power from within and just have to will it into existence.
As to why they wear robes call it tradition if you must but why should they wear anything else they can conjure armor and barriers while actually wearing it would only wear them down with their usually weak physique. Why so many apostates would wear robes though is beyond me and why others, Gascard for instance, don't.

[Adhin]

Magical pouchs works just the same if your in some kinda armor. Elven chain was a consistent upgrade for mages back in the 2nd edition days. Hell in 3E too for that matter.

 

Mage's in DA still have to will it into existence, yeah the fade is the source of the power but outside of dream walkers? Or whatever there called have a hard time initially learning how to even do that, and it takes a lot of practice to do it well. In the end its like anything I guess, doing it takes something out of you, mages can't cast big spells all day long. Granted that represented in Mana not Stamina, but I'd imagine draining your self of 'mana' has the same tiring effect, just maybe not working your body out.

 

That's something I liked about Dragon's Dogma, in storys it's often a physical/mental strain for mages to do spells (kinda like Psionics). In Magi anime it takes a physical toll, and working on your personal stamina can lead to better control and more powerful spells as your a better... 'vessel' for the power since your ultimately a conduit that controls the output? Anyway, Dragon's Dogma used stamina for 'everyone'. Casting spells? costs stamina, running? stamina, special melee attacks? Stamina. I kinda like that more then Mana now and days as it seems to fit up more thematically then mana does... even if mana has a more 'magical' feeling to it.

[Treacherous J Slither]

@JSlither: Only in DnD can I think of any RPG/world explaining why mages are often in robe/clothing instead of armor. They have an entire mechanic around it that can be sidestepped with a certain metamagic feat (or 2). In that, at least, it's because every spell requires a set amount of things to happen, generally speaking words and complex hand motions that can be easily fudged up if your in armor. Cleric spells don't have as complex or have no real hand motions, some mage spells don't have the vocal or the hand/arm motions at all. And there are feat's that allow you to ignore said component, still casting, silent casting. Epic level's have permanent version of these covering 3 spell tiers each so if you got high enough, and spent the perks your mage wouldn't have to move or speak to cast a spell heh.

 

As for Dragon Age? no reason at all really, Its... I dunno. They have no lore or reasoning behind it, Mages do **** because they will it to happen, they're like a mix of Psions and ritual Mages from other stuff. DAO just had requirements involved for waring armor and if you wanted to 'use' the armor (which had no negative impact on your casting) you had to have the strength. Which meant you where a weaker mage for not spending those points in magic stats. DA2 they pigeon holed the balls out of everyone like we where back in the goddamn 70's. And DAI seems to go back to letting us ware full plate on every class if we choose to.

 

 

I say get rid of the stat system altogether. Just have levels. As your character levels up, your attacks become more powerful and new abilities are unlocked. All weapon schools are available to every class but only mages can use magic. All armor/clothing is available for every class but the heavier the armor, the slower the character and the lighter you are, the faster you are. So tank or dodge. Some equipment comes with magical enchantments but most do not. You can however get an enchanter to enhance any object you have. A cool looking but normal hoodie can potentially be the most powerful item you have.

 

What do you guys think about this?

[cindercatz]

edit: Getting rid of stats, set levels? Hell no. That's practically what DA2 was, and I hated it. It kills a lot of the party customization, which is one of DA's best features. No way. 

 

Also, set levels are not at all unique. It'd just make it more like the majority of stuff that's already out there. Boooo.

Are you forgetting about the class dedicated to making a mage a warrior again? I'd say with that inclusion its a good balance.

 

Plus whats a piece of wood gonna do to someone in armor?

Used well? I'd like to see weapons opened up to all classes, and hopefully staff fighting is part of that. Don't see evidence of that in DA:I though.

[The Baconer]

What do you guys think about this?

 

Would not work in a game like DA at all. The proposed system works within a classless system (which again, doesn't work for DA's style of combat) but for some reason we would be keeping the classes for no reason other than to lock warriors and rogues out of certain content while allowing mages to simply do anything they want.

[SerCambria358]

edit: Getting rid of stats, set levels? Hell no. That's practically what DA2 was, and I hated it. It kills a lot of the party customization, which is one of DA's best features. No way. 

 

Also, set levels are not at all unique. It'd just make it more like the majority of stuff that's already out there. Boooo.

Used well? I'd like to see weapons opened up to all classes, and hopefully staff fighting is part of that. Don't see evidence of that in DA:I though.

huh?

[Adhin]

@JSlither: Sadly no, attributes have a tendency to make an RPG. They're a representation of what your character is from a base physical and mental stand point. Removing them is... well it's Diablo 3. As has been mentioned it can work, to some extent, in a setting where there is no class structure at all like Skyrim, but even then they had you picking between HP, MP, or SP to determine your base physical build on top of your perk selection with skill use.

 

Ultimately, the problem DAO had wasn't attributes at all. It came down to bad pacing, and how they handled Rogue's and Warriors and sadly that has led them to revert to some simplistic idea of set roles you can't properly deviate from. Warriors can only use 2H swords and Sword/Shield. Rogue's are the only ones who can use daggers or bows?

 

DnD already does a good job of setting up a big difference between Warriors and Rogues. And that comes down to weapon specialization and the misc stuff for rogues. In 3E everyone can stealth or pick locks, but a Warrior only gets 2 skills they can properly lvl up and those skills aren't part of there class kit. So they have to spend more, to get the same effect as a rogue. So if a Fighter takes lockpicking, it's like a cop knowing how ot pick a lock, but he's not locksmith or expert safecracker. Vice versa Rogue's could throw them selves into some armor but there base HP pool is lower, and they don't have all the weapon specialization stuff.

 

personally, I'd just like to see weapon open up for all classes but Rogue/Mage use the weapons in a different way. One thing I really like about DA2 was that Warriors had a 'group focus'. That is, 1H or 2H, you always hit multiple enemies at once. Now this is kinda where the development fan gets hit with ****. Basic time restraint. Only reason Warrior isn't Dual wielding is because the animations. IT would require unique animations from Rogue's that made sense for a little AoE attack stuff. Special warrior oriented talents and all that. Same for rogue in the other direction.

 

Now personally, i'd be happy if they just opened up all the weapons ignoring animation/perks. Like if a Warrior wants to use Daggers? Go for it, you don't have weapon specialization 'for' daggers but its still fast attack dmg, and there are PLENTY of talents to spend points on, your not gonna be hurting in that regard. Same with Rogues. You could be using a 1H weapon or hell even a 2H (even if that's a bit 'weird') and just not have weapon skills for it, plenty of other stuff to spend the points on. I know theres plenty of people out there who would like to make a Bow Warrior and end up maxing out Champion for aura crap. Sit in the middle buffing folks, directing combat, flingin' arrows. Can't do that with a rogue, and it's an entire concept ignored atm.

 

-edit-

Oh forgot to say BioWare also tends to have a do it right or don't do it approach. So, I'd also love to just see this show up in some DLC. Add Rogue/Warrior only perk trees that give the combat style that allows a warrior to dual wield, and use a bow, and a rogue to use 1H weapons (where they hold it in 1h but have some off-hand grapple/throw dust + stab, or 2H strong attacks with it). Could also use 2H weapon on rogue, or the staff and use it as a melee weapon monk style. It would make sense from a utility stand point (ninja weapons where often utility/tool based).

[Treacherous J Slither]

@Adhin: Great reply.

 

I like the DnD stuff but what really separates a thief from a warrior? Learned skills and physical training right? If i'm creating my very own character why can I not make a character that has only the skills and physical training that I want them to have? I want to be able to choose from every ability in the game. No restrictions. If my character ends up a ninja type then so be it. I don't want to be forced to pick a specific ninja type that only has access to certain skills, armor, weapons etc.

 

The abilities I choose for my character should determine their class. The class should not determine my characters abilities.

[Schreckstoff]

@Adhin: Great reply.

 

I like the DnD stuff but what really separates a thief from a warrior? Learned skills and physical training right? If i'm creating my very own character why can I not make a character that has only the skills and physical training that I want them to have? I want to be able to choose from every ability in the game. No restrictions. If my character ends up a ninja type then so be it. I don't want to be forced to pick a specific ninja type that only has access to certain skills, armor, weapons etc.

 

The abilities I choose for my character should determine their class. The class should not determine my characters abilities.

 

Then you are looking for a different kind of system that is build different from the ground. You can't make a system that works for both multiclass as well as selected classes

[Treacherous J Slither]

Would not work in a game like DA at all. The proposed system works within a classless system (which again, doesn't work for DA's style of combat) but for some reason we would be keeping the classes for no reason other than to lock warriors and rogues out of certain content while allowing mages to simply do anything they want.

 

Does the lore not reflect this?

 

What is a warrior? Someone with extensive combat training.

 

What is a rogue? Someone who sneaks around, steals, and fights dirty.

 

What is a mage? Someone born with magic powers.

 

 

By these definitions a warrior can be a rogue, a rogue can be a warrior, a mage can be a warrior, a mage can be a rogue, a mage can even be both, but only a mage can be a mage.

[Treacherous J Slither]

Then you are looking for a different kind of system that is build different from the ground. You can't make a system that works for both multiclass as well as selected classes

 

All the developers have to do is allow the player to choose their abilities from everything in the game. A larger ability menu is all this means. I doubt that's a big deal. If someone picks mostly rogue skills then they're a rogue. Mostly warrior then warrior. Half and half then Infiltrator >:]

[Schreckstoff]

All the developers have to do is allow the player to choose their abilities from everything in the game. A larger ability menu is all this means. I doubt that's a big deal. If someone picks mostly rogue skills then they're a rogue. Mostly warrior then warrior. Half and half then Infiltrator >:]

 

Then try that in DAO and DA2 in either case you'll end up with a broken character that doesn't need any companions on any difficulty. I pointed this out in a different threat regarding KE already Kingdom of Amalur tried to allow both select class as well as multiclass and it just ended up in hybrids and jack of all trades being massively superior to select classes.

[Adhin]

So I had this big, long post written out of my general ramblings of classless or class based or, multiclasses and blah blah blah. In the end doing it completely formless leads to everyone being a mage. From a story perspective, every companion and every character you make is a mage. Period. You personally may not take spells, but they have magical talent if they are allowed to take those skills and that mucks up story points. **** becomes to fairy land high magic world then. Which leads to all kinds of awkward story problems. Like someone could be a mage 'and' a Templar? Riiight.

 

Anyway I think they would be better suited doing a general talent/passive trees and class specific skill trees like they have now. General stuff involves physical trait stuff like bonus health or whatever, I'd also put all the weapon stuff in there. Unrestrict weapon/armor choices all together, have all that crap in the universal pool. Then you have class specific stuff. Mages get spells, Warrior get group stuff: class base AoE for all melee attacks, taunts, stuff they get now if you ignore the 2 weapon skill trees. Rogue's same ordeal but focused on single targets, the ability to use stealth with out buying it.

 

It's actually how I run a RPG mod thing I've been worked on for years. It's also kind of how DnD 3/3.5E handles thing (or now Pathfinder). Large pool of generalist crap anyone can take, buncha class specific stuff. Though in DnD you can mix classes, but anyones 'capable' of magic with the right attributes, as that determines all kinds of stuff, from what feats you can take to what classes you can be. As it stands they don't wanna have split skill/talent pages though, I think opening up all weapons to all classes (staffs being just melee attacks for rogue/warrior) would help, even if the skill trees aren't there for the cross choices (like dagger on Warriors, or anything on a mage).

[Treacherous J Slither]

Then try that in DAO and DA2 in either case you'll end up with a broken character that doesn't need any companions on any difficulty. I pointed this out in a different threat regarding KE already Kingdom of Amalur tried to allow both select class as well as multiclass and it just ended up in hybrids and jack of all trades being massively superior to select classes.

 

Problem being?

 

If the player doesn't want a OP character then the player will not make one. All i'm talking about here is more options for character creation. More freedoms for the player.

[Adhin]

JSlither that logic works better in mods, not base public releases from full companys =P

 

That kinda thinking is what leads to exploits and loop holes that cause wild imbalances and can make stuff either to trivial or overly difficult and luck based. But I'd still like a semi more open system. But for story/lore and tactical considerations a 100% pure open everyone can pick everything just would deaden the world and gameplay a bit sadly.

[Schreckstoff]

Problem being?

 

If the player doesn't want a OP character then the player will not make one. All i'm talking about here is more options for character creation. More freedoms for the player.

 

An OP character isn't fun, trying new builds only to find out they are OP making the game not fun is frustrating, never frustrate your player base unless it's why your game sells.

[Treacherous J Slither]

@Adhin:

 

When the player is creating the character they decide whether or not it will be a mage. Halfway through the game they may change their minds but I doubt this would be the case. I believe that the player would create a new character rather than potentially ruin the current one.

 

I see no issue with a mage becoming a Templar. The Chantry may not allow it but it's not as if a mage is incapable of learning anti magic spells. Mages are actually better at fighting other mages than Templars are simply because they wield magic naturally and don't need to become druggies in order to do their job. I believe that the only reason the Chantry doesn't allow mages to join the Templars is because they use the Templars as a way to keep ALL mages in check. Not just the so called "bad ones" which goes against their job description and reveals one of the biggest reasons as to why there has been so much conflict between mages and mundanes in many areas of the DA world. Fear of mage superiority.

 

I agree with you on the general skills/class specific skills thing. Great idea. Like how if my headcanon Mass Effect character has all biotic abilities and then I give him Tactical Cloak he's now an Infiltrator. Certain skills define the class.

[Treacherous J Slither]

JSlither that logic works better in mods, not base public releases from full companys =P

 

That kinda thinking is what leads to exploits and loop holes that cause wild imbalances and can make stuff either to trivial or overly difficult and luck based. But I'd still like a semi more open system. But for story/lore and tactical considerations a 100% pure open everyone can pick everything just would deaden the world and gameplay a bit sadly.

I disagree.

 

In Final Fantasy 12 all abilities were available to all characters. The only problem I saw with this was that throughout the course of the game you were able to aquire every single ability on every single character. Many people limited their characters on their own but most did afaik.

 

The solution would be to make maxing out impossible. There are 100 skills, you pick only 1 at each level, and your level cap is 30. This would encourage a variety of character builds across the players entire party roster.

[Adhin]

Yeah, I'd of liked to see mass effect take a more... free-form approach to it as well. Pick a class to determine your 'main thing' but then pick from 1-2 separate pools instead of the pre-defined whatever. Vanguard having charge is his thing, everything else is just kinda... secondary and isn't nearly as disruptive as it might be in DA. But then, you also only control 1 person and each companion is very specific.

 

Also if you think people don't change there minds halfway through a game you don't pay attention to how people play games =P. There is a reason I have multiple half-play throughs before i eventually settle on something, and it's not because its a class system. Also, humans, in general, can have bad (or at least minimal) self control when something is blatantly open. Not sure if you've been following Pillars of Eternity development (was Obsidian kickstarter). But Sawyer has talked about design choices causing degenerative gameplay. For instance, baldur's gate - you can rest almost anywhere! Resting restores all your stuff... people had a tendency to rest a lot... A LOT. I try not to but sometimes I just rest a bunch to get some stuff outa the way. It's a bad mechanic, something that should of been better thought out but was kinda an issue with base DnD then anything BioWare did.

 

Basically, if taking certain mage spells later in the game that you didn't have before (say at lvl 8) is a persons build.. it's there build. Maybe the most optimal path they see for there character. That's ultimately what I was talking about (though plenty of folks just change there mind halfway or just feel like they want to add something 'new' to the table). But ultimately, its a lore buzzkill. It would have to be a lvl 1 choice, not something you could switch on later on is all I was, to me at least, the most important thing. It would either be a lvl 1 choice, or every char would be considered a mage.

 

Take ME as an example, if they had it 100% freeform it wouldn't break 'to' much but... every Shepard would be a Biotic, regardless if you even built them that way. Perhaps not from a gameplay perspective but from a lore/story, people would mention it. As it stands, only if you pick one of the 3 Biotic classes for Kaiden ever mention you being an outlayer in the power department you know? That stuff makes your class choice mean something more then if they free-formed it to the point everyone would be considered a Biotic, or a top engineer (or in this case, both, always). I think lore/story is more important in that regard.

[Schreckstoff]

I disagree.

 

In Final Fantasy 12 all abilities were available to all characters. The only problem I saw with this was that throughout the course of the game you were able to aquire every single ability on every single character. Many people limited their characters on their own but most did afaik.

 

The solution would be to make maxing out impossible. There are 100 skills, you pick only 1 at each level, and your level cap is 30. This would encourage a variety of character builds across the players entire party roster.

 

Kingdom of amalur did that and as said single classes were massively inferior despite hybrids and jack of all trades never unlocking the the top tier abilities.

[Tajerio]

Kingdom of amalur did that and as said single classes were massively inferior despite hybrids and jack of all trades never unlocking the the top tier abilities.

For a single character that makes sense, though, right? If I were a lone adventurer in a magical world I'd definitely want to have as broad a range of skills as possible.

[Schreckstoff]

For a single character that makes sense, though, right? If I were a lone adventurer in a magical world I'd definitely want to have as broad a range of skills as possible.

 

Jack of trades, master of none