170 réponses à ce sujet

[Kimarous]

Warrior. First off, least utilitarian class - mages can do a billion things, and at least rogues can pick locks when out of combat. Damage output tends to be weaker than both classes, reducing one to what amounts to a glorified damage sponge. That's not how I roll.

 

In general, the basic "warrior / fighter" archetype is my least favourite in any fantasy setting. It seems like literally everyone else has something distinct or unique about them that they can do while the warrior's one solution to everything is "I tank damage and hit it with my sword."

[Sir DeLoria]

"I tank damage and hit it with my sword."

The Templar spec gives some pretty good variety and can be very powerful.

Champion and Reaver are nice too.

[FemHawke FTW]

I personally can't get into playing mages.  For me rogues are the way to go, nothing against warriors they're a lot of fun but it's hard to beat all that sneaky backstabbing goodness :-)

 

[ebevan91]

I have never played as a mage before, other than just to see what the Origin story was like. I just can't. Especially when you already have Morrigan and Wynne in DA:O, and Anders, Merrill, and Bethany in DA2.

[Turnip]

I've always had a hard time playing archers. Close combat with an archer is a pain for me. I also didn't like S&S warriors in DA2. They weren't as fun or as damaging.

[falconlord5]

Warrior. First off, least utilitarian class - mages can do a billion things, and at least rogues can pick locks when out of combat. Damage output tends to be weaker than both classes, reducing one to what amounts to a glorified damage sponge. That's not how I roll.

 

In general, the basic "warrior / fighter" archetype is my least favourite in any fantasy setting. It seems like literally everyone else has something distinct or unique about them that they can do while the warrior's one solution to everything is "I tank damage and hit it with my sword."

 

Funny, I'm the exact opposite. I have terrible difficulty playing anything other than a warrior.

[In Exile]

Warrior. First off, least utilitarian class - mages can do a billion things, and at least rogues can pick locks when out of combat. Damage output tends to be weaker than both classes, reducing one to what amounts to a glorified damage sponge. That's not how I roll.

 

At least in DA2 (and even in DA:O, though it takes a lot of work) warriors could be incredible in terms of sheer damage output. A 2H warrior Vanguard, even without Berseker, could dish out incredible damage on nightmare, with the added bonus of not dealing with elemental resistances. 

[quickthorn]

I found warrior dull in both games.  I played as warriors only in later playthroughs.  I went dual-wield for my warrior in DAO even though I had already done DW rogue, as it was the only way I could stand the combat, and 2H for DA2.  I wasn't fond of the feel of archery in either game, although I often play rangers/archers in others.

[Seraphim24]

Virtually never a pure warrior/fighter in any game ever. It's just very plain to me, no other reason. I can see the appeal though, it's got a very clean and clear vision to the class, very leader-like and heroic.

 

Well, I don't mind playing Link in Zelda, because Link. 

[AmRMa]

Never play warrior - never really saw the use because the game usually gives you good warriors and they can't heal others or pick locks- so I never needed to directly control one when I could just send one out to tank.

[MCG]

Oddly enough, I can play all classes but I've struggled getting into 'Dual Wielding' in particular. Coincidentally it's my preferred style in other games, just not DA. However this time I'm going to give it a proper go in 'Inquisition' and hopefully turn my weakest area so far into my greatest.

[Kimberly]

My #1 choice is mage followed by rogue. I've tried playing a warrior but I don't find it as interesting. I've never finished a play through as a warrior.

[Urazz]

For me it depends on the game.  In DA:O, I felt rogues were kind of redundant and pointless compared to a warrior dual wielding.

 

In DA2, I felt ranged rogues were pretty pointless, especially since I usually almost always have Varric in the party and he is just so much better at range dps than Hawke could ever be in my opinion.

[Lee80]

I've never liked Warrior all that much.  

 

Mage is my favorite because of all the awesome variety in the different spells!  It makes combat so fun!

 

Rogues have their advantage in the fact they are the only ones that can disarm traps and unlock things, so for that reason alone playing as them just makes the game a bit less tedious, so they are a solid second favorite.

 

That's again why I just don't see any big perks for playing as a warrior.  I mean they are more durable sure, but to me it just feels like the least interesting choice.  I'm really hoping that Inquisition switches my opinion by making a more interesting and useful Warrior.  Maybe the wall breaking thing they mentioned could help?  Who knows...

[Kimarous]

You know the weird thing? Despite my criticisms of the Warrior class (and the "fighter" archetype in fantasy games in general), I'm actually pretty optimistic about how they might get portrayed this time around and I WANT to like them. Granted, my obsessive need to have a lockpicker on hand at all times could put a damper on this idea, but I'm actually HOPING to have a fun time as a Warrior in this game, if only so each of my three protagonists are of a different class.

[Naktis]

Mage..feels strange

Never liked ranged classes in any game , I like go in the face so Warrior or rogue , non archer type

[CrimsonN7]

Granted, my obsessive need to have a lockpicker on hand at all times could put a damper on this idea, but I'm actually HOPING to have a fun time as a Warrior in this game, if only so each of my three protagonists are of a different class.

 

Aha, I know that feel, sees a lock, need to pick it which is why I find it hard not to pick a rogue most of the time!

[SuchBeautifulNoiz]

I have a hard time playing any class other than a mage. I managed a rogue playthrough, but it was pretty awkward even though actually being able to get rid of traps and pick locks for a change was nice. I cant stand playing as a warrior, I just really cant do it and never finish.

[Dabrikishaw]

I can play them all, but I have enjoyed Rogues less in Origins than I do Mages and Warriors .

[wright1978]

Loved dual wielding warrior in origins. Since it got cut like warrior much less.
Whereas didn't enjoy Mage in origins but loved it in da2.

[Dr. Doctor]

Mage is kind of hard for me to get into, at least in Origins. I had the same problem with Archer Rogue in Origins as well, just because it seemed less enjoyable than dual dagger combat.

I might give Knight Enchanter a try in Inquisition however.

[Squeezeweasel]

Warriors. There's just something so...obvious about smacking someone in the face with a sword. I usually play a mage - although my canonical playthrough of DAO had a rogue Warden. Because mages couldn't marry Alistair. 

[cjones91]

Warrior is my least played class of all the DA games.

[TheJediSaint]

Mages, because they wear dresses.