76 réponses à ce sujet

[Jazzpha]

Honestly, I'm torn between metagaming efficiency and interesting character dynamic bantering. The breadth of the cast has me seriously considering playing a rogue for the first time ever just so one of my other three slots isn't de facto occupied by a companion rogue.

 

Although at the same time, Cole seems like a fascinating character, and Varric is Varric. Ideally I'd have Cassandra, Vivienne, Dorian, Iron Bull, Solas and Cole all holding roundtable discussions on the nature of magic and such while we go stomping awesomely through the countryside, but alas. It's not meant to be. 

 

It might come down to just running multiple playthroughs, but I'm rambling. Back to my original question: are you guys looking at party composition from a technical, purely "gaming" standpoint, or from a more narrative-focused "I'm fine with some fights being more difficult as long as the banter is awesome" standpoint?

[Icy Magebane]

I go with whoever my PC gets along with... usually I wind up picking 3 favorites, but I try everyone out the first time around.  For DA:I, however, I have a lot of info on the characters that I didn't have before playing DA:O and DA2, so unfortunately I'm already prejudiced for and against a couple of them... so I can't say for certain if I'll even recruit everyone at this point...  but again, I don't do the "healer, DPS, tank" thing at all and just adapt to whatever problems my party composition creates.  It's more interesting for me that way.

 

Also, from what I have been reading, it sounds like we'll have more options for gaining money and exp, so perhaps having a dedicated lockpicker following you around won't be that important...  I hope that's true, anyway.

[DragonKingReborn]

I'll be picking one of each class + the Inquisitor, so my first playthrough (quest related party composition aside) will be two rogues, one mage and one warrior.  The Inquisitor will be a melee rogue so either Varric (maybe not, as he seems to have Qunari issues) or Sera will be the other (while things may change once I've 'met' him, currently Cole creeps me out).  The warrior to start with will be Cassandra (since I'm guessing we'll get her first) followed by Iron Bull.  The mage...unsure, will just have to wait and see.

[Elhanan]

First campaign, I am going with one of each class for Companions; then vary for banter and dialogue in replays with other Inquisitors.

[Sylvius the Mad]

I generally try to roleplay it. I make the choice of party a roleplaying decision.

If I don't do that, I just take all the mages.

[Stormy]

I generally try to roleplay it. I make the choice of party a roleplaying decision.
 

 

Ditto.  If it makes RP sense; if feels organic, then that's the party.  I won't force something that's not there for the sake of stats and "winning".

[Emby]

I'm going to go with one of each class to start with, likely going with Cassandra, Cole, and Solas for my Qunari mages party. Two mages, one tank, one rogue. Unsure on my other Inquisitors.

[Borosini]

Despite my best intentions I'm a serial metagamer—if it seems like bringing someone along will unlock more options (e.g. Dorian in the E3 demo) for a certain mission, I usually include them.

 

I will also say that I almost always try to include everyone at some point—but as I play through the game I will definitely develop a preference for particular party members. I don't have nearly enough information at this point to say who those will be for the first playthrough.

[SofaJockey]

Entirely story driven and flexing party regularly , but with the usual PC + Warrior/Rogue/Mage formula

I'll try to keep them all well equipped and levelled so the story choices will not leave me stranded in combat.

 

I also sense you are not going to assemble all 9 companions in a heartbeat so you may not get your preplanned favourite companion until later.

[Navasha]

First time through I almost always play a mage.    Will need the de-facto rogue I assume for picking locks, but the other two I usually just put the people I like.   

 

If for some earth-shattering reason they actually have a difficult difficulty, then I might worry more about party dynamics, but its been many years since gaming has usually required that kind of planning.

[keightdee]

With a couple of martinis, a blindfold, and a copy of Twister.

[Jazzpha]

Entirely story driven and flexing party regularly , but with the usual PC + Warrior/Rogue/Mage formula

I'll try to keep them all well equipped and levelled so the story choices will not leave me stranded in combat.

 

I also sense you are not going to assemble all 9 companions in a heartbeat so you may not get your preplanned favourite companion until later.

 

Good point, I hadn't figured that in since so much of what we've seen shows the Inquisition past its growing pains. The raw availability of party members will be a determining factor in who gets screentime, definitely.

[Jazzpha]

 

 

If for some earth-shattering reason they actually have a difficult difficulty, then I might worry more about party dynamics, but its been many years since gaming has usually required that kind of planning.

 

Touche.

[Deflagratio]

I think tactically first, and I like a breadth of options, so one of each class.

 

My intended first playthrough will probably have two warriors, a rogue and a mage... depending on how healing turns out to be. The intent is to have two damage soakers for extended expeditions, though one will be more geared for damage and another optimized for tanking.

[Inprea]

I'm fairly traditional in that I want to optimize my group. So one warrior to serve as a meat shield, assuming warriors have the strongest defense, one mage to handle healing and crowd control which will be the inquisitor in my case, one rogue to handle sneaking, disarming traps, lock picking and either another mage to help with damage dealing and emergency healing perhaps or perhaps a rogue built for archery. In my experience a ranged character can do just as much damage as a melee in most systems but the ranged character is easier to keep safe as they're not standing right next to the dragon or ogre or whatever.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

I always bring those I think fit the mission best from a story perspective. 

[Inprea]

I think tactically first, and I like a breadth of options, so one of each class.

 

My intended first playthrough will probably have two warriors, a rogue and a mage... depending on how healing turns out to be. The intent is to have two damage soakers for extended expeditions, though one will be more geared for damage and another optimized for tanking.

 

But with two damage dealers the enemies die quicker so there is less damage to soak.

[NoForgiveness]

I just go with my gut. Who ever I feel is important for a specific quest or when I just plain feel like bringing a particular person.

[katerinafm]

First I'll pick the ones that make sense so my party works well. One rogue, tank, healer, etc. After that I'll just pick whatever companions I haven't seen yet.

[Travie]

Varric because he was one of the only things that made DA2 tolerable to slog through, the rest... not sure. 

 

First playthrough will probably be an elf mage with a huge chip on his shoulder, so more elves will probably round out the party. 

[Jawzzus]

I'm trying to not plan my game out before I get it, I don't want to go into it and be like this is my gameplan and I have to stick to it, and then miss out on stuff I might of liked otherwise.  I'll just see how it goes with initial reactions, and then go from there

[Darth Death]

Once I find my favs, I'll always use them. 

[Brogan]

Solo all the way.

[Nukekitten]

Until I get used to the game and work out who I like being around, and dependent on what order party members becomes available in, some combination of the following.
 

Mage      -     Nuke
Warrior   -     Meatshield
Rogue     -     Spike damage
Mage      -     CC/Heal