122 réponses à ce sujet

[Bayonet Hipshot]

So from the videos we have seen so far, we have gotten a glimpse at the skill trees. However, my focus here is the mage skill trees. 

 

The mage skill trees appear to be radically different from the ones in DA:O and DA 2. 

 

In DA:O there was Arcane, Primal, Creation, Spirit and Entropy.

 

In DA 2 there was Elemental, Primal, Spirit, Arcane, Creation and Entropy. 

 

In DA:I, so far, there seems to be Fire, Winter, Entropy / Lightning and Spirit. 

 

In the previous two games, the magical skill trees adhered to the 4 schools of magic lore. However, in DA:I, they seem to have mixed and mashed everything up. 

 

Entropy now seems to be mixed with lighting which seemed odd to me. Spirit now seems to be all about pure support whereas in previous two games we have spells like Walking Bomb, Mana Clash, Arcane Bolt  and Spirit Bolt. 

 

There also doesn't seem to be any Creation skill tree which is very odd. 

 

Then there is the focus spells. From my observation and I could be wrong in this, but we have Haste as the Focus spell of Lightning tree, Firestorm for Fire tree, Blizzard for Winter Tree and Group Heal for Spirit (that is what the icon seemed to look like to me). 

 

Obviously there is the Breach which is making magic going haywire but such a drastic change ? I am sure these spells are not there just because of the Breach, they are like that before the Veil Tears up. 

 

Then there is the focus spells. How does that work exactly ? By this I mean how does it work lore-wise ? Mages have been able to cast these spells on their own just fine in DA:O and DA 2 but now they can't. Shouldn't the Veil Tear make it easier to cast high damage spells without relying on something new ? 

 

This much change in magical spells and lore is not exactly very consistent is it ? 

 

Again, this is speculation and deduction based on looking at the videos we have so far. This could be all wrong but I am interested for feedback. 

 

Should DA:I retain some element of similarity with DA:O and DA 2 with regards to this ? Or should this be a total overhaul ? Should mages have to depend on something else other than mana to cast spells ? 

 

[Icy Magebane]

It's a bit early to judge, but if what you're saying turns out to be true, Focus abilities seem to be a huge nerf to the mage class.  I don't like the idea of Firestorm... actually, I don't like the idea of any spells being Focus powers, not just the damage ones.  I mean, why not have the normal haste spell, and just make the Focus version more powerful?  Why completely remove group heal, haste, firestorm, etc from normal casting?  Assuming this is true, of course...

[ElementalFury106]

We actually have no idea about any entropy/lightning spell trees. All we know for certain is that currently there are 3 universal spell trees consisting of Fire, Winter, and Spirit magic.

 

I can see why'd you think entropy is there, considering the horror icon used in the E3 demos, but honestly I believe that was simply a stock/filler image, just like I don't think Iron Bull is actually a Reaver. I don't think either entropy or creation is making a return.

 

They did say that your mages/mage Inquisitor will have to be somewhat offensive no matter. You can't, for instance, just spam healing and buffs like you used to be able to in the previous games. It makes sense that they decided to cut out creation, and possibly even entropy, to put a bigger focus on offensive magical abilities.

 

I think a focus spell like Haste will be in the new Spirit tree, considering it is now the healing/buff tree, replacing Creation from previous games. As for the rest of the focus abilities, I wouldn't be surprised if there is at least one focus ability within every tree. Maybe as the final reward for completing the tree? Kind of like those huge passive buffs we got from the magic trees in DA:2.

 

I think we can definitely rule out Creation making a return (as it has been replaced by Spirit magic), unless it has been rebooted to incorporate offensive nature magic. If that's that case, by all means!

 

Now, my personal opinion/predictions are as follows;

 

-If we only have 4 magic trees (not including specializations) and they don't make any changes to what they currently have; we'll have Fire, Winter, Spirit, and Primal trees. So Fire and Winter are self explanatory, Lightning and Nature spells are within Primal (such as Chain Lightning and Stone's Fist), and all healing/buffs/spirit damage spells (like Heal, Haste, Mind Blast, etc.) will be in the Spirit tree.

 

OR

 

-We'll have 5 magic trees, and assuming they don't make further changes to what has already been established, it'll have Fire, Winter, Spirit, Primal, and Arcane. So we have 3 trees devoted entirely to offensive elemental damage. Then Spirit is our healing/buff/defensive tree. And Arcane is kind of our "misc." tree, where we incorporate spells like Mind Blast, Crushing Prison, etc etc

 

Just my personal thoughts.

[Bayonet Hipshot]

It's a bit early to judge, but if what you're saying turns out to be true, Focus abilities seem to be a huge nerf to the mage class.  I don't like the idea of Firestorm... actually, I don't like the idea of any spells being Focus powers, not just the damage ones.  I mean, why not have the normal haste spell, and just make the Focus version more powerful?  Why completely remove group heal, haste, firestorm, etc from normal casting?  Assuming this is true, of course...

 

My point exactly. I also wonder what they are trying to achieve with Focus. This is a single player game, there is no need to purposefully nerf powerful magical abilities. 

 

Using Focus for top-tier spells is akin to making powerful abilities like Singularity and Flare in Mass Effect rely on something else other than bio-amps and biotics. IMO, it is lore-breaking. 

[Bayonet Hipshot]

We actually have no idea about any entropy/lightning spell trees. All we know for certain is that currently there are 3 universal spell trees consisting of Fire, Winter, and Spirit magic.

 

I can see why'd you think entropy is there, considering the horror icon used in the E3 demos, but honestly I believe that was simply a stock/filler image, just like I don't think Iron Bull is actually a Reaver. I don't think either entropy or creation is making a return.

 

They did say that your mages/mage Inquisitor will have to be somewhat offensive no matter. You can't, for instance, just spam healing and buffs like you used to be able to in the previous games. It makes sense that they decided to cut out creation, and possibly even entropy, to put a bigger focus on offensive magical abilities.

 

I think a focus spell like Haste will be in the new Spirit tree, considering it is now the healing/buff tree, replacing Creation from previous games. As for the rest of the focus abilities, I wouldn't be surprised if there is at least one focus ability within every tree. Maybe as the final reward for completing the tree? Kind of those huge passive buffs we got from the magic trees in DA:2.

 

I think we can definitely rule out Creation making a return (as it has been replaced by Spirit magic), unless it has been rebooted to incorporate offensive nature magic. If that's that case, by all means!

 

Now, my personal opinion/predictions are as follows;

 

-If we only have 4 magic trees (not including specializations) and they don't make any changes to what they currently have; we'll have Fire, Winter, Spirit, and Primal trees. So Fire and Winter are self explanatory, Lightning and Nature spells are within Primal (such as Chain Lightning and Stone's Fist), and all healing/buffs/spirit damage spells (like Heal, Haste, Mind Blast, etc.) will be in the Spirit tree.

 

OR

 

-We'll have 5 magic trees, and assuming they don't make further changes to what has already been established, it'll have Fire, Winter, Spirit, Primal, and Arcane. So we have 3 trees devoted entirely to offensive elemental damage. Then Spirit is our healing/buff/defensive tree. And Arcane is kind of our "misc." tree, where we incorporate spells like Mind Blast, Crushing Prison, etc etc

 

Just my personal thoughts.

 

Interesting.

 

The thing is, there might be mages who do not wish to be outright offensive and perhaps wish to be supporters or debilitators instead of nukers.

 

In DA:O, that meant you had the option of going the way of Creation, Entropy with a bit of Spirit. For specialization you would go Spirit Healer or Blood Mage.

 

In DA 2, that meant you had the option of going the way of Creation, Entropy, Arcane and Spirit. For specialization, you could go for any of the three. 

 

I like playing support + debilitator mages. My Warden and Hawke were mages who focused on debuffs, healing as opposed to outright damage. 

 

Making making purely offensive removes the element of choice in spells. Not every mage wants to be nukers and elementalists in the same way not every mage wants to be spirit healers and blood mages. 

 

I find it odd that they would downright strip the mages of the options of being supporters and debilitators and then nerf us further with Focus. Why ? To what end ? With the Veil Tears, the Breach, shouldn't magic be more powerful ? Shouldn't mages be able to cast powerful spells with less effort ? 

 

I personally don't find this approach to magic appealing. In which case, its rogues for me. 

[ElementalFury106]

Interesting. I personally don't find it appealing. 

 

The thing is, there might be mages who do not wish to be outright offensive and perhaps wish to be supporters or debilitators instead of nukers.

 

In DA:O, that meant you had the option of going the way of Creation, Entropy with a bit of Spirit. For specialization you would go Spirit Healer or Blood Mage.

 

In DA 2, that meant you had the option of going the way of Creation, Entropy, Arcane and Spirit. For specialization, you could go for any of the three. 

 

I like playing support + debilitator mages. My Warden and Hawke were mages who focused on debuffs, healing as opposed to outright damage. 

 

Making making purely offensive removes the element of choice in spells. Not every mage wants to be nukers and elementalists in the same way not every mage wants to be spirit healers and blood mages. 

 

I find it odd that they would downright strip the mages of the options of being supporters and debilitators and then nerf us further with Focus. Why ? To what end ? With the Veil Tears, the Breach, shouldn't magic be more powerful ? Shouldn't mages be able to cast powerful spells with less effort ? 

 

Well no they're not stripping you of the option outright. They're just toning it down.

 

In the previous games if you wanted to make Warden or Hawke completely support/debilitator, you could. Now you can only do it to a certain extent, which obviously means you can't entirely focus on it.

 

That goes double for party members. I remember in Origins you could make Morrigan, who at her core was no where near a Healer, become a complete supportive role in the party. You could also do the same for Valenna in DA:A, and for Anders in DA:2. Now, every mage must have some offensive capabilities. 

 

At least that's what they said. I can see why they'd want to exclude the concept in DA:I, considering Spirit Healers in both DA:O and DA:2 were practically invincible if played and spec'ed properly.

[Bayonet Hipshot]

Well no they're not stripping you of the option outright. They're just toning it down.

 

In the previous games if you wanted to make Warden or Hawke completely support/debilitator, you could. Now you can only do it to a certain extent, which obviously means you can't entirely focus on it.

 

That goes double for party members. I remember in Origins you could make Morrigan, who at her core was no where near a Healer, become a complete supportive role in the party. You could also do the same for Valenna in DA:A, and for Anders in DA:2. Now, every mage must have some offensive capabilities. 

 

At least that's what they said. I can see why they'd want to exclude the concept in DA:I, considering Spirit Healers in both DA:O and DA:2 were practically invincible if played and spec'ed properly.

 

Which is why I am not fond of this. Why the toning down when we see an expansion of rogue talents like throwing knives and warriors with their hook which gives them more options ? 

 

Yes healers, supporters and debilitators can be invincible but they do next to no damage when they are healing. Debilitators need to for the most part, combo their spells to get good damage and if an enemy resists a spell, they do nothing. 

 

Again, this is about choice. Toning mages down like this is like toning rogues down because Twin Fangs do a lot of damage or a high Dexterity rogue cannot be hit at all. 

 

So I really don't get the point of toning down mages when there is a big tear in the sky and the magical realm is practically leaking into Thedas. I mean the source of magic has blown open and leaking. Shouldn't that mean buffs as opposed to toning down ? 

[ElementalFury106]

Which is why I am not fond of this. Why the toning down when we see an expansion of rogue talents like throwing knives and warriors with their hook which gives them more options ? 

 

Yes healers, supporters and debilitators can be invincible but they do next to no damage when they are healing. Debilitators need to for the most part, combo their spells to get good damage and if an enemy resists a spell, they do nothing. 

 

Again, this is about choice. Toning mages down like this is like toning rogues down because Twin Fangs do a lot of damage or a high Dexterity rogue cannot be hit at all. 

 

So I really don't get the point of toning down mages when there is a big tear in the sky and the magical realm is practically leaking into Thedas. I mean the source of magic has blown open and leaking. Shouldn't that mean buffs as opposed to toning down ? 

 

Those are some fair points. I mean I see both sides, I understand why you're unhappy about it and I see why BioWare made these decisions. Personally, as person who enjoys the Mage class the most across all RPGs, I'm not too bothered by this. I almost always make my Mages a balanced integretion of Offensive and Defensive magic abilities. For example; My Warden was a Primal/Spirit focused Mage with the Arcane Warrior and Spirit Healer specializations. A lot of offense, but a great amount of defense to ensure that I'm basically invincible.

 

And don't get me started on DA:2. My Mage Hawke was a Primal Spirit Healer...we absolutely WRECKED Nightmare. I remember I rolled with a party of Primal Spirit Healer Hawke, Primal/Entropy Merrill, Primal/Creation Anders, and Vanguard Fenris. It was just funny how easy the game was, because of the healing support Hawke and Anders were able to provide. On that particular playthrough, Hawke didn't ever die, not once.

 

I'm sure BioWare's reponse to the "nerfing" of healing/support roles of mages in DA:I is "if you want more, consider the Knight Enchanter specialization"

[dekarserverbot]

And don't get me started on DA:2. My Mage Hawke was a Primal Spirit Healer...we absolutely WRECKED Nightmare. I remember I rolled with a party of Primal Spirit Healer Hawke, Primal/Entropy Merrill, Primal/Creation Anders, and Vanguard Fenris. It was just funny how easy the game was, because of the healing support Hawke and Anders were able to provide. On that particular playthrough, Hawke didn't ever die, not once.

oh god you did make me remember one of the worst aspects of DA2 STUPID MERRILL MADE EVERYONE (except Varric who was the preffered target of the stupid pinata hordes of nowhere) INMORTAL... and DA2 was awfull, so awfull that i made an altar for Shaq-fu because at least it was a full game, not a demo.

I hope my words end boring the developers so they don't add anything from Dragon Age 2, I want an usefull inquisitor not a particle useless woman... yes thank you for making me remember that Hawke was a 2 handed warrior girl

[Bayonet Hipshot]

Those are some fair points. I mean I see both sides, I understand why you're unhappy about it and I see why BioWare made these decisions. Personally, as person who enjoys the Mage class the most across all RPGs, I'm not too bothered by this. I almost always make my Mages a balanced integretion of Offensive and Defensive magic abilities. For example; My Warden was a Primal/Spirit focused Mage with the Arcane Warrior and Spirit Healer specializations. A lot of offense, but a great amount of defense to ensure that I'm basically invincible.

 

And don't get me started on DA:2. My Mage Hawke was a Primal Spirit Healer...we absolutely WRECKED Nightmare. I remember I rolled with a party of Primal Spirit Healer Hawke, Primal/Entropy Merrill, Primal/Creation Anders, and Vanguard Fenris. It was just funny how easy the game was, because of the healing support Hawke and Anders were able to provide. On that particular playthrough, Hawke didn't ever die, not once.

 

I'm sure BioWare's reponse to the "nerfing" of healing/support roles of mages in DA:I is "if you want more, consider the Knight Enchanter specialization"

 

Same here, I can see they did this.  I can see why they want to go more damage focused and at the same time, impose limits on the powerful spells and healing. There is a balance to all that but it is still somewhat of a nerf. A nerf to flexibility and capabilities if you will. 

 

If they restricted healing since DA:O I would have no problems with what they seem to be doing now. 

 

At the very least, mages this time around have a lot more flare and flash. The visuals look awesome so that makes up for the nerf somewhat. 

[ElementalFury106]

oh god you did make me remember one of the worst aspects of DA2 STUPID MERRILL MADE EVERYONE (except Varric who was the preffered target of the stupid pinata hordes of nowhere) INMORTAL... and DA2 was awfull, so awfull that i made an altar for Shaq-fu because at least it was a full game, not a demo.

I hope my words end boring the developers so they don't add anything from Dragon Age 2, I want an usefull inquisitor not a particle useless woman... yes thank you for making me remember that Hawke was a 2 handed warrior girl

 

lol 

[ElementalFury106]

Same here, I can see they did this.  I can see why they want to go more damage focused and at the same time, impose limits on the powerful spells and healing. There is a balance to all that but it is still somewhat of a nerf. A nerf to flexibility and capabilities if you will. 

 

If they restricted healing since DA:O I would have no problems with what they seem to be doing now. 

 

At the very least, mages this time around have a lot more flare and flash. The visuals look awesome so that makes up for the nerf somewhat. 

 

To be honest I'm pretty worried about Mages from what we've seen so far. They seem to be the weakest this time around, the offensive spells (despite looking visually awesome) don't seem to be as devastating as they would initially imply. Also, the demos were on easy, so that really makes me wonder how much raw damage Mages do in comparison to Warriors and Rogues...

 

They do seem to still be the most flexible. Able to stun, chill, burn, etc etc. I just hope their power wasn't toned down, especially since such an emphasis on offense has been applied this time around..

[Jackums]

It's incredibly disappointing that they split fire and ice into two separate trees at the expense of other, actual unique and flavorful schools of magic.

 

Fire and ice are so easily interchangeable that an elemental tree made perfect sense. Instead we now appear to have two bland, cookie cutter magic types with their own trees, and other unique magic schools forced into one tree to accommodate.

 

But it's still too soon to say anything definitively, so I'll wait. 

[Bayonet Hipshot]

To be honest I'm pretty worried about Mages from what we've seen so far. They seem to be the weakest this time around, the offensive spells (despite looking visually awesome) don't seem to be as devastating as they would initially imply. Also, the demos were on easy, so that really makes me wonder how much raw damage Mages do in comparison to Warriors and Rogues...

 

They do seem to still be the most flexible. Able to stun, chill, burn, etc etc. I just hope their power wasn't toned down, especially since such an emphasis on offense has been applied this time around..

 

Yeap. In the demo, the Magequisitor is just doing damage in the tens to low hundreds.

 

Sera can crit in the freaking thousands. By the way, this is not hating on the rogues and not wanting them nerfed. I love rogues. 

 

At the same time,  we see that a bit of hit takes almost all the health away from a rogue in the videos, I mean Sera almost dies from a bit of dragon fire and the Roguequisitor almost dies from a hit by a giant / troll in the gameplay video and we see that Cole drops in the Dragon fight as well. 

 

All in all, there is balance there. High damage, low health, makes perfect sense. Rogues are glass cannons. So they are perfectly beautiful as they are. Don't change them Bioware !

 

Warriors in the videos so far are doing decent damage but they mainly shine with threat attraction, damage reduction and evidently they have good CC now. Mighty Blow stuns, throws enemy to the ground and breaks the ground a bit so that I assume will be useful for breaking objects. They also have this rush ability and the harpoon ability. Their taunt also seems to work a lot better this time around. 

 

The Bull was doing decent damage, attracting threat, tanking and he seems to only drop if the player becomes very careless. So was Cassandra in one of the earlier demos. She has good damage reduction, good tanking and good threat redirection. 

 

Which means, warriors also seem to be good and balanced. They also have CC and can close the distance now. Mobility has never been a warrior's forte. Again, like rogues, they look powerful but balanced and sensible. 

 

Then we have the mages. Their handblasts and staff twirls was not exactly doing impressive damage. Makes sense since those are auto attacks. But the spells they cast are not doing impressive damage either. 

 

Mages have always had the option of doing decent damage with a spell that costs little mana or a ton of damage with a spell that costs plenty of mana or do a combo.

 

So far, highly damaging spells like Firestorm, Blizzard and Haste...Have been changed into Focus spells. I mean the elemental walls and glyphs are good but not outstanding. The visuals for the spells look nice as well but again those are just visuals.

 

I mean the fact that the Mage Inquisitor took a while to take out a Bear at Level 7 whereas Mage Hawke and Mage Warden would have no problems taking out bears at level 7...I mean, there is an obvious nerf to damage potential.

 

However, for compensation, there seems to be nothing much. Not many healing. No health or mana drain. No hexes from what we have seen so far. 

 

So....

[ElementalFury106]

Yeap. In the demo, the Magequisitor is just doing damage in the tens to low hundreds.

 

Sera can crit in the freaking thousands. By the way, this is not hating on the rogues and not wanting them nerfed. I love rogues. 

 

At the same time,  we see that a bit of hit takes almost all the health away from a rogue in the videos, I mean Sera almost dies from a bit of dragon fire and the Roguequisitor almost dies from a hit by a giant / troll in the gameplay video and we see that Cole drops in the Dragon fight as well. 

 

All in all, there is balance there. High damage, low health, makes perfect sense. Rogues are glass cannons. So they are perfectly beautiful as they are. Don't change them Bioware !

 

Warriors in the videos so far are doing decent damage but they mainly shine with threat attraction, damage reduction and evidently they have good CC now. Mighty Blow stuns, throws enemy to the ground and breaks the ground a bit so that I assume will be useful for breaking objects. They also have this rush ability and the harpoon ability. Their taunt also seems to work a lot better this time around. 

 

The Bull was doing decent damage, attracting threat, tanking and he seems to only drop if the player becomes very careless. So was Cassandra in one of the earlier demos. She has good damage reduction, good tanking and good threat redirection. 

 

Which means, warriors also seem to be good and balanced. They also have CC and can close the distance now. Mobility has never been a warrior's forte. Again, like rogues, they look powerful but balanced and sensible. 

 

Then we have the mages. Their handblasts and staff twirls was not exactly doing impressive damage. Makes sense since those are auto attacks. But the spells they cast are not doing impressive damage either. 

 

Mages have always had the option of doing decent damage with a spell that costs little mana or a ton of damage with a spell that costs plenty of mana or do a combo.

 

So far, highly damaging spells like Firestorm, Blizzard and Haste...Have been changed into Focus spells. I mean the elemental walls and glyphs are good but not outstanding. The visuals for the spells look nice as well but again those are just visuals.

 

I mean the fact that the Mage Inquisitor took a while to take out a Bear at Level 7 whereas Mage Hawke and Mage Warden would have no problems taking out bears at level 7...I mean, there is an obvious nerf to damage potential.

 

However, for compensation, there seems to be nothing much. Not many healing. No health or mana drain. No hexes from what we have seen so far. 

 

So....

 

And Mages are in theory supposed to go down even quicker than Rogues. Like others said it's way too soon to judge, but just basing from what we've seen so far I'm more inclined to play a Rogue my first time around.

[Icy Magebane]

Yeap. In the demo, the Magequisitor is just doing damage in the tens to low hundreds.

 

Sera can crit in the freaking thousands. By the way, this is not hating on the rogues and not wanting them nerfed. I love rogues. 

 

At the same time,  we see that a bit of hit takes almost all the health away from a rogue in the videos, I mean Sera almost dies from a bit of dragon fire and the Roguequisitor almost dies from a hit by a giant / troll in the gameplay video and we see that Cole drops in the Dragon fight as well. 

The demo numbers are subject to change.  Here's Allan Schumacher's post about it:  http://forum.bioware...2#entry16922408

That was from a conversation about the E3 demo, and it probably applies to the latest gameplay demo as well.  I'm also a bit worried, but let's not get ahead of ourselves.  We don't know what the final numbers will look like once the balancing is finished.

[Kage]

I really really do not agree with you guys in this one, I am amazed how strongly I disagree in fact...

Two points: lore and non-support mages:

 

 

My point exactly. I also wonder what they are trying to achieve with Focus. This is a single player game, there is no need to purposefully nerf powerful magical abilities. 

 

Using Focus for top-tier spells is akin to making powerful abilities like Singularity and Flare in Mass Effect rely on something else other than bio-amps and biotics. IMO, it is lore-breaking. 

 

I dont think we can say what is lore-breaking, since they are the ones who invent the lore. Not to sound harsh, just get my point please.

They can always say that the breach makes magic go wild, and that is why Focus spells exist in the first place: Because they are severily overpowered. Just because the spell is called the same as in previous games, it does not mean it is as balanced. Maybe focus-firestorm deals 10x the damage of DA2-firestorm, who knows!

 

And also, we do not know if Focus abilities are only spells, has this been confirmed? Maybe all classes have focus-abilities?

 

And finally, this is a game, and therefor you cannot say that a mechanic is lore-breaking. Yes, magic might be severily OP in terms of lore, and still they can make mages not OP in combat, to balance the gaming aspect of DAI. Lore != gameplay.

That is why a lore-dragon != gameplay-dragon, that is why a single man cannot kill a lore-dragon, but a single man can kill a gameplay-dragon.

 

I dont know if I explained myself clearly.

 

Making making purely offensive removes the element of choice in spells. Not every mage wants to be nukers and elementalists in the same way not every mage wants to be spirit healers and blood mages. 

 

I find it odd that they would downright strip the mages of the options of being supporters and debilitators and then nerf us further with Focus. Why ? To what end ? With the Veil Tears, the Breach, shouldn't magic be more powerful ? Shouldn't mages be able to cast powerful spells with less effort ? 

 

I personally don't find this approach to magic appealing. In which case, its rogues for me. 

 

Why the heck are you all thinking that there are no support mages in DAI? I dont get it really.

Even if the final trees were fire, cold, lightning and nature, that would not mean there are non-support spells within those skill trees.

 

We have a wall of fire, that makes AI stop from crossing it. That is CC. There is also a wall of ice. The cold snap seems to freeze enemies, which is also CC. There is even a frost glyph, which is basically the glyph of paralysis, etc.

 

I will surely make a support mage in DAI, and I guess it will be just a matter of choosing the CC spells, and building the character with less intelligence and more willpower, since damage will not be important, but being able to spam spells more often. Spirit and Winter seem pretty pretty supportive to me, and then we have the specializations where we might get even more support spells, maybe in Necromancy (raising pawns and debuffing maybe?), or maybe Rift mage (who knows).

 

In fact I really like the idea of giving damaging spells a CC component. That way we can focus on the damage aspect or the utility aspect. We will see how it goes!

[KainD]

Leave lore behind all that enter here. Gameplay is a completely different creature than what is actually true for DA universe. Don't try to find any logic in it and don't try to connect it to lore. Gameplay is there just for fun and balance.

[LaughingWolf]

It's incredibly disappointing that they split fire and ice into two separate trees at the expense of other, actual unique and flavorful schools of magic.

Fire and ice are so easily interchangeable that an elemental tree made perfect sense. Instead we now appear to have two bland, cookie cutter magic types with their own trees, and other unique magic schools forced into one tree to accommodate.

But it's still too soon to say anything definitively, so I'll wait.

^ 100% Agreed

[Morroian]

It's incredibly disappointing that they split fire and ice into two separate trees at the expense of other, actual unique and flavorful schools of magic.

 

Fire and ice are so easily interchangeable that an elemental tree made perfect sense. Instead we now appear to have two bland, cookie cutter magic types with their own trees, and other unique magic schools forced into one tree to accommodate.

 

But it's still too soon to say anything definitively, so I'll wait. 

 

Yep, this all of it. I'm worried for the same reasons but I'm waiting to see more detail.

[andar91]

Okay, I skimmed over some of the responses in this thread, but admittedly did not read every single one.

 

 

Okay, WHOA WHOA WHOA! STOP!

 

/Brakes screech loudly

 

There is a LOT of bold claims being made based on assumptions about what we've seen so far, and I think we need to reserve judgement a bit. The most we've seen of the mage skill trees consisted of strangely mismatched abilities that had seemingly temp names with no descriptions attached. I SERIOUSLY doubt they are what we'll actually get. It's POSSIBLE that lightning is paired with Entropy, for instance, but I highly doubt it. Somebody also mentioned in the other thread that Iron Bull had that templar-looking ability (a sword surrounded by a blude-white halo) that wasn't in any of the Warrior ability trees that were shown. Therefore, I truly feel that those trees are not final, and we probably should keep that in mind when discussing them.

 

I love speculating about them! lol. I just think we should not become too invested in what we've seen so far since it wasn't a final build and was obviously incomplete.

[Gamemako]

Somebody also mentioned in the other thread that Iron Bull had that templar-looking ability (a sword surrounded by a blude-white halo) that wasn't in any of the Warrior ability trees that were shown.

That was Holy Smite. All characters in the E3 demo were fooled with, plucking abilities haphazardly from anywhere they please. Abilities skipped over the places in the trees, for example, but the abilities actually exist somewhere. Stonefist was also missing from the trees we saw, though it was probably the most-used spell in the qunari mage demo. It's possible that the spell will be removed from the final product, but that's a level of uncertainty that can be applied to anything (hey, maybe they'll get tired of Varric and just remove him!).

[Enigmatick]

It's incredibly disappointing that they split fire and ice into two separate trees at the expense of other, actual unique and flavorful schools of magic.

 

Fire and ice are so easily interchangeable that an elemental tree made perfect sense. Instead we now appear to have two bland, cookie cutter magic types with their own trees, and other unique magic schools forced into one tree to accommodate.

 

But it's still too soon to say anything definitively, so I'll wait. 

I have embarrassed myself once again as the one with the constipated whale morph avatar has pointed out.

 

But yeah I'd like that stuff folded back into one tree, though more importantly I want enemy spellcasters to use these spells too.

Modifié par Enigmatick, 05 août 2014 - 03:13 .

[Morroian]

Gotta get that Skyrim audience!

 

What? Fire and Ice in Skyrim are in destruction only 1 of the schools of magic. If anything I'd like the DA series to go the route of ESO and have I elemental tree but the exact spell be determined by the staff element eg  wall of elements which can be wall of ice or fire, sort of like what seeker swarm seems to be.