30 réponses à ce sujet

[Ferico21]

After looking at the few class specializations that were released, particularly the knight enchanter mage class, I began to wonder what it meant. Was this a new class that actually focused on arm(or)ing mages like warriors, creating hybrid-like possibilities and letting them lead the charge into battle.

Or was my imagination simply getting the best of me?

Considering we don't have too much information on the specializations, instead I am curious about what your inquisitor will be allowed to use and equip.  We do know that the armor is open to everyone, but with weapons will mages be restricted to staves or can they wield a shield if they desired to. Could rouges carry a two handed great-axe and backstab enemies.

 

I know none of this makes any sense since each class already has a set style (Mages: staffs, Rouges: Bows and daggers, Warriors: Everything else), but it's a fun idea that I think, while not efficient, would be a ton of fun.

 

What are you guys/gals thoughts to how they would implement this in the game, and would you do it?

[Dantrag]

I'd like to see staff and sword style.

[TheEternalStudent]

I imagined it as a protoss zealot, though I would love if you could Green Lantern it into changing shape as you wielded it.

[The Night Haunter]

It's been confirmed the combat Q&A that weapons (probably including shields) are class-restricted.

[Sylvius the Mad]

It's been confirmed the combat Q&A that weapons (probably including shields) are class-restricted.

And they're not even offering much variety within class groups.

All Rogue weapons are bladed, for example. No blunt weapons available.

[In Exile]

And they're not even offering much variety within class groups.

All Rogue weapons are bladed, for example. No blunt weapons available.

Blunt weapons weren't really ever available in DA. Gone are the days of dual wielding a hammer and a flail (of the ages, say).

[Wulfram]

Plenty of maces and mauls in DA:O.  That Chasind Great Maul was really powerful.

[The_Prophet_of_Donk]

I'd like to see staff and sword style.

Gandalf style punks!!!!

 

In all honesty though, I believe that the KE is going to be different as the description talks about weilding swords of energy or something....  there is an entire thread on it somewhere here.....

[SomeoneStoleMyName]

I dont get it. They advertised that any class could wear any armor. You could be a warrior in a dress if you wanted and a mage in full plate armor. So why would weapons be any different? That some skills requires certain weapons for balance reasons - that I understand. But for a mage to be denied the choice to use a shield and a dagger for close quarter combat etc?

Any armor for any class = ok
Any weapon can be wielded by any class = not ok

Just trying to see the logic.

[Sidney]

Plenty of maces and mauls in DA:O.  That Chasind Great Maul was really powerful.

 

 

...but while they had stats differences they never really felt any different to me. I never noticed a lick of difference using a sword over a maul and went with sowrds most of the time in dAO at least because they looked less goofy.

 

I don't care all that much about weapon variation unless they can find a way to make it actually feel like they differ, That is a lot easier in gun combat where RoF, recoil, hitting power and such can be made much more tangible than a lot of the differences in melee weapons.

[dutch_gamer]

I dont get it. They advertised that any class could wear any armor. You could be a warrior in a dress if you wanted and a mage in full plate armor. So why would weapons be any different? That some skills requires certain weapons for balance reasons - that I understand. But for a mage to be denied the choice to use a shield and a dagger for close quarter combat etc?

Any armor for any class = ok
Any weapon can be wielded by any class = not ok

Just trying to see the logic.

Weapons are different because there is animation attached to them which is not the case with armor. So whatever armor you wear it is not going to affect any of the skills you have but at the same time the developers would have to create an extra spell effect just to make a weapon work for another class. This also boils down to financial budgets and memory budgets. In a party centric game sacrifices need to be made as long as the older consoles are kept alive. And yes, it worked before in another game but there they likely got rid off something else to lower the memory footprint.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Blunt weapons weren't really ever available in DA. Gone are the days of dual wielding a hammer and a flail (of the ages, say).

DAO had maces. They had different stats. Anyone could use them.

And even if that weren't the case, it's still something I would request. The weapon variety in NWN is the least I would like to see.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Weapons are different because there is animation attached to them which is not the case with armor. So whatever armor you wear it is not going to affect any of the skills you have but at the same time the developers would have to create an extra spell effect just to make a weapon work for another class. This also boils down to financial budgets and memory budgets. In a party centric game sacrifices need to be made as long as the older consoles are kept alive. And yes, it worked before in another game but there they likely got rid off something else to lower the memory footprint.

DAO maces used the same animations as swords and daggers. So that's clearly not a problem.

[Boss Fog]

DAO maces used the same animations as swords and daggers. So that's clearly not a problem.

I think it is.  I don't want to see my PC stabbing with a mace.

[Sylvius the Mad]

I think it is. I don't want to see my PC stabbing with a mace.

Then don't use a mace.

[Boss Fog]

Then don't use a mace.

I typically don't.  But go tell that to all the people that DO want to use a mace but would like to see unique animations for it.

[Bayonet Hipshot]

I dont get it. They advertised that any class could wear any armor. You could be a warrior in a dress if you wanted and a mage in full plate armor. So why would weapons be any different? That some skills requires certain weapons for balance reasons - that I understand. But for a mage to be denied the choice to use a shield and a dagger for close quarter combat etc?

Any armor for any class = ok
Any weapon can be wielded by any class = not ok

Just trying to see the logic.

 

Logic has never been a key feature in recent Bioware game development. So don't think about logic, it will bring you unnecessary pain. 

 

It is funny though, how you could wear any armor in all 3 DA games, you just had to satisfy the attribute requirement of the armor but for some reason, weapons are class restricted.

 

Why not just give weapons the same treatment ? Give them attribute requirements that you have to fulfill to be able to wield them and leave it at that. It makes a lot more sense to me. 

 

As for making each class unique, the solution is quite easy really. Warrior talent trees should focus either on pure damage or pure tanking. Rogue talent trees should focus primarily on critical hits / backstabs and a little damage. Mage use spells so the only thing that should matter here is sheathed or unsheated. 

[Greenface21]

If blunt weapons were ever to be introduced they really would need their own unique attack animation.  Gamers today will nitpick that sort of thing if Bioware tried to do BG or even DAO attack animations now. 

 

It still bothers me a lot when i see Oghren use the eye of the axe to impale an ogre in DAO. 

 

Of course variety is good but if something is going to be done I'd prefer it be done well and not just for the sake of variety itself.

[Deflagratio]

I dont get it. They advertised that any class could wear any armor. You could be a warrior in a dress if you wanted and a mage in full plate armor. So why would weapons be any different? That some skills requires certain weapons for balance reasons - that I understand. But for a mage to be denied the choice to use a shield and a dagger for close quarter combat etc?

Any armor for any class = ok
Any weapon can be wielded by any class = not ok

Just trying to see the logic.

 

 

Armor is class restricted too.. But you can craft around it.

 

As for the logic, agree with it or disagree with it, I think it's pretty clear they want to maintain unique class identities and specific roles to foster a more rigid class structure.

[Sylvius the Mad]

I typically don't. But go tell that to all the people that DO want to use a mace but would like to see unique animations for it.

Whether having detailed combat animations was a good idea in the first place is a conversation we should have.

Did the consumers know, when the visuals improved, that we'd pay such a high gameplay cost for them?

[Sylvius the Mad]

Armor is class restricted too.

I don't think we've been told that.

As for the logic, agree with it or disagree with it, I think it's pretty clear they want to maintain unique class identities and specific roles to foster a more rigid class structure.

That's a terrible idea. Rigid classes are bad.

[dekarserverbot]

I typically don't.  But go tell that to all the people that DO want to use a mace but would like to see unique animations for it.

 

I don't care about the animations (specially if they are going to look as ridicoulus as DA2 where... which luckilly they don't as we could see in the videos) I just want to wear one axe in each hand with a rogue and a 2 handed sword with a mage... is that too much to ask?

[aTigerslunch]

Interesting, a mage with a 2 hander, which means they had to be on the field of battle or studying martial skills in place of studying spells. Makes for a weaker mage and a weaker warrior. Its plausible, not saying mages couldn't become physical but their would be a hindrance of some kind.

 

That is a fair choice to have as long as it is sound in play. Meaning, 10 skill points, 20 skills. 10 skills of mage spells and 10 skills of 2 handed sword fighting style. Breakdown evenly, 5 points in one and 5 points in the other.  Allows for the mix but a mage not using skills in 2 handed weapons would outmatch that mage using 2 handed weapons. 

 

I say go for it, if it was possible, but definitely would be weaker than a full mage that spent all 10 points in magic instead.

 

Alas, weapons are class restricted.

[dekarserverbot]

there is something called ARCANE WARRIOR that regularly uses either spellbound + bucker or dagger OR 2 HANDED WEAPONS

[aTigerslunch]

Yep, their is but they are weaker in spell counts than a mage that doesn't do the martial skills. They both have their strengths and they both have their weaknesses.

 

I would consider a full mage a bit more powered over a mage that learned sword fighting as far as spells are concerned.  Though honestly, I would ditch a staff and robes if I was a mage in DA. I would get leather armor or hide armor and a sword. A farmer got killed by Templars while using a gardening tool. So, yeah..... I would prefer at least a longsword to hide being a mage easier.   I don't actually disagree with you here dekarserverbot.