156 réponses à ce sujet

[bluebullets]

I think it was just not wanting to impliment anything to make blood mages significant. "we don't want to have to put in stuff to make blood magic feel significant, so lets just add a necromancer tree (which is freaking blood magic anyway!)

 

In terms of immersion, I would love blood mage to make people react differently and affect the story in some way, but even without that, it made me feel like a powerful blood mage: someone that can control the power and use it to save [the world].

Now I'm just going to be some derranged idiot raising corpses like that dude in DA2 that killed (hawkes mom?)  and used her as his wife lol.

Mike said in an interview they wanted to make specializations significant and affect the story.. I was REALLY hoping that this desire would come to fruition. :|

[thats1evildude]

Not me. I said a while ago that they should cut it.

[bluebullets]

Not me. I said a while ago that they should cut it.

why? some necromancer specialization is just worse. at least as a blood mage I could hide it, and when I used it, just cut myself andkill everything in a 40 yd radius.. Now, I'm going to raise skeletons and everybody is going to be OK with THAT blood magic?

I do not feel like this solves the problem. (I think the problem being that blood mage is too significant to just ignore in the story so they took it out)

[thats1evildude]

For the reasons laid out here.

1) Allowing the PC to use blood magic created a discrepancy with the setting's established lore. If you have a party member who aligns with the Chantry or at least holds a belief in the Maker, they should at least be hesitant about working with you. They might even be obligated to kill you. And that would hold true for many other NPCs. And yet, in both DAO and DA2, nobody really cared about the PC using blood magic, outside of some cut content.

2) Learning blood magic should actually be very difficult. Presuming you don't have access to a teacher, the only way to learn blood magic is through contact with a demon, which is how it was handled in DAO. But that also led to a lot of people basically cheating to get the specialization, just as they did with the reaver specialization.

3) It's difficult to model what a blood mage can actually do within the setting. According to lore, blood mages can view the dreams of others and tear open the Veil. A blood mage PC in DAO or DA2 can't do any of that, mostly because it would be totally game-breaking. And it goes further than that: if we're allowing mage PCs to use blood magic, then why don't we also allow them to tow around several slaves and slit their throats whenever the PC needs a power boost?

[HaHa365]

I'm a bit disappointed, because it was a powerfule spec in DA:O. However, if spcializations have more meaning this time, in Inquisition, than I'm willing to sacrific it. (As long as Necro is really fun ;-) )

[ManOfSteel]

No. I understand why it's omitted.

Plus, I never play a mage. So eh.

[thats1evildude]

Now, I'm going to raise skeletons and everybody is going to be OK with THAT blood magic?

 

You're making a lot of assumptions about what the necromancer specialization entails. It doesn't necessarily involve blood magic or raising undead. What if their abilities are focused on entropy magic (curses and draining energy from your enemies)?

[bluebullets]

For the reasons laid out here.

 

1) Allowing the PC to use blood magic created a discrepancy with the setting's established lore. If you haD a party member who aligns with the Chantry or at least holds a belief in the Maker, they should at least be hesitant about working with you. They might even be obligated to kill you. And that would hold true for many other NPCs. And yet, in both DAO and DA2, nobody really cared about the PC using blood magic, outside of some CUT content.

raising dead is blood magic

2) Learning blood magic should actually be very difficult. Presuming you don't have access to a teacher, the only way to learn blood magic is through contact with a demon, which is how it was handled in DAO. But that also led to a lot of people basically cheating to get the specialization, just as they did with the reaver specialization.

that is a good way to learn it: a demon.

there are spec quests now, in DAI, i believe.

3) It's difficult to model what a blood mage can actually do within the setting. According to lore, blood mages can view the dreams of others and tear open the Veil. A blood mage PC in DAO or DA2 can't do any of that, mostly because it would be totally game-breaking. And it goes further than that: if we're allowing mage PCs to use blood magic, then why don't we also allow them to tow around several slaves and slit their throats whenever the PC needs a power boost?

why can't you raise an army of 100,000,0000,000,000 dead?
you can cut yourself to heal, you can cut yourself to stun and boil others blood.. sure you can't bring around slaves, but if hawke did that, he'd be lynched: logically stupid idea.

 

[andar91]

While I understand the desire for a Blood Mage option, I also understand the challenges in implementing it, especially when health no longer regenerates.

 

Also, Blood Magic and Necromancy are not the same thing.

 

It is possible to manipulate death and the dead (Death Syphon, Death Magic, Walking Bomb to an extent, Draining Aura, and Animate Dead) are all from either Entropy, Spirit, or a specialization.

 

It may be frowned upon, sure, or considered icky or unseemly. But it's NOT blood magic. Blood Magic is magic using life force (blood) as fuel and often includes mind control and blood-related powers.

[bluebullets]

While I understand the desire for a Blood Mage option, I also understand the challenges in implementing it, especially when health no longer regenerates.

 

Also, Blood Magic and Necromancy are not the same thing.

 

It is possible to manipulate death and the dead (Death Syphon, Death Magic, Walking Bomb to an extent, Draining Aura, and Animate Dead) are all from either Entropy, Spirit, or a specialization.

 

It may be frowned upon, sure, or considered icky or unseemly. But it's NOT blood magic. Blood Magic is magic using life force (blood) as fuel and often includes mind control and blood-related powers.

based on the previous games, it is blood magic. Ie. the blood magic that rose your mother.

The problems still exist with the replacement: We can't have blood magic because a templar/chantry companion would want to kill you, but they'll be fine with you raising the dead?

[BloodyTalon]

No I'm happy about it, waiting for new details on necromancer would rather have an off shoot of blood mage.

[andar91]

There's also this from the codex entry for the Spirit school:

 

The first of the two Schools of Energy, Spirit is opposed by the Primal School. It is the school of mystery, the ephemeral school. This is the study of the invisible energies which surround us at all times, yet are outside of nature. It is from the Fade itself that this magic draws its power. Students of this school cover everything from direct manipulation of mana and spell energies to the study and summoning of spirits themselves.

By its nature an esoteric school, as most others know virtually nothing about the Fade, studies of spirit magic are often misunderstood by the general populace, or even confused for blood magic-an unfortunate fate for a most useful branch of study.

 

 

I'm not saying Blood Magic couldn't raise a corpse - it can also hurl fireballs.

 

I get that it's dark flavor, but that doesn't mean it's the same thing.

[Kisari]

I was disappointed at first as I absolutely love blood magic and everything it entails.
But I got over it and I understand why they decided not to include it. Still looking forward to necromancy.

I do think it's a little funny though considering I think in DA2 some blood mages comment that necromancy is something even they wont touch. Or that necromancy is "going too far". I think that was the Grace stuff with the dude in the cave.

[The_Prophet_of_Donk]

based on the previous games, it is blood magic. Ie. the blood magic that rose your mother.

The problems still exist with the replacement: We can't have blood magic because a templar/chantry companion would want to kill you, but they'll be fine with you raising the dead?

What Quentis does is blood magic.... He took random pieces of women/girls and stitched them together and made a Frankenstein type monstrosity! What you can do in DA:O "Animate Dead" is entirely different and pointing out what was stated by a previous poster, it is frowned upon but not fueled by blood which is what Quentis' thing was.

[The_Prophet_of_Donk]

To point out though, most of my playthroughs were as a Blood Mage and I absolutely love the spec! However (as I've stated in many threads) I trust the writers and Dev team enough to try to understand why it was removed and the reasoning is sound!

I didn't like being a Blood Mage and watching my mother die from the thing i am with no repercussions.

[Jawzzus]

No I'm not disappointed

[Dabrikishaw]

I was disappointed at first as I absolutely love blood magic and everything it entails.
But I got over it and I understand why they decided not to include it. Still looking forward to necromancy.

I do think it's a little funny though considering I think in DA2 some blood mages comment that necromancy is something even they wont touch. Or that necromancy is "going too far". I think that was the Grace stuff with the dude in the cave.

[bluebullets]

To point out though, most of my playthroughs were as a Blood Mage and I absolutely love the spec! However (as I've stated in many threads) I trust the writers and Dev team enough to try to understand why it was removed and the reasoning is sound!

I didn't like being a Blood Mage and watching my mother die from the thing i am with no repercussions.

meh. you were also a human- he was human too.. But that doesn't matter. I wouldn't feel bad about it unless I was using it badly. If anything, I'd be glad I had the power to use it against him

[90s Luke]

One of the developers mentioned that they would have to make Blood Mage its own class from now on in order to justify including the kind of reactivity that players expect and that is consistent with Dragon Age lore.

 

Since not everyone plays mage and not every mage player would choose the blood mage specialization, the content for a blood mage would be for a small fraction of the audience.

 

This is why they have reduced the number of specializations. Fewer specialization choices for the player actually allows the developers to create more content for specific specializations.

[EnduinRaylene]

Nope, never cared for it that much from a gameplay perspective and it was always so much at odds with the story, especially in DA2. So I'm OK with it not being an option in DAI, it would require a lot of work to make it fit in right and I don't think it's justified.

[bluebullets]

I feel like I'm ALWAYS the minority on these forums.. I think that it's counter intuition to remove blood magic for story reasons because its "wrong", but add in animating corpses.. Bloog magic was my favourite thing in the game.. It was different and madde me feel like a badass

[thats1evildude]

Necromancy is not necessarily connected to blood magic. You can animate corpses in DAO without being a blood mage. You're just limited to the one undead servant.

 

 

why can't you raise an army of 100,000,0000,000,000 dead?

 

Because there aren't that many people in Thedas? And no one has that much power? Even the most accomplished necromancer in either game (Quentin) could only raise a handful of walking corpses.

[Roninbarista]

I'm not disappointed at the exclusion. In my mind, I knew some changes were going to be made in blood magic before it was announced not to be a specialization. The extent to the changes was unknown, but I felt there may be changes. 

 

I believe I will play DAI and love it without blood magic. 

[cronshaw]

based on the previous games, it is blood magic. Ie. the blood magic that rose your mother.

The problems still exist with the replacement: We can't have blood magic because a templar/chantry companion would want to kill you, but they'll be fine with you raising the dead?

I think you are confused as to what blood magic really is.

It is using blood to power magic or manipulating another's blood.

So while Quentin may have been a blood mage, and used blood to perform necromancy or bind spirits

or Merrill may have used blood magic to communicate with spirits

the communicating and binding of spirits in of itself is not blood magic

A warden mage in DA:O can raise a skeleton using spirit magic, not blood magic

 

Edit:

 

I feel like I'm ALWAYS the minority on these forums.. I think that it's counter intuition to remove blood magic for story reasons because its "wrong", but add in animating corpses.. Bloog magic was my favourite thing in the game.. It was different and madde me feel like a badass

 

 

I'm sorry something you enjoyed isn't going to be in the game, that sucks, but there is a compelling reason for it not to be included.

In addition several people (including myself) have pointed out the distinction between blood magic and necromancy

[bluebullets]

"Fewer specialization choices for the player actually allows the developers to create more content for specific specializations."

 

thus, they could have applied this logic to  blood magic. necromancy is just as "wrong" and would spike just as many reactions as blood magic