653 réponses à ce sujet

[Hadeedak]

I support humans and think they're pretty niftykeen to play as and all that.

 

I just want it noted that I made a loud, frightening guffaw upon noting that the Human Support Thread was started by someone named "Generic Enemy."

[KC_Prototype]

Marcus Trevelyan reporting in!

[I SOLD MY SOUL TO BIOWARE]

I'm not really sure I'm going to notice that I have one extra ability when my character's a bit higher in level. Same with having an additional 50 health points for Qunari. Might be cool at first, but later on, meh. 

 

Usually I just get all the abilities I want mid-way and am only spending perk points for the hell of it by the end anyway. Mostly so the plus sign next to my portrait will stop bugging me.

 

To me, dwarves seem like the only one who have a gameplay perk worth writing home about. Not that I really care about that, I'll just play whatever I feel like regardless of the bonuses. 

[The Baconer]

To me, dwarves seem like the only one who have a gameplay perk worth writing home about. Not that I really care about that, I'll just play whatever I feel like regardless of the bonuses. 

 

Perhaps. If magic users are more prevalent than in DA2 (and work off of less-awful mechanics), and we won't have Mana Clash like in DA:O, then it could be very significant.

 

I also think people are really underestimating how good the Elf passive is. To me, enemy archers have been the most annoying motherf***ers in both DA games by far.

[The Ascendant]

Love how the symbol for humanity in Inquisition is the heraldry for the Tevinter Imperium, we may not be from it, but at least we get it's awesome symbol.
The extra ability point isn't too shabby either.

[BloodKaiden]

I also think people are really underestimating how good the Elf passive is. To me, enemy archers have been the most annoying motherf***ers in both DA games by far.

This so much!! F**kin crossbows -.-

[Lulupab]

I also think people are really underestimating how good the Elf passive is. To me, enemy archers have been the most annoying motherf***ers in both DA games by far.

OMG so much this!!! In both games I made this tactic:

Enemy using ranged attack: Use [insert strongest ability here]

Rogues and mages were most vulnerable to archers and they were 10x more common than enemy mages. This will make Dalish mage and rogue better on highest difficulty.

[TheGreyson]

Love how the symbol for humanity in Inquisition is the heraldry for the Tevinter Imperium, we may not be from it, but at least we get it's awesome symbol.
The extra ability point isn't too shabby either.

Yes, let's speak of this Tevinter banner shall we? What do you all think the significance of it is? Cool design to use for humans? Sign off some remnant of connection between the Inquisitors family and the Imperium? Something else entirely? I've been wondering about it ever since I first saw it.

[Br3admax]

Tevinter is awesome. 

Humans are awesome. 

 

I'm not sure why you don't get the connection...

[Br3admax]

Perhaps. If magic users are more prevalent than in DA2 (and work off of less-awful mechanics), and we won't have Mana Clash like in DA:O, then it could be very significant.

 

If you played Mage, like you're supposed to, this would also be irrelevant, because I high Magic stat cancels this out. 

[animedreamer]

Humans cause to many problems, but i still have at least 2 planned out.

[TheGreyson]

Tevinter is awesome.
Humans are awesome.

I'm not sure why you don't get the connection...

Oh, I get the awesome connection. There's a lot of human groups in Thedas though. And we've already got a rebel Tevinter mage in Dorian. I'm wondering if the connection runs deeper than cool looking heraldry.

[raging_monkey]

Oh, I get the awesome connection. There's a lot of human groups in Thedas though. And we've already got a rebel Tevinter mage in Dorian. I'm wondering if the connection runs deeper than cool looking heraldry.

maybe he human inq has some tevinter anstestry

[TheGreyson]

I like the idea of Tevinter ancestry. Might create some interesting interplay between Inq and Dorian.

[raging_monkey]

It would appease the player who wouldve liked to have beeen tevinter

[RobRam10]

It would appease the player who wouldve liked to have beeen tevinter

Indeed.

[Icy Magebane]

I'm not really sure I'm going to notice that I have one extra ability when my character's a bit higher in level. Same with having an additional 50 health points for Qunari. Might be cool at first, but later on, meh. 

 

Usually I just get all the abilities I want mid-way and am only spending perk points for the hell of it by the end anyway. Mostly so the plus sign next to my portrait will stop bugging me.

 

To me, dwarves seem like the only one who have a gameplay perk worth writing home about. Not that I really care about that, I'll just play whatever I feel like regardless of the bonuses. 

I was a lot more excited about humans getting an extra ability before the 8 per combat limit was revealed... now it seems like it could easily go to waste on something I will never use, but on the other hand, it may allow us to pick up an extra passive.  It could go either way, but it's not as godly as I once thought it would be.

 

As for the others, I think the Qunari bonus should probably be changed to a small % damage resistance or a small % health bonus... a flat "50 health" sounds good at level 1, but will get less important as the game continues.  Elves have a decent passive, but not nearly as good as dwarves, since I'm willing to bet that the final boss will be using they type of magic that the elven passive can't dodge...  but as you say, none of this is going to change my mind about what characters I'll be playing as.  They are fun additions that make the races feel unique, but that's about it.

[Lulupab]

I was a lot more excited about humans getting an extra ability before the 8 per combat limit was revealed... now it seems like it could easily go to waste on something I will never use, but on the other hand, it may allow us to pick up an extra passive. It could go either way, but it's not as godly as I once thought it would be.

As for the others, I think the Qunari bonus should probably be changed to a small % damage resistance or a small % health bonus... a flat "50 health" sounds good at level 1, but will get less important as the game continues. Elves have a decent passive, but not nearly as good as dwarves, since I'm willing to bet that the final boss will be using they type of magic that the elven passive can't dodge... but as you say, none of this is going to change my mind about what characters I'll be playing as. They are fun additions that make the races feel unique, but that's about it.

The number of each type of enemies we will face is more important in my opinion. Mages were rare enemies in previous games, Templar spec bonuses were already quite bad and only worked against mages. Weak bonuses versus rare enemies? no thank you. Templar spec was utterly outclassed by other warrior specs and everyone who chose it did so because of lore and it was really useless, in both games. So indeed the number of each type of enemies we face and for how long we face them is important. The Elven passive would be the most useful to have in DA2, bloody archers everywhere. So if its like DA2, then the elven passive will be far better than the dwarven one and sadly the Templar spec will be useless again.

[The Ascendant]

It would appease the player who wouldve liked to have beeen tevinter

You speak for all human mages good sir. I tip my hat to you.

[raging_monkey]

You speak for all human mages good sir. I tip my hat to you.

nope just one hell of a monkey that thinks of others

[Icy Magebane]

The number of each type of enemies we will face is more important in my opinion. Mages were rare enemies in previous games, Templar spec bonuses were already quite bad and only worked against mages. Weak bonuses versus rare enemies? no thank you. Templar spec was utterly outclassed by other warrior specs and everyone who chose it did so because of lore and it was really useless, in both games. So indeed the number of each type of enemies we face and for how long we face them is important. The Elven passive would be the most useful to have in DA2, bloody archers everywhere. So if its like DA2, then the elven passive will be far better than the dwarven one and sadly the Templar spec will be useless again.

*sigh* Not everything needs to turn into mages vs. Templars... I'm not even going to comment on the majority of this post, just know that I disagree.

 

Anyway, the dwarven passive covers things like dragon breath and magical AoEs, whereas the elven passive only handles magical projectiles like staff auto-attacks... they can't dodge a paralyze spell, for example, but a dwarf may resist it.  My prediction for DA:I is that the dwarven passive will be the most useful because it blocks damage from the widest range of sources... if it's like the DA:O version, it might even block all damage from a magical source and not just a percentage.  Archers were a bit of a pain in DA2, but to my knowledge demons don't use crossbows.  Until I know how common "magical projectiles" are, I'll assume that the dwarven passive will be more useful overall.

 

The human passive, on the other hand, is pretty much whatever we want to make of it... I do like that it's flexible enough to apply to any number of talents, I'm just wondering how effective that will be now that we know we can't access all of our talents whenever we want them.  I once thought it was the best racial bonus, but now I'm thinking it may be the second or even third best.  It's better than +50 health though... I'm almost willing to bet on that.

[Lulupab]

*sigh* Not everything needs to turn into mages vs. Templars... I'm not even going to comment on the majority of this post, just know that I disagree.

Anyway, the dwarven passive covers things like dragon breath and magical AoEs, whereas the elven passive only handles magical projectiles like staff auto-attacks... they can't dodge a paralyze spell, for example, but a dwarf may resist it. My prediction for DA:I is that the dwarven passive will be the most useful because it blocks damage from the widest range of sources... if it's like the DA:O version, it might even block all damage from a magical source and not just a percentage. Archers were a bit of a pain in DA2, but to my knowledge demons don't use crossbows.

The human passive, on the other hand, is pretty much whatever we want to make of it... I do like that it's flexible enough to apply to any number of talents, I'm just wondering how effective that will be now that we know we can't access all of our talents whenever we want them. I once thought it was the best racial bonus, but now I'm thinking it may be the second or even third best. It's better than +50 health though... I'm almost willing to bet on that.

I was purely talking about gameplay factors here, not mage vs templars, I was not questioning the might of templars in story but talking about Hawke as a templar, the spec was just so bad in comparison to Berserker or Reaver. The important factor in DA2 was we rarely fought normal mages. It was mostly blood mages and remember those red pools of blood those mages created? Yeah that ignored all resistances and dealt % based damage. Anyone who stayed inside for 5 seconds would die, regardless of anything or specs (unless shielded by arcane barrier which makes you immune to damage). Demons did spirit damage, spirit damage ignores most of targets resistances unless its specifically spirit resistance (which the Templar spec DO NOT provide, it simply gives magic resistance). So out of mages and demons we fought, templar spec which was supposed to be good versus them sucked because blood magic and spirit magic were main damage source of those enemies and blood magic damage cannot be resisted and spirit damage is very hard to resist. It was only good versus dragon breath perhaps or Cory fight where all elements are used except spirit and blood.

So you if blood magic and spirit damage function like they do in DA2 and most mages we fight are blood mages again then the Dwarven passive won't do much against blood mages and demons and elven passive might be better at the end. My main point was its still too soon to decide Dwarven passive is best, we have to wait and see.

[Icy Magebane]

@ Lulupab - Again, whether or not the DA2 Templar spec was useful doesn't really matter much in a discussion about racial bonuses in DA:I.  We don't know how frequently blood mages will appear in DA:I, and demons used all forms of magic in DA:O.  They didn't focus primarily on spirit damage, and even in DA2 this wasn't a universal rule.  Add to that the various enemies that will undoubtedly use non-spirit damage AoE magic attacks, such as dragons and rage demons, and you can see that the dwarven passive will come in handy when facing some of the more powerful foes.  In those case, the elven passive won't do anything at all.  Are we even certain at this point that spirit damage isn't considered magic damage in DA:I?  It wasn't a separate damage type in DA:O...

 

There is also that fact that while the elven passive can extend to certain magic projectiles, the dwarven passive protects not only against those attacks but all magic-based attacks... so that isn't really an edge for the elven passive, it's an unexpected bonus at best.

[Lulupab]

@ Lulupab - Again, whether or not the DA2 Templar spec was useful doesn't really matter much in a discussion about racial bonuses in DA:I.  We don't know how frequently blood mages will appear in DA:I, and demons used all forms of magic in DA:O.  They didn't focus primarily on spirit damage, and even in DA2 this wasn't a universal rule.  Add to that the various enemies that will undoubtedly use non-spirit damage AoE magic attacks, such as dragons and rage demons, and you can see that the dwarven passive will come in handy when facing some of the more powerful foes.  In those case, the elven passive won't do anything at all.  Are we even certain at this point that spirit damage isn't considered magic damage in DA:I?  It wasn't a separate damage type in DA:O...
 
There is also that fact that while the elven passive can extend to certain magic projectiles, the dwarven passive protects not only against those attacks but all magic-based attacks... so that isn't really an edge for the elven passive, it's an unexpected bonus at best.

But the Dwarven passive will not protect versus physical projectiles. Again it depends on number of archers. They were plenty archers both in DAO and DA2. in DA2 mages had plenty of magic resistance, much more than templars because each point of magic attribute gave 1% magic resistance. By the end of game mages had around 80% magic resistance and were vulnerable to archers much more. Provided the mechanic is the same, elven mages will fare better than other races.

Spirit damage was indeed magic damage in DA2 but before applying its damage first it ignored all resistances including damage resistance and magic resistance however it didn't ignore spirit resistance so there was a way to take less damage from it but it was much harder and Templar spec didn't provide it. It mostly came from runes added to armor.