Yup. Harder saving throws on 2ed + the hitpoints stop at around level 10.
Meant more as a better example. Rules changes are rules changes and shouldn't be conflated with lore changes - which is why I've said what I said about Inquisitor v. Warden.
Course my Warden would kick my planned Quizzy's ass but that's because my Warden's a sociopath.
This guy knows exactly what I've been trying to say. Please, please read his post and take it to heart. It's the truth.
I know what you have been saying. and I have adressed it....12 times now.
So, I understand right: No point-spending per level up? True? Didn't want to read an amzing 50 pages thread...
Okay, let's look at this: You are a mage...what will you spend your points on anyway? Magic, Willpower, an occasional point in constitution? Rogue ... dexterity and cunning, and occasional constitution-point?
Of course you might lose some illusion of control over your char...but in the end, it was an illusion. You need magic and willpower mostly for a mage, and you will assign your point that way...so why even bother in the first place...I didn't much miss spending attribute-points in Skyrim, guess I wouldn't in DAI either...
This is true however the choice it takes away is loading up on one of your prime skills. When I played rogues or had rogues in my party they were loaded one way or the other not an even distribution of cunning and dex. Hey I want my open locks skill maxed very early I want to load up on cunning now and then catch up with dex later.
Same for mages, I would load up one one of their prime stats and let the other only catch up enough to be able to use items. I don;t want a mage after 10 levels or whatever to have 40 will power and 40 magic. I want them to have 60 magic and 20 will power.
Meant more as a better example. Rules changes are rules changes and shouldn't be conflated with lore changes - which is why I've said what I said about Inquisitor v. Warden.
Course my Warden would kick my planned Quizzy's ass but that's because my Warden's a sociopath.
I see your point, certainly. Just saying that d&d used the lore to justify\explain the rule changes when they occurred.
Which (again) has nothing to do with the character itself. Equipments are items. Not the character. Even though the character can put these on, they are separatet from his mind and body. If you played a living suit of armour it would make sense.
But your equipment ISN'T separate from your character. In a sense, what equipment your character uses says something about their character and experience, and they've made it PART of your character now.
Which (again) has nothing to do with the character itself. Equipments are items. Not the character. Even though the character can put these on, they are separatet from his mind and body. If you played a living suit of armour it would make sense.
This honestly doesn't matter because the end result is the same. Please realize that.
You're assuming both that the scale is linear and that it starts at zero.That's not really much more of an abstraction than your character literally being five or six times stronger/more cunning/smarter than he was at level 1 in a couple of month.
But your equipment ISN'T separate from your character. In a sense, what equipment your character uses says something about their character and experience, and they've made it PART of your character now.
Yes and that is lame, since it has zero to do with the character, and they removed the player's choice in placing the "normal" stats on his character. Its more or less a forcd auto-level up now. And that is a huge oversimplification.
So if I take it off, I've lost experience?But your equipment ISN'T separate from your character. In a sense, what equipment your character uses says something about their character and experience, and they've made it PART of your character now.
Yes and that is lame, since it has zero to do with the character, and they removed the player's choice in placing the "normal" stats on his character. Its more or less a forcd auto-level up now. And that is a huge oversimplification.
I think we have different ideas of what constitute character. You seem to think it's something in the physical form of one guy, and I think it's absolutely everything around the character - their past, their armour, their weapons, their pets, the way they brush their hair, etc.
Sure. And that what the classes/races represent, I assume.
You mean like in army every warrior has the same height, build, capabilities ?
IRL, I am seeing strong and weak, tall and short, fat and slim ... police officers every day.
By your logic I should be seeing only powerhouses all around.
Oh, also by your logic the levels we get ability points at should be randomised as people learn things at different rates, so each playthrough the number of levels it takes to get an ability point should vary.
In a single player game ? Hmmm ....
You know what ?
That.Is.A.Great.Idea.
I am being seroius now. I would go even further and add even some more randomness
Are you very dexterous ?
Yes - You will get 1..3 points for DEX based abilities.
No - Well, here you go. 1 point for you.
So if I take it off, I've lost experience?
Or you've got less effective gear. Try manoeuvring quickly in multiple jumpers - then do it in a t-shirt.
This honestly doesn't matter because the end result is the same. Please realize that.
No its not. Because using the crafting system isn't necessary its optional. So in order to get the stats you should be able to distribute when you level up, you are forced to do crafting instead. Really adds to the relay value. Having to craft and craft in every playthrough.
I realize what the end result is. I allways did. Told you that several times. You really should read my posts. I don't agree with how the end result is reached. Thats all.
So if I take it off, I've lost experience?
Apparantly, yes. Removing your boots removes some experience.
Apparantly, yes. Removing your boots removes some experience.
You're like mister literal, if you've ever watched Ego Raptor.
No its not. Because using the crafting system isn't necessary its optional. So in order to get the stats you should be able to distribute when you level up, you are forced to do crafting instead. Really adds to the relay value. Having to craft and craft in every playthrough.
I realize what the end result is. I allways did. Told you that several times. You really should read my posts. I don't agree with how the end result is reached. Thats all.
Are you afraid of crafting gear?
I honestly don't understand you...
1) Why wouldn't they? Correct me if I'm wrong, but let's take the example of Dexterity and Cunning.
Dexterity, if I recall correctly, increases one's critical chance. Cunning increases one's critical damage. Let's say one has an ability that causes one to do two fast strikes with double chance of a critical hit. Now, with gear promoting high dexterity this means that a critical hit is almost assured with the ability. However, with high cunning it will do more damage. Two situational deployments of the same ability in different situations with different stats and gear. Derp.
First, your initial example was with regards to switching out daggers with a bow. This would require a respec of abilities, not just gear... Which, as i said, would be just like Origins/2. The rest really doesn't have much bearing(though it should be pointed out that in Origins, Dex affected defense, while in 2 it was cunning. That alone would probably affect a build using armor alone).
2) Yes, there is. Generally no more than a +10 increase. Here we have +36 increases or more. Larger swings means more variation - if you have more points on a line, you have more points one can stand on. DAI beats DAO/2 again.
I agree that one can see larger increases in gear bonuses in Inquisition, but I've only seen the +(insert big number) increases on weapons/armor in the crafting menu... We haven't seen very many stats on weapons/armor being picked up off the ground...
3) I have no idea what you're trying to say here. Why does the crafting upset you? Why is this bad for a single player game? I'd feel more confident if you could explain yourself.
I'm bothered by the fact that the focus on gear being the sole benefactor of attribute points forces the crafting system on the player. Something that has been said to be 100% optional. It's not optional if I have to craft an armor/weapon in order to beat an area. Sure, there may be enough drops in the game to get through and beat the game, but at the moment I'm skeptical because we haven't seen anyone pick up any loot during a gameplay trailer(barring the scripted ones like the Avaar boss, and the mage gear in the E3 demonstration).
As for the single-player comment. I was discussing the need for the attribute point display to begin with. There are very few games(let alone RPGs) that display the attributes of the characters and don't allow you to choose the allocation of those points. Usually the game just forgoes showing the player the attributes to begin with. And so I understand why people are upset about the loss of choice in how to allocate the attributes, even if I don't really care about that aspect... But from the other side, I have yet to see it adequately explained why the change is a good thing for single-player purposes. I would understand if it were a Mutli-player game, because you'd want things balanced, but it doesn't make sense to me why they'd change it for single player games, and still show the numbers. But if a player can't choose to not give Cassandra 30 strength at level 10, why even let them see that she has 30 strength?
You're like mister literal, if you've ever watched Ego Raptor.
That was sarcasm. Not to be taken literal.
Are you afraid of crafting gear?
I honestly don't understand you...
No I am saying it would be a drag to have to do it over and over again in every playthrough. I thought I was clear on that.
But that doesn't mean we can't voice our opinions.It all comes to that cursed "streamlining" concept. It has to stop somewhere unless we want Bioware to make point and click adventure games. That's how it will end up soon.
Of course anyone can voice an opinion, that's the purpose of forums 
But streamlining? Well, I now what you and the others are concerned about...but as I see it: You only miss this attribute-stuff because it was part of the first two games....but there are wonderful games in the RPG-sector (like, well, Baldurs gate? Or Witcher 1- 3? Mass Effect?) that have no such things as attribute-spending anyway. Putting points into strength is not, for me, an essential part of RPGs...
So I do not see this as the end of the RPG-world, and though I understand other's opinion and concerns on that matter, I do not share it...
First, your initial example was with regards to switching out daggers with a bow. This would require a respec of abilities, not just gear... Which, as i said, would be just like Origins/2. The rest really doesn't have much bearing(though it should be pointed out that in Origins, Dex affected defense, while in 2 it was cunning. That alone would probably affect a build using armor alone).
I agree that one can see larger increases in gear bonuses in Inquisition, but I've only seen the +(insert big number) increases on weapons/armor in the crafting menu... We haven't seen very many stats on weapons/armor being picked up off the ground...
I'm bothered by the fact that the focus on gear being the sole benefactor of attribute points forces the crafting system on the player. Something that has been said to be 100% optional. It's not optional if I have to craft an armor/weapon in order to beat an area. Sure, there may be enough drops in the game to get through and beat the game, but at the moment I'm skeptical because we haven't seen anyone pick up any loot during a gameplay trailer(barring the scripted ones like the Avaar boss, and the mage gear in the E3 demonstration).
As for the single-player comment. I was discussing the need for the attribute point display to begin with. There are very few games(let alone RPGs) that display the attributes of the characters and don't allow you to choose the allocation of those points. Usually the game just forgoes showing the player the attributes to begin with. And so I understand why people are upset about the loss of choice in how to allocate the attributes, even if I don't really care about that aspect... But from the other side, I have yet to see it adequately explained why the change is a good thing for single-player purposes. I would understand if it were a Mutli-player game, because you'd want things balanced, but it doesn't make sense to me why they'd change it for single player games, and still show the numbers. But if a player can't choose to not give Cassandra 30 strength at level 10, why even let them see that she has 30 strength?
First, your initial example was with regards to switching out daggers with a bow. This would require a respec of abilities, not just gear... Which, as i said, would be just like Origins/2. The rest really doesn't have much bearing(though it should be pointed out that in Origins, Dex affected defense, while in 2 it was cunning. That alone would probably affect a build using armor alone).
I agree that one can see larger increases in gear bonuses in Inquisition, but I've only seen the +(insert big number) increases on weapons/armor in the crafting menu... We haven't seen very many stats on weapons/armor being picked up off the ground...
I'm bothered by the fact that the focus on gear being the sole benefactor of attribute points forces the crafting system on the player. Something that has been said to be 100% optional. It's not optional if I have to craft an armor/weapon in order to beat an area. Sure, there may be enough drops in the game to get through and beat the game, but at the moment I'm skeptical because we haven't seen anyone pick up any loot during a gameplay trailer(barring the scripted ones like the Avaar boss, and the mage gear in the E3 demonstration).
As for the single-player comment. I was discussing the need for the attribute point display to begin with. There are very few games(let alone RPGs) that display the attributes of the characters and don't allow you to choose the allocation of those points. Usually the game just forgoes showing the player the attributes to begin with. And so I understand why people are upset about the loss of choice in how to allocate the attributes, even if I don't really care about that aspect... But from the other side, I have yet to see it adequately explained why the change is a good thing for single-player purposes. I would understand if it were a Mutli-player game, because you'd want things balanced, but it doesn't make sense to me why they'd change it for single player games, and still show the numbers. But if a player can't choose to not give Cassandra 30 strength at level 10, why even let them see that she has 30 strength?
Because if the attributes are still used in things like damage calculations and other combat information, they might be useful to see.
That was sarcasm. Not to be taken literal.
You seem pretty literal in your desire irregardless.
You seem pretty literal in your desire irregardless.
Yup. Pretty straightforward.
So, I understand right: No point-spending per level up? True? Didn't want to read an amzing 50 pages thread...
Okay, let's look at this: You are a mage...what will you spend your points on anyway? Magic, Willpower, an occasional point in constitution? Rogue ... dexterity and cunning, and occasional constitution-point?
Of course you might lose some illusion of control over your char...but in the end, it was an illusion. You need magic and willpower mostly for a mage, and you will assign your point that way...so why even bother in the first place...I didn't much miss spending attribute-points in Skyrim, guess I wouldn't in DAI either...
Retour en haut