You were objecting to having to make a choice in how your character fights. And most people here seem to want choice in their RPGs, so I assumed you did too, thus your objecting to a choice seemed amusing to me.
Careful, Joe-Poe! Nyarlathotep over here is trying to confuse you.
I was looking through the skills shown in this video:
An interesting thing to note at least: It seems that many passives in skill trees are balanced around the fact that you can't customize attributes outside of item customization.
Quite a few passives are based around landing critical hits and then granting a very powerful bonus upon success; for example one of the inferno/fire passives gives you a cooldown-free spell after you land a critical hit meaning you can cast two of the same spells at once!
One other thing about weapon swapping:
You're not getting more pre-planning by disallowing it in battle. If you can't swap between weapons during battle, you're not going to do it because there's no way it makes sense to lock yourself off from your talents. Short of respeccing you're going to be stuck with the one weapon the whole game.
You're projecting again, perhaps because of some ineptitude? A DAO Archer/DW Rogue might not be DA2's Assassin crit build that can one-shot the damned Ariskok, but it's still effective to the point that I had no problems clearing DAO, Awakening, and the DLC with it on Hard.
I think it's this mentality that the only way something can be effective is if it's optimized out the wazoo.
An archer/DW rogue isn't as bad as most builds because the skills run off the same stat. You are, in fact, optimizing and just making some cosmetic switches.
So I was wrong. The choice is between a cosmetic difference I don't need because of my companions, a jack of all trades build with stats too low to work, or a build that actually does what I want it too.
..or you are preparing for things in advance, just doing so every so often and not having to stop and check before every single battle to see if you need to go all the way home and get your Archer Spec Custom Gear™ instead of your Dual Wield Custom Gear™ for every fight. And then stop to redo all of your active abilities and tactics. Again. And again, and again.
Yeah, who needs that?
That's what the companions are for. If you seriously cannot build a team that can't deal with any situation you encounter, that's your problem, not BioWare's.
Careful, Joe-Poe! Nyarlathotep over here is trying to confuse you.
Hehe, first time I've seen someone remark on the avatar despite using it on a few forums. Demonbane is awesome 
But I wasn't actually trying to confuse him. I'm actually quite curious why, when so many people put a focus on choice in RPGs, that when faced with a situation in which you actually have to make a choice, they complain. If you can switch between bows and daggers at will, there is no choice. You take both weapons and use the best for the situation. It's a no-brainer. On the other hand, in DA2 and I, you actually have to make a decision on what weapons you use, and that decision will have a major impact on how the game plays. It is a significant, meaningful choice. Isn't this exactly what the "RPGs should be about choice" people should be wanting?
An archer/DW rogue isn't as bad as most builds because the skills run off the same stat. You are, in fact, optimizing and just making some cosmetic switches.
So I was wrong. The choice is between a cosmetic difference I don't need because of my companions, a jack of all trades build with stats too low to work, or a build that actually does what I want it too.
That's what the companions are for. If you seriously cannot build a team that can't deal with any situation you encounter, that's your problem, not BioWare's.
I could do that in DAO just fine, too. It wasn't something that required a change.
Hehe, first time I've seen someone remark on the avatar despite using it on a few forums
But I wasn't actually trying to confuse him. I'm actually quite curious why, when so many people put a focus on choice in RPGs, that when faced with a situation in which you actually have to make a choice, they complain. If you can switch between bows and daggers at will, there is no choice. You take both weapons and use the best for the situation. It's a no-brainer. On the other hand, in DA2 and I, you actually have to make a choice on what weapons you use, and that choice will have a major impact on how the game plays. Isn't this exactly what people should be wanting?
Haha, been a Demonbane fan since like 2006.
And I can kind of see it, but my issue with it is just that they've removed the functionality to alter during battles. If you need to engage something at range or at melee depending on the build, you have to use another character to do so, while your character either flees for their life or stands there twiddling their thumbs. I can sort of follow Bioware's logic, but it seems more than a little awkward.
It also makes the game easier due to not having to prepare for the unknown in advance.
Which, you know, kind of goes against the whole 'dumbing down' argument this 'no stat allocation' shpiel seems to be build around.
By that logic any option is bad because any option can theoretically make the game easier.
Allowing the player to react logically to changing circumstances and make use of a tactic that's hardly overpowered is not dumbing down.
A reduction in tactical choices does not equate to an increase of tactical play. One will tend to select the abilities and skills that will be more useful; not the misc spells and abilities which might be used, but are more specialized. And reloading to switch is not the best option for those that enjoy immersive play. A focus on mechanics over character is not advisable.
In a nutshell, my complaint is that while my Inquisitor may appear to be different than someone else, it basically is the same as the default choice. And beauty is only skin deep....
This part is something I don't quite get. A shield/sword warrior in origins is the same as any other shield/sword warrior as well. And unless you modded your game to let you respec, you were simply stuck being one for the entire game.
Hehe, first time I've seen someone remark on the avatar despite using it on a few forums
But I wasn't actually trying to confuse him. I'm actually quite curious why, when so many people put a focus on choice in RPGs, that when faced with a situation in which you actually have to make a choice, they complain. If you can switch between bows and daggers at will, there is no choice. You take both weapons and use the best for the situation. It's a no-brainer. On the other hand, in DA2 and I, you actually have to make a decision on what weapons you use, and that decision will have a major impact on how the game plays. It is a significant, meaningful choice. Isn't this exactly what people should be wanting?
You are confusing having choices and making a "A" choice.....I was commenting on the fact I had more choices in DAO and less in DA2 and it seems DAI as well. In DAO i could choose to spec one weapon style or two and change on the fly between them (which means more choices) In DA2 and DAI I have to choose ONE (which equal less choices).
Haha, been a Demonbane fan since like 2006.
Nice. I only found out about it a couple of years back, but when I discovered that there was a visual novel written by Nitro+ based on the work of Lovecraft, I knew I had to get hold of it. And it sure as hell didn't disappoint.
I could do that in DAO just fine, too. It wasn't something that required a change.
Clearly, BioWare disagrees.
And I can kind of see it, but my issue with it is just that they've removed the functionality to alter during battles. If you need to engage something at range or at melee depending on the build, you have to use another character to do so, while your character either flees for their life or stands there twiddling their thumbs. I can sort of follow Bioware's logic, but it seems more than a little awkward.
How so? That's the way I've played every team based CRPG I've ever played, so I can't really see any awkwardness.
You are confusing having choices and making a "A" choice.....I was commenting on the fact I had more choices in DAO and less in DA2 and it seems DAI as well. In DAO i could choose to spec one weapon style or two and change on the fly between them (which means more choices) In DA2 and DAI I have to choose ONE (which equal less choices).
But there was no choice in DA:O - you carried both weapons. There is no choice there. It's an utter no-brainer.
"Choice" is pointless if there either an obvious answer or no difference functional between the options.
By limiting your options, it enables those remaining to be made more meaningful and distinct, thereby creating real choice where before there was only a meaningless illusion.
I'm still not convinced a final build will have more than eight active skills, unless you deliberately seek a jack of all trades build.
In a pen-and-paper RPG, which is what I assume the majority of your experience comes from, that's possible. In a CRPG, you are going to be a clone of somebody elses build.
It's a limitation inherent in the medium. There are only so many classes and talents, and so many variations on those, that a game designer can bring into the game. Four guys on a table can come up with far greater variation then a programmer can, because a pen and paper RPGer is not limited by the same external factors as a video game designer.
This part is something I don't quite get. A shield/sword warrior in origins is the same as any other shield/sword warrior as well. And unless you modded your game to let you respec, you were simply stuck being one for the entire game.
And I generally prefer to be a more versatile character. And then must choose to forget what they actually have learned, and then only use part of that if one selects the incorrect weapon choice. That is not versatility; seems more like double jeopardy.
It is. Hence why a doubt you will actually be able to do so. The game, by and large, will not be balanced to allow you more than eight skills, unless spread yourself so thin that you past the point of supposed versatility and into out and out uselessness.
I could be wrong, but I doubt it.
Was not a clone in NWN1; still do not have any Dwarven Archer avatars in the Vault to my knowledge, and I have a Clan of them. Not a clone in DAO, as the old forums can attest concerning the subject of Class designs; primarily STR Rogues and higher WILL. And that is from this current century.
The limitation is from the mechanics of the rule-set, and I am one that prefer more options as a rule; not less.
That these builds don't show up on the forums is not an indication of whether or not they existed. I, for example, have not connected several of my DA:O playthroughs to Origins.
Somebody, somewhere, did the same build as you.
My S&S increased DEX to be able to use a longbow well at range, and higher WILL as fuel for Talents. I respecced going into Awakenings as I prefer 2H selections. So I doubt it was like many others.
It's not that unique; both my brother and I played with that build.
I don't know what my brother ended up doing, but I scrubbed it as soon as I realized Lelianna could everything I could, but better.
I was looking through the skills shown in this video:
An interesting thing to note at least: It seems that many passives in skill trees are balanced around the fact that you can't customize attributes outside of item customization.
Quite a few passives are based around landing critical hits and then granting a very powerful bonus upon success; for example one of the inferno/fire passives gives you a cooldown-free spell after you land a critical hit meaning you can cast two of the same spells at once!
I am actually really happy with the skill trees layout. But what I HATE is that the is no difference in how you up your stats on levelup. This is one of the worst ways to make a stat based game with control over how stats are allocated.
When I play origins/awakening and DA2 I always enjoy min maxing my chars to the point that not one point is allocated somewhere where I don’t want it.
I don’t think I will be able to do that in DA:I, even if I can craft my armor will I be able to min max the points on it? Maybe but the chances that it is that precise is slim. And ill always get points from level up and passive skills that I have no real control over more then choosing what passive skills I will have to a certain degree.
Needles to say, I'm going to miss min maxing my chars the exact way I want to. And I do understand this is not an issue for most ppl, but it was something that I liked to do, something I enjoy in rpgs.
Well you won't be able to because there is still the fact that the base attributes auto level up, so if you want something difference from the norm you will always have the base attribute that you don't want higher than you would want, maybe significantly higher. You can probably only customise to a certain extent with armor and will probably severely gimp yourself if you want to go outside the norms eg. a dex warrior.
By that logic any option is bad because any option can theoretically make the game easier.
Allowing the player to react logically to changing circumstances and make use of a tactic that's hardly overpowered is not dumbing down.
Funny thing, we've been saying quite similar things throughout this thread. But got slammed with 'but it's just dumbing things down!' all the way.
Which is why we're arguing that not having all the skills a character can get available makes the game more complex by forcing you to make choices. This is not 'dumbing things down' either.
Haha, been a Demonbane fan since like 2006.
Tried "Haiyore! Nyaruko-san" yet? It's Lovecraft gone banana's.
And I can kind of see it, but my issue with it is just that they've removed the functionality to alter during battles. If you need to engage something at range or at melee depending on the build, you have to use another character to do so, while your character either flees for their life or stands there twiddling their thumbs. I can sort of follow Bioware's logic, but it seems more than a little awkward.
Actually, it seems more like working as intended. The idea of having a four man party is that you need that four man party. Not that it's you, and three flunkies who maybe accidentally manage to kill something you missed.
It is. Hence why a doubt you will actually be able to do so. The game, by and large, will not be balanced to allow you more than eight skills, unless spread yourself so thin that you past the point of supposed versatility and into out and out uselessness.
I could be wrong, but I doubt it.
That these builds don't show up on the forums is not an indication of whether or not they existed. I, for example, have not connected several of my DA:O playthroughs to Origins.
Somebody, somewhere, did the same build as you.
Possibly, but that is likely because I posted my results, and some tested my designs to see if they could be confirmed as viable. Many still used only a couple of attributes, or solely used STR for some Warriors, but there were some others that also liked armored Rogues, and higher WILL characters.
Or they came up with it on their own. Plenty of gamers will not go anywhere near an internet forum (and I can't really blame them), don't use the guides on the 'net, and just generally stick to themselves.
The point is, no build is unique. No character you come up is truly original, and you are always playing a clone of somebody else.
Okay,I'm back from job orientation so what did I miss?
Tried "Haiyore! Nyaruko-san" yet? It's Lovecraft gone banana's.
Actually, it seems more like working as intended. The idea of having a four man party is that you need that four man party. Not that it's you, and three flunkies who maybe accidentally manage to kill something you missed.
Not yet - but I do have the CD where they sing one of the songs from Demonbane. Gotta love that.
And really, my character was the highest damaging, but I couldn't have done it without the others. Wynne to keep people healed and buffed, and Shale in Stoneheart mode is just amazing. I had Leliana to do ranged damage, but my character was versatile enough that I could switch to help out in that aspect if I needed. Just because a character is versatile doesn't mean they can handle everything.
Or they came up with it on their own. Plenty of gamers will not go anywhere near an internet forum (and I can't really blame them), don't use the guides on the 'net, and just generally stick to themselves.
The point is, no build is unique. No character you come up is truly original, and you are always playing a clone of somebody else.
I think it's somewhat unfair to call his build a clone as that implies a deliberate copy. While I do agree that truly unique builds in cRPGs are highly unlikely, most peoples build will be independently discovered, rather than copying someone else.
Okay,I'm back from job orientation so what did I miss?
Circular logic, re-hashing of the same tired arguments, ad hominem attacks, straw men. You know, the usual.
I assume if you're starting a new job? If so, I wish you good luck.
I think it's somewhat unfair to call his build a clone as that implies a deliberate copy. While I do agree that truly unique builds in cRPGs are highly unlikely, most peoples build will be independently discovered, rather than copying someone else.
Point.
But there was no choice in DA:O - you carried both weapons. There is no choice there. It's an utter no-brainer.
"Choice" is pointless if there either an obvious answer or no difference functional between the options.
By limiting your options, it enables those remaining to be made more meaningful and distinct, thereby creating real choice where before there was only a meaningless illusion.
How is having a CHOICE of weapon sets at any time not a choice...Your just lost mate or a troll..
Retour en haut
