43 réponses à ce sujet

[In Exile]

If you don't know any combat talents, there's no cost.

 

If none of your combat talents are useful right now, there's no cost.

 

Your statement also assumes that all combat talents are weapon-specific.  This wasn't true in DAO.  This wasn't true in DA2.  A Rogue with a shield in DAO could still use Dirty Fighting. There were talents in DA2 that could be used regardless of whether the Rogue was using daggers or a bow.

 

And why aren't we allowed to do self-defeating things?  This is why I never understood the objection to the "trap" abilities in D&D.  They're only traps if you don't bother to learn the rules before selecting them.  Otherwise, they're just flavour.  And I like flavour.

 

I loved my Rogue Warden who used a shield.  He was my favourite Warden.

 

Video-games aren't meant to - and shouldn't be - exercises in academic research. I shouldn't have to sit down and learn an entire ruleset in the abstract, as well as come up with a comprehensive outline of the impact and relative benefits of every ability in the game, as a precondition to being able to play it well. 

 

The reason D&D is a trash ruelset is that it's incomprehensible to new RPG players who have no experience with rulesets, a relatively poorly designed ruleset for those unfamiliar with it but familiar with RPGs, and a joke ruleset that's easy to exploit for people who know it well. 

 

Creating a non-combat oriented character needs to be a choice, not the result of a mistake. 

[TheEternalStudent]

No, you're not. No one who plays video-games is incapable of leveling up, that's just basic, and everything else is irrelevant at low difficulties.

 

A single sword leads to terrible gameplay, and that's an actual design problem. 

I can not click the little flashing arrow/plus sign that tells me to level up. I refuse to do so, this is a dumb choice. if they really wanted they could refuse to let me progress until I do level up.

A single sword is a common fighting style, refusing to awknoledge that by giving it its own fighting style is fine, but it's notsuch a rediulous request (unless we're talking masamune) that it would break the game.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Creating a non-combat oriented character needs to be a choice, not the result of a mistake. 

I think both should be possible.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Video-games aren't meant to - and shouldn't be - exercises in academic research. I shouldn't have to sit down and learn an entire ruleset in the abstract, as well as come up with a comprehensive outline of the impact and relative benefits of every ability in the game, as a precondition to being able to play it well.

And you know what, I'm going to disagree with that, too.

 

I'm annoyed every time I hear someone express a voting preference when that person clearly knows nothing about macroeconomics.  And it frustrates me endlessly to see people try to drive in the snow when they clearly lack any useful understanding of friction and inertia.

 

If you want to do something - anything - I would like you to learn about it first.  And if you don't, I think there should be some sort of penalty.  If you want to hang yourself, fine, here's some rope, but don't come crying to me later that you didn't know what asphyxiation was.

[TriedIDontKnow]

I fully agree that using a single one-handed sword should become common place in RPGs. Developers always seem to be unaware of hand-and-a-half swords. It makes more sense (seeing as how dual-wielding swords in actual combat has seen very little success throughout history, typically resulting in accidental suicide or maiming) and could be very easily balanced in a game.

[In Exile]

And you know what, I'm going to disagree with that, too.

 

I'm annoyed every time I hear someone express a voting preference when that person clearly knows nothing about macroeconomics.  And it frustrates me endlessly to see people try to drive in the snow when they clearly lack any useful understanding of friction and inertia.

 

If you want to do something - anything - I would like you to learn about it first.  And if you don't, I think there should be some sort of penalty.  If you want to hang yourself, fine, here's some rope, but don't come crying to me later that you didn't know what asphyxiation was.

 

I've figured everything out by intuition and trial-and-error, so I can't say I'm partial to proper learning. Every single professor I've had is just shocked to see how I work when it comes to anything intellectual. Especially drafting papers and arguments. 

 

I don't condone ignorance, I just dislike games where trial-and-error isn't really realistically possible without substantial aggravation. 

[In Exile]

I fully agree that using a single one-handed sword should become common place in RPGs. Developers always seem to be unaware of hand-and-a-half swords. It makes more sense (seeing as how dual-wielding swords in actual combat has seen very little success throughout history, typically resulting in accidental suicide or maiming) and could be very easily balanced in a game.

 

Hand-and-a-half swords could lead to really cool trees. Something that combines, say, pommel strikes with off-hand gauntlet blows, two-handed mighty blows, etc. I think it has a lot of potential. A sort of mixed grapple moves, slashing/piercing style. 

[TriedIDontKnow]

Hand-and-a-half swords could lead to really cool trees. Something that combines, say, pommel strikes with off-hand gauntlet blows, two-handed mighty blows, etc. I think it has a lot of potential. A sort of mixed grapple moves, slashing/piercing style. 

Exactly, and it would definitely help prevent combat from feeling repetitive (I'm talking to you DA2... and DAO).

 

     P.S. Please don't flame me for that anyone, I love Dragon Age.

[In Exile]

Exactly, and it would definitely help prevent combat from feeling repetitive (I'm talking to you DA2... and DAO).

 

     P.S. Please don't flame me for that anyone, I love Dragon Age.

 

It's also a fresh take. Sword and board abilities were relative cool and fresh when DA:O came out, but since then it's become a deluge of similar such trees in other games. Whereas 1 1/2 handers are pretty distinct. 

[Doominike]

We could have katanas too, even though there's no japanese or asian counterpart culture  

 

http://forums.na.lea...21&d=1375659468

[TheEternalStudent]

We could have katanas too, even though there's no japanese or asian counterpart culture  

 

[spoiler]http://forums.na.lea...21&d=1375659468

Technically there is more map to explore, maybe the Qunari originally hail from fantasy Asia.

[TriedIDontKnow]

We could have katanas too, even though there's no japanese or asian counterpart culture  

 

http://forums.na.lea...21&d=1375659468

 

 

Technically there is more map to explore, maybe the Qunari originally hail from fantasy Asia.

That's possible but I think it more likely that the East-Asian counter-part were either the people occupying The Anderfels before it was turned into a barren wasteland (though judging from the names of the cities there they were probably a Germanic people), or are an as of yet undiscovered race from beyond The Kocari Wilds.

 

Sorry for getting a little off topic there, but I was actually just thinking earlier today that Katanas and other Eastern styles would make a wonderful addition to the DA universe, perhaps one day we'll see it.    <--- and maybe some of these guys as well. 

[Sylvius the Mad]

I've figured everything out by intuition and trial-and-error, so I can't say I'm partial to proper learning. Every single professor I've had is just shocked to see how I work when it comes to anything intellectual. Especially drafting papers and arguments.

I don't condone ignorance, I just dislike games where trial-and-error isn't really realistically possible without substantial aggravation.

I loathe trial and error. If a situation offers me only trial and error as a means to learn things, I'll simply quit and go home.

[In Exile]

I loathe trial and error. If a situation offers me only trial and error as a means to learn things, I'll simply quit and go home.

 

I'm the opposite. If the only way I can learn something is as some abstract exercise without getting to play around it, I won't put up with it. 

[Sylvius the Mad]

I'm the opposite. If the only way I can learn something is as some abstract exercise without getting to play around it, I won't put up with it. 

I've quit jobs to avoid trial-and-error.

[In Exile]

I've quit jobs to avoid trial-and-error.

 

I admire your commitment. 

[Spectre-61]

It's also a fresh take. Sword and board abilities were relative cool and fresh when DA:O came out, but since then it's become a deluge of similar such trees in other games. Whereas 1 1/2 handers are pretty distinct. 

 

I'd be totally onboard with skills for only one sword warriors. What I also would like to see more in games like DA in the future is staff melee fighting (think of AC of GoT).

[AlexMBrennan]

It's also a lot easier to learn to use only one weapon than two (dual wielding or sword & shield) and requires less raw power than a two-handed weapon.

Define "use" - for example, I suspect that it will be easier to learn how to use a shield alongside your sword than to parry incoming arrows with your sword. I further suspect that there might have been a reason for the popularity of shields - sure, it's possible that you are correct and that everyone from Roman legions to Greek phalanxes would have been better off ditching their shields... But I somewhat doubt that.

[Kantr]

I'd be totally onboard with skills for only one sword warriors. What I also would like to see more in games like DA in the future is staff melee fighting (think of AC of GoT).

DA2 had melee.