312 réponses à ce sujet

[Neuromancer]

@Birdy (quote isn't working on this forum for me, idk why).

Yeah I plan to mod necromancer heavily if they don't have some sort of reanimate ability :\ I would just be too disappointed!

[Birdy]

@Birdy (quote isn't working on this forum for me, idk why).

Yeah I plan to mod necromancer heavily if they don't have some sort of reanimate ability :\ I would just be too disappointed!

Hehe, well if they don't I very much look forward to using the mod.  

[Neuromancer]

#Birdy, just don't expect too much too quickly.

I am still learning compsci D;

[Birdy]

#Birdy, just don't expect too much too quickly.

I am still learning compsci D;

I learned how to change models for DA2, not as complicated as other mods but still slightly complicated. Point being, want it enough you'll learn.  XD

[themageguy]

I find it interesting that you call yourself the mage guy yet you are ok with restricting the role playing options of playing different types of mages. By removing the role playing options they are taking the game away from being a role playing game and closer to shooter territory.

In this game, they have provided us with the option to choose one specialisation that actually will play some significance in our interactions within the game world. That to me has given us a greater ability to role play a particular type of mage.

Id rather be a necromancer who uses spirit and winter spells than a blood mage/spirit healer who gets no real in-depth reactions.

That is why im ok with the changes.
My favourite non primal spells have been glyph of paralysis and walking bomb.
So in inquisition, there is no creation school and spirit lacks walking bomb.
However, it would seem necromancer has a walking bomb spell and that frost glyph spell does exactly what the creation spell did.
And at the end of it, my inquisitor will be recognized as a necromancer, not just a mage.

So in short, for me, i get to play a meaningful roleplaying mage whilst still keeping the functionality of my favourite playstyle.

If i wanna play a shooter with magic, i play mass effect

[themageguy]

Spec'd as a rift mage, and went deep into the lightning tree.

What is that spell at the bottom of the rift mage tree? It looks like Merrills ensnare spell in dragon age 2

[GabranthSG]

I'm planning to use two mages in my first play through, Dorian and vivi. And I really want Dorian to be the Debuff casting, hexing type of sorcerer and for vivi to play the explosive nuking fire/ice/lightning type mage.

Here's hoping the spirit tree would include plenty of non direct damage type of debilitating spells.

[Morroian]

In this game, they have provided us with the option to choose one specialisation that actually will play some significance in our interactions within the game world. That to me has given us a greater ability to role play a particular type of mage.

Id rather be a necromancer who uses spirit and winter spells than a blood mage/spirit healer who gets no real in-depth reactions.

 

Um they removed blood precisely because they couldn't get the world reactions right, why would there be any significant reactions to uncontroversial specs, except maybe necro but that would be mild.

[Almostfaceman]

Yep, 9 for me. I chose 2 of each element and then heal for my mage. I found a lot of spells to be redundent. 

 

Actually, I'm excited to hear that there's going to be such an elemental focus in DA:I - it's my favourite path. 

 

Yes, redundancy is something I thought was a problem with a lot of the spells, just different flavors of the same thing, which is killing the enemy. This is why I don't agree with "more choices is always good". That's just wrong. People can and do design "choices" that are meaningless, poorly designed, etc. A well designed gameplay mechanic is FAR more important than choice for the sake of choice. That doesn't mean take it to the opposite extreme and just give folks one weapon... but hey a well-designed game can do a lot with a little. Look at Myst. Yes, I know the expectations are different than for Myst, but Myst is a good example of interesting, entertaining, simple game design. 

 

I have no evidence, but I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of this paring down is lessons they've learned from telemetry. They probably discovered that people just don't use that many damn spells. 

 

I would rather them use that data space to optimize spell choice (while keeping it fun, of course) and then give us more terrain, or more quests, or more dialogue, more story. I love gameplay, but the big draw with Bioware is the story. I still play Baldur's Gate 2 about once a year, just to experience the story. It certainly isn't for the antiquated graphics and game play. 

 

Yes, I understand that there are many different perspectives. There are folks who don't like change, or look at pieces and try to say they're bad without considering that that piece can't be judged without the rest of the pieces. There's folks who like to "role play" a healer - which frankly surprises me since healers in these single player games aren't as specialized as, say, a healer class in World of Warcraft. There are people who like to attach things to lore and they have trouble reconciling the changes with the lore. 

 

If the story draws you in, though, I think a lot of these will fall to the wayside. If the game mechanics work well together and still provide a fun experience, again concerns will fall to the wayside. 

 

If I were a dev, I would ignore a lot of this complaining, and just wait to see what people thought after they played the game. That would be the time to start taking notes for the next game. It would be nice if there wasn't quite so much negativity so prematurely, but that sadly never happens on a forum. Not the end of the world, just mildly irritating. 

[themageguy]

Um they removed blood precisely because they couldn't get the world reactions right, why would there be any significant reactions to uncontroversial specs, except maybe necro but that would be mild.

Necromancy is actually accepted in Nevarra and distrusted elsewhere. As blood magic deals in magic that deals in mind control and is used by notoriously evil minded mages....do i need to go on?

Also, it was stated ages ago and has been repeatedly said that our specialisations will be more significant this time around. So i really don't get why you're continuing to argue with me.

I've already offered my opinion on specialisation and spell functions in inquisition. You don't need to agree with me, but I hope other people who may have seen my posts but the feel same as you do, can get some sort of idea that certain elements are still in the game just under a different guise, and we are getting more than we ever had in other games.

Well that's all i have to say to you, i feel any further discussion would be pointless.

Happy gaming everyone

[Boboverlord]

The all-warrior party laughs at the notion of "barriers are a must."

 

Exactly my thought. Also rogues with heavy stealth/parry/evade build don't need barrier.

[Keroko]

Um they removed blood precisely because they couldn't get the world reactions right, why would there be any significant reactions to uncontroversial specs, except maybe necro but that would be mild.

 

Because being a blood mage means no templar (or anyone with the exception of some mages) will want anything to do with you. That... kind of ruins a big part of the game.

 

Necromancy is controversial, but tolerated. So while people may comment on it and treat you differently, it won't cause the same kind of instant hostility blood magic does.

 

 

Exactly my thought. Also rogues with heavy stealth/parry/evade build don't need barrier.

 

Or corridors filled with traps that not only CC and do damage, but also heal the rogues should the enemy get the odd swing in.

[Morroian]

Also, it was stated ages ago and has been repeatedly said that our specialisations will be more significant this time around. So i really don't get why you're continuing to argue with me.

 

IIRC it was said that we could only choose 1 spec but it would have more depth, the implication clearly being more depth in the ability choices. Yet from all appearances the specs have less or at least very similar numbers of choices as in DA2 so there is not more depth in this area.

[sim-ran]

Super upset right now and almost in tears, I waited for this game for years .... Right now all I can do is hope I see necromancer skill tree and if it doesn't involve me bringing an undead to life I think I may be done...

There is only a faux-veil of skill diversity... this is so upsetting.

Are you serious? You're nearly in tears because the mage might not have your preferred spells from a past game?! I really hope you're trolling or being melodramatic because I don't want to believe anyone can get that emotional about something like that.

[wtfman99]

I wonder if Hawke has any special dialogue with you if you choose to spec necromancer..

[Little Princess Peach]

Was just about to say that.

are there any similarities between the mages from Inquisition and Origins?

[Little Princess Peach]

I wonder if Hawke has any special dialogue with you if you choose to spec necromancer..

maybe But I know Varric would have a thing to say about it

 

Varric: Heey Inquisitor your a Necromancer right?

Inquisitor: yes...

Varric: well why are you having so much trouble with the ladies then?

Inquisitor: that's romancer not necromancer

Varric: Inquisitor thats racist!

[Medhia_Nox]

@Morroian:  "More depth" means to me that the spec will have more roleplay depth... not more spells.  

[Boboverlord]

I forgot to have some conclusion about this mage spell number topic.

 

Let's say mages in DA:O and DA2 are too OP, and this new game fixes that. Nuff said.

[Neuromancer]

So I am going to be Elsa from frozen and reincarnate the dead.

Fine. I will let it go. My frozen fury will not be something enemies can handle.

[DMaster2]

Was just about to say that.

And for those that liked Entropy more than dps mage?

[Kage]

maybe But I know Varric would have a thing to say about it

 

Varric: Heey Inquisitor your a Necromancer right?

Inquisitor: yes...

Varric: well why are you having so much trouble with the ladies then?

Inquisitor: that's romancer not necromancer

Varric: Inquisitor thats racist!

 

You can't spell necromancer without romance.

[Neuromancer]

"And for those that linked Entropy more than dps mage?"

We're essentially being flipped off by the developers.

[Paul E Dangerously]

"And for those that linked Entropy more than dps mage?"

We're essentially being flipped off by the developers.

 

Welcome to the Hall of Forgotten Characters, my friend. Sadly, there's a lot of room.

[Meltemph]

"And for those that linked Entropy more than dps mage?"

We're essentially being flipped off by the developers.

Haha, oh wow. Taking game design decisions as personal slights are we? Wow, I dont even understand that mindset... It's not like the game is designed to cater to any particular person, jeez.