312 réponses à ce sujet

[andar91]

Anyone else exceptionally bummed out that mages get so few options?

 

Yes. I've been trying to stay positive, but it seems like mages got the shaft this time around.

 

Staff.

[Astrolabe]

I'm sure people have their reasons for all these rather grim/defeatist statements. But you haven't seen every single ability/passive in every single tree yet. Why don't you wait for another week as people start releasing more videos/information before making a judgement? 

 

I feel like because of the 8 ability slots, individual abilities will be more impactful and as such, each one we don't know may alter the options and playstyles more than we are able to see atm. 

[DooomCookie]

Mages always had stupid amounts of versatility anyway.  In any RPG, even one that didn't restrict you to 8 abilities, DAO's spells would be considered huge spell bloat.  I'm pretty sure we're still more versatile than warriors and rogues.  We've just lost several trees to account for no healing and blood magic.  I don't have a problem with it.

[Bronson]

Reserving judgement until I've played. 

 

How dare you!!!!

[DLaren]

I just want to be able to cast a -single- Heal spell.

Im still not accepting the reasoning behind the removal of consistent Healing.

Every other successful party-based RPG handled healing just fine - Im not sure when it became taboo to want to role play as a Healer.

[efd731]

Gotta say I could care less about the number of spells going down, cause I never even used half the damn spells in DAO or DA2 cause they never interested me at all.

like I said, that's fine. Just that some people don't like options being taken away, and less spells means less options. And from what we've seen so far, the cuts have been mostly to debuffing/buffing spells and the like. Which isn't inherently bad, unless you liked those choices, then that's bad. Some people just like to play different ways, and I can't blame them for not liking those ways being removed.

[Walker White]

Every other successful party-based RPG handled healing just fine - Im not sure when it became taboo to want to role play as a Healer.

 

Healing in DA:I is just as plentiful as it was in Baldur's Gate 1 & 2, BioWare RPGs that are considered pretty successful.  In fact, DA:I combat healing is even better, because getting a BG spell caster adjacent to a wounded character, and having them cast without being hit (which automatically loses the spell), was really hard.

[efd731]

I just want to be able to cast a -single- Heal spell.

Im still not accepting the reasoning behind the removal of consistent Healing.

Every other successful party-based RPG handled healing just fine - Im not sure when it became taboo to want to role play as a Healer.

Different design mentality. Barrier gives "double" hp as long as you keep it cast, warriors guard is extra levels or armor, rogues have stealth. All for mitigation.
In previous games, the max hp for your party was the max amount of heal pots that could be used+the amount of heal spells+the amount of additional heal spells enabled by mana potions. This led to mini bosses with staggeringly high hp pools and insane damage, because they had to burst all that health down before you could heal/rotate the fighter Getting hit. This way, enemies are more similar to the party, and every step towards parity is a move I'm in favor of.

[l7986]

Gotta bring single player more in line with multiplayer some way.

[Alodar]

Gotta bring single player more in line with multiplayer some way.

 

Why?

[Zanallen]

I just want to be able to cast a -single- Heal spell.

Im still not accepting the reasoning behind the removal of consistent Healing.

Every other successful party-based RPG handled healing just fine - Im not sure when it became taboo to want to role play as a Healer.

 

You have one. A rather epic one that revives all party members and heals everyone to full.

[Gannayev of Dreams]

Mages certainly seem to have less depth and versatility than in DA:O, but I think this was intentional. They enjoyed a disproportionate amount of utility and cool abilities compared to the other classes.

 

Think about being a sword+board warrior in DA:O. What did that tree really amount to? Abilities that do... damage, stuns, damage+stuns, and a bunch of passives that increase defensive ratings. That's it. You didn't play a "tank" because it was genuinely fun to use their toolbox, you did it only if you enjoyed the role of "tank".

 

How many people would take a character like Alistair, equip them with a bunch of tank-oriented tactics and then just leave them for auto-pilot? I'd wager - a lot. Melee DPS classes/trees weren't much better. They always amount to damage abilities that just do damage in a slightly different rhythm and sometimes applied a debuff that had no visual appeal.

 

Let's face it, mages had all the cool toys in DA:O. For DA:I they decided to take away some of the mages toys and spread them around. This sucks for die-hard mage players; no disputing that - but for players with a well-rounded party... now they may finally feel good about switching characters in combat. Everyone in their party should now have abilities that are actually fun to use.

[renfrees]

Ugh, I was never keen on the bluntness of elemental trees. I want my Entropy back 

[SomeoneStoleMyName]

I too am fearful of the new mage trees. 

There seems to be mostly damage spells with one or two CC spells in each tree so far. If the spells lack real complexity and combos, along with buffs and debuffs, I will be disappointed. Wont affect me buying DA:I though. At this point my hype train is at maximum velocity.

[Neuromancer]

I can of course only speak for myself but I struggle to ever desire to play my characters in my team ever. I make MYSELF into the character I play and all the others are merely different entities. 

I really am disappointed they'd cut mages in order to make rogues and warriors more appealing.

It's like "hey here have this big beautiful icecream cake!"

"Oh wait the other cakes look like ****, better take a dump on the icecream cake LEL"

It's severely disappointing because I AM a diehard mage fan. I despise warriors, I hate Templars, I hate rogues. So now all I get is a boiled down over-stocked elemental tree with gimmick CC loaded into it.


Like I come from league of legends where hard CC is a massive boon. To me this doesn't remind me of Annie's tibbers, Lissandra's ult, etc. It looks like shoddy weak effects tacked onto an AOE.

For pete's sake ROGUE looks more CC oriented and now that is just sad.

[Astrolabe]

What are the rogue's CC abilities? I haven't looked at them much.

[Kierro Ren]

I wished you could be an apostate mage.

 

Be a Qunari, or be a Dalish Elf. Both are considered apostates.

[GodBrandon]

All mages should be made tranquil anyway.

[Varus Praetor]

Mages certainly seem to have less depth and versatility than in DA:O, but I think this was intentional. They enjoyed a disproportionate amount of utility and cool abilities compared to the other classes.

 

Think about being a sword+board warrior in DA:O. What did that tree really amount to? Abilities that do... damage, stuns, damage+stuns, and a bunch of passives that increase defensive ratings. That's it. You didn't play a "tank" because it was genuinely fun to use their toolbox, you did it only if you enjoyed the role of "tank".

 

How many people would take a character like Alistair, equip them with a bunch of tank-oriented tactics and then just leave them for auto-pilot? I'd wager - a lot. Melee DPS classes/trees weren't much better. They always amount to damage abilities that just do damage in a slightly different rhythm and sometimes applied a debuff that had no visual appeal.

 

Let's face it, mages had all the cool toys in DA:O. For DA:I they decided to take away some of the mages toys and spread them around. This sucks for die-hard mage players; no disputing that - but for players with a well-rounded party... now they may finally feel good about switching characters in combat. Everyone in their party should now have abilities that are actually fun to use.

A disproportionate amount of fun?  Can't have that.  Better strip out a bunch of those mage goodies and spread them around like this is some craptastic MMO instead of a single player RPG.

 

There's absolutely no reason the smart people at BW couldn't have found a way to make warriors and rogues more dynamic and fun (assuming that they weren't that way already, plenty of people enjoyed them as they were) without stripping half the tools from the mage toolbox.  Robbing Peter to pay Paul doesn't do anybody any good for this type of game.  Having said that, DAO mages had spell bloat.  There were some trash spells I won't miss, but I think they went way to far because I don't get the impression that solving a spell bloat issue was their goal.

[Giantdeathrobot]

Mages certainly seem to have less depth and versatility than in DA:O, but I think this was intentional. They enjoyed a disproportionate amount of utility and cool abilities compared to the other classes.

 

Think about being a sword+board warrior in DA:O. What did that tree really amount to? Abilities that do... damage, stuns, damage+stuns, and a bunch of passives that increase defensive ratings. That's it. You didn't play a "tank" because it was genuinely fun to use their toolbox, you did it only if you enjoyed the role of "tank".

 

How many people would take a character like Alistair, equip them with a bunch of tank-oriented tactics and then just leave them for auto-pilot? I'd wager - a lot. Melee DPS classes/trees weren't much better. They always amount to damage abilities that just do damage in a slightly different rhythm and sometimes applied a debuff that had no visual appeal.

 

Let's face it, mages had all the cool toys in DA:O. For DA:I they decided to take away some of the mages toys and spread them around. This sucks for die-hard mage players; no disputing that - but for players with a well-rounded party... now they may finally feel good about switching characters in combat. Everyone in their party should now have abilities that are actually fun to use.

 

I like this hagspawn, he understands.

[AtreiyaN7]

I'm interested in the different specializations, so no, I'm not disappointed by not seeing hexes, etc. (and I always play a mage - like...always). I'll discuss any hypothetical future disappointment after I get to play the game and experience the changes firsthand.

[andar91]

What are the rogue's CC abilities? I haven't looked at them much.

 

This is only off the top of my head, but...

 

Knockout powder puts people to sleep.

Leaping Shot gets you away from enemies, while your grappling chain or whatever pulls you in (the warriors pulls the enemy in in contrast).

There's a leaping ability too...basically teh Rogue's version of Combat Roll (Warrior) and Fade Step (Mage).

 

I THINK that's it, but it doesn't account for specializations.

[Tymvir]

Healing in DA:I is just as plentiful as it was in Baldur's Gate 1 & 2, BioWare RPGs that are considered pretty successful.  In fact, DA:I combat healing is even better, because getting a BG spell caster adjacent to a wounded character, and having them cast without being hit (which automatically loses the spell), was really hard.

 

Baldur's Gate was great because of its story and exploration, not because of the D&D system. I'm glad CRPGS have evolved away from that. The mana system is infinitely superior to memorizing spells and having to sleep after every tough fight.

[Astrolabe]

That doesn't seem...like much CC at all. It seems like...mages have more...

[andar91]

That doesn't seem...like much CC at all. It seems like...mages have more...

 

Yes, it does. Although we haven't seen everything in the rogue trees, and upgrades could also add stuns and such to abilities. So that's probably not the entire list.

 

Oh, I forgot caltrops. Not sure if they hamper enemies or just do damage...I think they stop them for a second. There's also the spike trap from artificer that throws them up in the air and knocks them down for a second.