Im trying to avoid learning too much about the game (aside from how good it is) but I would like to know if you can wield twin swords as a warrior (in heavy plate) like in DAO or are we stuck with daggers and leather like in DA2?
I know you can mod DA2 but the dagger animations don't suit swords
Warriors get Sword and Sheild or Two Handed. No Dual Wield.
Rogues get Dual Wield Daggers or Archery. No Twin Swords.
Mods are always an option but Frostbite is alledgedly virtually impossible to mod, so I wouldn't plan around it.
Unfortunatelly no as it seems 
Let's hope they'll return it in the future games
hmm well that's a bit crap...I thought they were going for a more DAO style...shame they missed one of its major ****** combat styles...lets hope the modders can work with this and fix it
I don't know why they took it out for DA2...how can less choice be better?
i quite liked the dual wielding swords from dao, but i get that it may have made the rogue class redundant, still maybe in da4 or so they can make and updated version, to differentiate it even more from a rogue class.
I liked playing as a Dual Wield Warrior but there was a lot of crossover with the Rogue version. If they could build completely different ability sets it would work, perhaps with teh Warrior more focused on parrying and counters versus the Rouges back stab, but then people would complain that Rougues were being forced into an Assassin role.
I also wouldn't want it at the expense of Sword and Shield or Two Handed. if I'm honest I'd rather have a Polearm spec than a Dual Wield.
hmm well that's a bit crap...I thought they were going for a more DAO style...shame they missed one of its major ****** combat styles...lets hope the modders can work with this and fix it
I don't know why they took it out for DA2...how can less choice be better?
In a vacuum, yes, less choice is bad. However, game development does not occur in a vacuum, and having more choice may not be the best use of resources.
If there are only going to be four weapon styles, personally, I'd much rather there be two dedicated rogue ones and two dedicated warrior ones, as, while it leads to less variety of concept, it offers greater variety of gameplay. In Origins, there really wasn't that much difference in playstyle (i.e they played very similarly) between warriors and rogues, in no small part due to the fact that weapon style abilities had to be designed such that they fit both classes. By instead designing a weapon style entirely around a single class, as they did in DA2, it can mesh better with that classes' other abilities, and inculde things which would be unsuitable for other classes. This results in greater differentiation between classes, and thus a wider variety in how the game actually plays (i.e. there is a much larger difference between the playstyles of warriors and rogues).
Of course, the ideal way would be to have a rogue dual wielding tree and a different warrior one. Along with a warrior archery tree. And a rogue sword and shield (buckler) one. And a spear one. And so on. But, development time and resources are not unlimited, often you're limited in how much you can put in, which means you have to make tradeoffs. And in this case, I feel that the tradeoff of giving up some choice in concept to create greater differentiation of playstyle between classes is one worth making.
I'm glad honestly. Dual wielding Warriors made Rogues near pointless, why limit yourself to inferior armor when a warrior can use plate?
They played nothing alike.
With rogues focus on stealth, backstabbing, their utility (picking locks, trap detection, etc).
Warriors were pure combat, no utility, they stood toe to toe, focused on cc and lots of sustain dmg rather then burst dmg.
Rogues could also wear plate, and had better damage mitigation abilities.I'm glad honestly. Dual wielding Warriors made Rogues near pointless, why limit yourself to inferior armor when a warrior can use plate?
I'm glad honestly. Dual wielding Warriors made Rogues near pointless, why limit yourself to inferior armor when a warrior can use plate?
Because a rogue can stealth, backstab and open locks? Besides, rogues could also wear plate armor.
I miss my dual wielding dwarf warrior berserker...
I'm glad honestly. Dual wielding Warriors made Rogues near pointless, why limit yourself to inferior armor when a warrior can use plate?
But it's a single player game, you don't have to play the warrior.
I hope for DA4 we get a new weapon style for each class. Wands for Mages (way easier to conceal than staffs anyway!), Spears/Polearms for Warriors and either throwing daggers (like Talis) or maybe even whips for Rogues
I would like to play a dual-wielding Reaver with a spear and a sword equipped. Dual-wielding warriors are much cooler, we need them in Inquisition!
They played nothing alike.
With rogues focus on stealth, backstabbing, their utility (picking locks, trap detection, etc).
Warriors were pure combat, no utility, they stood toe to toe, focused on cc and lots of sustain dmg rather then burst dmg.
I found DW Warriors got more mileage from DW talents than Rogues but only while rolling with full size weapons.
It was Awakening when DW Warriors started to fall behind since Rogues gained massive boosts to backstab damage which put them well ahead in terms of DPS and the Two Handers became better at CC.
Then with all the ways to boost Dodge Chance and Defense in addition to Legionnaire Scout, Rogues became better tanks too.
Nah, double daggers cunning rogues was the highest single target DPS in Origins by far. Axe, dagger rogue was a distant second. There was an thread on the old BSN with all the calculations; basically, the lethality talent + backstab made everything do stupid damage.
I'm glad honestly. Dual wielding Warriors made Rogues near pointless, why limit yourself to inferior armor when a warrior can use plate?
Because I hate being either a narrow-focused glass canon or a unbearably slow turtle?
DW Warrior was both fast, powerful yet sturdy
Plus what can be more epic than wielding two swords?
And what is the logical in-lore explanation? Have all warriors suffered some kind of trauma which resulted in inability to wield two sword at time? Like, it makes no sense
Nah, double daggers cunning rogues was the highest single target DPS in Origins by far. Axe, dagger rogue was a distant second. There was an thread on the old BSN with all the calculations; basically, the lethality talent + backstab made everything do stupid damage.
So while I wish there was dual wielding for warrior too, the Reaver spec kinda.. scratch that itch a little bit. The last skill, Dragon-Rage, puts your weapon away and you attack with like... glowy red claws. Basically you swipe with your left hand, then right hand, then do a double swipe upper cut thing. Consumes your life (2% per attack) instead of stamina, and has no CD. Does good dmg too. It's not the same, not really, but it's still gonna be a fun way to switch things up in a fight to just hold down that button instead of auto-attack for a DW-like chain attack.
I'm glad honestly. Dual wielding Warriors made Rogues near pointless, why limit yourself to inferior armor when a warrior can use plate?
as much as i don't like certain features that you get used to having, being a PnP//tabletop gamer, i feel as though the major features taken out of DAI like healing and dual wield only rogues, are better game play decisions!
so i'm ultimately cool with it.
PS- i know a lot of games lately, like skyrim//ESO want to allow you to make whatever type of class you want, i'm kinda of an older school of thought where i prefer the identity of being a class with a pre-defined skill-set that just any other class can't do as well.
so i like bio's approach here, it adds to the level of importance put upon the classes in the game, and this will especially make co-op even more fun IMO!!!
I hope for DA4 we get a new weapon style for each class. Wands for Mages (way easier to conceal than staffs anyway!), Spears/Polearms for Warriors and either throwing daggers (like Talis) or maybe even whips for Rogues
I've never liked wands except for utility on my non-mage characters in D&D.
Besides, the whole polearm/staff combination for mage staffs is decent enough at concealing that you're a mage. Of course, it would be better if the mage would actually attack with the thing instead of slinging colored balls around...
Because I hate being either a narrow-focused glass canon or a unbearably slow turtle?
DW Warrior was both fast, powerful yet sturdy
Plus what can be more epic than wielding two swords?
And what is the logical in-lore explanation? Have all warriors suffered some kind of trauma which resulted in inability to wield two sword at time? Like, it makes no sense
They were hit by that big bad reality train.
It sucks really. 
I'm glad honestly. Dual wielding Warriors made Rogues near pointless, why limit yourself to inferior armor when a warrior can use plate?
Retour en haut
