21 réponses à ce sujet

[Stargazer56444]

I've been playing for several hours now and every time I level up I'm only given the option to choose my abilities, my attribute build has been automated. Am I missing something or is this just how the game works? If so, I'm not pleased. Building your attributes was something I enjoyed about the series, please tell me I'm just missing something...

[Teh Chozen Wun]

No, attribute points are now leveled up through the skill tree. Each new skill you pick has an accompanying bonus to one of your stats, it should say which stat it is under the description of the skill.

[Stargazer56444]

No, attribute points are now leveled up through the skill tree. Each new skill you pick has an accompanying bonus to one of your stats, it should say which stat it is under the description of the skill.

Really? So what happens when you've maxed out your attribute building skills? There are only a set number of them. I just counted the amount of strength attribute building skills for warriors and theres only 10 including all of the skill trees, which means you can only build your strength by 30 points?

Edit: I'm forgetting the specializations, Templar and Reaver each have atleast one extra +3 strength skill.

What's the level cap?

[Ashnarug]

I too do not particularly like that we cannot play with the stats like we want.

 

As the character screen is not available while on level 1 is there a way to find out what are your stats at the start of the game ?

[KarmicSynergy]

Yes, another change by Bioware that was clearly NOT necessary. Oh, and don't get me started about the lack of a Storage Chest!

[Miggiwoo]

While I understand people's frustrations, being able to allocate stats created some ridiculous min-max strategies in the previous 2 games which makes it very difficult to balance, and nearly impossible to nerf.

 

Overall, I like that stats associated with skills tend to work together, and I really like that stats are much more significant (+10 strength is very significant).

[PsychicHammer]

And what's wrong with min/max builds? That's half the fun for me.

Taking attributes out of the players hands was a dick move. Attempts at 'balancing' in DA2 were awful. You know the patch I'm talking about... it broke the game.

Anyhoo, I'm sure that metagaming will produce some crazy builds for DAI even without control over attributes. Then BioWare will slap the game with a patch to bring this mystical balance. There isn't PvP in this game, which is where balancing issues come into play. But in a singleplayer game with a coop horde mode? Give a single reason why we can't have OP builds. Butthurt over sucking in MP because someone else is taking all the kills doesn't count.

[PsychicHammer]

Nerfing of any kind should have no place in this game.

[Gaz83]

Oh, and don't get me started about the lack of a Storage Chest!

 

This. A thousand times this.

 

I thought you'd unlock one though customising Skyhold, but nope!

[swk3000]

Actually, I think removing stat allocation was a great move. The problem with the system in the previous two games was that it wasn't balanced properly. Wynne was capable of one-shotting what was supposed to be a very difficult sidequest boss, and standard advice for a Rogue in the second game was to get crit chance to X so it would hit 100% with gear and passives, then dump the rest into crit damage. Now, the "It's a single player game; I can make my characters as powerful as I want" card has already been played, and for the most part, you're right.

Except you're not. See, while there are no balance issues in the gameplay portion of the equation, that same freedom makes it much more difficult to design fights that are as challenging as the devs want them to be.

The problem is that the stat allocation system created a massive power curve. Any given player could be anywhere between extremely weak (casual players) and extremely powerful (min/maxers), and the devs had no way of knowing where on the curve any given player was. This makes designing content very difficult. If you make things too easy, powerful players are bored because things aren't challenging. If you make things too hard, casual players can't beat the content, creating a wall that they can't get past. Since the devs have to make a game for everyone, they have to tread the middle, but with such a wide power curve, it's difficult to get things exactly right.

By removing the stat allocation system, the devs now have a much smaller power curve to work with, making it easier to design fights with the difficulty level they want. After all, there are fewer variables to worry about. This means we aren't likely to see something like Golems of Amgarrak again.

[SpaceV3gan]

You can bump attributes via crafting to pretty high numbers. You can still get the same ridiculous power curve from the the past.
For stance, playing a fresh level 1 character on Nightmare is truly a nightmare, unforgiving as one should expect it to be. Mid game with heavy use of crafting it is something else entirely.

[SomeoneStoleMyName]

Placing attributes manually would be useless anyway.
Hate to say this but attributes in DA:I are useless. 

 

Want absolute proof?

lvl11 mage using upgraded lyrium potion, which is a gigantic boost of +60 magic.
Damage increase? 20 flat damage. From 220 to 240.

 

Meaning that even if you had 5 attribute points per level, you would need 24 levels to increase your damage by 40 points. So when you can crit for 2k-6k damage, lets say 3k damage - 24 levels of attribute points would grant you 1.3% of your damage. 

Weapon base damage seems to be all that matters.

[SpaceV3gan]

You can bump attributes via crafting to pretty high numbers. You can still get the same ridiculous power curve from the the past.
For stance, playing a fresh level 1 character on Nightmare is truly a nightmare, unforgiving as one should expect it to be. However, Mid game with heavy use of crafting it is something else entirely. I have had a cakewalk since I hit level 12.

[draken-heart]

I like how they did the Attribute allocation (tying them to the skill trees). It makes more sense for a mage to to have more magic and willpower than a warrior. In Oriigins and II, the stats made little sense to upgrade yourself, as you probably would have just put the points into what was important anyways.

[Xhaiden]

Tying it to passives was a pretty elegant middle of the road solution to the problems of the previous games. There's still lots of leeway with crafting and passive selection if you want to focus on something in particular. Mage for example actually has some +Con skill passives if you want to be a bit more meaty.

 

The trees basically up the stats that work with the tree. Which serves as a guided natural stat growth. You're still free to use crafting or secondary trees to stack particular stats on a given build. The problem with a stat point allocation system, especially in DA1, was that it could be trial and error to find a good balance on a given class. If you were playing the game for the first time, stat or skill allocation would eventually end in regret as you realized later on what would work better for your play style. Then had to use a respec mod to fix it.

 

DA:I's system avoids the trap of assigning points to stats your class might not actually need or failing to raise specific stats it does and leaving you under powered. So you don't fall into early game pitfalls when first learning the system. The passive stat system ensures that you always have the right stats to do the job of the tree you're investing in so no need to worry about it. But still leaves you with the ability to customize stat distribution through crafting or secondary trees. Neither of which are permanent in DA:I if you change your mind later. 

 

With this system there doesn't need to be a community devised rule of getting x stat to y then start raising z stat for <insert class> and someone playing the game for the first time doesn't need to take to the internet to find out what said community devised rule is just to ensure their class performs well. 

[Tookah45]

Actually, I think removing stat allocation was a great move. The problem with the system in the previous two games was that it wasn't balanced properly. Wynne was capable of one-shotting what was supposed to be a very difficult sidequest boss, and standard advice for a Rogue in the second game was to get crit chance to X so it would hit 100% with gear and passives, then dump the rest into crit damage. Now, the "It's a single player game; I can make my characters as powerful as I want" card has already been played, and for the most part, you're right.

Except you're not. See, while there are no balance issues in the gameplay portion of the equation, that same freedom makes it much more difficult to design fights that are as challenging as the devs want them to be.

The problem is that the stat allocation system created a massive power curve. Any given player could be anywhere between extremely weak (casual players) and extremely powerful (min/maxers), and the devs had no way of knowing where on the curve any given player was. This makes designing content very difficult. If you make things too easy, powerful players are bored because things aren't challenging. If you make things too hard, casual players can't beat the content, creating a wall that they can't get past. Since the devs have to make a game for everyone, they have to tread the middle, but with such a wide power curve, it's difficult to get things exactly right.

By removing the stat allocation system, the devs now have a much smaller power curve to work with, making it easier to design fights with the difficulty level they want. After all, there are fewer variables to worry about. This means we aren't likely to see something like Golems of Amgarrak again.

 

 

I didn't read it all and I don't plan to because I happened to see the bolded bit first and realized how wrong you were. It's possible to oneshot a dragon on nightmare by using Mark of Death followed by Thousand Cuts. As we don't have the freedom to "min/max our stats", that means literally anyone can do it. But yeah, they did it because balance. That's got to be it. It's not just another inane decision like scrapping the working interface and useful features from two other installments. It's for balance.

[Xhaiden]

I didn't read it all and I don't plan to because I happened to see the bolded bit first and realized how wrong you were. It's possible to oneshot a dragon on nightmare by using Mark of Death followed by Thousand Cuts. As we don't have the freedom to "min/max our stats", that means literally anyone can do it. But yeah, they did it because balance. That's got to be it. It's not just another inane decision like scrapping the working interface and useful features from two other installments. It's for balance.

 

Now that's just kind of silly. By that logic the devs haven't done anything for game balance just because there is still imbalance in the game. If game balance were that simple it would have saved the entire industry decades worth of grief by now. Balance is a fearsome, multi-headed beast, You can't say it hasn't lost any of its heads just because they weren't all cut off at once. 

 

As for "one shotting" high dragons on nightmare that requires a pretty specific build and gear approach. It's the exact same kind of min/maxing just within a different system. Which frankly isn't even really that different mechanically speaking. You're still utilizing the most powerful builds and stacking the most potent stats on gear. So lets not pretend that's somehow wildly different because you used gear to do it instead of stat points. 

[swk3000]

First, to be fair, I was only looking at the stat allocation system when I responded, because that's what the thread was about. I'm sorry if that offended.

Second, at no point in my post do I say that it's not possible to game the system. If there is a system, it can and will be gamed. I'd be stupid to believe otherwise. It's just that with the removal of the stat allocation system, gear now plays a much bigger part than it did before.

Third, the point about Thousand Cuts: while I'm not sure that the devs intended for it to be that powerful, I'm really not surprised it can do so much damage. After all, it is a focus ability. It takes time to get the focus needed to pull that off; you cant use it in every fight against every enemy. The examples I gave from the previous games didn't need much, if any, prep time. Wynne just had to activate Vessel of the Spirit, and rogues in 2 needed positioning at most, assuming they didn't just crit on every hit, period.

It is true that there is still a power curve, and I'm sorry for implying otherwise. It's just that the biggest offender from the first two games has been neutralized.

[Zorlagius]

Ability points make more sense in actual pen and paper games, where abilities themselves are often utilized for other purposes beyond basic combat statistics (like trying to woo the tavern wench, impressing a guard or making a good deal with a merchant). You can certainly design a computer game around a system like that, but it is too late to ask for that in for DA:I. With current system in place you would just end up with yet another set of passive bonuses and very soon it would be known how to do optimal distribution for maximum damage or survivability. Not very exciting.

[draken-heart]

Ability points make more sense in actual pen and paper games, where abilities themselves are often utilized for other purposes beyond basic combat statistics (like trying to woo the tavern wench, impressing a guard or making a good deal with a merchant). You can certainly design a computer game around a system like that, but it is too late to ask for that in for DA:I. With current system in place you would just end up with yet another set of passive bonuses and very soon it would be known how to do optimal distribution for maximum damage or survivability. Not very exciting.

 

Thinking about it, it makes more sense for a S&B warrior to have a higher constitution than strength, because they do not need the strength as they do not use that much for their weapon. A rogue would likely be more apt to use stealth and speed and cunning to fight, so do not need it that much.

 

What is nice is that the "specializations" (I prefer the term advanced skill sets) have passive bonuses that fit them (A templar with no willpower is a dead templar, no matter the constitution).

[godlike13]

U add ability points mostly through weapons and armor now. 

[JaegerBane]

Tying it to passives was a pretty elegant middle of the road solution to the problems of the previous games. There's still lots of leeway with crafting and passive selection if you want to focus on something in particular. Mage for example actually has some +Con skill passives if you want to be a bit more meaty.

+1. I personally don't care about having control over stat allocation - in most RPGs the way stats work mean there isn't much point having control of them, as you either allocate them the way you should and reap the benefits, or gimp your character.

However, I do like how the passives double up as stat upgrades. It's a bit like having feats, but ones that work as part of a spell system rather an as a seperate one. It's *this* kind of streamlining that I like.