64 réponses à ce sujet

[Biotic Flash Kick]

if there one thing DA2 did better than DAO/DAI it was mages

 

mages in this game are a bit boring

 

warriors and melee rogues are hella fun though

[Uccio]

Magic is gutted and pathetic in this game compared to the last two... and that's saying something considering how weak it was in DA2. DAO's mages were right in line with all of the lore- they were the single most dangerous opponent you could face, and having a mage in your party was a matter of life and death if you had to face significant opposition. This time around the cries of magic abuse and mages as living WMDs ring more than a little hollow; there are only a handful of mages shown in the course of the game that have abilities I would characterize as 'fearsome'- and they're all playing for the opposition (even then, they never use the full extent of their powers in battle- only in cutscenes)! The AOEs are crap, the single-target spells are even less useful because they do the same pathetic damage but to only one enemy (exception: energy barrage is kinda nice), and the complete absence of healing spells is... jarring. I feel like the worst mage in the history of magic. The big bads are right to be contemptuous of me and my pathetic abilities. How I ever became First in my clan is a total mystery to me. Vivienne is the worst joke of a First Enchanter I could have ever imagined. Dorian's only real power is his epic moustache. Solas? Let's not even go there. Never has a full party of mages been so full of fail.

 

Magic was brokenly overpowered in DAO, sure... but I thought that was kinda the point, no? The reason why mages had to be locked away to protect the greater public good? Why warriors had to be specially trained as Templars to go mage hunting, because without their spiffy holy powers they'd be barbequed? Because the way things are now a warrior or a rogue without any Templar abilities, without any significant magic resistances, can pretty much mop the floor with anything short of a boss-level mage. It's pretty sad.

 

Yes, I do want mages to be horribly overpowered. That's how they've been built up in the lore. Gimme my nukes back.

 

This, I´ve been saying this so many times.

[Angry_Elcor]

Gym class. The coach is real meanie.

[In Exile]

And you're welcome to that opinion, but that is all it is, an opinion. You can pretend all you like that saying something is trash is fact, but its not. However the number of choices once available, the number of total available spells and what those spells in fact did without any assistance of any other class is quantifiable fact. 

 

I liked weapon passives, who are you to tell me how to play? Why exactly is your play style better than mine?  I can min-max with the best of them, sometimes I simply want to make a character fit the role I have created in my head for it. My ideas are very much limited in DAI, much more so than in DAO. So whether or not you can contend that spells or builds were complete trash as you call it is debatable, however the choice that I used to have to partake in that build is not. 

 

Summarily, normally meaning without regard, immediately and at once has in this case been used as hyperbole for me to say that I absolutely and immediately rebuke your assessment. Much like your comments of obscene, gimped and trash are idiomatic and exaggerated in the context by which you use them. If you don't want to use any form of semantics, then don't. But don't try the syntax and grammar game. I think you're better than that. 

 

I'm not telling you how to play. But the debate as to whether or not an ability is valuable - and whether or not there's an opportunity cost to picking it - is not just a matter of subjective role-playing preference. 

 

If you think having a multitude of options is valuable, regardless of the quality of that options, more power to you. But "versatility" isn't the right word for it, especially when there are a few clearly superior options and then a multitude of clearly inferior options. It implies that the choice was something other than a role-playing choice where one had to actively sacrifice performance. 

 

The argument that DA:I should have more builds and the argument that DA:I should just have more abilities, even if those abilities are complete trash in comparison to a select few, are quite different arguments. 

 

And I'm not debating syntax or grammar. But summarily is a technical term, and among other things it implies that there will not be further reasons. I was surprised that there were reasons. 

[Innsmouth Dweller]

mage in DA:I reminds me of this:

 

Spoiler

 

warrior has only one goal in his life: his bones have to look pretty in the sunshine

[Bladenite1481]

I'm not telling you how to play. But the debate as to whether or not an ability is valuable - and whether or not there's an opportunity cost to picking it - is not just a matter of subjective role-playing preference. 

 

If you think having a multitude of options is valuable, regardless of the quality of that options, more power to you. But "versatility" isn't the right word for it, especially when there are a few clearly superior options and then a multitude of clearly inferior options. It implies that the choice was something other than a role-playing choice where one had to actively sacrifice performance. 

 

The argument that DA:I should have more builds and the argument that DA:I should just have more abilities, even if those abilities are complete trash in comparison to a select few, are quite different arguments. 

 

And I'm not debating syntax or grammar. But summarily is a technical term, and among other things it implies that there will not be further reasons. I was surprised that there were reasons. 

How does versatility, which simply means having many uses imply that all uses must be equilateral? I think you are imposing your own view of the subject. What you are saying is this "The builds are not versatile because I want them to perform at a specifically high power level and disregard any other functions including role play that a more fully fleshed out system of magic might fulfill." Again, you are subjectively impressing what you want in a system that is supposed to be more ubiquitous. 

 

What field of expertise does Summarily uniquely relate to?  That's what a technical term is. 

 

Your entire basis of defense is that because the character choices do not equal the power level of what you deem necessary that all other builds are moot and thus disregarded. I reject your idea and state that choice and utility is about more than simply the power level of the character. It's about making them feel as close to a story in your own head as you want them to, because that is what RPG is about, not just going for the biggest gun in the arsenal, but picking the one that fits you the best. If you like to be super efficient autonomous and uninteresting then go for it..nobody is stopping you. However what would it hurt you if there were more options available? Your options would still be there, the only difference would be that a few other people would be happy too.

[snackrat]

For me, mage. I enjoyed mage in the previous two DA games, but DAI they're rather boring. Because of the limited slots, you have to choose between overspecialising in ONE element (and be boned when your opponent is resistant) or just brush against the lowest tiers. After adding in 'essential' spirit abilities (barrier and dispell are a must imo) who has ROOM for specialisations?

 

In related news, greatwep warrior needs more closers. Shield warrior has two in their tree (shield bash, and the lunge), and THEN there's charging bull in the tanking tree. So unless your greatwep is tanking, you have NO closers, whereas your typical tank has THREE. What gives..?!

[Jeffry]

In related news, greatwep warrior needs more closers. Shield warrior has two in their tree (shield bash, and the lunge), and THEN there's charging bull in the tanking tree. So unless your greatwep is tanking, you have NO closers, whereas your typical tank has THREE. What gives..?!

 

Well, you can have grappling chain and combat roll. And isn't charging bull right at the bottom just past one of the taunts or one taunt + one passive? Sacrificing a point or two for that isn't so bad imo.

[actionhero112]

Mages were neutered, both by the limited active skill slots and the relatively bad abilities they have. With the lowest damage weapon, combined with low modifiers and long cooldowns, mages are super pathetic. They can't use the heroic offense tonic either to even compare to rogues or warrior damage. 

 

This essentially makes them CC and barrier bots. 

 

Buid paths are also limited due to how few trees there are. Add 2 more for every class for build variety. 

[Jeffry]

They can't use the heroic offense tonic either to even compare to rogues or warrior damage.

 

I felt this was really weird, since at least Arcane Warrior in MP can use that tonic (I don't know about other mage classes there). Also I don't want to bring the Knight Enchanter card again, but that class can certainly compare to rogues or warriors in terms of dmg, they even have the single biggest dmg ability in the game (not counting Mark of Death which is fueled by your party's dmg or focus abilities). And Knight Enchanter certainly isn't a barrier and CC bot, because with him in the party, there is no need for CC and since you will be casting a barrier on yourself, you might as well cast it on others at the same time.

 

But yeah, that is one subclass, which has 1 possible viable build (with modifications due to personal preferences), so not much variability there either.

[snackrat]

Well, you can have grappling chain and combat roll. And isn't charging bull right at the bottom just past one of the taunts or one taunt + one passive? Sacrificing a point or two for that isn't so bad imo.

 

Nope. Most enemies I want to close in on (RAMS...!!!) are immune to grappling chain, and the roll isn't actually any faster than combat jog is.

And yes, you can get Charge with the second point - put on in either Cry or Challenge and you can get it, so I always do. STILL WANT MOAR closers though D: And it feels sad 'wasting' a point of a taunt for a DPS warrior.

 

EDIT:: Other thing I just thought of - Charging Bull is very inconsistent about cancelling. :c

[Jeffry]

Nope. Most enemies I want to close in on (RAMS...!!!) are immune to grappling chain, and the roll isn't actually any faster than combat jog is.

And yes, you can get Charge with the second point - put on in either Cry or Challenge and you can get it, so I always do. STILL WANT MOAR closers though D: And it feels sad 'wasting' a point of a taunt for a DPS warrior.

 

Yeah, the roll is only useful in close quarters when you are already in combat, because it is faster to roll to your next enemy than to run the 2 meters there on foot, since even for such a short distance your character is preparing like he is about to run a 100 meters sprint.

 

And yes, when the game only allows you to use 8 abilities, I feel like a taunt on a dps warrior is a waste of an ability slot, though it could be useful at times with certain party compositions.

[Dracon525]

I kinda feel that all the classes have been downgraded. To me, it seems all 3 have had a major "you're all about damage" focus put on them.

In Origins/2, my team usually consisted of; tank, healer/support, damager, debilitator. I miss my debilitating mages, hexing the hell out of everyone, or them supporting with buffs while the rogue cripples whoever my damager was attacking. Or my side-warrior stunning/knocking down enemies.

In DAI, it's just... Dull. I'm not sure about Artificer, but all aspects of the rogue skills are about dealing more and more damage. Can they even stun anymore? Mages are just "Hey, lets make a class where you needs to focus all your attention/build around a specific spell (barrier)". Even the slightly debilitaty tree for warriors is still full of '+ more damage when you use this ability"

[Dubya75]

If I need to open a lock I just fast travel back to camp, fetch a rogue, have him open the lock, back to camp and pick up a warrior again, and so on.

 

Feels like a lot less of a hassle than actually bringing a rogue with me all the time.

 

You do realize that warriors can bash open locked doors, right?

[Jeffry]

In DAI, it's just... Dull. I'm not sure about Artificer, but all aspects of the rogue skills are about dealing more and more damage. Can they even stun anymore? Mages are just "Hey, lets make a class where you needs to focus all your attention/build around a specific spell (barrier)". Even the slightly debilitaty tree for warriors is still full of '+ more damage when you use this ability"

 

I don't remember a direct stun on rogues (when we are not counting + % stagger on hit on items). Few staggering and 2 aoe sleep abilities (1 of them in the Assassin spec).