Nah, there was a spell that just took off MR. Lower Resistance perhaps? Something like that.
Level drain, incidentally, was one of the most retarded mechanics I've some across in an RPG. Totally and utterly unfun.
Oh ... I guess I misunderstood?! And yes ... it actually is "lower resistance" 
I only hated to get hit by this level drain crap ... always messed up my plans 
You were lucky they didn't hit you with a sequencer full of the unresistable magic resistance reducing spell (I forget the name). Just what you need to soften up an annoying paladin (or dragon) before you unload enough firepower to level a decent sized city within a single instant.
At that point I'd be counting on closing the distance and smacking him about ten times with a magic-dispelling greatsword (wonderful for bringing down magic defenses) along with Minsc with his head-popping axe 
At that point I'd be counting on closing the distance and smacking him about ten times with a magic-dispelling greatsword (wonderful for bringing down magic defenses) along with Minsc with his head-popping axe
No you wouldn't. Time has stopped (ZA WARUDO!!!!). You can't even move until after he's had the chance to cast 40 odd spells....
No you wouldn't. Time has stopped (ZA WARUDO!!!!). You can't even move until after he's had the chance to cast 40 odd spells....
Enemy spellcasters used to be feared in Dragon Age as well, not as powerful as your average lich in BG2, but they could still mess up your party good with a well placed fireball 
Inquisition seems too balanced between the classes IMO. Heck they even have some 20 activated abilities each, as if a warrior was some kind of melee spellcaster, or maybe mages in Dragon Age just got stupid since 60 spells were removed?
Either way, I find mages in Inquisition weak, no more than a nuisance as they're porting around, like chase the guinea pig or something 
Just one quick comment here ... towards the "spamming of potions" and towards the topics:
- Healing or no healing
- potions or healing
- the benefits of combat tactics
- the very much narrowed down spell range for mages in DA:I compared to DA:O
- difficulty in combats in DA games
Through the clever use of tactics and the skills you have at your disposal - including "heal" - there is no need to use potions! And when you don't carry potions, don't buy them and don't make them (craft) ... You will have a challenging ... or at least ... interesting combat "composition" (depending on the enemies and level of your party) that needs to be equalled out that will give you reason enough to think about what to do next! You have your strategy (the way you skilled your party members and their roles) you have your tactics (the order and combination of spells and skills used) and you have your fun factor involved (a variety of skills to choose from).
This is interesting to me. I don't need potions and I don't want them. Healing via spells ment to me that I have to "time" everything accordingly to how the fights went down !!! That's the fun! No parashoot (potions) to save you ... Just you and your attentions to details. You will have to plan everything ahead of the fights when picking your strategy and then - each fight - push yourself to go and try to be more aggressive towards the enemies, to take more risks and everything ... switching up the members to a pure mage party and so on ... juggling the encounters as they come with swiftness ...
When you can manage ... it is not necessarily difficult. But it is always much more intersting than to "spam" potions! This spamming is the exact reason why BioWare took away this ability to have so many potions! They stated that in a panel.
My personal opinion is that potions are wrong anyway. Either you can mange the difficulty or you should scale it down. When you can keep it up - you can work on your "personal style" (of "sorts"). I choose more skills to fit my tactical needs and to enhance the overall combat variety over potions any day ...
I don't play a RPG to drink potions ... I play a RPG to play my class and the party I arranged - FCOL!
(*Edit)
I think most important of all is to have an interesting combat that offers me variety and fun!
If I wanted to ... I could always raise the difficulty artificially!
(In Skyrim you even were FORCED to raise the difficulty artificially because the game was way to easy on even the highest - Master and Legendary) ...
Honestly I haven't seen many people suggest anything like this before. The fact that about the only way you're going to get much of any real "challange" after a certain point is more or less making your own.
I'd also add that if you aren't into having no "healing" then look at limiting use of gaurd or even bariers. But alot of this is going to depend on how well versed you are with the mechanics and different classes. Not really something I'd be trying on my first playthrough but a definate possibility if you are needing to play on nightmare just to get SOME difficulty. Try lowering it to hard where armor still has a use and just limit, potions, gaurd, barrier, and game mechanic abuse like the combat border abuse. It does provide more enjoyment for me too. Although, I do think it's lame that you need to do any of this at all... it is still an option.
+10
Enemy spellcasters used to be feared in Dragon Age as well, not as powerful as your average lich in BG2, but they could still mess up your party good with a well placed fireball
Inquisition seems too balanced between the classes IMO. Heck they even have some 20 activated abilities each, as if a warrior was some kind of melee spellcaster, or maybe mages in Dragon Age just got stupid since 60 spells were removed?
Either way, I find mages in Inquisition weak, no more than a nuisance as they're porting around, like chase the guinea pig or something
Well, DA2's mages, while not using nearly the same variety of spells as DA:O's were still just as threatening (if not more so). They were relatively easy to kill, but woe betide you if they got off their AoEs. DA:I's mages? Well....they've got quite a lot of HPs. Their spells are trivial.
I have to admit, I'd love to see something like good old Gaxx turn up in Inqusition. The sheer amount of range from the unresistable no-save imprisonment spells would be hillarious.
Honestly I haven't seen many people suggest anything like this before. The fact that about the only way you're going to get much of any real "challange" after a certain point is more or less making your own.
I'd also add that if you aren't into having no "healing" then look at limiting use of gaurd or even bariers. But alot of this is going to depend on how well versed you are with the mechanics and different classes. Not really something I'd be trying on my first playthrough but a definate possibility if you are needing to play on nightmare just to get SOME difficulty. Try lowering it to hard where armor still has a use and just limit, potions, gaurd, barrier, and game mechanic abuse like the combat border abuse. It does provide more enjoyment for me too. Although, I do think it's lame that you need to do any of this at all... it is still an option.
+10
When people say Origjns didn't require tactics, I wonder if they played the same game I did.
Or is it just because I never played a Warrior?
Well, DA2's mages, while not using nearly the same variety of spells as DA:O's were still just as threatening (if not more so). They were relatively easy to kill, but woe betide you if they got off their AoEs. DA:I's mages? Well....they've got quite a lot of HPs. Their spells are trivial.
I have to admit, I'd love to see something like good old Gaxx turn up in Inqusition. The sheer amount of range from the unresistable no-save imprisonment spells would be hillarious.
Again, the amount of effort you put into each encounter might have been X. The required effort was actually 0. That you didn't realize that is either a strength of the game or a weakness of yourself depending on how you look at it.
This isn't new. It wasn't like BG required a lot of thought other than a handful of encounters as well. It is largely true of all RPGs which are not tactical simulations but character progressions systems. There are fights that serve to build up XP and pad the game length and then fights that serve to menace players. Think about the Roads. You had the broodmaster and Branka fights which clearly tried to kill you then you had the semi-tough Forgemaster and spider queen fights that might be threatening. The rest of those battles were clearly not of any threat to you or your party and that is about 90+% of your time in the Roads.
Learning 350 spells + how to combine them didn't require a lot of thought? As opposed to casting barrier in DA:I and win the fight because of it?
In BG the enemies have access to the same spells you have, and you actually need to have certain spells to counter spells they use etc. In DA:I the mages, or anyone else, have access to the stuff the player has. You don't have to make a reactive action vs enemies at all, where in BG it was pretty damn vital.
Again, the amount of effort you put into each encounter might have been X. The required effort was actually 0. That you didn't realize that is either a strength of the game or a weakness of yourself depending on how you look at it.
This isn't new. It wasn't like BG required a lot of thought other than a handful of encounters as well. It is largely true of all RPGs which are not tactical simulations but character progressions systems. There are fights that serve to build up XP and pad the game length and then fights that serve to menace players. Think about the Roads. You had the broodmaster and Branka fights which clearly tried to kill you then you had the semi-tough Forgemaster and spider queen fights that might be threatening. The rest of those battles were clearly not of any threat to you or your party and that is about 90+% of your time in the Roads.
But in skyrim for example you had to do this for your whole pt to have any difficulty wse
Hate to sound like a broken record - but - there's a mod for that. Several actually. Mods that bring all (or some - up to you) npc's, critters, mobs, etc, etc to your level and beyond. With new abilities.
That's one of the major differences between DAI and Skyrim. Also why many people mod their characters up to level 25 or so before even beginning a new [Skyrim] gamw. With mods like Revenge of the Enemies or Combat Overhaul, you will get your ass kicked at any level.
DAI, sadly, is level based. So if you play the whole game (like level 23 or higher) before seeing Cory the battle is going to be pretty boring.
This isn't new. It wasn't like BG required a lot of thought other than a handful of encounters as well. It is largely true of all RPGs which are not tactical simulations but character progressions systems. There are fights that serve to build up XP and pad the game length and then fights that serve to menace players. Think about the Roads. You had the broodmaster and Branka fights which clearly tried to kill you then you had the semi-tough Forgemaster and spider queen fights that might be threatening. The rest of those battles were clearly not of any threat to you or your party and that is about 90+% of your time in the Roads.
Exactly. If you really want tactics go and try to save Cerya on neutral path in LUCT.
Hate to sound like a broken record - but - there's a mod for that. Several actually. Mods that bring all (or some - up to you) npc's, critters, mobs, etc, etc to your level and beyond. With new abilities.
That's one of the major differences between DAI and Skyrim. Also why many people mod their characters up to level 25 or so before even beginning a new [Skyrim] gamw. With mods like Revenge of the Enemies or Combat Overhaul, you will get your ass kicked at any level.
DAI, sadly, is level based. So if you play the whole game (like level 23 or higher) before seeing Cory the battle is going to be pretty boring.
(writing from tablet at the moment ... )
Well, it's not about the difficulty ...
It's about keeping it fun and interesting!
But in skyrim for example you had to do this for your whole pt to have any difficulty wse
Ok seems I missunderstood what your point was there. And my post wasn't honestly about difficulty so much as getting an actual "challenge". There's a difference. It may not seem like there is but there is. This game relies almost entirely on "difficulty" to provide something that's supposed to give you more of a "challenge". And fails misserably at it. It's based around a flawed system so they had to take liberties that just don't work to increase nightmare challenge. And it shows. I'll just leave it at that.
But ither way it's nice to see people suggesting something players can try to improve experience instead of just bitching about what doesn't work and leaving it at that. It was ment as a compliment
Well, DA2's mages, while not using nearly the same variety of spells as DA:O's were still just as threatening (if not more so). They were relatively easy to kill, but woe betide you if they got off their AoEs. DA:I's mages? Well....they've got quite a lot of HPs. Their spells are trivial.
I have to admit, I'd love to see something like good old Gaxx turn up in Inqusition. The sheer amount of range from the unresistable no-save imprisonment spells would be hillarious.
Gaxx could be beaten in no time at all with one Protection from Magic Scroll.
But yes, it would be fun to have somebody like that in Inquisition.))
For me the BSN is about two things really:Ok seems I missunderstood what your point was there. And my post wasn't honestly about difficulty so much as getting an actual "challenge". There's a difference. It may not seem like there is but there is. This game relies almost entirely on "difficulty" to provide something that's supposed to give you more of a "challenge". And fails misserably at it. It's based around a flawed system so they had to take liberties that just don't work to increase nightmare challenge. And it shows. I'll just leave it at that.
But ither way it's nice to see people suggesting something players can try to improve experience instead of just bitching about what doesn't work and leaving it at that. It was ment as a compliment
Exactly. If you really want tactics go and try to save Cerya on neutral path in LUCT.
Frankly something like Frozen Synapse on the mobile devices is a better tactical game than the DA series has been. That doesn't even get into Battle Academy and then more serious things like Lock n Load series or Close Combat even an older game like Steel Panthers is better. Heck, XCOM and Jagged Allaince are better tactical role playing-ish things. I think exposure to those sorts of things makes me a lot more dismissive of the tactical "glory" of BG and DA in general.
Wow, who would have thought that turn-based tactical games are better at the tactical element than BW RPGs. You know what is also a prety good tactical rpg-ish game? Crusader Kings 2, it really requires so much more thought to play than the gameplay in anything BW has ever done. Is Crusader Kings 2 relevant in the discussion about DAI being obviously dumbed down and stripped of core features from previous games in order to bring in much larger crowd? No, it is not, just as your post.
DAO was not really hard once you got the hang of it and that same goes for other BW RPGs. Nobody is saying any of their games were really difficult. We are only saying they required more thought than DAI and they allowed you to play them in many different ways. Which is true. You are not even defending DAI (why is that? could it be there is not really that much to defend?), you are unfairly bashing DAO and BG for not having the tactical depth of frikkin turn-based strategies and wargames But kudos for trying to pull that kind of argumentation off.
Frankly something like Frozen Synapse on the mobile devices is a better tactical game than the DA series has been. That doesn't even get into Battle Academy and then more serious things like Lock n Load series or Close Combat even an older game like Steel Panthers is better. Heck, XCOM and Jagged Allaince are better tactical role playing-ish things. I think exposure to those sorts of things makes me a lot more dismissive of the tactical "glory" of BG and DA in general.
It definitely puts things into perspective, "tactics" is a broad term. I still use tactics in DAI, because you can do that without AI tuning and tac cam, if you want to and you can still use tactics in DAO without ever fiddling with "if then" commands. I haven't changed the way I approach combat in DA games regardless of the combat systems that were introduced and I do enjoy the chaotic combat DAI offers well enough. i definitely don't approach it as button mushing fest or find that DAO needs more thought than DAI, it does not.
I think sometimes people confuse micromanaging with tactics when they talk about DAO. I also highly dislike when the conversation goes into "my way of playing this game is the only way you should play the game, or else you are stupid or cheating".
You are not even defending DAI (why is that? could it be there is not really that much to defend?), you are unfairly bashing DAO and BG for not having the tactical depth of frikkin turn-based strategies and wargames
Enemy spellcasters used to be feared in Dragon Age as well, not as powerful as your average lich in BG2, but they could still mess up your party good with a well placed fireball
Inquisition seems too balanced between the classes IMO. Heck they even have some 20 activated abilities each, as if a warrior was some kind of melee spellcaster, or maybe mages in Dragon Age just got stupid since 60 spells were removed?
Either way, I find mages in Inquisition weak, no more than a nuisance as they're porting around, like chase the guinea pig or something
They must be really stupid, since they forgot how to use healing spells
I believe his point was that he doesn't see much difference between DAO and DAI.
Ofc he doesn't see much difference between them when he is comparing them to XCOM or Steel Panthers. I too don't see much difference between DAO and DAI when I am comparing them to Europa Universalis, Hearts of Iron, Crusader Kings, Medieval and Shogun Total War (or to other games that have exactly as less in common with BW RPGs as he posted, like FIFA or Need for Speed)
If he doesn't see much difference between DAI and DAO, he should try to describe it on them. Not on comparison to tactics-heavy wargames. But then he would encounter the problem of having very little to say in DAI's defense.
They must be really stupid, since they forgot how to use healing spells
Quite right. Especially since there is only one person in the world that can actually save the world. One would think mages would make sure they had healing to keep the fellow alive for as long as possible.
Figuring out that one can stack healing potions on horses would have been nice too. They are pack animals, after all.
They must be really stupid, since they forgot how to use healing spells
Retour en haut