11 réponses à ce sujet

[N7ClassSoldier]

Normally in RPG's I like to choose a class that gives me a little bit of everything (for example, the Sentinel class from Mass Effect). I usually pick this class because it allows me to adapt to any situation without relying entirely on my companions for help. I know that for Dragon Age Inquisition, the Mage is almost the "go-to" class for being "a jack of all trades", as it allows me to defend myself, unleash big damage, and control the battle field. However, I was wondering if any of the other classes could also have a "jack of all trades" element to them? I don't mind having to worry about whether I have a mage or any other class in my party, but I want to be able to adapt to the battle field without solely relying on them.

 

The reason I'm asking this is because narratively, I'm not sure I want my character to be a mage. Since a huge part of the conflict in Dragon Age Inquisition is the mages vs the templars, I feel that by being someone other than a mage, it would give me more of an outsider approach to the situation. I feel that if I was a mage I would probably be doing nothing but support mages (granted, even if I wasn't a mage, I'd still support them because what better way to fight dark magic than with magic?).

 

Does playing as a mage illicit a different feeling in the narrative as opposed to playing a rogue or a warrior?

[PapaCharlie9]

Looks like you double-posted. Want to delete the other one?

 

With respect to the narrative, I would say yes. A mage or warrior, particularly a Rift Mage or Templar, respectively, seems to fit into the narrative better, IMHO. You have a clear side to take (or disavow) in the mage/templar conflict. There is a little bit of bonus content/dialogue for each as well. For example, mages take a penalty in WEWH, even if they are human.

 

A rogue is a more awkward fit in the narrative. I can convince myself that a Dalish hunter as an archer makes sense, but a DW Rogue? The only race background that actually fits DW Rogue is dwarf. Everything else requires quite a bit of headcanon gymnastics. What is a DW Rogue Qunari Vashoth (but not Carta) doing spying on the Conclave?

 

Reavers are also awkward, but not as much as a rogue, since being a Reaver is kind of a pan-racial sort of situation anyway. I can't see why a Trevelyan would be a DW Rogue, but I can see a Trevelyan being a Reaver.

 

---------------

 

With respect to jack-of-all trades, I'd say the Templar and Tempest come closest. Both of the specializations look like casting spells, more or less. Both can tank. Both can DPS.

 

But that's just superficial appearance. In terms of combat gameplay, there is no jack-of-all-trades.  There's just some stuff you can't do. If you solo as a mage or a warrior, you can't open locked doors, period. If you are a warrior or a rogue, you can't break through promoted magical force fields, period. 

 

That said, you can solo the game relatively easily as a rogue of any specialization, or as a Reaver, or as a Knight-Enchanter. There's stuff you can't do and side quests you can't complete, but nothing that prevents you from finishing the main quest.

[straykat]

Looks like you double-posted. Want to delete the other one?

 

With respect to the narrative, I would say yes. A mage or warrior, particularly a Rift Mage or Templar, respectively, seems to fit into the narrative better, IMHO. You have a clear side to take (or disavow) in the mage/templar conflict. There is a little bit of bonus content/dialogue for each as well. For example, mages take a penalty in WEWH, even if they are human.

 

A rogue is a more awkward fit in the narrative. I can convince myself that a Dalish hunter as an archer makes sense, but a DW Rogue? The only race background that actually fits DW Rogue is dwarf. Everything requires quite a bit of headcanon gymnastics.

 

Reavers are also awkward, though Reaver is kind of a pan-racial sort of situation. I can't see why a Trevelyan would be a DW Rogue, but I can see a Trevelyan being a Reaver.

 

---------------

 

With respect to jack-of-all trades, I'd say the Templar and Tempest come closest. Both of the specializations look like casting spell, more or less.

 

But that's just superficial appearance. In terms of combat gameplay, there is no jack-of-all-trades.  There's just some stuff you can't do. If you solo as a mage or a warrior, you can't open locked doors, period. If you are a warrior or a rogue, you can't break through promoted magical force fields, period. 

 

That said, you can solo the game relatively easily as a rogue of any specialization, or as a Reaver, or as a Knight-Enchanter. There's stuff you can't do and side quests you can't complete, but nothing that prevents you from finishing the main quest.

 

The game was originally designed around a rogue as the signature character. And a human. Like DA2 for the mage. Not a Dalish or dwarf, who are afterthoughts. They're the ones that need more mental gymnastics. Somewhere along the way, they changed the image to the warrior on the cover, but the rogue was supposed to be the "thing" at first.

 

  It fits well enough. And their default is female rogue. Why would they do it if it was so awkward?

 

I wouldn't say they're jack of all trades though. MY DW'er has range with throwing knives, but that's it really (artificer btw). It feels like Batman sometimes... so I guess that's kind of versatile. If I could switch weapons, that'd be awesome.

[AlanC9]

Wait a minute. Isn't a Vashoth rogue running security at the Conclave rather than spying on it?

[PapaCharlie9]

Wait a minute. Isn't a Vashoth rogue running security at the Conclave rather than spying on it?

My bad, you are right:

Regardless of the player's chosen class, all Qunari Inquisitors are members of the Valo-kas mercenary company and are sent to the Chantry conclave as hired security.

Not that that is any less far-fetched than spying. Well, okay, maybe it makes a little more sense, since the Templars couldn't be relied upon to do that duty.

[straykat]

Qunari rogue seems like a good fit for a tempest melee (or one building up to that)... it plays to their strengths at least (melee defense). And still handy in just regular security.

 

Don't forget either, the Arishok was technically a Rogue class

 

 

I can't believe I'm defending Qunari rogues, but there ya go...

[Bayonet Hipshot]

Looks like you double-posted. Want to delete the other one?

 

With respect to the narrative, I would say yes. A mage or warrior, particularly a Rift Mage or Templar, respectively, seems to fit into the narrative better, IMHO. You have a clear side to take (or disavow) in the mage/templar conflict. There is a little bit of bonus content/dialogue for each as well. For example, mages take a penalty in WEWH, even if they are human.

 

A rogue is a more awkward fit in the narrative. I can convince myself that a Dalish hunter as an archer makes sense, but a DW Rogue? The only race background that actually fits DW Rogue is dwarf. Everything else requires quite a bit of headcanon gymnastics. What is a DW Rogue Qunari Vashoth (but not Carta) doing spying on the Conclave?

 

Reavers are also awkward, but not as much as a rogue, since being a Reaver is kind of a pan-racial sort of situation anyway. I can't see why a Trevelyan would be a DW Rogue, but I can see a Trevelyan being a Reaver.

 

---------------

 

With respect to jack-of-all trades, I'd say the Templar and Tempest come closest. Both of the specializations look like casting spells, more or less. Both can tank. Both can DPS.

 

But that's just superficial appearance. In terms of combat gameplay, there is no jack-of-all-trades.  There's just some stuff you can't do. If you solo as a mage or a warrior, you can't open locked doors, period. If you are a warrior or a rogue, you can't break through promoted magical force fields, period. 

 

That said, you can solo the game relatively easily as a rogue of any specialization, or as a Reaver, or as a Knight-Enchanter. There's stuff you can't do and side quests you can't complete, but nothing that prevents you from finishing the main quest.

 

A Dalish Hunter can be a Dual Weapon Rogue. Just look up "Hunting with Knives" online and you will find many articles and videos about it.

 

As for Human and Qunari, being a Dual Weapon Rogue is perfectly viable since the basics of Dual Weapon fighting is a lot like Filipino Martial Arts (Eskrima, Kali, Arnis) whereby people use single and dual sticks, knives, swords and a whole host of other weapons to fight.

[Forsythia77]

My bad, you are right:
 

Regardless of the player's chosen class, all Qunari Inquisitors are members of the Valo-kas mercenary company and are sent to the Chantry conclave as hired security.

Not that that is any less far-fetched than spying. Well, okay, maybe it makes a little more sense, since the Templars couldn't be relied upon to do that duty.

 

 

I think it makes perfect sense to hire an outside *neutral party* as security since tensions were high and mages, templars and the chantry were all too close to the situation to be assess any threats in an unbiased manner.

[stop_him]

Qunari rogue seems like a good fit for a tempest melee (or one building up to that)... it plays to their strengths at least (melee defense). And still handy in just regular security.

 

Don't forget either, the Arishok was technically a Rogue class

 

 

I can't believe I'm defending Qunari rogues, but there ya go...

 

Yay! Now I don't feel silly having made DWD-tempest, Burtha Adaar!

[SpaceV3gan]

I also love the idea of being a jack-of-all-trades and have a hard time having fun with any ME3 class except for the Sentinel.

Back in DA:O pretty much any class could be built as a jack-of-all-trades. In DA2 character building was streamlined (I would say even dumbed-down) so that each class was 'locked' into their specific role, but at least we could quick-switch between weapons, something that gave the Rogue class a minor jack-of-all-trades feel.
Unfornately, what started in DA2 went much further in DA;I with the removal of weapons quick-switching and manual stat distribution.

I would argue that a ranged KE comes the closest to this concept, since you can still cast support spells and do ok damage with fire spells, nevertheless, it isn't that stellar. The Multiplayer can offer so much more flexibility because it gives the KE-equivalent-character Stone Fist which combos brilliantly with either Chain Lightning or Winter's Grasp making it an optimal damage dealer at range... but well, in the singleplayer campaign we don't have that option.

I love the Templar since it is a character that can and pretty much always will undertake different roles such as tank, CC and pretty good AOE damage dealer, but it has weak single target DPS and zero ranged abilities.

All in all, characters in DA:I are far better suited to do one role and min-max for that role only.

[capn233]

^Yes, KE is one.  Archer-Artificer is possibly another since melee range archery isn't bad, and you'll have other rogue / artificer skills that are also helpful in melee.

[Fylimar]

I still think, that the rogue fits the jack-of-all-trade- concept the best. They can fight, open locks and have some really cool skills to  distract the enemy. So, I'll go with rogue.

Storywise, Imo every class/race fits. The templar/mage war is effecting the whole nation, so many people would have reason to be at the conclave to see firsthand, if they manage a peace treaty. You don't have to be a circle mage or templar in training (I think, that was the human alternatives) to have an interest in those talks. You don't even have to be Andrastian - Justinia was just the person respected enough, to function as the negotiator. As we see pretty soon in the game, everyone is effected by this fights, so I guess, a carta dwarf, Tal Vashoth mercenary or Dalish is as pissed off by those fights, as every other citizen of Thedas. For me, that's reason enough, that my dalish elf or carta dwarf wants to be there