84 réponses à ce sujet

[wanderon]

It's about balancing the usefulness of classes both as PCs and as members of the party - add opening locks/chests to the warrior and you diminish the value of the rogue as a PC or party member becuase they no longer are the only option for opening locks and in a CRPG opening doors/locks and getting both exp and loot for doing so is a very big option.



Whether or not it makes "sense" that a warrior can't bash a lock open doesn't really come into play when you start giving all classes access to the same options you diminish the whole concept of classes in a party based game.



I'm against it as an official add-on - let the community fashion something to accomplish it if folks want to use it and leave the base game as is - if it's not broke don't fix it - I'm sure there were long discussions during development about the pro's and cons of giving the bash option or a mage spell option and I think they came to the right decision already - thats my take.

[bzombo]

Julian_Kraynog wrote...

Since we're talking about balancing issues, let me clear this up for you. The rogue's effectiveness or usefulness isn't only limited to in-battle scenarios but also the outside world. Warriors and mages have no skill or talent to be useful in free roam as rogues are, which totally defeats the balance between the classes. If rogues can have something only they can do to profit themselves, why not warriors and mages? Lets put aside the lock picking issue for now but are warriors and mages given anything special like rogues(like lock picking)? No. Wanderon, I totally agree with you that if the same skill is given to other classes as well, the variation in classes just crashes. But I do not see anything special I can do using only Warrior/Mage. If warriors and mages cannot be given this skill, then devs need to think of skills which are unique to them respectively and their usefulness also being out of battle.

ummm....mages have magic as their exclusive skill, and i think it is a pretty big one. warriors don't have a set skill per se, but they are the damage absorbers, which is a pretty big thing. without a tank, it makes it harder on the rogues and mages.

[IcemanII]

A thing called "Smash lock"

[jreist]

I personally think it makes sence how it is.



@ Julian_Kranog, What would you add for warriors to do outside of battle??



Seriously I don't think it unbalances the classes at all. Rogues are good at picking locks and stealing from people; they are rogues. Warriors are battle hardened soldiers who wear better armour making them harder to kill and deal good damage. Mages have uber magic abilities. Remember this is a "tactical RPG". Having certain classes do certain things fits right in with "tactics". You choose tactically whether to have a rogue who can open locks or not.

[bzombo]

Julian_Kraynog wrote...

@bzombo I meant OUT OF BATTLE. Which means not while fighting enemies but roaming around the world. For example,Pickpocketing is an out-of-battle skill. All those magic spells aren't of any use out-of-battle.

ok, but why does it matter if it is in or out of battle? every class has something that differentiates them. rogues just happen to have more out of battle skills, which is where most of their value is anyway.

[Krilral]

Yeah it would certainly be nice with an alternative to lockpicking. When i encounter locked boxes i often think: Maybe i can't pick locks but there's nothing wrong with my "Big Hammer" skill.

[DPSSOC]

I gotta say if my Warrior could open locks, even at the risk of destroying loot, I'd never take a rogue. The Rogue's one out of combat skill is there to balance that they're horribly outclassed (no pun intended) by Warrior's and Mages in combat. Now I've played the Rogue and done well in combat, but it's a slow and painful process. Rogues can't match the crowd control or pure damage of a Mage nor can they match the damage absorption or damage output of a Warrior. The Rogue's only saving grace is that the high dexterity requirements of their talents means they have high defense which makes them exceptionally hard to hit. Let the Rogue's have their lock picking.

[tomas819]

I use the Open Lock Spells mod, myself.

http://www.dragonage...file.php?id=157

If the game offered more rogue companions to choose from (instead of a bumper crop of warriors [Alistair, Sten, Dog, Shale, Oghren, etc.]), I might feel differently, but having to bring along either Zev or Leliana all the time just for the lockpicking gets old, imo.

A mod like Bash Lock or Open Lock Spells allows you to mix up your party composition more.

[Peeker2009]

Larry L wrote...

I personally don't understand why the game has locked chests in the first place. Not a single locked chest in the game has any decent loot aside from only 1 I can think of, which is the one with Zev's gift boots.

Exactly, but I don't think it was by chance that the loot was so uninspiring. I suspect that it was a compromise between the developers, that vaguely resembled this:

Dev1: I reckon only rogues should be able to open locks. We want to make the 3 classes as distinct as possible.
Dev2: Yeah that's a worthy aim, but I can imagine all the complaints from players who feel like they're missing out if they choose not to play a rogue.
Dev3: Hmm, perhaps we can do it so no one will be too badly affected by not having the open lock skill. What if we make it so only rogues can open locks, but we put nothing of importance in the chests, so if a player doesn't want to bring a rogue, or can't be bothered going back with one later, they can be sure that they aren't missing out on anything much.
Dev1: But then what's the point of opening locks in the first place?
Dev2: It gives the party experience points.
Dev1: Won't players still complain?
Dev3: Well yes, but missing out on 50 xp is not going to hurt as much as missing out on nice gear.
All: *some cheers, some nods of approval, and a couple of murmurs from the corner.

After reading and contributing to this forum for a couple of months now, I now understand what a disparate group Bioware has targeted with this game, ranging from those who really only want to be part of the story, to those who want to get involved in complex game play. I get the feeling that, as a consequence, compromises like this had to be made right through production in order to try and please all. The loot in DA:O was a victim of one of these compromises imo.

If this wasn't the case, then you would have to conclude that they just didn't think good loot was important in an rpg, or that they ran out of time to do it properly (5 years or so wasn't long enough?). The compromise scenario speaks better of the development team I think, though it might invite the "jack of all trades, master of none" criticism. It will be interesting to see the direction(s) they go in with the sequel.

Modifié par Peeker2009, 02 février 2010 - 10:12 .

[akkaze]

Reading all of these posts - all good points - I myself think:



it's good to have things certain classes can't do. it encourages repeat play-throughs, leaves some surprises, and enables more variety in story content according to class (eg. a rogue can find some miniplot item that other classes won't)



but it is also certainly true that a lot of the loot in DAO is sort of uninspired/generic/deflating. It is strange to solve some kind of minor puzzle or pass some skill check or other and then get a generic shield or some such. Now I'm not in favor of you know +500 swords in every corner. In fact, personally, I'd rather go for a low-magic setting, in general. But exciting loot/player rewards don't necessarily have to be powerful items. some of the books in the game have really neat little "short stories" or vignettes that add to the background/setting. What about more items like that, with roleplaying color? either a neat story or revelation of some kind. or a very minor fetch-and-carry quest. those very little things can make replays interesting and feel like a real reward for a skill success, without littering the game with magic swords of ultimate killingness



my 2c

[Allison W]

It's worth noting that Stealing, which would generally be considered a rogue thing, is a skill that can be taken by any class. Rogues will usually be better at it, though, due to the fact that chance of success is based on Cunning, and being in stealth mode when you make the attempt also increases the chance of success.



A similar setup would probably work well for lockpicking--instead of making it a rogue-only talent branch, make it a skill but keep it based on Cunning, the way Stealing is. That way, you could open many locks without keeping Leliana or Zevran on hand at all times, but rogues would almost always be better at it and might not even need to take all four ranks (bearing in mind they get more skill points to begin with) to pick the toughest locks, whereas even with all four ranks, warriors and mages would still have to make a significant special investment in Cunning to open the toughest locks.



For what it's worth, each rank in lockpicking is equivalent to ten points of Cunning, and the toughest locks in the game require 70 points of lockpicking total, IIRC (so with 4 ranks of lockpicking you'd still need 30 Cunning, but you could get away with 3 ranks if you have 40 Cunning, and so on).

[Wishpig]

wanderon wrote...
Wrong??? According to whom?

I think the mechanic is fine as it is. I see no need for warriors to have an alternate method of opening locks, nor do I see any reason for mages to be able to do it with a spell. I like it just the way it is - it helps to make up for other weaknesses the rogue faces early on and it encourages balanced party combinations with both rogues and warriors in attendence later on.

Helps them overcome weaknesses early on? I had two points in unlock before level 9 and couldn't unlock 1/2 of the locks I came across. I still couldn't unlock what seemed like WAY to many untill I hit level 14 and finally got the final unlocking tier.

And 99% of the time locked chests had nothing worth much value. On the other hand, at no time did I feel like my Rogue was any weaker then other classes... if I micromanaged him of course.By level 10 my Rogue was carrying his wieght with ease.

Long story short, I thought the whole lock system was really f*in lame. One of the few things I think needs a total ME2 style revamp.

I have a f*in giant, a golmn, mages that can literally BLOW people up... but I can't open a chest anyother way then by a rogue?

On another note, yeah mages feel REALLY powerfull, but this whole rogue unlocking thing was the only time I felt forced to set up my group in a certain way. To get chests I NEEDED a rogue with unlocking skill, I never felt like I needed any other class in my group.

[Lakmoots]

If anyone could open locks I would never take a Rogue.

Who would? As opposed to a warrior or mage?

Mages and Warriors *excell* at what they do... Rogues are in-between.

They are not efffective as front line fighters, even though they can be made pretty tricksy.

Without lockpicking they only have trap finding.

You *can* steal - that is enough.

Anything else is Rogue only. It was a smart decision, and will not be changed.

Otherwise there is only one reason you would take a Rogue with you from camp in the first place...

Because you are having sex with them and wanted to impress them with your heroism!!

[Wishpig]

Lakmoots wrote...

If anyone could open locks I would never take a Rogue.

Who would? As opposed to a warrior or mage?

Mages and Warriors *excell* at what they do... Rogues are in-between.

They are not efffective as front line fighters, even though they can be made pretty tricksy.

Oh no no no. Not since the dagger fix. Rogues are still stuck with the image of being ok in combat, and they were just OK in combat before the dagger fix. Now their beasts! I just started a game as a rogue and, jesus, even my mage can't drop enemies as quickly. Hell, my Rogue feels over powered, makes my Dual Wield speced Alistair seem look a pansy.

I will literally cut through enemies so quickly I don't get a chance to use talents.

No, after this plathough I will never be without a rogue agian simply because thei not only fun in combat but uber deadly.

I'm tempted to say my rogue feels cheap...to good!

This is how 90% of my fights play out. My warrior taunts, my mage heals him, and my Rogue kills the majority.

And I never really enjoyed playing a rogue either.

Modifié par Wishpig, 03 février 2010 - 03:43 .

[Lakmoots]

Hmmm... interesting.



So basically, if we could all open locks... Rogues would be sneaky fighters?



And Fighters would be... what?



Maybe they will make Rogues simply a subset of Warrior... but that would lose the flavor, IMO.



Now... let me just switch Zevran to Rose's Thorn...

[Elphaba]

Lakmoots wrote...

Hmmm... interesting.

So basically, if we could all open locks... Rogues would be sneaky fighters?

And Fighters would be... what?

Unsneaky rogues?

[wanderon]

Julian_Kraynog wrote...

Since we're talking about balancing issues, let me clear this up for you. The rogue's effectiveness or usefulness isn't only limited to in-battle scenarios but also the outside world. Warriors and mages have no skill or talent to be useful in free roam as rogues are, which totally defeats the balance between the classes. If rogues can have something only they can do to profit themselves, why not warriors and mages? Lets put aside the lock picking issue for now but are warriors and mages given anything special like rogues(like lock picking)? No. Wanderon, I totally agree with you that if the same skill is given to other classes as well, the variation in classes just crashes. But I do not see anything special I can do using only Warrior/Mage. If warriors and mages cannot be given this skill, then devs need to think of skills which are unique to them respectively and their usefulness also being out of battle.

Ok now let me clear this up for you. I am not interested in redesigning the game to meet your expectations (or anyone elses).

I am only here (in this thread) to let you and others who read the thread understand that I do not agree that warriors should have a way to open locks and to generally explain why I feel that way.

Mostly I like the decision the devs have made to only allow rogues this benefit and I don't want anyone to see this thread and think that every Tom Dick and Alistair who plays the game thinks this is some sort of priority issue that needs addressing to make the game better.
 
In fact I don't think it will make the game better at all I think it will harm the game and I have explained in general terms why I think so. In other words I vote NO thank you very much.

Hope that clears things up for you.

[Knal1991]

Lakmoots wrote...

If anyone could open locks I would never take a Rogue.

Who would? As opposed to a warrior or mage?

Mages and Warriors *excell* at what they do... Rogues are in-between.

They are not efffective as front line fighters, even though they can be made pretty tricksy.

Without lockpicking they only have trap finding.

You *can* steal - that is enough.

Anything else is Rogue only. It was a smart decision, and will not be changed.

Otherwise there is only one reason you would take a Rogue with you from camp in the first place...

Because you are having sex with them and wanted to impress them with your heroism!!

I played my rogue invested mostly in the rogue exclusive skills, she's dual wield... with top dualwield line full, the one which allows better defense strength and the ability to wield two swords, have starfang and asturians might...
spended points in assassin and duelist , also invested in poisons, so she can throw grenades....

She is the most powerfull tank, scrapper and backstabber I ever had, she can most likely finish the game on her own, (but I would miss the party banter much...)

still I realise she couldve been stronger, had I not invested in stealth or lockpicking.... but completed the duel line instead...

[Mlai00]

This is a single-player game; if you want lock bashing, all you have to do is dl the mod. Done. There's no reason to spend time here trying to convince anyone else to support official lock bashing.

[Wishpig]

Lakmoots wrote...

Hmmm... interesting.

So basically, if we could all open locks... Rogues would be sneaky fighters?

And Fighters would be... what?

Maybe they will make Rogues simply a subset of Warrior... but that would lose the flavor, IMO.

Now... let me just switch Zevran to Rose's Thorn...

Rogues are the kings of single target DPS.

Warriors are the kings of sucking up damage (unless you count the uber AW).

As awesome as my Rogue is, I've invested little to no points in consitution or stealth, he can't take a punch or escape, w/o Alistair's taunts my rogue would be chopped up fairly quickly. So don't worry fights are very very important, their just not the best at melee combat. Two- Handed warriors +DW warriors serve a role inbetween rogue and warrior...

Of course it's not THAT simple. There are many diffrent builds of rogues.

Modifié par Wishpig, 03 février 2010 - 12:13 .

[Matheau]

There are 3 classes and 4 character slots. I don't think it is exactly unreasonable that the game expects you to take a Rogue along. The game pretty much hands you the best lock picker in the game immediately after Ostagar.

[Knal1991]

you don't need constitution, spend your points wisely and you almost cannot get hit at all, imo more effective then warrior...

Modifié par Knal1991, 03 février 2010 - 12:31 .