58 réponses à ce sujet

[verrall20]

well necromancer is likely for the mage, maybe chevalier for warrior and and archer spec for rogues.

[Kimarous]

I'd love some kind of Diabolist spec for mages, summoning Rage Demons like Avernus or manipulating Sylvans like the Penny Arcade depiction of Flemeth.

[rtype33]

I would love a set of combat techniques for the Mage (Arcane Warrior) class.

[Lakmoots]

I had a thought on this...

I wanted, even more than new specs, to have the old specs further developed.

I would looove a second set of Talents for all the current specs.

Guess what... that is more work than doing one new spec for each class...

I will be dissapointed if Blood Mage and Arcane Warrior do not get another Talent tree, but it is more likely we will have a single new spec with a single talent tree.

It is simply less work to do, especially if they are adding to the core classes.

I am sure they planned for more, but time will tell.

I love the Chevalier and Diabolist/Necromancer ideas, though.

[Freezingfire]

I'm crossing my thumbs for a battle medic for the warrior.

[_Infiltrator]

I'd like to see the old ones refined and re-balanced, for one.

Shapeshifting comes to mind. Oh, the horrors..

Modifié par Infiltrator, 04 février 2010 - 08:44 .

[adembroski11]

Shapeshifting wouldn't be too bad if it didn't take forever to shape change. I find it makes an out-of-mana mage more useful, except that by the time she changes, she's gotta switch back and heal.

[MClover]

Well appartently shapeshifting should be better, but the stats are messed up. Much like the dex problem with rogues, shapeshifting doesn't convert magic into attack and/or damage the way is should properly. I would really like these problems resolved before the expansion, but that's probably mostly wishful thinking.

[Kalledon]

Where did they say new specializations? I only saw new talents/skills and assumed they were fleshing out the existing trees.

[Kalledon]

Nice.  I still hope they flesh out existing specializations.

Modifié par Kalledon, 04 février 2010 - 06:38 .

[Darkemorrow]

Yes, they definitely need to expand specializations. In fact, I would go so far as to say that fleshing out the specializations is the single biggest thing that Bioware could do to make this game even better than it already is. I'd personally like to see each specialization offer like 12 to 16 talents/spells to choose from rather than the current four.



As for ideas for new specializations...



For mages, I would like to a see a specialization for a traditional "blaster" mage. Maybe something like an Elementalist which adds more primal spells and/or enhances existing ones. I'd also like to see some kind of summoner specialization - Diabolist is a good suggestion.



For rogues, I'd like to see an archery-specific specialization, like Marksman or something. Melee rogues already have Assassin and Duelist, and archery needs help in general. A specialization that further enhances stealth and trickery would be cool too. Maybe something like the Shadowdancer prestige class from DnD.



Finally for Warriors, I would like at least one defense-oriented specialization, though not one limited to shield-use - I'm thinking more like a warrior's version of Duelist. Beyond that, warriors just need more variety. Anything that gives warriors more options to choose from would be good.

[Thanatos45]

MClover wrote...

Well appartently shapeshifting should be better, but the stats are messed up. Much like the dex problem with rogues, shapeshifting doesn't convert magic into attack and/or damage the way is should properly. I would really like these problems resolved before the expansion, but that's probably mostly wishful thinking.

It should not. Magic is supposed to determine what the str, dex and con of your shapes are going to be (where higher magic = higher stats), not be directly responsible for your combat prowess.

[draxynnus]

Darkemorrow wrote...

As for ideas for new specializations...

For mages, I would like to a see a specialization for a traditional "blaster" mage. Maybe something like an Elementalist which adds more primal spells and/or enhances existing ones. I'd also like to see some kind of summoner specialization - Diabolist is a good suggestion.

Beat me to it. As DSerpa says, at the moment, we have a healer specialisation, two melee specialisations, and a gimmick - plus the gimmick has a reputation that, deserved or not, means some characters may be avoiding it like the plague for RP reasons. There's no specialisation that really says "Y'know, I'm going to not bother with any of that and just focus on doing what Mages do" - except, of course, for characters that think of healing as what mages do.

I can see a number of ways this can develop. The primal-focussed version could, for instance, work by blending different elements into one spell (mind you, we've already seen what happens when you combine a blizzard and a lightning storm, but you could have things like combining fire and earth to open fissures in the ground and the like.

Alternatively, the "blaster specialisation" could involve wielding a new type of energy - the final spell shown in Anders' video, for instance, is a massive explosion of light. Now, it could be just that this light has a "-ning" suffix, but perhaps, after being subjected to it so many times, Anders has found a way for a mage to generate something like a Holy Smite, but better? (Most of the other new spells he's shown using look like they're just extensions of the Primal lines).

Diabolist/Summoner is definitely a good candidate as an additional specialisation - we see NPC mages summoning demons regularly, it'd be nice for the PC mages of darker/more ends-justify-the-means persuasions to be able to get in on the act. 

For rogues, I'd like to see an archery-specific specialization, like Marksman or something. Melee rogues already have Assassin and Duelist, and archery needs help in general. A specialization that further enhances stealth and trickery would be cool too. Maybe something like the Shadowdancer prestige class from DnD.

The main benefit from Shadowdancer already exists - Stealth IV will let you hide in plain sight. Possibly some trickery with shadows, but I'm not sure how far they can go with that in Dragon Age's engine, and I don't think it would be appropriate for rogues to be summoning shadows in Dragon Age's mythology.

Regarding archery...an archer-specialist rogue specialisation could be good, but I think the warrior needs it more - there are already specialisations that are compatible with rogue archers, while all of the warrior specialisations only grant their full benefit in melee.

[miltos33]

Yes, I agree that a "blaster" specialization seems to be missing from the game. The shapeshifter feels more like a druid, the spirit healer more like a cleric, and while the blood mage is more of a pure caster is quite limited from an rp perspective.

It would be nice to get a sorcerer like specialization with access to some sort of metamagic skills that enhance the effect of the existent and any other spells to be added in the expansion.

It would also be nice to add some sort of a spell focus mechanic that actually rewards a mage who selects all spells from a particular school instead of just giving you a meaningless achievement.

[blademaster7]

Mages -  I beg to differ. I want to see them nerfed a bit instead of making them more powerful. Seriously, blast mage? Just how much more overpowered do you want them to be? Keep it simple, a specialization focused on buffs will do.

Rogues - A specs for archers will be nice. For the most part however, I want to see them differentiated from warriors. Keep the talents based on cunning.

Warriors - Don't know what else they need, really. Maybe a spec that improves 2-Handers.

[sethroskull79]

I want an Archer Spec, maybe some advanced passive abilities that make your character better. Master Master Archer. Haha.

[Ferret A Baudoin]

There will definitely be new specializations. I'm looking forward to being able to talk about them. The new specs can add a lot to your tactical possbilities.

[Darkemorrow]

blademaster7 wrote...

Mages -  I beg to differ. I want to see them nerfed a bit instead of making them more powerful. Seriously, blast mage? Just how much more overpowered do you want them to be? Keep it simple, a specialization focused on buffs will do.

Mages are "overpowered" because of a handful of spells like force field, crushing prison, mana clash, etc. - NOT because of spells like fireball or lightning. Cone of cold is admittedly overpowered, but that's only because the freeze effect works on EVERYTHING, even when the enemy is supposed to be immune to cold.

You seem to be inferring a lot about what I meant by "blaster" mage, and what kind of power that would entail. I wasn't suggesting that mages should be turned into walking nuclear missile silos. My only point was that there is no specialization for mages that allows them to be a traditional straight-up caster, rather than a healer or tank. How powerful that specialization should be is a matter of design.

Personally, I would imagine an elementalist specialization to resemble the following, assuming that they keep the current 4 spell per specialization setup:

Tier 1: Scorch

The elementalist envelops a single target in flame, instantly dealing heavy fire damage. The target continues to burn, receiving additional fire damage over a period of time unless it resists. Additionally, an elementalist who has learned this spell receives a passive 20% bonus to all fire damage.

Tier 2: Shockwave

The elementalist slams the earth, sending a shockwave outward in all directions that deals moderate nature damage to all targets within a radius of the caster and knocks them down unless they pass a physical resistance check. Friendly fire possible. Additionally, an elementalist who has learned this spell receives a passive 20% bonus to all nature damage.

Tier 3: Ice Prism

The elementalist encases the target in an inpenetrable block of ice, who becomes completely immune to physical damage for the duration of the spell but cannot move. The target is still vulnerable to magical attacks. Friendly fire possible. Additionally, an elementalist who has learned this spell receives a passive 20% bonus to all cold damage.

Tier 4: Electrify

The elementalist shrouds an ally in a static charge that deals electricity damage to melee attackers with every hit. Lasts for 30 seconds. Additionally, an elementalist who has learned this spell receives a passive 20% bonus to all electricity damage.


This doesn't seem too overpowered to me, especially in comparison to arcane warrior or blood mage.  The only spell here I would consider to be iffy would be ice prism which is basically a version of force field, but without spell immunity. Still, anything can be tweaked with regard to mana cost, casting time, duration, chance to resist, etc.

Overall, I would hate for new mage specializations to be limited in usefulness and creativity because of concerns about mages being "overpowered". With the exception of a few spells, I don't think Mages need to be nerfed at all - instead warriors and rogues need to be "buffed" so that they have power and utility to match.

Modifié par Darkemorrow, 05 février 2010 - 03:39 .

[Ponce de Leon]

They should make combo no-combo specs. For example, if they added a spec like inquisitor to the mage, which focuses on hunting maleficar and those style, could never be able to have blood mage as another spec. Similar to Templar-Reaver (for some reason, let's suppose they are similar to blood mages).

[Allison W]

Since you're reading this, Ferret, and the thread is about specializations, riddle me this: the Templar and Reaver specializations both demonstrate that even someone without a mage's magical talent can learn certain limited, simplified magical abilities, correct? Even dwarves? Or is there some explanation for Templar and Reaver abilities that doesn't involve non-mages commanding some degree of supernatural power? I doubt it, since Alistair actually says in-game that Templars use magic of a sort.

I admittedly find myself wondering what quasi-magical rogue specializations would look like. (EDIT: can I teleport backstab plz plz plz)

Also on my list would definitely be a specialization for Constitution-oriented warriors, something that actually lets them stretch the extra hit points into meaningful durability (since more hit points don't seem to pay off a great deal compared to more defense).

EDIT:

dark-lauron wrote...

They should make combo no-combo
specs. For example, if they added a spec like inquisitor to the mage,
which focuses on hunting maleficar and those style, could never be able
to have blood mage as another spec. Similar to Templar-Reaver (for some
reason, let's suppose they are similar to blood mages).

Bad idea. Templar magic might be regarded as a sort of "white magic" in the setting and Reaver magic a sort of "black magic," but the DA setting doesn't really have any apparent cosmic regulation of morality or even "morality-based magic" a la D&D at all, meaning there is no contradiction in someone using both Templar and Reaver specializations and powers--you don't even have to be part of the Chantry, or believe in the Maker at all, to use Templar powers, for instance. You just have to get Alistair to spill his guts. Or head down to K-Mart and buy the manual.

So what I'm saying is, there isn't really any in-game reason at all for the Warden to not be able to combine seemingly morally opposed specializations, because this is not D&D and there is no evidence that morality is a force of nature in the DA setting--to the contrary, DA pretty much revolves around moral grey zones, and so this kind of thing fits just fine.

Modifié par Allison W, 05 février 2010 - 04:15 .

[adembroski11]

I'll bet Chevalier will be among the new options. I'd also like to see something based on the Ferelden Knight... especially if they were to bring in mounts! That might be something for Dragon Age II, though.

I would really like to see the skill trees expanded extensively. Preferably so much and so well balanced that no two Sword-and-Board Champion Berserkers are alike. Double the number of skills in each tree and make us decide how we want to focus that character within that skill tree. Oh, and tandem skills... if I go out with more than one shield warrior (as I often do), I should be able to lock together and form a shield wall to keep opponent's from breaking through the center. As it is, I can place both guys inches from one another but enemies will still spill through and turn a good tactical move into a ridiculous brawl.

Maybe some new weapon focuses as well.

An example of that... historically, a hand axe was used by making repeated powerful attacks against an opponent's defenses. They weren't designed to kill, but to intimidate (well, eventually kill, but you've gotta get to that point first). Taking hard axe shot to the shield over and over in quick succession wears on the shield bearer's nerves. This character type could be the foil to the sword-and-shield warrior.

More of that rock-paper-sissors type of approach would help the game. If dagger weilding dualists could get inside the attack radius of a maul-wielder, but a sword and shield warrior leaves no openings for the dagger to attack... I think the game becomes that much deeper and more intersting on a tactical level. Certainly that doesn't mean that every rogue is going to destroy Sten, but there should be an appreciable advantage in combat.

This should apply to mages as well. A solid club shot to the side of the head is going to be much more likely to interrupt my spell than, say, a dagger to the thigh. Both very painful, both very distracting, but the fact that the blunt trauma from the club will actually knock me off balance and interrupt any gestures I'm making, regardless of how zen I am, should give it an advantage against mages.

Modifié par adembroski11, 05 février 2010 - 07:03 .