255 réponses à ce sujet

[AlanC9]

Red Frostraven wrote...

Well. I have overcome the problems at hand, and have successfully maintained a heavy roleplaying standard, now with wynne in my party, without avoiding any one of my stupid roleplaying decisions.

He cannot reevaluate the Morrigan decision: She is gone.

Good for you. I applaud anyone who just lives with stupid decisions rather than reloading.

You can still stop gimping your rogue anytime, though.

[AlanC9]

Sidney wrote...

To me the flaw in the game logic isn't the joining, that is a necessary evil but why there are Warden's other than during a blight? Seems like given the price and the fairly meager threat to the non-dwarves of the day-to-day darkspawn threat it is silly to keep around a cadre of suicide soldiers to no good reason. You just need the ritual rules and when the Archdemon shows up get a swarm of volunteers to participate in the joining.

We don't actually know that, do we? Maybe you need someone who's already gone through the ritual around or the casualty rate is even higher?

Remember, the rules of magic are whatever the plotline requires them to be.

[booke63]

Red Frostraven wrote...

Who was that a response to?

In my first post I was implying that people here EXPECT you to NOT roleplay, but min-max:
When you ask for advice, you get told that you're doing things wrong.

I have not read very much of this thread, so who knows if I'm posting to an empty room...

I say roleplay away!  Don't give in to min maxers!  But you DO have to live with the role you've selected for your character, and if you're resisting metagaming, you should stay consistent.

Duncan selected you for Grey Wardendom. As your Grey Warden career develops you chose and develop your abilities--necessarily a subset of what is available as you can't get ALL abilities--and presumably you're choosing your abilities with an eye to the tasks required of a Grey Warden.  You ARE a Grey Warden after all.  If your chosen subset of abilities makes Grey Wardening easy, or challenging, or impossible to suceed, well so be it.  You then become a more or less successful, effective Grey Warden.  After all, I'm sure not ALL Grey Wardens are equal in abilities, success or effectiveness, do you?  So what is the problem with roleplaying your character of choice?  I guess I don't get what is stopping you or irritating you.  And if you say you SHOULD be able to be an equally successful and effective Grey Warden with any of your roleplaying ability choices that implies metagaming knowledge, no?  It's not even like you know a bunch of Grey Wardens to compare yourself with IN-game to learn that your ability choices are less successful, right?   Blaming Bioware for "imbalance" regarding your build is metagaming; instead the roleplayer would just keep on keeping on, doing the best he/she can.  To my mind, from a roleplaying point of view, why should every character build be an equally successful or effective Grey Warden?  That would be wierd.  Sort of like a short story I read where everyone on Earth had to "be equal."  So that meant if you were, for example, a great dancer you would have to wear sandbags strapped to you, so your dancing would be equal to the folks who were dancers but were lousy dancers.

Have fun! 

[MacroSamurai]

There is more to it than that. The ritual involves more than just darkspawn blood.

[Funkenstein23]

TLDR dude, sorry. I'll find the spark notes for that post and get back to you.

[sami jo]

They need to have Wardens around at all times to be able to detect when it truly is a Blight before the horde is standing on the proverbial doorstep having decimated a good chunk of the nation before a force could be prepared. Besides, the entire quest to retrieve the treaties is a clear reminder of the notion that knowledge is easily lost over time. No one believes Duncan when he tells them it is a blight. There are still those who don't believe it's a blight in the Landsmeet. And it's not as if the dwarves ever have a lack of darkspawn in need of killing. Would you really want to have a horde at the door while you run around trying to find that barmy ritual that hasn't been done in a few hundred years and hoping that you can manage to get all the elements in the same place at the same time before you are darkspawn fodder? Everyone but the dwarves and the Wardens will forget the true danger once the blight has been over for a generation or two.

[Fluffykeith]

I really didn't see a problem with the ritual as it was presented, at least not in the way the OP seems to have...



I accepted from the get go that I was joining a group of hardcore darkspawn killing nutjobs. I got recruited just after I'd butchered a keep full of human scum, after all. Duncan had blatantly looked at my gore covered "roaring rampage of revenge" and thought to himself "I can use that"...



I get that they can't tell you about the ritual because people like Jory would run like rabbits (I actually liked Jory, his motivations were very human) and the Wardens wouldn't be able to get any recruits at all. I see the Wardens as being similar to B5 Rangers...it's a crappy job that will probably kill you, but it needs done and it needs it's ritualism to preserve it's order because most people won't comprehend, or admit, to the nature of the threat you have to face. It's about giving youself over to a life of sacrifice that resembles a Dwarf with a hangover (ugly, brutish and short). If your the sort if guy who whines about the mortality rate of the recruitment process, there's a good chance you don't have what it takes to rip off a Hurlocks head and pee down it's neck.

[Red Frostraven]

Edit: POSSIBLE SPOILER AHEAD FOR THOSE WHO'VE NOT PLAYED THE FIRST 20 MINUTES OF THE GAME!!!

First and foremost, MY opinion on Duncan is that Duncan is a character in Dragon Age origins who plays a role as an instructor and serves the same role as Gorion in Baldur's Gate: He's there to teach you the basics, and then die (for PLOT REASONS) and leave your character alone in an open and dangerous world, and that his secrecy was a hard-to-make plot decision for the developers:
IF he told the player everything, the player  would know how the game ends 10 minutes into the game.
BUT that doesn't change the fact that when I roleplay, my human noble rogue character won't tolerate his behavior:
They could have told my CHARACTER the plot without telling me, as a player...
"I will tell you all there is to know about the ritual to come..." [Fade to black]
[Fade from black]...
1: "I... I think I understand..."
2: "I understand... but I don't know if I approve."
3: "That's madness!"

I also play a mage, who with his greater understanding of magic, curses and the supernatural can understand why a ritual that kills people must be performed:

SO bear in mind that I don't have a personal vendetta against Duncan, my rogue DOES. My reasoning for my character justifying hatered towards duncan will be sewn into the answer to the following post.
The reasoning is a discussion about the socially NEGATIVE aspects of Duncan (who is a very well-made character).  Discussing the positives is counterproductive when explaining how a character of mine can dislike Duncan.

Janni-in-VA wrote...

"The murderous bastard that killed two of my friends for the heck of it with an obscure blood ritual, and didn't forsee [sic] the betrayal that I foresaw with 2 points in coercion and a 15 second chat with some guy who obvously [sic] isn't going to help the king?"

1: This is just a note in defense of Duncan. Duncan plainly tells the recruits, "We Wardens pay a heavy price to be what we are." So, since the attrition rate of the Joining is so terrible, the Wardens should stop using it and allow their order to die out? How is using the same ritual every other Warden has been through killing "...two of my friends just for the heck of it..."? Also, Alistair comments that "In my Joining, only one died." Now, we don't know how many recruits were in his Joining, but one might assume that it's possible to have Joining rituals where no one dies at all.

2: In terms of game logic, there is no way for the Wardens to determine in advance who has the best chance of surviving the Joining. They simply don't have the technology to do things like blood tests or DNA scans. Duncan must use his own experience (and, one presumes, the experience of other recruiters) to judge who might be able to survive. Secondly, the Gray Wardens are an elite order in the sense that they give up everything for their one and only mission -- to fight Darkspawn and end Blights.

3: This is just one place where I think you judge the game world too harshly because the game isn't what you wish it to be. It all comes down to the choices you make and how willing you are to adapt to the exigencies of the game world and the limitations of the game engine. No, I don't think you should have to sell your soul to succeed in the game, but to expect the game to be anything other than it is is simply not reasonable.

1: This is all about psychology: Your character don't know anything about
the ritual, and then the ritual comes.
People die, before you're FORCED to drink from the EXACT SAME LIQUID that killed the first guy, or be killed by what killed the second guy.

We don't know how many people dies, but through rituals, we know that one guy in Alistair's group died, and we know that one in our group died.
Assuming Alistair's group was of three(*) people and a leader, and one died... we get:
Out of 6 recruits,
2 people died from the poison,
and 1 from murder.
Out of 5 drinkers, 2 deaths. Sure there may be joinings where noone dies, but surely there are joinings where ALL die or half of them die. From what we KNOW, a substantial amout of people DO die.

Yes. Every Grey Warden goes through the ritual. WE have no reason to doubt that.
BUT when people start dying from drinking a poison... and those that refuse are slaughtered... somehow, I imagine that CAN change SOME characters' disposition towards the whole shady Grey Warden shebam.
Keep in mind that we learn NOTHING about the ritual BEFORE it is there.
Keep in mind that they COULD have had each recruit drink the poison isolated, in a less formal setting.
Let them be dead drunk, for goodness sake, if you're going to kill a large portion of them with poison.
They could have tried to make the blood taste good, or at the very least  TOLD people that the ritual is dangerous, and offered them to join the order as "pink ******... wardens" -- or whatever -- and forced them to wear pink armor with silly Apprentice caps.(Just imagine a pink armor with a pink Apprentice cap. Look at that hat and imagine it pink) Silly as it may be, it WOULD have saved lives, and no man (who would not have been killed by big D), would have picked the pink armor over a can of poison, I assure you.
Alternatively, they could have simply FORCED people to drink it, one by one, and isolate them each after their death or joining to not disturb the other joiners.

And people complain about MY character dumping Morrigan? My
character didn't dump 2/5 recruits like the gray wardens seems to
afford with impunity, and he's well within gray warden standards for
recruitment and killing of said recruits: 1 out of 6 disposed off so far. Not
too shabby, I should think.

2: It is true that the Grey Wardens probably have been too inept before, and too strained on time now, to metodically test individuals with smaller doses of the poison to figure out signs of the allergical reaction that causes joiners to die. BUT they've had well over a hundred YEARS to find out this sh... stuff. Heck, they might even have such a method, but simply not enough TIME to employ that ritual.
OR they're not been introduced to the scientific method, and have no way to actually test this stuff, and/or possibly no willingness to find out because they believe the Maker decides who survives the ritual.

They're an elite order, where --to my knowledge -- over HALF the joiners are neither elite nor there by their own will.
The human noble plot line goes somewhat like this: Betrayal, parents are murdered, forced to serve in war by a random dude that came out of nowhere one day, forced to fight poisonous creatures with swords by this guy, you lose a friend to poison made by this guy, you lose a friend who is murdered by this guy for NOT drinking what killed your other friend, then you drink and pass out and wake up with effing headache...

3: Personally, I will admit ONE thing about my first impression of Duncan:
He's ment to be a charismatic trap-door into the somewhat sandboxy environment that is the game world, and his dialogue is there to teach you, as a player, the basics about the plot, while not spoiling the plot -- which puts him in a pinch:
His manuscript writers REFUSE him to tell the player what a stand-up-guy in Duncan's position WOULD have told your character, and I can imagine that the character Duncan is SUPPOSED to be portrayed as, is VERY angry with the manuscript writers for NOT letting him tell the main character WHY it's quest is imperative.
Heck.
Even not Alistair, the only Gray Warden out of harm's way, wasn't told anything about the ritual or reasoning behind it, despite Duncan knowing that he himself and the rest of the elite wardens might die in the encounter, leaving Alistair and a random newb in charge of business.
And tell me: How many partymembers have you forced to drink darkspawn blood? 4? 5? 8? 0?
NONE, because you don't have a clue what the heck it was any good for, before the very endgame.

THIS all is the reasoning behind ONE of my characters, my heavy roleplaying character, not liking Duncan.

I COULD write a similarily lengthy post DEFENDING Duncan's choices, from my MAGE's perspective -- but that isn't necessary, I'm just pointing out that it's not HARD to imagine someone NOT liking Duncan, in a roleplaying scenario where Duncan's dialogue can be weighted word for word, and found lacking, and Duncan judged from his actions, and found too light.

(*) The game limits groups of player characters to 4, so... It's really hard to draw any conclusions on the size of a regular joining.

MacroSamurai wrote...
Additionally, the Wardens aren't your typical, real-world soldiers
either. They're middle-of-the-road in morality super heroes in a world
with a couple of dragons, super-powered magic, and a massive horde of
evil preparing to destroy the world as they know it.

Real world soldiers are no better than the grey wardens, unless their leadership is... without disgressing into a rant about military leader****... I mean -ship... the past 150 years.

In any case, when you mention them beeing in the moral gray area, I humour the thought of the Gray Wardens beeing the Watchmen of Dragon Age...
And in that case, mages would have an effing blue limb dangling between their legs...

Modifié par Red Frostraven, 16 février 2010 - 12:28 .

[Sarielle]

You're in the no-spoiler section there, bro.



And for the love of god, it's "being."

[MacroSamurai]

For clarification's sake, my original defense of Duncan about not being mean to him was meant in jest. I fully respect and understood that one of your *characters* dislikes Duncan. I was just putting forth my thoughts on the matter.

Red Frostraven wrote...
The human noble plot line goes somewhat like this...

Now, as far as this goes. This is also another point of something you did differently than me. My human noble *wanted* to join the wardens. Because in my mind (as a player and a character) I think they're awesome. I mean, come on, stories about riding around on griffons and saving the world? Count me in. So, while my character *did* experience the same plot elements, he was not forced to serve in a war. The fact that I had nothing left back home only fortified my desire to be a warden on the grounds that I wanted to put forth my life to save Ferelden.

The point I was trying to get at in my last post was that the absolute secrecy was absolutely *necessary* in order to ensure that the future ranks of the wardens could be filled. And Alistair *did* know a lot about the ritual and so forth. He didn't know the real sacrifice a warden had to make to defeat the Blight however. He was being just as secretive as Duncan. By the logic that your character dislikes Duncan, he should also dislike Alistair because he, for the most part, knew just as much about the ordeal. And as far as we know, the one person that died in Alistair's joining could have very well been offed like Jory. But that's just left up to speculation.

Modifié par MacroSamurai, 15 février 2010 - 10:28 .

[soteria]

I would laugh if a mod moved this to the Story or Gameplay forums--Red Frostraven wouldn't be able to post anymore.



Anyway, here's the fight you asked for. This fight is pretty erratic, because the mage doesn't cast the same spells every time. This time he decided to use fireballs back to back, killing his own crew and making mop-up a cinch. If he had only used one fireball, I would have finished them off with a grenade and dual-weapon sweep. No fireballs and one or two party members would have ended up dying (which is always a possibility; this was a lucky run).

[Rendar666]

Man, look at it this way.



If you're playing dungeons and dragons without a cleric, maybe even a mage, you are doomed to die a thousand horrible deaths. That's just the way it is. It's freaking retarded to not bring a mage because... whatever your reason may be... and then complain about it. You HAVE to have a mage, simple as that.



You cannot go the entire game without the offensive and defensive capabilities of the mage in nightmare without losing A LOT. Well, if you buy about 1,000 heavy potions, then sure, you should make it. Without the spirit healer spec and the party heal and revive abilities, however, you're walking on broken ice and constantly getting frozen.



It's especially annoying when the person who doesn't bring a mage with them complains when they get whooped.



Change your game or quit it. Sheesh.

[Realmzmaster]

Actually, you can beat the game without a mage, but you must have one of your companions or PC take points in herbalism. Unless you plan on beating the game using only the potions you can buy or find. Beating the game without a mage is tough. but doable. I like to beat the game with my tank and ranger party. Instead of a 4 member group you can have a 7 member group (5 on the consoles). You have your PC take ranger at level 7. Lelianna and Zervan take ranger at level 14.

There are also other ways to beat the game without a mage.

The problem is OP wants the game to fit his character instead of creating a character that flows with the game story. An old D & D character should work quite well in old D & D settings (Forgotten realms,etc). DA:O is not D & D.

The other fact is that CRPGs are not p n p. No CRPG is going to be able to account for everything a DM can.

All CRPGs pay homage to the granddaddy of RPGs, but do not have to copy it. (T & T, Fantasy Trip, Runequesi, GURPS come to mind.) Would the exact same character work the same in each of these RPGS. I doubt it without some or many modifications.

DA:O is not D & D. DA:O is build as the spiritual successor to BG2, not a clone. It differs by the very fact it is not based on the D & D ruleset. It is Bioware's own intellectual property. Whether you agree or not is a moot point.

[Realmzmaster]

Double post

Modifié par Realmzmaster, 16 février 2010 - 07:57 .

[Red Frostraven]

I've found out the main two issues that bother me the most about the encounters I despise:
Beeing outnumbered 2 or 3 to 1, by creatures dealing 75% the damage of my party damage, using the same skills as my party has access to.

Had the 8 wolves all attacked the characters one by one... *Shrug*

soteria wrote...

I would laugh if a mod moved this to the Story or Gameplay forums--Red Frostraven wouldn't be able to post anymore.

Anyway, here's the fight you asked for.
This fight is pretty erratic, because the mage doesn't cast the same
spells every time. This time he decided to use fireballs back to back,
killing his own crew and making mop-up a cinch. If he had only used one
fireball, I would have finished them off with a grenade and dual-weapon
sweep. No fireballs and one or two party members would have ended up
dying (which is always a possibility; this was a lucky run).

Ah... There's something to ponder...
I drew the aggro of the guys that gets fireballed in the video first, and had the refugees fireballed WITHOUT the enemies dying -- every single time.
It never struck me to let the emisary take care of his own

Correct encounter. But just some MINOR details...

How do you manage to get Ali to only take 3-5 damage from those axes? (it might have been 5-8, but I'm biased towards 3-5)

And how did main character reach ~35-31 damage on that weapon sweep?
My character did 10 less damage per two weapon sweep. (~24-21)

That's the only two issues I had with damage; Main character dealing 10 more damage per attack, and alistair taking relatively much less damage; 3-5 instead of 8-14; 4 average instead of 11, almost one third of the damage taken.
This has nothing to do with myself gimping myself, ali uses the absolutely best armor and shield I had at that point, and so did the main character.

THEN comes the problem with defense/getting hit: 
My alistair AND my main character gets hit about 90% of the attacks that gets tossed at them (which I'll gladly reproduce with my cellphone cam again, but the following combat statistics should be enough), Ali taking a median of 12 damage from all attacks from axes to bows. He can only take 15 hits in total, at 180 life, and with the archers firing once per second, that happens QUITE fast even when I try to replicate the video, then they keep pelting him to his death because noone else can draw aggro.
The encounter itself isn't bloody hard, in hindsight, with ~20 more ingame hours of experience... It's just friggin' annoying due to there beeing the equalient of 3 four man parties of darkspawn, each dealing marginally less damage than my characters WITH the same hit-miss ratio as my characters.

I've saved the game at the location now, and can return at will.

The fact that I had just survived the wolves on my way there and had injuries on some of my characters BEFORE three of them got knocked by the wolves sure didn't help either. As you very well know, when you get ambushed and beat it with one character left, you cant choose a new destination when you leave the assault -- you continue to your destination.

Ali's stats, with full steel heavy chainmail; the best I had access to at that time..:
14 armor
62 defense
77 attack
32 damage (Green blade)

Main character:
8
62
75
17/12 damage (Oathkeeper w/rune / Enchanted dagger)

I'm content without knowing, but what was your combat statistics, with weapon names, for that run-through?
Just out of curiosity... I don't doubt it's quite easy to accomplish, and I don't want you to run it again, I just found the low red numbers and lack of red numbers in general slightly annoying, BECAUSE my charcters constantly get hit for a considerable amount of damage each hit (~12 for alistair, ~15+ for PC) despite wearing the best armor and defense items they've got their hands on at that point.
The screen looks like a bank business report from early 2009 when I fight that encounter...

AND thank you for mentioning bombs. Thrown bombs are fine with my rogue. That, and non-lethal traps... which I *Cough* I mean my character, didn't know EXISTED before he saw a reciepe in the store while perusing the nonlethal traps...

BUT the game is a breeze again now that I have wynne...
I'm half tempted to have my character leave her to do the cooking, and just not use a mage -- now that I know that all my major issues stemmed from NOT having a mage with me while my mage main character IS one

...
...
I breezed through the same encounters, except the bloody wolves, with my "light roleplaying" powergaming mage, before I decided to "heavy roleplay" a rogue the first time through...
BUT I really can't defend not taking my best support character with me, because my character knows life got easier after she came along <_<

Modifié par Red Frostraven, 16 février 2010 - 02:39 .

[soteria]

Well, phooey. I was on easy--I had dropped the difficulty so I could rush through some content (I had to do Redcliffe and some random encounters to get there at level 8). I bumped it back up to nightmare and did it again. Same basic strategy, except this time all the refugees died. I've done better, and I've done worse.  I think I actually moved a little too fast this time.  Maybe if I had waited slightly longer he would have tossed another fireball, or maybe I could have tossed a bomb at those guys on the way to the mage.

Modifié par soteria, 16 février 2010 - 03:14 .

[Godeshus]

OP, I think you went a little overboard on your life story here. Your friends' deaths are a great tragedy. Using that tragedy to try and drive home your opinions of a game on an internet forum is very immoral.



That being said, I have to agree with the idea behind your post. The game should be playable no matter how your character is built. If I wanted to play a mage that had 20 magic, 16 willpower, and 40 constitution, it should still be possible. If I want to play a sword and board warrior with 14 str, 20 dex, and 40 willpower, I should still be able to. That, in my opinion, is the point of a rollplaying game. Remove the ability to roll play, and all you have is a game.



Unfortunately, DAO is built up from a core that doesn't allow this. The devs have funneled us into a specific gameplay style. While there are a few testimonials of players finishing the game solo nightmare with a few specific builds, one is still quite limited in how they build their character.



Yes, it is possible to finish solo on nightmare with a 2 handed warrior, but it is impossible to finish a game solo on nightmare with a 2 handed warrior who maximizes constitution rather than strength/willpwer.



Yes it is possible to finish the game solo with a mage, but it is impossible to finish the game solo with a mage who maxes out the creation tree, and chooses no offensive spells. There are so many people who have so many different ideas on how to build a character, but then you get to level 7 and can't continue, because the game's difficulty won't let you.



I still, however, enjoy DAO. I play it the way the devs wanted me to, and that's that. I realized early on my first playthrough that I couldn't play it the way I wanted. If you want to play the game, you just gotta enjoy it for what it is. It's just not the kind of game you can play any way you want. A little disapointing, but hey, it's still a fun game, just not quite as fun as previous Bioware releases.



Godeshus

[wanderon]

Godeshus wrote...

OP, I think you went a little overboard on your life story here. Your friends' deaths are a great tragedy. Using that tragedy to try and drive home your opinions of a game on an internet forum is very immoral.

That being said, I have to agree with the idea behind your post. The game should be playable no matter how your character is built. If I wanted to play a mage that had 20 magic, 16 willpower, and 40 constitution, it should still be possible. If I want to play a sword and board warrior with 14 str, 20 dex, and 40 willpower, I should still be able to. That, in my opinion, is the point of a rollplaying game. Remove the ability to roll play, and all you have is a game.

Unfortunately, DAO is built up from a core that doesn't allow this. The devs have funneled us into a specific gameplay style. While there are a few testimonials of players finishing the game solo nightmare with a few specific builds, one is still quite limited in how they build their character.

Yes, it is possible to finish solo on nightmare with a 2 handed warrior, but it is impossible to finish a game solo on nightmare with a 2 handed warrior who maximizes constitution rather than strength/willpwer.

Yes it is possible to finish the game solo with a mage, but it is impossible to finish the game solo with a mage who maxes out the creation tree, and chooses no offensive spells. There are so many people who have so many different ideas on how to build a character, but then you get to level 7 and can't continue, because the game's difficulty won't let you.

I still, however, enjoy DAO. I play it the way the devs wanted me to, and that's that. I realized early on my first playthrough that I couldn't play it the way I wanted. If you want to play the game, you just gotta enjoy it for what it is. It's just not the kind of game you can play any way you want. A little disapointing, but hey, it's still a fun game, just not quite as fun as previous Bioware releases.

Godeshus

I suspect almost any of those characters could finish the game on easy and if the player is quite familiar with the game could probably make it through on normal as well - if the object is to RP then why would you choose Nightmare which is a difficulty level specifically designed for the power gamer looking for a challenge?

[Godeshus]

wanderon wrote...

Godeshus wrote...

OP, I think you went a little overboard on your life story here. Your friends' deaths are a great tragedy. Using that tragedy to try and drive home your opinions of a game on an internet forum is very immoral.

That being said, I have to agree with the idea behind your post. The game should be playable no matter how your character is built. If I wanted to play a mage that had 20 magic, 16 willpower, and 40 constitution, it should still be possible. If I want to play a sword and board warrior with 14 str, 20 dex, and 40 willpower, I should still be able to. That, in my opinion, is the point of a rollplaying game. Remove the ability to roll play, and all you have is a game.

Unfortunately, DAO is built up from a core that doesn't allow this. The devs have funneled us into a specific gameplay style. While there are a few testimonials of players finishing the game solo nightmare with a few specific builds, one is still quite limited in how they build their character.

Yes, it is possible to finish solo on nightmare with a 2 handed warrior, but it is impossible to finish a game solo on nightmare with a 2 handed warrior who maximizes constitution rather than strength/willpwer.

Yes it is possible to finish the game solo with a mage, but it is impossible to finish the game solo with a mage who maxes out the creation tree, and chooses no offensive spells. There are so many people who have so many different ideas on how to build a character, but then you get to level 7 and can't continue, because the game's difficulty won't let you.

I still, however, enjoy DAO. I play it the way the devs wanted me to, and that's that. I realized early on my first playthrough that I couldn't play it the way I wanted. If you want to play the game, you just gotta enjoy it for what it is. It's just not the kind of game you can play any way you want. A little disapointing, but hey, it's still a fun game, just not quite as fun as previous Bioware releases.

Godeshus

I suspect almost any of those characters could finish the game on easy and if the player is quite familiar with the game could probably make it through on normal as well - if the object is to RP then why would you choose Nightmare which is a difficulty level specifically designed for the power gamer looking for a challenge?

I was just using that as an example, and didn't go into great detail to avoid text walls. All I'm saying is that it is extremely difficult (to the point of frustration) or simply impossible to play many different rolls. You can't deny it if you've played other Bioware releases such as the forgotten realms games with heavy emphasis on roll play. You could challenge yourself, but there was ALWAYS a way to succeed. IN DAO, my first and 2nd playthroughs became impossible to push beyond level 7 or 8, because of roll play choices I'd made. I had to choose a different roll for my character in order to get beyond these early levels. DAO forces you to play in an intended way. Not saying it's good or bad, just saying that's how it is.

-rage

[Red Frostraven]

wanderon wrote...
I suspect almost any of those characters could finish the game on easy and if the player is quite familiar with the game could probably make it through on normal as well - if the object is to RP then why would you choose Nightmare which is a difficulty level specifically designed for the power gamer looking for a challenge?

Well.
Nightmare is more... well... realistic.
If you nuke the enemies, with your friends present... I have a hard time roleplaying my friends (aka companions, who all are friends of the main character) shrugging off the flames by merit of goodwill and good intentions.
It is the setting most comparable to Baldur's Gate, Icewind Dale and Neverwinter Nights' "Harcore D&D rules"...

Except that death is not "permanent" in Dragon Age.
Not that it was permanent AND irreversible for the most part in Baldur's Gate 2 either, but in most of Baldur's Gate 1 -- it truly WAS both permanent and irreversible for the most part due to raise dead being a level 4 cleric spell.
That, and there were many ways characters COULD die permanently and irreversibly.
(Before you all get your pants in a bundle, racing to make the point that
"This isn't Dungeons and Dragons you imbecile, Har har har, *sniff*, har har!"
I am perfectly aware, trust me: I've watched the development of Dragon Age closely, and was one of the people asking Bioware to free themselves from the D&D rules -- which were very hard to implement properly in computergames and sparked a lot of flaming discussions back in Neverwinter Nights.)

Here is a topic in NWN2 where I discuss the impact none-roleplayers have afflicted roleplayers with, specifically: 
Alignment changes in NWN2 based on actions rather than intentions, because powergamers can't be trusted to follow their alignment:
http://nwn2forums.bi...=109&highlight=

The trend  between Baldur's Gate -> Neverwinter Nights -> Dragon Age has continued:
Dragon Age caters MORE to powergamers than Neverwinter Nights, and Neverwinter Nights caters more to powergamers than Baldur's gate.
By all means, Dragon Age's story is bloody good, don't believe for a second that I don't like the game; I'm merely stating an observation.

Also, I strongly believe that while powergamers are in it for the difficulty, the games catered to mainstream powergamers causes the game to become more EASY for roleplayers (excepting balance issues): 
There's no permanent (even if it is reversible) death; everyone gets raised after the encounter, with a slight headache and bruises -- but there's no CONSEQUENCE for losing most of your party, only to have you mage save the day.
In Baldur's Gate 1, two months ago when I played through it preparing for Dragon Age, I lost no less than 4 partymembers, PERMANENTLY:
I mean.
In the Baldur's Gate series, people (player characters and enemies alike) get petrified -- not petri-for-a-while like in Dragon Age -- and could NEVER returned to life if they were shattered. 
Disintegrate also made death irreversible; Nothing left to revive.
I can't recall if Finger of Death destroys the soul, like it should...
Then comes Imprison which ALSO takes away party members forever.
Three or four spells and even some critical hits could render characters permanently dead for the remainder of the game.
Heck -- Cone of Cold dealing more than 20 damage below zero would ALSO render a character unraisable, if I am not mistaken.

Powergamers would surely reload upon losing their tank, mage or rogue forever, but "heavy roleplayers" like myself would often not, but ACCEPT the loss and actually cast Protection from Petrification the next time the party face basilsks or mages.

THAT was hard, to lose partymembers PERMANENTLY and continue on without them for the rest of the game.
Reloading and grinding is not hard at all, because there's no consequences for your actions EXCEPT the amount of time you have to grind...
The game is BALANCED for non-permanent deaths and grinding, which is the REASON why the game throws parties thrice your party's size on you constantly, with a slightly lower level of equipment on them, but with the same skills, only the AI separating your enemies from your party: 

There is NO consequences for nearly being defeated with three out of four character laying in a burning field of tar with axes in their sculls and three arrows through their heads, with a dead ogre laying on top of them, ONLY for being fully defeated.
As long as the last character manages to survive the encounter, the fact that three out of your characters were eviscarated doesn't matter.

Well. I admit it:
I don't like grinding, but I accept and LIKE that there are consequences for my actions.
BUT the consequence for NOT briniging the mage was ONLY grinding.

Edit..: To bee or not to be...

Modifié par Red Frostraven, 16 février 2010 - 12:43 .

[Mlai00]

soteria wrote...
Glad you liked it!  I do have a couple "generic" ones, "Chokepoints" and "Spell Combos." I think the narration quality is a little off for the Chokepoints video, but it goes into more depth on using the landscape to your advantage. Other people have pointed out that it's not really necessary to try so hard to play tactically, but I think it's more fun.
I'm sorry you're annoying him now. The irony is, you're the RPer, and I'm the dirty powergamer.
This thread reminds me of this discussion.

You spoiled THE ENDING for me with that link.  Thanks a ****g lot.
I'm reading this thread because I'm well past Ostagar.  Spoilers of the early-game is expected for ppl reading this thread is excusable.  But why the F did you just put up a link that spoils the ENDING??  I'm easygoing on the "non-spoiler" aspect of this non-spoiler subforum.  I don't really stress if I accidentally read about the solution to some quest.  But you crossed the line.
RF (and anyone else who hasn't finished the game yet), don't read that link.

[Mlai00]

Now, @ the OP:

So let me get this straight... your main point in this entire thread is that you want to complain to Bioware, but that it's not YOU who is complaining, it's your rogue character who is complaining? WHAAA?



(1) "OMFG why are mages so powerful it's not faaaaair~" Um... don't bring a knife to a gunfight? Maybe you just have to accept the fact that mages are basically the guys in your gang who own assault rifles. Would you cry imbalance in Doom because you tried to use the pistol to win against other players?

(2) "OMFG why is Duncan so eviiiil~" So, here you're saying you understand Duncan's actions but your rogue chara doesn't. So... what is your complaint?! There are dialogue options in DAO which allow you to express your displeasure for Duncan, **throughout the entire game**. Nobody is forcing you to roleplay liking him. Go ahead and hate on him all your rogue chara wants, whenever Alistair brings him up.

(3) "OMG why can't my poorly-rolled Rogue beat the game just like the min-maxed Warrior? No faaaair~" I'm sorry, but are you really a soldier? You mentioned you're a soldier, right? No RL soldier can be this whiny. So... a man who trains in warfare and pumps weights all day, and eats 40 eggs... should not do better in a fight compared to some guy who likes to fix clocks and chainsmoke when he's not fighting Darkspawn? If your chara doesn't want to train for warfare, why should he become the hero who succeeds rather than 1 of the lesser Wardens who failed?

[Red Frostraven]

Godeshus wrote...

1: OP, I think you went a little overboard on your life story here. Using that tragedy to try and drive home your opinions of a game on an internet forum is very immoral.

3: That being said, I have to agree with the idea behind your post. The game should be playable no matter how your character is built. If I wanted to play a mage that had 20 magic, 16 willpower, and 40 constitution, it should still be possible. If I want to play a sword and board warrior with 14 str, 20 dex, and 40 willpower, I should still be able to. That, in my opinion, is the point of a rollplaying game. Remove the ability to roll play, and all you have is a game.

2: I still, however, enjoy DAO. I play it the way the devs wanted me to, and that's that. I realized early on my first playthrough that I couldn't play it the way I wanted. If you want to play the game, you just gotta enjoy it for what it is. It's just not the kind of game you can play any way you want. A little disapointing, but hey, it's still a fun game, just not quite as fun as previous Bioware releases.

Godeshus

1: That's the third strike on the matter, and I'm out: I'll edit the first post, and just rewrite it all to better fit the fact that my roleplaying character lost a friend to an old bear-trap...
Which was my main point, anyway -- people reacted unexpectedly to my personal reasoning behind having one of my character not drop mortal traps onto the battlefield, and not executing people.
Two of my main characters DO use traps and excecute people summarily, one does not .
That was all there was to the story.

The one character that does not, and my primary roleplaying character, have maxed survival instead of trapmaking, and coercion instead of poison -- and suffers heavily from it.

( I'm not editing the first post to conceal
anything, on the contrary, I first chose to NOT to edit out the
information in the first post BECAUSE people have reacted to it and
because I expected editing out the controversy could and would cause
my debating opponents to lash out at me for trying to conceal something.)

2: By all means, I do love the game too. It's among my 3 most favorite roleplaying games this decade, century and millennium -- and even lifetime
(Chess being number four, the sick class imbalance between queens and pawns are slightly worse than between mage and warrior.)

3: Kind of exactly my point.
Damage or otherwise min-maxing defense or armor to be unhittable or undamagable, is all that seems to matter in this game.
Willpower gets completely IGNORED by most, despite it being a very important roleplay attribute.
They'd have to make it increase mana and stamina regeneration AND cause cooldowns to become shorter for powergamers to even CONSIDER placing 30 points in willpower.
Heck, even when I roleplay, I find it hard to place points into willpower.

Modifié par Red Frostraven, 16 février 2010 - 01:09 .

[TheRealIncarnal]

I don't think that this game is really catering so much to Min-Maxing. I've done several play throughs just playing my role and building my character how I want to, and while I doubt it would work on Nightmare, I have yet to have trouble with Normal and Hard is manageable.



I think that Bioware managed to make this a great compromise between the Min-Maxers and Role-Players.

[Sidney]

Godeshus wrote...

I was just using that as an example, and didn't go into great detail to avoid text walls. All I'm saying is that it is extremely difficult (to the point of frustration) or simply impossible to play many different rolls. You can't deny it if you've played other Bioware releases such as the forgotten realms games with heavy emphasis on roll play. You could challenge yourself, but there was ALWAYS a way to succeed. IN DAO, my first and 2nd playthroughs became impossible to push beyond level 7 or 8, because of roll play choices I'd made. I had to choose a different roll for my character in order to get beyond these early levels.

DAO forces you to play in an intended way.

-rage

My wife and I we've finished the game in almost every configuration you could want. There's nothing that even came close to making the game unfinishable. There are easier builds and harder builds but that is a matter of degrees not magnitudes. There is a lot of personal preference as well - i hated my arcane warrior build for example despite people loving that specialization. My first party, Morrigan was the only mage and I was doing a lousy job of selecting crowd control spells at the earlier levels. IIRC my fight with the super wolves (trap laying and envelopment manuevers) was around the same level as you and it went quite badly for for some time but I got past it . Combat does scale up and there's a stretch there around 6-12 that is much tougher than what comes before and what comes after.
 
I can't fathom what choices you could make either oll or role playing that would make the game unfinishable.