81 réponses à ce sujet

[k9medusa]

the_one_54321 wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

The_Abyss wrote...
Making a level 1 mage in a DnD game generally sucks though.

I want all games to start like that.  Level 1 characters should be incredibly fragile and useless.

You know, even a LV1 character in D&D is considered much stronger than any commoner class.

They are on a mission from God!  (Blues Brothers)

[the_one_54321]

k9medusa wrote...

the_one_54321 wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

The_Abyss wrote...
Making a level 1 mage in a DnD game generally sucks though.

I want all games to start like that.  Level 1 characters should be incredibly fragile and useless.

You know, even a LV1 character in D&D is considered much stronger than any commoner class.

They are on a mission from God!  (Blues Brothers)

[Xandurpein]

@the OP

There are six different orgins stories. Each Orgin story explains important elements of the society and peoples of Fereldan. You need to be on your seventh game to be forced to replay an orgin story that didn't have something new to show you about the game world. Seriously, what more do you want?

[k9medusa]

Xandurpein wrote...

@the OP
There are six different orgins stories. Each Orgin story explains important elements of the society and peoples of Fereldan. You need to be on your seventh game to be forced to replay an orgin story that didn't have something new to show you about the game world. Seriously, what more do you want?

And each story is about 40 - 60 Hours if you play fast and don't do many side quests...  50*7=350 hours of game playing time:O

[Sylvius the Mad]

the_one_54321 wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

The_Abyss wrote...
Making a level 1 mage in a DnD game generally sucks though.

I want all games to start like that.  Level 1 characters should be incredibly fragile and useless.

You know, even a LV1 character in D&D is considered much stronger than any commoner class.

Only in newer editions of the game.

In 1st edition AD&D commoners were basically just as powerful as level 1 adventurers.  They were 1 HD creatures.

[the_one_54321]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

the_one_54321 wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

The_Abyss wrote...
Making a level 1 mage in a DnD game generally sucks though.

I want all games to start like that.  Level 1 characters should be incredibly fragile and useless.

You know, even a LV1 character in D&D is considered much stronger than any commoner class.

Only in newer editions of the game.
In 1st edition AD&D commoners were basically just as powerful as level 1 adventurers.  They were 1 HD creatures.

I think that it makes more sense to have them tougher than commoners. A LV1 fighter has gone through some training, and a LV1 mage has gone through some training. If not, they wouldn't be fighters/mages.

[StartatZero]

I disagree, I love the beginnings. Especially in dragon age. And I usually play through them enough that I know exactly where every item worth getting is and how to complete all the quests. I love the sense of completion I have after them lol. Just the setup of the epic adventure I think they're all great.

Modifié par StartatZero, 11 mars 2010 - 11:20 .

[qalan]

I see where the OP is coming from in one sense.  However, the linear/not-linear format isn't what's important to me so much as the interaction with recurring characters and this is an area where BioWare excels at IMO.  The fun in multiple playthroughs for me is not only playing a different character, but assembling different parties and getting their (often very different) reactions as I play through an area, which helps make it 'new' (or at least interesting) again.  Unfortunately, in DA:O, the 'beginning' really lacks these lasting characters and, for me, that's what hurts it from my point of view. 

In the origins tales, you pretty well leave everyone behind at the end of them (except for the odd 'cameo' that might pop up later) and in Ostagar I have no interest in interacting much with Daveth or Jory after having done the 1st playthrough because I know they're not around for the long haul, which leaves you with only Alistair (even Dog is mostly sidelined in Ostagar/Wilds if have him as a Human Noble) to start building any kind of 'realtionship' with. 

So, yes, I too find the whole Ostagar/Wilds area kind of boring after the first part because you're always doing it with the same people with the same reactions and same outcomes.  At least with Taris in KOTOR you pick up 6 companions that will be with you for the rest of the game - Carth, Bastila, T3, Mission, Zaalbar and Canderous, and you can mix them up a bit, especially if you leave a lot of the side quests until you have most of the characters assembled.

[Sylvius the Mad]

the_one_54321 wrote...

I think that it makes more sense to have them tougher than commoners. A LV1 fighter has gone through some training, and a LV1 mage has gone through some training. If not, they wouldn't be fighters/mages.

They had skills.  A level 1 Mage could cast a spell; a commoner could not.  A level 1 fighter could use weapons proficiently; a commoner could not.  A level 1 fighter or cleric had a better THAC0 than a commner did.

That was their advantage.  They also tended to have higher stats (the average commoner stat was 8-10, the average PC stat was 8-13).

[Challseus]

The_Abyss wrote...

Baldur's gate 1 was way worse for beginnings - the reason I could never play that game more than twice. Making a level 1 mage in a DnD game generally sucks though.

My first time playing Baldur's Gate, was my first time being exposed to DnD/Western RPG's in general. My first class was a mage, and hell, was it fun. I LOVED that I was extremely weak in the beginning. It made the character progression that much more invigorating. Every time I gained a level, it really meant something. Ah, nothing better than slow level progression... But that's for another thread

[Dracul_Age]

Masticetobbacco wrote...

If you want full character development, I herd theres this MMORPGFPS called "Life"
No lag, one megaserver, level cap 100+, open ended gameplay, billions of other players online.

Wtf my guy's suck on hardcore >

Only 1 char?

omfggtfo

[casedawgz]

While I understand the necessity for it, when I get to Ostagar my will to play just drains away. Many characters have never made it past the Korcari Wilds for me.

[Argyle]

I haven't made it through my first time yet, but I thought the multiple origin story idea was a good one. A choke point at Ostagar is OK, but then I guess it is true that the next several areas up through Lothering make the bottle neck pretty long. And then when you get a choice where to go, there are only three or four options.



I remember playing BG1 the first time, when I didn't realize that just because the character could enter an area did not mean the character could survive it ... so I died a lot until I figured out I *had* to go to Nashkel. But I also met a cool high level mage (Thalantyr) in my second area after Candlekeep, and I met some other interesting characters in other areas. I like the idea that high and low level characters are not restricted from meeting each other, and although I suffered a lot of wolf bites, I liked the fact that I could blaze my own path at my own peril. Haven't seen that since BG1.

[The_Abyss]

Challseus wrote...

The_Abyss wrote...

Baldur's gate 1 was way worse for beginnings - the reason I could never play that game more than twice. Making a level 1 mage in a DnD game generally sucks though.

My first time playing Baldur's Gate, was my first time being exposed to DnD/Western RPG's in general. My first class was a mage, and hell, was it fun. I LOVED that I was extremely weak in the beginning. It made the character progression that much more invigorating. Every time I gained a level, it really meant something. Ah, nothing better than slow level progression... But that's for another thread

Different strokes for different folks. I always start off as a caster first in an RPG whenever possible, and dying whenever something sneezed on me wasn't fun for me.

Not to mention the spell memorization thingy DnD employs annoys me.

Granted, gaining a level in DnD WAS a big deal - much bigger than most other games.

[Feraele]

You know what I would like...a different option ..for Jowan at the start, I want to be able to tell him to stop what he's doing..OR actually escape with him, make it out that door past Irving and the guards. I have tried, a few times to get a different result, but of course you get railroaded into doing what Bioware wants in that scenario.



Namely I think we need a little more freedom of choice to be evil or good. I think certain scenarios require that. On the other hand, I do understand that limiting choices comes from more than likely the technical side of things...where its best to "railroad" the path rather than allow free choice.



Just saying.

[JerryT]

Masticetobbacco wrote...

If you want full character development, I herd theres this MMORPGFPS called "Life"
No lag, one megaserver, level cap 100+, open ended gameplay, billions of other players online.

I wanna re-roll!. I don't like this character.

[the_one_54321]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

the_one_54321 wrote...
I think that it makes more sense to have them tougher than commoners. A LV1 fighter has gone through some training, and a LV1 mage has gone through some training. If not, they wouldn't be fighters/mages.

They had skills.  A level 1 Mage could cast a spell; a commoner could not.  A level 1 fighter could use weapons proficiently; a commoner could not.  A level 1 fighter or cleric had a better THAC0 than a commner did.

That was their advantage.  They also tended to have higher stats (the average commoner stat was 8-10, the average PC stat was 8-13).

Well that makes them significantly better than commoners, doesn't it? 

[Sylvius the Mad]

It's significant in that it's measurable, but I'd still expect any two commoners to defeat any one level 1 non-Fighter'Paladin PC in a straight fight.

It certainly wasn't a big gap.

[the_one_54321]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
It's significant in that it's measurable, but I'd still expect any two commoners to defeat any one level 1 non-Fighter'Paladin PC in a straight fight.
It certainly wasn't a big gap.

Sonds fine to me.

[Moogliepie]

Ostagar is fine. Bioware games are like good "choose your own adventure" books, rather than sandbox style play. If you want sandbox, go play EVE online.



Bioware games do tend to follow a formula, but that formula works well. The only thing I don't like is the cheesy, adolescent romances in EVERY game. For once, I would like to start out a character who already has a love in their life, and maybe even a family. I also have mixed feelings about the M. Knight Shalayaman-style "twist" that I just know is coming. In DAO there wasn't any real big twist that I could think of, and it didn't need one. You don't need a ridiculous twist to make a good story. It's gimmicky writing.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Moogliepie wrote...

Ostagar is fine. Bioware games are like good "choose your own adventure" books, rather than sandbox style play. If you want sandbox, go play EVE online. 

I like how often EVE is now put forward as a suggestion.

It really is a terrific game.

[Cancermeat]

The only real problem i ever had with a Bioware game was BG1 because not all the companion were as not valuable as each other regardless of what character your pc was. You could almost asign them a report card grade based on their class value.

[icecubeflower]

In DAO there wasn't any real big twist that I could think of, and it didn't need one. You don't need a ridiculous twist to make a good story. It's gimmicky writing.

I think it should have turned out that the dog was the archdemon the whole time.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Cancermeat wrote...

The only real problem i ever had with a Bioware game was BG1 because not all the companion were as not valuable as each other regardless of what character your pc was. You could almost asign them a report card grade based on their class value.

Like this?

Wizards: A
Others: D-

That's usually how I constructed a BG party.

[Moogliepie]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Cancermeat wrote...

The only real problem i ever had with a Bioware game was BG1 because not all the companion were as not valuable as each other regardless of what character your pc was. You could almost asign them a report card grade based on their class value.

Like this?

Wizards: A
Others: D-

That's usually how I constructed a BG party.

Well that was AD&D 2e for you. I used to tabletop roleplay, and wizards would always be ridiculously overpowerd past level 12, that all other party members would become useless, unless there were some heavy handed house rules.