33 réponses à ce sujet

[cback]

Beechwell wrote...

cback wrote...

You'll just lose bonus' you could put toward caster skills.  So, in effect you'll be a crappy mage wearing armor.  Dont bother, that's what you have a tank for.

I pretty much expect enemies in DAO to also target my mage, no matter how well the tank is tanking in front. If not a defensive mage is indeed wasted potential and I'll be disappointed.

If played correctly, they won't target the Mage often.  You should have a defensive tank taking most of the damage.

[cback]

daem3an wrote...

cback wrote...

You'll just lose bonus' you could put toward caster skills.  So, in effect you'll be a crappy mage wearing armor.  Dont bother, that's what you have a tank for.

What bonus does a mage lose by wearing armor?

It's all conjecture at this point, but added spellpower, spellpoints, and other caster type bonus' that are typically offered on robes but not on plate.

[that guy with hair]

Tyrax Lightning wrote...

I personally don't see any reason why it would be unforgivable for some mage types to have armor. One of my favorite magic using classes i've ever played, DAoC's Thane class wore armor & casted at the same time. They weren't leet, but dang it, they were fun to play!

Haha yes, a flood of memories just washed over me. The Thane was my favourite class in DAoC. There's just something special about a playing heavily armoured, hammer-wielding storm-calling disciple of Thor.

For me, I'll be playing an arcane warrior because I like to treat my main character to the best spoils and loot; whether it is a robe or a set of massive armour, I'd prefer my character to have the best/coolest/whatever. For example, it would be a shame to let the Blood Dragon Armour or Grey Warden Commander armour (which I assume may indeed be heavy/massive) go to another party member, like Allistair .

I also like the idea of clerics and fighter/mages from DnD; quite some choice of weapons or armour (which also means ability to fight closer to the front line), but also access to spells, which makes them more interesting to play IMO.

Modifié par that guy with hair, 01 novembre 2009 - 01:43 .

[AffectedFiddle]

It's all conjecture at this point, but added spellpower, spellpoints, and other caster type bonus' that are typically offered on robes but not on plate.

So you've seen all the available loot? Even just a few levels in this specialisation means you can go Stone Skin (forgot proper name of the spell...Stone Armour?) mode while in massive armour armed with a shield all for a loss of 2 spells.



Thats a LOT of physical damage reduction thats essentially passive. Off the top of my head make your second spec healer and your probably a bloody hard to kill bastard who can heal and whack effectively.

If played correctly, they won't target the Mage often. You should have a defensive tank taking most of the damage.

According to people who have played, things still get passed not to metnion on harder difficulties or later stages f the game I'm sure Assassins and the like will be gunning for you.

[daem3an]

cback wrote...

daem3an wrote...

cback wrote...
You'll just lose bonus' you could put toward caster skills.  So, in effect you'll be a crappy mage wearing armor.  Dont bother, that's what you have a tank for.

What bonus does a mage lose by wearing armor?

It's all conjecture at this point, but added spellpower, spellpoints, and other caster type bonus' that are typically offered on robes but not on plate.

Fair enough, but you're just guessing based on games of the past. We already know there are armor sets that offer equally useful bonuses to spellcasters as well as rogues or warriors. That just makes sense to me, I hope we'll be seeing lots of gear like that in the game.

I fully expect at some point to have to decide between the benefits of a certain armor set vs a certain robe. Wearing armor isn't just an aesthetic choice, it's an obvious feature of the Arcane Warrior spec (and that doesn't mean I'm planning on using this character as a tank, although anyone's welcome to test that out, good luck). As far as being a crappy mage, you'll still have the same amount of spells and magic at your disposal as any other mage, plus you're wearing armor so I don't see the problem. If robes were that much better, Warriors and rogues would wear them too.

Not everyone plays just to have the most uber loot, spamming reload to get the best random drops. I sometimes prefer if a character has some inherent weaknesses, especially in a single player game. It has great roleplay value, and forces the player to find inventive ways of challenging themself, instead of falling back on the traditional tactics you'd use with a traditional party. The AW specialization encourages mages to wear armor by not incurring huge penalties, bringing some refreshing variety to playing a magic user. It doesn't make them overpowered but neither does it force you to totally gimp your character for the sake of roleplaying.

[Owlkapwn]

the only games the restrict heavy armor from mage or a mage type of class is online mmo`s. Thats only to ballance things out. IE wow and EQ. All types of Pen and paper and older pc games and a lot of bioware stuff have the normal *spell blade* in some shape or form. I my self have a blood arcane mage think Unholy dk. And to answer some questions: the stats that a mage loses by wearing heavey armor is will or mana to be exact. I order to play a mage with armor well u have to have your arcane warrior buff on that gives u 50% fatigue witch cuts into your mana pool. then the armr its self also reduces the number. SO more armor less spell. IF your going to make a armor clad mage skip the chest pice wear a robe and fight thru sustains and the spells that u should cast r healsor long cd aoe`s drop a nuke wade in and start swinging and pop a heal. And decide early on sword and board, 2h or dual weild. dual weild and sword and board ul have to have some dex but 2h ul just need your magic and a sprinkle of dex. BLodd mage i get duriong the redcliff quest ul go into the fade to kill a demon but if u want blood mage make a deal with her, arcane warrior u get during the dalish quest just exploer all of the ruins and ul find it.

[Owlkapwn]

my bad typos its 3am here

[Dreogan]

Arcane Warrior (mages) make godlike tanks. Except for the whole "no taunt" thing. At least you still have fireball, Miasma, arcane prison, etc!

Modifié par Dreogan, 02 décembre 2009 - 09:49 .

[Haexpane]

daem3an wrote...

I was checking out Chris Priestly's level 22 dwarf rogue and I noticed the armor set she's wearing offers a bonus to defense and reduces cost to activate spells and talents.

Also note the description for 'Thorn of the Dead Gods', a weapon that 'fell in battle with the mages that first wielded them'.

Personally I think armor sets with bonuses for magic-users is excellent! As for the short sword, I don't know if there are also talents or bonuses that relate to mages using melee weapons (I know they want to avoid the 'overpowered melee mage' type of character), but it's cool that it's in the lore. Does this offend the mage purists out there? Seems to me a sturdy blade could be handy in a pinch, especially for a mage who's tough enough to get close to the fray and survive.

Usually I don't see too many options for cool gear with mages beyond staffs and wands, and often robes all look the same anyway. I generally stick to melee/archer characters (at least until I've played through a few times) but this, the mage origin, and the character creator, are actually making me want to play an Arcane Warrior.

Anyone else liking/hating this?

AW are so overpowered they can play naked, they don't even need armor.