inherit
3061
0
58
rivverrabbit
21
Jan 28, 2017 23:29:39 GMT
January 2017
rivverrabbit
|
Post by rivverrabbit on Apr 28, 2017 16:00:10 GMT
Hear me out. And try not to think of it too much in Mass Effect: Andromeda terms, either -- this idea is not exactly the same (so, like, no profiles). In fact, think of Dragon's Dogma here.
You still select a class, which determines your starting stats (constitution, strength, dex, etc.). But any class can use any weapon, so long as they meet the basic stat requirements for that weapon. The higher your stat, the more effectively you can use weapons of that type (i.e., dex might affect critical hits even on heavy warhammers, but strength is going to be the big stat for that kind of weapon; dex is going to be important for double daggers with little reliance on strength, but a bow might rely on strength and dex both, because the pull strength gives you more damage and range).
If there's a crafting system this would also provide some interesting versatility, because you could favor different stats in the weapon to suit your playstyle (again, a big, heavy bow that fires more slowly requiring higher strength, or a smaller, faster-firing bow relying more on dex). Moreover, this allows greater versatility in the gameplay, as players can do more even when playing within the confines of traditional class archetypes. Added to that, you could have a second "loadout," which you can switch to on the fly as the situation demands: an archer could switch to double daggers when an enemy closes, a sword-and-shield fighter could switch to a sword and shortsword/dagger (ala Duncan) when faced with mobs of light enemies, a crossbow user might switch to a hammer.
As far as the abilities themselves, at every level you'd get points, as usual, to distribute, and each main tree (warrior, rogue, mage) would have smaller sub-trees of abilities (or just a huge smattering of abilities that each evolve on their own, this being not unlike Mass Effect). You'd also go back to getting stat points to invest as you see fit, ala DAO -- this system would just demand that level of stat control. So, a sword-and-shield warrior would be wise to get shield bash, of course, but they might also get a few duel-wield abilities, or other valuable passives. However, you'd still need to lean into your class archetype, if you wanted the higher-tier stuff (again like ME, certain abilities or upgrades might require so many points invested in that tree. But there wouldn't be profiles (there could, perhaps, be a separate section for passives, with new passives designed to support hybrid playstyles, these unlocking only with so many points in the two trees).
Class specializations would require the heaviest dedication to a specific tree -- unlocking the reaver would require a lot of points invested in warrior abilities. But the neat thing here is that you could have as many specializations as you meet the requirements for (which, realistically, is only going to be a couple or a few, and fully upgrading more than one or two is going to require sacrificing a lot of other things, or at least a very long time spent leveling).
All classes would need to have stamina, in case they use those abilities, but only mages would have mana, and only if you chose mage could you choose mage abilities. Now, at first blush, a min-maxer looking to be as efficient or as powerful as possible is going to conclude that you should always pick mage -- even if you want to be a stealthy rogue, you would just skew your stats toward that, having magic abilities as an option (there would be certain magic abilities or, at the very least, passives that would be extremely desirable or would synergize well with probably any playstyle).
But this is Dragon Age, and being a mage ain't no picnic.
Choosing to play a mage would need to have consequences as well -- story consequences, like certain people straight-up not trusting you, or even being hostile toward you. Moreover, the more magic you use or points you have invested, the more likely you are to attract spirits -- maybe when you rest there's even a chance you'll have to deal with dreaming in the fade, and the risk of possession (after all, it's such a scary but real possibility to mages in this setting, but player mages don't really ever have to deal with it outside a few plot points). Point being, there would have to be some ways to temper being a mage -- and I've no doubt they could conjure some creative but still enjoyable ones.
So, what do you think? Could it work in Dragon Age? Again, while I made some comparisons to ME Andromeda, also think of Dragon's Dogma, which offered a surprisingly fantastic, deep, and robust gameplay system that was (functionally) classless -- and, in the end, not that different from Dragon Age.
|
|
formerfiend
N3
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion, Mass Effect Andromeda
PSN: Former_Fiend
Posts: 547 Likes: 955
inherit
6916
0
955
formerfiend
547
April 2017
formerfiend
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion, Mass Effect Andromeda
Former_Fiend
|
Post by formerfiend on Apr 28, 2017 17:41:01 GMT
I've always been more inclined to think Skyrim when the idea of classless RPG's come up, thanks.
Honestly I don't think it's a bad idea - just because one is born with innate magical talent doesn't mean they put any effort into training and developing that magical talent and just because someone has innate magical talent doesn't mean they can't learn to swing a sword or shoot a bow.
But the big hurtle to this is that dwarves can't be mages except through extraordinary circumstance. And I'm very much of the opinion that I do not want them to remove race options from the game again and adding in the contrived explanation for how a dwarf PC can use magic is clunky when done along side three other PC options that don't require it.
|
|
inherit
285
0
1,950
Zemgus
1,251
August 2016
zemgus
|
Post by Zemgus on Apr 28, 2017 17:50:34 GMT
I prefer the current class system. It also adds replay value. Just hope we could have more active abilities and specializations to choose from.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
7959
0
Apr 19, 2024 14:10:20 GMT
Deleted
0
Apr 19, 2024 14:10:20 GMT
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 28, 2017 18:38:30 GMT
I liked all the variations of the systems they had in both franchises from the second game onward, with a slight meh for Inquisition, because it was too over complicated for the end result and did not go far enough in any direction.
I think classless would actually work for Inquisition, given how most emphasized was on The Hand.
In DA4, I would love to see Tevinter styled names maybe, and way less complexity. More like DA2 with Tevinter specialization, maybe?
|
|
inherit
3061
0
58
rivverrabbit
21
Jan 28, 2017 23:29:39 GMT
January 2017
rivverrabbit
|
Post by rivverrabbit on Apr 28, 2017 18:45:48 GMT
I prefer the current class system. It also adds replay value. Just hope we could have more active abilities and specializations to choose from. I've always disliked the replay value notion for a class system that is arbitrarily limiting. If the game isn't good enough to replay on its own, doing so only because you were locked out of be able to *hold a dagger* for no real reason is contrived. I've found the class system to be increasingly divorced from the setting -- like, it divides lore and gameplay even further to arbitrarily make it so that somebody can't pick up a bow or a sword. Functionally, the system I described, and others like it, don't even change the "replay value" in any meaningful way -- if you spread yourself across all the different skill trees, you're not going to unlock the top ends of any specific ones -- it's not like you'll even be risking having the same build every tingle playthrough, either. This just gives you a choice, instead of being stuck with one thing the whole game for no real reason. Hopefully that response doesn't sound hostile, because I certainly don't mean it that way -- I just think that if the best reason to have a class system in a game (where the setting doesn't delineate any such class differences re: rogue or warrior, as in, there really are only mages and non-mages, at the basic level) isn't because it makes the game better but because it makes you have to replay again... That sucks. Branching plot paths, different romances, different endings -- I'm gonsta replay for those reasons, not because my mage couldn't figure out how to hit things with a sword.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
2726
0
Apr 19, 2024 14:10:20 GMT
Deleted
0
Apr 19, 2024 14:10:20 GMT
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 28, 2017 18:52:25 GMT
No
|
|
linksocarina
N5
Always teacher, sometimes writer
Teaching Mode Activated
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
PSN: LinksOcarina
Posts: 3,179 Likes: 4,063
inherit
Always teacher, sometimes writer
370
0
4,063
linksocarina
Teaching Mode Activated
3,179
August 2016
linksocarina
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
LinksOcarina
|
Post by linksocarina on Apr 28, 2017 18:55:18 GMT
Id prefer it to continue with the three classes.
I would just say revamp them a bit with specializations. How they did it in Inquisition was great, but I think it should have been introduced earlier...and have more than three choices.
|
|
inherit
1020
0
Nov 26, 2017 12:37:49 GMT
21,685
fylimar
5,415
Aug 16, 2016 18:31:34 GMT
August 2016
fylimar
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire
|
Post by fylimar on Apr 28, 2017 19:14:25 GMT
I do like the way, you can make your own class in the Elder Scroll games, but I don't think, it would work lorewise in DA. While there wouldn't be any problems with cross class skills or talents between warriors and rogues, there is the problem with magic. In DA it is emphasised how magic is a talent, you are born with, you can't learn it through training like in ES or other games. So a mage might pick up warrior or rogue skills, but someone born without magic can not simply pick it during the game. I would love to see some cross classes though. Something like the arcane trickster from the D&D universe (basically a rogue/mage who focus on Illusions and such) or maybe a druid - a mix between the ranger rogue and the shapeshifter mage with some nature based spells. We already have the arcane warrior/knight enchanter as a mage/warrior hybrid - so basicallyI don't think completely classless would work in DA but class mixing could be fun
|
|
inherit
∯ Oh Loredy...
455
0
26,660
gervaise21
10,775
August 2016
gervaise21
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights
|
Post by gervaise21 on Apr 28, 2017 19:35:36 GMT
They could just go back to the system they had in DAO. There anyone could use any weapon but they were limited by their strength or dexterity. Everyone had two weapon slots, so you could have ranged weapons in one and melee weapons in the other, switching between the two as the situation demanded. Whilst there were limitations as to skill trees according to class, there was much more flexibility than in later games.
Mages could use lightweight daggers from the beginning but if they were of a martial disposition, they could have arcane warrior as one of their specialisms and use their magic score instead of strength when determining which weapon they could use, instead of having a light sabre as is the case with DAI. This also allowed them to wear heavier armour. Mages did not have to carry a staff.
Warriors could use a bow but were limited by their dexterity. They also had the option of dual wielding in addition the sword & shield and two handed.
Rogues could dual wield various weapons in combination but were limited by their strength score. However, if you put more points into strength, then they could use heavier weapons and armour.
I like having some skills/talents limited to certain classes and I felt that DAO was sufficiently flexible in that respect. Now some attributes, like trap finding and lock picking seem almost to have been dispensed with altogether, whilst mage schools have become far too narrow and restricted. I'd also like a return to being able to chose at least two specialisms during the game, even three if you get to high enough levels (as with DAA).
So instead of looking to another game, like MEA, or another developer, just go back to what the Dragon Age universe had in the beginning.
|
|
inherit
3061
0
58
rivverrabbit
21
Jan 28, 2017 23:29:39 GMT
January 2017
rivverrabbit
|
Post by rivverrabbit on Apr 28, 2017 20:04:34 GMT
I do like the way, you can make your own class in the Elder Scroll games, but I don't think, it would work lorewise in DA. While there wouldn't be any problems with cross class skills or talents between warriors and rogues, there is the problem with magic. In DA it is emphasised how magic is a talent, you are born with, you can't learn it through training like in ES or other games. So a mage might pick up warrior or rogue skills, but someone born without magic can not simply pick it during the game. I would love to see some cross classes though. Something like the arcane trickster from the D&D universe (basically a rogue/mage who focus on Illusions and such) or maybe a druid - a mix between the ranger rogue and the shapeshifter mage with some nature based spells. We already have the arcane warrior/knight enchanter as a mage/warrior hybrid - so basicallyI don't think completely classless would work in DA but class mixing could be fun And that's really what I'm saying: in the setting, in the lore, there are people who can use magic, and people who cannot. Rogues aren't different than warriors, on a fundamental level. Now, when it comes to specializations and some other details, there are differences, but there's no lore-based reason somebody who can use a sword and a shield can't also use a bow -- but the game creates a three-sided, power-balanced restriction for pure gameplay reasons. My idea is that anybody can do anything, but the more you specialize the better you get at those specific things. Then, if you have magic, that opens up a lot of new power and possibilities for you -- but that power comes at a cost. Dragon Age is all about that cost. As a setting, as a story, Dragon Age is nothing if not the conflict between the magical world and the nonmagical. It's all about how those two things do and don't weave together.
|
|
inherit
3061
0
58
rivverrabbit
21
Jan 28, 2017 23:29:39 GMT
January 2017
rivverrabbit
|
Post by rivverrabbit on Apr 28, 2017 20:15:37 GMT
They could just go back to the system they had in DAO. There anyone could use any weapon but they were limited by their strength or dexterity. Everyone had two weapon slots, so you could have ranged weapons in one and melee weapons in the other, switching between the two as the situation demanded. Whilst there were limitations as to skill trees according to class, there was much more flexibility than in later games. Mages could use lightweight daggers from the beginning but if they were of a martial disposition, they could have arcane warrior as one of their specialisms and use their magic score instead of strength when determining which weapon they could use, instead of having a light sabre as is the case with DAI. This also allowed them to wear heavier armour. Mages did not have to carry a staff. Warriors could use a bow but were limited by their dexterity. They also had the option of dual wielding in addition the sword & shield and two handed. Rogues could dual wield various weapons in combination but were limited by their strength score. However, if you put more points into strength, then they could use heavier weapons and armour. I like having some skills/talents limited to certain classes and I felt that DAO was sufficiently flexible in that respect. Now some attributes, like trap finding and lock picking seem almost to have been dispensed with altogether, whilst mage schools have become far too narrow and restricted. I'd also like a return to being able to chose at least two specialisms during the game, even three if you get to high enough levels (as with DAA). So instead of looking to another game, like MEA, or another developer, just go back to what the Dragon Age universe had in the beginning. That was one of my thoughts here -- it's just frustrating to be so limited in that way. The reason I suggested a technically classless system is, as I noted above, that the setting, the world of Thedas, doesn't have any delineation between a rogue and a warrior, lorewise. They're just people who are good at different things. Of course, at the upper echelons, with the specializations, you start to see things emerge, but at the basic level there's no reason many of the skills should remain locked out if the weapons weren't. If my mage can pick up a sword and shield, then my mage should be able to learn shield bash, full stop. Now, if I'm putting points into willpower and mage spells and other abilities, it's going to be harder for me to upgrade shield bash all the way, and I won't be able to shield bash as well as somebody who dedicated their points to a build more catered around tanking -- my passives might not be as synergistic, my stats won't be as good. I can't fuel the one without neglecting the other. Every point spent is a major choice. I feel like, with this suggested system, we'd still get to make those weighty class choices, and we'd still get to really build to suit our playstyle -- we'd just have more options. Options in games are almost always good.
|
|
formerfiend
N3
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion, Mass Effect Andromeda
PSN: Former_Fiend
Posts: 547 Likes: 955
inherit
6916
0
955
formerfiend
547
April 2017
formerfiend
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion, Mass Effect Andromeda
Former_Fiend
|
Post by formerfiend on Apr 28, 2017 21:54:57 GMT
If racial selection was limited to human and/or elf and/or qunari, then there's no real contradiction with the lore with a classless system; the PC is a mage, period. It's just a matter of whether or not they put any effort into developing and utilizing their magic. Having magic doesn't mean you've ever learned to throw a spell.
It's not dissimilar to the mass effect series; Shepard and the Ryder Twins are biotic from the word go. It's just if you pick a non-biotic class with Shepard - or if you start with a non-biotic specialization with Ryder, they simply haven't trained their latent biotic powers.
I do still see the biggest problem being that dwarves are the odd ones out because short being exposed to Titans, however that works - I haven't played the Descent yet - they can't use magic, period, so you'd be blocking off a third of potential progression for them. And, again, I don't want to take dwarves out of the running for playability.
|
|
inherit
738
0
4,632
Link"Guess"ski
3,882
August 2016
linkenski
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, KOTOR, Mass Effect Andromeda
Linkenski
asblinkenski
Linkenski
|
Post by Link"Guess"ski on Apr 28, 2017 22:03:05 GMT
Andromeda being classless is a product of Ian Frazier's "rules of fun" guidelines and experience with Kingdoms of Amalur. It's counter-intuitive to RPG in my opinion. It has a certain place perhaps but it is a big "dumbing down" of what makes an RPG an RPG, and especially to Dragon Age where the emphasis on the party comes so much from which abilities they have to balance yours out and playing as the party-members for unique movesets and abilities would be contradictory to having a classless system.
The number one biggest design flaw in Andromeda comes from the emphasis on the player character I think. The companions are just there and they don't have any unique abilities that you can't get and you can't tell them which abilities to use so traversing the open-world maps feels pointless as a companion-game aside from the occasional banter which is basically just fun and meandering and doesn't serve a purpose besides establishing the "companions are there" feeling. All Dragon Age games thus far strongly highlighted the companions as characters as well as gameplay objects. They need to take that even further before they Mary Sue-up the player avatar with cross-class skills and insanely overpowered combos.
Instead I'd love to see them add features to the open-world formula or whatever they make where you can actually interact with companions inside the gameplay in an emergent way. DA:I had the places where Rogues could pick lock things, Mages could energize and warriors could bash stuff but I'd like to see something else that would create more of a sense of cooperation so they're not just following you.
|
|
Wulfram
N3
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire
Origin: wulfram77
Posts: 489 Likes: 837
inherit
692
0
Jul 10, 2020 11:18:42 GMT
837
Wulfram
489
August 2016
wulfram
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire
wulfram77
|
Post by Wulfram on Apr 28, 2017 23:07:59 GMT
I think a party based game benefits from encouraging specialisation. Also, if you offer the player too many options there's a good chance they'll make a rather rubbish character and not enjoy the game much as a result. I'd be more inclined to allow some sort of limited multi-class system - maybe let the player grab a single tree from a different class.
|
|
inherit
4964
0
Jun 17, 2017 17:29:55 GMT
3,700
arvaarad
1,465
Mar 18, 2017 16:32:40 GMT
March 2017
arvaarad
Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Jade Empire
|
Post by arvaarad on Apr 29, 2017 0:59:58 GMT
Classless can be decent. I think Shadowrun is a good example of this, but they achieve that partially by slapping players with weaknesses if they combine certain traits... which to me seems to defeat the purpose. Of course, in classless games that don't penalize mixing, I usually end up with really similar builds.
A problem with a lot of classless systems is that it's hard to have radically different mechanics across the tree. Either they'll mix really poorly (which, again, defeats the purpose) or they'll mix too well, and there will be an obvious optimum path. So often classless systems end up making the abilities kind of samey. That makes it easier for combat designers to compare abilities' strengths.
I don't like samey abilities, so generally I prefer class-based trees.
|
|
lynroy
N6
Thief
Current location: Tuchanka
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
Origin: The3tWits
PSN: The3tWits
Prime Posts: 24,721
Prime Likes: 34,638
Posts: 7,900 Likes: 20,042
inherit
Thief
80
0
Apr 19, 2024 13:26:06 GMT
20,042
lynroy
Current location: Tuchanka
7,900
August 2016
lynroy
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
The3tWits
The3tWits
24,721
34,638
|
Post by lynroy on Apr 29, 2017 2:46:37 GMT
|
|
inherit
ღ Aerial Flybys
61
0
1
26,161
Obsidian Gryphon
10,117
August 2016
obsidiangryphon
ObsidianGryphon
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire
|
Post by Obsidian Gryphon on Apr 29, 2017 3:01:52 GMT
I think they should stick with the three. Warrior, Mage, Rogue but allow all of them to handle at least an alternate weapon. By rights, warriors should be able to handle any kind of swords and the shield; proficient in them. They should be able to handle bows albeit with less skill. If they're templars, then they would have an alternate special skill to use.
Rogues specialised in daggers and bows. I think they should also be able to handle ropes; to trip / trap the mobs and various kind of traps.
Mages. Other than staff and dagger, I think DA devs ought to branch out more for this when it comes to magic. I think mages ought to be able to mold the elements around them with magic. If they could cast ice spells, can't they shaped water (if there is water around) into ice daggers to throw? If there is a campfire nearby, use the fire elements. Or a scarf. Shape it into a rope to use, etc.
Besides, the dagger, I think mages should be able to use crossbows. I do not suggest bows / longbow since these required a lot more skill and stamina. If they're powerful enough, they could magick the arrows.
|
|
shaqfu
N3
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR
Posts: 812 Likes: 2,584
inherit
1142
0
Apr 19, 2024 13:05:19 GMT
2,584
shaqfu
812
August 2016
shaqfu
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR
|
Post by shaqfu on Apr 29, 2017 3:04:15 GMT
I hope they keep it class based. Just keep adding new and exciting specialist trees to them or even make some diff base classes. I'm still hoping we can get a battlemage close range spell build that attacks with their staff like in da2.
I also like how the characters and world has always had unique dialogue and situations for you depending on class/race in the dragon age series. I'd hate to see that go away just to be a jack of all trades.
|
|
inherit
4007
0
Apr 15, 2024 13:11:17 GMT
3,578
kotoreffect3
1,656
March 2017
kotoreffect3
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquistion, KOTOR, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by kotoreffect3 on Apr 29, 2017 6:01:48 GMT
It works for Skyrim but only because of the overall solo adventure that it is. I did not like going classless in MEA. I like how the classes work in DA. To me it is one of the most defining traits of my characters outside of their race and social status.
|
|
inherit
3061
0
58
rivverrabbit
21
Jan 28, 2017 23:29:39 GMT
January 2017
rivverrabbit
|
Post by rivverrabbit on Apr 29, 2017 16:17:34 GMT
If racial selection was limited to human and/or elf and/or qunari, then there's no real contradiction with the lore with a classless system; the PC is a mage, period. It's just a matter of whether or not they put any effort into developing and utilizing their magic. Having magic doesn't mean you've ever learned to throw a spell. It's not dissimilar to the mass effect series; Shepard and the Ryder Twins are biotic from the word go. It's just if you pick a non-biotic class with Shepard - or if you start with a non-biotic specialization with Ryder, they simply haven't trained their latent biotic powers. I do still see the biggest problem being that dwarves are the odd ones out because short being exposed to Titans, however that works - I haven't played the Descent yet - they can't use magic, period, so you'd be blocking off a third of potential progression for them. And, again, I don't want to take dwarves out of the running for playability. Honestly I don't think it'd really be a problem at all. Dwarf players have been locked out of magic so far -- it wouldn't be any different here. If anything, dwarves just get more options this way. It's an intrinsic part of the setting, so it's not like it would come as a surprise. I really see it as a simple choice in the beginning: do you possess magic, or don't you? And that is way more important a question to the overall setting as well, so for once gameplay could tie in to the setting in a far more meaningful way.
|
|
inherit
3061
0
58
rivverrabbit
21
Jan 28, 2017 23:29:39 GMT
January 2017
rivverrabbit
|
Post by rivverrabbit on Apr 29, 2017 16:29:55 GMT
Andromeda being classless is a product of Ian Frazier's "rules of fun" guidelines and experience with Kingdoms of Amalur. It's counter-intuitive to RPG in my opinion. It has a certain place perhaps but it is a big "dumbing down" of what makes an RPG an RPG, and especially to Dragon Age where the emphasis on the party comes so much from which abilities they have to balance yours out and playing as the party-members for unique movesets and abilities would be contradictory to having a classless system. The number one biggest design flaw in Andromeda comes from the emphasis on the player character I think. The companions are just there and they don't have any unique abilities that you can't get and you can't tell them which abilities to use so traversing the open-world maps feels pointless as a companion-game aside from the occasional banter which is basically just fun and meandering and doesn't serve a purpose besides establishing the "companions are there" feeling. All Dragon Age games thus far strongly highlighted the companions as characters as well as gameplay objects. They need to take that even further before they Mary Sue-up the player avatar with cross-class skills and insanely overpowered combos. Instead I'd love to see them add features to the open-world formula or whatever they make where you can actually interact with companions inside the gameplay in an emergent way. DA:I had the places where Rogues could pick lock things, Mages could energize and warriors could bash stuff but I'd like to see something else that would create more of a sense of cooperation so they're not just following you. I generally dislike the attitude of "this is what an RPG has to be." If the requirement for being an RPG is that it has to have arbitrarily divisions to the classes, that's just adhering to old, and frankly dumb, limitations for the sake of it. That's silly. I said classless, but to be fair I'm not really suggesting classes don't exist -- specialization is still key. This foundation, if anything, frees the player to go deeper into specialization. It permits there to be more legitimate specializations, it permits the companions to be more unique. It means there can be in-world interactions beyond just "pick locks, break walls, light veilfire." It can mean there are a dozen different little details that have multiple answers -- instead of walking up to the gaudy, silly-looking breakable wall, and needing a warrior to bust it down, maybe you need some ability that gives you enough force to bring it down. Any ability, like charge, or mind blast, or others. I'm advocating the world be more dynamic and interactive on the whole, beyond just three very basic options. Further, under this system, companions could have many special abilities to which the player never gets access, unless they undergo deep levels of training. Far from rendering companions useless this frees them from the stagnant roles they've been forced to occupy. They can be unique characters with unique blends of abilities. The player can't hope to cover all their bases, because every point spent on a wide spread means points lost to eventual specialty. That's a far deeper choice than just choosing one of three. Mind, I'm suggesting an overhaul that makes higher tier (i.e., abilities that have the potential to be "overpowered") unlocks cost a lot more points. They could balance this by adding more specializations -- if each tree in Inquisition, for example, was its own specialization, with more overall abilities and options, then they could rank the (let's say six) warrior trees in order of power. The crazier ones with more power potential could simply require more points invested in warrior abilities before unlocking. So if you want the good stuff, you have to forsake any fluff and play for quite some time -- which means you need to bring valuable companions along.
|
|
inherit
3061
0
58
rivverrabbit
21
Jan 28, 2017 23:29:39 GMT
January 2017
rivverrabbit
|
Post by rivverrabbit on Apr 29, 2017 16:32:15 GMT
I think a party based game benefits from encouraging specialisation. Also, if you offer the player too many options there's a good chance they'll make a rather rubbish character and not enjoy the game much as a result. I'd be more inclined to allow some sort of limited multi-class system - maybe let the player grab a single tree from a different class. Well, you'd have to specialize if you want to be truly great at any one thing -- if you don't specialize, you'll be versatile enough to meet any situation, but you won't be able to master those situations. You'll still need to make smart companion choices. There are only so many points to go around. If players end up with a build that isn't synergistic and they don't like it, there's always the option to respec. If this was really a problem, it would only be worse under the current system -- what if you choose a class you don't like? You can't ever make that class enjoyable to play, and you might not find out you don't like it until you're mostly done. That's a miserable game experience. In the example of Mass Effect, Bioware discovered that 70% of players only ever played soldier. In Andromeda, many players who say they only ever played soldier are reporting that they love finding out about abilities and a whole world they never knew existed. I'm not in total disagreement with you here, mind. Designers far more clever than I would need to balance this, and make hard choices about how it all works. Choosing a single tree from another class is an idea, but I still think it needs looking at. There are a great many basic, entry-level abilities (shield bash, charge, etc.) that anybody should have access to. So perhaps the answer is building more trees, and making these trees have different kinds of specialization value to them. Then, you make it so that trees with more unique skills, with skills that would demand more technical proficiency, cost more points in that "class" to even unlock. Every weapon type could have its own tree, with a few simple abilities, and anybody could have access to those, simulating training with that kind of weapon. Then the more complex stuff would require some kind of investment in the basics. When you add in bonuses and penalties, like for example stealth tree abilities losing effectiveness if you're wearing heavy armor or using heavy weapons, you get some pretty intricate, tactical choices to make.
|
|
inherit
♨ Retired
24
0
Apr 19, 2024 13:29:51 GMT
24,246
themikefest
14,804
August 2016
themikefest
21,655
15,426
|
Post by themikefest on Apr 29, 2017 16:49:38 GMT
I like the current system. I doubt I would have as many playthroughs as I do now if the games featured classless. It's the same for ME1/2/3
|
|
inherit
3061
0
58
rivverrabbit
21
Jan 28, 2017 23:29:39 GMT
January 2017
rivverrabbit
|
Post by rivverrabbit on Apr 29, 2017 16:50:15 GMT
Classless can be decent. I think Shadowrun is a good example of this, but they achieve that partially by slapping players with weaknesses if they combine certain traits... which to me seems to defeat the purpose. Of course, in classless games that don't penalize mixing, I usually end up with really similar builds. A problem with a lot of classless systems is that it's hard to have radically different mechanics across the tree. Either they'll mix really poorly (which, again, defeats the purpose) or they'll mix too well, and there will be an obvious optimum path. So often classless systems end up making the abilities kind of samey. That makes it easier for combat designers to compare abilities' strengths. I don't like samey abilities, so generally I prefer class-based trees. An excellent point, and designers far better at this than myself would definitely need to work to get it right. I think the reason that samey-ness happens, though, is because they're trying to balance things too much -- each class archetype gets the same number of skills that let them do roughly equivalent things to roughly the same degree of power -- of course stuff is going to feel similar. Instead, I say make it lopsided. Have 10+ individual trees in each area, and inject all kinds of things in there to really make those choices important -- social skills, trap skills, crafting skills, stealth skills -- those could all fall under the rogue purview, with more combat-oriented stuff under the warrior purview. Do it, have radically different mechanics. It's not necessarily an easy undertaking, but I honestly believe it can be done. I'd love to see them try.
|
|
inherit
3061
0
58
rivverrabbit
21
Jan 28, 2017 23:29:39 GMT
January 2017
rivverrabbit
|
Post by rivverrabbit on Apr 29, 2017 16:53:50 GMT
I hope they keep it class based. Just keep adding new and exciting specialist trees to them or even make some diff base classes. I'm still hoping we can get a battlemage close range spell build that attacks with their staff like in da2. I also like how the characters and world has always had unique dialogue and situations for you depending on class/race in the dragon age series. I'd hate to see that go away just to be a jack of all trades. I don't think that needs to go anywhere. First of all, those unique dialogue choices have always boiled down to a tiny smattering of inconsequential, throwaway lines anyway. This would permit them, indeed force them, to implement more meaningful and creative acknowledgements of your talents and accomplishments. If you have the most points in combat, that shapes your identity in the gameplay, and the story can respond accordingly. It's not really any different, but here the two would be tied together. They could build dozens of different interactions all across the game that only trigger when you have certain abilities or thresholds, truly making you feel all the more unique in your identity.
|
|