Dragon Age Forum News (Dec. 06, 05)

Remove all ads!

Here are today's Dragon Age forum highlights, taken from the Dragon Age Official Forum. Please take into account that these are only single parts of various threads and should not be taken out of context. Bear in mind also that the posts presented here are copied as-is, and that any bad spelling and grammar does not get corrected on our end.

David Gaider, Lead Writer

Will bioware/publisher continue the trend of limiting consumer rights?

---

Will bioware help contribute to the continuing trend of destroying consumer rights in the name of a good publishing deals?

---

Gosh. That sounds very dramatic.

Race specific classes

---

I would prefer to have MUCH larger difference between the races than just culture. Otherwise, you could drop elves and dwarves and make all "races" simply different nations.

For example, I would love to have different senses for different races, such as:

Humans = normal senses
Giants = colourblind (only sees grayscale), nightvision
Orc = colourblind, extra fine sense of smell
Dwarf = infravision
Gnome = infravition and fine sense of smell
Elf = extraordinary fine sight and hearing, nightvision

---

And I would say that if this is your definition of "much larger" than culture, we're probably not going to agree on this point.

I don't see anything wrong with the idea of elves having a particular fighting style and dwarves having their own style and so forth -- I don't know that it needs to be a different class, though, really.
Having all kinds of unique classes that each require some kind of prerequisite (such as a specific race) sounds like a good idea on the surface... it hits that "more choices" button which makes a sound that only gamers can hear, after all. It seems to me, though, like the choices are being put on the wrong end. Instead of offering more paths to development, you're offering more limitations in the end, and the only way to fix that is to offer more classes. More classes and more classes, more more more! Like 3rd edition D&D and the prestige classes --- the worst, most unbalanced non-mechanism that I've ever seen any game put out, all in the name of diversity. It makes for great magazine editions and expansions, though, each offering up a dozen or more new prestige classes "each more unbalanced and limiting than before!"

I'm sure that there are those who disagree with me, and that's fine, but I simply feel that it's a mentality which is very wrong-headed and I haven't much interest in servicing it.

Why levels
Skill-based systems aren't a new thing, and they are replete with their own drawbacks just as level-based systems are. It's an old argument, and making a choice between the two is pretty fundamental to whatever type of rules system you're developing.

We've chosen the level-based route. This doesn't mean it's D&D-style, though, as some believe -- there's quite a variety of level-based systems to choose from.

Class restrictions based on stereotypes?

---

For example, will our clerics (or equivolent) run around with clubs and hit undead

---

Well, there's no class like that so I can say no. As for those classes which are meant for melee, they're free to steer their development in a number of ways... as long as those ways conform to the general class -- that being the nature and purpose of having a class, after all.

---

or our Wizards stuck with sticks and no ability to take melee further?

---

It's not a melee class, so yes... they don't have access to melee skills.

---

Essentially, will our characters be rail-roaded towards a stereotype?

---

Rail-roaded is a pretty loaded term, as is stereotype. There are development paths available, as well as other classes -- though if what you're asking is whether or not wizards in DA get access to anything beyond basic melee skills, no they don't. Nor should they, really, in light of the fact that we're using a class system and the way that the DA wizard works in particular.

Save the world? -Again-? No thanks.

---

I do hope we're not saving anything more than a country.

---

Some nation-saving may not be out of the question.

Though, to be honest, even if there was a world-threatening prophecy involved that doesn't mean it would necessarily have to be done poorly. You'd have to be pretty jaded to have your only requirement for something to be good is that it be different.

More: It's a non-issue, really.

Regardless of whether or not the world is actually endangered, the plot will be epic in scale and that means world-affecting things are in the offing... and the player's story will be centrally tied into it, it won't just be some optional thing the player might or might not do.

And we're going to do that kind of story because we think it's exciting and that's the kind of stories we like to do. The overly jaded might moan that this isn't a fresh enough idea to strike their fancy and get them excited -- but I suspect there's not much that would. If we said that the story revolved around the player defending his farmhouse against assault or wandering the land offering their services for hire that they would suddenly say "now THAT sounds exciting!"
Of course not. Any story broken down far enough is going to sound generic and leave itself open for people to see what they want to see, the differences will come in how the story plays out.

More:

---

Alright, let me suggest a new idea. The world is in big trouble, and a party of heroes set out to save it. It could be anything from a villain to a natural disaster to God knows what. We have a great adventure full of sub-quests, twists and turns in the story and all that, and finally come to the end. But... you failed. The world as we know it cease to exist - and yet you have half the game left. Basically you tried to save the world, screwed up and now need to face the consequenses. Kinda like starting with Baldur's Gate and ending up with Fallout. Could it work?

---

So you can't save the world? You are destined to fail your mission, and it takes half a game for that inevitability to occur? And you spend the rest of the game facing the consequences of an outcome you could not avoid? Or can you also succeed... at which point you miss half the game?

I suppose there are many types of tales to be told, and perhaps yours could even work, but remember that even Fallout's premise was based on the ultimate success or failure of your mission to save the Vault. Changing things so that the premise isn't about saving something isn't going to automatically make things fun -- which is what this is about, after all. There is a game to be played as well as a story to be told.

More:

---

We could try to save the world (or a country or whatever) from a villain and fail. Then you play the other half of the game and face the villain again. This time you do kill him or her. (or fail again and get a different ending sequence).

---

And how would that differ from a story that is about, in essence, trying to save the world? Only the details of the plot differ, the epic nature is the same. What difference are you actually yearning for, here? The ability to fail at the premise of the adventure and yet continue to play?

Is There Anyway in Hell to Resurrect this Thread?

---

If you wouldnt mind, I ask you Mr.Gaider; So far have you found that writing the dialogue and story (rather then creating the world) for DA noticeably more challenging then writing other games?

---

Yes.

---

how so?

---

It's more complex.

More: Still banging the same drum, I see.

---

Is such a system in the works for DA?

---

As a system? No.

---

If such a system is not in the works, will we be left with simple summoned furry/feathered/scaly/chitinous meat shields?

---

I'm not sure who "we" is supposed to be. Everyone? Spellcasters? At any rate, no.

---

If neither of these ends of the spectrum is planned, what middle ground shall be offered?

---

Have you considered the possibility that we're not offering that spectrum at all?

More:

---

Will there be examples of this "good" being subjective, leading to such things as violent holy wars, crusades, ect.?

---

In the history? Certainly.

That is not to say that everything is grey, however, from a moral standpoint. Simply that one of the central themes of DA is that there are no easy choices.

More:

---

By "no easy decisions" does that mean there are reprocussions for all morally directed decisions?

---

No, it means it is not always easy to determine which is the best path. Sometimes the decision is a personal one, and sometimes it involves unpleasant repercussions or sacrifice -- not always, of course, but generally it's not a matter of encountering a plot and having two paths offered to you, one being very clearly the "good path" and the other being very clearly not. There is no alignment, no dark side/light side sliding scale, no guide to the path you should take other than your own sense of right and wrong and the opinions of those in the world around you.

More:

---

- Will the different races and cultures be tied to specific regions and climates which have to be visited? So, does our exploring include visiting different continents or are we more tied to a specific area that includes all races?

---

You won't be gallavanting across the world, if that's what you're asking.

---

- How much thought have you given to the DA world in terms of astronomy, i.e. thoughts about the sun system, planets, or eg if the world will be spherical or elliptical and such? (I understand this is not a question about gameplay, but just to see how much thought about the entire world is given)

---

There's plenty of thought devoted to DA's cosmology. As for its astronomy, not much beyond what the player will be able to see.

---

- Will it be possible to play the mage similar to the sorcerer from BG2, so with the ability to choose from all spells (not restricted to a school) and use spells more often (even going perhaps as far as having a spell like ‘project image’)?

---

The terms don't translate very well, but if you mean what I think you mean then no.

---

Additionally, will spellcasters gain xp tied to the use of spells or just like any other class through combat/quests?

---

Mages earn XP just like anyone else.

Derek French, Technical Producer

Will bioware/publisher continue the trend of limiting consumer rights?
Once again, Maria cracks me up...

 

I tend to agree on classes and stereotypes. Eh, what does it mean if someone wants a wizard that isn't "stereotyped" into staves and poor melee? Someone wants a fully functional wizard with fighting skills without, let's say, taking some fighter levels instead of wizard levels. This being said, I have succeeded in building wizards able to offer decent melee presence apart from being good mages within the D&D rules. I would like to hear more about consumer rights and the "drama" surrounding the topic.

 

Ok then, here's some quotes by the members from the topic (first one is the originator's post).

---

---

---

---

 

Pretty much everyone taking part in that debate has lost something in my eyes. Yes, David Gaider included.