Dragon Age Forum News (Nov. 06-09, 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.

Brenon Holmes, Programmer

Dual wield

---

Due to my extremely low online time I haven't got the time to spend much time searching through the forums for similar posts. So I hope you'll bear with me.

My question, as some may have guessed already, how will will dual wielding be dealt with. The D&D system had a fairly good system for it, despite the fact that your offhand weapon tended to miss alot. But since you won't be using D&D for this game I assume you'll be having some other solution to this.

---

Currently, I believe you get an additional attack every other attack with to hit penalties. Of course, this sort of thing is quite likely to change... balancing and whatnot.

---

And out of curiousity, will we be seeing the more flashy animations (such as in KOTOR) or the more subtle ones (Such as in NWN).

---

There are custom animations for the dual wield style, and if the combat interaction system works out the way we'd like... I'm sure folks will be pleased.

---

And finally, will there be skills/feats (or whatever you end up calling it) that can only be used/acessed when dual wielding. And will there be a dual wielding specific class.

---

Yes and I don't think so.

More:

---

Wow, that is the straightest mechanics answer we've ever seen out of bioware I think.

In either case, my comments:

An additional attack every other attack...this might imply more than we think:

This would have strange effect if weapons have differing attack speeds: is the offhand attack delay-free? If it is based on the attack speed of the mainhander, then the player will want a fast weapon mainhand (to maximize dual wield 'procs') and a heavy hitting offhand (since the slow delay of a heavy hitter might not factor in).

---

The exact specifics are still being tweaked. I believe we were looking at having the offhand weapon speed simply bind to the onhand speed. So having a high damage offhand would be better.

Although, again depending on the balancing we may end up with some sort of activated offhand as well. So maybe it only activates if the weapon is ready to swing (based on the offhand speed factor), though that could end up binding users into a few limited optimal weapon types.

---

Of course, if all weapons share a single set attack rate (ala DnD rules, for example), then players will want the highest damage possible in either hand.

---

Weapons have different speed factors. They fall into a few categories, though I can't quite recall off the top of my head what they are or what the speeds are.

---

If the bonus of dual wield does not apply every attack, should the penalty?

Is offhand selection limited? Are only certain weapon types allowed?

---

Only certain types of offhand weapons are currently allowed. Sword/Dagger, I believe.

More:

---

Interesting that you're talking about having an extra attack every other attack... with the demise of the fixed length combat round, why not have duel wielding increase the frequency of attacks by 33% and have each attack alternate between the two equipped weapons? In other words (and assuming I'm reading you right) if we assume a normal period between swings is 10 seconds, why have

1 swing
10 second pause
2 swings
10 second pause
loop

instead of

1 swing
6.67 second pause
1 swing
6.67 second pause
1 swing
6.67 second pause
loop

---

We want to keep the number of things that modify the animation speed of attacks fairly low, as it tends to mess around a bit with some of the more complicated interactions we have planned. Though that's not a bad idea, especially as the speed modifiers are rather small.

More:

---

Of course, this is offset by the dual wield penalty a bit, but my concern is that the system would encourage a slightly backwards approach to weapon selection (most people would agree that you don't want to wield a heavier weapon in your offhand when using two weapons, but this system would encourage it)

There are many factors that could balance this: fixed rate of attack, limiting selection of offhand weapons (say you can ONLY use that dagger in your offhand, not the sword. However, the problem with 2 daggers outdamaging sword/dagger will still exist).

Perhaps a better approach would be to apply a generic speed PENALTY to attacks, BUT each weapon would attack at it's own pace (this works even with the set speed approach). So overall you get more attacks, but less attacks PER weapon.

---

There are other factors that could be taken into account as well... reach modifiers for one. (NOTE: this is just an illustrative example, not something that is or is not in DA).

Additionally this also assumes that daggers are actually faster than swords. You have a reach advantage with a sword so you have less distance to travel physically.

Moving a dagger physically is faster yes... but hitting someone with one, not necessarily.

I haven't seen any metrics yet, but I don't believe dual-daggers will be outdamaging swords or a mixed type.

More:

---

Corrected.

Anyway,

By the sounds of it, it's actually a backwards method of handling things?

Example, with a Sword and Dagger.

Normally you'd put the Sword in the "Mainhand" and the dagger in the "offhand", for penalty reasons typically.

Here it sounds like you'd be best doing things the other way round. Putting the Sword in the "Mainhand" and the dagger in the "Offhand", unless penalties say otherwise.
This way you'd attack more frequently with the Dagger, compensating for lower damage, whilst the Sword attacks less frequently and gets more punch out of the Offhand.

*Goes to check if this backwards method has any use in PnP*

---

Yep, we're probably going to want to encourage the large weapon in the main hand. As I said, it's still a work in progress. We're working on getting the simulation aspect of things working well enough to get statistically significant data...

More:

---

Hey Brenon, why not just make the character attack with each weapon based on it's speed and make the penalties too hit a little higher? That way you don't have to change attack speeds or worry about main hand/off hand, and which weapon the player puts where... In other words, if the player uses a long sword/short sword combo, and the long sword attacks every 6 seconds while the short sword attacks every 5, they would stay the same. However, with all dual wield skills/feats/whatever, instead of being -0/-2 maybe you would be -1/-3 or -2/-4 or something of that nature. Don't know how this works from a programing standpoint, but shouldn't hurt balance...

---

It'd probably be okay from a mechanics point of view... the issue there would be when you attempt to translate that to a viewable simulation that you'd start to get issues.

DA world in technological era..

---

I'd like to see some technology and industrialness in DA, somewhat along the lines of Final Fnatsy 6. I.E. Mechanical suits, machinery, tools, airships, steam-powered stuff. I dig that.

---

The setting isn't steampunk, sorry.

More:

---

---

The setting isn't steampunk, sorry.

---

Rats.

Well, would it be more accurate to use medieval or classical to describe DA's world? I.E. more castles, dungeons and small towns (BG1-ish) or elaborate and beautiful cities with statues, temples and whatnot (like say BG2).

P.S. What's steampunk?

---

This isn't really my area, from what I've seen though there's a fair mix depending on the area of the world.

For elaboration, you'd probably be better off directing that question at one of those writer types... (like David ).

David Gaider, Lead Writer

NPCs and Backstories

---

Will the party companions available to the PC be different for each background?

---

No. Party members are available to all players, though their relationship with you might be different based on your background.

---

Also, to what extent will regular NPCs reactions refer to backgrounds?

---

It varies. Sometimes it's very minor, sometimes you get entirely different dialogue and even different plots or different rewards. Essentially what we want is for the player to feel the recognition of their race/gender/background at least a little bit everywhere they go. In one area you might just have one or two characters that bring it up, in another it will be very different for everyone, but the idea is for it to be at least noticeable throughout.

More about romances

---

There will be romances, we know that.
But will there be any homosexual romances.
Will there be any guy-guy or girl-girl actions.
The standard guy-girl romances in games are so predictable ...

---

I wouldn't rule out homosexual romances, but writing off regular romances as "predictable" seems a bit odd to me. So straight romances are now cliche? And so by extension a homosexual romance is thus "unpredictable"?

It certainly would be a surprise if the burly barbarian came on to the male PC without that PC indicating his interest... and I don't think that would be a good place to go. If any homosexual romances are in the game they will be by the PC's initiation only.

Even so, such romances certainly wouldn't be put in at the expense of the regular romances. Regardless of your opinion or interest thereof, you have to admit that including homosexual romances is servicing a pretty niche audience and thus must have a lower priority... if it's included at all.

More:

---

Even if you decline to follow the romance path, the fact that it seems to be an option for the character is what adds to the game, regardless of race or sexual orientation.

---

I suppose. There's also no harm in having characters that are homosexual, even if you can't romance them. It would depend on the circumstance -- the one thing I'd want to avoid in either case is such a thing being included solely for the purposes of titillation.

More I'm not a big fan of having a romance apply to either sex with the same dialogue, but that's what Jade Empire did, I believe. Maybe someone who played those romances could tell us how successful they were?

More:

---

Why do you want gay and lesbian content? Fine, you can have it, but first gimme a global sandbox game please. A world which I can manipulate and take up plots by my design. Some game where dialogue matters, and where I have the possibilites between dozens of outcomes for each quest.
After that we can talk about trivia.

---

They're not even comparable. It's not as if my not writing a single romance or even adding the odd gay character suddenly means that you can have your "global sandbox game" -- and I don't think that saying if we don't make the game a sandbox that we shouldn't thus spare the expense for something smaller is very reasonable, either.

At best, the exchange we're talking about here is having more or less romance plots and more or less interaction with party members (meaning friendship lines, banter and so forth). Obviously writing time applied in one place has to come from somewhere else.

More:

---

I don't think we want gay and lesbian content. I think we are going to get it. And it is going to steal resources away from other romances.

---

I don't know if it would take away from other romances so much as it might take away from other types of interactions with some of the NPC's... in particular the one you would be romancing. It's not as if we're sitting around saying "let's write 5 romances" and then divvying it up amongst gender and sexual orientation. In yours or Shayna's mind, I imagine that somehow equates with the female players losing out, am I right?

More likely it'd be a case of that character who would have the gay romance losing out on a more developed friendship plot, or taking some time away from other non-romance NPC's so I have, say, 2 weeks to write them instead of 3. Or something like that.

But having gay romances would definitely be considered on top of and in addition to any other romances that might exist. Losing it would not mean having another male party member for female players to romance.

More:

---

Oh no, Daggerfall or what you seem to see as a sandbox title, is not what I mean. I don´t mean "open ended"(only). I mean that NPCs have jobs, that they buy goods at the appropriate stores, that NPCs last beyond a quest, that they don´t disappear but go to their hometown, house or hideout. That my deeds in the gameworld cause a real impact so that everyone whom I want to recongnize me, really does so. That I can go climb a virtual ladder say, from an adventurer to my own kingdom. That there are four seasons with graphical and physical changes.
That´s worldsimulation what Dave humbly calls sandbox design.

---

And the implementation of such a thing has nothing at all to do with whether or not there will be gay romance plots in the game.

---

Hmmm, that was one of the problems the friendships were supposed to address. So um...DG, are these still in?

---

Why wouldn't they be? Did I give some indication that they weren't? All I said is that in order to apply writing time in one direction, it has to come somewhere else. That applies as equally to friendship paths as it does to gay romances. I don't understand this perception that including a gay romance (were there to even be one) means that there is suddenly no time at all for anything else.

Personally, I lean more to what a poster said just above. Giving an indication that homosexuality exists in the world and that everything isn't some sanitized, Brady Bunch-like fantasy world is a worthwhile endeavour -- gay romances specifically I could really only see if it worked for a particular character. But, again, that's just my personal view.


More: I understand that, Shayna. I think what I'm saying in this case though is that with reference to something as low-priority as a gay romance plot it's the sort of thing that would only happen if there were sufficient zots allocated -- which is to say extra. If there were only enough zots available to write the basics, then it would never happen.

I guess the misleading part when it comes to discussing zots is that they're invoked as a reason not to do something, when a feature costs more zots than someone realizes or doesn't give enough return for what it costs. But it's really all about resource management -- sometimes you're going to invest sufficient zots to get those extra smaller things because sometimes those extras are important because they add up. If the game is all bare-bones essentials, that's no fun at all.

More:

---

Actually the opposite would be true. Considering that every title since Baldur's Gate II has had multiple romances geared towards male players, would be an indication that Bioware thinks that males are more concerned for character interaction.

---

Errr... no. We tend to include more romance options geared towards male PC's because the majority of our audience are males who play male characters and thus it makes sense to devote more time to writing plots geared towards them. I know some people think that's unfair, but it's not a matter of fairness. How much time do you devote to providing options that only a minority of the players will even choose?

Not that we don't spend the time to provide those options. I think it just tends to be that the balance falls in favor of the male PC's, time-wise.

More:

---

But we are the devoted minority! Very, very, very devoted.

---

Heh. I'm not sure if that should make me more eager to write more female-PC romances or more hesitant to...

More:

---

But romances! That's the best. How many men do you know read romance novels? Since I enjoy romance, it makes sense that my PC would too. And I would care much more for social complexities than for my PC reaching 30th level and being able to consume the baddies with fireballs from her eyes and bolts of lightning from her ***.

I'm probably barking up the wrong tree. "Go play the Sims" you might say (which by the way does not have what I am describing). But all I want is some catering to the ladies in the way they'd like to be catered to. At least, what I'd appreciate. And maybe I'll tell my ten girlfriends about this awesome new game.

---

I'm not going to tell you to go play the Sims. I think we already keep our female audience very much in mind -- it's not as if I suggested not providing romances geared towards female players at all. All I said was that the balance tends to fall in favor of the male player because they are (by far) the majority of our audience, and I don't think that can really be argued.

Whether or not the female audience can be increased by "catering" to them is arguable -- I'm not sure that just increasing the number of female-oriented romances would do it, exactly, it's a bit of a larger issue than that. Not that it would hurt, though, right?

Daniel Erickson, Senior Designer

DA world in technological era..
There is quite a bit of variety to the DA world, depending on how long a culture has been around. David's original write up of the world included thousands of years of history, of wars and conquest, of nations and empires rising and falling. It's an old world. It took days for me to get through the historical documents so that I could get a handle on where the world is when the game begins.

So no, there are no guns and no strange psuedo-tech of gnomish invention but there are places where medieval technology is much further ahead and where architecture and culture are far beyond the dark ages. There are also places, however, where the people are just beginning to move out of barbarism and trying to establish themselves.

More: The drift away from plate armor came with the introduction of gunpowder which Dragon Age stops short of. So expect to see plenty of impressive armor.

More:

---

Well, my history isn't the best, but the drift away from plate armor began at the end of the 100 Years War, I think. It was becasue at the Battle of Agincourt, the French, in their heavy plate armor, were totally mowed down by English longbow men. In fact, the longbow was more effective than early guns at the time. Anyway, that pretty much signaled the end of heavy armor and knights, and moved in favor of long distance weapons and lighter armor.

---

True enough. It was gunpowder that put the last nail in the great armor coffin but it was the longbow and the crossbow that started the demise.

More about romances

---

I am expecting Minsc's gay romance any day now. With a touch of bestiality.

---

You leave Boo out of this!

More:

---

And every romance doesn't have to be something huge convoluted that ties into all kinds of personal background history and family affairs.

( Note how delicately and gently I skirt something here. )

---

True enough. There has been some out loud wondering on this end why it's so hard in our games to get a someone, anyone, into bed -- this seems especially odd if you're playing a female character. Not saying that shouldn't be the great romances but every man in the world holding out for that bonding commitment before you can even get a kiss? Hardly seems realistic. If you think of a TV or book series you have the great romances that span an epic and the single episode pieces that are there and gone…