Dragon Age Origins

[Nepenthe]

Well neither Carth nor Kaiden were particularly interesting, but the Voice actor did a pretty good job on both of them nonetheless.

 

MMh, I mostly agree with you. I think the thing that gets most people is that the roles are fairly similar, he has a fairly distinctive voice that he doesn't bother to even try to change between the two characters, and apparently a lot of people found the character superbly annoying in KOTOR.

 

In a semi-related tangent, I always thought that Bastila is the best 'romanceable npc' Bioware's had in their games, and Jennifer Hale rocks.

 

I'm also a sucker for showing Viconia the Light with my Paladins, but now I'm just totally digressing.

[RPGmasterBoo]

Bastila is nowhere near Jaheira in writing or in characterization.

 

But that could just be me, I always found Aribeth Bastila profoundly irritating.

[Guest Slinky]

Bastila didn't irritate me, but she is suffering from the typical Bioware undeveloped character -syndrome. I would have liked her otherwise.

Edited September 11, 2009 by Slinky

[RPGmasterBoo]

She's not really undeveloped, you find out plenty of stuff about her motivations and feelings but the stupid instant change to the dark side at the end ruins everything.

[Guest Slinky]

Yeah, it's just the 1 dimensionality that bugs me. Well, I guess jedis are like that.

[HoonDing]

Bastila is nowhere near Jaheira in writing or in characterization.

 

But that could just be me, I always found Aribeth Bastila profoundly irritating.

At least she didn't spout "I will be your doom!!"

[Nepenthe]

She's not really undeveloped, you find out plenty of stuff about her motivations and feelings but the stupid instant change to the dark side at the end ruins everything.

 

True, true. I do have the advantage of not connecting her with Aribeth, I never got more than ~10-15 hours into NWN (show-stopping bugs, hard-drive crashes and not feeling like chapter 1 all over again... and a general feeling of rather spending my time on something else, like Baldur's Gate 2 for the umpteenth time).

 

More a fan of how Jennifer Hale portrays her than the way the character was written, would probably be a more accurate description.

 

Jaheira's neat too, but the way her romance starts makes Bastila's turn to the dark side seem drawn out.

[Morgoth]

Well I never really liked Bastilla much, despite the awesomeness of Jennifer Hale.

 

People can argue however whatever thgey want, but for 2003 standards, I think the Kotor cast was for the most part superb.

[Guest Slinky]

How anyone can connect other characters on NWN characters in the first place? NWN has like the world record of shallow characters. Only character I can remember by name is Aribeth.

[Slowtrain]

NWN has like the world record of shallow characters.

 

 

Not quite. Oblivion runs away with that award.

[Guest Slinky]

Not quite. Oblivion runs away with that award.

Oh, right

 

My mind tends to forget all bad stuff.

[Kelverin]

Not quite. Oblivion runs away with that award.

Oh, right

 

My mind tends to forget all bad stuff.

Yet you remember NWN

[Guest Slinky]

Not quite. Oblivion runs away with that award.

Oh, right

 

My mind tends to forget all bad stuff.

Yet you remember NWN

Well, NWN was the first RPG I played. Then I found Fallouts and Baldur's Gates, so NWN kinda faded in the background for some reason... Though Hordes of the Underdark is a lot better than OC and the first expansion, but that too suffers from the not-so-great engine.

[Hurlshort]

Not quite. Oblivion runs away with that award.

Oh, right

 

My mind tends to forget all bad stuff.

Yet you remember NWN

 

I think it's a bit of a stretch to say Oblivion included characters. They are really just cardboard cutouts with annoying voices.

[Purkake]

I think it's a bit of a stretch to say Oblivion included characters. They are really just cardboard cutouts with annoying voices.

 

Something like this?

 

Edited September 11, 2009 by Purkake

[Amentep]

Yes, but the amount of spells you can memorize is ridiculous in lower levels. You

[Aristes]

Yes, but the amount of spells you can memorize is ridiculous in lower levels. You

Edited September 11, 2009 by Aristes

[Gromnir]

Yes, but the amount of spells you can memorize is ridiculous in lower levels. You

[Monte Carlo]

^ Look at how pen and paper RPGs have managed spellcasting over the years and you'll see that they are virtually identical to how computer games have looked at them, even after you've taken away the obvious legacy issues of PnP RPGs > CRPGs.

 

That is to say, how to manage a modal, as opposed to passive, power? Mana and cooldown timers are, to my mind, as valid as Vancian D&D 'Fire and Forget' system. The D&D system is idiosyncratic, for sure, but it's still pretty viable (as for choosing the right spells in advance... imagine your D&D wizard is a fragile fighter-bomber: choose the right weapons package for the target and listen to the bloody briefing!).

 

A barbarian, with 'Rage' ability can only use it 'x' times a day, right? Where, really, is the difference with a wizard using a magic missile? FWIW, I like the sorcerer spellcasting model as employed in 3E D&D, for me it strikes the right balance between mana and classic Vancian D&D.

 

Other systems? RuneQuest - best pen and paper fantasy RPG ever written, period. Uses a mana based system based on a primary characteristic called POWER (on a 3-18 range). Use a spell - lose POWER. This weakens other abilities like combat and hit points over time... the answer? Hoarding POWER crystals, matrixes and other storage devices that put off the moment you have to use your own innate power source / mana. It really works, especially when power storage devices are rare and extremely expensive. Want to cast a really sexy, enemy-melting piece of magic... choose wisely and take a big power hit. Want to cast minor buffs / hexes / curses - no problem. Of course, this was a fairly low magic setting where even relatively powerful wizards knew their way around a couple of weapons and would wear some armour, a bit like classic Celtic mythos druids.

 

Of all my numerous criticisms of DA:O, what I've seen how it handles the magic system ain't one of them. It seems fit for purpose for balancing the classes and how the game world setting approaches magic as a phenomena, you can't ask for much more than that.

 

Cheers

MC

[Amentep]

Yeah, remember the days of one spell per rest for the wizard? That was okay.

 

The reason I brought up the spell memorization/casting mechanic is that Maria mentioned that mages would not have have a weapon skill tree or something like that. In 1e Dungeons and Dragons, even if you did blow your only spell when playing the mage, that you could still beat on enemies with a staff or stab them with a dagger. In fact, at low levels you were still contributing to the battles when you were forced to throw down. At higher levels, you were pretty wimpy without your spells, sure. ...But you had plenty of spells and anyhow, the nature of a PnP RPG means that someone is running the game. Another person can run things much better to ensure that the players don't feel useless.

 

In terms of DnD, if Dragon Age had used a similar system, my mage might have spent a lot of time in the early game twiddling his thumbs, especially if he couldn't even help bash some poor bastard on the head.

 

I think it'd depend on how its handled; a number of action games with mana systems allow for rather unsophisticated enemy bashing by mages. Not having a weapon tree doesn't mean you can't bash (or does it?) just that you're not as good at it as someone who dedicates themselves to the fine art of bashing.

 

 

am recalling a school play we saw a few years ago. bunch o' fifth graders did a musical version o' mary poppins. the kid who portrayed george banks were particular impressive. in any event, am not thinking that the novice actor is withheld from playing lead 'cause o' line memorization. 5th graders, with the exception o' a couple o' kids, were able to memorize and deliver considerable dialogue and song without error.

 

the vance system o' dnd is silly and arbitrary. mana makes more sense but is rare implemented well. personally, we prefers a universal derived Fatigue stat for such stuff... helps avoid dump stats and is more logical.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

I dunno, I remember our school plays and a lot of time we winged it (we had a vague idea of the dialogue and where it was going and when we forgot we just said a bunch of stuff).

 

Or maybe I just went to an elementary school with a bunch of low memory kids...

[Sammy Chung]

Yeah, remember the days of one spell per rest for the wizard? That was okay.

 

The reason I brought up the spell memorization/casting mechanic is that Maria mentioned that mages would not have have a weapon skill tree or something like that. In 1e Dungeons and Dragons, even if you did blow your only spell when playing the mage, that you could still beat on enemies with a staff or stab them with a dagger. In fact, at low levels you were still contributing to the battles when you were forced to throw down. At higher levels, you were pretty wimpy without your spells, sure. ...But you had plenty of spells and anyhow, the nature of a PnP RPG means that someone is running the game. Another person can run things much better to ensure that the players don't feel useless.

 

In terms of DnD, if Dragon Age had used a similar system, my mage might have spent a lot of time in the early game twiddling his thumbs, especially if he couldn't even help bash some poor bastard on the head.

 

The mage has a basic low cost magic attack they can cast if they're low on mana. You can also have them hit things with a sword if you want, but they won't be able to do any of the fancy stuff that warriors and rogues do. You also have to pump their strength stat if you want them to do significant damage with the sword.

[Aristes]

To be fair, I might like the magic system as much as Monte. Fact is, I don't know much about the system and I was just making conversation regarding the fact wizards apparently don't have a weapon skill. In fact, if we include at least some way for wizards to participate, I could live with the Vancian system. Heh, I didn't even know the system was called Vancian until Gromnir posted it. I had to look it up.

 

Anyhow, I don't hate the system, per se. I just don't like it as much in a computer game. You can always come up with creative ways to use spells in DnD, but you lose a lot of that in a computer game.

 

I can come up with a lot of differences between the rage ability of a barbarian as opposed to the mages spell memorization ruleset, but I don't really care as much since I learned that DA will use mana. Maybe not perfect, but it should mean that my mage still has some way to participate in the early battles even without a weapon skill. Frankly, I've been thinking and maybe I just don't have enough info. I was actually thinking that even before Amentep posted his stuff just now and seeing his post reinforces that suspicions. Just because mages don't have a weapon skill tree doesn't mean that they are barred from using any weapons does it? If not, great. If they are, I just want something I can do during the battle. maybe hurl insults at the bad guys? Scream and run in cirlces?

[Gfted1]

In DA, all mages have a Staff of Unlimited Pew Pew, much like the archers unlimited arrows. Low damage attack, but hey, its free.

[Monte Carlo]

I make all wizards, whatever system I'm using, combat auxiliaries. Invariably I spend a few feats on archery / martial weapons skills so that they can plink away at the baddies if (a) their spells run out or (b) the enemy doesn't deserve the spell power wasting on them.

 

DA, as I understand it, gives mages a staff that allows them to dish out consistent low-level ranged damage. Fine, I've no problems with that.

 

Cheers

MC

[Aristes]

Oh, that answers my question. ...And undoubtedly doesn't spoil any of the game for me.