Dragon Age: Tactics

[Monte Carlo]

^ As I posted earlier in this thread, having a good rogue with high Stealth skill (3+) and decent Cunning makes crowd control very different from the vanilla 'Tank & Mage' melee / fireball inferno route.

 

You can manage the mobs using stealth, backstab and traps: lead smaller groups off into ambushes and weaken them gradually until your main party is ready to deal with them en masse.

 

Even with no archery talents I was able to use a crossbow to finish off enemy mages I'd already back-stabbed to middling health, then re-stealthed and ran off. Brescillian Ruins and the Cultists up on the mountain were all dealt with this manner, and they are pretty big mobs.

 

Archers are good for taking out mages... line up your archer to critical strike one whilst, simultaneously you backstab, with poison and follow up with dual-weapon sweep, then get your tank to draw on Aggro with his taunting. All the time your healer is just buffing / healing.

 

Like I say, not everybody's cup of Earl Grey but very good fun and a different experience altogether.

[HoonDing]

^I think I'll use Shale's AoE & shock/freeze bombs instead. Might even go dual-wield with this in mind.

 

The less Morrigan in the party, the better.

[Gromnir]

^ As I posted earlier in this thread, having a good rogue with high Stealth skill (3+) and decent Cunning makes crowd control very different from the vanilla 'Tank & Mage' melee / fireball inferno route.

 

honest, am thinking that alan managed to sell folks on the high cunning rogue 'round these parts before folks actual played. no doubt the high cunning rogue is still effective, but the numbers (at least the ones that is viewable) is still seeming in favor o' the high str rogue. more base damage and you don't need lethality line to achieve. better attack rating regardless if you is flanking or not. am not sure what is minimum cunning to open all chests, but even if you not go past 18 a handful o' missed chests is unlikely to be more than a minor irritant.

 

am aware that cunning gives additional armour penetration and critical chance, but we recently began using tier 4 duelist and it became pretty damned obvious that criticals ain't near as important for a rogue as we surmised. if you use coup de grace or you is backstabbing, you is effective doing criticals anyway. the numbers leaping up on screen is no different/better for Gromnir when he uses the tier 4 duelist auto-crit, then when we is attacking from flank or attacking a stunned/immobilized opponent... and is appears that criticals and backstabs is identical... no stacking. also, am not bloody worried 'bout minor improvements to armour penetration if our backstabbing rogue ends up with a modified str in the 50s.

 

can still get stealth 3 with 18 cunning. as counter-intuitive as it first seems, am not sure if there is a reason to go past 18 cunning for a rogue... dual wield or archer. strength for dual wield and dex for archer... and less need to spread attribute points. your dw rogue is gonna get to at least 25-27 base str anyway just so you can use the best 1-h swords in game, right?

 

dunno, am thinking that low 20s cunning is all you need to open all chests and disarm traps, so if that if you need such to be appropriate rogueish, then so be it... otherwise, am not seeing a reason to go past 18 cunning for any rogue build.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Enoch]

From what I've read over on the Bioboards, the lockpicking formula is the same as the persuasion formula: 4 tiers of difficulty at 25, 50, 75, & 100. The formula for your ability is (Cunning - 10) + 25*(ranks in the governing Skill).

 

So you can still unlock anything if you take all 4 skill ranks, but with a Cunning of 35 you only need to take 3.

Edited December 9, 2009 by Enoch

[Gromnir]

From what I've read over on the Bioboards, the lockpicking formula is the same as the persuasion formula: 4 tiers of difficulty at 25, 50, 75, & 100. The formula for your ability is (Cunning - 10) + 25*(ranks in the governing Skill).

 

So you can still unlock anything if you take all 4 skill ranks, but with a Cunning of 35 you only need to take 3.

 

makes cunning even less necessary... or more, depending on how you look at it. the lack o' transparency is a real hoot, no?

 

so, 18 cunning gets 3 ranks in stealth (if you like stealth) and to get 4th tier o' lockpicks you need a cunning score o' 22.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Wrath of Dagon]

Is taking duelist useful for an archer?

[Gromnir]

Is taking duelist useful for an archer?

 

well, am thinking you can still make use of keen defense (tier 3) and the initial dex boost. 'course, what is your other options, 'eh? the ranger critters ain't half bad.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Monte Carlo]

I really don't get the math, but high cunning lets me disarm traps without a single point in the skill (good XP fodder), I get some cunning based dialogue options and I win every coercion check (persuade).

 

Perhaps not the best use of stat-dumping, my cunning is now in the high 30's un-adjusted with dex in low 40's, str mid-20's I use The Edge offhand and Ahod axe with the best runes I've got (paralyse / slow / +5 fire damage). My damage sits high 30's to low 50's and my defense rating is 100% (improved drakeskin armour). Most importantly of all my stamina adjustment, fully kitted out, is +2.25% or something, so with lethality and momentum switched on I'm a chainsaw.

 

I am the single most effective melee character in my party, but I need the tanks a lot. I can still go solo commando around most missions, though. Boss fights are another matter entirely, though.

[Wrath of Dagon]

Yes, I was thinking ranger makes the most sense for an archer, but without knowing what you get it's hard to tell.

[Monte Carlo]

I think ranger / assassin is a solid archery build, extra dex plus a critter ain't bad... I presume the assassin skillz apply to ranged attacks too. Being able to mark of death somebody with an arrow then unleash your critter on them could be an interesting anti-mage gambit.

Edited December 9, 2009 by Monte Carlo

[Enoch]

Are the ranger critters controllable, or are they wholly AI-based?

[Wrath of Dagon]

You can be both a ranger and an assassin? I thought you had to choose one.

[Monte Carlo]

^ I'm assuming they're like the undead you can create, i.e. a controllable 5th party member with talents etc.

 

That was something else - killing enemy archers then raising them as a 5th party member saved my bacon numerous times on my first playthrough - the undead get some talents of their former incarnations.

 

At Wrath O Dagon: You get two specialisms, one at 7th level one at 14th so yeah, you can do both.

Edited December 9, 2009 by Monte Carlo

[Enoch]

You can be both a ranger and an assassin? I thought you had to choose one.

You get 1 spec slot at level 7, and a second at level 14.

[Gromnir]

"Most importantly of all my stamina adjustment, fully kitted out, is +2.25% or something, so with lethality and momentum switched on I'm a chainsaw."

 

with wade's superior drakeskin and a halfway decent helm you is gonna get something like -6.1% fatigue... but that has nothing to do with cunning.

 

momentum is great... but that also gots 0 cunning relevance.

 

lethality is complete unnecessary if you go str route.

 

most o' the stuff you mention ain't cunning dependent. can get same benefits or more with str build. cunning not improve your defense. cunning not improve attack. cunning can improve damage, but it still not equal what you get by boosting str over cunning.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[cronicler]

I have to agree, the lack of transparency in game mechanics isa real pain. Personally Dps wise high str is better than high cun. They both give you same bonus damage however 1hands use %100 of the bonus while daggers use %85 (%42.5 if you use the dex fix). High str gives you the ability to use main hand weapons which have higher dps then the daggers. On the other hand high cunning gives you a lot more penetration, making more from your lesser base dagger damage. 30+ base penetration is enough to negate nearly all armor your attacks have to encounter, except in some rare cases like massively armored bosses.

Also I have to note that I have no idea if tha dagger attack rate is higher than 1hands or not.

 

However for a rogue (and persuasive main character, if you like that route) cunning also gives you the other underhanded options: combat stealth vs bosses, lockpicking and trap disarming, a couple of dialogue options here and there,

*If you are an assasin, then you get bonus damage from your bonus cunning on crits.

 

Edit: On a DW warrior there is no dispute, you need very high str (2per lvl) and high dex (1per lvl). the bonus stats you gain from fade and a few other places are more than enough to get your stats to the needed numbers to unlock the talents.

 

Still at the end of the day, It boils down to preference instead of solid facts I guess

Edited December 9, 2009 by cronicler

[Enoch]

The dagger attack rate is faster than the attack rate with bigger weapons. I'm not sure how the damage-per-second math works out, but it is noticeable.

[Aristes]

Generally speaking, you should do more damage with a weapon that does more damage at a slightly slower speed than a weapon that does less damage at a slightly faster speed. If the speed difference is greater, then that will cease to be true. That is to say that if you have a sword that does 10-20 points of damage per hit and a dagger that does 5-10 points of damage per hit and the rate of speed combines to make each do 10dps, then you should actually average slightly more damage from the sword than the dagger. If the dagger is much faster, then it'll pull ahead on dps. At least that's how it seems to work out. Maybe a number cruncher who has put the crunching through some actual tests can speak up. I base my assumption on recording like DPS with different damage spreads with a damage meter in WoW, though, so I guess it might not apply here.

 

I'm interested in a cunning build myself, since I'm going to play a duelist/x next. I'll stick to the cunning build even if it's slightly less advantageous than strength build, assuming that it's not suicidal. What I'm getting is that it's less powerful, but still workable. There are enough dialogue options that depend on persuasion that it might make for a different experience on that basis alone. That and the Mage Tower puts more points into cunning. Anyhow, I like mages and fast talking rogues best. Well... I like fast talking mages best, but that just doesn't seem to be a viable build in this game. Maybe I'm wrong?

[Gromnir]

"I'll stick to the cunning build even if it's slightly less advantageous than strength build, assuming that it's not suicidal."

 

is definite not suicidal. the cunning route is perfect viable... is simple no good reason we can see to choose. am not recognizing any kinda real advantage to going the cunning route if you is a dual wield combatant. the str option ends up resulting in a superior combatant, and you actually can be a bit more diverse in your talent choices.

 

*shrug*

 

and the mage tower only gives 1 more point for cunning than str or dex... is not much significant.

 

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

ps as for stealth... three tiers o' stealth with a mere 18 cunning is good for 99.9% of game.

Edited December 9, 2009 by Gromnir

[Monte Carlo]

My bad, I meant I've got -2.25% fatigue not +.

 

Again, I'm kind of flying wearing poorp quality night vision here, but one thing I have noticed with my high cunning rogue is sick (I mean sick) stealth abilities. Again, I'm sure a tier 4 with high dex might have the same skill, I'm not sure but I can just hide in plain sight. It's a big part of the character build.

 

There's one duel coming up where I'm more or less relying on it...

[Aristes]

the str option ends up resulting in a superior combatant, and you actually can be a bit more diverse in your talent choices.

Now this is the rub. I don't mind giving up a little bit of combat ability in order to have a fast talker. What I don't like is giving up diversity. I wonder if it's possible to split the difference. Have enough cunning to persuade folks and pick locks and the like and have enough strength and dex to give me a good spread on talents. I mean, talents make this game. You can literally have two people from the same class who are nothing alike because of talents, which I think is good. It does lead to the opportunity to screw yourself, but overall it's a good aspect of the game.

[cronicler]

I would suggest Assasin/Duelist (Or vice versa) for a pure meele build. The 3rd Assasin talent provides a hug passive bonus to your attacks (Cun-10). When you mix that with paralyse runes, stuns and 4th duelist ability; it brcomes a meat grinder.

[Gromnir]

the str option ends up resulting in a superior combatant, and you actually can be a bit more diverse in your talent choices.

Now this is the rub. I don't mind giving up a little bit of combat ability in order to have a fast talker. What I don't like is giving up diversity. I wonder if it's possible to split the difference. Have enough cunning to persuade folks and pick locks and the like and have enough strength and dex to give me a good spread on talents. I mean, talents make this game. You can literally have two people from the same class who are nothing alike because of talents, which I think is good. It does lead to the opportunity to screw yourself, but overall it's a good aspect of the game.

 

fast talking can be achieved through skills... need 18 cunning to get tier 4 talky skill. what we didn't know is that a high cunning player don't need tier 4 o' proselytizing skill... so with high cunning you can save 1 skill point (although we s'pose you will not get top-end intimidates). talent-wise it would appear that the high cunning rogue doesn't need the fourth tier of lockpicking if you want to open all chests. so you save a point there.

 

...

 

dunno. you gotta spread talents and abilities much more careful to get a good cunning rogue, whereas the strength rogue you can get all the benefits o' the cunning rogue, while not having to go the Cunning Route with talents. am really not seeing an upside to the cunning rogue.... but that don't mean that the cunning rogue ain't effective, 'cause they are effective.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Enoch]

Given that intimidate can be used in place of persuade in most conversations, a high strength is nearly as good as a high cunning for talky purposes.

 

 

I'm going to play a rogue in my next game, but I'm not yet sure how I want to build her. (I'm thinking Dwarf Noble.)

Edited December 9, 2009 by Enoch

[Gromnir]

Given that intimidate can be used in place of persuade in most conversations, a high strength is nearly as good as a high cunning for talky purposes.

 

 

I'm going to play a rogue in my next game, but I'm not yet sure how I want to build her. (I'm thinking Dwarf Noble.)

 

Gromnir chose dwarf noble 'cause none o' the starting talents/skills were objectionable. sadly, we was displeased to see how little impact our origin had on game when we returned to orzamar. a couple of snide remarks were the only difference we noted... and one additional conversation to explain just why your returning weren't noteworthy.

 

if we does rogue again it will probable be city elf or human... but the human noble origin is just gawd awful. "Oh, the humanity!"

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited December 9, 2009 by Gromnir