Question about gamelength for Mass Effect 1+2, Dragon Age and Fallout 3

[Ubereil]

There's two handed warrior as well (differs from the rogue by being able to wield the heaviest weapons and the heaviest armor). Playing a Two-handed warrior as your main character isn't supposedly that bad, by the way, since you probably have the best damage output of any non-caster but getting that damage output requires a little timing in when to use your abilities.

Übereil

 

[Dasale]

DA:O - once you get your party setup, has almost ZERO variety during fights. It's the same endless tank/spank fights with a few major bosses needing special attention.

First play, mainly rogues, no tanks. Second play, mainly 2H, no tank. You just don't know anything of DAO fights, again with no curiosity you'll find no depth that is sure.

Fighter - Focusing on high crit chance using a suitable weapon like the Falchion - with feats like Improved Critical and power attack for added damage.

Fighter- Focusing on single large weapons like Great Sword and brute strength, aided by relevant feats like Cleave and Great Cleave.

Fighter - Focusing on dual wielding with high strength and dex for the dualwielding feats.

First I quote you carefully omit the very statical classes design that are prestige classes.

So Fighter 1: Critical Improved and exactly one special attack/stance, Power Attack. That is a specialization, exactly what I pointed, 2 features including just one more special attack make for you a new build.

Fighter 2 : Damage level improved and 2H and no special attack. That's enough to make a build, that's where is the problem.

Fighter 3 : Dual Wielding and well let see feats linked:

• Bonus to 2W: 3 levels
• Bonus +1 AC and +2 AC
• One special attack.

Now take S&S vs 2H in DAO and compare the number of differences, here is significant different classes. Multiple special attacks quite different, your different fighter build in NWN2 are just pale in comparison.

For the specializations, I disagree with you:

• Not all are a success but many are. They bring 4 new skills each ie more than new stuff that bring any of your build or any of prestige classes (that mainly only pickup among the common pool of feats and most new feats are just stuff like +3 instead of +2, how fun is this.
• Fighter Reaver: Difficult to play but use its special skills involve a rather different play.
• Fight Berserker: It seems insignificant to newbies but use its skills and you know it makes a real difference and it is easy to play. The final skill needs improvement but can find some cases of use for Final Blow which is a more difficult skill to use well.
• Templar : Fighter standard this specialization bring nothing until you face mages, then it's just another fighter.
• Champion: Mainly brings buffers to allies, that's a choice, and one special area attack.
• For mages, I won't detail but no it's not only Arcane Warrior which brings different play, but also Blood Mage and Spirit Healer. Shapeshifter is a good idea but need a total remake.

For the mages, here few points there's in DAO and not in D&D:

• Sustained spells : D&D is so boring with all those buffer spells you cast and cast again, what a crap, as D&D rules evolved it became more crap because buffer spells multiplied.
• Glyph effects: A line with interesting effects that offer really different tactical choices you don't have in D&D:
  • Paralyze trap for mage.
  • Area defense bonus setup on a static area not an aura of a character, that is a really significant tactical difference/choice.
  • Area with a knock back effect during a time: Nothing like that in D&D and again interesting tactical choice.
  • Area with a double opposite effect during a time: Immunity to magic and High draining of mana.
• Drain life: Very interesting option for mages, in D&D system with no mana regen such spell is totally pointless.
• Death Magic: Healing from dead bodies, again a very interesting option you don't have in D&D.
• I could multiply quite a lot of DAO mage spells involving really different effects you don't find in D&D or that just don't work in D&D and that are quite more than pure damages, buffers, charming, and paralyze. Effects you have in DAO too.

Here some weird spell diversity that get D&D, two spells with charm monsters and charm humanoid… That's just a trick for a longer feature list. That's like those specialization in exactly one exact type of weapon, weird fake diversity (and boring limit).

I see you are a fan of D&D system, for me it's a system old, not adapted to computers, ton of fake choices, poor fighters design not much improved during so many years, confuse system. A great news when I learned that Bioware tried something else. But yes and again I can't deny it has ton of class stuff that DAO is far to have. Like monks, Druid morph (at least well done for first time in MotB or NWN2 OC, not sure which one) when shapeshifter supposed to offer an option tried be original but end in a failure in DAO.

Yes more features in D&D, but again enough diversity in DAO for one replay fi you enjoyed fights and want explore it deeper. Yes DAO has its sum of failures and a large area of improvement. At its current state I still would love get a DAO turn based that would make a huge fight game. But yes it needs more classes, classes offering more different pathes and not only mainly based on specializations and some large path (2W, S&S, …) more specialization. Also it needs more specialization and design fix of some skills/spells and specializations. I quote the XP brought some more specializations I don't know if they are well done and if some older not well done have been improved like Shapeshifter.

 

[Thrasher]

Well there is the variety between duel wilding rogue vs fighter and bow ranged rogue vs. fighter. But the differences appear to be somewhat small.

 

[Dasale]

There's two handed warrior as well (differs from the rogue by being able to wield the heaviest weapons and the heaviest armor). Playing a Two-handed warrior as your main character isn't supposedly that bad, by the way, since you probably have the best damage output of any non-caster but getting that damage output requires a little timing in when to use your abilities.

Übereil

At my replay I totally felt in love in 2H. Also using two 2H and even sometimes 3 was very fun. Many mini bosses end be constantly stunned by the multiple 2H. 2H has some different attacks that are rather fun to use and are useful in different cases you have to identify. Even the slow attack was great for me, the ability to decide when use a special attack breaking the delay was a fun little tactical choice.

 

[Dasale]

Well there is the variety between duel wilding rogue vs fighter and bow ranged rogue vs. fighter. But the differences appear to be somewhat small.

LOL better read that than being blind. Well let time pass and hate vanish, I know time will make such affirmation.... no word.

 

[Davion]

While I wouldn't say that Dragon Age has low replayability (I've finished it 3 times now ), I do heartly agree that it has very shallow classes. The only real difference gameplay wise can be introduced after 1 playthrough, is using the dog or shale in your party.

The main classes are too similar (As said before, a dual wield rogue is almost the same as a warrior) and the "prestige" classes have FAR too little impact.

But about D&D; yes, a bit of research is required to understand the D&D system. But after a short while you should be able to understand the basics, and then a world will open up that offers loads of versatility and depth.

 

[Thrasher]

The skill set is just much less diverse than the feat + skill +spell set in DnD 3.x. The greatness of NWN was the large number of community modules to try out different character builds on. I could never stomach replaying any of the official Bioware campaigns. But with DA I don't see that motivation...

 

[Dasale]

There are only like 8 'classes' in DA:O:
- Warrior sword+shield
- Warrior 2-handed (I bet almost nobody played this though)
- Archer rogue
- Dual wielder rogue
- Healer caster
- Damage dealer caster
- Metacaster (another rarely selected route)

I didn't played Tanks and I mean you don't need any. But check forums and wiki and you'll see at least 3 different sort of tanks when you didn't quote any:

• S&S based
• DEX based
• Mage Based with Arcane Warrior.

And if you quoted S&S as a Tank, then S&S can be used and equipped not for tanking but for a much more versatile use.

For mages, you have many controls options not based on damages, it's quite more choices than the mage you quote. For mage Healers I suppose you mean with Spirit Healer specialization but you can have a made more general not with this specialization and still with some healing responsibilities in the party. That's one example of choice you don't quote.

For Rogues: The Ranger specialization makes a huge difference, you didn't quote it. Bard is also a very different choice.

Dual Wield Rogues are of three build, they imply different builds and items choice but also difference on important points, CUN skills or DEX Skills and defense improved, STR. Again another point you don't quote.

For fighters, Warrior 2W is hidden by identical rogue 2W, that is definitely a point to improve in next DAO games. But when you dig it's not identical, because at each level a warrior get more Health and more Stamina, improves two times more his damages improvement base. When Rogue get more skills plus rogues skills matching well various 2W paths. Still in some 2W paths, DEX and STR, the Warrior 2W is a significant build as much different than a Rogue build than are different ton of build in D&D.

I can go long on this path, just dig forums and wiki to get an idea.

But yes there's a system to increment and classes that need to offer more internal choices. But quoting it as a poor skill system is weird when for fighters you have quite more choices during action than all D&D fighters classes but monks. And I already explained in a previous post how DAO increased real tactical options for mages.

 

[Dasale]

The skill set is just much less diverse than the feat + skill +spell set in DnD 3.x.

Yes? D&D Fighters can use skills like:

• Short stun attack?
• Huge single blow?
• Shield bashing with knock back effect?
• Taunt ability?
• Untaunt ability?
• Stance to increase enemy attention during some time? Different sort here.
• Stance to decrease enemy attention?
• Improved chance of stunning?
• Stance with immunity against stun?
• 2H area attack with knock down effect?
• Damage armor stance?
• Stance for improving protections against arrows?
• Stance for canceling attacks bonus from side?
• Stance for canceling attacks bonus from side and behind?
• A brutal move forward knocking back enemies on path?
• And I can increase a long list of effects really different for fighters through rogues and specialization like using blood and many more you find nowhere in NWN series... well but few, very few.

If there's any of that in D&D I wonder where they are hidden in NWN series.

Go on give your list for D&D.

 

[Thrasher]

You need to look at all characters types rather than just focusing on fighters.

 

[JDR13]

I think we should all just surrender to Dasale at this point.

It's obvious that he possesses knowledge of Dragon Age that the rest of us can only hope to comprehend someday.

 

[Dasale]

You need to look at all characters types rather than just focusing on fighters.

Easy to skip the comparison, I hope some with more persistence like DArtagnan will do better than that. That said I already know (roughly) the result, fighters design in D&D is very poor with one exception, monks.

You want we go for mages comparison, Im' fine for this, go on fire you list of effects in D&D spells, not a spell list, but effects types list. I'll follow with DAO.

I think we should all just surrender to Dasale at this point.

It's obvious that he possesses knowledge of Dragon Age that the rest of us can only hope to comprehend someday.

Well now we go on real lists of real effect suddenly there's nobody to wish make a comparison D&D vs DAO… Why I'm not surprised? DArtagnan where are you?

 

[Thrasher]

Don't really want to as I am convinced of my point of view, and have no need to convince anyone else…

If you really want to prove your point, you go ahead and make an honest comparison and we'll see...

 

[DArtagnan]

Dasale

I think I pointed out that I have no desire to convince you. Let's just say I'm pretty firm in my opinion, and nothing you've said has made the slightest impression in terms of me changing my mind. I've played D&D since the first edition came out, and have spent years and years forming my opinion about the system and its evolution.

Everything up to and including 2nd Edition was rather shallow and boring in terms of class diversity - but 3rd edition made a huge leap and added incredibly flexible class mechanics.

Once again, you completely ignore that you will have EVERY single skill available at later levels in DA:O - that relates to your fighter "build choice". So the tactical options aren't in question. The issue is that EVERY single 2-handed fighter (for instance) will be almost EXACTLY the same, because he will have EVERYTHING. You see? No class diversity. The only diversity is the minor powers/skills and the prestige class.

Ranger prestige class changes things greatly? Haha, are you joking? He can summon pets and that's that.

Let's see, 4 pets I believe he gets?

Why don't you google the Ranger class of D&D and notice what gamechanging class mechanics mean.

D&D 3rd edition has a myriad of implemented combat options, like grabble, charge, defensive fighting, attacks of opportunity, pin, cover rules, knockdowns, and much MUCH more - that's completely separate from the skills and feats. Your cute little list of options for the fighter totally pales in comparison with the fully featured ruleset of D&D including feats and skills. Yes, you can taunt, stun, gain immunities, and pretty much everything non-aggro related. Most of these are implemented in NWN1/2 by the way. Have you counted the amount of feats available in D&D and compared them with your little list of combat options? Do you realise that we're talking a huge disparity and that the amount of unique powers in Dragon Age for fighters and rogues is TINY when you look at the total feat list in NWN1 with expansions or NWN2? Oh, and did I mention that feats and skills in D&D/NWN are separate from INHERENT CLASS POWERS AND FEATURES? Yeah, those go ON TOP of the rest.

Oh, and in case you don't understand my point. It's NOT about the TOTAL amount of powers ONE character ends up with. Because classes in D&D have relatively few feat slots available. It's the AMOUNT OF COMBINATIONS = CLASS DIVERSITY.

THIS IS KEY to understand - and you haven't gotten that straight yet.

I'll be gentle and not get into spell lists versus Mage powers in DA:O - because that would make you look drunk in your claims.

I'm not a fan of the aggro concept in general, because it's a design clutch adopted from MMOs - to make fights much easier to design as an appropriate challenge.

Again, you have no idea of that which you speak, and it's plain as day.

You like Dragon Age, and that's great for you. You're letting your passion for this game completely blind you to what's true for D&D. You forget that D&D or games based on it like NWN can be crap in your mind, and that's totally ok. But why do you fight something as obvious as this about class diversity? Don't you realise how futile it is when you really think about it? I'm not exactly talking out of my ass here, and I still play PnP D&D - by the way. No one here agrees with you about this, even if they've agreed about replay value. You're walking on thin ice my friend.

But you have absolutely zero knowledge of D&D in terms of class diversity - which you clearly demonstrate again and again. I made it very clear that my fighter builds were "gist" builds, and do you really expect me to list a detailed list of skills and feats for these builds just because you can't accept the obvious?

Do you think I don't notice how you completely sidestep the gigantic issue of no multiclassing in DA:O? Almost any combination of feats and spells is avaliable to a huge amount of classes in D&D. DA:O has ZERO multiclassing. That alone means perhaps a MILLION more combinations than anything you'll EVER approach in DA:O. You're totally defeated before you even start.

You think DA:O has more diversity and I have no problem with your opinion. I'm not sure why it's so important to convince anyone?

If you really think stubborn blindness is going to change anything, you have to think again

 

[Dasale]

Don't really want to as I am convinced of my point of view, and have no need to convince anyone else…

If you really want to prove your point, you go ahead and make an honest comparison and we'll see…

LOL, too me all the work? No way, I'm hoping DArtagnan will come back as the hero to save the D&D dignity in this thread.

I'm not an action player and like dig rules. I played whole PoA series but never finish the 3rd, the whole BG series but one dungeon in ToSC, the whole NWN series but NWN2 xp after MoTB, many NWN1 modules among the best released the first years, ToE. But it seems I could not have dig rules enough, and could not compare well with DAO.

So well last hope for a fair comparison is DArtagnan for the D&D part and I'll try do the DAO part.

 

[DArtagnan]

So well last hope for a fair comparison is DArtagnan for the D&D part and I'll try do the DAO part.

If you're hoping people adopt your completely flawed and inadequate "comparison" methods because you want them to - prepare to be disappointed a lot.

You're being irrational about this, so don't hope for too much.

 

[Dasale]

First point to remove a large part of the confusion, I never made any comparison with pure D&D rules for paper game and not implemented in computer games. I don't care compare abstract rule for pen and paper game with concrete implementation in a computer game. Let stick to NWN series and ToE, but you can get older D&D computer games and they won't be better.

That said some people really need some quote and pinpoint the real details:

Taunt in NWN series: Enemy suffer -2 to AC and -2 to concentration for five rounds.

DArtagnan you name that taunt? Lol that is the nice example to quote how it's not about really different effect in computer D&D we got.

Also in DAO it's rather more difficult to taunt than in WoW to really attract fast the attention (not just a poor effect like in NWN series) and it's rather more dangerous to throw your tank and have it attracts the attention of everything during the fight.

Knockback? For fighters? Where in D&D computer games? Another quote:
The spell with this effect from a wiki search:

Repelling Blast: This invocation is not in NWN2.

Nothing more in NWN2 wiki but I'm sure you know better NWN2 than its wiki does.

Charge? NWN series? where? When looking at NWN2 wiki the only result is a skill not implemented in NWN2 (Acrobatic Charge) and I don't remember any charge in any D&D computer games. Another point is the effect of the charge. High damage and lower defense for a duration? Not a new effect, just a new word with old effects.

The point is I played quite a lot of the D&D computer games and if I get surprised by many new effects in DAO from spells to fighters.

Now for this thread, I didn't realize the exchange was about D&D ideas thrown on paper and never implemented. I don't see the point of comparing rules on paper and computer games.

 

[Thrasher]

I think DAO knockback is like NWN knockdown.

 

[Dasale]

No DAO has:

• Knockback that only push pack,
• Knockdown making fall but with a little Knockback effect,
• Stun for a very short duration for few fighters attacks,
• Area attack with Knockdown+Small knockback for one fighter attack,
• Knockback for a spell you cast on an area for a duration
• Not sure but if I remember well also a spell with a Knockback aura.
• Earthquake with a knockdown/Sort of Stun/Slip effect during a duration.

In NWN series:

• only the Monk has Knockdown with a number limit per day
• Stun also only for monk, not sure if it has a limit per day.
• For magic there's no Knockback effect, not sure there is any Knockdown.
• Earthquake is just a basic instant damage area spell.

Here is the for the "famous" D&D computer games diversity when you look further than words.

 

[bjon045]

No DAO has:
In NWN series:

• only the Monk has Knockdown with a number limit per day
• Stun also only for monk, not sure if it has a limit per day.
• For magic there's no Knockback effect, not sure there is any Knockdown.
• Earthquake is just a basic instant damage area spell.

Here is the for the "famous" D&D computer games diversity when you look further than words.

In NWN2 Fighter has knockdown. Fighters can stun. There are around 100 spells for just the wizard in NWN2. The druid equivelent spell of earthquake does not just do damage. It is obvious you have probably not even played the NWN series.

You are just making yourself look foolish if you arguing DAO:O has more "options" that NWN2 in regards to combat and character builds. There are 39 character classes in NWN2 and 185 spells.

Here are just the feats for fighters:
http://nwn2.wikia.com/wiki/Fighter

Notice they can disarm (not in DA:O), stun, knockdown and even deflect arrows.

That is assuming you go a straight fighter build when infact there are almost infinite combinations you can choose from.