Is Dragon Age really a BG successor?
View Single Post
March 8th, 2010, 20:34
my biggest problem with DAO was the rule set - I did not find it as engrossing as DnD and I did not find it 'subtle' in any way. There was essentially no notion of spell power scaling with level (Shapechange anyone?) - yes I know you had points to put in 'magic stats' but the seemed to have very limited impact (unless you ignored everything else, which I did not - dex seemed important for example). You also suffered disproportionately if you did not follow one of the 'approved' builds. Sorry, despite it's 'complexity' I think DnD rules simply provided far more gameplay opportunities/paths to explore, at least for wizards. I could cast every spell in the DnD spellbook given time and resources. In DAO you get 1 skill per level, and max our around level 20. And those have to be divvied up between class specialization (2/3 wasted right there) and about 35 (?) spells/skills which all had prerequisites so you cannot use any skill if you have spare points. So you ended up using the same tired old tactics again…and again..and again. Sure BG2 is viewed through rose-tinted glasses, but DAO is nowhere near the game I was hoping for. Which is not to say its crap, but it ain't no 'spiritual successor'.
*edit* and in BG2 you could force a chest. Perfectly logical! You are forced to use lock-picking in DAO (and DS for that matter). Your huge fighter, or Shale can't break an itty bitty lock? Come on.
Keeper of the Watch
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Cape Town, South Africa
View Public Profile
Send a private message to booboo
Find More Posts by booboo