Warriors, mages, and sneaky types are for PANSIES. Real mennly manns use their fist and be a brawler, and beat the shit outta stuff....in real life and in the game!
GRRRRRRRRR.
GRRRRRRRRR.
Poll: Does anyone actually like being the "warrior"?
- Thread starter pppppppppppppppppp
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Pure warriors tend to feel a bit... odd, in a setting that has magic. Sure, maybe the big lunk never mastered the accuracy of wizardry, but unless there's some reason he can't it feels like he should know some sort of magic.
Even a simple charm that freezes those around him in ice or encases them in rock, or the ability to engulf himself in flame would give the warrior SO much more survival power, so many more options besides just sitting there and taking hits, and maybe that's what they need to spice them up... some flashy, magical ability to them that, while different and more melee based than the mage, still lets them be more than just the sum of their gear.
My favorite freeform RP character is a warrior with a bit of magic mixed in, and he is amazing. Of course, most of that is the plowshare utility of his power... but I digress.
Even a simple charm that freezes those around him in ice or encases them in rock, or the ability to engulf himself in flame would give the warrior SO much more survival power, so many more options besides just sitting there and taking hits, and maybe that's what they need to spice them up... some flashy, magical ability to them that, while different and more melee based than the mage, still lets them be more than just the sum of their gear.
My favorite freeform RP character is a warrior with a bit of magic mixed in, and he is amazing. Of course, most of that is the plowshare utility of his power... but I digress.
Yes! say what you want about the story, but 300 made sword and shields warriors RIGHT!gmaverick019 said:
and thanks
Silly mage classes. Even if game dynamics dictate that magic hits harder than physical dmg initially, there will always come a point where your mana pool (and any items that restore it) runs dry. Thus leading to downtime, which is inefficient.
"Warriors" are the energizer bunnies of DPS. They just keep going and going.
"Warriors" are the energizer bunnies of DPS. They just keep going and going.
For the mechanical concept, yes. I like the idea of being the big tough guy who willingly paints a target on his back so his allies can do their jobs. That's also my attitude toward multiplayer in general; I exist to make sure other people on my team make it through the fight. Doesn't matter what class or job I have, I play it like support. It's just easier to live through the experience if I can also take some punishment without crumpling like a paper crane in the hands of a 4 year old.
Also, the creative concept of being a noble, self-sacrificing fighter-type willing to put his skin on the line for his comrades has a strong attraction for me. I was one of the few people in my circle of friends that enjoyed playing the templar classes in Hellgate: London, and again in Hellgate Global. It's more than being an armor wearing, sword swinging badass, it's about protecting people.
Also, the creative concept of being a noble, self-sacrificing fighter-type willing to put his skin on the line for his comrades has a strong attraction for me. I was one of the few people in my circle of friends that enjoyed playing the templar classes in Hellgate: London, and again in Hellgate Global. It's more than being an armor wearing, sword swinging badass, it's about protecting people.
Well, when I play RPGs, I put most of my level up points into strength, durability, and if those two are good for the time, speed.
There are a couple games where it's fun... my hybrid stealth/longsword specialist in Oblivion was pretty beastly, and playing as that dude from borderlands who fired rockets and punched things was pretty sweet.
I like stealth, but half the time, the stealth is just poorly done, so I prefer to play stealthily in games where the focus is stealth.
I like stealth, but half the time, the stealth is just poorly done, so I prefer to play stealthily in games where the focus is stealth.
Another reason I like to play a warrior; in squad games like Dragon Age, it's easier for me to keep my posse alive. If I can rush in and draw all the aggro, I've only got my health bar to worry about while my buddies can hang back and launch fireballs and stab baddies in the back.
I like it when the melee combat is good. Dragon Age: Origins and Oblivion had pretty absymal melee combat. When it's more fluid, a la DA2 or WoW it's a whole lot more enjoyable.
Also, Gnome Warriors are the most awesome badass-and-adorable things. EVER.
Also, Gnome Warriors are the most awesome badass-and-adorable things. EVER.
I usually end up with something like a battlemage. I can use most of the weapons and armor, roast most of my enemies at long range before they get close and when they get close I can finish them off with a broadsword to the face.
In fact the first game in a while that I'm actually playing full warrior is Divinity 2. Melee just seems to kill things faster in that one. I do keep a bow with me at all time for sniping though.
In fact the first game in a while that I'm actually playing full warrior is Divinity 2. Melee just seems to kill things faster in that one. I do keep a bow with me at all time for sniping though.
I generally play the warrior. There is little more fun than embedding your axe in someone's skull.
I never play warriors. I could conceivably fight as one IRL, whereas I cannot shoot fireballs IRL. Anyone can swing a sword; only a select few can wield the power of the gods.
Soldier/warrior, no. Vanguard/berserker, fuck yeah.
The first always tend to be the goody-two-shoes, up-their-arse characters that are incredibly boring. The second, even though they get the same story, have that element of being absolutely fucking mental that makes them that much more enjoyable. An example of how gameplay affects story.
I am, however, a stealth aficionado first and foremost.
The first always tend to be the goody-two-shoes, up-their-arse characters that are incredibly boring. The second, even though they get the same story, have that element of being absolutely fucking mental that makes them that much more enjoyable. An example of how gameplay affects story.
I am, however, a stealth aficionado first and foremost.
Im always a hybrid of sorts if given the ability, though in general I usually play the character I see myself being the most helpful at playing as whether it be the guy whos purpose is to get swords shoved through him all day long or the guy who sings songs and dances gaily about the campfire for currency.
Eventually though I try every class there is to offer, even the ones I don't personally like such as Rogues/Assassins
Eventually though I try every class there is to offer, even the ones I don't personally like such as Rogues/Assassins
The appeal of a warrior for me is less in the mechanics and more in the personality. A good warrior is usually someone who is trained and disciplined, with military experience. A mage is born with the ability to use power, and a rogue usually uses trickery or stealth to win. Only warriors and warrior-types have learned the value of strength through perserverence and training.
When I play RPG's as a soldier, I like the idea that I lead my group into a fight as someone with combat experience. We don't use magic or trickery to get the job done, because we can't. So we rely on strength, steel, and effort.
In short: I root for the underdog.
When I play RPG's as a soldier, I like the idea that I lead my group into a fight as someone with combat experience. We don't use magic or trickery to get the job done, because we can't. So we rely on strength, steel, and effort.
In short: I root for the underdog.
