I don't mind playing as the warrior. It's (usually) the simplest class and helps me get into the game with the least bit of trouble.
Poll: Does anyone actually like being the "warrior"?
- Thread starter pppppppppppppppppp
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Yeah, I quite enjoy playing warriors. Hitting things with an oversized sword or bashing them with a shield can be great fun.
Though I love playing classes like Paladins or Dark Knights when there is an option. That abundance of physical power and heavy armor with a slight ability to use magic is such a nice and fun thing. Great versatility!
Though I love playing classes like Paladins or Dark Knights when there is an option. That abundance of physical power and heavy armor with a slight ability to use magic is such a nice and fun thing. Great versatility!
I love playing the Warrior, but not with a shield, never a shield, chunky two handers or duel wielding for me, i've got things to kill. I usually play that or a healer, kinda bi-polar
I can understand not wanting to always play as the "warrior" all the time, but there is a certain amount of enjoyment that comes from being a heavily muscled behemoth, in a skin of steel, laying waste to more or less everything that stands in your path. I also think you should always play whatever suits your play style. If you like jumping right into the middle of enemies and slashing or smashing everything withing reach, your a warrior, this rule applies to the other classes as well. For example, in Diablo 2 I tried playing as other characters, druid, paladin, sorcerer. I didn't have nearly as much fun as playing the barbarian. Regarding, putting warriors on the case of every RPG known to man, that marketing seems to work. Otherwise we wouldn't buy the damn things. If you need an example of games marketing other charcter "types" look no further then the Thief series, Assasins Creed, and...ok I can't think of a game that features a mage on the cover but I'm sure it's out there.
If I'm looking for a straightforward bash, then sometimes I'll roll up a warrior. Mostly, though, I'm more of an indirect-damage sneaky-***** type (Hit'n'Run Bow Ranger, Trap Assassin, Minion Master Necro, etc...)
Probably because I'm not as young or quick as I used to be.
Probably because I'm not as young or quick as I used to be.
I normally try to use mage/stealth in rpgs but i am always prepared to dish out the damage with a massive sword/axe. In Oblivion especially. I was exclusively mage but i always kept a nice sword for when i fucked it up and i needed to defend my self. <3 Dusk/Dawn Fang
i almost always choose the warrior class, but thats because i love being the tank, something that usually applys to MMOs is after a long battle against a boss you did your job so well that nobody had to worry about being killed, well it just feels so rewarding
I play warrior all the time. It's the class that I have most fun playing as, and it's really simple. Even since I was little, I've just loved the whole brutal warrior concept of bashing things repeatedly until it ceases to move. Getting straight into the action is always my playstyle, no matter if it's a platformer or anything, I just like getting in there without a second thought--usually gets me killed, though.
I also enjoy playing as stealth. Very fun, and it was greater fun in the Thief games. I hope Skyrim has stealth as good.
I also enjoy playing as stealth. Very fun, and it was greater fun in the Thief games. I hope Skyrim has stealth as good.
Nah. There's something appealing about a warrior (in some games anyway).
No special tricks, no complicated tactics, just you, your strength, and your skills against the enemy.
This only applies in action games though. In most normal RPG's it's not as much skill as it is luck.
No special tricks, no complicated tactics, just you, your strength, and your skills against the enemy.
This only applies in action games though. In most normal RPG's it's not as much skill as it is luck.
I just got into a bit of an argument with my brother about this. We used to play DnD 3.5 and are now just upgrading to Pathfinder. He started raving on about how the Fighter class now has class features besides just a Bonus Feat every other level, and that he wishes he could just go back to the simpler system where he just puts all of his feats into the "Do More Damage with a certain weapon/type" feat trees and swing his sword until the encounter is over. I was nearly dumbstruck about how backwards this kind of thinking was, but I, can't say I don't understand the appeal of being able to succeed with a character that requires a low amount of skill, forethought and critical thinking. As this is a "Video" gaming forum, I might not get a lot of people relating with me about how god-awfully frustrating this conversation was, but I hope that most of you are geeky enough to get it.
I'd say I mostly prefer ninja/mage but mostly because of the mage aspects, only caring about the ninja part because of finding more backstab possibilities than others would, hiding when someone is actually within physical range, or if fought head-to-head I could dodge enough to get that range back.
However, with Morrowind, I was almost entirely warrior, the same for Ultima Online. Special attacks in UO and healing abilities (not paladin healing, warrior since it was bandages and not potions or magic) gave fights some variety. With Morrowind, I had no issue at all modding a halberd to do higher slash damage than thrust, then lumberjacking orcs in half. The only class that exists in Mount and Blade is warrior, and that's fun as heck. Wish the physics and lag was better though.
I think what set 'warrior' apart in the games I enjoyed warrior is just the variety, so you're not just clicking 'auto attack' and wait until something dies.
Warrior bored me in FFXI, so I went RDM/BLU, RDM/DRK, DRK/RDM, DRK/BLU, BLU/DRK, and BLU/RDM. People called me a purple mage. I tell you right now- that's a definite Mage class that can hold its own in melee combat.
However, with Morrowind, I was almost entirely warrior, the same for Ultima Online. Special attacks in UO and healing abilities (not paladin healing, warrior since it was bandages and not potions or magic) gave fights some variety. With Morrowind, I had no issue at all modding a halberd to do higher slash damage than thrust, then lumberjacking orcs in half. The only class that exists in Mount and Blade is warrior, and that's fun as heck. Wish the physics and lag was better though.
I think what set 'warrior' apart in the games I enjoyed warrior is just the variety, so you're not just clicking 'auto attack' and wait until something dies.
Warrior bored me in FFXI, so I went RDM/BLU, RDM/DRK, DRK/RDM, DRK/BLU, BLU/DRK, and BLU/RDM. People called me a purple mage. I tell you right now- that's a definite Mage class that can hold its own in melee combat.
I do. I like playing the warrior and/or the medic most when with my friends.
I like the feeling of being one of the most important and useful people on the team, and for me that is the tank or the medic.
Also, when I just start a game, the warrior is usually the easiest class to just jump in and play. If being the warrior isn't fun, I'm likely not going to stick around and try the other classes.
I like the feeling of being one of the most important and useful people on the team, and for me that is the tank or the medic.
Also, when I just start a game, the warrior is usually the easiest class to just jump in and play. If being the warrior isn't fun, I'm likely not going to stick around and try the other classes.
Depends on the game, now.
I've played roughly equal time mage, stealth and warrior based classes on most computer games. DA:O, DA2, Oblivion, Morrowind, etc).
In D&D I have, so far, exclusively played a warrior-type character. This is only our second campaign but I have little to no inclination to play a mage. While I wouldn't mind playing a stealth-based character, I'd have to really sit down and study the potential builds to see which I might enjoy the most because, man, I love my warrior.
I've played roughly equal time mage, stealth and warrior based classes on most computer games. DA:O, DA2, Oblivion, Morrowind, etc).
In D&D I have, so far, exclusively played a warrior-type character. This is only our second campaign but I have little to no inclination to play a mage. While I wouldn't mind playing a stealth-based character, I'd have to really sit down and study the potential builds to see which I might enjoy the most because, man, I love my warrior.
In many games, playing a good warrior/tank takes WAAAAAAY more skill than playing a good caster/damage dealer. I like the challenge in those games. Hell, even in DA:O I don't think I've ever actually made it all the way through as a mage since rogue and warrior are so much fun.
Same here dude. My first tabletop character was an insane Wookie with a huge ass axe and rage issues. Six years four campaigns and several characters later and I have yet to play a Jedi in a Star Wars game, and my first DND character is a Monk. Straight up fighters are just freakin' fun. Who wants to mess with that pansy ass magic shit when you can just wail on some ass with a freakin' sword?Valkraye said:
Yes, I play warriors more then any other class, but I never play tanks. The sheer unadulterated power is what makes warriors appealing to me, but not just from a gameplay standpoint.
Don't get me wrong, I like playing as characters with other abilities, Zevran was the only other party member I consistently played as, other then myself. I think the stealth and magic aspects are fun, but IMO, warriors can learn some badass shit to. Berserker-type classes are especially entertaining, and in real time, no other class exemplifies the glorious display of violence.
My DA:O character was a good example of this. He was a Berserker who wielded a sword in each hand. What made him so fun to play was managing all the buffs he could bestow on himself, because he took a lot hits I had to carefully choose when it was time to relinquish my special attacks(Good for bosses) for more damage(Good for crowds). At times I beefed him up enough to one shot almost every conventional enemies, not to mention he could attack almost three times as fast as other warriors.
I had to carefully plan out the way I would level him up, and I was rewarded with a killing machine. That's why I play RPG's.
But even then, that's not the reason I play warriors almost exclusively. I play warriors as much as I because I think they make more interesting protagonists.
Again in Dragon Age, with all the build up around mages, there was a real satisfaction in obliterating abominations without the help of magic or stealth, it makes it seem like my character really is the stuff of legends.
When everyone flocks to join you and the whole story revolves around you, it's much easier to buy when you've witnessed your character perform nigh godlike feats.
Warriors just fit my in-game persona the best. I'm not altruistic but I'm highly principled. I prefer to deal with problems directly, but not always with brute force. I always pick a charisma option given the chance, so my characters tend to be stern debaters but they rarely lie.
I don't play warriors because they're more fun, I play them because they're more fun to roleplay.
Don't get me wrong, I like playing as characters with other abilities, Zevran was the only other party member I consistently played as, other then myself. I think the stealth and magic aspects are fun, but IMO, warriors can learn some badass shit to. Berserker-type classes are especially entertaining, and in real time, no other class exemplifies the glorious display of violence.
My DA:O character was a good example of this. He was a Berserker who wielded a sword in each hand. What made him so fun to play was managing all the buffs he could bestow on himself, because he took a lot hits I had to carefully choose when it was time to relinquish my special attacks(Good for bosses) for more damage(Good for crowds). At times I beefed him up enough to one shot almost every conventional enemies, not to mention he could attack almost three times as fast as other warriors.
I had to carefully plan out the way I would level him up, and I was rewarded with a killing machine. That's why I play RPG's.
But even then, that's not the reason I play warriors almost exclusively. I play warriors as much as I because I think they make more interesting protagonists.
Again in Dragon Age, with all the build up around mages, there was a real satisfaction in obliterating abominations without the help of magic or stealth, it makes it seem like my character really is the stuff of legends.
When everyone flocks to join you and the whole story revolves around you, it's much easier to buy when you've witnessed your character perform nigh godlike feats.
Warriors just fit my in-game persona the best. I'm not altruistic but I'm highly principled. I prefer to deal with problems directly, but not always with brute force. I always pick a charisma option given the chance, so my characters tend to be stern debaters but they rarely lie.
I don't play warriors because they're more fun, I play them because they're more fun to roleplay.
Not to burst your bubble, but Bioware has released statistics on several occasions. The most played origin in Dragon Age was Human Noble, a.k.a warrior and over 50% of Mass Effect players picked Soldier as their class of choice. I'm sure that this isn't the case in the your circle, but you do not represent the majority.Glass Joe the Champ said:
As for me, it depends which class is more suitable to the game.
I always do my first playthrough as a warrior because it's an easy way to learn the games mechanics, but in my heart of hearts I remain a rogue. Usually a dual weilding rogue leaning toward being a ranger, but sometimes with a bow(or gun if it's a more modern RPG).
