UESP Forums

I really disliked Inquisition's combat, dropping it down to easy was something I should have done way earlier. And you know, gameplay is a big part of a game so when I don't like it that's not a good sign. Then again I think a lot, possibly even most RPGs have kind of crappy combat. Combat in KOTOR was crappy and it's really the first Bioware game when it comes to what you think of when people say Bioware games, far more so than Baldur's Gate. Now I've made no secret that Origins is my favorite Bioware game and I like that kind of tactical style but I'm playing The Witcher 3 at the moment and really loving the combat in it which is very action based but still does require plenty of thinking in terms of which signs (spells, basically) do I use, will I go for fast or strong attacks, if light, medium or heavy armour suits your play style best, dodging and rolling at the right time, using bombs and crossbows, using the right potions, finding which tactics work best on which enemies which you'll need to read up on.

Hmm, alright, here's a topic of discussion that might sound sacrilegious but what if Dragon Age dropped all notion of being a blend of more tactical RPG ala Infinity Engine and action RPG and just went straight up third person action RPG like The Witcher 3 or Dark Souls? (Yes, I know you don't like Dark Souls Unionhack, but hear me out.) It's not like Bioware doesn't already have a series like that with Mass Effect, you play one character and then everyone else is a NPC you don't control but give some insturctions. And it's pretty clear they don't want to make games like Origins anymore, that's why Dragon Age 2 and Inquisition were more of a blend. It's not like series haven't had significant changes in gameplay styles that still manage to keep the heart of the series strong and make good games with new gameplay styles, Resident Evil 4 and Fallout 3 come to mind. In each of those cases both gameplay styles were good and produced really strong games.

Now I think if they were ever to do this you'd need to change how classes work and not just because I prefer classless systems. But you know, having all PCs be a mage from the start and then choosing what skills you develop would solve the problem of how much being a mage should impact your character. Because now all characters are mages, not just two thirds of characters and in Tevinter being a mage is kind of a big deal. I'm not saying this is the best route to take persay but I don't think it would be a terrible one.

Dragon Age seems to struggle with finding it's gameplay. We've gone from Origins(Which for the first time ever, has [&@%!] me off with the fade section, will explain later in the post)'s tactical based combat to Inquistion's simplified action oriented gameplay. The tatics in Inquisition are a massive joke. Origins? Complete control over it. It just can't decide what it wants to be. First, it was a dark fantasy then an adventure-type/family plot themed game(Which, they handled well, just got rushed and failed to live up to it's potential) and then attempting to be a massive open world game. With fetch quests and shards. If they do decide to drop the remains of the tatical based combat and go full on action with something like the Dark Souls or Dragon's Dogma style of combat(Though, they would have to slow aspects of it down for what DA has established itself as, so far.), it would help them to improve the gameplay instead of switching every game.

I perfer classes and to me, it's a part of RPGs but that is dying out and overall, tis something I'll have to accept. I disliked Inquistion doing away with traditional levelling up as it felt wrong and never felt like I was truely in charge. Origins and DA2? Complete control over the leveling(Apart from intial skills and talents etc..) I hope they do keep the controlled party aspect but Inquisition's needs to be overhauled in terms of tatics and magic. Bring back the 4 schools of legal magic with Blood Magic as a spec. Never really liked the whole lack of healing spell and just made life tedious due to how easily one could go through the supplies. Tanks would down it like ales most of the time if one wasn't wanting to control them directly. But i think they'll just use Inquisiton as the template for the gameplay of the franchise and add stuff onto it.

I think they'll approach IV with all playable races from the start instead of adding it last and it resulting in some limitations. E.g. Qunari armour is limited. IV should hopefully have a lot of armour for all races or do away with the race limitation and go back to the Origins/II approach to armour. Magic needs to be overpowered at high levels again. It really backs up why Mages are shunned and why the Chantry fears another Tevinter. But it being based in it and I hope they go back to either just one city with a lot of surronding areas(Like DAII but fully fleshed out) or Origin's locations but on a bigger scale. Inquisition suffered from being too large. Hinterlands had a lot of content though some of it was filler fetch quests whilst some areas were lacking and some had no real purpose to the plot. Origins made use of all of it's locations and DAII used Kirkwall the best it could.

It being set in Tevinter will be interesting and I would love for them to go back to being dark visually. Inquisition told us too much and showed us too little. E.g. they could have set the tutorial before the event that sets off the events of Inquisition, having the Inquisitor take on certain war table missions directly etc..

Now, DA:Origin's Fade Section. I understand why it is hated by some folks. Playing as a rogue in this was brutal. I mean, it seems to be geared towards warriors and mages. Rogues? Good luck with your fragile low level archer! What's that? You are low on potions? Welcome to a lot of deaths! I mean, by god, I never usually struggle with the fade but as a rogue? It was gruelling. The game itself seemed to pretty much refuse to give me any chance. I got frozen and horror comboed. I got stunlocked by shieldbashing(Which has never happened to me before). 2 hours it took me to conquer the demon lords. TWO HOURS. It usually takes an hour at most as warrior or mage but rogue? It turns into bloody Dark Souls! Really frustrating. I swear, it was luck based for certain parts.

@Kerr; I don't hate Dark Souls for its gameplay style, I hate it for a lot of design choices and general player punishment among many, many other things. I think its style of combat would be great for a sort of game where 1v1 fights were commonplace, ie; a Legend of the Five Rings sort of game, or perhaps a future Zelda title (since combat in Zelda has been lacking for quite some time IMO. Except for Twilight Princess)

I wholeheartedly accept that Dragon Age is being pushed more towards an action RPG sort of flavor and honestly that really works for me. Inquisition is by far my favorite of the series in many aspects and I would like to see some of these aspects expanded upon; and this is very likely considering how successful Inquisition was.

However, despite them having different dev teams, I think the reception and success of Andromeda is going to have a very large impact on how Dragon Age 4 is going to play, seeing as that was the case for Mass Effect 3 to Inquisition.

Given that the game will take place in Tevinter I would prefer that the game can accommodate a PC viewpoint from either a mage or a non-mage. Personally I think the game will have us play as a foreigner from Tevinter; since the land is so foreign and different from the rest of Thedas (to say nothing of Seheron), a PC that wouldn't know much about Tevinter would be ideal to help facilitate the introduction of new lore to the player.

What I do want is more Dragon Age set in the Free Marches. The Marches are easily my favorite region. I'd also like to see Rivain and Nevarra expanded upon.

I've been replaying Origins and it's honestly a joke how unbalanced the game is. Certain builds COMPLETELY outplay others, and some are utterly useless (looking at you, Shapeshifter). Archer suffers from this as well, while I fine archers are a complete joy to play in 2 and Inquisition.

Having a lot of options is all well and good, but balance is important too. Otherwise everyone just runs an Arcane Warrior and steamrolls the entire game solo on Nightmare, or runs a specced out Rogue that dodges every attack in the game.

My deal with Origins is that as enemies become more complex, they start to feel disconnected from a gameplay to lore standpoint. I look at Ogres and Dragons in Origins as an example of how I dislike battles against large enemies in the game; they don't interact with the environment nearly enough, and their AoE attacks besides fire breathing are limited to a number of little kicks and what not. The only thing that makes them big is their size, but they don't really FEEL big if that makes sense.

A good example of a big enemy is the final boss of Mass Effect 2, or the final fight in Dragon's Dogma (which I hold up as the best dragon fight in video game history). They I retract with the environment around you and make it a very real factor in the encounter. Some dragons in Inquisition do this (Trespasser, the Highland Ravager and the Fereldan frostback) while some don't, and the ogres are still just as bad as they were in Origins and in 2.

I do agree that certain builds can break the game but it's not the only game where builds break it. I always find the game to be challenging in the right way apart from the [&@%!] fade that turned it into Dragon Souls:Lolz, have fun with ambushes as a rogue!edition. Seriously, that is the first time i've actually encountered that much trouble on that portion. Ogres, I view as an excellent boss. Dumb, vicious and able to take on an entire party at once. Reveants are a bit cheap due to their entire group pull ability and are challenging but I do agree that they should have interacted with the enviroment more. E.g. the very first ogre could have used barrels against us or rip out parts of the walls.

I heavily agree with that DD's final boss is the best dragon fight in history. It's not a mere battle but one that tests you thoroughly. It forces you to think and actually makes you feel like you're fighting this massive dragon instead of whacking it to death with a sword. *glares at Skyrim* Ogres are supposed to be powerful in lore and I feel they do pull that off.

I think they will go with the foreigner route for IV to allow all 4 playable races and to avoid a repeat of DA:I where a Dalish elf that should know the basics of elven history asks it. I do hope that Quanari will be the worst treated(ingame) by the vints due to the nature of the conflict between the vints and Quanari. Would love it if we're Ben-Hassarath or just part of the Quanari with an option to turn Tal-Val soth. THe Qunari in Inquisition is just Vosth and it works but I really want to learn more about the race and being a proper Qunari would be interesting. E.g. racially insulted with options to turn the insult back on the person, persuaion being very hard.

I doubt it will be in the free marches again, at least, not until DA:V due to them confirming it unoffically at the end of Trespasser.

What I'm trying to drive here as a point is that functionally there is nothing special about ogres. If you gave a common genlock a damaging stun, 50,000 HP, a knock back, and a few immunities, it would be no different than fighting an ogre.

What if, for example, you make it like a boss fight in DA2 (best boss fights in the series IMO) where the environment plays a factor, like when you fight Corpyheus in Legacy or the Profane colossus in the Deep Roads?

How about an ogre battle where he is fought in a room with stone pillars, and the pillars provide cover from stones he throws but also might eventually collapse and potentially fall on your characters? And if too many pillars collapse, the cave might collapse in on itself, giving the battle a sort of time limit or new factor. How many rocks can I dodge before all the pillars collapse?

It's stuff like that I like to see and it's why I like boss design in Dragon's Dogma as opposed to, say, Bloodborne (looking at you, Cleric Beast). I feel like numbers shouldn't make a boss special. The way they interact with you and the world around you should.

If you're talking about fighting any large enemies or something that flies, you know, Shadow of the Colossus. It's one of the best games ever, the 13th Colossus is the best boss fight in any game. But I agree, boss fights in Dragon Age leave a lot to be desired. Overally I'm thinking just making a straight up Action RPG is the way to go.

Personally I'm really hoping we get to play a City Elf in the next game. I'd also like to get a look at class and slavery in Tevinter, it's a big part of their society afterall. A slave revolt could be interesting. Although I'm fully expecting to get Bioshock: Infinite style "actually, when you think about it, rebellion against slavery is as bad as slavery." Or the only alternative to Tevinter's Slavery is The Qunari or Ol' Man Solas's Apocalypse Gang which, I'll pass.

Fantasy is often a rather conservative genre, not intentionally, but through the implications of the problems of a society being due to "bad kings" which can be fixed by having "good kings" rather than being inherent in the nature of feudalism itself. That class structure of nobles who are in charge of everything and peasants who do what they're told is never really questioned. You might get Robin Hood figures but you'll rarely get a John Ball or Wat Tyler. And I don't think it's intentional, I don't think most people who write fantasy are monarchists. Tolkien was and I think people who write like Tolkien sometimes do so without thinking of the implications of what their writing means. (Which is part of why I like Game of Thrones, that title actually comes for a quote about how feudalism sucks.) Not every story set in feudalism needs to be about the nature of feudalism or anything and of course when you get even further away from Tolkien and see something like Planescape it isn't really true at all anymore. But I think there is some fertile storytelling ground you could explore which is rarely touched upon in the genre. If there was a rebellion in Tevinter, how would the rebels envision a better society?

Good point, Union. Ogres, if i remember correctly do end up going down from being a boss to an elite enemy but it doesn't really use it's strength and size to it's advantage. Hopefully, if they appear again, the modified Frostbite engine will allow them to show how truely dangerous they are and whilst it would be nice if they had a huge chance of coming back to life, I can see it would be a bad gameplay mechanic. Dragon's Dogma is the a RPG that i've played where bosses are excellent. Same with Dark Souls(apart from one, I loathe that boss with every inch of hatred I can muster)

I agree that numbers don't serve as a boss but it does add challenge and sometimes make sense. E.g. Ogres appear with Darkspawn makes sense in lore due to their nature. A ton of mages that can wreck you within seconds is not a boss or challenging. Just pure [&@%!] as it turns it into luck based stuff. Seriously, why did that get put into the fade section?! A rogue has low chances! No, I'm still [&@%!] about that!

Dark Souls is a prime example of bosses done well and bosses done badly. Capra Demon by himself is a good boss. The dogs? That's just throwing numbers at you for the sake of it. Bed of Chaos is the worst RPG boss i've ever encountered and that is purely because it is a luck based boss.

I would love to see DAIV adopt DD's gameplay, slow it down and develop a lot of the tatical combat we've seen in Dragon Age. Bring back the Origin-style tatics, put it on steroids and make it really viable to play it as a strategy based game on top of the action RPG it is nowadays.

Tevinter should be shown as a dark fantasy game with a ton of [&@%!] up stuff. Think of BroodMother levels of [&@%!] up. Blood Magic is common, elves are slaves and I can see what happened to a City Elf Warden happening daily but only 10 times worse.

I would love to be a city elf in IV and to be honest, Inquisition should have had the elf be a City Elf. Kinda embarrassing that a Dalish Inky lacks some knowledge that they should know regardless of the missing memories. If they approach it in the same way they did with Hawke(Who is easily the most developed PC due to the personality wheels in II), it could be really interesting. I hope they aren't going to start adopting the "Ye' a chosen one, 'arry." route as that is a very tired and lazy way of showing PCs. Stuff like Hawke and the Warden's from being nothing to a hero is what I feel the franchise should do. Granted, the Warden is important in some origins but I mean stuff like the City Elf and Dwarven Commoner origins. Being viewed as nothing and rising up to being a hero. Along with working for it.

EDIT: Annoyingly, I've just realised i've screwed up. Ok, not really screwed up but tis a mess with party and going to cut the 22 hours i've spent so far and restart from scratch. Annoying but i've not done the rogue build properly. Most fights are getting to the point where it ends with at least one party member knocked out. Forgot that planning ahead with classes is not always a bad thing in Dragon Age.

Going for the same kinda build. Bow and dual wielding. Dex and Cunning as the main stats. 20 Con. 20 Strength. Specs(Which i've unlocked by completely the Arl of Redcliffe. Annoyingly as i wanted to indivually unlock them but oh well.) Duelist or Assassin. Stealth is a key skill. Need to use better tatics. Sten will be my threat drawing tank and probably be Blood Dragon Armour based. Wynne Fire talents, anti-mage and spirit healer. Morrigan crowd controller(ish). Alistair will be my defensive tank with medium-heavy armour. I am never sure what to do with Leilana. She is a good archer but so far, she keeps getting knocked out or barely contributes. May go for the same type build as my Warden, level up her Con but use her behaviour as passive. Shale is well, Shale. Same with the Dog. Zevran is erm... kinda useless to me. Literally can't think of any use. Dual wielding rouge is covered. Archery takes too long to exceed his predeterimed skill set. Hopefully, this time, it'll still be challenging but not result in every battle being too close. Rogues will be light armoured and defense raised. Oghren, when I get him is going to be the same as Sten. Will not make any plans for the choices and go with what is suggested by Alistair at the start. Kinda makes it pointless for me to replay the game if i keep choosing the same choices.

I may need a few dozen bottles of booze when I get to the fade again. *shudders* Swear that is an anti-Rogue level.

A note about slavery in the Imperium, TSD, is that they live better lives on average than a slave elsewhere on the black market or something. Not that I'm condoning the Imperium practicing slavery, but Dorian sort of frames it as not that bad of a thing. Slaves can live a good life in Tevinter in exchange for manual labor. Of course your average magister will flay a few on Sundays for that extra helping of blood fuel for filthy rituals, but I imagine those sacrificed for such things are likely the unlucky "I shouldn't have come in to work today" guys.

That, or Dorian is out of touch, which I doubt. He has a grim but unbiased view of his home.

I've finally decided to go for the platinum on Inquisition. This means it's time for a Nightmare playthrough. This presents a problem because I typically play the game on hard and barely skirt by some encounters at times.

So, it's time for me to put together the most badass party I can think of to conquer the challenges of the game.

I'm looking at a female dwarf archer for my Inquisitor, dipping into the Assassin spec for stuff like Mark for Death and all that. Blackwall has a guaranteed spot on my crew to keep me the [&@%!] alive, Vivienne will be on deck because Knight Enchanter is outstanding, and the third party member is up in the air for now.

I'm considering Blackwall/Vivienne/Sera, as they are all largely considered to be the best of their classes in the game and that would definitely help me slide through some of the tougher spats, but I also don't want to double up on archers with Sera, and I certainly don't want to make her a dagger rogue. I have trouble keeping dagger rogues alive on normal for heaven's sake.

So maybe double mage is the way to go. Dorian or Solas can take the third spot...



I suppose the only way to find out is to delve in. Tomorrow I have nothing to do save for seeing Rogue One with the family, so the rest of the day can be dedicated to dipping my toe into nightmare and giving life to my 7th Inquisitor, Sanri Cadash.

Anyone have any nightmare tips? Or like, funny recommendations for a world state for Sanri? I'm thinking something along the lines of maybe "kill as many people as possible in the previous 2 games" or something like that.

True but I rather be free then a slave. Wouldn't like never knowing when a magister gets up and go "Mwahahahaha!" Casts a ritual to increase his powers via blood magic and do magister-y stuff.

I do hope that DAIV won't be as open as Inquisition as it was a bit too big for Dragon Age. Would like to see a hybrid of Origins and II in terms of size. A kirkwall sized city as one location would be interesting. Do hope they bring back the final battles and have the antagonist be viable instead of getting it's ass kicked repeatly after having just one victory.


Never played on nightmare in any of the games. I like a challenge and to me, Normal is a healthy dose of challenge. I did something unexpected in Origins. I killed the Ashes High Dragon with my rogue. Twas a very close call. Forgot how awesome the dual wielding kills are. I hope we can dual wield swords or axes or maces again but I can understand why they got rid of it. Probably just less then 10% of the fanbase used it(Not counting the offline ones as i think that is what Bioware does). Still, would be nice to dual wield swords again or a sword and mace.

Try not to die at chaetua Haine. If you do, try to outsnark Hawke.

Hopefully, by the time i've done Origins-Witch Hunt(likely be a Morrigan romanced Elven Mage), I will be in a position to get all of II's DLCs and the adventures of Snarky Hawke shall begin!

Man, I wish Inquisitor was just as snarky as SnarkyHawke. We need more Snarkyhawkes in general.

Inquisitor can be pretty snarky, just in a different way. Confronting the traitor at the ball, for instance, is a great scene. I find that the Inquisitor, should you generally stick to middle choices, has a drier sense of humor than Hawke does. Far more... British.

As far as Nightmare goes so far, it's actually really not that bad. Granted some fights like the Pride Demon in the beginning of the game took lots of strategizing and positioning work, but it's actually really great. After playing the game so many times on normal with occasional ventured into hard, it's making me look at the game in a whole new light when it comes to things like how my party works together and how to manipulate the environment.

For example, a fun thing to do is to throw up a wall of fire before targeting a mage with a warrior's grappling chain ability. This way you can bring a dangerous ranged enemy right to you at the beginning of the fight in order to take them out early, and since they pass through the wall of fire when they do this it lights them on fire for additional damage of time.

There's that, and I'm also finally touching the crafting besides armor and weapon crafting. I never really paid much attention to the potions, but now on Nightmare I always make sure Sera has a full stock of Bee Jars. Those things save lives.

True but I prefer Hawke when it comes to snark. He/She is the most snarkiest PC i've ever seen and Bioware needs to do more Hawkes.

Nightmare mode, I don't touch in any of the games. Inquisition, I am likely to ragequit a lot on account of hold being broken. It is a very underrated command in Origins and II. Love setting up ambushes to counter the inveitable mobs behind a door or tipping an outnumbered battle in my favour.

I seem to be on a roll with dragon killing.

Honestly thought it would take me at least 2 attempts. Instead, one and once again, my Warden got the killing blow. Using Starfang and Vanguard as my weapons. Should use daggers but the damage output of those two weapons is something i am very happy with. Probably switch to Fang for the last few hours of the game and Starfang.

Just finished Origins and I kicked Archie's scaly ass. Used Axe of the Grey and Fang for the endgame weapons. Said no to Morrigan. Going to play Darkspawn Chronicles on Causal just to get all the achievements. Don't intend on giving it more then one playthrough.

Going to replay as an Elven Mage. A crowd controller that is geared towards destroying other mages. I underestimated them a lot and I intend to go onto Hard Mode. Will be interesting and will force me to constantly think. Tis time for a challenge. The two specialisations will be Arcane Warrior and Blood Mage. Overpowered, I know but this is going to be for Awakenings onwards after Origins. Going to milk the potent Lyrium potions for constant supply of gold. Tedious but worth it.

Been ages since I last played Inquisition. @The SheoDovah is Origins better than Inquisition? I don't know a lot about the other DA games but how come people never talk about DA2? For the longest time I thought that DA:I was the successor to DA:O. I didn't even know the second part existed

It all kinda depends on what you like. The fandom as a large has massive nostalgia goggles for Origins and refuses to even consider anything approaching it in significance.


All 3 games are very different experiences. My recommendation is to try them out one by one. Play Origins, if you like it then proceed. Play 2, like, proceed. The worst thing you can do is look for opinions on the games online before you play them; Bioware fans tend to spit a lot of unnecessary vitriol and this could potentially impact your experience.

It's what happened with Dragon Age 2 for me. I read up all the criticisms and went into it with a really negative outlook and didn't like it. Years later and I love the game because I decided to play it with my own judgments in mind. You'd be surprised by the difference it makes.

Personally, I would say Origins is the strongest in the franchise and would recommend it. Inquisition is a superb game though it does kinda feel a bit rushed towards the end. That's just one part though. The rest is a superb game though the open world setting does harm it due to a high volume of fetch quests.

I agree with Union in the order of playing them. DAII, it was a rushed game but it is a good game. The fanbase tore it apart and even to this day, merely mentioning II is likely to start arguments. I pretty much loathed the game at first due to it not meeting my expecations set by Origins but a few years later, I got over it and it is a superb game. Just never filled it's potential thanks to EA being EA.

I would recommend getting Inquistion on PC if you can run it. PS3 and X360 had support pulled from it after the 1st DLC and as a result, the story is not 100% there due to the ending and Tresspasser continuing from the last few minutes of the ending in terms of the subject of the plot.


Get the Ultimate edition of Origins. All the DLC and it's cheap. 2 lacks an ultimate edition due to the sales not being as much as they expected and only PS4,X1 and PC have the Inquisition Ultimate edition.


Origins has a very interesting antagnoist. Admittly, it does require some of the books to be read to get more background on it but unlike most RPGs, it isn't "Mwahahahhaha! Time to stab, stab kill." It's a mixture of grey, good intentions, poisonous snakes being involved. Kinda a tragic figure.

Oh and Origins has
But go into all three games blind. Origins turned me into a massive RPG gamer and is my favourite RPG on PS3.

My newest Warden post Archdemon-slaying.



I had Alistair marry Anora, convinced Loghain to go through with Morrigan's ritual, and romanced Leliana. Also doing Awakening now, and hooooo boy, not being on good terms with Alistair certainly delivers all the relationship depth I thought it would.