Hi, welcome to the Dragon Age Wiki! Thanks for your edit to the Console page.

I hope that you will stick around and continue to help us improve the wiki.

Please leave a message on my talk page if I can help with anything! -- Snfonseka (Talk) 17:55, December 5, 2009

Re:Loghain Mac Tir Info Question Edit

Hhhm, well the wiki is soon introducing new spoilers that cover the spoiled text, if a new page is created it might get merged by an admin. I haven't heard of anyone taking on a project on an in-depth Logain/secret companion, if you like you can ask one of the admins or do a post on the Forum:Wiki_Discussion.


Also please try to sign your messages ie. ~~~~ for talk pages/discussion pages and forums. So people can find you easier :)  Hollowness | Talk | Contr 09:01, January 31, 2010 (UTC)

Fixed for IN Edit

There ya go :D  Hollowness | Talk | Contr 10:21, February 5, 2010 (UTC)

Np, anytime  Hollowness | Talk | Contr 10:25, February 5, 2010 (UTC)
Done :D  Hollowness | Talk | Contr 10:31, February 5, 2010 (UTC)

<3 Edit

Thanks :D I have been waiting for those icons for a while now :P  Hollowness | Talk | Contr 03:58, February 7, 2010 (UTC)

Nice, Ya more mechanics info and other info is needed on the shale talents, when I input them into individual articles they only 4 talents where documented so I have to input the info straight from the game and I didn't have the tool tip info : / so I didn't do the greatest job, LOL.  Hollowness | Talk | Contr 04:55, February 7, 2010 (UTC)
You know you can remove that stat description, it is in the item transformer as a note, FYI, if you need to remove or add quick reference mechanics notes (italic text on the talent list) to the individual talent (ie Entropy Spells all italic text is mechanics).  Hollowness | Talk | Contr 06:25, February 7, 2010 (UTC)
Hehe, don't worry it isn't something many people know or care to know, if you read the info in the transformer it says:

<!--Below information is for the SkillSpellTalentRow-->
Is my note for my template, so really not many know but if asked, I'd let people know :D  Hollowness | Talk | Contr 06:33, February 7, 2010 (UTC)

Re:+X% Healing Received Bug Article Edit

Hmm, ask an admin about what should be done with the article. I am not sure about that one.  Hollowness | Talk | Contr 21:48, February 13, 2010 (UTC)

For you, anytime :D  Hollowness | Talk | Contr 21:57, February 13, 2010 (UTC)
Why have you included Maric's Blade and changed that article when that item doesn't have +X% to healing effects received modifier ? PhilV 11:47, February 14, 2010 (UTC)

You are absolutely right :) That was a reason:

I'll remove both the link to Maric's Blade and the note in the article dedicated to that weapon. Thanks for pointing it out! :)

IN 12:57, February 14, 2010 (UTC)

Re:Two Things Edit

One, do you edit with Rich text editor... thats why Forum:Rich Text Editor - Kills Tables

Two, regardless, the admins will call for it too. Because it is opinionated it won't have it's own article unless it is integrated in the Tank article or put on the talk page (reason why I don't have an article for my AW guide). Trust me there is a very slim chance the admins will let this be a stand alone article (or else there would be multiple how to guides on how to play one class/spec/role), I put the merge tag so it can be put to their attention, sooner, rather than later. So you can do 2 things, ask the admins (I think Loleil would be the most appropriate for this one, might need Tierrie's ok too), if it is fine as is, which I have a feeling they will have some idea of change on it. Or leave the tag and see what they do with it along the road.  Hollowness | Talk | Contr 23:08, February 15, 2010 (UTC)

Yes, the respective page Tank is not any better because some articles have to be opinions cause there is no hard facts but to minimize them, keep them (similar topics) in the same article. I heard Loleil say something like that to some one once. Thats why I took notice.  Hollowness | Talk | Contr 23:26, February 15, 2010 (UTC)
Hi IN, I would support a merge in this case. Essentially it reads as though your article was written as a response to the Tank article to point out the flaws that exist there. This means it ends up reading as even more of an opinion piece than other guides. I was slightly hesitant about allowing guides in the wiki because of personal opinion, but I relented because I feel that there is still good reliable information that people can benefit from reading.
With rewording I think the two articles can come together to make one good article and it is a wiki, so if there is anything that is wildly off target in the original article feel free to take an axe to it. On an initial glance I would loose the first two paragraphs from your article and put everything else from your article at the top of the existing page. However there is no rush, and if you would like to be in charge of combining the two articles I would encourage you to do so. Also, if you want to keep your article untouched, you could copy it into a blog. Friendship smallLoleil Talk 00:34, February 16, 2010 (UTC)
Sure, no problem. Thank you for a clarification. I'll see what I can do about merging Tanking: An Alternative Approach and Tank into one innerly consistent article. IN 04:28, February 16, 2010 (UTC)

Yep Edit

I can't make him respond to the thread, so maybe someone else will notice it and respond. Mictlantecuhtli 05:19, February 19, 2010 (UTC)

Uh, no, I don't imply I prefer him over any other dev team member. As far as I recall, however, you mentioned his existing post on the topic, so I was actually just asking for a link to that post. That way, we won't have to trouble him again regarding the same subject. If you cannot find it, though, fine by me -- there is no rush, hopefully someone will answer. IN 05:42, February 19, 2010 (UTC)

Vandalism Edit

Hi there IN. I just picked up your message from yesterday. You're right in thinking that the first message when someone makes their initial contribution is automatically generated (with a random admin's name, I think). I'll keep my eye on the user's contrubutions for the next few days to see whether this was a one-off or the start of a pattern. Thanks for the heads-up! Zoev talk 12:51, February 23, 2010 (UTC)

Hi there, IN. It appears that this is about me. I want you to know that I find the fact that you instantly assumed the worst about me, called my edit "vandalism" and threatened me with an IP block on my first "offense" completely offensive and high-handed. If you had, for example, asked me for my reasons for deleting that section, I would have happily explained them to you. Instead, you tattled to an admin, accused me of bad faith, and reverted my edit. Again, I find your manner completely offensive and I expect an apology. 18:15, May 9, 2010 (UTC)
Since the code of conduct does not address Trivia specifically, this is purely my own personal opinion. I felt the above user's removal of said irrelevant Trivia from the article was certainly justified - this kind of content really has no informative value here - but his comment was perhaps a little over the top. It would have been adequate to simply state that the "information" provided under the Trivia section was superfluous and unnecessary. However, I believe calling his actions "vandalism" and implying that he would be banned is going too far. His attitude needed to be corrected to be in line with the code of conduct, but I feel it could have (and should have) been done in a more civil manner. If any apology is expected from, then I would expect one from IN as well. The best solution is for everyone to calm down and leave their ego at the door.Kastagir 19:01, May 9, 2010 (UTC)

Threat items... Edit

Hello IN, thanks for that update on Cleansing Aura. You seem to know alot about the game's mechanics, so I thought I would ask you. Do you know whether the reduce/increase hostility items stack? Is there a formula that shows what effects these items have on threat? Thanks,

Lufos 00:04, February 26, 2010 (UTC)

My judgment is based on my empirical experience only, whatever it is worth, but I think they do stack. However, hostility modifying items do not seem to draw/reduce threat by much. On Nightmare, the difference is barely noticeable. Let's put it this way: if you equip your party tank with both Ageless and Cadash Stompers, the enemies will probably target him first. Maintaining threat via items is, however, impossible. Probably the modifiers are something like +10 threat per gear piece, so the very first crit from your archer or the very first direct damage spell from your mage, and... I believe you get my drift. IN 00:27, February 26, 2010 (UTC)
P. S.: It is possible hostility modifiers are not fixed bonuses/penalties, but factors. Say, 'Increases hostility' mod = all threat generated x1.1, while 'Reduces hostility' mod = all threat generated x0.9. The figures above are totally arbitrary, of course, but you should get the idea by now: both the increment and the reduction are largely insignificant. IN 00:33, February 26, 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I was wondering if they were indeed modifiers. That's what I mean't by a formula, but I guess it isn't something that can be easily tested (without extensive modifcation of the original program.....). Ahh, well thanks. Lufos 00:45, February 26, 2010 (UTC)

script Edit

I have never enabled or used script X /, I am not familiar with it. Is it easy to do, I'll try for ya.  Hollowness | Talk | Contr 02:22, February 26, 2010 (UTC)

Ah, ok, maybe I'll get the bf to do it for me some time for the future, he is the computer tech. Sorry about that.  Hollowness | Talk | Contr 02:34, February 26, 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Edit

Still a wiki-noob. I learn when I have time though. Lufos 19:09, February 26, 2010 (UTC)
I'm new to this whole wiki-editing business, too. IN 19:11, February 26, 2010 (UTC)

Vulnerability Hex Edit

75% is what you need to be able to strip away in order to use nature spells/staves/poisons against [Beasts] without any penalty. While undead possess a 75% resistance to cold I believe. Mictlantecuhtli 17:36, March 2, 2010 (UTC)

That was my reasoning as well. Some people might not want to bother with using windows calculator, or doing the calculations in their head. Mictlantecuhtli 18:33, March 2, 2010 (UTC)

Abilities Edit

I may be going for a while or for good but I am sooo happy I have you taking care of my abilities and doing such a good job! Most I couldn't do better myself, I hope you project duncan is a success, its everything I want our abilities to be :) hug  Hollowness | Talk | Contr 18:05, March 4, 2010 (UTC)

Thank you! :) Best of luck, and please consider coming back. At least after DAA release, when this wiki will begin to grow steadily once again -- don't let personal feelings stop you from doing great job (even when this 'job' is a hobby) forever. We all know this wiki will be worse without your input. IN 18:15, March 4, 2010 (UTC)

Coup De Grace Edit

I don't think there is any info on the Wiki that describes that the critical hit/backstab damage bonus only applies to the weapon base damage + attribute bonus and NOT weapon bonus damage properties, runes, spells like Flaming Weapons, Talents like Berserk.

The way it's worded right now, implies that the critical hit/backstab damage bonus applies to everything.-- 21:25, March 6, 2010 (UTC)

The most logical solution would be to add the corresponding sub-section to the Combat Mechanics article. I'm sure you are competent enough to do it on your own :) Inserting notes into different crit-generating talent descriptions could prove quite time-consuming, and, ultimately, counter-productive. IN 21:32, March 6, 2010 (UTC)
Actually, the damage section of Combat Mechanics does have something. Didn't see that before... -- 21:48, March 6, 2010 (UTC)

still a wiki-noob Edit

Yeah, I undid one part of what that user did to the effort page, but I wasn't sure about the other so I left it. I see you removed that change too. Heh, oh well. Guess I missed the fact that he made that link unusable. Lufos 22:15, March 9, 2010 (UTC)

Uh? I didn't remove anything aside from restoring the link's validity... IN 22:18, March 9, 2010 (UTC)
Err, sorry I am partially delirious from sleep deprevation. I meant that you basically undid (hence removed) the other change I debated on undoing because I missed the fact that it was a link. nevermind. Lufos 22:35, March 9, 2010 (UTC)
That's okay :) IN 22:42, March 9, 2010 (UTC)

Attack Timing Edit -- 17:25, March 12, 2010 (UTC)

Flanking angle Edit

Hi! I'm hardly a designer either, but I made an attempt at new illustrations. I'm not very happy with them, but at least the angles should be correct :-)

I write this here since I seem to have managed to sabotage the Talk page for Flanking :-O I had problems getting the new images to refresh and cleared the browsers cache without realizing that this was not a good thing to do while in editing mode. Yup - really stupid of me. Boise66 12:13, March 14, 2010 (UTC)

Cone of Cold, Patch 1.03 Edit

Are you sure, it's not spell resistance (did you get cold damage)? Resistance checks heavily favor the attacker. Typical resistance check, Lvl 14 Morrigan against Lvl 12 Wolf: final_res = -111. Attack attribute (spellpower): 64, Defense Attribute (mental resistance): 8. final_res < 0 means, the check is always lost. Even with 100 mental resistance, final_res would still be -11.

Unfortunately, it's only possible to log the checks by modifying core scripts. Patch 1.03 script sources are not available.-- 07:16, March 15, 2010 (UTC)

BTW, those mages likely have spell shields up - 75% spell resistance.-- 07:19, March 15, 2010 (UTC)

I don't know what to say... That's really embarrassing... Look, I wasn't dreaming and I wasn't imagining things: they resisted CoC (not only mages, Qunari Mercenaries too) more than 50% of the time in the morning. I tested shattering, so I was both shocked and annoyed to load the same scenario over and over again... Now, when I run the same test under the same conditions, none of the enemies in the first room is able to resist CoC. Not once. I've tried it about 20 times. I'm removing the note. IN 08:00, March 15, 2010 (UTC)
Gave it some more thought. I think it's another Rock Mastery bug. I'm serious. My party was Shale, Morrigan and Warden archer. I'll try to test it again in the evening: maybe the attacker and the target must both stay within aura's limits for the resistance bug to occur, or maybe the attacker must stay outside the aura with the target inside, and so forth. I'll try different combinations. There's no other explanation I can think of - no other factors were involved. IN 08:39, March 15, 2010 (UTC)
It's not (just) Rock Mastery. The funny thing is, the resistance check code is correct. There must be some weird bug in the engine that causes it to return the wrong resistance value under some condition(s). But, I have only seen the -1 with CoC and that's consistent with all CoC checks in my logs. -- 08:55, March 15, 2010 (UTC)
No, no. I mean, the ability to resist CoC was a bug as opposed to normal state, when no target ever resists it :) My point was: I'm quite positive this bug inside bug was caused by Rock Mastery. IN 09:00, March 15, 2010 (UTC)

You might already know me. Edit

I posted on the social.bioware DA:O forums for a while under the name 'tetracycloide' and, as far as I know, was one of the first to point out the mechanics of aim there and here (the wiki, i kid you not, used to say Aim was bugged and didn't add any crit at all). I think it's awesome that you didn't just presume you were correct and rererevert. It's refreshing to run into someone technically minded that's willing to question everything, even things they think they already have down. Getting more to the point, I wanted to make a 100% critical chance archer after I discovered the mechanics of Aim for myself hoping that I could then use them to test the roll mechanics in the game. I never got around to it, however, since I got side tracked playing ME2 when it released. I was wondering if you had done a 100% critical chance archer and if you recall them missing with a 100% critical chance on an auto attack hit. My instinct is that auto-attacks are a two-roll system in this game (hit then crit) but if it were a one role system that would be a neat revelation. Tetracycloide 01:03, March 15, 2010 (UTC)

There are two rolls. An attack roll that determines if you hit. If you hit and a second roll says it's a critical, the attack result is set to be a critical (if the second roll says no critical, it's a normal hit). -- 07:46, March 15, 2010 (UTC)
Actually, I'm not sure that's what Tetracycloide was asking... I mean, anyone even remotely familiar with this game knows you have to hit first in order to deal any damage (not just critical hit), right? :) That's the reason I decided to refrain from explaining such intuitively understood basics in my reply on his talk page. Let's hope he will come back and clarify things a bit. IN 08:22, March 15, 2010 (UTC)
No, that's what I meant. It might seem counterintuitive but there are systems where the crit and hit rolls are combined into one roll such that, once crit rate = hit rate, each % of crit added adds both 1% crit and 1% hit by converting 1% of misses directly from misses to criticals. Like I said, my instinct with dragon age was that auto-attacks where a two-roll system but it's important to confirm these things with tests and data mining. Since I hadn't been keeping up with developments on the DA forums or wiki after ME2 released I assumed you could point me to tests or data that answered what was an outstanding question when I stopped playing a few months ago.Tetracycloide 13:12, March 15, 2010 (UTC)
Well, DA:Ology had progressed far since then, it seems :) Personally, being a D&D (both pen-and-paper and CRPG variants) veteran, I wasn't even thinking about the possibility critical hit chance and chance to hit might be interrelated somehow. That's definitely an unusual idea for me, so I hope you didn't find my comments about how elementary and immediately intuitive it is snobby or condescending :) IN 16:27, March 15, 2010 (UTC)

DAA Question Edit

hey IN,
I noticed you already got DAA, I'm wondering if you could help answer my question here, coz right now I'm really stuck in at Wade The Origins. All I wanna know is:
Is there any new Fatigue Reduction Armor in The Awakening? I'm about to go see Wade about my Dragon Scale Armor, and I'd like to know whether I should get the Massive Armor or just Medium Armor for my Arcane Warrior.

Fycan [fahy-kan] @ 05:22, March 18, 2010 (UTC)

I think Wade's Superior Dragonskin Armor Set is still your best bet as far as fatigue reduction is concerned. Unfortunately, I don't play AW, and I haven't advanced much through DAA, either, so I have no idea whether there is an equivalent (or a better) set in terms of fatigue reduction in DAA. I know I haven't seen one yet. Stick with Superior Dragonskin, if you ask me. IN 05:55, March 18, 2010 (UTC)

Have you noticed Accuracy? Edit

I found your efficient approach to archery to be very useful for Leliana in DA:O (made her actually relevant), but man, have you noticed Accuracy in DA:A? This skill is pure ridiculousness, especially with lethality and song of courage (and actually, I'm not even sure if those two skills are even necessary anymore given accuracy). At level 24 with tier 7 gear (that is, just starting off on DA:A), with 70+16 dex and 52+7 cunning I'm doing 140-160 normal auto attacks and 220ish crits. This is without using Aim. 49.5% crit chance without Aim, 97.4% with. It's just plain crazy!

Although, I must say, I just got DA:A the other day, so actually this might not be all that big a deal within the scope of the expansion (I'm really not sure as to what the top range for damage is yet with all the new skills introduced to the game), but good lord, I thought my dual wield rogue was cleaning up before... I put this same build on Nathaniel--two rogues doing 140-200+ ranged damage per hit. Insane! - Basileia 10:17 UTC 03/20/2010

Yes. In fact, I'm in process of making a major DAA update to my guide. Stay tuned! :) IN 08:13, March 21, 2010 (UTC)
Awesome. Looking forward to that. Put together a very basic build myself if you're interested. I'm almost bored with the game now, what with accuracy being so ridiculously overpowered. It's hard for me to believe that the designers would not have anticipated a build that dumps 100+ points into dexterity--the defense, attack rating, base damage and crit chance with accuracy at that point is just so out of whack that it pretty much breaks the game, especially if you bring over some of the end game items from DAO. And vitality and clarity just makes it that much easier. - Basileia 08:48 UTC 03/21/2010
It's hard to disagree on this. A very weird re-balancing done. I'd prefer 4 solid useful archery abilities to 1 uber-ability and 3 crappy ones. Anyway, update done. It's not finished, I'm going to add more items and tidbits of info (I'm currently mid-game, there is a lot of stuff I've yet to discover in DAA). P.S.: Nice little guide. You aim for a less academic, more personal approach, and that's a welcome change from my guru-like tone for some people! :) IN 14:08, March 21, 2010 (UTC)
Hey, thanks man. I like that your coverage is so exhaustive. I think its a better discussion method for seeding experimentation. On a separate note, I think though, the other branch 4 archery talents aren't so bad. Obviously, not as useful as accuracy, but Rain of Arrows definitely has its uses. An extreme example: 3 high dex archers launching 3 Rain of Arrows on the same spot at the same time should kill everything inside within two, at most three, ticks. And if Rain of Arrows is like a carpet bomb, burst shot is like a tactical nuke. Its just that you need some sort of crowd control while the skills cast, or to use the skills outside of engagement range. - Basileia 00:27 UTC 03/22/2010
My point was that immobilizing AoE preparation is absolutely mandatory to make this talent work. AI on Nightmare always flees stationary AoE effects. Say, you have a group of 12 enemies (all neatly arranged within 10m radius) assailing you. Time for triple Rain of Arrows, you say to yourself! Uh, wait a second... We need a preparation AoE. Hmmm... Let's see. We have three viable options here: Mass Paralysis, Blood Wound, Paralysis Explosion. The latter is somewhat slow to trigger. The former is pointless, since Blood Wound combines paralysis effect with some solid spirit damage. But if you have 3 Dex archers able to eliminate a crowd with triple Rain of Arrows, your mage is no slouch, either... So I can guarantee there won't be much left of that crowd after Blood Wound. I trust you get my drift. Too much preparation required, to the point the preparation itself can be a viable alternative to Rain of Arrows. A theoretically godly skill it is, no doubt. But I prefer practically solid to theoretically godly. That said, if there are Broodmother/Flemeth-like stationary opponents in DAA, I'll use it gladly. IN 01:05, March 22, 2010 (UTC)
Hmm, I would say that immobilizing AoE is actually not necessary in that there's a much easier (no prep) crowd control method that can be used in tandem with Rain of Arrows: a shield tank with Air of Insolence+Threaten and Carapace (or Force Field, as in the link in my last comment "has its uses"). Air pulls all the mobs to a single point, and Carapace lets the player use Rain without danger of friendly fire (oh, I should mention that the threat generation here [in Nightmare mode] is high enough that mobs will ignore AoE and still go after the tank, even after multiple ticks). I only mentioned the example with the 3 rain of arrows, though, in that I'm looking at your preference to play with three archers. With high dex, rain does at least 60 damage per tick, so 60x3x2 (that is, two ticks of rain) = 360, which should be just enough, or just under enough, damage to kill most unranked mobs. As long as you cast it outside of engagement range (that is, they don't start moving until after the first tick), they should be dead before they can move out of it. But 3 rain of arrows is totally overkill--just one is good enough to clear out most mobs with good cc.
It's definitely a circumstantial skill, agree with you there. But I think there are enough circumstances, or you can create the conditions with a good tank frequently and easily enough, that it's a good skill to have. At this point though, I think I'm just discussing a play preference more than anything else. - Basileia 01:35 UTC 03/22/2010
Heh. (1) You won't believe. I actually missed a link in your post. Didn't click on it :) (2) I'm totally ignorant as far as DAA tank skills go. (3) Yup, that's option number 4, right after Paralysis Explosion. I'm not so sure it's easier to execute (= worth the hassle), however. I'll try it, of course, seems interesting enough! :) IN 05:35, March 22, 2010 (UTC)

I had a question about your archery guide. In the Awakening section, you cite the passive, unresistable benefits of the Assassin class. What benefits are these? As I understood it, the bonus to critical chance granted by the Assassin specialization only affects melee weapons...the only other benefit I see is the +2 dex. Are you referring to Mark of Death exclusively? Kastagir 16:17, March 26, 2010 (UTC)

Probably the wording or the syntax are to blame... Passive benefits = spec bonuses. Unresistable = Mark of Death. IN 17:23, March 26, 2010 (UTC)

A favor... Edit

I usually check out your archery approach page and leave messages for you there. I find the page informative about the game mechanics that the game doesn't tell us about. I have a question however that's not archeyr related. I'm wondering if you could check out the exact numbers for shadow striking? Alot of awakening skills/talents lack numerical descriptions really and this is one I'm really curious about.

There is a note on Combat Mechanics page, claiming Shadow Striking is total backstab damage *1.5. I'll check it out though, no problem. At least, the parameters that are checkable. IN 08:48, March 24, 2010 (UTC)

Cool. While you're at it could you check what part of dmg (or if it's the total) mark of death, weak points and shattering blows modifies?

No. It's not the total. I'm inclined to think it's attribute-based+base weapon damage only (w/o DamageBonus). IN 09:37, March 24, 2010 (UTC)

You think this of all the 3 I mentioned above? So it's pretty much like crit or backstab then? Any progress on shadow striking?

I'm 100% positive only about Mark of Death. The other two will get tested (though Weak Points probably works the same way). About Shadow Striking: I won't have time to test it until Friday, unfortunately. IN 12:30, March 24, 2010 (UTC)

It's cool. I'll just keep checking back here. Is the cap for +crit/backstab dmg still the same in awakening by the way? I noticed elemental dmg's capped has been raised and I think physical/mental resistance as well. Would you also know if there's a cap for on-hit dmg like poisons, runes and weapon enhancement spells? As we know there's a 100 cap for dmg bonuses +armor penetration and I thought there might be a cap here as well. Maybe even the attribute bonus to dmg as well.

Yes, it is the same old 200%. Checked, verified. As to poisons and runes: no idea, sincerely, but since they are limited by the number of rune slots and suchlike, I think there's not much room for experimentation. Attribute bonus is not capped (i. e., it is capped, but only as a consequence of the fact the maximum primary attribute value is capped at 1000). IN 14:13, March 24, 2010 (UTC)

So any word on the exact numbers for shadow striking, weak points, mark of death and shattering blows?

Shadow Striking (with Shadow Form active) is indeed Damage * 1.5. Some more research is needed, then I'll update the article. Mark of Death mechanics are clear enough -- article updated. Shattering Blows increases DamageScale attrubute of consctructs by 0.5: only the character that has this passive can benefit from this bonus. I've yet to check if this passive works only when wielding two-handers. Probably not. Weak Points is a tricky one. It does affect DamageScale, but this effect does not manifest itself in the attribute value for some reason. From my testing, it's something along the lines of +0.1 to target's DamageScale. I think it is stackable additively. IN 09:16, March 27, 2010 (UTC)

Shadow then seems to be the 2nd best backstabber specialization w/ bard or ranger getting the 3rd spot then. That's quite a multiplier since it affects everything. Will the dmg bonus only work for the backstabber who has it or will it also work for other party backstabbers? Shattering blows seems to give quite the dmg boost to the user then when facing constructs since again it affects everything. So how does weak poins exactly work? What do you mean stackable? Like it working for other party members as well?

Heartwood Bow Pic Edit

Hello my friend =). I personally always thought the image more important than the text in any medium, because it shows clearly what is the thing mentioned whereas the text only supposes a certain things. But I understand that some don't agree with me =). That noted, I fix the image, is true is quite big. Good day to you and see soon ! Itachou [~talk~] 14:27, March 24, 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome ! And sorry for my bad english sometimes, I'm French =). Itachou [~talk~] 14:35, March 24, 2010 (UTC)

Shadow Striking Edit

Hello IN:

Combat_damage_h has the following lines:

// GXA Override
   if (HasAbility(oAttacker, 401312) == TRUE) // GXA Deep Striking
       if (IsModalAbilityActive(oAttacker, 401310) == TRUE) // GXA Shadow Striking
           fDamage *= 1.5f;
   // GXA Override

I assume the ability ID is the proper #, but I didn't check the TLK file to confirm the descriptions pointed to by the GDA file. (Also, there are a scant few references to Awakening in the core files, which gives a minimum time period when BW started working on Awakening :p)

I have a question for you:

You wrote: "+X% damage abilities debuffing enemies rather than buffing the character (e. g., Mark of Death, Weak Points, Shattering Blows) are not affected by this cap."

How did you determine the function of Weak Points? And how much +% does it do? Also, since Mark of Death affects damage scale property, and since damage scale isn't necessarily 1, it might be better to give a more complete explanation.--User:Thc 03:15, March 26, 2010 (UTC)

Hi, I saw in your article on spirit warrior archers that they can get two dreamsevers. I was just wondering for my DW spirit warrior build, how do you get both? Thanks, and I learned a lot from your articles!

One of them is an import, the second one is... Uh-huh... From DAA :) That's all I can really say. Either one of the merchants sells it - pre- or post-Lilith (they sell a lot of DA:O unique stuff, in fact), or it is a drop (a rare drop, perhaps?) from someone somewhere. No idea, really, since I was playing rogue archer party, and the idea of experimenting with SW came to me very late into the game. Consequently, wasn't paying much attention to the acquisition of the non-rogue stuff. I'll document it on my new playthrough, but at this point I really cannot help you much. An obvious alternative before you stumble upon the second Dreamsever would be equipping the Spiral Band imported from DA:O. IN 03:28, March 28, 2010 (UTC)

Hello again Edit

Hi. The guy that created the script seems to be MIA. Would you mind re-uploading it or sending it to me by e-mail? Also, any update on how Weak Points work? Thanks :)--User:Thc 03:36, March 28, 2010 (UTC)

Sure, no problem. A bit later today, though, since DA is installed on the second laptop. Regarding Weak Points: no... It does not affect any of the properties in any noticeable way, but the evaluation is it is about +10%, as I've already stated. It's hard to be positive about that, of course. It may be 5%, 7.5%, 12.5%, and so on... Hell, it may even be +25% to the DamageOffHand+((Cun-25)*0.375)/CreatureRank :-D You get my drift: we cannot be sure without the actual formula. IN 03:46, March 28, 2010 (UTC)

backstabbing w/ attack talents? Edit

Would you know w/c attack talents benefit from backstabbing-support talents (lacerate, feast of the fallen, shadow striking and exploit weakness)? Besides Flicker?

Unfortunately, can't help you here. You can ask User:Thc, however. He seems to be well-versed in all things DW. IN 08:37, March 31, 2010 (UTC)

Archery Question Edit

Hey IN,
I got some questions here regarding Archery, I got really bad sense when it comes to determining Attack Speed purely by Eyes so...

Repeater Gloves + Rapid Aim Long Bow = Work/Bug?
Are their Stats Cumulative?
Reading information from Rapid Shot & Repeater Gloves only confuses me further. I know how Run Speed/Attack Speed bonus from Spells could Cancle each other Out and I certainly don't want that.

Fycan [fahy-kan] @ 08:42, April 30, 2010 (UTC)

Tanking Edit

Hey, not sure you're still with us here but I've been thinking about your "Alternative" strategy to making a tank. It definitely makes sense in general but seems kind of closed minded in some ways and I want to know whether you've overlooked some things or if my own understanding of the game is incomplete. Keep in mind that I always concentrate on the end game and am happy to scrape by with whatever I get for a good while until I reach the thing that works best.

Firstly, your main recommendation is for a two-handed, dwarf tank - how is oghren not perfect for this (again, assuming you can get by in the time it takes to reach him)? Secondly, why not a weapon and shield tank? Assuming the immunity to "direct knock-down effects" is the same bonus as indomitable, a warrior with a shield should have better physical defenses and many many more options for shutting down troublesomes (stuns and knock-downs). The only difference is that Indomitable also provided stun-immunity, which is nice but not nearly as commonly used as knock-downs. A two-handed warrior has a very nice multi-hit capability (with a few more in Awakening) but keeping in mind the philosophy that the role of a tank is not to deal damage it seems that improved survivability should take precedence. This all assumes that just spamming Taunt is enough to hold the attention of the enemy - please let me know if this is not true on Nightmare as I haven't gotten around to playing on that difficulty, yet.

My next point also assumes that Taunt is enough of an aggro-controller and I question the usefulness or the Reaver specialization. Unless the 33% threat bonus is really necessary (and is actually enough to make the difference) this spec doesn't seem all that useful since low-health tanking does not seem safe. Berserker will give the 10 damage bonus all the time in addition to other benefits (but drains stamina) and Champion will give yet another AoE! shut-down technique - you can't have too many ways of putting your opponent on the ground. All this assumes that Templar spec is a given since the armor it unlocks is invaluable and it is easily the least useless warrior spec overall.

All of my this has assumed that threat management wouldn't be a limiting factor and the following explains why I think so. Like I said, I haven't played on Nightmare difficulty but I don't see how managing threat could be a problem, even with only basic Taunts. Since you only percent life taken off in threat for attacking it seems that the most threat a character could draw that way is 100 per enemy. Assuming you don't spam the very very few techniques that actually generate threat correctly, the 300 threat from Taunt, which only decays by 10 in the 20 second cooldown window, should mean that no one even glances away from your tank. I hope that someone has the patience to wade through this long post and address my points for my enlightenment as well as that of others reading this. DemonDoll (talk) 14:40, July 13, 2010 (UTC)

I became aware of this "strategy" while it was still relatively early in its development back when the author required extensive convincing of the broken status of certain talents (e.g. Frightening Appearance) from which the author drew much of his reasoning. As anyone who has played the game as a non-stun immune character can tell you, stun can be one of the biggest annoyances in the game due to the frequent use of Scattershot and Dirty Fighting among enemies (not to mention Dragon Roar and other such effects). However, any character with a maximized Physical Resistance will mitigate the duration of most stun effects, so its impact can be minimized. However, for some people this is simply not sufficient and pursuing a character build that grants stun immunity is required.

Your reasoning on using Berserk to augment damage output is viable on the surface, but Threaten is perhaps not one of the Warrior's better talents. One often overlooked benefit to the Berserk line is the bonus it grants to health regeneration in combat. One flaw of the Two Handed Weapon tank approach is that they don't do that much damage (being focused on Dex) and get picked apart by flanking and ranged attacks. Any bonus to health regeneration is welcome.

All this being said, I find a Two Handed Weapon tank to be every bit as fun to play as a Weapon and Shield tank and in my opinion they both can be very effective, although I find the Weapon and Shield tank to be much more survivable. And in the end, that's what matters, is it not? You can't generate threat if you're dead.Kastagir (talk) 18:46, February 3, 2011 (UTC)

To be honest, with DA2 I'm more worried about the overall story and voiceacting more than I am the actual gameplay. Looking at things, it seems they put a lot of effort into skill design and balance. However, the demo was very lackluster in terms of the companions and story. Tivadar (talk) 17:45, March 4, 2011 (UTC)

DA2 Edit

I haven't played it much at all beyond the demo, I mostly hang around to babysit my unobtainable items and cut content pages. I may grab DA2 for the 360 since they supposedly refined the horrible console controls of the first game. Mictlantecuhtli (talk) 20:08, March 5, 2011 (UTC)

Uh, had no idea you were playing DAO on XBOX :) IN 21:27, March 6, 2011 (UTC)
I wasn't until I got it for free from a friend. I've got it on PC and 360 now, though my gaming PC needs to be rebuilt (currently in pieces) so I use a laptop for editing. I don't really play DAO at all anymore, the franchise is already stale and boring to me (DA2 might change it, probably not though). Mictlantecuhtli (talk) 01:08, March 7, 2011 (UTC)

The Spellward - Tank AlternativeEdit

You should check out my notes in the talk page and review the acquisition of two amulets. A dwarf noble rogue can afford The Spellward by the first time they reach the party camp if reloads are used to control the quality of loot in random containers and from stealing (also selling almost every item to that point). You can simply turn the difficulty down to easy until after Warden's Keep and have the amulet, armor (Knight Commander) and sword (Starfang) for Alistair very quickly this way. The rogue can then serve as a cunning archer for stacking Song of Courage. Mictlantecuhtli (talk) 22:52, April 4, 2011 (UTC)

Oh, also I have been using Sten for the alternate tank approach. I haven't had to actually use the Qunari Prayers for the Dead but they give him an edge over Alistair in my opinion. Mictlantecuhtli (talk) 12:33, April 10, 2011 (UTC)

Videos Edit

Hello! Please take a look at our video guidelines. Any personal videos not intended for use in the mainspace shouldn't be uploaded, they need to be embedded by using the {{youtube}} template. I would appreciate if you could please update the videos currently on your user page with that template so that we can delete the incorrectly uploaded ones from the wiki (and of course, make sure to use that template for any further videos you want to display). Thanks! --Kelcat Talk 02:49, February 8, 2016 (UTC)

Several of them have been uploaded, as you can see here--those are the ones that need to be changed to the template listed above, or changed to url links to youtube, whichever you prefer. The only types of videos that should be used on the wiki at all are official videos, such as trailers. Walkthrough and strategy videos aren't allowed for various reasons, as listed on the the Video guidelines I linked. A lot of those strategy articles are definitely in need of help, so I'm excited to see someone's planning on revamping them! --Kelcat Talk 19:27, February 8, 2016 (UTC)
Thanks very much, I appreciate you making the changes. --Kelcat Talk 04:53, February 9, 2016 (UTC)

Hi, sorry, I might not have been very clear, but no vidoes are allowed on article pages unless they're official trailers--especially walkthrough videos. The youtube template is for displaying videos on user pages, blogs, etc, but there's still a no video policy on mainspace articles. --Kelcat Talk 19:52, February 10, 2016 (UTC)

It's in the guidelines that I linked you to, I apologize for not stating it explicitly, but as you can see, the very first sentence of the guidelines I linked states:
"Due to concerns about quality, copyright, and featuring individual player characters, the wiki does not feature videos or video links in articles, except for officially released trailers on Videos."
The original forum that brought about this amendment 5 years ago is here if you're interested. --Kelcat Talk 04:47, February 11, 2016 (UTC)
The problem with linking to user pages is that they can (and quite often are) completely deleted by the user at any time, making the links on the article useless. User pages also can't be edited by other users, so people don't get a chance to help edit or improve the info. You could add all the info you want to convey onto the articles, but solo runs aren't common so I really don't see a need to add huge chunks of info about it onto a lot of different articles, but that's just my opinion. We do have articles like Archery (strategy) and Tank. How about you create one for solo runs? Then you can link to that article--sans videos, of course.
And you are of course welcome to propose changes to any guidelines--including the video ones--via the Forums. Guidelines are built by community consensus, after all. I luckily don't have to make rules around here, just enforce them Smiley Kelcat Talk 05:24, February 11, 2016 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.