The Witcher 3 Signs

[gab96]

I was surprised when I read the books because I saw that Geralt is almost never using signs in combat. Most of the time he was just using his sword. I hope they will put more emphasis on sword combat since the real Geralt uses his sword most of the time.

 

[scratcherpen]

That will be interesting if Geralt can combine signs. One sign in one hand,other in another. Thaeir cobinations could be just stunning.

 

[Sagitarii]

That will be interesting if Geralt can combine signs. One sign in one hand,other in another. Thaeir cobinations could be just stunning.

The less Skyrim combat system, the better...

 

[Kinley]

That will be interesting if Geralt can combine signs.

So Axii + Igni would mind control someone while at the same time setting them on fire?

 

[ONLY_ONCE]

I hope that all the new signs look and sound way better then they did in TW2.
I hope they make my controller buttons vibrate too

 

[Triss_Merigold1]

So Axii + Igni would mind control someone while at the same time setting them on fire?

both hand axi would mind control someone much faster.

maybe fire + ard will make a firestorm xD ...ohk.... well .... shit just got weird....

much better if we do not take this route i guess :S

 

[dragonbird]

I got rid of your double-post for you. The forum glitches occasionally.

I don't really want two-handed signs, I'd prefer it to be consecutive signs with just the left hand, as in the earlier games. I'd prefer to keep the sword going in the right hand.

 

[ONLY_ONCE]

I want real cool looking signs and sounds to match the new animations in TW3.
The only cool looking one in TW2 was the AARD sign imo.
I could not stand the empty vigor sound in TW2, it was just awful.
That trap sign was by far the most ugly to look at, I did't like the sharp straight lines at all.
I can't wait to see the signs in TW3, I bet they will be so much better in every way

 

[Lieste]

Signs are just really basic magic, that can learn witchers like geralt, no like a fireball, but just for overtake some circumstances, Geralt isn't a wizard, so the signs should stay very simple and weak, even on high lvl, the "Quen" Sign on witcher 2 was FUCKING OP, i mean, you can take a hit by giant monster and almost don´t take damage, that is crazy, i beat the Letho using just "Quen" and "Igni" with no effort.
So yeah, i wish that signs were more weak

Meh, I just sliced and diced Letho *both times* with little to no effort. I think he hit me once in the second fight (and of course plot-armoured/attacked his way out of the first)... without using any signs at all, just oils, potions and sword skills maximised for that point in the game. (FCR 2)

Igni I used mostly with lighting torches, burning corpses and once or twice in other fights.
Aard - putting out torches, breaking barriers but not often otherwise.
Yrden - twice in the Kayran battle, 3-4 times against the battle-mage, when there was no real alternative... generally not otherwise.
Quen - forgot it in the Kayran battle. Used it a few times elsewhen... not really very often - never as active block - it was beneficial during the end fight to put out flames, other than that I took more damage while casting it than I reckon it saved me, so I didn't use.
Axii - one of the most frequently used signs... took advantage of *every* dialogue where it's use was permitted. Never used it in combat.
Heliotrope ~ not used, but then I seldom discharged my Adrenaline once charged. The permanent damage bonus to swords was worth more than a short-term frenzy.

 

[Jimbob_2.1]

It would be nice (or terrifying) if when you set guy's on fire with igni they howl around in pain. i think being boiled alive in your armor, assuming it's the excruciatingly painful experience i imagine it to be would cause them to howl around on the floor begging for mercy. Im no sadist, so i'd probably save the igni sign just for people who really piss me off or monsters.

As for how they actually work i hope they make them more powerful but balance it by making vigor slow to recharge. In fact i hope vigor doesn't recharge. that would really make you think about how best to use signs effectively, and would stop it being possible to run round a group of enemies spamming signs. i'd feel more like geralt from the books this way as he rarely used signs.

 

[Geralt_of_bsas]

It would be nice (or terrifying) if when you set guy's on fire with igni they howl around in pain. i think being boiled alive in your armor, assuming it's the excruciatingly painful experience i imagine it to be would cause them to howl around on the floor begging for mercy. Im no sadist
.

I thought about this many times and we discussed it briefly in the thread about how mature will TW3 be.

Enemies and other stuff react in a pretty light and almost cartoony way even in very "realistic" or serious games. Burning people alive should be pretty meaningful, and i wish soldiers around the burner guy would vomit or stuff like that, from smelling the flesh.

 

[Jimbob_2.1]

I thought about this many times and we discussed it briefly in the thread about how mature will TW3 be.

Enemies and other stuff react in a pretty light and almost cartoony way even in very "realistic" or serious games. Burning people alive should be pretty meaningful, and i wish soldiers around the burner guy would vomit or stuff like that, from smelling the flesh.

agreed. I feel that it's necessary in a mature game to go about these kind of things in a believable way. Otherwise it's like your making someone's death something not to be taken seriously. killing someone in a game shouldn't be you do without even thinking about it. Of course a realistic depiction of violence shouldn't get in the way of game play, and they don't have to go into too much detail.

 

[GuyNwah]

Too-realistic depiction of violence is an area where you can get into deep trouble with rating authorities. The well-researched absence of any causal connection between game violence and acting out real acts of violence cuts no mustard with these authorities. Even when their decrees have no force of law, they are taken seriously by dealers in those games, and a rating that dealers will not handle will exclude you from the market. If you wish to do business in countries that have strong regulation of violence in computer games, you do what they tell you.

ESRB can rate you AO for "prolonged scenes of intense violence", where "intense violence" is defined as "Graphic and realistic-looking depictions of physical conflict. May involve extreme and/or realistic blood, gore, weapons and depictions of human injury and death."

PEGI regulates "gross violence" and "certain types of violence"; they define "gross violence" as "Gross violence is the most difficult to define since it can be very subjective in many cases, but in general terms it can be classed as the depictions of violence that would make the viewer feel a sense of revulsion."

USK (Germany) regulations have the force of law and require retailers to keep USK 18 games out of the hands of children, strongly limiting the market for such games. (Witcher 2 is USK 16, which raises no such problems.) A summary of their 18 classification is "violent game concepts and frequently generate a dark and threatening atmosphere. This makes them suitable for adults only.... The background of the respective story has its basis in such elements as war conflicts or brutal fights between rival gangs. "

What you're asking for is the ability for the PC to inflict "intense" or "gross" violence, basically amounting to torture, in essentially unlimited measure. No matter how much you may believe this to be justified, it will not be anything you can blame the game or the developers for if you do not get any more violence than Witcher 2 has.

 

[Daeron87]

Well, if Axii is mind affecting, it could be used as a form of temporary non detection. Not invisibility mind you, they see you, but don't perceive you as a threat, so you can easily have access to places or stuff. Unless you draw your weapons, cast a sign, hit someone, break things, or draw enough attention anyway. But perhaps it would be too much for a witcher. :/

 

[n0rv]

Quen - effective at reducing damage in combat, but shouldn't last very long so that players don't abuse it

Not damage. Quen should reduce *chance to hit* just like original version from books (see The Lesser Evil ending for example).

heliotrop - powerful but only available late in the game

In books Heliotrop works similar to Quen in games. It creates protective shield against magic (on demand, not constant) and in my opinion Heliotrop in game should be just (most powerful probably) variant of Quen.

 

[Pedrolago]

In books Heliotrop works similar to Quen in games. It creates protective shield against magic (on demand, not constant) and in my opinion Heliotrop in game should be just (most powerful probably) variant of Quen

IMO it should be just like in the books, a kind of last minute protective shield that has limited use, so we use it for emergencies

 

[SMiki55]

In books Heliotrop works similar to Quen in games. It creates protective shield against magic (on demand, not constant) and in my opinion Heliotrop in game should be just (most powerful probably) variant of Quen.

Not only for magic, but for all serious attacks. Geralt uses this sign in the short story "A Grain of Truth" to cushion the impact of the wall and in new novel "Season of Storms" when a vigilosaur jumped on him.

IMHO Heliotrope will be good when you accidentally fall down from small precipices.

 

[Tutux]

I was surprised when I read the books because I saw that Geralt is almost never using signs in combat. Most of the time he was just using his sword. I hope they will put more emphasis on sword combat since the real Geralt uses his sword most of the time.

^ same reaction, when reading the books I found out he doesn't really rely on potions or signs so much in the novels. I'm excluding the short stories.