Diablo III

[Suleman]

So why are they called the sisterhood than?

Nitpicker.
I said they could create a similar order for men. If they wanted/needed to, and there is need. They lost many of their number to Diablo and Andariel.

[Infiltrator]

Ah, so they could, while the Amazons couldn't?

[Ethric]

Indeed, if a sisterhood can open up and create a male order, amazones could teach their males to fight.

[Suleman]

Indeed, if a sisterhood can open up and create a male order, amazones could teach their males to fight.

Sure, but then they'd be forced to both change the name of the class and explain why the amazons would abandon their millenia old traditions and religious doctrines. Also, explain why the amazon goddesses would suddenly approve. I haven't read the amazon entry in the manual in a while, but I think their special powers are divine gifts of some sort.
Rogues, on the other hand, seem to use inner, possibly psychic powers like the assassins.
But hey, useless speculation for the win.

[ThunderTitan]

Yeah, just like the French had to change the names of their entire army because of Jean D'Arc...

The males being traders actually doesn't sound as if they're all that inferior in status to the females...

As for Goddess... last time i checked the High Heavens and the Burning Hells where the only things around, so any powers they have are more likely magic passed off as divine gifts...


Also, remember the Sorceress in D2... read her description again... women weren't supposed to be mages where she's from either...

[Suleman]

Eh. I've explained my points already. This speculation is rather pointless anyway. We'll just have to see what the future has in store.

The Sorceress's Description doesn't say anything like that.

[Angelspit]

Is the first Diablo still playable today (I'm not a big fan of retro games, but I can still play Starcraft after all these years)? Can you just skip the first one and play the sequel? How much time do you need to finish it? It's been a while since I've played a good RPG.

[Ethric]

Diablo, one and two, aren't really RPG's. Unless you take a broad view of it Still fun though, an entertaining sort of repetitivenes, and the stories are well told.

You can play the second without having played the first, it's not a Baldurs Gate I -> II sort of sequel, more of a start from scratch with the baddies being badder and more plentiful for their second try at world domination.

[Suleman]

Is the first Diablo still playable today (I'm not a big fan of retro games, but I can still play Starcraft after all these years)? Can you just skip the first one and play the sequel? How much time do you need to finish it? It's been a while since I've played a good RPG.

The first Diablo is... playable, yes. It's not the same game as the sequel, as the first one emphasizes the creepy atmostphere more while the second one is a hack n' slash orgy. The first one also emphasizes survival more, while the sequel is more forgiving. The second one is better in every technical respect, but not as creepy.

Diablo 1 is pretty short if you know what you're doing. It can be played through in less than a week. It's not a real RPG, more of an action game with RPG elements.

[Panda Tar]

Diablo 1 should be played first if you never have played Diablo 2, or you might find it a bit dull.

The main problem with Diablo 1, in my opinion, is that heroes, appart from their focused attributes, can learn anything, like: the warrior can learn spells, the same spells you learn with sorceror and the rogue (I don't know much about the monk - expansion character - but it'll be likely). Beside that, the dungeon is always the same place: the cathedral. Although you go through different looking places, like caves, pits, etc., it's always the same boring and depressing view, going down, down, down, all the way down. There are few bosses, a regular quantity of items (some give you negative status), nothing wonderful. When you reach level 30, you can select nightmare difficulty (you don't need to finish the game) and I guess you can go to hell by reaching level 50 or 60, don't remember.

Since gameplay is not difficult (just setting Function keys for spells and clicking maddly), you can skip it to play Diablo 2. You won't miss much of a storyline, given that the new one explains briefly what happened. New classes and unique skills are the big changes. You can play throughout a whole desert, catacombs, jungle, hell, frozen caves - new environments that won't make you bored that fast. Items are also improved, and you can have imbued ones, others which you can put on attached runes (some runes make names that'll give special powers to those items) or jewels, quest items, set items (giving many bonuses when they are all grouped together), and some unique bosses.

The only wearing thing is that you must go through the game about 2 times to be able to go to the real challenging Hell game difficulty, which is really difficult. It's also a bit exasperating if you didn't developed your hero well, you'll have to dig into nightmare for a while to be able to even start playing Hell. You finish off Baal, but you might die out of the blue for a simple ghoul. Not mentioning that you'll find many special monsters (they are like the others, but they are enchanted with some stuff and have minnions. They usually drop good items and give you fair experience) that are enchanted with so many things that you wonder if you'll ever be able to kill them. For instance: if you're a warrior that do no magic damage and you find a monster with "Immune to Physical", you'll have to leave it and run or else. And it's pretty common finding these things in Hell since the very beginning.

In Diablo II, you have:
- Barbarian with warcries, battle techniques and weapon masteries;
- Necromancer with curses, bone/poison spells and golem summoning/raising dead;
- Amazon with bow skills, passive skills, lance/javelin skills;
- Paladin with offensive auras, defensive auras and battle techniques;
- Sorceress with ice, fire and lightning spells (and passive on their own);
- Assassin with traps, finishing moves and shadow techniques;
- Druid with animal summoning, shapeshifting and wind/fire-lava spells.

Dunno what more I could say, but that's that.

[Angelspit]

Thanks guys! I might give it a try.

[darknessfood]

You won't regret it Angel, the games are really fun to play, and addictive. Found my copy (of Diablo 2) yesterday, and started with a sorceres who can freeze your balls to a whole new level !

[Angelspit]

What? You mean she gives her opponents the blue balls? That's nasty.

[Panda Tar]

You won't regret it Angel, the games are really fun to play, and addictive. Found my copy (of Diablo 2) yesterday, and started with a sorceres who can freeze your balls to a whole new level !

What happens to the sorceress when you find a boss immune to fire, lightning and cold? You yell to him to death?

[darknessfood]

You won't regret it Angel, the games are really fun to play, and addictive. Found my copy (of Diablo 2) yesterday, and started with a sorceres who can freeze your balls to a whole new level !

What happens to the sorceress when you find a boss immune to fire, lightning and cold? You yell to him to death?

Nah, i put a staff up his ass ^^

[Panda Tar]

What if there's no ass? I've never played too much with Sorceress. I became bored after a while, because the lack of...hum...changing in spell casting. I'd rather prefer druid, which is the character I played the most, along with assassin and paladin.

In Diablo I I played most with the Rogue.

[wimfrits]

Um.. I think sorceress is the least boring of characters as she can just teleport through levels when you get bored

Druid was nice but imo too much a mix of things. A little summoning but not as strong as necro; a little elemental magic but not as good as sorc. Shapeshifting to up battle skills but not as good as barbarian. I think it's better to be good at 1 thing than be mediocre at multiple things.

Assassin was better I think, but kind of repetative since the only thing that worked well on Hell (especially in MP games) is a trap-assassin.

As for DIII, I'm really excited!

[Panda Tar]

Um.. I think sorceress is the least boring of characters as she can just teleport through levels when you get bored

Haven't tried that.

I think it's better to be good at 1 thing than be mediocre at multiple things.

I used to develop druid shapeshifting, partially supported by summoning Heart of Wolverine and the element shield for an offensive fighter. It was pretty much good. I went through hell with it like that. Thanks to all the items and charms that helped with magical damage avoiding those "immune to physical" annoyances.

[wimfrits]

It was pretty much good. I went through hell with it like that.

That's pretty good.
You can have a barbarian with more hit points, better attack damage, better resistance, better defense and more combat skills and still run into problems

The firebear was hot for a while on battlenet though, but purely for player-vs-player combat.

[Panda Tar]

That's pretty good.
You can have a barbarian with more hit points, better attack damage, better resistance, better defense and more combat skills and still run into problems

Haven't played much with a barbarian. Max of level 20, I think. He seemed a bit more too much in trouble sometimes, and I didn't enjoy it.

The firebear was hot for a while on battlenet though, but purely for player-vs-player combat.

They say it's rather nice, but I grow sleepy just waiting the bear to strike once. It's soooo slow (in comparison to the wolf, that is ).

But the assassin was the most difficult to deal with in the hell, for me. I was a extremely strong fighter, but just getting next to the monster was so damn hard! Then I supposed I had to develop traps. It seemed that all my time was wasted at all.