After all, Daggerfall was by and far the best TES game right? I think we figured out why!

No, that belongs to Arena because its the oldest, and that always means its the best!

Another thread about attributes? My God, over-discussed is an understatement for this topic.

Some people don't want quality over quantity. They just want more, and they never want anything cut or changed, regardless of how well it worked or was implemented. And they equate this to being complex or adding complexity, when really it's just adding mediocrity.

Any change, even for the better, equals, " restriktin meh rollplayz n brakin imershin1111"

Yep :goodjob:



I couldn't have said it better myself. I'm saving this line to quote in the future. :celebration:

Hit the nail on the head. :goodjob:

No way, Daggerfall changed way too much from Arena.

And we all know Arena changed way too much from what it was supposed to be, a simple gladiator game.

If Bethesda never changed, TES would be a lore-driven, closed-gate gladiator combat game.

NOW BRING BACK MUH ATTRIBUTES DURRR AGGGGHHHHH

Honestly, I think it's for the best. All these choices are restriktin meh rollplayz n brakin imershin1111

Now that you've learned the way of these forums, you are now a true member.

Congratulations!

I agree. Perks should be for unique things, not for mundane stat raising.
But people like perks, so lets make perks, in fact lets remove attributes so we can boost the number of perks so it sounds cool!

Attributes are best for mundane raising of skills. Even if its automatically allocated, it would be fine because it makes sense. Perks are to make your character more unique, not increase encumberance.

And the people who defend the move either argue we have more options (and because of some pekrs you can make your character somewhat more unique, but not really more options IMO), or argue we haven't seen it yet so it can't possibly be bad. I agree we haven't seen it in action, so I don't understand the praise for it.

NO! Morrowind was better!!!!! BLLLAHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!! :gun: :dead: <----- (you)

Meh, I'd prefer the off the beaten path-ness of the TES Travels series. So unconventional and sooooo underrated IMO.

*proceeds to gain hipster status*

You owe me a quarter.

Revolutionary thought here, but how about we let skills handle skills? Huh?

No, first, it is impossible to add/edit base Skills or Attributes, or anything hardcoded into the game.
Second, the first few mods are retextures to weapons.

You owe me a quarter, too.

Depending on whether or not modded perks are limited to being part of a skill, and whether or not they can be locked (prevented from being chosen) and unlocked easily, and whether or not they can have ranks, I can think of a pretty messy way to simulate attributes.

But why have mundane stat raising at all? Why not have 3 attributes that actually are useful to raise and cut out any mundane system and replace it with a system that is actually noticeably useful and actually fosters variation instead of just posing as something that actually makes a difference in character customization. That's my view on it. I'm not saying that the new perks system is perfect or even good until I see it in action, I'm just saying it's a good move from the information of what we have now on the grounds that we know it gives much more customization that actually affects the differentiation between one character and another.

That makes perfect sense (although my wording wasn't most clear). I have a high level in blade (or whatever skills we have, I still refute the idea of 1 handed being a skill), so I must be a hulking brute. Or we have mundane perks control how our strength is modeled. Or we have "health" control how strength is modeled. Because now there is no other way to model strength.

So what makes my agile swordsman, and hulking barbarian different? Mundane lame perks, bolstered in number by mundane perks for PR? Or let skills modify this? Or even the generic "health" stat. Attributes are the best way to model such things as a characters attributes.

And these mundane stats are important for modifying the base attributes of a character. If I have an agile swordsman, and a hulking barbarian, I want to see a difference between them, not that 1 can dodge, and the other ignores armor, and everything else is identical. The agile swordsman has a number of benefits from the increased agility, and the best way to model those is with a proper attributes system.

I'm a bit worried about this too. I think it was said we get a perk every level over 50 levels. And there are 280 perks in all. If we need to use around 15 or 20 to increase values that attributed used to handle, we lose out on quite a few options from the skill perk trees.

But I'll hold out on any real criticism until I can see the system in action or we get some more in-depth info. Bethesda's a good company, they'll do what it takes to make a great game.

Well to help put your mind at rest about 1 handed skill, here is a line from the IGN article "In Skyrim, all skill increases fill an overall leveling gauge, just as experience points tend to do in most role-playing games. So if you use one-handed swords all the time, your one-handed swords skill will continue to increase and gradually fill the level gauge."

So we might still have individual weapon skills left.

.............................This isnt a discussion...this is spam


Last I checked Perks are rewards, why are rewards defining my character? he is perfectly valid in his thoughts about a mage not being different from a fighter or the stressed to death topic about a Wood elf and Nord averaged out being of equal strenght or even in the speculation that though I kick so much ass with a two hander perks and all, my damage with one handed weapons is a pitance.

Perks do not make attributes redundant I don't know where you people get that BS, a REWARD for all your hardwork to supplement the SKILLS you've been training to do not replace the attributes of your character and all that crap about Perks adding quality choices is also BS when you count all the skills for what the perks are to be divided by.


jeesh a genuine concern and expression of opinion and a guy gets treated like the ass end of a walrus........it never fails, its always the people for this move treating people against it like they're flaming idiots or something, always.

Or with the new system you choose the proper perks for the character your using at the time. :bonk:

Yay!
I don't condone the, "all one handed weapons are alike, so as you get better with one your body learns how to use the others better" arguement for 1 handed and 2 handed skills, but that should be the role of attributes in my eyes, oh, sad...

Then again, I like having a lot of skills. Adds a little bit more customization, well under the right conditions. In Morrowind I never had a problem raising skills not in my class, but in Oblivion I maxed my magic skills and stayed level 1 by not choosing those skills. Thats (partly) to blame for the ridiculous level scaling. And its not that the "no classes" thing is terrible, I'll just miss my class name.

But yeah, I feel attributes could play a powerful role. They model character attributes such as strength, agility, intelligence, far better than perks alone could. They might "condense" into other stats, but its the combination of those base attributes that defines how your character is and could model many imporant aspects of the game.

Perks were rewards in Oblivion but they have always been a defining factor for your character in Daggerfall and now Skyrim. They aren't just fun little bonuses like in FO where I can make some guy explode for no reason, they actually define your character now.