For all we know the most functions of attribute that had nothing to do with the three main stats (health magicka and stamina) are implemented as an immutable racial traits this time (via leveling but still possible by alchemical/magical effects) so your racial choice in the beginning does matter much more than before. But I'd say let us just give this topic a rest for now and see how it pans out after the game has been officially released. Only then we can dissect it in a fair manner.


Don't mark my words on it but I recall that there is no more; you only had to decide your gender, race (where each of them are supposedly to have a more pronounced game play difference this time) and customize your face and body type. That's it.

I think that the new system boils down to, use your imagination, the world is your oyster, and I'm all for it. :thumbsup:

Not according to Todd's statement, that they didn't want a player to have any skill limitations, based on the character that they created at the beginning of the game. There can't be any major racial differences, that cannot be overcome with perk selection or skill use/improvement. Everyone would have exactly the same potential . . . in ALL skills.

This forum is here so we can discuss these things . . . otherwise Bethesda would not have created a Skyrim discussion forum, until after the game was released.

Racial traits are an interesting bone to throw in, but people of the same race still differ quite a lot in size, shape, build, intelligence (irrespective of skills).

Overall, I like the idea of removing the attributes.

But I'm still holding onto the idea that each race will have starting "attributes" that remain static throughout the game. In my mind, it makes sense. There are quotes from Todd and others that could argue for and against this idea. But he has numerous times indicated a desire to make race a more important choice and for each race to feel different, and this would be one way to accomplish that. It was reiterated again in the German interview. (I don't have the exact quote handy, and I don't feel like listening to the whole thing again.)

In the previous games, races (and gender to a lesser extent) started with plus/minus in certain attributes. However, by end game -- no matter your race -- you could max out any given attribute. This always seemed artificial to me. The strongest Nord should always be stronger than the strongest Wood Elf, etc. Static racial attributes or traits would allow for each race to provide a different play experience, while overall still allowing you to become any kind of character you want... a Wood Elf can always wear an amulet, make potions, etc. to be stronger warrior. (See how you can achieve the same end result, but a means that plays very different?)

That's kind of my hope. I want races to feel different, so it's more meaningful to replay.

I don't think the quotes I've seen intimate that there are no racial differences (in fact, some quotes promote the opposite idea). I think the key is "based on the character that they create at the beginning of the game," which takes into account so much more than attributes... namely classes that give bonuses, skills such as blade or axe that steer your character to a specific path, birthsigns which give bonuses, major/minor skills which give bonuses, etc. More simply, the things that steer you to a specific style. Attributes themselves don't do that to a great extent. I think there's an important distinction between all the choices previously during character creation vs. simply the race choice. I think races will vary at start, but not in ways that steer you toward being a certain type of character... but instead, towards ways of giving you a different experience.

Static attributes won't be present in TES games because of its "be who you're playing" philosophy. The main idea is that your character should evolve mainly around the choices you make during gameplay, not character creation. This doesn't include only the skills, attributes should be included too, otherwise there wouldn't be improvement in many parts.

Yes at the beginning, characters will start similar, but they'll end up more different at the end, which is much better than having it the other way around.

Well then let's just make sure that we don't got overboard. I've seen way too much aggressive cadence (subtle they maybe but still vitriolic nonetheless) whenever this particular topic got raised. I humbly doubtful that the people on the development team would take any more than a mere glance and proceed to giving a very wide berth with the amount of emotionally-charged circular arguments to be found on such threads, which to be perfectly honest, was nothing more than an eyesore in the end.

If you don't like what he said then don't read it and don't respond.

And leave out the emoticons.

Wow so a guy has a legitimate concern and a well thought out OP and all some people can say is "Oh gosh, another attribute thread!" Very Mature guys.

Anyways, to the OP. I agree, I think they should have tried to revamp their attribute system rather than just axe it. But this seems to be a reoccurring trend with Bethesda. I'm looking forward to trying the new system though, I'll definitely give it a chance. My only concern is now that every character will start out exactly the same, it's going to require even more micromanaging on what you do just to specialize as a specific character. If I want to play a thief I'm going to have to do only things that have to do with those skills rather than giving them an advantage at the start and playing somewhat normally. Just feels like it's going to be a grind for the first 15-20 levels (since it's on a 1-50 scale) before I can even become a specialized character. That to me just cuts down the want to replay.

I think I'm wrong in originally using the term "attributes" due to the previous conception of what that means. I think it's more accuracte to say racial variances. And I don't think static racial variances would affect the character you can become (the "be who you're playing" philosophy) nearly as much as it seems on the surface. The thing it seems Beth is trying to change is the idea that previous character generation choices almost forced your playing style... if you made choices that give you extra health & endurance, superior ability with long sword, aptitude with heavy armor, etc. you'd almost be foolish to play the game as any style other than a sword-wielding warrior. You've just selected a character and you already have a style! But that condition mostly arises from other choices, as stated in a post above (i.e. class, major/minor skills, birthsigns, etc.).

In the end, I don't think inherent racial variances affect becoming any style of player nearly as much as other choices that have been eliminated at character creation.

I like that factor. I never liked it when I saw a movie and the character was a simple farm boy and out of nowhere held the power to handle a sword like a master. I'm going... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gslOnN3zWmA I like having to be a simple character (even though I am dragon born) and having to climb my way to the top.

Sorry for the multiple posts, but I wanted to add this quote from Todd...

Todd Howard (from German Interview):

“We do have the 10 races we had in Oblivion. And it is just those 10 again. We think that’s enough, and we’re more interested in making those 10 feel different from each other.”

(There are other similar quotes you can find.)

Ultimately, if race was nothing more than an aesthetic decision or "skin" at the start, there would be no chance of fulfilling the above quote. Thus, I expect some racial variances at the start of the game and possibly through race-specific perk tress throughout the game. Just my opinion, really.

A scrawny smart guy should be able to build up his strength without becoming dumber. There would probably be a few health warnings at the gym if there was any proof of that lol...

While I understand what you're saying, I don't like your suggestion.

Also, everyone is not the same at lvl 1. This being a single player game means that it is only ever your hero who would start out the same - which makes perfect sense really.

Are you a ninety pound weakling with giant brain? Lol. The way you specify makes it seem so personal.

I'm not pumped about attributes being tossed, but I think I'll prefer the perks. Although, a combination of some attributes, skills, and perks might be the best. We'll see.

Todd says lots of things. Anyone who paid attention to the things he said in the run-up to Oblivion knows to take them with a grain of salt.

I tend to think that, in spite of what Todd says, there will be virtually no racial differences, in addition to the already advertised lack of "attribute" differences. That's specifically because of the perk system.

Imagine - you have a system that gives Altmer some sort of advantage in spellcasting - whatever that advantage might be. In the past, it was a bonus to intelligence (impossible now, since intelligence apparently doesn't exist on Nirn), some sort of bonuses to magic skills and a bonus to magicka. The skills and magicka pool do still exist, so bonuses could be applied to them, but what happens with the perks? If a magicka-increasing perk is a straight number or even a percentage, it would have to be perfectly balanced. Make it a bit too high and Altmers are uber. Make it a bit too low and Orcs can never be spellcasters. The only other way to deal with it would be to make the size of the perks race-specific, but then you'd essentially be rewarding Orcs for playing spellcasters and punishing Altmer, by giving Orcs more healthy bonuses to make up for their starting disadvantage and giving Altmer smaller bonuses in order to avoid overpowering them. That latter seems entirely unworkable, so the only possible approach, as I see it, is the former - every perk bonus has to be exactly and carefully balanced - exactly the right amount to provide some benefit to a race that starts out at a disadvantage but to not overpower a race that starts out with an advantage. And then understand - that would have to be done with every single perk, for every single skill, for every single race. Every one of them would have to be very precisely balanced such that the races with disadvantages wouldn't be shut out from a path completely but the races with advantages wouldn't become uber.

That would be an enormous amount of work, and let's be frank here - Beth has a long and essentially unbroken history of being faced with things that would require that sort of work to balance, and deciding to just scrap them instead. The easiest approach, by far, would be to either eliminate racial bonuses entirely, so that the perks only have to be balanced with the overall gameplay rather than with each race, or to, at best, make any racial bonuses so inconsequential that any slight imbalance from perks would have little if any effect on the gameplay.

I could well be wrong, but I have little doubt that that's exactly the way the game is going to be set up - that in spite of the noises about making races more distinct, the differences are ultimately going to be cosmetic only. Having even somewhat signficant advantages and disadvantages simply by dint of race would require an enormous amount of effort to precisely balance the perks such that characters don't end up either uber or entirely locked out of a particular sort of character simply by dint of race, and I've seen nothing to indicate that Beth will invest that effort into balancing, and in fact much to indicate that they won't - that, as they've done with so many things over the years, they'll simply eliminate it instead.

It's funny that you mention this, OP. Because in your original post you said some pretty stupid stuff about "limitations" on your character's attributes. I am absolutely at a loss as to why in the world you think it could ever make sense that a big, strong character has to have lower intelligence. This makes no sense. IRL, there are many people I know who are college football and wrestling stars, who go on from state schools to getting masters degrees at Yale and Harvard, to become lawyers, doctors, etc. A couple of these guys I know are huge, athletic, incredibly smart, and good-looking, with great personalities. So, just giving some quick examples there. Those are real people, meaning those are the absolute MINIMUM possibilities I would expect out of a character in a TES game.

On the point - Why should any character have imposed attribute limitations? Especially now, when TES is trying to let us actually become who we want instead of a limited class.

It makes sense to have racial differences, and yes, I know people have genetic differences. But those should be choices you decide on in a videogame, not limitations imposed by game rules. That would be absolutely awful and extremely unfair, like many primitive RPGs were.

Perhaps you misunderstood my post. I did not say that when you choose a higher strength, it would automatically lower you intelligence. Have you ever played a RPG where you had a pool of points at the beginning to distribute among you attributes? So, you can choose to excel in strength up to say 8 points with your pool, but if you want to go to 9 or 10, you have to lower one of the other attributes (it usually takes more points to raise the attributes at higher levels).

Do you believe that the PC is supposed to be superior in all attributes like one of those Harvard grads that you suggested. Sorry, I find that to be a boring setup. I like characters with limitation and imperfections.

Getting rid of attributes is the best decision Bethesda ever made.

Thank god.

What's wrong with racial advantages or disadvantages. Sure, for most things it should be possible to work your way up the ladder, but I rather like the idea that races have natural differences that come in to play in both subtle and overt ways. In some ways, it's almost better that the attributes that normally governed this are either gone, or hidden, because it allows you to "just do it" Make the bosmer smaller, faster, and more agile - but less capable in full frontal combat, etc. Likewise for the other races. Orcs can try to be mages, they just aren't as good at it without significantly more effort - but can bludgeon people out of the womb. Just subtly alter the player based on racial characteristics. Don't even announce it after char gen - just mention it during race selection.

Then, if the player wants to buff up in an area, they can - but on top of a natural advantage or disadvantage.

I love how they are changing the attribute system. Instead of focusing on leveling the right skills, to get the attribute bonus I want, i can just PLAY.

I'll post what I did in another thread: I think we need more choice and consequence in character creation. It seems like they are just simplifying it and cutting stuff so there is less consequence when you make a build. You should make somthing and stick with it, unless its that characters "arc" to change in some way. Wanna change gameplay styles, make another build.

People, you will still get you skinny guy with a large brain/muscular magic user/tiny thief etc or whatever other character you want to role play. Ok, you pick look of your character. By this, obviously, I mean body type/skin color/scars/height etc... and you start the game. Whatever character you decide you want to be, you just start being that character in the game. So if you decide you want to be an orc magic user with the highest intelligence and willpower of any orc in the elder scrolls universe, you simply start using magic. When you level up, you choose to enhance your magicka, in turn increasing you intelligence and willpower. You then pick a perk, something like increasing your damage with destruction magic. Again, this will increase your intelligence and willpower. Attributes are not gone! If I am a pure melee warrior and I choose to level up my health, this means I probably level up my endurance, although I don't have a number on a stat page telling me as much. What it also means, by process of elimination, is that I have NOT leveled up my intelligence, since I chose not to level up ky magicka. I am baffled by the fact that all the attribute naysayers can't make this distinction.

Attributes are, in fact, gone. Attributes should have had more consequence on the game than increasing your stat bars.

Read the post. I'm arguing that attributes should not and should never have had anything to do with leveling.

I think most of the folk who don't like attributes are biased based on the crappy leveling system on Oblivion more than anything.