And it wasn't even the actual leveling system for the user that was terrible, just the scaled leveling of enemies and loot.

I've only played Morrowind and Oblivion, but I never really thought the attributes did all that much. I agree with the OP's thoughts on how a RPG could function. I never felt that TES series (mor, obl) are RPGs though (adv>rpg.)

There are many good ideas in this thread, conserning RPG builds and if Bethesda decided to make TES into an RPG, I would be angry about the cutting down too.

When it comes to Skyrim, I think they've made the right decisions.

OP I agree with you, not enitrely because i thought about something that will tune my rage against none-attributes game down.

Well first of all, my problem is that everyone are going to have the same int, personality, str, and so on. in an immersive world that does not make sense. What I will do - to balance the logic, is to pretend that if i chose an altmer it means i have more int. if i chose an orc i have more str. Sadly the game mechanic will snap me out of this sometimes, but most of the time it wont affect my role playing. and as long i will believe we all have attributes - then we all have.

TES isn't a pure role playing game, and that's by design. Todd actually described Oblivion as more of a hack and slash, with a virtual world on top. Nowhere in that interview did he call it a role playing game. You go into dungeons, kill monsters, collect loot, sell loot to get bigger weapons, lather, rinse, repeat.

Skyrim is also a hack and slash game, with a virtual world on top. Yes, there are role playing elements, but it's not like DnD, where you can spend half the time horsing around with local politics, rather than actually kicking a**. Morrowind came the closest to a true RPG IMHO, but even it wasn't a pure RPG. However, that's not necessarily bad. One of my all time favorite games, Deus Ex, was similar. It was a combat game with role playing aspects.

I do always enjoy the role playing aspects of the game, but I understand that TES games are combat oriented first, and role playing second - and it shows. Besides, modders do a MUCH better job of bringing in the role playing aspect anyway. I'd rather see Bethesda focus on what they are good at.

Birthsigns got the axe. GREAT news though, cuz now the Constellations are Perk trees :facepalm:

Every major TES game was an RPG. They've all been real time, as opposed to turn based, but they are all RPGs.

Not at all. I like this one better, so I'm glad they scrapped the old one.

This, 100%.

Oblivion's leveling system was broken. It was broken because of leveled opponents and because of a horribly warped system that increased major skills much faster than minor ones and vaulted you pell-mell up levels without having a chance to increase more than a mere handful of skills at any given level. People sure as hell didn't end up level 10, dying to mountain lions and trolls while vainly trying to defend themselves with their inflated security and mysticism skills because of attributes. That happened because the leveling system was broken. Attributes had nothing to do with it.

If attributes hadn't existed in Oblivion, nothing would've changed. If you picked most-used skills as majors, and especially if you picked too many non-offensive skills, you'd still level up too fast with too few skill increases and you'd still get your ass handed to you by trolls and mountain lions.

And all the nonsense about "grinding for +5s." In the first place, opponents in Oblivion never got +5s. They averaged +3 and +2 per level, just like casual players get. Again, the problem wasn't the attributes, but the broken leveling system. Grinding for +5s was just a way to compensate for the broken leveling system, and if the leveling system hadn't been broken, it wouldn't have been so important (except to the obsessive powergamers, but that's their problem). Nobody had to grind for +5s just because the attributes were there - they (at least felt they) had to grind for +5s because the leveling system was broken and that was one of the easier ways to compensate for it.

Hell... blaming attributes for Oblivion's broken leveling system makes about as much sense as blaming a drunk driving accident on the car.

Typical pc gamer fan response. The game isn't even out, yet you already like it (without exception of course) having never even played it.
"Oh, if something about the game svcks on release I'll just mod it"
Because that attitude really stirs the devs to create a great game for their customers (sarcasm). Thankfully for those of us on consoles, pc gamers are a dwindling portion of the gaming market....

This isn't what I know as a typical PC gamer response. In my experience, they strongly dislike the new system....without knowing everything about it and having actually played Skyrim. You know, like you.

I'm a pc gamer.

I'd submt (for RPhx Leonine's benefit as much as for yours) that one's attitude toward the game, its design and the potential merits and flaws thereof has next to nothing to do with the device upon which one intends to play it.

I'd further submit that hurling bile at other posters only serves to get threads locked.

I know my averege joe will probably only be moderatly intelegent probably pretty strong but more swift than anything. And now for the first time if you want a ninty pound weakling ur pc acctualy looks the part. That makes me happy

You are right. But it has appeared to me that PC gamers are usually the ones who dislike the new system, most commonly anyways. That's just my observation.

Interesting, yes this would have been better in my opinion... But let's face it TES is no longer an RPG fans' game (I've only played Daggerfall, Morrowind and Oblivion though, but in my opinion Oblivion was worse than both in an RPG sense).

Sorry, just get really annoyed when people who seem to not care about the release product feel the need to project that apathy onto the forums as a response to threads meant to generate useful discussion/debate.

Fat drunken nord axeman sounds fun.I just hope that potion stacking makes a come back.
There was nothing quite like drinking 900 jugs of assorted Morrowind liquor then proceeding to one shot an ordinator with a rusty iron dagger.

ok what do you want them to do? scrap it even tho players didnt try it and delay the game another 2-3 years?

Then again I dont think dragonborn or the hero could be some handicap or [censored] anyway....

Been on the forum for 4 days & heard this argument dozens of times. We don't want it scrapped. We want it to be a decent addition to TES series on release. There's no open beta or other public hands-on preview material, so we use the forums to express valid concerns about major changes to the game system rather than blind faith & acceptance. A large portion of fans are console gamers that will not be able to adjust the game with mods post release.
Let us have our say. If you intend to get the game regardless, that's your choice. By that same logic, you have no need to continue paying attention to any discussion about game mechanics then. Go post some creative ideas, that's what were trying to do between fending off these attacks.

Personally, I like the Average Joe approach. You shouldn't be building a character with preconceived ideas of how you want them to end up as, it should be an organic process that evolves as you play the game. Think of it as a child first starting life. Does it start out thinking that it wants to be a doctor or a lawyer etc? It will make those decisions as it goes along and experiences the world around him/her. If you use a particular skill to a point that it unlocks an ability that sounds interesting, you should be more concerned with whether it would be something useful you could use at that moment, rather than with how it fits into some overall image of what you expect your character to be like. In the end you might find your character evolving into a direction that you didn't quite expect, but is just as effective. That approach will certainly add alot to the re-playability of the game by allowing you to shape your character in completely different ways each time.

I am in the minority in these posts it seems as I quiet like the idea of the attributes being condensed into the 3 Core factors of Health, mana and stamina.

in response to the post above, Bethesda have not discussed races yet and I suspect that each race and gender will have different starting levels in each of the skills, for example a Orc/Nord will have a higher 2 handed starting level than a wood elf, and a high elf will have higher magic skills than a orc etc etc.

which for me will be a better starting point for the character rather than a class and birthsign defining starting numbers.

This means that in general it will be easier to level a magic wielding altmer at the start of the game rather than a 2 handed sword wielding altmer. But you will not have the potential of inexperience meaning that you choose a game breaking character in later levels this way.

As you can guess i'm all for it, as TES games for me are more about the exploration and immersion than the spreadsheet skill building to get the best character at the highest level.

@ OP I fully agree & further submit that birthsigns were an additional touch that lent each character a sense of uniqueness, which have also been removed. The arguement has been made that most birthsign bonuses & abilities became almost worthless at higher levels. I agree. However instead of removing birthsigns they should have been upgraded to scale with the players level. Same with Racial Abilities.

If the devs can demonstrate that ALL previous stats set by attributes in TES3&4 will be able to be managed with the same or greater degree of control than previously available to the player, then great. Until then, the jurys out on the new "attributes".

With Morrowind- and Oblivion-style attributes systems, ninety-pound weaklings can grow into muscled hunks through soldiering (as you have noticed). Dumb people become smarties, socially inept people become suave and popular, and sickly people become hardy. In real life, attributes improve (and worsen) over time, though not to the point that everyone doing equal things achieves equal attributes. Bethesda seems to prefer giving everyone equal potential.

With the axing (spearing?) of the core attributes, Bethesda has removed attributes from impacting our skill effectiveness (with the possible exception of race and gender atttributes). They have also taken away our ability to improve our core attributes, effectively taking us half way to the kind of system you describe for old-style RPGs, where attributes "DO NOT CHANGE OVER TIME." All we need now to get us to the old-style system are attributes reintroduced as static elements. Done right, it would be a good move.

Belanos,

What you describe is how an average Joe evolves through skills, which is fine if you are born an average Joe - medium height and build, IQ of around 100. But not everyone is average -- some are fat and clumsy, some are anti social, some are smooth talkers, some are geniuses. These are what attributes are -- what you are born with, not what you learn through experience. Skills that emphasize your strengths will enable any one of these different types of people to succeed in this game. I'd just like the game to let me start out as a non-average Joe.

As I posted earlier: Todd stated in one of the interviews that (and I'm paraphrasing here, as I don't recall his exact words), basically they didn't want a player to have any skill limitations, based on the character that they created at the beginning of the game. So your starting points will mean nothing after a few level ups . . . essentially the only real differences between characters is their appearance (and any starting differences can be compensated by perk or by just beefing up any lessor skills, by using them)



Fallout 3 uses 10 attributes, called S.P.E.C.I.A.L.s (for Strength, Perception, Endurance, Charisma, Intelligence, Agility, and Luck) . . . plus Fatigue (a misnomer of Stamina, which is a hidden attribute); 13 skills, and 58 perks (not counting additional perks that came with the 5 DLC) . . . but there was just one playable race.

So in Skyrim, we'll have 10 races (and 2 genders), but they will all essentially play out the same . . . since, according to Todd, there won't be any skill limitations based on race (or gender). That is a concern for me, and I see this as a valid concern (with my fear being that an important RPG aspect is not going to be a part of Skyrim).

Attributes are an essential part of your character . . . attributes define your character's inherent strengths and weaknesses . . . that never change when you level up.

This is not about spreadsheets . . . it is about being able to create a truly unique character, that allow us to play out the game in a unique way . . . instead of the only real difference being, just cosmetic differences. Todd even stated in the German interview (between about 9:30 to 9:45) that any quests differences due to your character's race, will be "more flavor, rather than locking you off from one thing or another . . ." I have NEVER used a spreadsheet to create my character, I just picked the traits that fit her (race, gender, birth sign, and attribute point spread), and play the game . . . accepting her inherent limitations.