Since I have my own ideas about this topic, and Aradal's post has inspired me, I will make my topic of discussion here. See the quote for the source.



So on that note, here are my balancing suggestions for the classes. Tell me what you guys think about them.

Warrior

-Massive amounts of health and incredible melee damage
-"Realistic armor" i.e. wearing a heavy armor made of huge plates of metal covering every inch of your body should give the specialized warrior incredible endurance to attacks
-The highest stamina of all the archetypes
-The ability to bash locks and intimidate enemies and merchants alike <perfect for perks

Mage

-Huge hit to magickal efficiency when wearing any armor
-Lowest stamina of all the archetypes (they should have to stay and fight with their powers without the ability to run away easily - no cowards among mages, I say)
-The specialized mage should keep the ability to do what other archetypes can do, using magic, but at the cost of bonuses like Sneak, Alchemy, Heavy/Light Armor, Speechcraft, and all other combat skills

Thief

-High sneak attack bonuses, with sneak kill moves
-Mastery of the bow
-Middle amount of stamina between the warrior and the mage, to allow fluid combat movement and evasion, but to a limited extent
-The specialized Thief has the unique ability to get past locked things quietly, charm merchants and possible foes, and to create potions/poisons that give him boosts in combat or in general
-The specialized Thief should also not be able to survive in open combat for long, and must rely on escape, potions, and ranged weaponry to survive

*Keep in mind everything I've proposed about the balancing of the archetypes is solely based around the skills each archetype will include in it's constellation in TES V*

An interesting read, thank you for your thoughts.

I agree with the part about warriors gaining bash and intimidation, those would even the playing field, perhaps enough to call it balanced.

On some other areas, I don't necessarily agree, but if Bethesda did everything you said, I would be content.

Yeah but anyone with enough strength can bash a lock.

In TES, even warrior can cast spells. I don't really want TES to become a "tank/thieves/mages each with their own "special" power" game like Dragon Age.

@Koldunic - Read the last line of my OP, please. I'm referring to the balance of the archetypes, their skills, and the pure characters possible from each archetype.

@Aradal - Well, the thing to keep in mind is that this is how the "pure" versions of each archetype should work in Skyrim, not bearing in mind the obvious fact that most players will never use ONLY the skills from one constellation. A Warrior may want Restoration or Alchemy skill, a Mage may want a 1H weapon, a Thief may want some Illusion skill, etc.

I don't really think the intimidate option would work, though, because I don't really know what skill would govern the perk for it. I mean, it makes sense for Speechcraft to govern it, but that's from a different archetype, so it wouldn't be completely pure. :shrug:

As for the skills themselves, based on the best ideas we have about what each constellation will include, I'd say a pure character of any archetype will have a balanced skillset based on what Bethesda has given them.

For reference, this is the breakdown of the skills as close as we can get from the evidence so far:

Warrior - 1H, 2H, Smithing, Block*, Heavy Armor*, and H2H* (*Unconfirmed, but most likely)

Mage - Enchanting, Destruction, Restoration, Illusion, Alteration, and Conjuration (All confirmed)

Thief - Alchemy, Speechcraft, Sneak, Light Armor*, Marksman/Archery*, Security* (*Unconfirmed, but most likely)

Any thoughts on how to improve each archetype? Or perks that would be great for a specific skill?

Marksman is pretty much in. I cant imagine them trying to put it as 2H

I don't see how exciting Armor could be as a skill. What defining perks would make armor worthy to be a skill? Yay, more damage resistance.....

Hand to Hand should be folded into one of the combat skills.

A new skill for warriors could be Tactics. That solves the Intimidation problem Much more exciting

The Thief looks great, Alchemy is a great boon to them whilst balancing Mages out

A final note before I sleep, I recognize of course that most people won't play pure builds. I just want to ensure that there's some balance among the skill sets so that its actually WORTH it in the first place

About Marksman, I said unconfirmed because the name could be different. My bad. Security could be Lockpicking, and H2H could be Unarmed or something, and Sneak might be Stealth for all we know. Just not confirmed on those names yet.

The Armor skills will probably stay, but I agree that they could be pretty pathetic on the perk side of things.

As for H2H, I would prefer if it was renamed Unarmed or Martial Arts. There are real lore-based martial arts in Elsweyr, so why not be able to study them or do something like them? The perks for it would be amazing. And the finishing moves? Awesome.

Tactics would be great, but then you'd have to remove a skill, since there will only be 6 per archetype. I would be fine with the removal of Block to add Tactics. That would be perfect, since I think Block is a stupid skill. In my imitation of Todd Howard, "Who doesn't block in combat?". I mean, how do you "get better" at blocking? You pretty much either block the attack....or not..... :shrug:

The Thief will be almost perfect, as will the Mage. I just hope they go with some better improvements for the Warrior's skills.

Btw, did you see my response in your thread about 1H and 2H? I think that sums up why those skills give the Warrior skillset a boost. But I think Block should go in favor of tactics.

Blocking is a skill because there are interesting perks attached to it. Quoting the article from Gameinformer called "Skyrim: Building better combat":

"Warriors who prefer the sword-and-shield approach can increase their defensive capabilities with shield perks that give them elemental protection from spells".

Bashing chests open would be good for any arch type. They could also just add more keys around. It's more realistic if there is a key for most every lock.

The way to look at the arch types is how they relate to gameplay style. The warrior is combat, the thief is stealth and exploration, and the mage is both.

Yeah, I know, I read the article. That still doesn't excuse the fact that the concept of Block as a skill is stupid. I mean, I understand the possibility of training with a shield, but I don't see how that changes how you use it over time, or the effect it has. Think about it this way - It doesn't make sense to change the amount of damage done to you because your "skill" with Blocking went up. If you block a sword strike, you blocked it, and the shield took the blow for you, there should be no difference in that outcome between level 1 and level 100. Another example, blocking arrows in Oblivion "reduced the damage done by 50%". Wtf? If I block an arrow, and it's stuck in my shield, then it didn't hit me, so why did I take any damage??? The same goes for melee weapons. If you manage to successfully time your block to meet an enemy's melee strike or arrow, you should be protected from damage, but the shield should take damage. Not only is that more realistic, but it makes combat more dynamic, more challenging, and ultimately more fun.

As for blocking with your weapon or your arms, then I would understand taking some damage, and then you obviously couldn't stop arrows from hitting you. But as for using an actual shield, so far TES has failed at having that make sense.

Also, I understand the bonuses for Block from Oblivion, as I got them all for each character. But it still never made since as a specialization. It made it impossible to bash an enemy with your shield until you were a certain level, as if reaching that level suddenly granted you the knowledge of how to move you arm forward quickly while holding your shield up. :confused:



Anyway, I digress from my rant about the silliness of the Block skill in the past. About Skyrim's implementation of shield use, I would have to say it is nice to see some more creative perks being put into play, but to be honest, that "elemental protection perk" from the article just doesn't make sense. How exactly do you get the ability to block an elemental attack by having blocked some melee strikes, which made your level go up? I get that type of perk for a magic user, maybe for Restoration or Alteration as a shielding perk. But for Block? There's no logic as to why practicing with a shield would grant you elemental protection from spells. It would makes sense if the shield itself is enchanted with that protection, or if the user of the shield is skilled with Alteration enough to shield himself from elemental spells.

Anyway, I just can't think of many practical applications for perks of the Block skill. If you or anyone else can, please recommend some.

I totally understand the yearn for balance among the three archetypes, and I agree with the stuff about Mages having better magic power but worse stamina/ health and warriors having more health and stamina, to a point. the fact that classes are gone means this 'balancing' is pretty much useless. you want to tote a giant axe, but still be able to pick locks? Then invest in alteration or security (assuming its still its own skill). you wanna be a tank mage? Take a hit to your overall magicka in order for more health, and rock some heavy armor. I don't think making all 'pure' playstyles able to do the same stuff is a good fix. a warrior, imo, shouldn't be able to get better deals from a merchant. he may be able to scare npcs in dialog (think mass effect intimidation), but I think bartering should be kept for a more guile-oriented player. same goes with lockpicking. magic can do it all because magic is, well, magic. Versatility is its greatest asset. But the downfall of classes are obvious. warriors aren't versatile, their made for combat, and combat only. Mages have to rely on limited magicka as the source of their power, along with a general lack of closer combat efficiency, and stealth players are generally at a huge disadvantage if their position is compromised. This gives playstyles their flavor, and making all 'pure' styles equal by means of being identical is not how I want TES to do it.

I don't think the classes or archetypes should be identical, but archetype flavored alternatives to certain situations should be available.

Overall though, I think that they really just have to try their best to ensure all specialization combos are viable at all stages of play. Ideally, there should never be a situation where you think, "wow, I totally gimped my character by choosing this set of abilities". Or "wow, these abilities were great when I was low level, but now that I am fighting stronger enemies they are worthless."

At the same time, I hope they veer away a bit from allowing every player to be some godly jack of all trades, master of everything-one man swiss army knife. When you think about it, someone who was practiced their craft exclusively, to the expense of other things should generally be better at it than someone who has dabbled here and there, and spread themselves thin as far as what they are learning.

The simplest example of the way it should be I think is with Final Fantasy's old school white mage, black mage, red mage, and fighter. The red mage was generally passable as a fighter, but not as sturdy, and could cast black and white magic, but could not perform any of those functions at the same level of power or ability as a pure fighter, black mage, or white mage mage.

I'm not advocating any kind of removal of flavor from the game. As I've stated many times, this isn't concerning the obvious point that most players will use skills from multiple archetypes for one character. I'm talking about the concept of playing as a pure, single archetype, and actually having it pay off as a viable solution. The point being that, according to the lore, the 3 main archetypes are common and are the basis for many great heroes, as well as being the "style" of gameplay of choice for many, many TES players. So, from that standpoint, I think it really IS important to ensure that the archetypes can stand alone. Because if we get to that point, any mixing and matching a player does will be assured to improve the "flavor" of their character, while still allowing them the option to be as pure or as mixed as possible, and still have a great gameplay experience.



As I said above, we should have the option to start from one archetype and branch out from there. I for one almost always play a mixed character, but just knowing that there is a pure type available that dominates, or one that just svcks compared to most other types, is actually pretty sad. It does ruin the game experience and loses replayability for me if I know that I can't go through the game and have a fun time as absolutely ANY archetype because of imbalanced design. The point is that the archetypes are the pillars of character design in TES. This is even more evident than ever with Skyrim's constellation skillsets being the 3 archetypes. With that in mind, I'd like to see them all done to the best possible extent. Luckily, I've already seen a lot of evidence that points to Bethesda already taking the required steps to make that so.

I agree on this.
There should be room for hybrids, you should be able to play how you like.
Besides, balance is overrated and there is no such thing as overpowered.

You should probably read my OP and the subsequent threads. There's some interesting content. Like the point of the thread. Go ahead, check it out.

The archetypes do stand alone perfectly fine, though. each archetype has its strengths and weaknesses. you're totally right, the warrior does suffer from a lack of versatility, but it doesn't shy away from that... Thats why the specialization is combat and not, say, strength. the thief is the stealth archetype, and suffers from a lack of survivability if he's not hidden. but he's also best at avoiding confrontation, and looting places (I always thought it would be best if the thief was only available lockpicker due to the fact he doesnt often loot corpses, because he avoids fighting). the mage is the most versatile, and arguably has the most potential for pure power, but also suffers from a distinct lack of survivability, as well as having to manage magicka on top of everything, limiting what they can do at one time. I believe the general archetypes are in fact, balanced. they can all stand alone in the game. you don't ever need to pick any locks, nor do you need to barter to get good deals, those are perks for playing a certain way, and if you choose to not pursue those abilities, you live with those consequences.

Besides, previous games encouraged you to play with a single specialization because of bonuses to skills to start... Without classes, there isn't a need to encourage pure or hybrid play. so you do what you want, and you live with what you choose.

lol i rarely ever play a "pure" character i usually play a combo of all three with a focus on one main arch type. i usually start off with an assassin that is really good with a bow, is good at sword combat (will dual wield swords in skyrim), and uses magic as support.

but i see your point with the pure characters and could agree with it.

I very much agree that they are balanced for the most part coming from Oblivion, but as for how that could be improved upon, Aradal made some good points about Warrior types and the possible benefits that could be added to the Combat skill archetype, such as the suggestion of Tactics as an additional skill, or perhaps even something along those lines as perks for combat-based skills.

As for my suggestions, I think the best new one I have would be the improvement of the Block skill to actually be more closely linked to the blocking method used, and the incoming attack. Meaning, I'd like to see a little more realism in the blocking system so that melee combat isn't just number balancing between attack and defense, in the same way combat won't be a slash and hack fest anymore. Just a simple improvement in design, but it would go a long way as far as improving the melee combat in general, and it would make playing a close-combat Warrior more fun, no matter if you're pure or mixed.

As for the armor skills, I think they're fine, but they could do with some serious improvement in the perks. OB's armor skill perks were barely justifiable, and they needed to be extrapolated upon greatly.

Yeah I agree. although it bothered me in oblivion, that once you were a master on your respective armor skill, it mirrored a master of the other one... Which meant you basically chose which armor style you looked better. armor perks are gunna be hard to make, and so will block... But I think bgs will have it under control. as for making close more fun, I'm all for that... I couldn't even play a pure combat type in oblivion because combat itself was sooo boring lol.

First, I'm going to crack this nut because it will help refine it to a more balanced build. I'm not doing this to be an ass or some really devoted fan.
I fully agreed with the quote in the original post.



You can't put Combat on steroids or this will be like Blizzard trying to fix PvP imbalances among different classes. Giving warriors the ability to use pick perks in the 2 handed tree to do more and more damage or the option to spec in Block to allow them to take more intense beatings would allow the player the ability to choose their combat preferences (either offensively or defensively). If you let them have tons of health and stamina while allowing them to smash everyone's face in with any weapon they choose, it will just turn TES into WoW, where people storm the forums to whine about how "THESE GUYZ ARE SO OP!" and "these guys" will change with each new release of a TES game.

Bashing locks wouldn't be so bad, but intimidating merchants shouldn't be in game, players from other Arch-types rely on Combat skills (like 1 or 2 handed weapons), so it's okay for a Combat oriented player to practice their Speechcraft and Mercantile.



This just sounds like an obscene nerf to Magic characters. The way Oblivion dealt with spell efficiency was perfect: If you spend time training an armor skill, you learn how to do better with magic while wearing that armor, so it gave Magic characters incentive to get pummeled for a while, their spell efficiency would improve from taking the beatings. The stamina penalty makes perfect sense; mages spend most of their time studying magic, so they don't run around too often. And the last part further reinforces the magic nerf, forcing players to only rely on magic isn't how any TES game was designed, so penalizing magic characters would just force players from magic all together.



This is already pretty good, but like I said, being charming should not be limited to one Arch-type, and everyone was able to pick locks without being caught, they just had to be careful if their sneak was low.

And I think it's that type of point that makes the need for work on the Combat skills that much more necessary. As I said in another thread to Aradal, it's already great how they've handled Blade and Blunt becoming 1H and 2H. Here, let me find it.....

As for the reasoning about the Warrior having a "bloated" skillset in Skyrim.....I think you're missing the point of the change to 1H and 2H. To be fair, the change from Blade and Blunt to 1H and 2H skills doesn't reduce the skill count, but it does simplify the skill concepts themselves, at least. Yes, most people use only one type, but with perks unique to 1H or 2H, there will be incentive to use both based on the combat situation. In Oblivion, without perks, and with only Blade and Blunt, it was bloated. In OB, why would I put down one of my perfectly good swords to attack something with a mace or axe? But in Skyrim we'll have better reasons to use a claymore or 2H axe or warhammer because of the perks associated with the 2H skill. The same goes for the 1H skill, as well. I think Bethesda's got it right on that one, giving a "Warrior" double the combat options of the other 2 archetypes(i.e. Mage with magic and Thief with bow). ***Also, the secret bonus of making the change to 1H and 2H is that Bethesda can now add polearms/halberds/spears to the game in the 2H skill, thus keeping only 2 melee weapon skills, while actually adding more weaponry to the Warrior's arsenal.
They are trending towards the complete removal of any skills that "bloat" a character's skillset. Bethesda ditched Athletics and Acrobatics, removed Mysticism as a skill, and will combine Speechcraft and Mercantile. This is a great thing imo, and I'm excited to see how it will work.

That tells me the combat skills should be much better organized, and I can't wait to learn more about them.

Oh I couldn't agree more, except the whole spear thing... Thats just wishful thinking at this point lol. the skills will be much better from an organizational standpoint, and with the addition of perks, weapons will feel much more unique when compared to one another. the only part of the combat system I'm scared of is how the actual mechanics go... I don't want another 'slash slash slash block slash slash' system. with finishing moves, and possible combat maneuvers via perks, I'm not afraid as much as cautious lol. From what I've read it sounds more visceral, but I need to play it, or at the very least, see it, before I can make any kind of judgement.

While I'm impressed by your enthusiasm, I think you were one of the unfortunate ones who forgot to read my last little "fine print" sentence that you so handily quoted. I said in it that I based my balancing not solely around the archetypes as playstyles, but also around each archetype constellation and the skill tree for each that is going to be seen in Skyrim. Your additions about limiting things to certain archetypes has nothing to do with what I said. I was suggesting how each base archetype in the game could accomplish the same goals as another, without one having a distinct advantage over another for no apparent reason.

Examples: Should a heroic warrior be denied the ability to get his way when talking to friend or foe because he spends his time saving the day in battle instead of chatting with merchants and bards? Should a powerful mage be forced to go hire a lowly thief to break into a locked castle for him because his powers are not fitting for such tasks? Or should a cunning thief not be able to heal themselves and bleed to death in the dark of a dungeon without a mage to heal them?

The correct answer should be NO to all of the above. Each archetype's skillset is supposed to have all the essential ingredients for the adequate survival and success of the player character without needing the aid of another archetype's skills.

The ultimate idea is this: If Bethesda can't even make a game where we can be a single archetype and succeed with an enjoyable experience, what hope is there for a mixed character to be balanced and fun? And even worse, if Bethesda does neglect the pure PC's, does that mean they're now mandating that we all play as mixed characters? If either of those is the case, there is a gloomy future for TES games in the future. And based on the comments some people have been making, they seem to think those options are ok. I for one believe Bethesda has already done a lot of what I've proposed, which tells me they're going toward more options for the player, and less restriction to using certain skills and playing a certain way to succeed. And that is a damn good thing.

You call http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_4lrm97dBqNo/TUFlwb82vlI/AAAAAAAAAYs/J3KOH-Y0YDM/s1600/artofskyrim_008_elvenfemhalberd.jpg wishful thinking?? And in the video from GI you can see another concept art with the same weapon outlines.

That's not the only evidence either, Todd said "not in the traditional sense". He didn't say "no" for a reason.

Anyway, I don't really care if you don't believe that evidence, because I'm happy to. But, I am glad to see you understand my points and can actually discuss improvements instead of citing how my OP is wrong because people don't play "pure" characters, lol. It's crazy that so many people didn't get the point about balance for the sake of better gameplay for more people. Perhaps that's just too utilitarian for them to accept. Well, at least Bethesda thinks from a utilitarian perspective, because of course it makes them more money, after all. Happy fans and properly balanced gameplay = huge profit.

Haha yeah, the 'not in a traditional sense' coupled with the fact they never bothered to detail that spear is why I'm skeptical... Though I hope they are in, Cuz it'd be awesome. and like I said, as long as they all can't do everything I have no problem with the idea. I just don't want an orc warrior dual wielding a Mace and a lockpick lol.

I find pure characters to be boring a lot of the time. I hope the incentive to go pure isnt too much that hybrids lose out.