If my character get's to powerful, I get bored.

I found it odd in Skyrim that there were smiths, enchanters, and alchemists that spent their entire lives learning their trade and in the matter of a few weeks (game time) I've mastered them all. I would prefer, you can only master a couple of things, and you rely on your companions/settlers to make up for the skills you lack.. Like in FONV, I always found it weird that I just couldn't ask Veronica to make something for me.

You would miss out on a lot of the game if you go without companions the entire game or went through the whole game with the same companion plus Codsworth or Dogmeat.

Needing to take a different companion because you need a different skill set is part of the fun.

Options or Choices?

If you can't be a jack of all trades then you have to make choices and do things differently.

Playing a jack of trades who needs no one will cause you to miss out on a lot of the game.

Hopefully there will be options available to fit both styles of play.

If not a console command or a mod will take care of it.

FO3 was a perk every level and with no skills anymore you will need to put some of those perks towards skill perks.

It took two levels to increase a skill to the next threshold with a few skill points left over.

Now you can do it with a single perk.

I figure if you put all your even level perks in to a skill perks and all your odd level perks in to other perks, the advancement will basically be the same as in FONV.

I think that regardless of being able to max out everything or not, we'll be able to become OP like we could in every other Bethesda RPG. And I care only to the extent that I would prefer to max out everything (or everything I want to max at least) over merely being powerful.

No, personally I feel that you should have to specialise in 2 or 3 skills or be proficient in all but master of none.

With the removal of skills hopefully perks come along more often, we will just have to wait and see on release, and there is no harm in speculating until the fateful day.

There should not be the option for that. Stat upgrades should be rare as hen's teeth, and skill upgrades should come at the expense of each other, not simply push each other back a few levels... They should not come at all. Making the choices for the PC should be a life commitment for them, not a lunch selection.

Maybe I want to be a Genius Lightning Bruiser/Badass Bookworm/etc who needs no one though

What does having companions add btw ? I never used any and I don't feel like I missed out tbh

The only companions I've used in Bethesda's games have been Dogmeat and Fawkes in Fallout 3 and Serana in Skyrim. I liked Serana enough to keep her around after wrapping up Dawnguard, I liked Dogmeat a lot, and I used Fawkes because he kept the bullet sponges Broken Steel added in check.

In New Vegas I used all the companions, and I thought they were all fantastic (in terms of stories and personalities). Wasn't too big a fan of Rex, though. Poor guy just couldn't hold a candle to Dogmeat or ED-E.

Edit: As for the topic, I vote yes. If this was an RPG where we'd be making and managing a team of characters I'd be more okay with no ability to be a polymath, but I don't see that happening. Also, I fail to see how letting it be a thing is detrimental to the people who won't use it.

I voted no. I believe we should just specialize in specific fields like guns, speech and lockpick.

Without skills and having perks, I don't see being a "Jack of all" to even be an issue. Take the perks you want, play the way you want...All gravy.

I voted yes, but it should be hard. Not because, I personally will probably try to get most 'skill' perks as high as possible, but because to deny some the ability to max their 'skills'/stats limits player freedom. They should just make it challenging, or at least slow down some elements of the game to achieve the said perfection. The difference is 'freedom to' (a yes) versus 'freedom from' (a no), imho. I do prefer trying to do as much as I can in one play through and then decide if I want to play it in a specific style or for a specific goal. I have played FO3 and FNV three times each, trying to experience the games as much as possible and have put in over 1,000 hrs in one game of Skyrim.

No. Too many games offer this and the trade-off, becoming OP far too early, isn't worth it to me.

That doesn't mean that the game should offer, or allow that.

(Yes, that means that it should refuse players that freedom. No RPG should be obligated to allow a PC that unbalances it, or impairs its presentation and gameplay.)

That's why, I believe, if you want to get maxed out, you better be prepared to grind a bit. But it shouldn't be denied, just because. At least the 'skill' perks, should be attainable, I could give a care less about maxed SPECIAL.

It's discussions like this that makes me glad not to be on gamesas's PR team.

Having a master of all stats ruins RP because you aren't being limited in what you play.

Having a roughly-defined backstory ruins RP because you are being limited in what you play.

How is that not roleplaying? [IE. playing the role.]

I would consider not having a roughly-defined backstory as ruining RP because you have no idea what role to play; and neither does the game have an idea of it, or how to react to it.

Dredge up one of the (multiple) complaint threads about the PC being married, having a kid, being a Veteran, etc. Gist is, as far as I can tell, "I CAN'T PLAY WHATEVER I WANT TO PLAY AS!" Raider, Talon Merc, general sociopath who would never settle down, all now invalid because of the semi-defined backstory.

And no, apparantly the "your life is ruined and that can cause you to go off the deep end and be any of those things" shtick isn't a good compromise.

That's my problem as well, too limited due to voiced Protag, background, lack of skills, speech wheel, not big enough map, or potential problems with modding, but you have to be limited from being a Jack-of-all-trades. Contradictions abound.

An RPG that touts player freedom shouldn't refuse any reasonably possible option. Being OP "impairing" presentation or gameplay is subjective, and unbalance in that case would be my fault, and I wouldn't mind it because I don't want balance.

Again, don't want it, don't take it. What other players do in their single player game isn't your problem nor your business.

Of course it should.

(And the designers do want balance.)

If someone wants to mod the game to their liking, and if that's not prohibited buy the EULA, then that's fine ~of course; but the official release should be a well put together game without serious balance and servility issues.

*Personally though; If it were me, the game would be designed with anti-tampering routines...

Like on the fly point checks to detect if the PC's stats and skill levels are impossible to make without cheating.

(And CRC checks to invalidate hex edited save game files.)

Whenever I play Fallout games I like to have one character that I use to eventually unlock each location and explore everything (as it's easy to forget and overlook quests/locations when you're restarting a new character everytime you want to do something different) I don't want to have to make a checklist of things to do for each playthrough. That being said, this character generally takes 175+ hours to fully max out which makes reaching that level take quite a bit of dedication. In the meantime I generally do multiple playthroughs as solely playing that character can get a bit tedious.

As a solution for those who don't want this playthrough why not just offer a character trait like ¨Logan's Loophole¨ (limit max level to 30) for the people who don't want to be a jack of all trades and leave the option open to the players?

Theres no point in taking away player options when the game can easily offer both experiences to make a wider audience happy.

No MOAT, kills replay value and choices/consequences. What is the point of choice, if I can get everything.

I'm just saying.

And companions did have their problems.

They have been getting better.

There how ever have been some great companion mods.

Try the Willow mod for Fallout New Vegas.

It is one of the best.

Yeah but at that point what's the point of the barter skill or even caps with console commands?

FNV did it right with having who you side with be the big reason to replay, and unless you want to wait until you've played the game for a super long time to do any quests ¨getting everything¨ isn't necessarily going to make a big difference. That is, if you choose to play that way.