Good thing this isn't real life. People in real life aren't born in a prison without ever touching somthing they may or may not be skilled at. We are not Chauncey the Gardener, born then let out of our prison/confinement to become a god in a year. If its in your character's arc to change, then thats fine RPing, but doing everything with one character just because its practical is not RPing, unless your RPing a JOATs. This is even more reason to have attributes. A total idiot will not be good at casting spells, no matter if he wants to, or not. real choices with consequences who define who and what you are. It used to be one of the best parts of an RPG, but newbs these days apparantly just want their instant headshotz, they dont want to have to create a new character.

No I don't. Where in the world did you get that from? I happen to take people at their word, until they give me reason not to anymore.

I'll admit that I'm very direct and I tend to take things very literally . . . both are because I have language disabilities, from having suffered a severe head injury when I was very young, which destroyed much of the left side of my brain. Writing is VERY difficult for me, because I cannot even think in words. I do the best I can, but what I write often falls short of what I am trying to express, so I am misunderstood a LOT and people like you who don't know me jump to totally false conclusions about me. And that is very hurtful. Since you didn't quote me, I have no idea what I wrote that gave your that impression of me. So I don't know how to respond in a way that might clarify what I was trying to say.


No it isn't. Again, what makes you think I cannot conceive something like that? Having language disabilities doesn't mean that I'm stupid. I was quoting Todd, and gave HIS reason behind getting rid of Classes. My take on the reason why people didn't like Classes (and Birthsigns) is because a bad character build results in limitations on your character. You don't have to spend much time here to see that any time anyone even suggests that player characters should have some limits (or ANY kind of inherent weakness) a LOT of people post that imposing limits is a HORRIBLE idea. There is a very vocal group here that will all chime in whenever any character limitations are suggested. That is a fact . . . not something that I'm imagining or "assuming" to be the case. If enough people complain about something that they don't personally like, it tends to get changed in the next game. Much of the way that Oblivion was simplified from what we had in Morrowind was a direct result of people complaining.

Morrowind was my first real RPG, and I was TERRIBLE at playing it at first . . . I had no clue how to make a decent character, but I just kept working at it until I figured it out. That game had a pretty steep learning curve for anyone new to RPGs, but that didn't make me like the game less . . . it made me like it more. My belief is that, if a TES game ever gets to the place where the game is NOT hard for anyone new to the series, that that game fails as a TES RPG. One of the things that made Morrowind so attractive to me was the fact that you COULD mess up your character build . . . that showed that we actually had the freedom to make mistakes . . . and that my mistakes would impact my game play . . . for quite a while. I personally want a RPG to give me negative consequences when I mess up.


Why do people here keep bringing up Oblivion's less-than-perfect way of handling attributes, as a counter argument for my points? I have clearly stated in my last reply in this thread: "Attributes were not perfect in Oblivion (they were better in Fallout 3), so there is a lot of room for improvement . . . which is why their weaknesses in OB is not a valid argument for just removing them.

If attributes were actually done as attributes (instead of being more like skills), that would be a good first step. (Attribute definition: "a property, quality, or feature belonging to or representative of a person or thing.") If Attributes were done in a way that was inherent to your character (initial character build attribute points would only rarely increase) , , , AND if an Attribute would truly limit your ability to increase the related skill, then character builds would remain truly unique. You would decide on what strengths and weaknesses that you wanted your character to have at the beginning of the game . . . by the distribution of points in the Attributes. These Inherent strengths and weaknesses would determine your initial skill points AND how much each skill could be increased. To compliment this, leveling up should be slow . . . NOT fast. "

I really don't know how to make this any clearer.

I don't think of it as "dumbed down" or "streamlined" just different from what it was before (I voted streamlined though because "dumbed down" just sounds insulting to the great game I think it will be). From what I can tell I don't mind most of the changes either and I like almost all the additions too. I'll buy it and if I don't like it I don't like it :shrug: I honestly can't imagine a TES game that I wouldn't like no matter what they change because they're all unique in their own way and they always have that special TES something that I love. I'm not going to [censored] and moan about a freakin vidya game not being exactly I want it to be cause that's never existed, there's always going to be something I don't like and then I'll just change it with mods and if it can't be modded I'll get over it like a normal person would because you know..it's a game.

Bethesda isn't trying to dumb down the game, they're trying to streamline it. However, streamlining it could involve dumbing it down. I personally agree with everything you said, I'm nervous but sure that it will be a great game. I am a little bit worried about attributes being removed, I feel as though with only health, fatigue and magicka to level up you could end up with certain characters being extremely similar, for instance, thieves should have less health than warriors, but since they both need health and fatigue, in Skyrim it seems they would have the same amount of health/fatigue. I'm also not too happy about birthsigns being removed, that is futher reducing the differences. My last worry is that some of the skills may have dissapeared. I'm already worried with attributes, but now I'm afraid Athletics and Acrobatics may have been removed. It doesn't seem that important, but if everyone moves at the same speed and jumps the same height I'm of the opinion its going to svck. That may sound a little pessimistic about Skyrim, but I think Bethesda has realized these possible problems and will have dealt with them, so I'm not too worried. But everything else looks amazing about Skyrim, so I'm extremely amped.

Now I just say it out right, I don't care how it goes for everybody, but if you base your roleplay on attributes, you're doing it wrong.
Again, it should go the other way around, you form your stats to your selected role. So if you want to play a big burly guy, then yes you have to put a lot into the one-handed or two-handed skill, preferably the later (how convenient it's been more generalized :teehee: ).
Not the same? What did strength do anyway? Makes you better at hitting things, and carry more stuff. So raise your weapon skill and get the encumbrance perk (how convenient, hand-to-hand is removed :teehee:). Want to have just brute strenght, without any skill? Raise the skill, don't pick the perks.
There, just adjust to the system...

You can't.

I am comming to the conclusion that we will have to see (as in play) Skyrim before the true consequences of these choices becomes evident. Ideas can sound good to a couple of people on paper, but when the idea is actually put into practice, it turns into a disaster.

How can you have replayability of the previous games with only 10(maybe 20) different starting options? Where is the replayability when only the same small set of spells is available each game? How can one character distinguish themselves from others of the race (stronger, smarter, quicker, and so on)? Why is my strength always lower than that other guy despite being a melee oriented character while the other is a mage? Where is the depth that will be me and many other people comming back? I can see that there is no choice at this point as to which platfrom to buy unless they are able to work something out with mods on consoles.

I like the idea of attributes being dynamic... I hate D&D's system of locking in your attributes before level 1.

People change throughout their lives. Theodore Roosevelt was born weak, thin, clumsy, and slow. He became the strongest, fastest, and toughest president the U.S. has ever had!

And the poster above me does not quite seem to grasp the concept of what they are doing with Skyrim's skills and perks.

In Skyrim, the mage is less likely to be stronger than the warrior: It's possible to increase Strength each time in Oblivion or Morrowind, even if you never use any melee skills. This won't be possible in Skyrim.

Here, it's taking the natural approach: The way to get tougher is to take hits and toughen up. The way to get stronger is to bash skulls in.
And the spells in Skyrim will be just as potent and varied as they were in past games, if not moreso, by merging and folding them together in unique combinations, even if there are fewer actual "Spells" (Is there really a difference between Fireball and Enemies Explode, aside from maginitude?)

I was bothered by past TES games inability to have my spells scale with my skill.

k but see my brute for instance is an idiot so I now have to play him without weapon significant skills, and since H2H is gone what am I SOL?

People have inherent strenghts and weaknesses, things they are predisposed to and things they are not, and their inherent advantages/disadvantages make them more adept or inept and acquiring skills :shrug: as that person refines and dedicates themselves to a particular aspect advantages and disadvantages change and the cycle starts again.

based on Todd saying its easier to jump from Skill set to skill set, faster leveling, and all skills being able to reach one hundred, that notion goes out the window unless enforced by the players.

and not everyone roleplays, hell I didnt in Daggerfall and Morrowind initially but I was able to gauge what I can face without a problem and what I can't


Perks are not disadvantagous that would cases a shi*storm :shrug: so meh


just going on the info we got, didnt say we need classes, or Skyrim svcks......its like I have to put a disclaimer all the time now

^^^ this

We can't actually criticize or evaluate game before it is out.
Yes it may seem, that TES5 role system will be worse than in TES3, but right now we have no idea how character creation will work
Because birthsign removal is confirmed, but there is no info regarding full process
Like in TES2, there were optional choices for advanced players (advantages/disadvantages and reputation), maybe something like that will be also in Skyrim
And after it we will be wondering how we could rant about system that actually turned out so great.
Maybe wishful thinking, maybe not, but lets all keep in mind that we have no idea about full system, only about few changes.

I agree, I am liking what I have seen so far for TES5, but if it came down to turning it into another DA2 I would gag.....lol That game was the worst I have seen in a while.

Sorry to burst the proverbial bubble but yes, we can criticize it all we want. I know full well I don't like the idea of dragon shouts because they seem like they're shoehorning magic into every character. I can make that decision without ever touching the game.
Some people just don't like the idea of X and know they don't like it :shrug:

We can criticize the idea or concept, but not game or system itself.
And regarding putting magic in every character- must agree, but I personally consider shouts like greater/lesser powers only in better package

If the concept is part of the game or system then we are also criticizing the game. I didn't like having greater powers either >.< it was pretty much the same deal. Good thing we can just ignore them though.

No read it carefully.. the newbs REACTION to birthsigns was simply to reroll. They kept PLAYING. But the devs didnt like how that worked. It was the DEVS not the newbs that caused the change.

Also on birthsigns.... in the new mag we find they didnt kill them they just recombobulated them. They are doomstones now and you pick them during the game .. and can change your pick.

..............that was a misinterpretation Mane..go check the thread.....not to mention how much sense that does not make...DOOMSTONES are back from Oblivion, not Birthsigns, the Constallations are in....the skill screen where perks are.....

I dont care what you call them the ability to get 13 different abilties much akin to birthsigns are in and you can swap around... Thats what I was expectinbg tho I was expecting quest perks doomstones will handle it just as well.

And it was becasue of the newbs that it was changed.

Birthsigns were a constellation you were born under and you could be born under only one.
Not picked from 13 rocks you find in your travels at your whim, they are not birthsigns....

So you admit they are simply changing/moving things rather than simply removing them.

Just like attribite ---> Perks.


So in other words, its not getting streamlined OR dumbed down.

I never said anything about streamlining or dumbing down. or attributes/perks
They are not merely "changed" and I don't see where I admitted to that at all because I stated they are completely different things. Birthsigns are simply not there, you do not pick a birthsign that you are born under. You pick powers from rocks.
Congratulations it's a fail.

Agreed, with all the stuff they are adding and fixing I can't see how anyone could assume they are "dumbing down". Didn't see an option to vote for that though so, whatever......

As long as Skyrim provides the lattitude that Oblivion does, I have no concerns. Riding dragons... too easy of a game... etc etc etc.... The modders will take off from where the developers stop. Remember OOO? Remember flying a dragon? It will happen with creativity as long as the game empowers the modder.

actually I would say Streamlined/dumbed down because so called Attributes to perks which makes no sense is streamlining/dumbing down

and so is moving birthsign weaknesses/strenghts and powers to freaking rocks streamlining/dumbing down.


both signs and stones were in Oblivion...now just stones :bonk:



again just because they are adding things don't mean those things added make up for things removed......so get your heads out of whats being added, no one is complaining about whats being added, thats a concensus that so far whats added is good, whats taken away is not.

No because it wasnt just the newbs that reacted that way. We all did. It was the devs who didnt like that reaction.

1. Perks and 3Stats do the same stuff as Attributes - Todd/Pete. Oh wait, they do the same stuff and more. When did attributes result in bleeding, sniper bullet time, armor ignore, and 10x dagger backstab damage?

2. Minor streamlining - they put BSs into the stones. They don't last 120 sec, they are permanent and give special powers.


You simply obtain them through different methods. Infact I'd say its the opposite of dumbing down since getting your BS is harder. You have to go find them instead of click an easy mode newbie grocery-list at the starting :facepalm: Looks like the casual newbs will be upset that Birth-signs are tougher to get now.