It seems like a good way to divide them. Oblivion's Blade and Blunt skills were pretty similar, since they both had 1-hand or 2-hand options, the same attacks, and same perks. 1-hand and 2-hand weapons will play differently so there'll be more of a reason to choose one skill or the other.

Axes aren't blunt anyway. They would be useless in real life.

Not useless, although if they were blunt, they'd call them "maces" or "hammers" instead of "axes".

The 1-hand / 2-hand distinction makes a better starting point than the blade/blunt division, although it's not perfect.

Another possible way of breaking it up would be by type of attack: stabbing, slashing, chopping. Using BOTH distinctions, and having a combination of one's weapon type and attack type affect combat, might work. You could take a shortsword, for example, and your character might be better at using it to slash, whereas another might be better at stabbing with it. Finding a nice Claymore would be of far more benefit to a 2-handed axe user who developed his or her chopping skills, than to a dagger-wielder who had learned stabbing.

At this stage, I'm pretty sure that Bethesda already has their system pretty well defined and is just ironing out the animations and details, so we're not going to see any drastic changes between now and November.

LOL they traded 6 for half a dozen.
Its more of the same.

Should have been 2H/1h/weapon skill (spear/blade/mace/hammer/etc.)

I'd prefer stabbing/puncturing, slashing/cutting, and crushing/blunt. I can't see the difference between a slash and a chop, and blunt is completely missing. If they were in as subskills/perks, gaining in 1H should automatically also gain for 2H. Each weapon would have values defining its puncture/slash/crush damage values (plus a whole lot of other ones). So:
Dagger - 60P 20S 0C / 1R 1B 5A
Sai - 70P 10S 0C / 1R 2B 4A
Shortsword - 50P 20S 10C / 3R 1B 4A
Longsword - 30P 50S 20C / 4R 2B 3A
Claymore - 10P 60S 30C / 6R 4B 1A (2 handed)
Falchion - 0P 50S 30C / 4R 1B 2A (Half sword half axe)
Axe - 0P 40S 40C / 2R 1B 4A
Battle Axe - 0P 50S 50C / 4R 3B 1A (2 handed)
Morning Star - 30P 0S 50C / 3R 2B 3A
Flail - 30P 0S 70C / 4R 0B 1A
Club - 0P 0S 60C / 2R 2B 3A
Mace - 0P 0S 80C / 3R 2B 2A
Buckler - 0P 0S 10C / 1R 3B 4A
Shield - 0P 0S 20C / 1R 6B 1A
Short Bow - (30P 30S 10C) / *R 0B *5A
War Bow - (35P 30S 15C) / *R 0B *4A
Long Bow - (40P 40S 20C) / *R 0B *3A
Crossbow - (30P 30S 25C) / 30R 0B *2A
Heavy Crossbow - (35P 35S 30C) / 50R 0B 1A

For the dagger:
60P = 60 Puncture base, damage applied when doing a puncture move, or a stab. Armor is VERY effective against stabs.
20S = 20 Slash base, damage applied when doing a slash move, or a cut. Armor offers some protection against cuts.
0C = 0 Crush base, damage applied when doing a crush move, for blunt. Crushing is very effective at reducing armor.
1R = 1 Reach base, how far can you reach with the weapon.
1B = 1 Block base, success rate in blocking/parrying, more important to have a high value against a crush move than a stab. 2H and shields as good.
5A = 5 Action base, meaning how quick the weapon is to use. You're faster with a dagger than a 2H claymore

For archery, which is its own skill, the damage values are held within the ammunition, then multiplied with the damage values of the weapon, then multiplied with the reach which is coming form how far you draw the string on a normal bow. The reload speed (action) shows worst case based on your draw time, but the heavy crossbow is special in that speed is fixed (as it uses mechanics to reload bolt rather than muscle).

I was kind of on the edge about this until I found out about the perk system. It adds a level of gameplay and immersion IMO that is really nice.
I'm not one for dumbing down game mechanics, cutting out skills, homogenization, etc, but the way they are doing it with the weapon skills with perks, it's nice. I approve.

Since we know that not all weapons have their perks under the skill they belong to, this is just as fine (and nonsensical) as the old system. Now the theory is that you practise the way your body moves with the weapon you use, and there is much more of a difference in stance and balance between one handed and two handed use of weapons, than there is between different one handed weapons.

I'm fine with what I've gathered about the mechanics thus far. Not the ideal, but nice enough for me.


This is interesting. I like. Plus I've always think that separate puncture/slash/crush values for each weapons are the most essential.


Somewhat related on that issue, here's a nice little discussion thread about those stuff and more (armors, etc.)
http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?t=529739

Agreed. If I'm a master with a blade, it's not going to hurt me too much to pick up a mace, but once I pick up a warhammer or claymore, that's a different story.

I think it's more a matter of weight,really.Of course single or double handed matters too but I'd prefer light,medium and heavy weapons in a sense of "genealization".

It works much better and feels much more TES when it's Longblade,Shortblade,Axe........Marksman though.

I'll have to try it out before I give my opinion.

If they have enough perks to specialize, I think it will be decent.