I think you'd have a point if you said someone without any stealth abilities shouldn't be able to complete the thieves guild, but dragons are a major part of the game and limiting them to only people that use either bows or destruction magic would just be boring. Yes, a fighter could just pick up a bow, but if I just played the game as a bow assassin I'm not going to want to do it again right away. I doubt that's the way they're making the game though.

Fighters could always use Dragon Shouts to damage their wings then go Melee when on ground.
No idea what magicians that don't use Destruction Magic or what assassins are gonna use when it's on the ground on the other hand.

^What he said

My thief character is skilled with daggers and stealth... why should i be forced to play how you want me to just so i can defeat the dragons, the "bosses" of the game? If i can't, then that is fail game design.

There are always mods for something like this!!!
:flamethrower:

Everyone seems to be forgetting that in order to use dragon shouts you need to absorb the soul of a dragon, by y'know, killing it first.

My character is skilled with speechcraft, restoration and block but doesn't use weapons nor combat spells because his religion forbids him. Why should I be forced to play how you want me to, just so I can defeat the dragons, the bosses of the game? If I can't then it's a fail game design.

/sigh

Lets look at this shall we? Beth likes to shout out things like "play however you want" "be who you want" and other nonsense, and then turns around and forces you into a niche of either spellslinging or arrow-shooting to accomplish something as important as grounding a dragon. And that's not even taking into account what you have to do after its on the ground, where both a mage and warrior would be at an advantage to a thief/rogue type character(mage would have shields, warrior has pure health and defense).

Also, to point out the difference between your post and mine: If you choose to play a pacifist character, that's your choice and you've made that decision. You made the decision knowing full well that you wouldn't be able to defeat enemies like a combative character would. My character is not a pacifist though, he just svcks with a bow and has no talent for destruction magic. So sure, i could "eventually" beat a dragon with my horrible marksmanship(assuming i don't run out of arrows beforehand), but designing an encounter as important as dragons are in skyrim to screw over a large portion of characters is ridiculously stupid.

note: I'm not saying its impossible for stealthy characters/melee characters to kill dragons. I know good and well that i could slowly whittle away at their health until it dies, but just because i can does not mean the designers should let that be their reason for not implementing more melee friendly means to fight them.

"So guys, dragons are really going to svck for players unskilled in destruction/marksmanship, you guys think we should do something to help them?"
"Lol, no way, they can just pick up a bow and shoot it" /sigh

Meh, oh well. In some demo review or something it mentioned pete or w/e jumping on the dragons back to wrestle it to the ground, hopefully that will make it a bit easier, who knows.

Bethesda has provided us with a means to kill the dragons, regardless if it is a thief, mage, warrior. I understand a thief would be a little harder but poisoned weapons and elemental/invisibility potions can be very effective once the dragon is on the ground. However, you should know as well as everyone else is you can be what you want to be by using archery, destruction or whatever else you want to do.

By the way, in one of the gameplay videos where Todd reaches that temple on some mountain he hits the dragon with maybe two arrows, definitely not enough to damage the wings to bring it down, yet the dragon, by will, decided to set itself down near him on the ground.
Doesn't this mean that fighters and thieves have to use the environment around them?
Like, the dragon is flying, obviously out of reach, what do you do? Go somewhere where the dragon cannot hit you from the sky, it has to land, when it lands you go toe to toe with it, and if you're a thief you trick it into landing and then sneak around it.

To me it looked like the dragon chose to land to attack Todd cause the pillars and entrance where in the way.
In that case every character has the possibility to attack dragons without being forced to use Destruction magic or Marksmanship or hell even Dragon Shouts.
Or did Todd manage to damage it so much with that 2 or 3 arrows that "he" brought it down?

I remember that! I was thinking of the other encounters, the generic ones where he fought the fire/frost dragons next to the tower. I suppose if most encounters are like the one you mention then it would be much better But I can imagine a few situations where it would be hard/impossible to "force" the dragon to land of its own accord. Time will tell.

Well in that case you better run like Forrest Gump towards some cover.
I doubt anyone just stood there with their hunting rifle while a behemoth ran towards you in Fallout 3.

Dragons use "shouts" just like the player. It will probably want/need to land in order to take on the player.

..Though that Ice dragon in the demo keeped it up for a while.. :shrug:

I think some replies could be just shortened to "Yes, I want hand-holding in my games".

Apparently "Unforgiving" is a virtue on a game just for some of us.

If Groob the Dense can remember to always bring his tiny bow and Wizzy the sparkly can carry his hidden poisoned blade, just in case, Stabby McStabstab can find a way to deal with his problems. I know I'll eventually play a sneaky sob (maybe on the third or fourth run) and I know I'll prevail if I have to cheat, trick and lie my way through the game.

I wonder if it's a generational thing or if it depends on wether one uses nethack as measuring bar of unforgiveness.

If you don't have a ranged attack, you'll have to persuade the dragon to come to you. Get aggro, position yourself so that he has to land to attack you, just inside the entrance to a cave would be good, and use your abilities. Of course, deciding that you're not going to use certain tools means that you can expect certain fights to be more difficult. But that's part of the fun, isn't it?

"Unforgiving" is appropriate for some games, but TES is a do what you want, not a min max game. If unforgiving is what you want, you need either to play a different game or play with mods. Or perhaps the highest difficulty setting will offer that level of challenge.

The way I see it, the game doesn't have to be changed for any player to meet any challenge, it should just be something the players takes upon themselves. A thief that wants to kill a dragon with only a dagger should have to get creative.

On the other hand, it isn't fair to pigeon-hole certain game aspects to one build of character. Ideally, these two ideas should meet somewhere in the middle, but it isn't hand-holding.

"How can a no-magic, no-bow, sword fighter fight a dragon (or other flying creature)?"

He uses his dragon shouts!

I agree.
Not everyone should be able to do everything just as well, even in a singleplayer game. It raises difficulty, makes your decision have weight on them ('will i train with a bow so i can kill that dragon more easily?') and adds replay value.

If I had these limitations on myself, I would make sure to have plenty of poisons in my inventory to put on my sword or bow and make sure my running skill was as high as possible. I'd use a hit and run form of attack to keep weakening the dragon and replenishing my own stamina and health. Without magic, I think poison is key. Good luck with that.

:tes:

Another possibility is that alchemists will be able to make things that can be thrown at an enemy. Hard to know exactly what options will be available at this point, but success will come down to figuring out the best use of the terrain, gear, consumables, and the abilities that your character is willing to use. In general, I'd say that playing limited ability characters is best not done by someone inclined to ask others "how am I supposed to." It's more an option for folks inclined to ask themselves "how can I."

But they are Dragons. You know they can fly so if you decide to hunt Dragons without any ranged weapons that's just silly.

Maybe some will just have to use ...........strategy. There is always a way..

I fine with being able to take down a dragon with a sword or Dagger if you use stratagy....

What Im not fine with is being able to kill a dragon with only your bare hands....not saying it shouldnt be possible but it should be the hardest thing to do ingame.

That would be a cool Achievement

Chuck Norris Who? (cant think of a good name or creative one)-Kill a dragon only using your bare hands

Yeah that's dumb...how can a hand to hand fighter kill a dragon...pshh......it's not like he has any dragon shouts or anything.... :rolleyes:

Designing a game so that players can choose any of several paths/builds, only to discover partway through the game that the MQ isn't completable by their build and they're screwed.... that's not "unforgiving" or "no hand-holding". It's just bad game design. If you were going to lock a number of builds out of actually playing the intended game (i.e, the main quest/plot, not just puttering around with sidequests), then you shouldn't have included them at all. Or put a warning at the beginning "note: is unplayable in the main quest."


All general paths provided in a game should be viable in that game. To do otherwise is lousy game design.
("general" paths, as compared to bizarro/niche builds. Like playing a pacifist in a game that doesn't actually support it with dialogue & plot options.)