I was saying in another thread about insted of armor as ebony is heavy that ebony is a material for making armor and you could make or find light, heavy, meduim ebony armour thus for us assassins out there , there could be great light ebony armour. And i say ebony as an just one type of material others of course being steel, leather, dwarven, elven etc....

As for layering clothing and armor it could go by their “size” and slot, the general separation would be:

Underclothing:
-Shirts
-Light and short pants
-Socks
-Light gloves
-Cloth masks
...

Overclothing:
-Jackets
-Thick shirts/pullovers
-Pants
-Scarfs
-Masks
...

Armors:
Pretty much all armors...

Covering clothing:
-Wide jackets
-Ponchos
-Cloaks
-Skirts/Kilts
-Capes
-Hats
-Hoods
...

Some armoring like chainmail however can be worn under clothing as well to hide it, perfect for assassins. Belts could be worn on any clothing layer but for holding items they make most sense on the outermost.

Also all pieces of clothing should add some armoring value, after all clothes ARE protection of your environment. Thicker gloves generally count as armor since, aside finer ones, they are to protect your hands from getting hurt.

Not entirely sure on how the armor pieces should be split or merged though.

Ignore that. Fallout 1 and 2 used single-item armor systems as well. Just because Bethesda works on both franchises now does not mean any design choices in Fallout 3 are an indication of what's going to happen with TES V, aside from advances in the engine technology.

If it is in Skyrim, I believe all reces besides for Nords would have a tiny ammount of constant frost damage. various clothes and armors would add/subract to that (Leather would lower it, while steel or iron would add to it)

I'd only put that in very cold regions AND i'd also say while nords are more resistant to cold they're not IMMUNE to it.

Are you kidding? That would be the most annoying thing ever. Like Daniel said, maybe in some areas of extreme cold that a normal player wouldn't likely be for very long, sure, but to have a constant damaging effect the entire game..?

While that might be true about fallout, it still doesn't take away from the fact that rendering the clothing and programming it into the game would still require a lot of work.


The reason Morrowind had more diversity was because of its graphics. Devs could get away with the diversity because most of the armors lacked any 3D-definition. Sure, there were bumps and such on armors to signify that some pieces weren't just blocks, but the time it would take to individually sculpt pieces of armor to great detail would be tedious. What Bethesda did with Oblivion was make things more efficient. Why wear pants underneath chainmail greaves? you wouldn't even see them. As for pauldrons, most are generally attached to the armor in the first place. There are some pauldrons that don't require the chest piece, but allowing pauldrons to be seperate, just for the sake of a few exceptions, would be annoying.

Posted a expanded idea about armor pieces and layering in the general suggestions thread.

http://www.gamesas.com/bgsforums/index.php?s=&showtopic=1059919&view=findpost&p=15396088

It's for mixing and matching.

Due to the fact that went dont even have a shred of information , the armour types hasnt even begun to speculate about even the slightest possiblility of crossing my mind.

Same here. They've heard enough "separate pauldrons etc!" stuff to take the hint. I personally wouldn't mind having separate boots as well, even though it would look clumsy if they were different.
Also, I'd like to be able to equip up to 8 rings and 2 necklaces (one longer and one shorter). By some strange logic, 2 magic items shouldnt touch, so you can only have 4 magic rings at a time and one necklace :I
Then some customization a la Daggerfall: Capes with usable hoods. Shirts with some options how to wear. Helmets with face pieces that can be lifted.

And yes, FO3 has nothing to do with this.

I think the whole 'only two magic rings' is just silly. My magic cuirass is certainly touching my magic greaves, and my magic pauldron is touching my magic gauntlet. Why can't my magic rings occasionally rub together?

I honestly thing we're going to get a lot of things back in the next Elder Scrolls. Oblivion was a huge leap in graphics and I feel that they used up a lot of the resources to bring us a 'pretty' game, but had to sacrifice a lot of the little things we liked so much about Morrowind. This time around I bet you they are able to maintain or slightly improve the graphics, but put back in the things they originally had to drop. Hardware is better than it was four years ago, and optimization for the PS3 and 360 is way better than it was four years ago.

Perhaps the reason we're having to wait almost four years for even an announcement is because they are really going over-the-top on this one. I believe that Todd Howard has said in the past, they every Elder Scrolls title must redefine the series anew, and be completely built from the ground up. Daggerfall redfined the size of a game world you could play in, Morrowind redefined the atmosphere and depth of a game world, and Oblivion redefined the graphics of TES. Perhaps this time we get the best amalgam so far of an Elder Scrolls title!

The "2 magic Rings" is just an old habbit left over from all the other RPGs in existance. You know bethesda, you dont HAVE to make a clone of every D&D based game ever made.

I'm not following the comparison. True, Oblivion's armor as compared to Morrowind's armor had a bit more 3D definition, but Oblivion's armor still used normal maps like crazy, just like virtually everything in Oblivion. If it's a concern that their current team can't manage a bit of 3D definition coupled with mixing and matching while avoiding clipping, then see below.


"Efficient" in terms of in-game options is only good when the complexity is something that almost all of the fanbase uniformly despised. And I think it's incredibly safe to say that the fans of armor-over-clothing and mixing-and-matching render that a nonissue. Why wear pants underneath chainmail greaves? Why not? Why not wear robes over armor? Why not wear only one guantlet just to look cool? Why not do any of those things? That to the clothing/armor world would be like saying, "You don't need all of these guild options" to the faction world (Oh, and whether the pants could be seen or not under the chainmail depends on how the chainmail greaves were designed relative to the pants).

Besides, any "resources" argument is pretty null and void by the fact that their team has significantly grown in size from Morrowind and Oblivion. They, with their current increases in employment, can handle creating mix-and-match pieces and clothing-under-armor. And anyway, so long as they laid out mesh-design (and body-part replace) rules and stuck to them, they could avoid clipping entirely as opposed to going back and fixing it after the fact.


In your opinion. I find that pretty much everyone else on these boards would welcome the return of interchangeable pauldrons, and they don't care in the slightest if it somewhat unrealistic from earthly armor designs. This is TES. It's their party, and they can design armor types with separate pauldrons if they want to.

Yes, I don't know why TES needs to pay heed to this notion that more than two rings will somehow create a magic conflict. They ignore the old D&D paradigm that armor interferes with magic already.

I worry about people saying that complexity and variety is 'annoying.' The simpler TES gets, the further away it gets from it's hardcoe RPG roots. Todd Howard said his #1 most influential and favorite RPG of all time was Ultima (Ultima 7 I believe). If you have ever wanted to see what in-depth is, get DOSbox and play that game, both parts 1 and 2. Map markers? Not a chance! Compass arrows? Paaaleeease!

I hope TES comes out swinging for the fenses on this one. Huge gameworld, more side-quests, more factions, and lots of separate armor pieces (since it's an armor thread)! I want to have silver pauldrons with my ebony half-plate, silver leggings, and boots, and a steel T-visor helm, with a cloak.

In the actual game I don't really care if they design clothing and armor to work together, armor split up, etc. However, I would like more slots. So, even if they don't want to mess with making it work, at least put the available slots in for us modders to make use of.

I personally think it should depend on the armor.


In TES IV, wearing armor decreases the effectiveness of your spells.

Which was a terrible attempt at "balance," I might add.

Just an idea. IF they knew how to balance the powers of the items, then fine, lets wear 8 or 10 magic rings. But it was too easy to get near 100% reflect damage in TES4 already. Maybe the effect of similiar constant spells would diminish per item, depending on how many you wear? That brings me to the fact that there were ONLY constant spells or cast when strike spells in TES4, which was a major dumb down from previous.


The magic part aside, I would love to play a merchant or something who can actually WEAR his wealth. Thats why more rings. I would use a mod anyways that makes magic items rarer. Hate how almost everything you find has a spell on it.

In old D&D, however, you couldn't wear any metal armor at all. I'm not even sure you could wear studded leather.

To me the most glaring thing about Oblivion was the level lists. There was no challenge at all to getting complete sets of armor of one alloy type, or getting magical loot. Once you reach a certain level just walk down the road, kill four or five bandits all wearing elvin armor and poof you're all set. They need to ditch their Oblivion version of level-items, monsters, etc...

The limitation of rings should be obvious. You could put at least two rings on each finger without much trouble, and wearing the 20 best rings in the game is hardly balanced unless you make every ring pathetic.

Plus, just imagine how stupid it would be if in any given fantasy story, every time the hero picks up a magic ring he sticks it on his finger alongside the other dozen. It's much more interesting when he has only one or two really powerful ones.

Since it's a single player game, and you will never be forced to see that many rings on your characters finger, they ought to just let the player decide on how many is too many. I personally would never wear more than one or two on each hand, but what do I care if some guy on this forum I'll never meet in my life puts a ring on both thumbs and all his fingers? In terms of balance, perhaps you could have diminishing returns on the rings. So after the first two you lose x amount of power for subsequent rings because of magic interference or something. But from a purely asthetic view, I don't care if they allow more.