This argument is a straw-man as you are arguing the descriptive detail and qualification of a person in attributes vs. skills perks. False anology as no one, to my knowledge, is advocating removing skills and or leaned perks from an game, much less this one. More accurate comparison is skills aside as they can/do exist in both scenarios: What better defines the character you are playing: 8 arbitrary and not completely accurate mathematical qualification of a person (str, agility, constitution, intelligence, personality, wisdom, and luck) versus three arbitrary mathematical figures describing people/character via health stamina magica?

I believe actually learning something should give you some intellect.. Like reading a book.. I believe it was a great idea for getting rid of the things half the people didn't understand...

This argument is a straw-man as you are arguing the descriptive detail and qualification of a person in attributes vs. skills perks. False anology as no one, to my knowledge, is advocating removing skills and or leaned perks from an game, much less this one. More accurate comparison is skills aside as they can/do exist in both scenarios: What better defines the character you are playing: 8 arbitrary and not completely accurate mathematical qualification of a person (str, agility, constitution, intelligence, personality, wisdom, and luck) versus three arbitrary mathematical figures describing people/character via health stamina magica?


If i were to describe new upcoming character as 100 health, 50 stamina character then a 50 health 100 stamina character you have no clue what gender, what race, or the background/history/base abilities of what is being played as health/stamina are so generic umbrella adjectives which a slew of items fall under their purview. The race, gender, I choose the change the visual avatar on the screen is meaningless as any avatar as health/stamina do not define anything. whereas using attributes, or any other system for quantifying an individual, if I were to assign number to the above stats or letter grades, anything you would have a somewhat better picture of whom is being created/described/played. Yes, attributes or any other mathematical system in comparing people based upon chosen criteria will not be all encompassing and can catch every variable or exception, but much like Democracy - it is the worst system there is, except for all the rest.

Riddle me this: what health/stamina (as magic doesn't exist) would you assign: Winston Churchill, Michael Jordan, Pele', Einstein, Barack Obama, and Mother Theresa when each was say, 20. What is the mathematical probability of someone else successfully putting the figures you come up with with the names? Would or would not that probability change if you were to mathematically assign figures to their strength, dexterity, bodily constitution, intelligence, wisdom, willpower, etc, etc?

What excited me about Bethesda's overarching creed "play whoever you want to be, go where you want to go, etc, etc, etc" is precisely my problem with the oversimplification/crude abstractness of the three "attributes" which are very poor descriptors for TES V. I am not playing "who i want to" as every person with the exception of a few points of health and energy is like every other person as the variables are greatly reduced and poor descriptors to boot. I am playing clone version 1, avatar chosen E, next time close version 2,avatar chosen H.

How can you be so sure that it will be as you describe though? They have already said that the simplification is only really dumbed down in the attribute department. The meaningless numbers and stats that they think takes a person out of the role-playing experience. Instead they have replaced it with an intricate web of perks and skills that feel more natural to the player and to how you roleplay. The categorizing of people under Health Magicka and Stamina is inaccurate, those are, as Todd said, base stats that are commonly affected by every attribute. What makes the individual unique, and what still give us that freedom that Bethesda have promised is in what skills we choose to master. What perk trees we decide to develop and flourish. The difference is that its not in a list of numbers and words in front of us, it had been put into other categories. In the end, Skyrim won't come down to numbers or mathematical probabilities. It's gonna come down to how you play, and where you choose to aim attention in terms of skills and perks.

The meaningless numbers and stats that they think takes a person out of the role-playing experience.

I am by no means advocating removal of skills and/or perks! I oppose the gross oversimplification of the base character.. the origin of the story as it were. It like picking up harry potter book one and the author never describing harry and his physical traits but only describing him by the skills he acquires. I oppose replacing good variables to describe and set the baseline of a character with the three cookie cutter meaningless figures of hit points/energy/magic energy. I am completely on board with acquired skill progression and the acquisition of special bennies (perks) based upon ones improvement of said skills.! Todd said the "EFFECTS" of perks will duplicate attributes (meaning perk A add to damage in lieu of strength attribute) but perks cannot by their very definition define or describe the origin of said character, esp with a +1 perk per level.

"Another one of these threads? I hope we have some more info come out this week, to at least give you guys something else to complain about. This is getting extremely old, and we've only known about the attribute thing for a couple days. " Customers have but two ways to express their opinion to corporate entities - with their wallet and with their voices (calls/letters to CEO/board in the old days, etc). I am trying to with as much respect and cordiality as possible perform the latter as I do not wish to do the former.

This argument is a straw-man as you are arguing the descriptive detail and qualification of a person in attributes vs. skills perks. False anology as no one, to my knowledge, is advocating removing skills and or leaned perks from an game, much less this one.

I am by no means advocating removal of skills and/or perks! I oppose the gross oversimplification of the base character.. the origin of the story as it were. It like picking up harry potter book one and the author never describing harry and his physical traits but only describing him by the skills he acquires. I oppose replacing good variables to describe and set the baseline of a character with the three cookie cutter meaningless figures of hit points/energy/magic energy. I am completely on board with acquired skill progression and the acquisition of special bennies (perks) based upon ones improvement of said skills.! Todd said the "EFFECTS" of perks will duplicate attributes (meaning perk A add to damage in lieu of strength attribute) but perks cannot by their very definition define or describe the origin of said character, esp with a +1 perk per level.

But the whole point is that people want to use attributes as a descriptive detail of a character. They don't care that "Intelligence" just increases your magicka pool (as you can still do that), they want to make a "smart" character.

There is a simple solution to that, when you make your character say to yourself "This character is smart." Problem solved. No need to waste development time for the game for a feature that doesn't affect gameplay if attributes are just descriptors. People need to use a little imagination, it's required in RP. I've never once used attributes to define my character. When I raised intelligence, I raised it for magicka, not to say my character got smarter. If my character was intelligent, I just told myself that when I made my character, it requires nothing else.

In what way has attributes ever described the origin of said character? The players imagination describes the origin of your character, that's the point of starting out as a prisoner (Daggerfall you weren't a prisoner in the normal sense) you can define your character as you please. People are overreacting to this whole ordeal and when they slow down and think about it, all characters in the previous games have been similar at the very beginning and when they leave the tutorial dungeon or Imperial customs office, that's when your character is different in several ways, just like how Skyrim will be as well. Also, people need to notice that there is way more customization and differentiation between characters than Morrowind or Oblivion had, so much so it might actually end up in a tie between Daggerfall and Skyrim. Your character will be more different from other peoples characters than in Morrowind and Oblivion and isn't that what your all advocating for?



There is a simple solution to that, when you make your character say to yourself "This character is smart." Problem solved. No need to waste development time for the game for a feature that doesn't affect gameplay if attributes are just descriptors. People need to use a little imagination, it's required in RP. I've never once used attributes to define my character. When I raised intelligence, I raised it for magicka, not to say my character got smarter. If my character was intelligent, I just told myself that when I made my character, it requires nothing else.

Attributes, being as they are descriptive choices, help not only the player to start defining who they are playing other than generic hero clone #9, but that they help one start to "own" the character - i.e. make it your own. My problem is I can play a plethora of combat games or adventure games where I play the named/unnamed hero clone and go around improving my abilities (skills) and those games are incredibly popular - but not to me. I oppose everyone being - practically - the same at the beginning no matter what internal mental choices or avatar choices of race/gender or young/old tough/wimpy - as none matter very much as its hit points and energy. You are also basing my statement upion previous TES games - stop. The model I wish they were doing is the Fallout beginning (attributes plus a trait) and then the TES skills and perks on top of that. Metroid was fun - but metroid wasn't an RPG -just having health/energy does not a role-playing character make - YES later on skills and perks will define better - of course! all for it. I only am saddened by the simplified cookie cutter/clone origin.

Attributes, being as they are descriptive choices, help not only the player to start defining who they are playing other than generic hero clone #9, but that they help one start to "own" the character - i.e. make it your own. My problem is I can play a plethora of combat games or adventure games where I play the named/unnamed hero clone and go around improving my abilities (skills) and those games are incredibly popular - but not to me. I oppose everyone being - practically - the same at the beginning no matter what internal mental choices or avatar choices of race/gender or young/old tough/wimpy - as none matter very much as its hit points and energy. You are also basing my statement upion previous TES games - stop. The model I wish they were doing is the Fallout beginning (attributes plus a trait) and then the TES skills and perks on top of that. Metroid was fun - but metroid wasn't an RPG -just having health/energy does not a role-playing character make - YES later on skills and perks will define better - of course! all for it. I only am saddened by the simplified cookie cutter/clone origin.

So without a stat screen telling you your character is smart... you assume he's not smart? I mean, I see what you're saying, but I think you can assume that your character is at least as smart as you even without a number telling you as much...

Except that many mods (including some I've authored myself) use these the numbers on these so called "stat screens" in scripts vital to the functionality of their mods. Even more important even are the Strength, Agility, etc. attributes.

But the whole point of the TES since Morrowind (probably Daggerfall too to a lesser extend) and something people really love in the game is that you can do anything you want. Want to train that Destruction skill after reaching level 20 by the strength of your two handed claymore alone?No problem, just pick up a spell and start blasting away.

TES is now synonymous with freedom to train the skills you want, when you want and how you want. In that sense, starting the game with some skills pretrained goes against what some find to be the main attraction of the series.

http://wallbase.cc/wallpaper/845411

With increased Intelligence your character is able to case more complex spells. He/She has to be literally smarter to cast these spells. Your character is becoming smarter and with that they can concentrate more magica. It's not just a simple Intelligence=Mana Pool, it's Intelligence=Greater Understanding of Magica which in turn gives you more to work with. At least that's the way I always saw it.

Same with strength, and the rest of the attributes.