I increased my character's intelligence so he would be more

Post » Tue Mar 29, 2011 9:07 pm

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.


Knowledge is not intellect. You understand the nuances of magicka through reading and practice, not brain size/structure
User avatar
Kayla Bee
 
Posts: 3349
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2007 5:34 pm

Post » Tue Mar 29, 2011 9:38 pm

Following that description, yes it just raised the mana pool, you just described it in Roleplaying perspective.
A side effect, nothing more ~unless the PC were to purposely train to build 'magicka'.


Knowledge is not intellect. You understand the nuances of magicka through reading and practice, not brain size/structure
I disagree (not with the first part :teehee: ). Intellect can sort through knowledge (but not vice versa). A sharp mind can create relationships between disparate readings and learn things that the text might not be imparting or that the authors having not even considered; (where as otherwise they simply learn what was in the book).
User avatar
Josephine Gowing
 
Posts: 3545
Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2006 12:41 pm

Post » Wed Mar 30, 2011 6:59 am

I don't get where people think attributes define your character early on because in reality, when you start a game, all characters are the same. Then by the time you get out of the tutorial dungeon, your character is diversified by your attributes and skills. This will be no different in Skyrim. By the time your leaving the tutorial dungeon, your attributes will be different than the next character

That's simply false. Yes - my character will have some amount of difference from another in the aptly-named "derived attributes" of health, stamina and magicka, but my character will NOT be more intelligent, stronger, more agile, faster or in any of those many ways in any way different from any other character, for the simple reason that all of those attributes - attributes that you and I and every single person reading and posting on this forum in fact possess - will simply not exist in the game at all. They exist in the real world, but they won't exist in the game. They help to define and describe individuals in the real world, but they won't in the game. They won't be able to since they won't even exist.

If I want a character who's more intelligent than the norm, I should be able to create a character who's more intelligent than the norm. When intelligence doesn't even exist in the game, I can't do that.

Yes - of course - I can make believe that the character is more intelligent than the norm. I can also make believe that he's 17 feet tall and has orange skin with blue polka dots. But the game isn't going to give me any more reason to actually believe the former than the latter.
User avatar
scorpion972
 
Posts: 3515
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2007 11:20 am

Post » Wed Mar 30, 2011 7:57 am

Not because I wanted more Magicka.

Just wanted to clear that up since there seems to be some confusion on this subject!

Cheerio!


But for this game Intelligence had no other use for the points added to it except raise your Magicka.

If you just wanted it for roleplay, then surely you could have just roleplayed that your character spent time reading books, or speaking to people to gain knowledge/intelligence?
User avatar
Loane
 
Posts: 3411
Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2007 6:35 am

Post » Wed Mar 30, 2011 8:22 am

but my character will NOT be more intelligent, stronger, more agile, faster or in any of those many ways in any way different from any other character, for the simple reason that all of those attributes - attributes that you and I and every single person reading and posting on this forum in fact possess - will simply not exist in the game at all.

Unless, of course, there's perks that give you the same properties.
User avatar
Damian Parsons
 
Posts: 3375
Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2007 6:48 am

Post » Wed Mar 30, 2011 7:43 am

Unless, of course, there's perks that give you the same properties.


I certainly hope so! I love being a smart ass in Fallout 3/NV

;)
User avatar
Far'ed K.G.h.m
 
Posts: 3464
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 11:03 pm

Post » Tue Mar 29, 2011 9:08 pm

But for this game Intelligence had no other use for the points added to it except raise your Magicka.
That's the problem, no?

If the games had to pass muster without graphics, would anyone accept that system?
User avatar
Tyler F
 
Posts: 3420
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2007 8:07 pm

Post » Wed Mar 30, 2011 9:27 am

If you just wanted it for roleplay, then surely you could have just roleplayed that your character spent time reading books, or speaking to people to gain knowledge/intelligence?

For that, why doesn't Beth just sell a sheet of paper that says, "Imagine whatever you want! Have fun!"

The fact is that the very purpose of the game is to represent things - to define a character and let the player live out a story regarding that character. To that end, among other things, the game defines particular traits of the character. Yes - there's an upper limit on what the game can successfully define, and thus a lower limit on what the player, if so inclined, must imagine. You could feasibly say that the player must imagine everything, but then there'd be no point to the game. The game provides some number of things so that the player doesn't have to imagine them. And those who oppose the removal of attributes believe that attributes should be among the things the game does provide rather than among the things the game does not. Certainly we can make believe that they're there, just as, if necessary, we could make believe that our character just engaged in combat. We don't believe we should have to.

And regarding the recurring criticism that attributes didn't have enough effect on the game - that could also be dealt with merely by expanding the effect they do have. The nominal fact that they didn't have enough effect no more justifies their complete removal than the fact that my roof has a hole in it justifies taking it off the house. Some things are important enough that, if flawed, they should be fixed rather than removed, and we believe attributes to be among those things.

And I will point out, yet again, that you, I and everybody reading this in fact possesses the attributes of intelligence, strength, agility, endurance and so on. These aren't fictional things that Beth just dreamed up one day, but are actual, measureable qualities that in fact exist.

Except in the game....
User avatar
Ladymorphine
 
Posts: 3441
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2006 2:22 pm

Post » Wed Mar 30, 2011 2:26 am

That's simply false. Yes - my character will have some amount of difference from another in the aptly-named "derived attributes" of health, stamina and magicka, but my character will NOT be more intelligent, stronger, more agile, faster or in any of those many ways in any way different from any other character, for the simple reason that all of those attributes - attributes that you and I and every single person reading and posting on this forum in fact possess - will simply not exist in the game at all. They exist in the real world, but they won't exist in the game. They help to define and describe individuals in the real world, but they won't in the game. They won't be able to since they won't even exist.

If I want a character who's more intelligent than the norm, I should be able to create a character who's more intelligent than the norm. When intelligence doesn't even exist in the game, I can't do that.

Yes - of course - I can make believe that the character is more intelligent than the norm. I can also make believe that he's 17 feet tall and has orange skin with blue polka dots. But the game isn't going to give me any more reason to actually believe the former than the latter.


Your assuming that they are RP descriptor values when they are game mechanics, not something that decides if your character is smart or not. The player decides if their character is smart or not, not the game mainly because you don't get more intelligent as the game goes by. Your either intelligent or your stupid, you don't gain intelligence as you use spells for a little while. Wisdom you gain overtime but there is no wisdom attribute. Those attributes aren't required to define your player in video games anymore as the technology moved on. Those values only matter for a pen and paper RPG, it doesn't work in a game where the characters in a game are actually tangible and aren't just in the imagination of the players and DM of the pen and paper rpg. In a video game with a world as real as TES, why do you need the attributes? An NPC should not say "Oh your an intelligent looking one" because that is unrealistic because intelligence doesn't appear as a physical trait and if it doesn't appear as a physical trait, what is the point of having it if it's not recognized as a part of the game? In video games now, you can make your character look how you want, their personality to be what you want, make them intelligent as you want and all without needing to have a number that some how is supposed to be equated to those things. Things like 17 feet tall and the color of the skin is not something you imagine as you can actually can form your characters looks, thus the part where it's a video game versus pen and paper.
User avatar
Gemma Woods Illustration
 
Posts: 3356
Joined: Sun Jun 18, 2006 8:48 pm

Post » Wed Mar 30, 2011 8:57 am

Mordy already showed on page six that people complaining about this have NO grasp on the mathematics at work behind attributes in the past games. So let this thread die. You have been irreparably refuted.

People have to understand that the decision in Daggerfall to not use XP, and instead have you progress by what you use poses a LOT of technical problems, problems the series has been carrying since Daggerfall and Morrowind. They've tried to fix them (that's the point and art of every craft, solve the problems), and removing attributes is a way to do that. Attributes always felt a bit strange; its natural, its an XP-less RPG. If they think this solves some of the problems with the system, great. It will work in some areas, it may be defect in others...but thats what video game design is about. Hell, its what every art form is about.

I also wanted to comment on somebody saying Intelligence should work like the Intelligence overhaul mod. Well...that mod has a few problems. It thinks it has nailed what intelligence is, but its a confused mess conceptually. Sure, it reads like fun, but its also a pretentious mix and match bag of "hardcoe gamer" concepts that simply dont add up. First of all, a lot of it is based on things TES is not even interested in doing. The game is just not about that. And secondly, having high intelligence has nothing to do with skill building. An intelligent person can still be a total failure in physical exercises. So making that conjunction between intelligence and skill building is completely artificial.
User avatar
NO suckers In Here
 
Posts: 3449
Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2006 2:05 am

Post » Wed Mar 30, 2011 3:27 am

Your assuming that they are RP descriptor values when they are game mechanics, not something that decides if your character is smart or not. The player decides if their character is smart or not, not the game mainly because you don't get more intelligent as the game goes by. Your either intelligent or your stupid, you don't gain intelligence as you use spells for a little while. Wisdom you gain overtime but there is no wisdom attribute. Those attributes aren't required to define your player in video games anymore as the technology moved on. Those values only matter for a pen and paper RPG, it doesn't work in a game where the characters in a game are actually tangible and aren't just in the imagination of the players and DM of the pen and paper rpg. In a video game with a world as real as TES, why do you need the attributes? An NPC should not say "Oh your an intelligent looking one" because that is unrealistic because intelligence doesn't appear as a physical trait and if it doesn't appear as a physical trait, what is the point of having it if it's not recognized as a part of the game? In video games now, you can make your character look how you want, their personality to be what you want, make them intelligent as you want and all without needing to have a number that some how is supposed to be equated to those things. Things like 17 feet tall and the color of the skin is not something you imagine as you can actually can form your characters looks, thus the part where it's a video game versus pen and paper.
What!? How has Wisdom been obsolesced by technology in modern RPGs?

D&D games had it and it served a distinctly different purpose from Intelligence. IMO RPGs need both Wisdom and intelligence stats (and to react appropriately to them).

When you remove the base attributes of a character you are removing what makes them a character instead of a costume; that's fine for an adventure game, but its terrible for an RPG.

In this day and age where we don't have to cut corners for storage and processor power... Why are games shying away from more advanced world and NPC AI? ~And favoring a digital Halloween adventure?

Its not that technology has advanced past something like a Wisdom stat ~they had it [functional!] in cRPGs of the 1980's; It is that modern games are favoring the sort of titles that can't properly incorporate such concepts; and that's depressing to me.
User avatar
Sherry Speakman
 
Posts: 3487
Joined: Fri Oct 20, 2006 1:00 pm

Post » Wed Mar 30, 2011 2:05 am

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.

Very close to how I feel about the attributes. By removing attributes, you simplify the play. I enjoyed playing the dark elf with a bad attitude. Or the Lucky Bosmer. If all attriubtes mean is damage, mana and stamina, then you won't get the other side of the argument. If attributes allow you to customize your character for RP purposes, then you get this perspective. I played a Ranger custom character towards the end of O, with FCOM mods. I wanted to be fast, agile and a little lucky. With attributes, I could accomplish those things. I'm sure perks will have some value, but they just don't equate to attributes. It's more a function of a special animation or skill with a particular weapon.
User avatar
Daramis McGee
 
Posts: 3378
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 10:47 am

Post » Tue Mar 29, 2011 7:59 pm

What!? How has Wisdom been obsolesced by technology in modern RPGs?

D&D games had it and it served a distinctly different purpose from Intelligence. IMO RPGs need both Wisdom and intelligence stats (and to react appropriately to them).

When you remove the base attributes of a character you are removing what makes them a character instead of a costume; that's fine for an adventure game, but its terrible for an RPG.

In this day and age where we don't have to cut corners for storage and processor power... Why are games shying away from more advanced world and NPC AI? ~And favoring a digital Halloween adventure?

Its not that technology has advanced past something like a Wisdom stat ~they had it [functional!] in cRPGs of the 1980's; It is that modern games are favoring the sort of titles that can't properly incorporate such concepts; and that's depressing to me.


What? Why are you talking about Wisdom as if I said it was obsolete? The only thing I said was Wisdom is the only thing that increases over time, not intelligence and that there is no Wisdom attribute in TES. Where did this rant about Wisdom come from :pinch:

Also, the base attributes aren't gone, we still have health, stamina and magicka, the attributes that truly matter. Also, I don't see what makes attributes like personality, intelligence, strength and so on any more qualified to define a character than a more complex system such as perks in combination with skills and the "pure" attributes? Also, TES hasn't shyed away from more advanced world and NPC AI, we have only increased it beyond anyone else.
User avatar
Charlotte X
 
Posts: 3318
Joined: Thu Dec 07, 2006 2:53 am

Post » Wed Mar 30, 2011 1:19 am

What? Why are you talking about Wisdom as if I said it was obsolete? The only thing I said was Wisdom is the only thing that increases over time, not intelligence and that there is no Wisdom attribute in TES. Where did this rant about Wisdom come from :pinch:

Also, the base attributes aren't gone, we still have health, stamina and magicka, the attributes that truly matter. Also, I don't see what makes attributes like personality, intelligence, strength and so on any more qualified to define a character than a more complex system such as perks in combination with skills and the "pure" attributes? Also, TES hasn't shyed away from more advanced world and NPC AI, we have only increased it beyond anyone else.
Did I mistake it for the heart of your post? apologies then, but when I read...
Those attributes aren't required to define your player in video games anymore as the technology moved on. Those values only matter for a pen and paper RPG, it doesn't work in a game where the characters in a game are actually tangible and aren't just in the imagination of the players and DM of the pen and paper rpg.


... I took it to mean 'Those attributes aren't required to define your player in video games anymore as the technology moved on.'

Perhaps I'm seeing this out of context (among several posts?); but I read it as 'Obsolete'.


**Also [IMO] those attributes should be derived statistics, not base attributes. Do we define disease resistance based on hit points or both hitpoints and disease resistance based on the PC's constitution?
User avatar
JD FROM HELL
 
Posts: 3473
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2006 1:54 am

Post » Wed Mar 30, 2011 9:14 am

**Also [IMO] those attributes should be derived statistics, not base attributes. Do we define disease resistance based on hit points or both hitpoints and disease resistance based on the PC's constitution?


But this shows that we don't need them to be individual attributes of their own. Disease resistance is an underlying stat that you don't have active control over but it is still there and everyone is good with that.

Mainly what I was talking about as obsolete is things like personality that are only descriptors, which your characters personality is decided by you and how you decide to answer in a conversation. You decide your character is a [censored], so you answer in a rude way to the NPC. That NPC now knows your character is a [censored]. See what I mean by we don't need those attributes to define those aspects of your character.
User avatar
Amiee Kent
 
Posts: 3447
Joined: Thu Jun 15, 2006 2:25 pm

Post » Wed Mar 30, 2011 2:32 am

I did the same thing as TC. Personable characters had a high personality even if it didnt have any major in game effect. My Crusader had high willpower even though he didnt need fast magicka regeneration. My Daedric Archaeologist didnt even really use magic, just had a high intelligence, even though he was a bumbling klutz, Chevy Chase meets Inspector Gadget, bungling his way through the MQ Jacques Clouseau style.



Oh, Attributes I've known you very well
I've seen you growing everyday
I never really looked before
but now you take my stats away.

Suddenly you're in my life
part of everything I do
you got me working day and night
just trying to keep a hold on you.

Here in your numbers I found my paradise
my only chance for happiness
and if I lose you now I think I would die.

Oh say you'll always be my baby
we can make it shine, we can take forever
just a minute at a time.

More than a number, more than a number to me
more than a number, more than a number to me
More than a number, oh oh

User avatar
Sammygirl
 
Posts: 3378
Joined: Fri Jun 16, 2006 6:15 pm

Post » Wed Mar 30, 2011 5:41 am

And regarding the recurring criticism that attributes didn't have enough effect on the game - that could also be dealt with merely by expanding the effect they do have.

But by expanding their use, you marginalize them. The more you expand an attribute, the more character types are going to benefit from it. You end up making everyone "smart", "strong", and/or "agile" because those attributes would have auxiliary effects that many character types you would have.

By cutting down to the three main attributes, and relying on skills and perks to define the character beyond that, you can still get the same effects as the expended attributes but in a much more granular way, which increases character diversity. You're no longer just "smart", you're "book smart" or "street smart". You're no longer just "strong", you're a "tank" or "martial artist". The attributes become redundant because you can already define the character as you want, through skills, perks, and health/magicka/stamina.
User avatar
Roberta Obrien
 
Posts: 3499
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2007 1:43 pm

Post » Wed Mar 30, 2011 1:31 am

But this shows that we don't need them to be individual attributes of their own. Disease resistance is an underlying stat that you don't have active control over but it is still there and everyone is good with that.

Mainly what I was talking about as obsolete is things like personality that are only descriptors, which your characters personality is decided by you and how you decide to answer in a conversation. You decide your character is a [censored], so you answer in a rude way to the NPC. That NPC now knows your character is a [censored]. See what I mean by we don't need those attributes to define those aspects of your character.
Well, I can play like that, but I'd prefer it not be arbitrary; I'd prefer a back story and character attributes to base my decisions upon. In fact, I'm comfortable with a completely assigned character, as that usually means that the game's story is custom tailored to them.

Here is the thing about a constitution attribute (or any attribute)... By having it separate as a base stat. the mechanics can allow magic, drugs, and preternatural origins to affect the stat and have a cascading effect on the PC; both for good or bad.

Base stats define the unique biology and psychology of every PC and NPC. I can't help but think that multiple recombination of stats into three overarching values is a bad thing, and encourages homogenous PC design. Its bad enough that I read today that for Skyrim, all you do is pick a look ~and you're done; Heck, I'm not even sure that you enter a name for the PC, or if such a thing still matters in the game.

Its just not very appealing to me if the PC is just a McManikin race with contrived perk variations that do not seem to represent a unique personality, just a bag of exceptions to the rules.

But by expanding their use, you marginalize them. The more you expand an attribute, the more character types are going to benefit from it. You end up making everyone "smart", "strong", and/or "agile" because those attributes would have auxiliary effects that many character types you would have.

By cutting down to the three main attributes, and relying on skills and perks to define the character beyond that, you can still get the same effects as the expended attributes but in a much more granular way, which increases character diversity. You're no longer just "smart", you're "book smart" or "street smart". You're no longer just "strong", you're a "tank" or "martial artist". The attributes become redundant because you can already define the character as you want, through skills, perks, and health/magicka/stamina.
I see attributes as defining the individual's natural aptitudes ~Which could apply to several chosen skills at once. I see nothing wrong with this.
User avatar
Vicki Blondie
 
Posts: 3408
Joined: Fri Jun 16, 2006 5:33 am

Post » Tue Mar 29, 2011 9:50 pm

But by expanding their use, you marginalize them. The more you expand an attribute, the more character types are going to benefit from it. You end up making everyone "smart", "strong", and/or "agile" because those attributes would have auxiliary effects that many character types you would have.

By cutting down to the three main attributes, and relying on skills and perks to define the character beyond that, you can still get the same effects as the expended attributes but in a much more granular way, which increases character diversity. You're no longer just "smart", you're "book smart" or "street smart". You're no longer just "strong", you're a "tank" or "martial artist". The attributes become redundant because you can already define the character as you want, through skills, perks, and health/magicka/stamina.

Er, no you dont, you balance it out so you can only max out a few if even that many. your the one that wants to max everything and make a JOAT, not the devs. Your trying to rationalize its exclusion with fallacious logic. More attributes would add diversity not take it away.
User avatar
Saul C
 
Posts: 3405
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 12:41 pm

Post » Wed Mar 30, 2011 10:47 am

But by expanding their use, you marginalize them. The more you expand an attribute, the more character types are going to benefit from it. You end up making everyone "smart", "strong", and/or "agile" because those attributes would have auxiliary effects that many character types you would have.

Whether deliiberately or not, you misinterpreted my use of the word "expanding." Feel free, as inclined, to substitute "clarifying" or "detailing" or "making more significant" or whatever you might choose. The point I was making, I thought sufficiently clearly, was that one of the oft-lobbed criticisms is that attributes weren't significant enough. Fine then - make them more significant.

By cutting down to the three main attributes, and relying on skills and perks to define the character beyond that, you can still get the same effects as the expended attributes but in a much more granular way, which increases character diversity. You're no longer just "smart", you're "book smart" or "street smart".

No. In fact, you're not "smart" at all, in any way, since there's no attribute to measure that. You have some amount of health, some amount of stamina and some amount of magicka, and that's it. You might have some perk that sounds like the sort of thing a "book smart" or "street smart" character might have, but that no more makes you either of those things than being able to dunk a basketball makes you tall.
User avatar
Eduardo Rosas
 
Posts: 3381
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 3:15 pm

Post » Tue Mar 29, 2011 10:11 pm

Base stats define the unique biology and psychology of every PC and NPC. I can't help but think that multiple recombination of stats into three overarching values is a bad thing, and encourages homogenous PC design. Its bad enough that I read today that for Skyrim, all you do is pick a look ~and you're done;

"You are what you play." If you want to play a character that has a specific set of attributes, then use skills and perks that befit what those attributes mean. The start of the game should start everyone off on relatively equal footing, so that certain types of characters don't become inherently "better" than others. You no longer have to worry about matching race, gender, class, and birthsign to give yourself a good start in your skills. Everyone starts low, and moves up their own way.
User avatar
JESSE
 
Posts: 3404
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 4:55 am

Post » Wed Mar 30, 2011 9:31 am

Well, I can play like that, but I'd prefer it not be arbitrary; I'd prefer a back story and character attributes to base my decisions upon. In fact, I'm comfortable with a completely assigned character, as that usually means that the game's story is custom tailored to them.


But that's the thing, YOU decide your characters backstory. Trust me, your back story was limited in every game including Skyrim and you as the player filled the gaps and completed the backstory. In Arena, you were imprisoned because you decided to not go along with Jagar Tharn in his plot. In Daggerfall, your sent as an emissary to Daggerfall to exorcise the King of Daggerfall's spirit and then you crash. In Morrowind, your a prisoner that was sent to Morrowind by the order of Emperor. In Oblivion, your a prisoner that ends up being freed when the emperor walks through your cell. In Skyrim you were captured as you passed into Skyrim and were imprisoned and slated for execution. I just don't see how attributes are supposed to set up a backstory, especially since all attributes are the same to people at the very beginning with only slight variations depending on race. Then you go on for a little bit and pick a sign (or have a sign picked at the same time as your race, it depends on the game) and even then the variation in attribute is very small and it will be the same in Skyrim. Some people have it in their mind they won't have any variation when in reality they will have more and it's not going to be only later in the game when your character is differentiated but there will be just as much variation and just as earlier as there was in the previous games.

Base stats define the unique biology and psychology of every PC and NPC. I can't help but think that multiple recombination of stats into three overarching values is a bad thing, and encourages homogenous PC design. Its bad enough that I read today that for Skyrim, all you do is pick a look ~and you're done; Heck, I'm not even sure that you enter a name for the PC, or if such a thing still matters in the game.


Except, that is for pen and paper RPGs. You can already have the unique psychology and biology represented in visual and audio values in a video game. If someone is strong, you can see that by their muscle tone. If someone is intelligent, you can tell that during the conversation with them. If someone is insane, that's not even an attribute but a conversation with them in the game can reveal that. Everything that you and others have said you wanted out of those attributes can be covered by the game and actions that NPCs are now able to do.
User avatar
koumba
 
Posts: 3394
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2007 8:39 pm

Post » Wed Mar 30, 2011 2:35 am

I see attributes as defining the individual's natural aptitudes ~Which could apply to several chosen skills at once. I see nothing wrong with this.


That's one way - and not an unreasonable one - of thinking of attributes. I've often thought of them in that way as well (although I'm not sure about the "natural aptitude" bit). Attributes represent more general traits which are manifested in more task-specific abilities, which are governed by skills. So Strength represents that general trait which is manifested in swinging various types of weapons; Agility represents that general trait which is manifested in sneaking; Personality represents that general trait which is manifested in conversation; and so on.

But here's one way to push back against that. Those general traits are not as unified as one might think; nor are they manifested in the same ways in the skills they govern. Take Intelligence for example. It's fairly well established that folk notions of cleverness/smartness/intelligence do not carve out a psychological natural kind. A person might have an ability to do well at one sort of cognitive task, but poorly at another - and this might not be for lack of "knowledge". A person who is able to work out the mechanistic workings of a lock or trap might not be so good at working out how to use a spell. Or take Personality. That's pretty clearly a notion which lumps together all sorts of different traits. Consider someone who is good at getting others to like them, through wit or charm or humour. Are they going to be the sort of person who can convince someone to sell them something cheaply? Not necessarily. And if not, should we say that they have a high or low personality? And I think similar cases can be made for all of the attributes of previous TES games.

The point here is that one could think of the attributes as grouping together various task-specific abilities in a rather gerrymandered manner. There may be some commonalities between the various skills, but not to the extent that, say, Security and Conjuration are both marks of Intelligence. Whatever commonalities there are, are so broad that they are adequately captured by HP/MP/Stamina. As for the differences, well, that's why they are different skills.

Anyway, I just wanted to offer a different perspective on how to think of attributes, such that getting rid of them is not an unnatural move.
User avatar
Laura-Jayne Lee
 
Posts: 3474
Joined: Sun Jul 02, 2006 4:35 pm

Post » Wed Mar 30, 2011 10:12 am

Er, no you dont, you balance it out so you can only max out a few if even that many. your the one that wants to max everything and make a JOAT, not the devs. Your trying to rationalize its exclusion with fallacious logic. More attributes would add diversity not take it away.

Whether deliiberately or not, you misinterpreted my use of the word "expanding." Feel free, as inclined, to substitute "clarifying" or "detailing" or "making more significant" or whatever you might choose.

This is exactly what the move to using skills and perks as a replacement for the classic attributes accomplishes. Everything attributes could do can still be done, but in a much more granular, detailed, and significant way. With the combination of skills and perks, you can define what it means for your character to be smart, besides just ticking the "Intelligence" attribute on level up. You can specify in what way they're strong, in a way that lets the game recognize it for gameplay. You actually have to use relevant skills to pick the better perks. The reason they removed attributes is not because they don't want you to have the choice to be intelligent or strong or whatever, it's because you can already choose to be so without them.

BTW, I in no way want to max everything and be a master-of-everything. I like the new levelling system and perks because it specifically prevents that.
User avatar
Sunny Under
 
Posts: 3368
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 5:31 pm

Post » Wed Mar 30, 2011 6:50 am

Pfftt. I've entirely lost interest. There's nothing more to say and the game will be whatever the game will be. I see absolutely no sense at all in the notion that perks alone is greater than perks + attributes (as if 1 > 1+1), but I'm confident that anyone who would actually argue such a ludicrous position is certainly not going to be swayed by anything I might write, so.... so be it.
User avatar
Jarrett Willis
 
Posts: 3409
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 6:01 pm

PreviousNext

Return to V - Skyrim