nothing to see here

So it's less sad if the PCs 'development' is based upon, say, a 'specialization'?? :\




You also got perks in Oblivion. I find it really really hard to understand why so many people have a problem with the term "perk". It's entirely arbitrary. It changes nothing about the game.

There are more than 4 choices for those who are on the fence about these less than remarkable developments. However, it would be the height of rudeness and, imo, a banworthy offense to be openly discussing such options on the game makers own website.

In the end, 2 and 3 are best options from the list you put together.

What's the reference?

Really? What?

(* Its true though that Traits and Birthsigns are essentially the same.)

It depends entirely on how much is hardcoded. The less that is hardcoded into the engine, the more us modders can change. The engine that Ob-Nv ran on had ALOT hardcoded, and really was in many ways a horrible platform for modding. I hope they took the good from it, then opened up even more to us modders, allowing even crazier things to be done.

The bonuses for skills, such as paralyse attacks and jumping on water are called perks on UESP, I think that is what is being referred to, makes sense, the Skyrim perks seem to be a similar thing.

http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Oblivion:Skill_Perks Happy now?? The arbitrary name is in Oblivion as well as Fallout. Woohoo!! :\

EDIT: No reference. Just an arbitrary word that doesn't change anything.

Arguing semantics is just a last resort for people who have no argument. They could have called it Flappy Dingle farnbottoms, it doesn't change a thing about it.


I personally believe that once the Good attribute mods start rolling out, and they will, it'll be apparent as to why they were removed. Most people only have one-track minds, and a total lack of an empathic drive, as in unable to perceive something from a perspective other than their own. Once some of those people get their hands on the Attribute mods, there's only 2 outcomes. 1. They're going to feel incredibly stupid, or 2. They're going to be happy there's 1 more connection point in the game to roleplaying.


As I've read the hundreds, if not thousands of attribute crythreads that creep up over the months, I've come to the conclusion that the particular crowd wanting them, don't actually care about their function in gameplay, though there's a smallish group out there, myself included, curious as to certain things like Encumbrance, speed, and all those other derivative things. What the real issue is, seems to be this whole "Defining a character" banner being waved. The easiest example is "I have no Intelligence, how do I know my character is smarter than x", which doesn't hold ground in The Elder Scrolls world for two reasons. First, there was actually nothing "Smart" you could do with a higher Intelligence. It's not like Fallout, where with higher intelligence, you learn more skills, have better dialog, and can win speech challenges. The whole "I'm smart" Part of Intelligence was just imagined by the community. Which leads into my second point, why did you need the number to define that for you? If someone can answer that question in the context of The Elder Scrolls, I think I'd better understand. It's not that I'm trying to devalue the position, it's that I'm trying to see it through a different perspective, and I can't come up with a reason.

Even though they technically did less(mechanically), the Attributes in Fallout(s) were much more important to roleplaying. Again, intelligence (And Charisma) being the most obvious and easy examples, had certain dialog, challenges and bonuses associated with them outside of an isolated number. Had The Elder Scrolls ever taken that approach, I would not have any complaint about "defining a character", but that's not the case.

Why don't you give a chance first? You haven't even played it yet.

This is a good point, and was put by many for Fallout 3, before it shipped.

But... most of the members this was put to had already seen enough to predict ~and for the most part they were right, it turned out.

I agree with this. Though it's hard for us long time RPG fanatics to imagine a system without numbers defining our potential possibilities, I do believe that Bethesda will make this work for the better. I for one like this innovative idea where what you do effects how you grow, for instance in any game that allows you to choose where to place your stat points it doesn't have to make sense, You might fight hand to hand to kill all your enemies and then you increase your intelligence. I want to get wiser as I use magic, stronger when I use my muscles, faster as I run. more nimble as I sneak around. I think however they plan on doing this (which might not be how I explained) I believe it will be great and most will appreciate this game for its uniqueness.

I mean...you think people are talking out their asses here? this isnt akin to Beth saying BLUE! and people flipping out screaming why isnt it red , or why it isnt one shade of blue compared to another, we got information, its not like they said oh there are things we are working on with Attributes, no they gave a plain and simple..(very simple) explanation of what is and what isnt, much of which don't add up when people are trying to rationalize and praise such descisions.......if you have no desire discussing it then don't, but dont come up and try to discredit people with legitimat concerns and minimizing them.

if you think its the right discision kudos to you, but don't railroad people who think otherwise.

How to graphically depict charisma, and intelligence?

[http://i271.photobucket.com/albums/jj125/Gizmojunk/Ah-Hah.jpg]

Numerical attributes have been used to great effect in RPGs as an abstract method of determining the PC's personal abilities. The only valid reason I can see to remove the intangible ones is for a game that has no place for them, geared for players that have no interest in the concept of the PC as a defined separate entity from themselves. Such games are concerned with simulation of a visual & aural experience for the player, and IMO, have little or no concern with role playing the PC. :shrug:

Because I never fully enjoyed MW or Ob until I modded them. Bethesda does not write games completely to my tastes, but they come closer than anybody else. Add in a construction set and I can make the game play the way that I want to play. I am forever grateful to Bethesda for releasing the construction sets with the game. Because of my own mods and others I got hundreds of hours of enjoyment from OB.

I already know the direction that Bethesda is going. Just read what they say. Their direction might appeal to 90% of the people out there, but for me the appeal +50% and -50%. By modding the game I can take full advantage of the +50% and mitigate the -50%.

Some preferences that I modded into Ob:
Tougher economy such that making money was much more difficult.
Reset all leveled loot to greatlly decrease "special" weapons and armor.
Added my own historically accurate weapons and distributed them to NPCs and into the leveled loot system.
Adjusted damage to make combat sharper and more lethal.
Adjusted enemy leveling to make weaker creatures stick around longer and stronger creatures appear earlier. In this way combat might be easy or very difficult, but generally more varied.
Adjusted AI to have a better sense of self preservation for humanoid creatures.
Adjusted AI for beasts to be more realistically aggressive.
Adjusted attributes such that they were more constant.

Not everybody's ideal but then it doesn't have to be. Thus this topic.

In Ob I played quite a bit to get the feel and then commenced to modding. In Skyrim I am planning on modding early and often.

considering attributes were in as they were previously in SK before the devs changed their minds there is no reason (other than pettiness) that we can't use the CK to tweak the attributes. I don't think it will take as long as a year to do but the first couple of versions will likily be either buggy or change the nature of the game all together than what the vanilla turns out to be like. the option to create attributes in CS was there so I don't see a reason why not in CK.

Has it occurred that this may just be the idea they had in mind?

Attributes are just numbers, while perks offer variety to gameplay.

So perks are superior.

Attributes define the personal abilities of the PC. Numbers just make this easy. In an RPG, a player should be limited to what their PC can actually accomplish. The hulking sword fighter should succeed over the agile thief ~when the task is to steal (and haul off) a 2'x2' gold ingot. Perks should change this? (and be superior in some way?)

Which can be further defined into numbers.

Attributes: "This guy will die faster now."
Perks: "Oh cool! Now I can make enemies fall to the ground when I bash them with my shield!"

*you probably wont be interested in #1, its the same counter point that is typical back and forth but it has to be said because you and others are discounting antire factor* #2 answers your question tho

1.if your implying that the devs removed attributes because they thought they were broken you are wrong, but I know that you know what bgs/ todd said in regards to their reasons; to make it so that players could switch play styles from a marksman then swiftly into a pure mage if they wanted to. thats fine I guess, I think its moronic but enough people want to do that. but it has been a baseless lie that the attribute system is broken. it was not until it was announced that they were gone that people began to say it was broken, before every one blamed the real issue with leveling: leveled enemies. the small faction here is the fan boys who literally claim that SK will be the best game ever (they literally mean ever) and they respond to every change "oh it didn't do any thing any ways" just shows that they know nothing of how the system functioned. being a heavy RP'er I learned the very in's and outs of attributes so when I know what parts are not there any more I know what I can and can't do. the new 3 macro attributes greatly limits what I can do in realation to creating specifc characters that have stats that are different from other play types.

2. the point of having a middle man stat like intellegence and willpower even though we technically could just keep it in our heads is for two reasons (that I can think of) 1; so that there is one less thing to keep track of out of many when role playing while making a middle ground out of full out D&D style and linear rpg. 2: having a few extra stats can make a defining point between very different character types. like a mage and a very smart thief. mages use both will power and intellegence, while intellegence determines total magicka willpower determins how fast it will regenerate. so a very intellegent thief (intellegent for role playing) does have alot of magicka but having willpower allows me to keep that stat low so his magicka hardly regenerates so it makes him very different even though he uses half of the same attributes as mage. how can I do that now with H/M/S? what determines varying types of thieves or mages?

Don't feed the...... you know. His response has absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand and should therefore be entirely ignored.

Meanwhile..... Gizmo - "Has it occurred that this may just be the idea they had in mind?" What is the idea to which you're referring here?

thats been a bunk story from the start. it has NEVER been the case that it was one or the other. the game while in development had both, the confirmed reason attributes have been reduced is to make it easier for players to switch gameplay styles from melee to magic or to marksman. the whole perks vs attributes thing is a lame distraction, I want both because both are great features of the game.

Do you mean that giving abilities that allow a character to perform new actions, slow down time while aiming with a bow, effect the performance of a specific weapon type within a category (swords v. maces. v. whatever), etc. are defined easily quantified in an attribute scale?

Attributes are fine for an extremely vague personalization of a character, but they do not make a character unique. I think BGS is trying to make the game feel more organic through the use of a lot of specific options rather than a few all encompassing ones.

Attributes and perks are not mutually exclusive, I dont see what part of that is hard to understand?