I remember reading that attributes are still there but in a different form. Perks will take care of the skills, which attributes used to do. But you will be adding to attributes, with your health, fatigue, and magic in mind. Its still there just in a lesser form because perks are there to pick some of the slack. Stuff like luck will be pumped by perks

Virtually every post you make on the subject is, at heart, based on the presumption of the removal of perks being the position of those with whom you're debating. That's the only way that you could argue that the system you advocate could offer more variety. If you were to base your posts on the undeniable fact that we are actually arguing for attributes in addition to perks, then all of your claims of greater variety would immediately collapse.

And note - you go on below to do, again, exactly what I just addressed:

Perhaps perks will be done somewhat like they were in Fallout New Vegas (from the Fallout Wiki):
"There are 88 regular perks, 8 companion perks, 16 challenge perks, and an unknown amount of special perks. Only regular perks may be selected during level up. Other types of perks are granted through completing various tasks, and do not count against the limit of regular perks.

Companion perks, as their name suggests, are granted by the player's companions. For example, Enhanced Sensors is only in effect while the Courier is accompanied by ED-E. The perk remains in effect so long as the companion is currently following the player. Unless the companion is dismissed, the perk will remain in effect regardless of the distance between the player and their companions. Companions told to wait are still counted as active companions.

Challenge perks are unlocked by fulfilling certain requirements. Challenge tasks can be accessed from the Pip-Boy menu; on the 'Misc.' page, accessible from the 'Data' section. Most of the perks obtained this way are related to the skill or task that was completed to earn it. For example, Set Lasers for Fun increases the odds of scoring Critical Hits with energy-based energy weapons; to earn the perk, a player must score a total of 64 critical hits with energy weapons over the course of their game. Additionally, some challenge perks have multiple ranks or more than one version, which 'level up' as the player continues adding to its requisite challenge task."

So you may get to take up to 50 regular perks, but you'll also be receiving quite a few other perks. I just don't believe that out of 290 perks, you'll only get to receive at most 50 of them.

They said perks are only related to skills and that their perk tree is directly relater to its corresponding skill set. No mention of general perks, or challenge/quest perks etc.

Sorry for the repost, but I still would like someone respond.

Currently there are 3 "Attributes" (health, magicka, stamina). You would lose nothing and gain hundreds of new possiblites by extending those to 6-8 again.
More options and more distinguished characters are not redundant. It's crucial for any good RPG. And you cannot argue against options while defending the perk system (which is great).

Agreed. I honestly don't see what the fuss is about. They've already stated everything Attributes did is already being handled some where else. What does raising an INT attribute really do? Well it gives you more magicka, which is still in the there, only you raise Magicka directly. What does increasing a STR attribute do? Increases you weapon damage, which is done by raising you weapon skills or increases your encumbrance which I don't think it is a wild guess that there will be perks for that.

The only purpose left that attributes served is a poor RP tool where you can say "Hey my character is really smart" if he had 100 INT. Which you obviously can still do, only you don't have a numeric measurement of it. Is that really what we are complaining about? Would folks be satisfied if the added an attribute mechanic that you earned points to put into that effected absolutely nothing just so you could say "I have 100 STR"?

Now if the game responded to attributes in the way the old Fallout games did where playing a smart/dumb character or a strong/weak character, etc could actually have an effect on your game experience, then I could see what all the gnashing of teeth was over, but honestly that isn't the case here.

No, your just misinterpreting the situation. It's in comparison to each other. It's what the new system has versus the old system, it has nothing to do with "thinking people are trying to take away perks". Like I said, keeping attributes would mean having to spend precious development time to make them all useful again just to be redundant because the new system already does everything attributes do and more. So by keeping attributes with perks, you just doubled the benefits so now the game is imbalanced. The only reasoning I see for keeping attributes at this point is for Nostalgia's sake which is not a good reason, functionality over "because it was here first".

No, read what they said carefully on twitter - Perks will perform the same as the effect of attributes. I.e. perk that gives extra damage in lieu ones physical prowess score.

I have no problem.

My problem is the mindless bland cookie cutter beginning/origin where everything is practically the exact same. Getting perks based on skills does not define who you are/were prior to you learning advanced skills at university - you had physical and mental quantifiable characteristics going in.

And you're repeating yourself with your head in the damn sand. I told you why attributes plus perks would not make a [censored] difference unless they were implemented in a way that was completely different from prior games, because as they're implemented in Oblivion and such the direct increases to magicka and fatigue invalidate a large part of what they did. I then went on to point out that doing so would run counter gamesas's goals for Skyrim. They want your characters to start out the same and become different as you progress. Attributes that you pick at the start of the game would negate that goal.

Now, of course, they could set those attributes by race for you as they have in the past. Fine. Let's assume that. We still have to consider the way the attributes are implemented. It would have to change quite a bit for them to be retained and still be significant. For one thing they'd have to become far more important, because if they don't make a noticeable difference then they're dead weight. If the difference in damage you do with a sword at strength 10 or strength 20 can be overshadowed by the weapon you're using, it's kind of pointless to have strength. So we increase the effect it has. Now your character's strength is a major determinant of the damage he does. Those perks are less important now, aren't they? After all, your mace guy and your friend's axe guy have different perks that give you different advantages with those weapons, but if you ignore both of those and just use a Daedric sword that relies on your strength to do damage by the truckload then it's kind of pointless to pick the damn perks because you have less reason to use your plain old Elven mace over the Daedric sword. If the perks are to be emphasized as being the most important aspect of character ability then computationally speaking they should be just that, and that necessitates scaling back the importance of the attributes in the first place, and if they're going to be mostly useless then why include them?

Simplification is not a bad thing, damn it. The old adage "less is more" has some merit, but a better quote would be that "perfection is achieved not when there's nothing left to add but when there's nothing left to take away." New system makes attributes kinda pointless? Ditch the [censored] attributes, move on.

E3 is only two months away, im sure they will show and explain everything then.

thank you for that, some people don't know how to do research

If you feel the attributes don't have enough effect, then why not make them have more? How could it possibly improve the game to eliminate them entirely instead of making them more significant?

Because that's what they decided to do? Why leave attributes in if they are only going to be redundant to the systems already in place?

It's not like we are "losing" that early Fallout type experience where people recognize you have the IQ of an ant or the strength of Hercules. Could they have done that if they wanted? Sure, but obviously they didn't. All they really did was remove a system that would have been redundant with the new systems already in place.

Because, it's a REDUNDANCY. It does the same thing as the perk system does. Keeping attributes in (and especially if you decide to improve them to be useful) will cause imbalances because you start to pile on bonuses upon bonuses and you still have the issue of no real differentiation because people are still going to pick the same attributes, the ones that improve combat capabilities. Why keep them individual values when they can be still part of the game but in a different place and then add even more customization in it's place? Like speed, you have sprint now, all the speed you should need. Personality, we had the speechcraft minigame last game and we don't know how they will be handling it this game, so it was pretty much useless. Luck has always been so passive that it was basically useless by default except if you wanted to get more enchanted items to drop than normal, which wasn't a major flux in the number. The list goes on.

lol, I think that he is ignoring you

Ah, so I'm not the only one that gets that feeling :tongue:

It doesn't bother me that he disagrees but I wish he would at least acknowledge I was even posting a response.

because it has no weight in game, and just like others saying how attributes and birthsigns didnt matter in the long run, the same can be said for RP thoughts.
So...what now? hack and slash?


I love how people are beating the 280 number, last I checked as far as we are concerned that signifies Quantity not Quality, and a Mace which inherently ignores armor (I.E Chainmail/light armor and with significant strenght...(oh wait thats not there anymore) heavy armor) and does direct damage all of a sudden needs a perk to do so. Perks which have been around since Daggerfall, and MADE SENSE in their implementation (in most aspects) are all of a sudden branded "new" and are supposed to replace core aspects of a character. some guy was throwing around numbers here, all I see is quantitative results (until proven otherwise by beth that perks aren't +4 to walking speed)


280 / 18 skills = 15 and some change yeah? for each skill now perks aren't even branded with attributes, they are supposed to be arbitrary replacements so me swinging around a war hammer often wont increase my strenght, I have to pick a perk oh and that increase in damage might not translate to other weapons or even my fists for that matter, because its skill based, and in addition if I wanted to tailor my character to have as many perks pertaining to strength I am now limited in other avenues of play even more so than just being a "pure fighter" WHICH isnt even the case, because in the interviews yesterday its stated you don't want to do something anymore you can drop it and go for another skill, so now not only did I use um my availible Perks of 50 max, but I also f'ed my leveling since Im raising skills that were no longer my focus and I have to grind until the rollercoaster starts again.

yeah, they like to ignore people of reason and go after people with weaker arguments.

If "attributes", mathematical quantification of properties of a subject, are redundant - then remove them from the game. Health/stamina/magica. Have everything based upon perks and skills - even those three found in any FPS (except magica - change to bullets). Having any character from any of the "playable 8races" differ only in crude/vague ways between health/stamina, which are extremely poor adjectives for individuals, caters to the I don't want to spend time making my character - they don't make me do that in COD/insert random shooter.

So a swordsman that has trained his swordsmanship for a long time and then he realizes through his training that if he strikes this one point on some body he can pierce the heavy armor at it's weakest point allowing to bypass armor isn't realistic? I say this as an example because that is how discovery happens, by practicing something over and over and discovering a new way to exploit your enemy and yes, it happens all of a sudden.

Attributes are not redundant.

Lets say I am a level 20 Sword type guy, who used a blade from level 1. Obviously my blade skill is pretty high. I can do a backspinning whirly woop, a front slashing hurricane, my damage with it has increased and got a perk that I have a chance to cause continual bleeding. But then I see this pretty mace on the ground.

So I have 0 skill in mace, but when I as a level 20 perform a basic swing with it, it should come with more damage on that basic hit then some level 1 with a 0 skill in mace. Why because my strenght attribute is taken in effect. Without real attributes, a level 20 guy will be just like a level 1 guy if he abandoned all his skills with perks, and thats not right.

Ah, VA_Ghost. You continue to deliberately miss the point and cry about how since you no longer have a number that tells you how smart you are this is automatically Call of Duty. And you're 100% right. Every character will do the exact same damage with a given weapon, which will never deteriorate with use. People will hide behind cover to regenerate health instead of using spells that depend entirely on your skills to determine their effectiveness, or using potions that similarly depended on your alchemy skill to create, or simply upon your mercantile skill to purchase. The entire game will be a series of linear corridors with an overblown melodramatic cutscene thrown in every fifteen minutes or so instead of a huge and expansive fantasy world that you can roam through freely. Praise be to the prophet VA_Ghost, who tells us of the apocalyptic future with the aid of his superiority complex (god those people who like FPSes sure are dumb!) and his ability to tell the truth without backing up any of his claims with evidence or reasoning. More numbers is better, regardless of their significance!

Sorry - I tried a couple of times to compose a response to that last one, but I can't even quite sift through all the contradictions in your first sentence, much less work up a response to them. And it's not as if there's even the vaguest chance that you'll ever, under any circumstances, acknowledge even the slightest bit of credence to any statement anyone makes that is in any way different from the opinions you already hold.

I feel I made some valid points well, and I'll leave it to the lurkers to judge them.

lawl....I love you sleign, I really do, I see you everytime I check my messages under friends, but if I had a stick I'd throw it at you.



MACE NOT SWORD rofl.....thats why I said Inherent, not learned, to strike through armor with a sword, you learn or get lucky (oops thats out too) thats perks