The way I imagined them when we first started talking about them was a more general shaping of skills, inspired somewhat by Badass Points in Borderlands. We are past the point in TES where we can really restrict players from using skills, so my thought was you could use Techniques to shape HOW they use a skill by basically.giving manual control over what variables of that skill develop as you level it up.


So, for instance, if you had a Blade Skill... When you level up the skill, you get a point to invest in one of a number if variables that would traditionally be automatic, such as Speed, Power and Critical. This would allow you to develop the skill like you want, rather than along a pre-set path. So, at level 100 Blade, basically everyone has a different 'Technique' that distinguishes their skill-use from others, rather than everyone at 100 being exactly the same. It even allows you to branch out into more specialised categories, so you can specialise with specifics.


There are problems with that, though. For one, even at its simplest, it involves a degree of micromanagement. This could be mitigated with an Auto-Level feature you can turn on or off, but you're still looking at a more involved and time consuming process. And this just gets worse the more variables you add. Secondly, it could be very hard to balance. Third, it practically necessitates a different basic Perk mechanic, since these Techniques would govern most of what Perks do now.


The other system, which I mentioned above and which Jackal has advocated in the past, is basically like a Trained Perk. A teacher gives you access, and you train for awhile with the technique before unlocking it as a permanent bonus. I've seen systems like this... Somewhere before, I just can't remember where...

I see techniques as being more or a morphing of how skills are used, and areas of efficiency. Like, a technique that allows non-charged strikes to occur faster, a technique that morphs a particular charge attack to knock enemies down, disarm enemies, leap forward at a long distance, etc. Some could also increase attack range, increase the power of attacks, or just random things like this


For destruction, techniques could impact effects that happen when using a particular element. It could make frost more likely to engulf an enemy, or fire more spreading on the environment, or it might increase the size or speed at which fireballs are fired out. For other magic skills, techniques could grant bound weapons or armor unique enchantments, a light spell might blind enemies that look towards the light, telekinesis spells might disintegrate when they hit an opponent, mage armor might provide slight health regeneration when used, etc.


I guess I'm seeing them as ways to morph or augment aspects of skills. Some of them could be the more percentage-oriented modifiers for skills, that might have been seen as more like what some of Skyrim's perks were.


Whereas I think perks themselves should be more general and character-defining, like some of then game/world-bending abilities that Fallout perks often are.


I'm open to alternative views though. They could work best as being less about giving specific skill abilities new effects (i.e. blade strikes, charged mace attacks, fireball, mage armor, etc.) and more about giving them just mathematical/percentage modifiers. My interpretation as of currently might have a bit of uncomfortable overlap with perks.


I guess one of the issues with techniques is that if they're based just on percentage modifiers, I could see them potentially interfering with spell crafting, since some of the variables tweaked in a spell crafting system could be spell size, spell range, spell damage, magicka cost, combined effects, spell velocity, etc.

ok, I think I get what you are saying. To clarify I'm going to use KotOR2 as an example. In KotOR2 you could pick feats(perks) that helped you with lightsaber combat. You could also learn "forms" that granted you different abilities during lightsaber combat from the various Jedi masters you came across. Is that kind of what you are envisioning?

It sounds like it. Basically, I think techniques should be what differentiate one sword wielder from another. Same applies to alchemists with different approaches towards their skill, or pyromancers, or conjurers, etc. It reflects the "style" in which they practice the skill they're good at. The higher the skill, the more defined it could be.


Perks should be more related to attributes, and the perks that you pick should be amplified by the attribute level. They should be more general traits and talents that influence your character, and how they interact with the world, bending its rules in their favor.

Got it. Now I fully understand. Would you think all of that would be hard to implement?

Oh yeah, definitely. There are a few problems with it, such as magic skill techniques being redundant with spell making, at least if they're relegated to just percentage increases. On the other end, if we go too far towards modified effects or additional effects, it could begin to have a strange amount if overlap with perks. Maybe some hybrid system of both would be optimal, but yeah, it would be hard to figure out.


Although, I actually think it wouldn't be too hard to conceptualize a system that brings attributes back, while making them useful by tying perks to them. This might just be my personal preference, though. I've seen a few people here who actually dislike attributes/want them to stay gone.

Hmm, yeah I was thinking Beth might not put that kind of time into it, especially if they are selling a lot units with the system they have now. I would welcome something like that. I would welcome attributes back as well. Maybe not on the scale of previous TES games but perhaps the 1-10 of Fallouts special but instead of special it would be the traditional TES attributes.

Oh look, we're talking about my brain child.

Gonna say no on this one. Fallout's 1-10 system exists because its not intended to be modifiable. You start out the game that way, and your character (is supposed to) stay that way. You have the ability to modify it a little bit, but outside of 4, that's that. Its not a model that plays nice with TES's "improve as you go" methodology, and I think its Attribute system should still reflect that.

I'm not opposed to this (hell, I played Morrowind and Oblivion gleefully without being bothered by the attribute system), but would you bring Attributes back exactly as they were? How would you tie in perks with the attributes?

Not entirely. TES's attribute system was pretty...bad, when it came to trying to experiment with character builds. You couldn't run a intelligent warrior who doesn't use magic, and not have that intelligence represented in any aspect because of what Intelligence governed. I'm more for all Attributes being potentially beneficial for all character archetypes, as opposed to having to have strong warriors or smart wizards. A warrior with a high intelligence as opposed to strength might not stagger their enemies as often or his as hard, but they know where to hit the enemy where it really hurts to acheive more damage, or a mage with a high strength pool might see their spells not get interrupted when getting hit, or their wards being more robust then their squishy counterparts.

As for perks...well, Fallout NV already kind of shows how that works. Most of them would naturally make sense, with things like Sweep, the ability to use two handed weapons to hit multiple opponents, would need a high Strength. Or having perk that rallies your Companions and giving them a buff with a high Personality. A high Awarness could give you a perk that Marks a target, giving damage buffs with certain attacks/circumstances. Things that would synergize well with Skills, or emphasize your characters particular strengths.

Of course, like Fallout, there would also be perks that don't have a lick to do with Attributes, like being exhilarated by the thrill of killing a target, giving you a small portion of your stamina back, having a higher magicka regen when it direct sunlight, spells costing less at night, War Cry, Berserk, Terrifying Presence, things that add additional dialogue options if you belong to a certain Guild, perks that involve Lycanthropy or Vampirism, things of that nature.

I'm okay with most of what you said, but the main thing that I don't agree with is having some perks that are influenced by attributes, while having other perks that have nothing to do with them. It doesn't seem very... neat or organized, and I personally prefer perks that are based on and around attributes. I also don't like perk ranks, and would much prefer attribute level impact the effectiveness of the perks.


I agree that lockpocking and things if that nature should be based on skill but also keep a real time minigame. I also would like having puzzles that depend on attributes and player ability in a similar fashion, with a real time minigame or two.


Another area where I differ, is that I don't feel that perks should include things like a sweeping power strike, but that techniques should include those things. What I meant by overlap, is that I was trying to think of whether techniques would be more related to statistical increases that would impact performance with different weapon types, or more towards the "feel" of using different weapons, with things like different effects of power attacks, etc. I'm in my head trying to think of a way to make perks and techniques work with eachother, without having any kind of overlap between what both are meant to do. And once again, having a perk that influences how a weapon moves seems... like something that a technique should do. At least, to me.

Plenty of other RPG's already do it, including New Vegas, so the point is moot. There are cool abilities that have nothing to do with potential attributes but rather character temperment, so there's no way to include things like War Cry or Adrenaline Rush into Attributes. Also, I said nothing of Perk Ranks, since that's exactly what Fallout 4 did. 3 and NV did, but they were the exact same perk multiple times, as opposed to changing them/adding to the base perk like what 4 did.

If you try to adhere to everything being Attribute based, you end up something like Fallout 4. Its not a terrible system, but some things like Endurance having squat to do with Cannibalism were just silly. Sure, Attribute requirements would make up the bulk of the perks, like they did in New Vegas. But making them all have that falls into the pit that Fallout 4 did, and while it isn't offensive, I find it severely lacking in flavor of any kind. You need that kind of flavor for having a good character system.

Doesn't work with Blade/Ax/Blunt, since that requires the same perk in three different trees. Its supposed to represent how monstrously strong your character is that they can just cleave a bunch of guys at once, with little to actually do with Technique. If you're skilled with a greatsword and pick up a battleaxe or warhammer, you're still going to be murderously strong with those weapons regardless of Skill. You can just have more tricks with the weapon you're skilled in as opposed to the other two. Strength based perks that affect a weapon archetype is a way to represent that.

I should say that I saw abilities as being different from perks. I saw perks as being abilities that are tied to attributes that you pick upon leveling up. Regular abilities, on the other hand, I saw as things like the racial abilities you mentioned, or things like birthsign abilities. Whenever I've mentioned attributes and perks in the past, I've imagined a system similar to that of Skyrim's perk trees, but towards attributes, like attribute clusters.


The system I've been envisioning is an attribute cluster system, with a large variety of game-bending/meaningful abilities that pertain to each attribute. Rather than the attributes themselves restricting the perks one is able to pick, I've preferred a system where any perk one fits a level requirement for can be picked, and the perk picked has its effects magnified by the perks that are associated with it.


Ex:

Juggernaut (level 30, associated with the strength attribute) - whenever the player falls while wearing heavy armor by x amount of height, x% damage is dealt by a shockwave that knocks nearby enemies back by x amount, while mitigating falling damage by x amount.


I'm not against attribute requirements for perks as well, but I think it's best to make attributes meaningful by linking them entirely with perks, rather than making the only connection between them just attributes serving as arbitrary markers.


I don't think that an attribute-based perk system would lack character at all. I see it as the optimal way of making attributes matter and have in-game effects that reflect different characters using their abilities in differen lt ways.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Regarding the second part of your post, I disagree that it wouldn't work for a skill system with a division of blunt/blade/polearm/axe. Functionally, all of those weapons should be different and feel very different. In each of those skills, there should be sub trees for weapon specialization, like claymore vs. shortblade. Each of these sub-trees could have different technique options for kinds of attacks one can perform. One with shortblades might get a technique that allows them to perform rapid stabbing attacks if they use a charge attack running, where as a claymore user could have a single leaping strike while running. Different weapon types wouldn't need several of the same technique for each, because I don't think that different weapon types or sub-types should behave the same.


Now, if we're talking about strength perks, there are other ways that we could represent this without making specific moves generalized on attributes. I agree that there should be strength perks that impact how one's blows hit an opponent, but I don't see how making a specific movement tied to all weapon types makes much sense. Someone with high strength isn't going to use a dagger in the same way that they would use a claymore, regardless of how they are conditioned to fight. Different structures would require different approaches and should not be generalized. It would be weird to me to have all weapon types with essentially the same attacks. There needs to be more variety.


Instead of having a specific movement tied to attributes, I'd much prefer having a perk that actually changes the feel. Maybe there could be a perk that makes heavy armor and heavy weapon-using characters move around, have the impact, and the feel if power armor from FO4. I think attribute perks, instead of giving specific movements, should be about feel of the character and how the rules apply to them.


Will elaborate on anything I didn't adequately describe/portray upon waking up.

Except you can already do that without using Perks to begin with. If your character is monstrously strong, unlike Fallout 4, they're still going to get the benefits of being strong. The difference is that whether or not the player decides to emphasize that strength, and utilize perks that are tied to their own innate Strength, and using it to its full potential. I might have a strong character, but is that the core point I'd want to focus on? Maybe not, but I shouldn't feel gimped out for investing in something and not getting the benefits of it by using perks. That's exactly the opposite of what the word perk means.

We only need six attributes. Three of them are mental and three of them are physical, so there is a nice symmetry.

Mental Attributes

Perception*

- Total magicka

- Cast cost reduction

- Increased critical hit chance

- ?

Willpower

- Disease resistance

- Magicka regeneration

- Fatigue regeneration

- Total fatigue

Personality

- Starting disposition of NPCs

- Loyalty of followers

- Intimidation and yielding success

- Bartering bonus

Physical Attributes

Strength

- Total carry weight

- Total Health

- Power attack damage

- Chance of knocking down or staggering an opponent

Endurance

- Total health

- Total fatigue

- Fatigue drain from activity (running, jumping, climbing, dodging)

- Disease resistance

Agility

- Fatigue regeneration

- Chance of being knocked down or staggered

- Recovery time from power attacks

- Bonus to jumping, dodging and climbing, but not sprinting or swimming; and readying items (like putting away a sword and pulling out a lockpick or a potion)

We don't need Speed as an attribute. A re-imagined Athletics skill can cover movement speed, as well as the ability to dodge, jump, and absorb damage from falling. Personality is a different enough concept from Speechcraft the skill that it deserves a place. You can inspire courage, loyalty, fear, trust, etc... in people without being a smooth talker.

Intelligence should have a fourth thing that it does. Something thief-y, perhaps.

*Intelligence is something better simulated by how you play the character, rather than how the character plays, if you get my meaning. 'Perception' has more tangible effects on the way our characters move in the world without awkwardly limiting them.

"You pick up the book, but you are too dumb to understand it" or "you cannot learn how to summon a scamp until you do more logic puzzles" would not work in TES. Let's focus instead on the character's ability to notice things and to be connected to reality.

Nearly everyone seems to be in agreement that Speed and Agility existing simultaneously is incredibly redundant.

I'd move this out of magicka...well, most magicka related things out of everything but Willpower for the most part. Again, you can be pretty dim to be a mage in Tamriel, and an Intelligent mage would know more about magicka efficiency then merely being perceptive. Instead I'd focus on how well your character notices things in conversation and the environment, while in combat increases their Crit chance. Also, I'd like to tie how far it is when undiscovered locations on your compass appear. A character that is aware of their surroundings is going to actively pick up on more things then characters who aren't, after all.

Not a fan of a whole lot here. Honestly I'd let Stamina regeneration back be with Endurance for the most part, but...there ideally would be plenty of different ways to regenerate Stamina, especially via perks. I'm actually more okay with letting our starting regen rates for magicka and stamina remain mostly the same, with it starting to differ when our character learns new things.

Again, I'd rather avoid monotyping the Attributes to make them useful to all potential builds. Sure, high strength and endurance might be preferable to a warrior, given its nature, but ideally, I'd want all types of builds to look at an Attribute and thinking "That could be really useful for what I'm playing." Agility is a good place to start with that. Sprinting speed and general movement abilities like dodging seem ideal for rogueish characters, but things like lowering the enemies chance of landing critical blows, how quickly our character can act after being interrupted from an attack, the speed of which our character can preform the moves necessary to preform a large spell, are things all characters can benefit from.

Resisting nasty things like diseases and wounds are things that should be left to Endurance. However, Willpower affects how our character responds to them. If striken with a nasty disease, dying of hunger or thirst, or a going through a lack of sleep, a willful character is not going to be as bothered by it as others might, meaning they would see less drastic debuffs applied to them. This more suits the mental aspect Willpower over Endurance, which is more of a physical measure of how far they can push themselves before suffering the consequences. How badly they let those consequences affect them however is where the real test begins, and Willpower lets them push on regardless. This gives more physical characters a better reason to invest in this Attribute, since being able to push yourself passed ordinary limits can be a significant boon.

As I said previously, Willpower is really the only Attribute that is intrinsically tied to spellcraft and magicka in TES. As I see it, it should effect your raw Magicka primarily before everything else, with Intelligence acting as a modifier to how costly Spells could be. Also, it could be a means to how well you can Turn other creatures, resist an enemies attempts to debuff you through magic, or how an enemy resist your own Illusion spells, or how easy it is to dispel an enemies attack.

Getting into Personality, there's nothing I have a problem with there since its not hard to really deal with. Personally though, I'd like it if Strength affected Intimidation attempts, or having a low Personality actually makes it easier to do so. If you seem like a friendly sort and everyone in town knows it, it'd be harder to intimidate people because of your reputation. If your a misanthrope that everyone whispers in hushed tones about...its less so, since no one knows how you might respond.

I know I will be in the minority here but.:I don't want it and I don't need it.Magicka regeneration just makes playing a mage far to easy and is one of the reasons magic got nerfed in Skyrim.

I really don't want doge rolls in a TES game it was already silly enough with the useless rolls for Acrobatic in Oblivion.And I honestly think they look stupid and don't make any sense in combat.

Yeah, except playing a mage in the games shouldn't be harder then any other builds. Especially given, again, how easy it is to become a mage in-universe to begin with.

Dodge doesn't equate to rolling. I know that runs contradictory with what most third person perspective games gives us, but you can have a good first person dodging mechanic. And no, its not going to be a dice roll.

i miss the attributes, however going from Skyrim and ESO where you assign directly to health to Fallout 4 who uses the traditional health=level x endurance I can almost be willing to drop them.

More so with the high levels you reach in FO4, My level 80 FO4 character ended up with 500 in health 3 in endurance. combined with decent armor enemies had no chance killing you.