A month or so ago, I submitted a question to the fan interview asking if perks would be available every level, every other level, at the third level, etc. Well, what do you know, it got answered yesterday! Perks are currently (at this period of development) available every other level. Do you like this change or not?

I personally do like this. It reduces the amount of perks from a ridiculously overpowered 30 to the more moderate number of 15. Remember in Broken Steel where you could select almost all of the gamebreaking perks plus the skill-boosting ones and become a sort of God? Hopefully, this will prevent that, because it's pretty boring to play a God; All you do is go around one-shotting things in VATS, taking almost no damage. It's also closer to traditional Fallout because they has perks at once every three levels.

The overpowered-ness never really had anything to do with the perks (Aside from Almost Perfect and Grim Reapers Spirit) it mostly had to do with skill points. There really weren't that many worthwhile perks on FO3. I always found myself running out of useful perks at around level 21. That's another argument for why there should be fewer perks I suppose.

I'm a random person on the internet, and I approve this message.

As long as it's properly balanced, it doesn't matter how often they are.

Making it every few levels just gives the opportunity for the individual perks to be more powerful, since you'll be choosing less of them.


I wouldn't expect that the perks in a "choose 29, one every level" would be the same perks in a "choose 15, one every other level" or a "choose 10, one every three levels" system.

(For example, I doubt FO3 would have had "two skills +5" perks in an every-other-level scheme. They'd never be worth a pick, and not a single person would ever choose one. Whereas I was happy to pick them when it was every level.)

Ambivalent. I liked 1 / 3, And 1 / 1. So 1 / 2. will not make much of a difference.
However if I can make functioning character builds each with new perks suitable to whom I am playing as. I will be happy.
If they make a lot of piffle with only 1 or 2 perks of use by being uber perks and penalize you for not taking them. Then I would rather have more then less so I can Roleplay without getting frustrated that I can not end the game how I feel my player character should.
So depending on build choices and perk choices, and if roleplaying has more influence over the game 1 / 2 will suit me fine.



Yes I stopped taking S.P.E.C.I.A.L increases and just took one of these to suit who my pc was. Because they added some background in my opinion. If NV adopts them I would like to see them boosted one offs with more dialogue paths. Than multi picks that have little reason to be there.

I'm with you if the perks are useful improving balance las vegas style perks which should be useful.

Every 3 levels. Perks should be a big deal.
(maybe every 2 levels with an optional feat that would severely decrease skill points and/or stats)

if the perks are good then this will work well

It's a good choice for them to be every two levels, but I would prefer for them to be every three levels.

Just to clarify.... I also don't have an opinion on which version they use. As long as it's balanced, each version can work well.

Balance is good. I honestly don't care very much, but I lean towards more less powerful perks every level with more powerful perks available every 3 or 4 levels.

This, I like every two levels, as long as things are balanced. I'd say easily half of the perks in fo3 were filler, and of course there were also the stupid over-the-top ones from borken steel... please no more nuclear kameya-mayas.

It was actually every 4 levels in the original games... there was a trait that would allow for perks every 3 levels but you didn't get... iirc... as many skill points...

In that sense, this is a nice move towards making the game more balanced at late levels, more challenging at early levels, and will make the reward of quest-earned perks, greater.

I just hope they are useful perks then, because at around lvl 15 in FO3, I just stopped really needing any of the perks, I honestly cared about increasing my stats more than picking a perk.

Yea most of the perks svcked in Fallout 3. I found myself sitting there going, "Uhh... which one do I pick?!?" then picking a random one that usually then is useless to me. Of like the 40 you could choose from (Without any DLC) only like 5-10 were usefull. At most.

I think every 2 levels is fine, possibly even every 3, so long as they have much much better perks, so each one you pick actually makes a difference to your gameplay.

Well, while I agree that there were too many skill points allotted, many of the perks gave huge bonuses to skills, so I have to say that they're almost, if not just as much to blame. :shrug:

Were there really that many less skill points awarded in the original games...
I'm playing FO2 again... and my 5 intelligance guy gets 10 per level... that's pretty close to fo3 isn't it? My fo3 characters all end up with a 10 int (thank you intense training), where I am earning about 20 per level... 2x the int, 2x the skill points

it doesn't really bother me if the perks are interesting

Every two levels is fine, as long as there are more balanced and meangingful perks. None of the crappy skill point/XP gain increases. I want perks that actually affected how your character played and behaved. Granted there were some in FO3, but more variety with those would be nice.

CHARACTER SPECIALIZATION IS IMPORTANT!! I really don't want to play New Vegas like I did Fallout 3 and worry that by utilizing perks and getting skillpoints I would become a boring, unspecialized, near-perfect GOD CHARACTER with few differences in skills/perks to other PC's by the time I reach level 30. This was a big problem in FO3 (Especially after Broken Steel, and since this game is going to have a level 30 cap, I imagine it might be the same, but I hope not). So, once every 2 levels for a perks sounds about right, also, I want less skill points per level (at least for hardcoe mode, if nothing else).

No you are right, Since most combat skills were spread out and useless more or less. You could still end up with 125% or more in most skills that mattered. Speech, Small guns, Energy, Sneak, Science. with a mid level character and high intelligence.

While I voted for the second option, I think this should be the case if no revolution happened as far as perks go. That is to say, if perks are pretty much the same as they were in F3, with minor changes and additions, then yea, definitely once every three levels.
However, if there are tons of new perks, new ones along with old ones (some tweaked or broken-up), and there's more than one way to specialize in a single field, along with plenty of flavor, dialogue and RP perks, then by all means - once every 1-2 levels it is.

I think it'd be cool if there were mostly perks that were game oriented, that wouldn't help the fps-players too much, so they would just choose one at random and don't care too much about perks at all. But the way it is now, one can of course choose to ignore those options anyway, so it is what you make it. If you don't WANT to be a demi-god, the simple solution is to NOT choose demi-god perks... easy, really. I guess the developers wouldn't want to rid themselves of a vast part of their audience, either...

Wrong.
You got it backwards


You get one every third level but if you pick the skilled trait you get one every forth.

[3rd edit]
Oh and I'd rather have it at one perk every third level or forth if they include the skilled trait (Or any traits for that matter).
But I guess one every other level is good enough.

I'm happy with the perk every other level. It seems like a nice compromise. I love perks though.