indeed

allowing exploits is just bad game design

For those saying "Chameleon is not a broken spell" I disagree. Its an invisibility spell in a game where there already exists an invisibility spell. It is redundant. Change the way you implement the spell, and you change the spell itself. So [censored] to those who keep saying "Don't fix what aint broke"...it is broke, and it needs fixin'! If its not fixed in Skyrim though, I won't pitch a fit, I'll just never use it, like I did in Oblivion. I'll be disappointed, but not angry. I won't be throwing the disc out of my living room window for any reason whatsoever.

Edit: I'm not sure why or how the vadagar quote above got in my post...I didn't hit reply or anything. Regardless, I'm leaving it in there because its a valid point, and somewhat fits with the content of my post. Bad game design requires fixing. End.

Nonsense.
And I do have built up a particular dislike for the meme 'redundant' by now.

The spells did two completely different things for one.

And secondly an optional feature is by defintion not gamebreaking.

Thirdly, if so many people enjoy the feature, how can it be bad game design?

but what if you find special armor. I got 100 percent chamelon not by enchanting clothing but by getting specific rare items

Content shouldn't be removed to fix an exploit. AI should be pumped up to handle it, hence getting rid of the exploit.

Mages knowing how to use life detect while warriors and thieves getting in touch with their "get back to the chapppa" inside them and setting traps would make chameleon something fun to use while not feel like you're cheating.

I was watching my friend play one time, and he had a set of gear enchanted to give him 110% chameleon. He ran through the Imperial City, just slaughtering the guards with ridiculous ease. They didn't even swing at the air, they just freaked out. I think chameleon needs to be toned down and cost a much larger amount of Magicka, as well as NPC's swinging at the air around them.

if you guys want to cap it just make them 85% yourselfs no one forces you to make a set to max it at 100%. i like it at 100% if i want that type of game style if i dont i just take off a hood or some other peace of garb, problem solved!

I never did use it i used plain ole sneek im not developeing the game i dont get to change it.Just disscusing what i think is best .my opinon on it is i think its stoopid and game breaking i woulnt put it in a game i designed at those levels is all but i wont be upset if its in i dont use it.

There is no need for fake and arbitrary caps on anything. It is bad enough they have confirmed cool down timers..... All you need are developers smart enough to balance these things so that they work themselves out naturally. A little work with the EVIL, EVIL spreadsheets and some ingenuity should allow one to create a nifty system where 100% is still possible, just insanely hard to get to or only possible during very limited circumstances....

I disagree that it is redundant. Invisibility (at any level) gives complete, whole, and total invisibility until you interact with something or the duration expires. Chameleon gives only a percentage (not perfect until 100%) invisibility though you are able to interact or attack and it will not dissapate until the duration expires. I was shutting down an oblivion gate and drank a few potions that gave me a total of 98% chameleon and I still got attacked. That doesn't happen with invisibility. They don't see you. Period. They have two different effects to be used in different situations. I don't see the necessity of a cap but I do think it was too easy to accomplish 100% in OB. Make it much harder in Skyrim and I think it will be fine.

:facepalm:

You know, considering past history and Beth's blatant disregard for the game world......I would not be surprised....

That sounds like a wrong approach as well. I mean why go through all the trouble you described to get smacked down by the next enemy who hears you stepping on a branch or something.

Something that is game breaking generally is actually optional because its something that beats all other options by quite a margin.. so yea your definition is pretty terrible. Just because something is optional does NOT mean that its not a game breaker.

Overpowered faction in an RTS? Game breaker.
Overpowered unit in an RTS? Game breaker.
Overpowered strategy in an RTS? Game breaker.
Overpowered weapon in an FPS? Game breaker.
Exploits for an advantage? Game breaker.

and so on. For something to be game breaking in a way it HAS to be optional because it has to be compared to other routes in gameplay.

People enjoy the spell, sure. What is bad game design are the mechanics around it. Its pretty much a given that a lot of people like to have easy mode games. So many people enjoyed the level cap being raised from 20 to 30 in Fallout 3. Was it bad game design? Yes, it was incredibly bad game design.

Why do I, and others who dont want an easy mode game, have a problem with YOUR Chameleon spell? Because we want options and we want to have all the gameplay depth we can. I want to be able to use Chameleon without it feeling like im putting the training wheels on.

So actually its your post thats nonsense, infact most of your posts are. You seem to be practicing posting fallacies.

To be honest, i don't think it needs removing. If you want to use the 100% chameleon then do it. I think removing things sends the game backwards, but i think it would help if it was dumbed down or capped somehow.
I still think it could be a really cool idea to get a cloak of invisibility or something in oblivion, but when you interact with items NPC's should become aware.

I had fun with the chameleon effect but it makes stealing and murdering too easy so i just choose not to use it anymore

All these arguments could be solved in the chameleon effect was not by percentage and invisibility was not like "100% chameleon until an action", but something like this:

The chameleon was like camouflage power, and invisibility was like a "higher camouflage power, until an action", but those powers could be countered by sight, smell and hearing power and keenness of the opposition.

Those power could be added to sneak power, the coloring of worn gear, and environmental effects like ambient light and fog, and so on...

Something like this:

Sneaker:
Sneak skill + Camouflage spells + Worn gear + Environmental effects + Action effect and sound

Opposition:
Keenness + Blindness or Detect spells + Alarm state + Line of Sight + hearing and smelling power

Environmental effect is the ambient light of the point where the sneaker resides, the material of boots and ground, and the fog effect and the like.

Actions can make sounds and alarm the nearby foes.

The Alarm state can be like this:

• Unconscious: Can not detect anything. :sleep2:
  
• Distracted: Attention caught by something else. :violin:
  
• Unaware: Idle, whistling, mumbling and the like... :whistling:
  
• Alarm level 1: Heard a sound, and looks toward the direction. :shifty:
  
• Alarm level 2: Saw a something and comes looking for it. :stare:
  
• Alarm level 3: Find something bad like a corpse and start actively searching. oo:
  
• Alarm level 4: Found the target but lost it and looking for it. :flame:
  
• Alarm level 5: Actively pursuing/attacking the target. :gun:
  
• Alarm level ?: Fleeing from the target. :bolt:

And each alarm state affects the sight power or keenness of the pursuer, so at first it would be easier to avoid them, but if you knock something down and make a noise, it would become harder to avoid them.

This way, you could cast a chameleon spell and pass the regular foes, but those higher level guards and bosses, they should be harder to avoid, because they had keener senses, and thus obtaining a high level item, at high level area, that would have higher level foes, would require better spells and more advanced sneak skills, and that would mean higher level player, which would prevent the problem that was my concern.

I.e. using an easy to gain invisibility spell and getting higher level items in higher level areas should not be an option.

Wonderful.
If only all your examples werent all about FPS and had nothing to do with any RPG I would be impressed.
No.
I am still impressed by your ability to make a logical sentence.
Im really sorry but I do have to disagree on the initial premise.
This is neither an FPS nor a multiplayer.
There literally is no such thing as overpowered in a TES game.
It just doesnt fit the concept of the game.

There literally is no such thing as a game breaker.
Im really very sorry, but if you were unable to put down the skeleton key then you did play the game wrong.
This is not Halo.
I know its quite condescending to tell people how to play a game, but, I am truly sorry, if you really thought the skeleton key was a gamebreaker, then you are an idiot. You should go play halo as clearly you dont get this. I know its harsh to say.
I dont think I can say it any nicer than this.

How do exploitations have nothing to do with RPGs? Spell stacking in Oblivion was a common exploit which they actually tried (and failed) to patch out of the game at one point. The genre of the game doesnt matter (only one of those examples was FPS by the way, again you fail pretty hard with definitions) when it comes to defining what game breaking means, you clearly do not know what it means. You tried to define it and was very wrong.

If for example, Destruction had a spell that cost no Magicka and instantly killed every enemy in view it would be game breaking because there would be no reason to use any other Destruction spell. If you have a choice between A, B and C with A being considerably better than B and C then A is game breaking. If A is overpowered then A is game breaking. I dont know how to make it any simpler than that and if you still cant understand then I feel sorry for you. Chameleon was obviously considerably more powerful than it was intended to be.

And yes even single player games should be as balanced as possible otherwise we end up playing garbage like Fallout 3s Broken Steel.


EDIT: An example of an RPG having a game breaker. Ever played the Witcher? If you have you would probably know that you can walk through the entire game spamming a single sign over and over to easily wipe out hordes of enemies. It gets even easier if you direct your character progression towards improving this. All other signs besides Igni were useless because of how overpowered Igni was.

The gameplay suffered because this one spell was overpowered. You either used it and the game was a cakewalk or you didnt and you were basically down a spell because its poorly balanced.

Sorry, I have not played the Witcher, but enough people on this forum like it enough to make me put it on my wannabuy list.
Have you played Blair Witch Project, to retaliate? Awful movie.
Wonderful game.
Never held your hand. Puzzles were puzzling and combat was terrifying cause lethal.

What I mean is that in a good sandbox RPG 'redundant' is an idiotic term.
One can open a lock with securtiy, open spells, one can use the skeleton key. These are all options and none of them disqualify the others nor make them obsolete.
Truly, you are playing the game wrong if all you go for is 'the best'.
I would want skills and options to overlap, as to make more builds possible.
I do fear that a whole lot of this 'OP' nonsence purely comes from people who quite frankly would not know how to play an RPG if it bit em and they treat it like an FPS. This is an opinion of course, but given the level of people who insist things are 'OP', I fear Im not far from the truth.

Really, and I do mean it. If you think anything was 'OP' in Daggerfall, Morrowind or Oblivion, then you were playing the game wrong. I know this is presumptious.
I never had any trouble to place the 'amulet of shadows' from Morrowind on a desk. I never had any trouble to put Oblivions skeleton key in a cupboard. I reveled in the option to create an open lock artifact in Daggerfall.

You are joking right? We are talking 2 different spectrums of the spell. Its only "Broken" if you have a real high percentage, and you could never get more then like 20% on a single piece of clothing (At a really high cost mind you), so everyone who doesn't like 100% can still get the effect by just NOT USING ALL 5 PARTS. Seriously.

How in gods damn name does me wanting to use something that is optional effect you in any way, shape or form? Honestly, I have not seen one answer to this. All I see is "its broken" "its broken" "Its broken."

IT IS OPTIONAL, meaning YOU DONT HAVE TO USE IT

ZOMG mind blown, whoda thought that's what optional meant.

It's an exploitative feature, hence (in my book) it's broken. I did main quest at highest difficulty (won't do it again, jeez!), and invisibility made it a complete no brainer. All "aid for Bruma" quests (gates) without a single fight. In ALL other games, balancing issues such as these are patched up once they're reported. NO racing games let me have infinite nitro if I jerk the joystick sideways fast enough, and then ask me to not use it - it is patched.

Invisibility IS really badly balanced atm, and it needs some serious thought.