An intelligent warrior is contridictary? So strong people are stupid? And intelligent people never fight? I am sure the many generals over the years from Alexander to Napolean would have something to say about that.

The point i was making is that the previous attribute system (and i still stand by if we are removing we are comparing to previous games, otherwise it would be ommitting) was actually very limiting. You couldn't make so many builds because the attribute system didn't cater for them. You couldn't make a very weak Wizard, the lowest you could go was around Strength 30. What if you wanted to roleplay someone weaker? You had to ignore the numbers! Because there was no use in the attributes beyond magika, stamina and health they ended up being a hinderance, not a bonus.

If you ever wanted to truely roleplay a charcter in any of the other ES games you had to ignore the nmbers and place your own constraints on the charcter. If you wanted to play a weak charcter for example, you had to decide that you wan't going to lift things over a certain weight. If you wanted to play stupid charcter you had to choose to not pick obviously better choices in dialogues. Nothing has changed with regards to that.


I still don't get why anybody really felt their attributes told them anything about their charcter that their skills didn't do a better job of. By the end of the game all attributes were around 80-100 anyway. We all became the strongest, smartest and quickest people in the world. And yet we here all about how attributes made us all different. Not in any playthrough i saw.

Well, I hate to keep pressing this because it make my dork nose grow a little longer, but you guys appear to be very basic at role-play. If you think that STRENGTH and INTELLIGENCE (etc) are the most important aspects of your character, I feel like you haven't enjoyed it as much as you could. You can still have concepts about your character (deep and personal concepts) without those standard, lame mechanics that are included in video games in general.

This game offers a world to have adventures in. If you can't figure out role-play within Skyrim, your creativity is lacking.

How so? Think about it, a world where you can't outrun anybody, win at arm wrestling(ok there's a wee bit of skill), beat anyone to press the buzzer, beat anyone to answer the question, lift more or less than anyone at the gym, and everyone has the same personality, what kind of nightmare is that?

Nitpicking here but how exactly am I going to play an acrobat character? Not that I am disregarding the point that you, and other people, are making, which to me is valid and is a point that I understand now, but there is no way that someone can play an acrobat character anymore without... well, acrobatics. Again, I see your point and it makes the removal of attributes not seem as bad. However, I think taking out athletics and - especially - acrobatics was a huge mistake.

And how about speed, that ties them all together? That attribute had a relatively different mechanic than the other attributes, as it governed how fast you moved and the skills of athletics and acrobatics. I don't know, perhaps that's a topic for a different discussion. I think, though, after understanding your point, that the removal of acrobatics and possibly athletics appears to be the true menace here. :shrug:

Well I am CONCERNED, which wasn't a choice in the poll.

The last game franchise I played that made a major change was Dragon Age Origins to Dragon Age 2, ... and IMO it was terrible. Completely killed the franchise for me. So when something as basic as attributes are removed from the game, something that has ALWAYS been in TES games, I am concerned.

My real concern was why did they do it? Did attributes not work? Seems odd to wait until game number 5 to fix this if they didn't. Does Bethesda believe that gamers are just dumber now and can't be bothered with such details? Did it give console players headaches? I mean if there was a real reason they were removed I'd be all over it. Adding perks is fine. Perks worked great in FO3. But FO3 also had attributes. If I wanted a character skilled in stealth I had to build them that way with their attributes. If I wanted a big time melee fighter I had to build them that way with their attributes. Gamers are not so stupid that we can't figure this out. Why a basic and essential part of character development was removed I have yet to hear a good reason for, other than simplification and dumbing the game down.

I have thought about long and hard ,ever since i heard they are not there anymore. I've been over this so many times that my fingers still hurt from typing about it. Nothing,not one thing that someone has said in all these months has convinced me i'm going to miss attributes. People really do not think enough sometimes....each to their own. Point is ,is that they are not there anymore as we know/knew them......let's move on.

That's not what I meant, I already gave you an example.Fitness would better serve a warrior than intelligence. Not a commander.


Those are valid points, though I never got to that point I agree on avoiding jack and master of all trades. I didn't say the system you're referring to is perfect but having everything vanishing into a black hole is a little extreme.

Need them? No. Do they add to Roleplay? For many of us, yes.

Skills do not equal attributes, they are 2 completely different things. A skill is something you learn and an attribute such as intelligence is something you are born with and can improve.

Roleplaying is all about defining your character. It is about how well a game can make you play the roll you want to play.

And we have been limited in that due to removal of attributes. Skills add to roleplay as well but do not replace attributes at all.