As opposed to being specialized and having only one choice in how to accomplish a task?

Jacks open all kinds of different ways to accomplish the same task/goal. You may find them boring, but I do not

That's true. But on a non-jack (let's call them like that for now) you need to be creative with the character's skillset. Only then, you can say you've really learned the skills you set out to use.

You can use a jack to do the same thing, but in general, that's something you do at high levels. This, means you'll propably never see how dedicated skillset characters perform at low levels, or what difficulties they may have to face. Your views will be skewed -as were mine for a while.

These from a player who, just like you, loves playing jacks. But I also appreciate and respect dedicated skillsets, as I've learned from both types of characters.

Nothing to do with "how to accomplish a task", everything to do with "should this character do this task or not".

They're great for just screwing around doing whatever, but if you're role-playing an archer, then you have to make sure you pay attention to the skills best suited for that archer. While he/she could fling a fireball or use a sword if it came down to it, point is they would probably not feel comfortable with it. If I were an archer, I would much rather stick with my trusty bow than use a sword I've no experience with or risk burning my arm off trying to use a fire spell. When you specialize, you tend to focus on only the skill sets that makes sense for that particular character and adjust gameplay to how that character would respond.

For example, if my archer grabs a sword, he/she isn't going to be all Jack Sparrow on a bandit's ass. He/she would probably swing the thing wildly, hitting everything but the bandit, or just the bandit's shield. Same if he/she tried to shoot a spell. With no experience with a sword or a spell, and out of reach of his/her bow, my archer would be helpless unless he/she got really lucky. More often than not, retreat would be first priority.

have quite a few jacks. To me they can be just as fun as any gimped specialized character. They certainly do have more than one way to deal witha problem.

To me the classic 'jack of all trades' (master of none) is the Bard class from the old D&D days. A Bard could do a bit of fighting, a bit of magic, a bit of thievery.

But Jacks do best when offered multiple ways to solve problems, and this gets to one of Skyrim's weaknesses (as opposed to a game like Fallout: New Vegas) - most of the content involves straight-up combat and killing.

It's hard for me to play a jack of all trades Bard in Skyrim, because it still comes down to 'how am I going to kill that thing, and then the dozen other things in this dungeon?' Plus, Skyrim's melee combat is gritty and badass, which doesn't really fit with the mentality of a Jack, as I picture it.

There are other options besides killing (sneaking, Illusion magic), but again, the game doesn't reward or incentivize the player to mix those styles, really. If you can Calm your way through a dungeon, why bother sneaking or picking a fight? If you can murder everything with your sword, why fall back on magic? So playing as a Jack seems too much like I'm forcing it to happen rather than a reasonable approach to the game's challenges.

If there were more social interactions, if Speech mattered more, if quests had multiple ways of being tackled and resolved, then it might be more rewarding to play as a Jack character, because mastery of a single (usually combat-related) specialization might not be so desirable.

No love for "Jacks" here.

It completely destroys role playing in an RPG.

In fact you can get to a near Jack of all Trades in Skyrim at higher levels, particularly using the legendary skill reset. So you kind of have that option. But then things get really, really boring at that point.

I had one character with all skills and attributes max'ed out in Oblivion. I just wanted to do that once. but it wasn't particularly interesting to me.

I have some more observations about this topic. First, it doesn't necessarily have to be about which play style is superior.. Secondly, it sounds like people are using a high level endgame prototype to evaluate the hybrid characters which is not valid as most of my time with my multiple characters is spent well before 'end game' and every high level specialists I have is just as uber as hybrids. Generally a character that uses many different skills will have many challenges at low level and have to rely on creative gameplay and tactics. Therefore, I don't know how the overpowered argument applies, unless people who play specialist also make an effort to gimp their characters by arbitrarily reducing AR, MR, and health, in which case you are no longer comparing classes but player choices on how to play.

This last brings up the unfounded "roleplay" complaints against hybrid characters. This argument is unfounded for several reasons, first of which a hybrid character doesn't have to do all quests, and can still pick actions based on .personality. Also, most importantly, I think it is unrealistic from a roleplay point of view not to strive for some diversity of skill sets if one were placed in the shoes of the PC. If you were a real person in this situation would yoe u make yourself a 'glass canon' ? I could see a person using magic being more specialized as a matter of course, but I would still have some hand to hand skill and carry a sword and possibly work on being sneaky just in case. If you had access to some of the alteration and restoration spells in the game you would likely use them and possibly 'choose perks' to go with them even if you were primarily a warrior or thief.

Nicely written. I would just comment on the "glass canon" at least for me is a carry over from my D&D and AD&D days when there were game restrictions. That is, you were not allowed under the rules to use armor as a mage, etc. Perhaps many carry this concept into TES games where it isn't necessarily the case, they are after all 2 different worlds/games. Just my 2 septims. Cheers!

Indeed, we’re talking about a few different things in this topic. When comments are taken out of context the arguments for and against don’t make much sense. Then the explanation leads to another fruitless argument. It might be an interesting discussion if we were all talking about the same thing, but we’re not.

When I saw this thread title I thought it was about people from Swansea for a moment (they sometimes call themselves jacks).

Anyway, the problem I have playing them is that I prefer to work within factions. So if I was playing a jack of all trades, he'd have to be involved with a few of them and that means that my game would overlap with that of other characters I play. It works if there are lots of factions, but Skyrim doesn't have many. I did tend to play them in Arena and Daggerfall when classes were more restrictive. Plus Daggerfall's temples had scattered skillsets.

I'm not a fan of jacks, playing as one seems to remove any sort of challenge from the game.

I'd much rather play a 'jack of many trades / master of none' type, because for me the goal isn't end-game stats, 'builds', grinding, or becoming a master of anything. It's not about seeing how effectively I can navigate a narrow path defined by my own rigid, unforgiving RP. It is, however, about the freeform creativity that happens along the journey to get there that makes it fun for me, and jacks simply have more forked paths available to them. I also fully admit I am one of those people that suffocate and get painfully bored when I'm guided, led, hand-held, or channeled.. whether by game OR story. It's one of the biggest reasons why I play Bethesda games... and not much else

I prefer to play a "Jack of a few Trades"... Stealth is just too much fun to pass up, so I work on sneak and archery. In sneak I only take perks up the right side until I have the assassin's blade thing with the daggers. Triple damage with a bow is not a bad thing either. Let's call Stealth a "Major" with a secondary in alchemy until I have "poisoner", and then I usually take a minor in one-handed, taking only the first option's perks. It's also fun to use Illusion, so I take the first three perks in that eventually (not including "dual cast").

Of course at least SOME enchanting skill is needed if you're to survive at all...

The thing is that playing that way, Illusion is never so powerful that you can "calm" your way through a dungeon with confidence, and sneak is very important when your one-handed is perhaps 25 to 30 at level 25 with one or perhaps two perks. Your bow is then a powerful asset and a primary weapon, but let's face it... when the first shot only angers the target, you have a big problem, and bows are actually very weak comparatively.

I find improvement in restoration happens whether you try or not, but I rarely use any perks on it.

I had a character that started as a ranger then ended up being a spellsword as part of the Roleplay and progression of the character's abilities.

All of my character eventually become jack of all trades no matter what type they are at the start.

I am a power user not roleplayer although I never abuse the system crafting system. I didn't use enchanted gear or drink potion when smith or enchant.

Some great and salient points! It is true that Skyrim's basic and most often used "answer" is kill everything. If you do not, less loot. Same with lockpicking. No lockpick, less loot. You get nothing for avoiding the combat so neatly placed i your path. Is it a viable gameplay option? Sure. So is never leaving Riverwood.

I find it more fun to be a specialized hybrid. A Nord assassin who masters stealth, but is also skilled in melee combat (stand up and fight), but cannot take a hit as well as the warrior starting off, or a warrior who uses only supportive/defensive magic are actually kind of tough to deal with.

I don't have anything against jack of all trades, but I find that if I attempt to "master" all three archetypes with one character (mage, warrior, thief), I get bored/frustrated as a player. I can do two out of three- I've played spellswords (magic + melee), scouts (stealth + melee), spellsneaks (magic + stealth) and had lots of fun, while still feeling meaningfully limited yet powerful. I do think that some kind of Achilles heel is necessary for me to really enjoy the game ( I love the Apprentice standing stone/birthsign for this very purpose.)

I guess I like my gameplay experience to be one of suspense and moments of victory snatched from the jaws of defeat, rather than a tale of hyper-competence, where success is just another day at the office. But I don't think players of jacks are inferior roleplayers or any of that other elitist rubbish. It's all about the imagination you bring to it.

Well you don't have to do any factions to be a hybrid. I have several characters that I don't want to even go to the college but will use shield spells. I take novice and apprentice perk then 1 or more of the magic resistance perks and stop there because you can't buy a higher level spell than stoneflesh anywhere but the college. If you happen to find a better shield and even paralyze somewhere it is very exciting as you can then move up the perk tree if desired. If you just use stoneflesh you don't need to ever put any points in magicka.

Good points

I have only tried a spell/thief once and that was for Illusion since sneak does not help Destruction at all. But I have tried the other combos and had fun

Jacks are not "all powerful", as some people are trying to say. I still die (often) with them. You still have to drink potions at the right time or get your healing spell off in time. The only difference is that there are more options to choose from for defeating enemies.

I have never been a "Master" of every skill, nor have a desire to do so (I get bored too quickly ). I have the most fun with characters that have a variety of skills. I still die often, so it is not an "easy" playthrough