Or mayhaps a perk that enables undetectable leaning if you haven't been spotted already.

(we get it, me, you're a svcker for perks. Not everything has to be a perk. Jeez, me.)

I'm sorry to tell you but it is impossible to make "realistic" combat in a bethesda game.

1. Beth makes rpgs

2. Beth's idea of rpgs is that charater progression is linear as [censored]. lvl 2 is 5% stronger (as in do more dmg and have more hit points) than lvl 1, lvl 3 is 5% stronger than lvl 2 and etc.

3. Realistic doesn't work with linear power progression. It just doesn't.

actually 2. is not accurate. character progression isn't linear at all in the majority of their games. you do get slightly stronger each level but by how much depends upon how you level which skills and what perks you choose. its possible based on choices that you could pit a lvl 2 character against a lvl 5 character and the lvl 2 would be able to kill the other because they picked better combat skills while the other leveled skills and perks that were not related to combat. the progression of a character depends on the way you play bethesda's games. different styles have different results in combat ability vs lockpicking/sneaking etc.

Nope.avi

In Skyrim every skill that matter give you more dmg with each skill and each perk. Some skills just give more.

eg. one handed in skyrim gives like 20% more while sneak gives 12000%

I would say that it is indeed possible to add realistic combat, but you do sacrifice the core RPG aesthetics... However since Bethesda titles don't adhere to those, it's not a real loss from that perspective. They make simulations that enact a reactive world around the player (who is the center of it, for ego purposes)... This is totally incompatible with core RPG mechanics that seek to depict a separate persona [who belongs there], with finite strengths and weaknesses that serve to define the range with which they can operate in the game world.

Those PCs with exceptional combat skills will have commensurately less talent elsewhere, and their ideal solution will favor the shoot first/ ask questions later approach ~because that's who they are... While the exceptional diplomats will tend to be silver tongued, minimally skilled combatants, that might rely totally upon the aid of NPCs to survive a serious fight. The thieves have their stealthy ways, and can slip in and out unseen, while the jack-of-trades PC is generally sub par at everything, but a pinch hitter in all situations; which can be useful. All of this is thrown to the trash when the game instead seeks to substitute the player for the PC, and practically negates all purpose for the PC having any skills at all, or even having their own name; they are seen as being the way.

RPG combat [seen by a few as unrealistic] seeks to depict the behavioral advantage (or disadvantage) of experience (or its lack). When the target gets shot with 15 rounds and is still fighting, it's because the PC is a damn poor shot, and/or the opponent is a very experienced fighter. It is a forgivable mistake to assume that the PC actually sinks 15 head shots into the opponent; made worse because awkward first person RPGs can actually display that happening, and show the impact and the injury.

But the PC has a weapon skill for a reason, and it's not supposed to just be a reduced penalty applied to the player's aim; that's essentially them doing the shooting for the character; and that is polar opposite core RPG intentions. The sharacter should only ever make the shot if they can manage it on their own, without help.

Realistic combat has a problem in RPGs. It ignores the PC's life experience, and either reduces them to the level of novice players, or unfairly raises them to the level of expert players... Either way, the result bears no semblance to how they should actually fare in a fight; as the novice player will handicap the experienced PC, and the expert player will compensate the PCs inadequacies. Doing it the right way for an RPG, is counter to Bethesda's planned avatar experience; (and why they are so popular), so it's really a non-issue; we won't get RPG combat in a Fallout title ever again, not under their stewardship. But we won't get realistic combat either, because that (for most), is ego deflating... And that won't float in the empowerment fantasy experiences they are known for.

So what we will get is a limited RPG hybrid system, that is forgiving enough to not be frustrating, while just stern enough to seem fair.

Well said.

Although... Fair and forgiving, and also lacking in any respectable impact to make it worth it on any tangible level even for a sort of thereabouts compromise purposes.