Just how powerful should our PCs be at high levels? Do you want to be practically invincible or would you prefer to remain somewhat vulnerable even @ high levels?

Some specific questions -

-Should health/mana pools have a maximum, and if so how much higher should that max be above starting health? How heavily affected by endurance/intelligence? Should endurance be retroactive?

-How many levels below the PC should NPCs be to essentially have no chance?

-How much more dangerous should fighting multiple NPCs be compared to one? Should NPCs get flanking bonuses?

I kinda liked how it was in Oblivion. You start with a power level of about 10 and get 1 per level.

Fighting multiple enemies was much more dangerous than fighting one.

Again Mount and Blade was good, multiple enemies is insanely dangerous as one can backstab you while you fence with another. Farmers was nuisance enemies at high levels, but if they cornered you they would kill you as attacks staggered you so you could not strike back. it's not twice as dangerous to fight 2, 5-10 times is more realistic.
Yes if you are faster them they you can do a avoid getting mobbed, ranged attack reduce the problem except if both parts has ranged you get lots of incoming.

I think there should always be characters that are way weaker than yourself,and ofcourse characters that are way stronger than you (such as some monsters and/or famous characters, Arena Grand Champion for example).

When I go against a bandit at lvl 30 I don't want him/her to have a Daedric armor/weapons. On the other side when I enter a dungeon I wana be scared s***less and really use my brain to go through it,get whatever I came to get and get out in possibly one piece.

Those skeletons from Skyrim are a fine example of an "Oh crap,run!" situation. If they're tough as they look,we have a winner.

i think that level scaling needs to go out in the first place..
that being said, i also dont want the pc to be extremely overpowered when u reach higher levels.
in my opinion the way bethesda has handled the leveling system in their previous games awful.. like in morrowind u were undefeatable at certain levels and in oblivion it stayed the same the whole damn game.

i think they need to make combat alot more tactical for skyrim :


-piercing ur steel sword through a leather wearing enemy's hearth = massive damage
-trying to pierce a heavy plate wearing enemy with ur iron sword = nothing happens
-hitting a heavy plate wearing enemy in the head with a blunt weapon = normal damage but stunning ur enemy
-hitting a heavy plate wearing enemy with an iron sword in the head = nothing happens
-pierce with an arrow through ur enemies eye = headshot
-hit an enemy with an arrow in the leg = he takes low damage but falls on the ground
-chopping on ur enemy's shoulders with a two handed battleaxe = OH LOOK, NO ARMS!!!!!
-kicking ur enemy in the sack = he gets on he's knees while holding his crotch yelling " WHYY???, whyyyyyy???!!?!?. "
*fighting an enemy with shield => jump here, jump there, dodge, wait for when he's offguard, hit 2-3 combo's to weak spots = win
*fighting a dualwielding enemy => use shield or a massive 2 handed weapon to either block his attacks or to hit him as hard as u can so he wont be able to parry ur attacks.
*fighting a mage => take out ur bow = boom headshot
*fighting an archer => KILL IT WITH FIRE
*fighting a dragon => light its wings on fire and have fun watching him try to get some air.


this is how the basic combat mechanics should work for any game that is trying to be somewhat realistic. so back to your question,
i want fights to be really deadly no matter if im a level 5 or 50 i want them to be dangerous but also tactical, if im fighting a dragon and i wont get hit once and pierce a spear in his brain i want the damn thing to be dead even when im a level let say 15.
i also dont want a mana or health pool cap, but make them less important than they are in previous games