Then keeping attributes would be redundant. The OP already pointed this out, if you read it.

And a starting Orc player will have bonuses in all weapon skills while a starting Breton will have bonuses in magic skills you know. So at start, those two level 1 persons, the Orc WILL be better with a sword than the Breton. Happy?

Not really, especially if they, you know, actually made attributes matter.

But, at first level leaving the prison they are not a burgeoning Conan the Destroyer as soon as he gets his axe and Einstein the reality-warper as soon as he learns some spells. They are Mr. Joe average - just as strong, just as smart, just as charismatic.

That and by the time people are advlts we are practically unique not identical amorphous blobs awaiting perks to define us.

I like perks - loved them in the Fallout games. But they are oversimplifying one base/starting point so everyone is exactly alike.

Quite Frank Im not sure why many are so surprised, we figured this to be the case in the first onsets of information released for Skyrim 4 months ago, it was a fear and now it is fact and I can't see why people are saying.


Axing attributes/Lowering skills/and basing everything on perks which completely detach reasoning for learning a skill or gaining ability through gameplay dynamically not choosing some perk is better than

Keeping Attributes, Making them more involved in Characters, attribute gain and styles being varied among races, Skills being better with Attributes and supplementing other skills + a Perk system that supplements everything but is gained over the course of your play dynamically depending on your playstyle.



Sigh...now exactly how hard is it to come up with something like THIS when you have Hundreds of employees working on a game for 5 years, HOW?

I don't want to see some stupidity (and I ask how is this anyless spreadsheety) that is a perk saying +5 to attack damage or +1 to stamina :eek: or weapon properties that should already be native to the game and not require perks to enable them, serious mace needs a perk to ignore armor? a Mace should already do that save for heavy armored foes > the mace's attack strenght + the players strenght, but nooooo.

Slowing down time perks for arrows is a step in the right direction, but it should be something learned and uncovered, not "I press this perk" bewm I can now slow down time because I picked this perk out of nowhere.


People...people Oblivion made you keep track of your skills and the "spreadsheetyness" because LEVEL SCALING was CRAP, if you did not micromanage, in Vanilla oblivion you were F'ed and had to start over, this isnt the Case.

In my modded Oblivion I don't worry about what I should level up next? I play my damn character and their actions shape their growth, PERIOD but of course this has been utterly detached and left to Perks.

so its your opinion that we should only have one weapon in the game? maybe we could all just use swords and pick perks that make them seem different.



how is rebuilding a system to do the same thing not redundant but using the time saved by not reinventing the wheel so that we could have more perks or other content is redundant? yea I read it, and I disagree and I have the right to disagree and provide evidence for why I believe I am right.

Oh noes, they took out X but put in Y, which virtually does the same exact thing, which Todd is trying to get across to people, but they don't seem to understand.

Whoops.

I love the new system and accept it. You jumped all over it from the beginning. Who's close minded?

It's all well and good to say "just as strong, just as smart, just as charismatic", but try transferring that into real terms. As in how it affects things in the game, and the world around you.

Liquid wisdom.

Bigger body and heftier frame always = A higher strength capacity.


The Breton may be able to be the strongest and mightiest of all Bretons, but in all likelihood the strongest and mightiest of the Orcs will be stronger and mightier than the Breton because by nature he was born taller and larger.

Then we can agree to disagree. I'm just saying this new system won't be a deal breaker to me, and I'm open minded to change when I feel it'll be done right.

So play Daggerfall. Morrowind and Oblivion pretty much worked the same way, you now just have fewer things pre-determined. You determine your character's stats as you level, and in-game mechanics will obviously take the place of these disadvantages. A pure mage shouldn't wear heavy armor because heavy armor impacts your ability to use magic. He probably doesn't want to use an axe because axes are slow and cumbersome, whereas a dagger is swift and can do damage while you dodge away from blows to create distance so you can go back to casting spells, which will be far more effective because you've invested in the perks that make them so.

Seriously, you're pretty much looking for a different sort of game. TES has always, ALWAYS been action first and RPG second. Hell, it's arguably not all that great at being an RPG because they've rarely had different, unique ways to do any quests and you have almost no say in how your character interacts with others apart from basically asking simple questions.

Yeah. They've been reducing content (weapon/spell variety) since the first (or maybe second, since they did add guns... cool?) game. But anyway, it's a joke. Like I said, I think Bethesda knows how to streamline a game without cutting needlessly.

How is it any different to have a perk that does + to attack damage or +1 to stamina any different from attributes that do that?? And the more skilled you become with a mace, the more it ignores armour. And you don't just randomly pick a perk out of nowhere. From what you're saying that perk will become available once you reach level 12 or an arbitrary number, when that hasn't been confirmed to be the case, and it's already been alluded to that you need to be pretty darn good with a bow in order to get that perk.




It would have taken the same amount of time to balance out all the perks and make them work with the attributes in a way that satisfied Todd an/or Bethesda as it would have to do the current system, So nothing has been lost.

Haha, where the hell are you getting that from? Way to be extremely irrational.

I feel like a lot of people don't understand what "less is more" means so I'll explain it. It's similar to quality over quantity or, as Dragonborn1 said, addition by subtraction. By making things less convoluted and less complicated for no reason, it makes for an overall better product. By removing redundant and excessive, superlative things, it allows the game to be organized, accessible, and enjoyable.

It doesn't mean "only have one weapon in the game." That's ridiculous and missing the point entirely.

you are completly ignoring why this is an issue, its not a problem specifcly because they took out X, the issue is that they replaced it with Y which does the same thing (in your own words) so why waste the time to make no change when they can use that time for adding content or improving existing content. so calling it redundant to keep attributes is just self contradiction.



I disagree with you, and I have the right too, you can't call some one else invalid just because the world doesn't fit in with your vision. we disagree thats the only thing we agree about. months ago we had topics just like this and every one "oh I trust bethesda, they won't do that" but here we are, if people don't question what the devs do then they'll put in every bad idea there is before they get any feed back.

And why do we care about that? That Orc might be stronger but it doesn't mean he'll do more damage with a sword than that Breton. And Str in Oblivion only mattered for two things : carrying capacity and damage with swords/axes/maces/punches.

And he;s right. They did do that.

It's just unfortunate that X was already flawed from the start, and Y is just as flawed, but flawed in the other direction. They didn't fix the problems Morrowind and Oblivion had, they just reversed them.



This isn't an after-school special where everybody is born equal and is equally as good at something as everybody else. Melle combat is based on strength. If you are stronger then you will be more proficient at hitting things, hitting things is a strength reliant skill.

A Blade Master may be a talented in combat, and may be able to block, dodge and counter many attacks that an unskilled opponent would do, but if a Blade Master stood still and a brute took a swing at him with a large, sharp sword, then the brute would cleave him in half due to his brute strength. Blade Mastery has always been a skill of agility and tactics, you best your opponent by being smart and quick no your toes, not being strong... however a stronger opponent will always hit harder.

This is why Oblivion's combat was so asinine, for some reason blade skill changed the amount of damage you did on a linear rise, which is moronic.

I think everyone gets it. Lol. I think people were just having fun with the expression by using it literally.. fun, remember? Though, I could be giving too much credit?

With a lot of people complaining and making a big deal out of nothing and coming off as very angry, it's hard to differentiate the comments that are just having fun.

less is more only applies if health, fatigue, magicka (edit) [as attributes] is of better quality than what we had before. in which it is is not. some times quanity is a quality. the world is not black and white, thats why I called you out when you arbitrarily posted "less is more" as if that could blanket every aspect of the game.

Natural abilities: strong, smart, charisma, etc are one baseline.
Skills are things learned as one goes through life. Because someone is ignorant regarding combat skills (one handed, two handed, sword, whatever) does not mean that person has no strength at carrying weight and cannot pick up a spare tire nor should it mean that if you hit a magical break point of a 30 sword you can learn park to carry more as one has nothing to do with the other.

Being healthier or having more stamina (say running the yearly IronMan) does not mean if I hit a magic break point number for one of those I can magically learn gymnastics skills where one can walk down a 3inch beam with ones eyes closed because you shot a bow a certain number of times or swung a heavy object certain number of times.

But he wasn't talking about swords. The guy just wanted to be a Breton stronger than an Orc, or a Dark Elf faster than a Kajiit. Of course the Orc might not do more damage than the Breton, but where did anyone say it would have??

That's true. Inflection doesn't really read well.

it does not matter to me either way. when i first read the article i was like awww poo! then i thought about it and really in character creation what i really spent most of my time on way how i looked then i just picked the atributes that i was gonna use hte most if i wanted to level fast or the least if i wanted to stay low. i really dont think i will miss it


(looks like a level 5 save will be the new dungeon save)