Basically the topic description says all.

I see the removal of the attributes as a simplification of the game. I think Bethesda is doing what every company is doing. Simplifying the games. (Supreme Commander, Splinter Cell, Patrician...)

The removal of this system to allow casual gamers to simply increase their health and stamina is a mistake.

Also, consider that Bethesda has said we have 280 perks... Well, it′s a good number, but how many perks to we need to substitute the attributes? If we want to do it well, we need at least 50...

50 is the number you can choose.

Simplification is only a negative change when it introduces a limitation or reduction of content, though.

As much as I love having attributes (for nostalgic and comparative purposes), can you describe a single character action or progression path that is now impossible as a result of attributes being removed? Can you describe 50 of them?

I see your point and yes its an over simplification, but theres nothing to really to do about it now is there?
I mean there not going to change the whole system this late are they?

i'm hoping for some perks that are tied to the 3 main atributes, such as things like "strong back", increased speed (or a longer sprint duration), longer jumps tied to stamina, magicka resistance/absorption tied to magicka/mana and partial immunities to poisons and elemental damage tied to health.

characters will usually reach level 70ish, 50 is the soft cap.

How many attribute threads do we need? I love the new system. Thank you Beth.

the 50 he mentioned i believe is for perks, not levels.

you gain a perk each level, but after level 50 you cease to to gain perks.

Like I've said before, I really don't see how 18 skills+280 or more perks+3 attributes is simplifying anything. I'll use the example of perks that Todd uses

If your getting up your one-handed skill, and you decided that you want to get your axe skill up, there is a perk tree for that in the one-handed skills catagory, or if you want to focus on blades, daggers or maybe even one handed hammers(who knows), then you can.

The system is actually more complex than it was before, people just cannot except change and just call it "dumbing down" when, if you actually look at the information presented, its much more complex than you think.

Nicely said.

as ive stated in some other thread, i think that health will govern your strength and ability to carry stuff, magicka will determine whatever intelligence and willpower did in oblivion, and stamina will govern agility and speed. solves everything.

The main problem that makes the removal of attributes unrealistic is, that a skilled warrior will not be better with an unskilled melee weapon than a mage. All characters are equally "strong".

The other big problem I have with this is the removal of Fortify Attribute skills and the lack of a replacement for enchanted items. Items that added attributes were always the best. These skills were also pretty useful for certain mages and alchemists; those builds are gone now.

I don't think perks can replace attributes. They are fundamentally different.

That doesn't mean the new system will be a total disaster, but it will be different.



The skillsystem is deeper / broader, thanks to perks, but the overall leveling system is not more complex. It's true that there is more too chose from, but that is not what complexity means. The relation between skills and perk is very straightforward. That's the whole point of the streamlining process.

Thats not really the case. There is a one-handed and two-handed skill, so even if you don't have perks specializing in axe combat, you will still be better than a mage if your one-handed skill is higher.

Yep, I was referring to perks. The OP said we would need at least 50 and I answered that that's the number we'll have.

It's funny how the people that complain about making the game simple, are the ones needing a one point lesson (with pictures) on how the perk system works.

Todd also said in the g4 interview thatthe attributes have basically been moved around and tied into other things. take strenght for example, the damge from str can be moved into the skills for 1 hand and 2 handed weapons, ecubrance could be tied to the race that you choose and have a perk like the fallout 3 strongback, or it could just be a flat amount.
I expect race and six to play a big part in this more than perks as the way i see it, back in oblivion, a bosmer with 100str was just a strong as an orc, nord or reguard which is pretty stupid considering the fluff that orcs are ment to be so strong that they could rip and imerial in 2 with their bare hands.

Get over it,sorry to be frank,but they're gone.Move on.
And how do you know it's a mistake? Do you work at bethesda? Do you know all the info yet?

I have not been following the attributes approach in detail, since I don't want to be too spoiled before I get the game.

However, Attributes in both Morrowind and Oblivion seemed to me to be a clunky and kludgy contrivance.

I think it would make alot more sense if they were "behind the scenes" stats. But the tying of skills to specific attributes was just not natural.

BTW, I also don't particularly care for the Fallout 3 leveling system. The nGCD mod for Oblivion provides an excellent natural character development system, in my opinion. I hope it is like that for Skyrim in at least some respects.

I'm looking forward to see how Bethesda approaches character development. I don't know whether or not I'll like the new system. But I do believe the system needs a major overhaul from Oblivion and Morrowind.

I really don't see how this is a bad thing though, there just eliminating one extra choice that is already made elsewhere. Sure, i can't speak for encumbrance, but your health/magicka/stamina are covered by leveling up those three "attributes". Its a little simpler, I'll admit, but whats the point of keeping something if it can be handled better in other ways. We can't say its handled horribly until we play the game.

Judging from an article i just read ,it seems encumberance is still there.

It's all about in game effects. If you take increase your weapon skill, take a perk to increase your inventory capacity, and take a stamina at level up, this has exactly the same effect as increasing your strength in previous games. If you take more magicka, this has exactly the same effect as increasing your intelligence. Granted you can't run faster than a horse anymore, but there are certainly arguments that a limited sprint ability is much more realistic than increasing your speed and becoming superhuman.

Okay, I will explain further, although this has been said a few dozen times too often:

You have a warrior with maxed 1-handed weapon skill and a pure mage that never touched a melee weapon.
Now both pick up a 2-handed weapon.
In reality, one would expect the warrior to be better with it from the start, but this is not the case without attributes. Both characters are equally good or bad with 2-handed weapons, although the warrior is a melee weapon master.

And this doesn't even take hand-to-hand combat into account, which might get its own skill again because acrobatics and athletics have been cut. A boxer that picked up a sword would be just as helpless as a wimpy Bosmer hunter.



I was just arguing semantics. I don't think "complex" is a word that describes the new system correctly.

I agree that removing them is a wrong, but not out of paranoia for casualisation. I see it as wasted potential. Rather than saying "attributes are just padding, let's remove them" I would say "attributes are just padding, how can we give them more purpose?"

There are plenty of opportunities to give weight to attributes in the game world. Minigames, for instance, should be heavily influenced by your attributes. Trying to win at arm wrestling? Not likely without any strength or endurance. Horse racing? You'll need agility, endurance and a bit of charisma to coax your horse into sprinting that last stretch. Mage duels could be made into minigames influenced by intelligence and willpower. Reaction times of the character in minigames should be handicapped/augmented by speed. See what I mean?

Sure, attributes might not have done much in past games, but that doesn't mean that they have to be useless in the future.

I like the new system personally, but the one thing that worries me is it seems like you can arbitrarily pick your perks and health/magicka/stamina despite how you play. Maybe I missed something or misread something, but it sounds like you can go around hitting people with a mace until you level up, and then pop over and select a perk from the Stealth nebulae and a magicka increase for no reason. That's TOO much choice if that's how it works, it makes no sense. Shouldn't you only be able to choose from increases that make sense to what your character has been "training" for? I mean... if I go out and study chemistry, why can I then suddenly shoot a bow better? Basically, its those kinds of absurdities I'm a bit worried about.

If that is resolved, otherwise, the perk system has more pros than cons imo though. Less metagaming/powergaming, more diversity at end game, deeper contextual RP less baseball card stat RP.

Says who? In Oblivion, you increased your strength for 2 reasons. Either to carry more loot, or do more melee damage. What's stopping them from having perks that allow you to carry more, or do more melee damage?

@carbuncle: I am pretty sure some of the perks wil not be allowed until your respective skill is at a certain level. If you never use your sneak skill, and it stays low, you will be very limited at the perks you can take for it.