like many here have said armor is comprised of seperate pieces and i would like it that way can pack on more enchants that way. but i fear we wont get true confirmation on that until a dev comes in here to tell us so and if armor is in a single suit i have only this to say CHANGE IT BACK NOW.

PLEASE be a mistake PLEASE!

I'll tweet Pete about it, although I'm sure this is wrong.

@DCDeacon Someone with the Playstation Mag says it talks about single suit armor, I thought the armor was in Pieces?

We'll see what he says.

Tweet man tweet!

Some posts have been edited or deleted. Calling other members trolls is classed as flaming here and going to get those who do it in a lot of trouble.

I can't wait to get this cleared up, I kinda hope we will have both.

If any of my female characters can't wear a skirt with a cuirass, then it's a case of "the rpg is dead, long live the action/adventure game." Are you guys all reading Playstation magazines from the same country?

USA XD

The day RPG's die is the day I find a new hobby.

Haha yeah

tweet away brave warrior tweet away the game itself is threatened by armor being only in single suits if this is true.not to mention it would utterly destroy the fan base and maybe even the elder scrolls itself!

I'm calling mistake on this, why would Pete confirm one thing to then suddenly go, "You know what, let's anger and isolate the majority of the fan base."

That was true for a lot of armor in Oblivion, but Morrowind had a lot of fun combinations. Oblivion, too, had some decent combos. I liked the Cheydinhal guard chest with leather armor.

I'm really hoping that PS3 mag is incorrect. Even if they had hundreds or thousands of single suits, it doesn't entirely make up for not being able to mix and match.

Exactly my thoughts, but we will wait for it to be confirmed(again) I guess.

That's what I read too, and I'm glad, I'm not sure what is going on with the supposed information about single piece armor in the magazine, but I'm more inclined to believe Pete's words than the magazine in this, if there's a contradiction, seeing as Pete Hines is a Bethesda employee and thus likely has more direct access to this sort of information than a third party, such as a gaming magazine, magazines can only report based on what they've been shown or told and their interpretations of it could have some mistakes in them. Perhaps it's like in Oblivion where while most armors have seperate pieces, there are a few sets of single suited armor, and the people at the magazine happened to see one of these and assume all armor is like that, I guess we'll see in time. For now, all we can do is wait until we know for certain which claim is right.

In any case, I can at least say I hope this claim is not true, I'm not going to say that "RPGs are dead" if it turns out it IS true, because I've played games which I'd argue are just as much of an RPG, if not more so, than the Elder Scrolls, which have single piece suits, such as Fallout 1 and 2, anyone who tries to claim that those are not RPGs instantly uses all credibility with me, still, removing seperate armor slots would be a step in the wrong direction for the series, some complain about Skyrim becoming like Fallout, but I don't mind Bethesda adding perks or removing the class system, however, taking out the multi-piece outfits is one aspect of Fallout I would not want in the Elder Scrolls, if anything, I want a return to the number of equipment slots we saw in Morrowind, not fewer than we had in Oblivion.



I'll be the judge of that when I decide which combinations of armor I want to wear, naturally, not all armor combinations are going to look good, but if that bothers me, I'll just not wear those armor combinations, I don't want the game to remove the ability for me to combine different armors entirely. In any case, if you're going to use that argument to say seperate armor slots are not needed, we could also extend that elsewhere and say that character creation is not needed because you could potentially create ugly characters with it.

I cannot believe this would be true. A change like that would almost unanimously be opposed...

God, I hate all of those answers!

That's the day I blow the dust off the old Rolemaster books.
And yes they effectively have one piece armours, plus greaves and /or bracers, but it's pen and paper, I can pretend my character has a plate cuirass with leather bracers, I don't have to look at a character who either doesn't wear the armour at all, or is clothed head to foot in Elven Armour Yellow :yucky: .

So do I. I'm getting concerned now...

Plus, that doesn't even make sense, since we've seen the same the same pauldron/round-the-body thing in about 10 different costumes already.

I also hope this isn't true. It's great to for example be able to wear just a heavy cuirass...No greaves, boots, or gauntlets. You can be more agile and carry more stuff when not having a whole heavy suit.

i hope you guys are right and this is just a mistake on the magazine's part... i was under the impression for months now that there would be multi-pieced armor... and i thought the was confirmed to... thats why when i read the magazine this morning it almost made me sick to my stomach... so i got angry and jumped on here to see if other people were talking about it.... i read these forums everyday but i don't actually take the time to say much... i guess this just isn't one of those things that i can be quiet about..

Er... uh... Maybe Todd was drunk! Please be drunk when you did that interview, Todd.

like, omg, it doesn't matter what you wear, it's who you are that matters ^^

Perhaps it will only be certain single suits, like the DB armour.