Not so. An RPG is not a "because I want to" sandbox. Your character has to have affecting in game limits; or it's all just digital daydreaming. Stats implicitly state whether or not the PC is strong enough, or perceptive enough; or agile enough, or charismatic enough. It doesn't matter if the player wants to attempt to intimidate or outclass an NPC, if their character lacks those qualities it is the epitome of 'mouth writing checks that the body [or mind] can't cash'. That's what stats and skills define.
It's what ensures that not every character can can effortlessly pull off stunts like this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z1nYEH6EDwM and this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cm91hh9SqXs
That's what skills & stats reflect.

In Fallout 2, the PC without sufficient insight, was incapable of selecting/and saving the best brain to use for the robot. It was because their skill was so high that they had that option. In Planescape there were many conversations where the replies depend directly upon the PC's skills and stats; because that's what defines the PC to the game engine. In Planescape, for instance, the PC could spot a pickpocket robbing him, and [only] with sufficient agility, could catch the thief in the act; the less agile PC would be unable to match the agile thief, and they would slip away from him. Alternatively, the PC could opt to allow the robbery, and even study the thief's technique... improving their own skill for the insight.

The player in an RPG has sway over what action the PC takes, but the PC's background dictates what the PC is competent in. The player usually has the choice to improve the PC's competency in certain skills over time; but this [rightly] comes at a cost... The cost of not improving other skills instead.

The problem with all of Bethesda's learn by doing titles, is that there is no time limit ~sadly. If there was a limit to how far the PC can progress, and that improving skills made them faster to improve ~~while not improving other skills made them slower to improve, then the system would be far more RPG-like, and a better game for it. the player would have to decide what their PC was going to be, and be held to it. It would result in PCs that had affinity and aptitude for their favored actions... It would shape the boundaries like all RPGs should have for their possible characters... But of course, it's a bit pointless if they don't account for and support the PC's skill proficiency, and other aptitudes. , but that's just being a bad/poor RPG.


Of course they were skills; they were even called skills in the UI. As for weapon proficiencies, those are skills (that's a synonym for skill). Character classes are the PC's education and aspiration. It's what they chose to be in life. Spell casters too... Spell casting is a skill [for non-innate casters]; the spells themselves are skills, and they have to be learned to use them.

With this definition... perks in fallout are skills too. They work the same way. Weapon proficiencies are similiar to ranked perks. A perk with five ranks.

They are not supposed to be, though; but then... none of it is as it's supposed to be.

Perks ~at least in the Fallout series, were not, and are not supposed to be skills; they were, and are supposed to be minor rule variations [special handling] in the PC's favor. Perks would bend the rules a bit. They should barely even be acknowledged in the game. The rest of the Fallout series [the real ones] only granted them occasionally.

Unfortunately old boy, we have to roll with the times. The underlying mechanics of the old Fallout's is long gone and I'd rather see a good game made than cling onto a system that doesn't work.

Hell, maybe now Bethesda will actually be able to make speech do something in the game.

Yeah its much easier to accept these changes if you don't consider Bethesda games as RPGs, but as open-world-action-adventure-shoot-em-ups.

The system works fine; the appreciating market just doesn't exist anymore. The only sad thing about it is that it keeps the name; which no longer describes the products.

*Wouldn't we all have been fine if they had simply ~easily, just named it Fallout:[something else besides #3] ? Then the name could have been accurate.

Not around here anyway.

Well yeah but they aren't going to make a game like that anymore are they? They're going to make a FPS/RPG hybrid and, IMO, I don't necessarily think that skill points are the best thing to utilise as a system in that type of game. In the old school definitely, but in the modern build of the games not necessarily.

Like all the gun skills didn't do much except give a bit of wobble on the guns or some minor damage buffs, science was just about hacking terminals. I think with perks that they might actually be able to give these skills actual meaning rather than just minor tweaks and allowing occasional dialogue options.

I personally I like this change, as skills are most likely fused with perks; so I think it will be bit harder now to max out our stats, its either you invest all perk points into this one perk to get it to lvl4 or you will invest them equally.

Agreed!

I'd never consider NOLF 2 an RPG, but I bet some would.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BEsO9HTx9rY&t=4m37s

Hear, hear!

One of the best role-playing experiences I've had was in Way of the Samurai (which was, gameplay-wise, an unapologetic beat-em-up). There were no stats, no skills, no character sheets, etc., but you were given the ability to create and play any role you saw fit. Out for revenge? Got it. Pacifist? No problem (yes, in a beat-em-up). Town drunk? Covered.

I understand where the "RPG == spreadsheet-based strategy game" crowd is coming from (the terms have been used interchangeably for going on 40 years now; thank you very much, Gary Gygax), but there should be a distinction between the two.

I have to disagree, Skyrim's style system was grind base not Exp, mission & kill based. it was based on the stuff used which left stuff like Smithing, enchanting, Speech & more empty unless you stopped doing quests to grind, heck to level lock picking all you had to do was break picks to gain exp in that skill. unless they overhaul the heck out of it it will be the same as skyrim combat perks will be all you get unless you grind for hours, for me I hate doing that it ruins the immersion in a open world Rpg like Fallout.

If the theories are correct that perks replace traditional skills, why would that bother anyone? It still works mostly the same. You just don't level up "Guns" but instead "gun nut" and "science" instead of energy guns. Still several levels and the implication that a character can only use or modify weapons with a certain knowledge seems to add to the roleplay aspect.

Skyrim's way of 'skills' was terrible, honestly. Glad there's mods that increase the skill experience by hundreds of percent because honestly, grinding on a Master Lockpick just to increase your lockpicking skills was an obvious chore. Speech was also a chore to grind up as well, along with the Armor skills (Which only increase if you took damage, meaning you have to gain failure in order to gain success....what?)

Let's hope Fallout 4 is less 'grinding' in the skills section of the game.

I like that skills are being folded into perks. I just hope we get at least one perk per level. Maybe with two perk intervals evry five or ten levels.

Or some as quest rewards. Caps are nice, but if I save a doctors brats from a BBEG he'd better teach me a bit of first aid.

There is; the first one is playing a role ~and you can see that role outlined on the character sheet, the other is an adventure sim, where the role is the player wandering around in the sand box, doing whatever they want.

Their character, is to do anything that comes to mind; or optionally follow a list of a few things they have decided should never be done... (like no stimpaks)... Neither of these qualifies as roleplaying IMO, unless the character is a neurotic.

Sure I do, multiple in fact.

You can't be an RPG without skills? Damn, all those years growing up playing pre-D20 Dungeons & Dragons, and apparently they were never RPGs at all!

I could see that very easily.

Mad Bomber and a couple of the other explosives perks with just a few changes could stand in for the explosive skills.

And using perks actually helps you define your character better since you can chose which perks best fit your character.

Are you a gunslinger or a sniper? Having an 80 guns skill treats all the weapons the same if you meet the skill requirement of the weapon.

But picking SMG/Pistol perks vs sniper perks defines the character better because the character is actually better with the weapons his perks support.

The same goes for splitting hacking off from the science skill.

Someone might be a great hacker but have only basic hardware knowledge.

this doesn't make it an RGP then, but an SPG.

a Split Personality Game.

Wut?

What exactly is your definition of a role-playing game?

Cause to me it is being able to either create a character or take an existing character and define his/her/its/their role in the world and see how that definition plays out. Skills, stats, traits, perks, talents, reputation and whatnot all help to limit the characters capabilities and set certain advantages and with that I roleplay a character. I think of a brief backstory and try to imitate what I want the character to be like with the game mechanics presented to me and then I let the character loose in the world and try to think like him/her/it/them so I can make the choices they would and see how it plays out, for better or for worse.

Sims very much provides this to me. More so than most RPGs in fact. Though it doesn't have any writing so you have to make up the writing for yourself based on the vague'ish events that happen during the course of a sim's life.

the crucial part you forget is: it's YOU being in ONE role that makes it an rpg.

leaving this out, "lemmings" was an rpg as well...

Gun Nut and Science apparently govern our making modifications to guns, but I think that the more traditional Small Guns and Big Guns and such may govern our firing of guns.

LARP is role-play. As you and I both know, role-play by itself is not a game. It is only an activity, a form of play. What you may not realize is how little is required to turn role-play into a game.

Let's say that you are a LARPer. I approach you and propose a challenge, which challenge constitutes a game. I will describe to you a fictional problem, and the challenge for you is to tell me how your character would deal with that problem.

That is all there is to the game. If we wanted, we could have you act out your solution instead of simply telling me, although the telling alone would suffice. I don't need to know your character's attributes or skills, nor do I need to know anything else about your character. You have everything you need to play the game. My part in the game is only to give you the problem, not to constrain you or to evaluate your performance. You are on your honor to hold to the rules.

Players wander about in the original Fallout sandbox too, doing whatever they please in that game. Fallout too is make-your-own-adventure. Its sandbox is even purer than Fallout 3's, because it places fewer restrictions on where the player may go and on what the player may attempt. Players don't have to seek a chip to save Vault 13. They can choose to win their fortunes at Junktown's gambling tables instead, or go explore the wilderness just to see what's out there, or take up all kinds of other activities. Plenty of Fallout's players are unconcerned with playing some character's role, but only with doing what they themselves want to do. Kill that guy not because your character wants his jacket, but because you want your character to have his jacket. Fight that radscorpion because turn-based, tactical combat is fun, not because your character needs or wants to fight it.

Fallout's attributes, levels, perks, and skills prevent the player from achieving things outside of his character's ability. Fallout 3's attributes, levels, perks, and skills likewise prevent the player from achieving things outside of his character's ability.

Think again about that, you picked your skills when you selected your class. that's what a class is; a skillset.


And yet what a lot of people don't realize is how much work is required to turn a game into role-play.