Superfluous skills : V - Skyrim

» Fri Feb 18, 2011 6:02 pm

Forget the d and d references, this is Skyrim, which is so dumbed down from Rolemaster. That has skiing as a skill. Essential, obviously.

» Sat Feb 19, 2011 9:08 am

In short, people need to realize between the new perks system (which is a blend of the original TES perk system and the original fallout perks system), the new leveling system and new magic system gives you numerous choices and we don't even know at what extent the armor system is yet, which has been confirmed to be more than the fallout armor system so it will probably be between Oblivion's armor system and Morrowinds. The fact of the matter is that there are more choices than any other TES game and that's just the features we know of. So people need to stop being doomsayers and overreacting, when less skills doesn't mean the game is less content or fun, it's just that way when you make it that way which is what most people that loved Morrowind so much did, they played through Oblivion but didn't appreciate it for what it was because they were too busy looking for differences in the game instead of letting them sink into the game and seeing how great it was.

:bowdown:
Glad I wasn't one of them. My only complaints in Oblivion were the obnoxious level-scaling and that it favoured certain character types over others.
I'd also like to add this: People, don't take things at face value. Until we've actually played the game and seen how it all works and feels together, we don't know whether or not individual features (or lack there-of) will be a boon or a bane, and speculating isn't going to help anyone.

» Sat Feb 19, 2011 1:40 am

and really when it comes down to it, people want stuff simplified. Do you write in Binary? also a perk system is getting added that can break down skills into specific sections

Yeah, binary is about as simple as it gets. Two digits: 0 and 1. Sometimes simplification goes too far. Obviously, if they consolidate ALL skills into just "skill", then you can do anything you want. Never mind that there's nothing to differentiate a fighter from a thief or a mage, or a librarian from a barbarian, it's an "improvement", right?

I prefer the CHOICES WITH CONSEQUENCES and OPTIONS which a bit of complexity offers. Plainly, there are a lot of recent additions to the series fanbase who don't see any point to any of this, aside from swinging a weapon and casting spells. Sadly, the series is catering more and more to the "FPS" players with each release, at the expense of the core RPG mechanics, which are being gutted at every turn.

» Sat Feb 19, 2011 2:22 am

I prefer the CHOICES WITH CONSEQUENCES and OPTIONS which a bit of complexity offers. Plainly, there are a lot of recent additions to the series fanbase who don't see any point to any of this, aside from swinging a weapon and casting spells. Sadly, the series is catering more and more to the "FPS" players with each release, at the expense of the core RPG mechanics, which are being gutted at every turn.

Choices with consequences is great. Hopefully that Todd has said that they want more uniqueness among races is a sign of that.

I don't see them "gutting" core RPG mechanics, though. Sure, there's only 18 "Skills", but there's many more "skills". Think of it this way:
You have a Skill for 1-Handed weapons. Training in short swords or maces will increase this Skill, as you've improved your general knowledge of fighting with 1-Handed weapons. When you level up, you pick a perk to make your short sword do more damage. Your short sword skill is now improved over your mace skill, as you've learned something unique to short swords. Using short swords increases your proficiency with them, but also with other somewhat similar weapons, but your skill with a short sword will still surpass your skill with all other 1-Handed weapons.

Also, if you pickup a 1-Handed longsword of +10 pwnage, all your general training with 1-Handed weapons will not have gone to waste. You may not be nearly as good with it as a short sword of +10 pwngage, but you're not completely dense with it either.

Think of the 18 Skills as "skill groups", with more refined skills contained within them. If you're good with a short sword, don't you think you'd be at least a little more knowledgable on how to handle a long sword over a bow&arrow? If all skills were kept separate, like in previous games, these skill relationships would be lost.

» Sat Feb 19, 2011 12:19 am

Since Daggerfall, TES games have been RPGs leaning on the "skill based system when skill improves with usage". I think this part is the most important part of the TES RPG system. But we have to remember it's not absolute, there are some stuff that improves not directly from usage. Max HP increases on level up which doesn't depend on training some "HP capacity" skill. Max Magicka improved when we increased Int, same as HP it's not governed by a skill. Int increases when we put a small coin token next to it at level up screen which has nothing to do with "Int" skill we practiced.

The point is, despite cutting and all that, some skills in Oblivion didn't work well with the system of improving by usage. Those skills are :
- Athletics
- Acrobatics
- Armor skills

First because it's always on skill. It could basicaly be renamed to "Moving around" and improved when you "moved around". As a result, it's for all purposes impossible to really make a game were we don't really improve that skill. This skill fails.

Second skill. This one you actually CAN not make use of it, you can decide to never press the "jump" button and never fall down big heights but why would you? This skill is something everyone will want to improve on way or another too although kitting ranged builds will need to make it as high as possible for AI abuse. Since everyone jumps around and not everyone should become a master Acrobat, this skill improves slooooowly with each jump. Kitting based ranged builds will then have a damn painful experience to level this. This skill in it's Oblivion (and Morrowind) form fails too.

Lastly, the armor skills. Those are controllable in a good way, not like the two previous skills. Wear light armor = improve light armor. The problem was that once you were equipped according to the class of your choice, it'd become just like Athletics a purely passive skill to improve. This skill improves when you get hit in combat and nothing else. The tedium required to improve it combined with the fact that good play means you get hit less means you will not improve much the skill is a problem. For that reason, those skills fail too.

What can be done to have the effect of those skills present in a non fail way? A good skill is one which the usage is controllable : the skill is used when you decide to use it and thus, the skill improves only when the user decides to use it. What can we do for those skills that fail to make them better then? Here's some examples how the old skills can be rolled together to make them work better without losing most of their effects.

- Acrobatics. This one is easy. Did you notice one of the the Acrobatics perks allowing you to make dodges in fight? Acrobatics could become a skill mainly controlling those combat dodge movements with perks unlocking more complex moves, maybe moves that can be used as counter attacks.

- Athletics. This one is harder but there is one tool we can use to control it : the stamina draining moves in combat. Special moves and charged up attacks like in Oblivion probably drain a lot of stamina, as the sprint in combat does. Hardest part is making sure not every "class" will level this one because it's too important of a feature to pass up but I guess it can be done. Heavy armor will probably put a big penalty on the stamina usage and this skill will mainly serve to counter it then. It'll be kind of the heavy armor skill for fighters.

- Armor skills have to go somehow but we already got the heavy armor interesting one in Athletics. The light armor friendly effects will be mostly under Stealth and/or Acrobatics.

It'd give a list of 18 skills of :

The Mage :
we know all 6 already

The Warrior :
- Smithing (practically confirmed)
- One handed weapons
- Two handed weapons
- Hand to hand
- Athletics (for combat techniques using stamina like sprinting and maybe special weapon skills)
- Block (block with shield, parry with weapon or maybe even barehanded!)

The Thief :
- Stealthy stuff (sneaking, pickpocket, reverse pickpocket, lockpicking, backstabing)
- Speechcraft (persuasion and barter all rolled in a single skill, it's probably for the best)
- Alchemy (poisons are more of a thief thing than a mage one so no qualms on this one switching to Thief group)
- Marksman
- Acrobatics (jumping around in and out of combat, generally evasive maneuvers for more survivability)
- ??? one last Thief skill needed. Maybe Mercantile isn't merged with speechcraft? Maybe some part of Stealthy stuff will be it's own skill?

In Oblivion, when you improve Blade your Str improves which increases damage with Blunt weapons too. Is a sence, your blunt skill got a hidden bonus of half your Blade skill (and same in reverse) In Skyrim it'll be implemented with a generic One Handed skill that improves both blade and blunt weapons and consuming perk slots to further specialize in one or the other. That's why reducing the number of skills doesn't reduce the depth of the system. The important skill effect that were hard to mesh into a "train by use" system will be lumped into a related skill that works in the form of perks. You train a skill that works well with the "train by use" and pay with a perk slot to improve the stuff that didn't work well

Train stealth by being stealthy and at level up take the "Light armors do not cause stealth penalty" perk.

» Sat Feb 19, 2011 9:33 am

People seem to focus on the three less skills, and NOT on the addition of the 150+ perks. This leads me to believe that they simply have a defeatist attitude.

I completely agree. Having 18 skills seems like a letdown at first, but the 150 perks makes it even more in depth than oblivion, and yes, even morrowind. The 150 skills will probably include specializations in individual weapons and armor times, so it will actually feel like you have about 35 different skills. Plus there is the possiblility of getting perks that make you better with, for example glass armor/weapons. Thats even more detailed! There is nothing to complain about. People just see 18 as a smaller number, ignoring 150.

These ones speak truth. :spotted owl:

In a RPG you are playing a ROLE. The term RPG is very very loose. You can do whatever you want. It's like Todd said in the GI interview. Even football games these days are using RPG mechanics. Hell, even Halo and Call of Duty have picked up the whole, level up and get better ~~weapons/armor/perks~~ loot.
Is Mass Effect 2 any less of a RPG than Mass Effect 1? No. Most would argue against me on that, but it's simply not the case. You're still playing the role of commander Shepard. You're still making a huge choices that not only affect the game, but also the next game. You're still leveling up and choosing skills, but that doesn't define what a RPG is.

A RPG, or what people associate that term with are as follows: You get to choose what you are, whether that's a class/race/morality, you level up by gaining experience or through the use of skills, you constantly get better and better loot, you're making huge impacting decisions that affect the storyline and sometimes the game world, you complete quests, you're free to abandon the main story for a while and go complete side quests, you're free to explore a world, you have a party that sometimes you can level up, or they level up by themselves, etc, etc.

Does Elder Scrolls fit all of that? No. I can't think of single game that fits every single part of that. Mainly because it has conflicting parts that no one game can have. As I said, the term RPG is loose.

» Sat Feb 19, 2011 2:28 am

As I said, the term RPG is loose.

The line between genres is disappearing and for the better. :celebration:

» Sat Feb 19, 2011 9:49 am

http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/558516

» Sat Feb 19, 2011 3:59 am

Oh noes! They changed one thing in the new TES game! THE TES SERIES IS DOOMED!!!

These ones speak truth. :spotted owl:

In a RPG you are playing a ROLE. The term RPG is very very loose. You can do whatever you want. It's like Todd said in the GI interview. Even football games these days are using RPG mechanics. Hell, even Halo and Call of Duty have picked up the whole, level up and get better ~~weapons/armor/perks~~ loot.
Is Mass Effect 2 any less of a RPG than Mass Effect 1? No. Most would argue against me on that, but it's simply not the case. You're still playing the role of commander Shepard. You're still making a huge choices that not only affect the game, but also the next game. You're still leveling up and choosing skills, but that doesn't define what a RPG is.

A RPG, or what people associate that term with are as follows: You get to choose what you are, whether that's a class/race/morality, you level up by gaining experience or through the use of skills, you constantly get better and better loot, you're making huge impacting decisions that affect the storyline and sometimes the game world, you complete quests, you're free to abandon the main story for a while and go complete side quests, you're free to explore a world, you have a party that sometimes you can level up, or they level up by themselves, etc, etc.

Does Elder Scrolls fit all of that? No. I can't think of single game that fits every single part of that. Mainly because it has conflicting parts that no one game can have. As I said, the term RPG is loose.

:goodjob: You speak the truth. Even games like GTA (!) has some RPG elements in them now, with those (albeit few) storyline choices in GTA IV, that lets you define who your Niko Bellic is. The term "RPG" is indeed very loose. And at the first sign of any change from the previous TES game, people are very quick at pointing fingers and holding speeches of how the RPG genre is dying and that everything was better before.

Guess what. We may be rid of the actually very bad attributelevel up system from the old days. We may be rid of some superfluos skills. We get a lot of perks, which I think helps us define our character much more than a +5 in Speechcraft ever could.

Some things are bound to be worser as things change. But a lot of things are also bound to get better as things evolves and advances. Look at the future with hope instead of despair! Chances are, that Skyrim will turn out great.

» Fri Feb 18, 2011 11:01 pm

The line between genres is disappearing and for the better. :celebration:

I agree. As you said earlier, gone are the days of "This is a action game." Or, "This is a RPG" Or even "This is a shooter" most games now days take the best parts from every genre to make a incredible experience of super fun time. :foodndrink:

» Sat Feb 19, 2011 12:40 am

Anyone else finding it a bit amusing that the "OMG 18 SKILLS TES IS DOOMED!" doomsayers are focusing JUST on the 18 skills and completely dodging around the fact that there's going to be a perk system with over 150 perks to make up for it?

» Sat Feb 19, 2011 6:20 am

Oh noes! They changed one thing in the new TES game! THE TES SERIES IS DOOMED!!!

:goodjob: You speak the truth. Even games like GTA (!) has some RPG elements in them now, with those (albeit few) storyline choices in GTA IV, that lets you define who your Niko Bellic is. The term "RPG" is indeed very loose. And at the first sign of any change from the previous TES game, people are very quick at pointing fingers and holding speeches of how the RPG genre is dying and that everything was better before.

Guess what. We may be rid of the actually very bad attributelevel up system from the old days. We may be rid of some superfluos skills. We get a lot of perks, which I think helps us define our character much more than a +5 in Speechcraft ever could.

Some things are bound to be worser as things change. But a lot of things are also bound to get better as things evolves and advances. Look at the future with hope instead of despair! Chances are, that Skyrim will turn out great.

Exactly! :thumbsup: I always had a love/hate relationship with that +5 and I will be happy to see it removed. It only really "added" frustration and caused you to play the game incorrectly. Such as not focussing on your main skills. Skyrim's system of adding perks and removing classes seemingly fixes that. And I for one, am more excited to play Skyrim than any other game.

» Sat Feb 19, 2011 5:03 am

I was just playing Morrowind and was getting frustrated that I couldn't hit this dude and we both stood there swinging our weapons like idiots. I do not like dice-rolls! The term rpg is misleading.

Thats just because two factors are in:
Poor imagination player + Limited implementation at the time being.

You can easely do Oblivion combat based on skill. Which by the wasn t done.

To the OP, well your right.
The factors are:
Skill require time to be implemented right so they are usefull ingame and worth to be increased. This take thinking out of the box and work to implement the way it should be ingame.
beyond usefullness increasing is better received by non classical RPG audience when in increment, the infamous "i win button" factor. This is what generated the Oblivion sistem perk. Instead of being ruled by formulaes easely calculated by PC, it was brought in steps, but this left all the in between raising "useless". (the arguments presented are true for attributes and skills)
The enfasis for bethesda now is eye candy, not an interesting game...(Morrowind to Oblivion main quest implementation, secondary quest etc) no matter if eyecandywise whatever they do will be pulled under by modders the week after its realeased, since Bethesda became a Console company they must deliver eye candy first for various reasons that will piss most forum users , so i won t get in.

What Oblivion showed and Skyrim will confirm, is the adherance to Diablo like system, or maybe D&D system. Decrease in skill and attributes and overall game interest and compensate in focusing on combat activity.
In a classical RPG way of looking to this transition, TES is slidding from a more broad and overall time rewarding Rolemaster experience to a less complete fastly rewarding AD&D like experience.

In my vocabulary this is devolution and its sad, but for most its called "comprehensiveness", things are imediate imediate so fun and its good.

Short bus for everyone, if it doesnt fit you, you know where the door is.

» Fri Feb 18, 2011 6:14 pm

Anyone else finding it a bit amusing that the "OMG 18 SKILLS TES IS DOOMED!" doomsayers are focusing JUST on the 18 skills and completely dodging around the fact that there's going to be a perk system with over 150 perks to make up for it?

Uuhhh, anyone else notice you're clearly over-looking those of us that have brought up the perks system?

Perks are a great addition, I really do see their potential. Are they a replacement for skills? Not by a longshot. Why is it if you agree with the develloper, you 'speak the truth', but if we wish to voice our opinions, we're 'just complaining about change'. We don't know what the game's like, and it may be good? Sure, but you don't know what the game's like, and it may not be a welcome change either.

Can we all please have an intelligent discussion about the topic now, rather than both sides ignoring each other's points?

» Fri Feb 18, 2011 8:16 pm

Numbers don't make an rpg though Mordobb. Role playing game means you play a role, it doesn't mean you role the dice. A game can have the depth of the classic rpgs of old where numbers were life, and yet be fast paced and rewarding kinda like how Oblivion was. I don't see why things have to be so black and white like that. To me, I see there could be a gray area in there that is quite rewarding. Fun to pick up and play, but time rewarding like how non-computer rpgs were like.

The decitions you make in a game make your role, not the numbers backing your character up, once again to me at least.

» Sat Feb 19, 2011 8:34 am

These ones speak truth. :spotted owl:

In a RPG you are playing a ROLE. The term RPG is very very loose. You can do whatever you want. It's like Todd said in the GI interview. Even football games these days are using RPG mechanics. Hell, even Halo and Call of Duty have picked up the whole, level up and get better ~~weapons/armor/perks~~ loot.
Is Mass Effect 2 any less of a RPG than Mass Effect 1? No. Most would argue against me on that, but it's simply not the case. You're still playing the role of commander Shepard. You're still making a huge choices that not only affect the game, but also the next game. You're still leveling up and choosing skills, but that doesn't define what a RPG is.

A RPG, or what people associate that term with are as follows: You get to choose what you are, whether that's a class/race/morality, you level up by gaining experience or through the use of skills, you constantly get better and better loot, you're making huge impacting decisions that affect the storyline and sometimes the game world, you complete quests, you're free to abandon the main story for a while and go complete side quests, you're free to explore a world, you have a party that sometimes you can level up, or they level up by themselves, etc, etc.

Does Elder Scrolls fit all of that? No. I can't think of single game that fits every single part of that. Mainly because it has conflicting parts that no one game can have. As I said, the term RPG is loose.

This one understand all about RPG! because its clear FPS and RACE game name are mistakes, as long you re first person its a RPG.
Well, to say the truth, anygame is a RPG because you impersonate something or someone that ain t yourself.

Extremely clever person.

Imo, many should play lemmings IRL.

» Sat Feb 19, 2011 3:31 am

Anyone gonna come up with a link where it says 150 perks? an actual dev or mag confirmation not something akin to some random person saying spell making is gone.

I'd understand if acrobatics is gone, and at the same time I wont, since Oblivion gave you reasons to use it, by dodging.

Barter and speech Craft...um I don't know your intelligence and speechcraft should handle how you can underhand a merchant really.

» Fri Feb 18, 2011 7:10 pm

Uuhhh, anyone else notice you're clearly over-looking those of us that have brought up the perks system?

Perks are a great addition, I really do see their potential. Are they a replacement for skills? Not by a longshot. Why is it if you agree with the develloper, you 'speak the truth', but if we wish to voice our opinions, we're 'just complaining about change'. We don't know what the game's like, and it may be good? Sure, but you don't know what the game's like, and it may not be a welcome change either.

Can we all please have an intelligent discussion about the topic now, rather than both sides ignoring each other's points?

How are perks not a decent replacement for skills? They give you bonuses to your specializations, just like skills do. The only difference is you don't level them up. Only, technically you do because your leveling up a certain skill so you can get that perk. Plus, 18 skills compared to 21 is only a 3 skill difference. Sure, more skills than that have been dropped, but not really, they are still present in other skills and probably perks in the game.

» Sat Feb 19, 2011 5:56 am

Thats just because two factors are in:
Poor imagination player + Limited implementation at the time being.

You can easely do Oblivion combat based on skill. Which by the wasn t done.

To the OP, well your right.
The factors are:
Skill require time to be implemented right so they are usefull ingame and worth to be increased. This take thinking out of the box and work to implement the way it should be ingame.
beyond usefullness increasing is better received by non classical RPG audience when in increment, the infamous "i win button" factor. This is what generated the Oblivion sistem perk. Instead of being ruled by formulaes easely calculated by PC, it was brought in steps, but this left all the in between raising "useless". (the arguments presented are true for attributes and skills)
The enfasis for bethesda now is eye candy, not an interesting game...(Morrowind to Oblivion main quest implementation, secondary quest etc) no matter if eyecandywise whatever they do will be pulled under by modders the week after its realeased, since Bethesda became a Console company they must deliver eye candy first for various reasons that will piss most forum users , so i won t get in.

What Oblivion showed and Skyrim will confirm, is the adherance to Diablo like system, or maybe D&D system. Decrease in skill and attributes and overall game interest and compensate in focusing on combat activity.
In a classical RPG way of looking to this transition, TES is slidding from a more broad and overall time rewarding Rolemaster experience to a less complete fastly rewarding AD&D like experience.

In my vocabulary this is devolution and its sad, but for most its called "comprehensiveness", things are imediate imediate so fun and its good.

Short bus for everyone, if it doesnt fit you, you know where the door is.

There are so many things wrong with this that I don't have time to type them all out.

» Fri Feb 18, 2011 11:52 pm

To the OP, well your right.
The factors are:
Skill require time to be implemented right so they are usefull ingame and worth to be increased. This take thinking out of the box and work to implement the way it should be ingame.
beyond usefullness increasing is better received by non classical RPG audience when in increment, the infamous "i win button" factor. This is what generated the Oblivion sistem perk. Instead of being ruled by formulaes easely calculated by PC, it was brought in steps, but this left all the in between raising "useless". (the arguments presented are true for attributes and skills)
The enfasis for bethesda now is eye candy, not an interesting game...(Morrowind to Oblivion main quest implementation, secondary quest etc) no matter if eyecandywise whatever they do will be pulled under by modders the week after its realeased, since Bethesda became a Console company they must deliver eye candy first for various reasons that will piss most forum users , so i won t get in.

What Oblivion showed and Skyrim will confirm, is the adherance to Diablo like system, or maybe D&D system. Decrease in skill and attributes and overall game interest and compensate in focusing on combat activity.
In a classical RPG way of looking to this transition, TES is slidding from a more broad and overall time rewarding Rolemaster experience to a less complete fastly rewarding AD&D like experience.

In my vocabulary this is devolution and its sad, but for most its called "comprehensiveness", things are imediate imediate so fun and its good.

Short bus for everyone, if it doesnt fit you, you know where the door is.

This.
The continued skill cutting is a problem. I hope Bethesda can pull off some fantastic perks and not some passive +5% firebolt damage crap. Sure streamlining some skills is better and more efficient but when you don't add anything of value to replace what you are removing you are "dumbing" down a game. Just look at Bioware, They have completely lost the way when it comes to making RPG's from a gameplay standpoint. Don't get me wrong ME2 is a fantastic game and a phenominal story but one thing it should never be called is an RPG. At best an RPG Lite so that people who want true depth in a game and hours of tinkering know to stay away from the game.

» Fri Feb 18, 2011 11:22 pm

How are perks not a decent replacement for skills? They give you bonuses to your specializations, just like skills do. The only difference is you don't level them up. Only, technically you do because your leveling up a certain skill so you can get that perk. Plus, 18 skills compared to 21 is only a 3 skill difference. Sure, more skills than that have been dropped, but not really, they are still present in other skills and probably perks in the game.

Dude i don t want Diablo or WOW in my TES is this conception hard to understand ?
You want perks go play diablo, wow, AOC and so forth.

Why people want everything working exactly the same way ? Probably final aim is alzheimer...

» Sat Feb 19, 2011 1:50 am

How are perks not a decent replacement for skills? They give you bonuses to your specializations, just like skills do. The only difference is you don't level them up. Only, technically you do because your leveling up a certain skill so you can get that perk. Plus, 18 skills compared to 21 is only a 3 skill difference. Sure, more skills than that have been dropped, but not really, they are still present in other skills and probably perks in the game.

They are great to supplement different skills. They are not so good to replace skills.
Perks work with one off system and development in that system is segmented more than it is continuous. It will not be the same, obviously, as OB. But the same conflict will be in place where an rigid system will be imposed on a growth system. I think that is more effective if there is much more growth system than rigid. Between 18 skills with their perks I am a bit nervous.

» Fri Feb 18, 2011 8:19 pm

Dude i don t want Diablo or WOW in my TES is this conception hard to understand ?
You want perks go play diablo, wow, AOC and so forth.

Why people want everything working exactly the same way ? Probably final aim is alzheimer...

You say you don't want perks, yet you have no argument against them besides the fact that they are in Diablo and WoW. Two great games by the way. Well....at least Diablo. Anyway, do you actually have something against perks?

» Fri Feb 18, 2011 8:54 pm

Cutting skills doesn't make a game less of an rpg. Your role has little to nothing to do with stats at all. Stats dictate what you can and cant do, but your choices make your role. We can argue clasical rpgs vs these so called 'rpg lights' all we want. At the end of the day, a clasical rpg is just as much an rpg as a 'light' rpg. I for one couldn't care less about skills, or the numbers that go with them. They're a digital representation of my character's limitations. They do not make my character. I make my character who he is, not the numbers. A game is not less of an rpg if it has less numbers.

It means they've gone elsewhere, taking away from our eyes. There will always be skills, but why on earth do we have to see them? Why do there have to me more skills. Why does taken them away dumb a game down? If you can still play your own role, the game will always be an rpg. Even if you can't see the numbers, or they got moved around to make some sense.

» Sat Feb 19, 2011 9:17 am

They are great to supplement different skills. They are not so good to replace skills.
Perks work with one off system and growth in that system is segmented more than it is continuous. It will not be the same, obviously, as OB. But the same conflict will be in place where an rigid system will be imposed on a growth system. I think that is more effective if there is much more growth system than rigid. Between 18 skills with their perks I am a bit nervous.

I kind of agree, but is it really something complaining about? 150 perks actually makes it more in depth than Morrowind and Oblivion, I wouldn't know about the others because I haven't played them. Plus the perks will be based on a certain skill anyway. A perk that gives you bonuses to longswords is probably related to the one handed weapon skill, and so on.