More choices and options to change builds on the fly I guess, my view is expressed in post #169 though. I dont think Perks and a background are mutually exclusive. One defines what you do in the game, the other defines what you were before, or what path your most likely to take.

I'm personally not annoyed about role-playing, I'm annoyed that the game is becoming easier.

You can't role play your character has had a special gift since birth, bestowed upon him/her by a mysterious cleric who visited your mother in a dark winter storm? Come on, I just made that up like, right now.

Every time a new change is announced, one of the first responses I see is "Great, now I can't RP the way I want because X is gone".

Disappointment is understandable, especially when it comes to this series because we are all so close to it. Most of us have put hundreds of hours of gameplay into TES and have certain expectations. But please...stop using roleplay as the excuse. I'm starting to turn into Inigo Montoya every time I see this in a thread- "You keep using that word. I don't think it means what you think it means".

Roleplaying is PRETEND. It's the fantasy you create with your character. In that fashion, if you are decent at role playing, you should be able to role play ANYTHING. Remember when you were a kid and the floor in the living room was hot lava? Seriously, just because mom moved the comfy chair doesn't mean that the role play was doomed, it meant you had to find a different pirate ship to get across the lava!

As a fan of role play myself, I am constantly surprised at how limited some of the TES fans are. They took birthsigns out of the game, your roleplay is now broken? You can't roleplay that you are under a certain sign? Really? There is now slow regen of health. You can't role play your character has had a special gift since birth, bestowed upon him/her by a mysterious cleric who visited your mother in a dark winter storm? Come on, I just made that up like, right now.

So, if you want to be disappointed in game mechanics and changes, have at it. But please, stop using pretend as an excuse. Because what it really sounds like is "I'm not that imaginative and can't pretend my way out of this simple scenario".

Thanks

I read your view and to each their own. I think if I ever make a post about something they did that you were excited about instead of concerned about I'd fall over backward from the shock of it. That said, it's fine to find fault in all things, most of us do.
'Tis a shame your so disappointed. Personally I'm looking forward to see how this one plays out. I may end up more disappointed than you think you will be.

So.... I find myself curious. If you're such a whiz at this thing you claim to be "roleplaying," why are you interested in a game at all? Isn't the purest form of the "roleplay" you're advocating simply sitting in a chair, closing your eyes and pretending ALL of it?

In point of fact, the ONLY purpose that an RPG serves is to provide a framework and context for your imagining - to take it out of your head and give it some sort of shape. So the argument that a game need not provide this thing or that thing because it can be imagined is invalid, since, in reality, ALL of it can be imagined. The game's explicit purpose is to provide a representation of the character and her surroundings, to illustrate interactions with the world, in order to further the roleplay - in order to take at least some portion of the roleplay away from pure imagination and give it some discernible shape.

The only real question regarding any of that is what the game should provide. It must provide something - that's its only purpose. And since its only purpose is to provide a representation of what might otherwise be imagined, the fact that it might otherwise be imagined is moot.

The game provides the rules and the framework, much like the DM in PnP.

And I hardly think he was saying what you suggest at all. You're sort of going a bit extreme with your anolysis of what he said here methinks.

Well yeah... that was sort of the point. Reductio ad absurdum.

The proposition that was made was that arguing against the removal of this or that aspect of the game because its removal harms the ability to roleplay is invalid, since one can simply imagine whatever is necessary to compensate for the removal. In point of fact, one can simply imagine ALL of it, so the fact that one can imagine this or that aspect of it is moot. Every single thing that the game provides is something that can be imagined. If the fact that one can imagine it is sufficient to compensate for its removal, then the game might as well not exist at all, since all of it can be imagined and thus the removal of all of it can be excused by the OP's logic.

The reality is that the game's explicit purpose is to provide a framework within which to roleplay - to represent aspects of the character and the world and provide feedback to aid in imagination. The only valid issue is whether or not this or that particular feature should be included, and that issue has to be settled in some way other than "It's okay if it's removed since we can imagine it," since, again, we can imagine ALL of it.

I'm personally not annoyed about role-playing, I'm annoyed that the game is becoming easier.

I'm with you.

It's essentially what I was getting at earlier, when I posted:

"After a fashion, you are of course correct, HOWEVER, part of the power of video game RPGs is to give visual representation to the roleplay you are imagining. When certain features are ommitted, you end up right back to where you were when you were superimposing The Forest of Mirkwood over the living room floor. . . having to visualize things that just aren't there to be seen.

The really advanced RPG games like Elder Scrolls is that so much of the visual representation is well taken care of, that the main thing you have to entirely imagine and roleplay the type of person you are, and your backstory prior to entering the game. The game offers you visual support for roleplaying much of the rest.

Not being able to jump very high, or not being able to merge certain spells, or not being able to wear just a cuirass and no pants, or just greaves and no upperbody apparel, detracts from that visual aspect.

Its like. . . if you are roleplaying old school with toys, yes you CAN pretend that a My Little Pony is Conan the Barbarian. . . . but that pretend is much more convincingly backed up with a He-Man action figure, who at least looks the part. Likewise, if you want a Pegasus representation, then the My Little Pony is much better suited to the role then Cobra Commander from G.I. Joe. lol "