In the podcast todd says that he looks at the previus games skills and remove what he think isn't necesary. He want us to make more big decitions about which we chose, but my own opinion is that the fewer skills there are each decitions will count less. What does it matter to me if I have to chose the general blunt skill in OB? I can fully utilize all axes and hammers, but in MW I had too make a more important decition about my skill since they were more specialized. I think that the more specialized skills will make each decition more important.
I know the perk system is there to specialize, but in general I am rather dissappointed with the constant removal of skills since DF.
Thoughts?

Less is more. I'd rather have a few essential skills that are actually usefull than many skills where several are redundant. Trim off the fat and get to the meat of the game.

Just don't let us end up with:
Combat, Magic and Stealth
as our skills.

Amen to that.
Beth, PLEASE don't do that to us!!!

Yeah, great idea. And we must continue "trimming off the fat" until we're left with some horrible thing like Fable, right?

I'm sorry, but when it comes to RPG's, Elder Scrolls has to be one of the fattiest series of them all, and that's a good thing. If "trim off the fat" is your motto here, then you've been playing the wrong series.

He's looking to get skills that yield gameplay, having 300 skills that work the same is just redundant, there needs to be a gameplay advantage, a certain style to each skill.

For example, there's not enough gameplay difference between blade/blunt, but there's more difference between 1hand/2hand, which is why that has changed, and I think this is a good change. He isn't necessarily about to remove options, as you can see from the info on skyrim, we can specialize in Axes, because there is a Axe perk tree within the 1hand skill, this is an improvement over Oblivion, and because Axes have different properties (bleeding effect), the difference from other weapons aren't just range and damage, the difference is an actual gameplay mechanic, this makes it better than Morrowind, even though morrowind had Axe as it's own skill.

This ^

I think there should be more skills Oblvion had too few. I think all the skills from Morrowind should make a return (including spear).

skills, perks, stats ...etc are all math representing actual game thingies, so all in all they have as much value as the game-play allows, so how many skills or abilities there are is irrelevant, its the actual game-play that matters, the weapons the animations the spells the ways a player can effect/use the environment.

so removing skills or adding them means nothing if the game-play svcks.

Skills only makes you better at a certain thing. Perks lets you *do* something new, making it much more versatile. The Oblivion way of gaining "weird perks" as part of increasing skill doesn't really appeal to me. As long as people want immersion (FPS) rather than dice success rolls (RPG), the RPG concept of skills makes less sense. Since it's already determined that everything is a success, you only need a boolean value (perk) to say *if* you can do it, rather than a skill integer amount indicating a chance.

Actually, if they were deep enough and we got plenty of perks to specialize, I wouldn't mind this. I hate trying to figure out the discrepencies between the Magic schools, or having to level up three different schools to high level just to get three spells I find thematic to my character (And often related).

Having weapon skill and block skill be the same is also annoying to me. Weapon handling is as much about defense as it is about offense.

It had to be done for the perks to be worthwhile. The perks will be sweet.

Well said. :thumbsup:

If they deliver on their promises (which I believe they will) Skyrim may appear to have less, but in truth it's going to be far more deep than Morrowind or Oblivion. I would even go so far as to say more so than Daggerfall if this Radiant Story thing works out.

I see the proposed changes as less of 'trim the fat' then outright remove the cancer of past games in the series. TES as it is today manifest by Oblivion is a game top heavy with over growing nodules of cancerous over growth. Too many redundant functions, items, and systems; and all of the redundant growth makes the game not overly comlex ...but simply overly conveluted thus making any chance to make the game better impossible.

In other words it was time to go in an clean house, but clean it out so new health growth can occur. The game will never fix nagging issues of immersiveness & depth unless thing that stand in the way are removed. It is hard enough making a complex RPG game but when it is needlessly top heavy with legacy functions.

The potential is there for an improvement, with the system changing from a reliance on lots of skills and attributes to one with less skills and a lot of perks. Bethesda's past history with perks doesn't show much in the way of "promise", however. The "auto-perks" in Oblivion, and a lot of the "campy" perks in FO3 show how they can be misused to make "character advancement" a joke.

I'm not writing this game off yet, but remaining very skeptical about how it's going to work out.

What legacy functions? It almost sounds as though a split fanbase each values the opposite 50%, and sees the other ? as the cancer. :shrug:

I completely agree.

The new system sounds great, with a lot of specialization. And in my opinion, the change to "1 handed weapons" and "two handed weapons" is a good thing... in Oblivion, I could understand axes in blunt skill (actually, historically they were used practicallt in the same way), but the fact that using a dagger made me better with claymores looked... very strange. And now you would be able to decide what you are better at with the perks, that count the most. If this system results to be what it looks to be, it would be better than Oblivion and Morrowind's ones, in my opinion.

Not in a RPG, sorry.

I disagree with this. not only are the combat techniques different, but the various armor styles can lessen or defeat blade or blunt weapons. Chainmail can stop a blade, but does almost nothing against a mace. :shrug:

As for game mechanics: Have you not played an RPG where your PC must resort to an unfamiliar weapon, and do so at a severe loss of attack skill? A combined skill means that every fighter in that world is equally skilled in bladed and blunt... This means from one skill they receive equal proficiency in foils, daggers and warhammers.
I consider this terribly unrealistic, and creatively limiting to character design.

They have took away three skills for [censored] sake.
It's not the end of the world....we now have 3 less skills overall,but inplace we have ranks and perks.
Combined = 280 perks,then (even though not ful fledged skills ) we have crafting,wood chopping ,mining.
I really don't see what the problem is.
I know what i would prefer....and thats the new way...some people really don't understand what bethesda are trying to do.
Settle down.
They are trying to give you more choices to define your PC or class.
Like two assassins,they style and class is the same but the ranks and perks set you apart,makes you unique.

To be frank, what's the difference between a skill and a perk tree? With the skill, you just see a bar going up as you get better. With a perk tree, you see yourself getting better as the little lights brighten up. Only difference is that the skill is a line, while the tree has more than one path. Wouldn't perk tree's be oh so much better? Not every swordsman is going to be the same. No way. WIth perk tree's you gain the ability to be a different swordsmen when compared to the one next to you. Skills are old and rusty, while perk tree's fit the mold of rpg much better.

Mmmm... actually, if I remember correctly, it is exactly the opposite. In a chainmail, the force of the blunt would be distributed within the entire surface, while a plate armor could be dented and hurt you a lot. However, a sword will easily cut a chainmail, but not a plate armor.

Actually, thjey've taken away 18 skills since Daggerfall, and each of those skills had a meaning and an impact on the game.

However I'm looking forward these perk system too.

18 skills is fine and they brought back enchanting as a skill.

IMO this is comparing a few coins to a sack full of slugs (the metal punch-out kind)
For me the rest (wood chopping... etc) are like icing and sprinkle bits on the cake, and to me less skills means less cake.
(and yes... an all icing cake is a lie )

I'd think most of us understand their intentions about as well as anyone outside of the company, seeing only public press... Its just that some don't like the perceived intentions. :shrug: