Three Skills : V - Skyrim

» Fri Jun 11, 2010 4:51 pm

Really, I've never played Fable before, so I don't know if what I'm describing is anything like it. That said, I dont' see how it could be, based on the fact that the core mechanics from TES are still here.

Also, by no means am I saying that this is the system that has to be used for Skyrim. I'd just like it to be considered. Synergy has been kinda thrown out of the loop, mainly because there are few if any people fighting for it.

lol really? thats almost how fable works, when you kill you get combat exp(if using a melee weapon) magic exp (if using magic) skill exp (if using bow[fable 1] or guns [fable 2 & 3]) and general exp just for making the kill or completing a quest which can be placed in any skill or abilities under any of the 3 tree's. under each tree (combat, magic, skill) you can unlock new abilities related to that tree.

» Fri Jun 11, 2010 1:12 pm

Well, in the end this is The Elder Scrolls: Skyrim.... And, its you the OP v Bethesda and 1000's of others... Where do you expect to get? Do you expect Bethesda to go hmm, yeah, our system svcks (which it doesn't btw) and say, lets use this system that makes no sense.

Good luck.

I didn't expect anything, but I was hoping for some form of debate, instead of "ur stupted nub lozl". Like I said, I'm just countering Beth's system with my own version, trying to point of some of the weak points their system has. I know for a fact that mine isn't perfect, but neither is theres, and instead of fighting for more skills I chose to fight for more synergy in hopes that would open up more rounts to be unique. Do I expect Beth to give two dragon tougnes worth of gold? Nah, but at least I didn't make another thread that everyone's seen before.

I think the way you had to make some of the perks work more like skills demonstrates that three skills would not be ideal. Instead of "skills increase as you use them and perks are selected at level up" it's "skills are increased as you use them and perks are selected at level up, except there's also these other perks that are gained as you use the skill". It seems like an unnecessary complication just to keep the number of skills low. Synergy between skills could still be added without doing this.

Rather what I'm going for is that skills would represent synergy, while perk tree's would creat a great amount of uniqueness. I'm sure it could be added other ways, this is just my sugestion. Like I've said before, I by no means expect or hope Beth to use this. This is just an example of one way it could be done. It fixes some weaknesses while making new ones. The point is to get skills to ballance out, and to make sense. Ballance is not going to be achived if people only clammer for more skills, without thinking about synergy or how they could work together to prove more usefull.

lol really? thats almost how fable works, when you kill you get combat exp(if using a melee weapon) magic exp (if using magic) skill exp (if using bow[fable 1] or guns [fable 2 & 3]) and general exp just for making the kill or completing a quest which can be placed in any skill or abilities under any of the 3 tree's. under each tree (combat, magic, skill) you can unlock new abilities related to that tree.

So that's how it works? It doesn't sound like a horrible idea on paper. Now, if they have perk tree's that grow automatically, such as a Long Sword tree trunk increasing as you use a Long Sword, and for every three trunk levels you gain you get to choose a branch perk for that trunk...then I'll agree that my idea is just like Fable.

» Fri Jun 11, 2010 2:37 am

the more the better! I will actually have a challenge that way.

» Fri Jun 11, 2010 3:50 pm

Something tells me that first post was a very long and elaborate case of sarcasm.

» Fri Jun 11, 2010 8:35 am

...really? I mean, seriously? All right then, I'll counter with a post of equal intellect. If you'll only read half...no, not even a half of what I said, why reply to what I'm saying? The basic functions of the game will stay, never did I ever say "ber der neber I only use swords so cut everything else". Really, I didnt. I sugested 3 skills that cover synergy along with 29ish perk tree's that would act like super skill bars that had options to make character's different. Oh...darn it, to much intellect...can't be helped I guess.

I don't waste time reading troll posts, especially XBox sized ones.

» Fri Jun 11, 2010 11:34 am

Yes. I get it. Locks are not all the same, I know that. But in Oblivion the mini game for every lock was the same. Every lock in Oblivion is the same, sheesh. I'm not that stupid, just because I sugested something that wouldn't be popular doesn't mean I have mush for brains.

You are to focused on the three skills and not even looking at the fact that there would be 29ish perk tree's as well. If you only look at have of my idea, of course it'll come off as half baked. That's not really giving me any credit, like at all.

I honestly did not mean to imply you mush for brains or suggest your idea was half-baked. I realize and credit the time it took to formulate everything you wrote.
But if you're just lessening skills for perks, then isn't that what's already been done, just on a grander scale?

I think the things they've combined make it much more realistic, and if they lessen it more, it might upset the balance. In my mind, this doesn't apply especially to combat (a fair point there, I reckon, minus the archery) but with Magic. Magic is such a versatile and different tool in every game/fantasy story that the system Elder Scrolls seems to work best with the system they have now. At least in my mind. To micromanage it on that amount of scale doesn't feel right.

Your idea definitely had some good points, there's no arguing that, my opinion is just that for the Elder Scrolls series, what they have already works best.

» Fri Jun 11, 2010 1:53 pm

Look at me, I am skilled with a dagger, therefore I am a master at using a warhammer and also a master at using a shield.

Yeah, pretty much this. You're wrong on a lot that you said. People don't know how to use an Axe because you know how to use a Sword. Despite the wrong facts you've stated, it's not the same thing.

» Fri Jun 11, 2010 12:54 pm

I honestly did not mean to imply you mush for brains or suggest your idea was half-baked. I realize and credit the time it took to formulate everything you wrote.
But if you're just lessening skills for perks, then isn't that what's already been done, just on a grander scale?

No worries. I probably shouldn't have said that to you per say, because you're at least listening to what I have to say first and then giving me actual reasons why you don't think it would work. So that's my bad.

I think the things they've combined make it much more realistic, and if they lessen it more, it might upset the balance. In my mind, this doesn't apply especially to combat (a fair point there, I reckon, minus the archery) but with Magic. Magic is such a versatile and different tool in every game/fantasy story that the system Elder Scrolls seems to work best with the system they have now. At least in my mind. To micromanage it on that amount of scale doesn't feel right.

I think so to, and that you're probably right. Synergy seems to be taken into account with the new system to a solid amount, and at the same time it's keeping things spearate to a realistic amount. I'm looking foraward to playing with it, and I think it will work very well. I think that people are focusing to much on the name, instead of what it would do. The magic skill would really only make it easier to learn magic from other classes, and would allow for a master mage of restoration to at least be compitant with altderation magic. That said, magic is really up to the personal view of how it should work due to us not having a real world comparison. This is just my view on how magic works, but a lot of people are going to say theree's a lot more that makes the schools different, and being skilled with one doesn't necessarily mean you'll be good with another.

Your idea definitely had some good points, there's no arguing that, my opinion is just that for the Elder Scrolls series, what they have already works best.

Thanks again for posting in an intelligent manner. And I agree, I'm looking forward to see the new skills in action, and I think they will serve their perpose very well. That said, they'll probably always be open for improvement, and as many different looks on the matter as possible could help creat a system that maximises the good and minimises the bad.

Something tells me that first post was a very long and elaborate case of sarcasm.

If that were completely true, I would have given up the ghost a looooong time ago.

Yeah, pretty much this. You're wrong on a lot that you said. People don't know how to use an Axe because you know how to use a Sword. Despite the wrong facts you've stated, it's not the same thing.

...I dont' remember ever saying that would be how it works. Synergy be damned for a moment, my perk tree's alone would be a system many fans would want, if they would look past the name. Then adding three overall skills to compensate for synergy is just another way to include it. I remember specifically stating that a master of the dagger, upon picking up a warhammer for the first time, would with no dought in my mind be better at using it when compared to someone who's picking up a weapon in general for the first time. A master of using a dagger, if forced to use a warhammer, in my system would mearly be able to hold their own, and they would be able to pick up how to use a warhammer quicker than a new fighter.

» Fri Jun 11, 2010 2:22 pm

Thank you. I'll take what I can get.

I haven't any issue with an intelligent discussion with a polite individual.

I never said it did. Never ever ever did I say that, and I don't know why people keep saying that I did. I said that a master of swordplay would be better at using an axe or a bow than the new hero off the block. By no means would they be a master at different combat styles, but they wouldn't be incompitent either.

You had suggested grouping combat together. As skills, not perks, are the ones that evolve based upon experience through usage, it would imply that someone who is exceptional at swordsmanship would also be supremely efficient with an axe, mace or dagger.

Just as long as you know that argument works both ways. We don't know, so its up to Beth to decide. My arguement is just as valid with that arguement as those against it.

I'm well aware. Still, given that in the older games the magic seems to have been based upon different innate talents, my own take on the series is that Destruction either uses a different talent or train of thought than say, Mysticism.

True, but being good at one would help in a small way at being good with the other. Your reasons would stand for why each would get its own perk tree, or at least a large branch. But being able to blend in is a blanket idea, one that would be represented withe the synergy skill called stealth, with larger perk tree's that allow for specialization. When you're talking to someone, you'll want to use dialect that won't stand out to much, you'll want to blend in. When you're sneaking around in the dark, you'll want to blend in with the night. When you're stealing something, you'll want to blend in. And when you're all dressed up to sneak around in broad daylight, you'll want to blend in. Stealth wouldn make a master sneaky character suddenly know how to talk with a silver tougne, rather they would be able to gain that silver tougne easier.

See, I personally disagree with you here. A politician is an expert at speechcraft, their career is dependant on it. Grab a politician and stick him in a paintball match, and tell him to sneak up the right, you'll probably find his talent with words doesn't do a whole lot to prevent him from being shot all to hell. Conversely, someone extremely proficient at sneaking may have very well never had the need to talk their way out of a situation, or may be anti-social in general. But they'd still be able to sneak past you no problem. As for stealing, there was no "sneaking" about (As that would draw attention) nor talking our way in to wares. It was usually just walk in, find something, wait, take, walk out. Eat.

Now your just assuming Im stupid here...come on, give me some credit. I'm not ignorant to believe save cracking is like picking a lock on a door. In oblivion, every lock was the same. In the game world, every lock was the same. Not our world, Oblivion's world. If Oblivion's locking system was like our world's, then I would draw comparisons, but as it stands it isn't.

The examples I gave you are both single blade (Key is flat on one side) vertical tumbler systems. If you saw them in a cutaway, they would look the same, save for more tumblers, same as in Oblivion. Despite that though, the added tumblers in a house key make the job exceptionally more difficult, as all tumblers are closer together, meaning you end up "nudging" the wrong one on occasion.

Perhaps a better idea would be a perk tree that allows for more unique/efficient...erm...running/jumping styles...in the game based on the attribute's rather than a skill.

You're talking to someone to vehemently opposes perks as a replacement for skills.

While I see where you are coming from, its hard for me to believe that none of you're experience with using lacross gear wouldn't help you use your hockey gear. The skill in itself is rather hard to define, but bacically ti comes down to how well you can move in a type of armor. Perk tree's could just as easily fill the rolls of skill bars, only perk tree's would allow you to choose say a little more uniqueness, and maybe create more of a feel of you getting better. I think we both agree in this one.

No, and as I stated, I can only assume wearing one type of armour actually would cause you to be more proficient in all other types. In fact, the only difference I could conceive would be how well you could adapt in combat to the different styles (Lightfoot vs tank, for example).

Be there three skills or three hundred of them, an rpg is a game that allows the player to make a character that is allowed to take different paths, and to make choices. Master Chief will always be Master Chief no mater what armor we put him in, he's going to be the badass silent hero. If we could choose to make him evil, good, or somewhere in between and we got to name our character and choose what the spartin looked like, even if the game mechanics didn't change, it would be an rpg because we got to make our own role and then play it.

No, but then what you're arguing for is a reduction in RPG elements. In an RPG game. Do you see my concern?

But I'm not changing the basic formula at all. My system would simply strip synergy to its very core. This allows for a multitude of perk tree's to be added, all which wouldn't have to worry about if it be one handed or two handed or whatever. It is basically a name change, but there is a little more two it than that. Synergy would become visable, and perk tree's would allow for a much more visual representation of what we're seeing all ready in spread sheet form. Its moving from a spread sheet with a small constialtion reltated to it into one big constalation, with the spread sheet still being present in the form of a link to the constalation to keep things neat. What I'm sugesting isn't game changing by any means, only visual with synergy being the main focus.

I think the system you proposed would be more game-changing than you consider. Lets look at two examples of how one could become more effective at handling longswords.

Existing: Player grabs a dagger and uses it, develloping new talent as he gains experience with the item. (Shortblade skill)

Proposal: Player grabs a battleaxe and uses it, somehow develloping talent with the dagger as a result of this action (Combat skill). Every so often, while still possibly never having touched a dagger in his life, he is imbued with the ability to wield a dagger even more effectively (Perk), perhaps even moreso than the battleaxe he has been using the whole time.

Besides the logistics issue, I also hate that perks are something one simply selects when levelling up. Skills are more intimate, and require you to actually invest time in to a talent if you wanted to improve at it. Ultimately, skills are half of what give the game it's longevity and character.

» Fri Jun 11, 2010 3:40 pm

No offense OP as I see you've pot a lot of effort into this. But why don't we just take away all skills, set the game 1000 years into the future and make it a fps

» Fri Jun 11, 2010 5:53 am

:nope:

Im not trying to be rude, but after reading the entire OP I have to say, I do not agree with this at all. Personally, I think that would not necessarily ruin the game, but would take a lot away from this series. The amazing part about this game is that it goes so in depth, and there are so many different levels and ways to play it. If you take that away and simplify it, you end up with something like Fable or worse. Not to say Fable wasnt a good game....but I do NOT EVER want ES to become like that. Sorry.

My favorite part about this game is that you level up and get better at doing things......by actually doing them. To me, the fact that this is broken down across many different skills (Acrobatics, Short Blade, Sword, and so on...) is one of the best parts about the game. Its these little touches that make ES an amazing series.

I certainly wouldnt want to decrease the amount of playable races, even though most of them I dont use. I just like the fact they are there if I want them. I dunn, I guess Im just saying that respectfully I disagree with this, and hopefully this isnt the direction these games ever go in. Sorry.

I haven't any issue with an intelligent discussion with a polite individual.

You had suggested grouping combat together. As skills, not perks, are the ones that evolve based upon experience through usage, it would imply that someone who is exceptional at swordsmanship would also be supremely efficient with an axe, mace or dagger.

I'm well aware. Still, given that in the older games the magic seems to have been based upon different innate talents, my own take on the series is that Destruction either uses a different talent or train of thought than say, Mysticism.

See, I personally disagree with you here. A politician is an expert at speechcraft, their career is dependant on it. Grab a politician and stick him in a paintball match, and tell him to sneak up the right, you'll probably find his talent with words doesn't do a whole lot to prevent him from being shot all to hell. Conversely, someone extremely proficient at sneaking may have very well never had the need to talk their way out of a situation, or may be anti-social in general. But they'd still be able to sneak past you no problem. As for stealing, there was no "sneaking" about (As that would draw attention) nor talking our way in to wares. It was usually just walk in, find something, wait, take, walk out. Eat.

The examples I gave you are both single blade (Key is flat on one side) vertical tumbler systems. If you saw them in a cutaway, they would look the same, save for more tumblers, same as in Oblivion. Despite that though, the added tumblers in a house key make the job exceptionally more difficult, as all tumblers are closer together, meaning you end up "nudging" the wrong one on occasion.

You're talking to someone to vehemently opposes perks as a replacement for skills.

No, and as I stated, I can only assume wearing one type of armour actually would cause you to be more proficient in all other types. In fact, the only difference I could conceive would be how well you could adapt in combat to the different styles (Lightfoot vs tank, for example).

No, but then what you're arguing for is a reduction in RPG elements. In an RPG game. Do you see my concern?

I think the system you proposed would be more game-changing than you consider. Lets look at two examples of how one could become more effective at handling longswords.

Existing: Player grabs a dagger and uses it, develloping new talent as he gains experience with the item. (Shortblade skill)

Proposal: Player grabs a battleaxe and uses it, somehow develloping talent with the dagger as a result of this action (Combat skill). Every so often, while still possibly never having touched a dagger in his life, he is imbued with the ability to wield a dagger even more effectively (Perk), perhaps even moreso than the battleaxe he has been using the whole time.

Besides the logistics issue, I also hate that perks are something one simply selects when levelling up. Skills are more intimate, and require you to actually invest time in to a talent if you wanted to improve at it. Ultimately, skills are half of what give the game it's longevity and character.

I agree. Skills should be kept as separate as possible. The more you combine the less realistic it is. You dont use a sword and become proficient in archery at the same time, or firearms in a more modern sense. Personally I would rather see more classes than less. And I completely agree with the perks. I was dissapointed when I heard this was a Fallout feature being included. I mean it worked in Fallout....but I was still less than thrilled about it.

No offense OP as I see you've pot a lot of effort into this. But why don't we just take away all skills, set the game 1000 years into the future and make it a fps

lol

» Fri Jun 11, 2010 3:44 pm

:shakehead:

If the OP is sarcastic, he should make this clearer and avoid any further confusion and/or controversy.

If the OP is genuinely arguing for just 3 skills... :ermm: :rolleyes: Well let me put it this way; if you want real feedback, make a poll and see how it turns out.

Anyhoo, because of this threat's massive potential for :flamethrower: and :swear: , I'll :bolt:

» Fri Jun 11, 2010 5:34 pm

No thanks OP I dont want another Fable. I know it seems to be the trend to simplify RPG's into action/adventure games. For example Fable 3/Mass effect 2/Dragon age 2/FF13, dont change how elder scrolls works, I enjoy leveling up my characters skills, character progression/customization is becoming so limiting with most high end rpg games, most are going backwards nowadays.

» Fri Jun 11, 2010 8:51 am

No thanks OP I dont want another Fable. I know it seems to be the trend to simplify RPG's into action/adventure games. For example Fable 3/Mass effect 2/Dragon age 2/FF13, dont change how elder scrolls works, I enjoy leveling up my characters skills, character progression/customization is becoming so limiting with most high end rpg games, most are going backwards nowadays.

No simplification here...not sure what you read, I'm fighting for more variation. The skill bar's we have now make it so that every swordsman...every archer...every thief is the same. With a perk tree, you could have so much more.

Think of it this way...what to you get when you level up the blade skill 3 times? You gain some damage...and you're better with higher end swords. Every swordsman with a level 100 blade skill will be the exact same, no matter which way you look at it. Now...with my system...for every level you gain using a blade, the blade tree will have a star light up in it's trunk. So with three levels, three star's will light up. But that's not all, after the character levels up, with three lights in the trunk brightened up, the character could then choose a perk on either side of the tree. Some may choose to have their tree grow towards the left, a more technical swordsman, while another may choose to go the the right side, a more power based swordsman.

It could be even taken a step ferther, by at the beginning choosing between a two trunks for swordsmen, one increasing speed and controle of the sword more so than damage, and the other side doing the opposite. There are so many things that perk tree's could do better than simple skill bars.

That's what my system is trying to push. Its not trying to simplify things...I don't want that either. My system is trying to represent synergy better, and allow for different types of swordsman, or fire mages...or theives. Skill bar's can't do that.

If the OP is sarcastic, he should make this clearer and avoid any further confusion and/or controversy.
If the OP is genuinely arguing for just 3 skills... Well let me put it this way; if you want real feedback, make a poll and see how it turns out.

I want this discussed, I think multiply systems should be considered by the comunity before we agree that simply more skills is the way to go. I think perk tree's allow for more unique character design, and allow for diversity between fighting styles. Every swordsmen is not the same, but that's what skill bar's do...make every swordsmen the same. Stop focusing so hard on the three skills, and think about all the diversity 29 in depth perk tree's could bring to the table.

No thanks OP I dont want another Fable. I know it seems to be the trend to simplify RPG's into action/adventure games. For example Fable 3/Mass effect 2/Dragon age 2/FF13, dont change how elder scrolls works, I enjoy leveling up my characters skills, character progression/customization is becoming so limiting with most high end rpg games, most are going backwards nowadays.

I'm not making the system simple by any means. In fact, a new player probably would have to read the manual a few times before they got the jist of my system. Like I said eariler, stop focusing on me reducing skills to just three that represent synergy, and look more at the 29 in depth perk trees that bring so much more to the table.

No offense OP as I see you've pot a lot of effort into this. But why don't we just take away all skills, set the game 1000 years into the future and make it a fps

I'd have thought I would have gotten this across by now. Such a game is not what I'm sugesting by any means...and to slipery slope fallacy me all the way to that...well...even if you didn't mean any offence to it, I rather am quite offended. I know my system has some flaws, one being that such a thing as archery increasing the synergy of bladed weaponery. That said, ignoring my other points and just focusing on the three skills...I'm not trying to make the game into Fable...or Mass Effect. I really am not trying to do that...rather, I want to see a system where swordsman a is different than swordsman b.

Im not trying to be rude, but after reading the entire OP I have to say, I do not agree with this at all. Personally, I think that would not necessarily ruin the game, but would take a lot away from this series. The amazing part about this game is that it goes so in depth, and there are so many different levels and ways to play it. If you take that away and simplify it, you end up with something like Fable or worse. Not to say Fable wasnt a good game....but I do NOT EVER want ES to become like that. Sorry.

My favorite part about this game is that you level up and get better at doing things......by actually doing them. To me, the fact that this is broken down across many different skills (Acrobatics, Short Blade, Sword, and so on...) is one of the best parts about the game. Its these little touches that make ES an amazing series.

Maybe I'm just bad at getting across what I'm trying to say...honestly.

What depth does a skill bar have? What? Where in bloody hell'd I miss it? A single path everyone goes down is boring! Every swordsman is the same with just skill bars. Its so bland...really, perk tree's bring so much more to the table.

You'd still level things up by doing them. Perk tree's would grow just as skill bar's do now...only you'd have some different path's to go down. I've taken away absolutly nothing here. You'd get perk tree's for everything...even two handed swords would have a different tree than longswords. My system would ad soooo much variaty to the combat system...albeit adding a slightly odd synergy system as well. Perhaps I should have gone with 4 or 5 skills...at any rate...that's not what you should be focused on. Look at all the things perk tree's could bring to the table!

» Fri Jun 11, 2010 11:57 am

I haven't any issue with an intelligent discussion with a polite individual.

Neither do I. Its upsetting, but inteligent descutions seem to be less common around here than they should be.

You had suggested grouping combat together. As skills, not perks, are the ones that evolve based upon experience through usage, it would imply that someone who is exceptional at swordsmanship would also be supremely efficient with an axe, mace or dagger.

But that's not the system I'm trying to talk about. I grouped the synergy together, yes, but I also took a lot of the power skills hold and put them into perk tree's. Perk tree's with 100 star trunks that level up just as skill bar's do now...only with a chance to choose a different path...there are so many options larger perk tree's bring to the table. The swordsman would only be minorly efficient with an axe or a mace. He'd only be able to pick it up and use it better than most people, and he'd level up that perk tree faster.

I'm well aware. Still, given that in the older games the magic seems to have been based upon different innate talents, my own take on the series is that Destruction either uses a different talent or train of thought than say, Mysticism.

You're probably right. That is the way TES has handled magic in the past. While it's hard for me to believe that there wouldn't be even a little bit of synergy, its harder still for me to argue that when we've never seen any.

See, I personally disagree with you here. A politician is an expert at speechcraft, their career is dependant on it. Grab a politician and stick him in a paintball match, and tell him to sneak up the right, you'll probably find his talent with words doesn't do a whole lot to prevent him from being shot all to hell. Conversely, someone extremely proficient at sneaking may have very well never had the need to talk their way out of a situation, or may be anti-social in general. But they'd still be able to sneak past you no problem. As for stealing, there was no "sneaking" about (As that would draw attention) nor talking our way in to wares. It was usually just walk in, find something, wait, take, walk out. Eat.

I'll admit this is a weak point for my synergy system. However, I think that perk tree's would make up for the synergy. The more talking the politician does, the higher the synergy stealth goes up along with the speechcraft as well. The power of talking would lay with the perk tree, so if a player only ever talked...and never snuck around in their lives, the speechcraft tree would be high and the stealth synergy would be a little higher than most, but the stealth tree would still be low.

And when someone's trying to steal in broad daylight, they're sneeking in the sense that they don't want to be noticed. Sure they don't squat down, they try to look like everyone else...which every thief should be able to do in my mind. Be thing sneeking at night or durring the day...I've never seen a thief who couldn't blend in at either time.

The examples I gave you are both single blade (Key is flat on one side) vertical tumbler systems. If you saw them in a cutaway, they would look the same, save for more tumblers, same as in Oblivion. Despite that though, the added tumblers in a house key make the job exceptionally more difficult, as all tumblers are closer together, meaning you end up "nudging" the wrong one on occasion.

Oblivion's system would just need to be more realistic in that fact then. As it was, it was relatively to easy and every lock was handled the same. Even if it is like fallout's minigame, I really don't see a need for a skill.

You're talking to someone to vehemently opposes perks as a replacement for skills.

But perk tree's could do so much more, than simple skill bars.

No, and as I stated, I can only assume wearing one type of armour actually would cause you to be more proficient in all other types. In fact, the only difference I could conceive would be how well you could adapt in combat to the different styles (Lightfoot vs tank, for example).

This is where I think a perk tree would work very well. Two perk tree's, one for light and one for heavy armor, would grow as you fight with them on...with perks on the side you could choose once the trunk gains three levels, that would increase how fast you move with that armor on or how well you can use that armor to protect yourself.

No, but then what you're arguing for is a reduction in RPG elements. In an RPG game. Do you see my concern?

I'm agruing for more rpg elements. I'd much rather have every swordsman be different, rather than be the same once they hit level 100. My synergy system may be a bit clunky, but fleshed out perk tree's could dramatically increase the difference between two characters who fight with the same weapon.

I think the system you proposed would be more game-changing than you consider. Lets look at two examples of how one could become more effective at handling longswords.

Existing: Player grabs a dagger and uses it, develloping new talent as he gains experience with the item. (Shortblade skill)

Proposal: Player grabs a battleaxe and uses it, somehow develloping talent with the dagger as a result of this action (Combat skill). Every so often, while still possibly never having touched a dagger in his life, he is imbued with the ability to wield a dagger even more effectively (Perk), perhaps even moreso than the battleaxe he has been using the whole time.

There'd be a small turnover with my synergy system, but it wouldn't be dramatic as everyone things. The power would be in the perk trees. The perks you personally choose would be locked to the perk tree you leveled up, and the perk tree trunks would grow just as skill bar's do now, only alloting for a lot more uniquness.

Besides the logistics issue, I also hate that perks are something one simply selects when levelling up. Skills are more intimate, and require you to actually invest time in to a talent if you wanted to improve at it. Ultimately, skills are half of what give the game it's longevity and character.

But the perk tree's I'm sugesting do just that, you get many as you level up the tree automatically, just as skill bar's are now...only you'll get a choice of you're swordsman either being fast and tactical or slow and powerful. Swordsmen would differ from one another, that's what I would like to see.

» Fri Jun 11, 2010 7:37 am

Neither do I. Its upsetting, but inteligent descutions seem to be less common around here than they should be.

But that's not the system I'm trying to talk about. I grouped the synergy together, yes, but I also took a lot of the power skills hold and put them into perk tree's. Perk tree's with 100 star trunks that level up just as skill bar's do now...only with a chance to choose a different path...there are so many options larger perk tree's bring to the table. The swordsman would only be minorly efficient with an axe or a mace. He'd only be able to pick it up and use it better than most people, and he'd level up that perk tree faster.

You're probably right. That is the way TES has handled magic in the past. While it's hard for me to believe that there wouldn't be even a little bit of synergy, its harder still for me to argue that when we've never seen any.

I'll admit this is a weak point for my synergy system. However, I think that perk tree's would make up for the synergy. The more talking the politician does, the higher the synergy stealth goes up along with the speechcraft as well. The power of talking would lay with the perk tree, so if a player only ever talked...and never snuck around in their lives, the speechcraft tree would be high and the stealth synergy would be a little higher than most, but the stealth tree would still be low.

And when someone's trying to steal in broad daylight, they're sneeking in the sense that they don't want to be noticed. Sure they don't squat down, they try to look like everyone else...which every thief should be able to do in my mind. Be thing sneeking at night or durring the day...I've never seen a thief who couldn't blend in at either time.

Oblivion's system would just need to be more realistic in that fact then. As it was, it was relatively to easy and every lock was handled the same. Even if it is like fallout's minigame, I really don't see a need for a skill.

But perk tree's could do so much more, than simple skill bars.

This is where I think a perk tree would work very well. Two perk tree's, one for light and one for heavy armor, would grow as you fight with them on...with perks on the side you could choose once the trunk gains three levels, that would increase how fast you move with that armor on or how well you can use that armor to protect yourself.

I'm agruing for more rpg elements. I'd much rather have every swordsman be different, rather than be the same once they hit level 100. My synergy system may be a bit clunky, but fleshed out perk tree's could dramatically increase the difference between two characters who fight with the same weapon.

There'd be a small turnover with my synergy system, but it wouldn't be dramatic as everyone things. The power would be in the perk trees. The perks you personally choose would be locked to the perk tree you leveled up, and the perk tree trunks would grow just as skill bar's do now, only alloting for a lot more uniquness.

But the perk tree's I'm sugesting do just that, you get many as you level up the tree automatically, just as skill bar's are now...only you'll get a choice of you're swordsman either being fast and tactical or slow and powerful. Swordsmen would differ from one another, that's what I would like to see.

Just as a head's up, I'm leaving your post as one quote, but will address each paragraph in chronological order.

I have noticed the community seems to be polarized to the point where anyone with a differing opinion is attacked. Those with concerns as those who like everything they see are at eachothers throats especially. I can't help but feel any simplifications done to the game will be as a result of Bethesda finally realizing more and more of the "core" crowd seem to be immature at best. Never-the-less, it's refreshing when a logical and considerate person is found.

True, but then this leads me to wonder if that is still a step in the right direction. Under the current set-up, I still foresee a problem of me being able to master three talents alone (Say, Axe, Destruction and Security). Given that these talents are also all polar opposites of one another, this flies in the face of what you're hoping to promote: A synergy between talents.

I think we're just going to have to leave magic off the table, as it classifies as an unknown variable for us both.

I understand, but I still believe that "over-grouping" all the stealth skills to one doesn't make sense from a logistics standpoint. Most of the skills in stealth have nothing to do with one another.

That's true, but then that would also make sense to group that in to a Sneak skill... Such as it is now.

It was too easy, you're right, and I think half of that is because the world stopped to let you do your lockpick. If it were a real time event, if would've made more sense. Then suddenly trying to pick those five tumblers becomes a much more difficult and involved task. Does one rush to try and get the last couple pins set before the guard comes back? Or simply take their time and try to get them right the first time?

We're just going to have to agree to disagree here. One of the biggest reasons I love the Elder Scrolls is because of the skills. I knew if I wanted to improve at a particular talent, I needed to focus on doing exactly that thing, be it speaking, shooting a bow or summoning a daedra. My concern with your synergy system is that by the time I get around to learning the last few things, I'll have either already mastered them (Shared skill), or will have no chance at learning it effectively (Locked perk tree). I understand some people like specialization, I'm not one of them, however. Most of my replay time (Without mods) was spent to improve specific talents to their peak.

Agreed, in that manner, the system in place is currently vastly inferior to what you propose. I think the armour skills in general have always been a weak area of the current set-up.

I think the logic is that by the time a skill reaches 100, the player has epitomized the absolute best possible manner of using it. Thus, if a swordsman, say, being a quick swinger while wielding the sword a certain way is the absolute best possible fighting style, than it doesn't really make sense for there to be an opposing "also best style" where it can be slow. At level 100, the reason all swordsman would seem the same, is because they all have figured out that "style x" is the perfect manner in doing it.

Again, as my point above proclaims, that presents some interesting predicaments of it's own.

But could your goal not be achieved from a less radical change? Say, for example, different fighting stances?

» Fri Jun 11, 2010 1:33 am

True, but then this leads me to wonder if that is still a step in the right direction. Under the current set-up, I still foresee a problem of me being able to master three talents alone (Say, Axe, Destruction and Security). Given that these talents are also all polar opposites of one another, this flies in the face of what you're hoping to promote: A synergy between talents.

Hmm. There definitly are other options that could handle synergy in a better manner. It's really up to person on how far they think it should be taken, Beth getting the final say wiether we would like more or less. I personally want to get my hands on Skyrim for this reason as well, I'm looking forward to seeing how the system is handled. It's hard to say what would work best untill you've seen it in practice, and I'll probably change my entire proposed system here after playing around with Skyrim's for a while.

I think we're just going to have to leave magic off the table, as it classifies as an unknown variable for us both.

Fair enough.

I understand, but I still believe that "over-grouping" all the stealth skills to one doesn't make sense from a logistics standpoint. Most of the skills in stealth have nothing to do with one another.

The more I look at it, the more I think you are right. Hmm. Well, a perk tree that stands on its own...not connected to the three synergy skills, would work best if it just was helped with intelect. And in all honesty...it's hard to think up of many perks for speechcraft in general. Talk about a thorn in my side. <_< As boring as it is, a simple skill bar here will work just as well as anything really.

That's true, but then that would also make sense to group that in to a Sneak skill... Such as it is now.

Ya ya, I know. :ermm: A few specific perks that only deal with blending in durring broad daylight would add a little to the theif skill however. Make them a little different, give them a greater sense of always trying to blend in and not get spotted.

It was too easy, you're right, and I think half of that is because the world stopped to let you do your lockpick. If it were a real time event, if would've made more sense. Then suddenly trying to pick those five tumblers becomes a much more difficult and involved task. Does one rush to try and get the last couple pins set before the guard comes back? Or simply take their time and try to get them right the first time?

I'm all for it being in real time. I remember picking a chest under water, and always wondering why I suddenly could breath water for a while to finish with the chest. Fallout 3 has the same problem. Hopefully that'll get changed in some way or another.

We're just going to have to agree to disagree here. One of the biggest reasons I love the Elder Scrolls is because of the skills. I knew if I wanted to improve at a particular talent, I needed to focus on doing exactly that thing, be it speaking, shooting a bow or summoning a daedra. My concern with your synergy system is that by the time I get around to learning the last few things, I'll have either already mastered them (Shared skill), or will have no chance at learning it effectively (Locked perk tree). I understand some people like specialization, I'm not one of them, however. Most of my replay time (Without mods) was spent to improve specific talents to their peak.

Well, as I have things right now there wouldn't be a perk or level cap...it just would take a long long time to get everything. I know why they're giving us a soft level cap this time around in Skyrim...I'd much rather just have a more flushed out perk tree system so that character's end up different. It's rather boring that if you choose to be a swordman more than once, they'll play the same way no matter which way you slice it. I think that at the endgame, if people put the time into it they should be able to get pretty much everything. However on the way there, I think that specializing could be pushed. And more than specializing, make it so that swordsman somehow could end up being different than one another, even at endgame.

Agreed, in that manner, the system in place is currently vastly inferior to what you propose. I think the armour skills in general have always been a weak area of the current set-up.

I'm open for any improvement there really. The way things have been done...it didn't really feel like the armor skills did much. They may have increased the numbers...but it just never really felt like anything happened...until having full light or full heavy armor made it so that the weight was removed from what you were carrying...which never really did make much sense.

I think the logic is that by the time a skill reaches 100, the player has epitomized the absolute best possible manner of using it. Thus, if a swordsman, say, being a quick swinger while wielding the sword a certain way is the absolute best possible fighting style, than it doesn't really make sense for there to be an opposing "also best style" where it can be slow. At level 100, the reason all swordsman would seem the same, is because they all have figured out that "style x" is the perfect manner in doing it.

If that were true, there'd only be one sword style in the world. There are boxing styles that deal with dealing damage and other boxing styles that deal with being quick and hitting a lot of hits all be them weaker. I think swordsman could fundamentaly be the same way, the perks allowing for players to choose if they would act more like a tank and deal high amounts of damage or try to be more of a rouge swordsman who would be quicker and sacrifice damage for speed.

Again, as my point above proclaims, that presents some interesting predicaments of it's own.

But could your goal not be achieved from a less radical change? Say, for example, different fighting stances?

It could be. However...how would one choose those fighting stances? I think the skill leveling system should work the same way here. You'd develope you're own fighting style and stance with perks and by doing it. You'd grow into the stance, instead of just choosing it at some point along the line. That's what I'd like to see, albeit a very hard request to fill.