Personally almost every combat model I've seen used in action RPG's, especially first person ones like Elder Scrolls feel off. Something was "right" about dice rolls and how your character skills actually determined how effective you were with your weapons in old school 2D RPG games. However that system is completely broken for action RPG's where you have greater control over your character. On the other hand, simply going the Oblivion route feels tacked on and extremely floaty. It's the Uncanny Vally of combat systems - skills don't seem to do much except arbitrarily affect damage values and let you unlock an ability at X skill aquired. It's a lot like dice rolls actually - except instead of dealing good damage at random, you deal mellowed out damage every time. Not very satisfying at all, but what else can you do for an RPG and still preserve the "skill" nature?

What really needs to happen with Action RPG's or first person RPG's is that they need to make your character skills affect things such as how fast you "ready" your weapon, how much your camera shakes when you strike an enemy, how fast you can attack, etc but keep the overall damage values consistant (at least with your attributes... i.e. if you have 100 strength you should still do a [censored] tonne of damage even with a melee weapon you have little skill in).

Effectively this means that using weapons that you have a low skill in, means you simply wield them much more sloppily as a character and won't be able to do "special moves" at higher levels. When you land a hit though, it should do the damage you expect a weapon of the type you have with a modifier depending on that weapon's attributes (strength for swords, daggers and bows use agility, etc).

Viola, the perfect damage model for an action RPG game that does the same desired effect of a dice-roll RPG without the dice roll part and still preserving the FPS-action nature. Make skills actually have real effects in action RPGs, not simple damage modifiers.

I 100% agree with everything you said, that kind of combat system would make sense and make skills have a point than just damage.

Agreed,although at this point in development Bethesda probably has the combat singled in.I think theyve learned from all the MW and OB wars on here to balance.Hopeully that is.

I like the gist of your idea. It may be hard to make those minute differences, but that is what will make "next gen" combat. I also think proficiency in one weapon will increase your ability in other, even slightly related weapons, perhaps up to a point, like say, 1 point gain in any melee skill will result in a 1/4 point gain in any other skill, up to 50 points. That way, if you have a guy whose a master of blade, and blunt, and axe, he won't pick up a spear and wave it around uselessly (if we have those weapons, in those categories) But also, by limiting to 50, you won't have that same guy pick up a spear for the first time and be able to carve his initials into his enemies faces.

Secondly, any weapon that you are less skilled in means that it is easier for any attacks you make to be blocked/parried.

Dude those are actually really good ideas. It slightly reminds me of Fable 1 where when your speed was higher, you could swing your weapon faster. But anyway, I really like your ideas.

I like this. A lot.

I think this is a good alternative to the problems you raise.

The damage should also be slightly determined by skill i think. Other than that tiny point iI completely agree with everything you say. The problem is making all of the animations.

No thank you, that would feel even less immersive, strength is not enough by itself to determine the damage, and how much you shake or how fast you are at readying your weapon would just be weird, so I′ve been swinging my heavy Warhammer around on my warrior with 100 str and 100 blunt skill, but then I hold a dagger and I wobble around and I am slower getting the dagger ready and swing it slower ? And when I manage to get a hit in I do as much damage as a master assassin who knows how to handle the dagger and where it hurts the most when you stick it ?

Also I don′t like to look at TES as really being any sort of an Action RPG, but if it is then it would only be even more so if you did the same damage with different weapons (then I mean for that weapontype, a lot for weapon A and a lot for weapon B), and just shake and wobble more depending on the weapon and how well you know it... in fact that is exactly how many if not most action games are.

With how it is now we could have a Blacksmith that repairs armor all day, and he could have 100str but he would not do as much damage as a trainer warrior would with a sword, and most certainly neither more than a bit weaker soldier, but would do more damage than a fellow blacksmith that doesn′t know weapons any better than he is and is a little weaker, it′s more realistic.

At least that is my take on it.

I agree there are flaws in the original post but it is still better than what we already have in my opinion.

I feel taking the block skill out as a separate skill and factoring it into your weapon skill would help alot as well. Low level -knocked back. High level -parry or disarm.

Well obviously different skills would have different effects.

If you have poor blunt skill your character MIGHT (for example) wield the hammer much more slowly, swing much more slowly, shake around a lot more when using the weapon, etc than one with a higher blunt skill.

Low skill with daggers on the other hand could perhaps make it so you can't block with them, wouldn't be able to easily land hits (say the xhair in the screen would be much more jittery), etc.

My post was more of a general concept with some potentual suggestions, rather than a set in stone "DO EXACTLY THIS" idea.

And BTW Elder Scrolls is an almost exact example of what an action RPG is. If it wasn't an action RPG it'd probably be point and click based like Dragon Age.

Hell no! I just hate it when the screen bounces all over the place. :down:

Other than that: it could work.

If this was expanded on and made deep and meaningfull this would be a very good means of making everyone happy. I dont want a heavy spiked war club I just slammed into someones head coming up as a "miss" but I still want my characters skill to mean something and help push along the player skill. I agree with your idea though i do feel it needs to be expanded on. I hope to god beth put in something along the lines of your idea...something that makes player skill and character skill both relavent without killing either one.

Your idea is great.

It would be good if swords actually hit each other. The high skill level would knock the other back, shake them up a little.

i agree with almost everything you said..... but as you said.... if you have lower skill it would be sloppier when you wield the weapon.... so wouldn't it be harder to land a clean hit, and therefore make the hit less powerful?

To a certain extent yes, but not in the same "do +1 damage per skill point" sense. That kind of damage model was designed and worked well for dice-roll old school RPG's. It doesn't work well and comes off as arbitrary (because it is) for real time action RPG's.

The difference here and the current system is that there is still a chance for a character to deal a serious amount of damage with a good weapon they have poor skill with - the thing is though it should theoretically be much harder for the player to really "take full advantage" of the weapon. Maybe the character only does simple swings that don't flow together very well, making the overall damage output not as efficent in a real simulated sense. Perhaps skilled characters with certain weapons will easily be able to combo moves and cause "status effects" on enemies (such as knock-back, knocking off shields, short stun, etc), and the swings are more fast and efficent.

Battles against armored or skilled opponents would be very tough to pull off without a good skill as the armor might add some kind of bonus other than basic damage reduction (i.e. hitting daedric armor with an iron sword and having a skill of 10 in long blade might cause your hit to recoil off their armor "stunning" you, while someone who is highly skilled would still do not-great damage due to the weapon type but be able to attack "weak points" and penetrate the armor).

Basically what would happen is that fighting low level/unarmored characters would be feasable with any weapon at any skill, if a bit unefficent and sloppy from a character animation/timing standpoint at first. Any strikes you can land effectively would do decent damage against such opponents.

Now you might say, "Well that is just as bad as dice roll cause it will get really annoying fast!", and I disagree IF it's done right. Care must be taken into making it so hits you do make are viceral, satisfying, and clearly show some kind of feedback. This is easily possible by effective use of sound, animation, and visuals. Just take a look at 300 - that movie is a pristine example of how simply someone getting stabbed by a sword can be an exciting and rewarding event for the player... it's all in the theatrics. Combine good theatrics with a solid simulated skill point combat system such as this and I garuntee there will be little annoyance in the game play, and instead it will feel VERY VERY rewarding for players to watch their characters grow and fight.

It makes combat fun.

Great ideas OP. That's exactly the kind of stuff I would like to see more of in RPGs. Or at least in action RPGs like TES and Mass Effect where you have direct control of your actions.

I would like to see a more squadbased with ranged weapon approach like FSW http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CdvHXhz_qs8

FSW had two 4 man squads which would make more sense in most RPGs even lower level Elder Scrolls. That said the OP is right on the money. Deus Ex did a fine job of imposing character skill in an action game.

What you fail to take into account is aim. If you spend all of your time with a warhammer, you will not be fantastic with long blades, too. You may still pack quite a punch, but you won't know how to swing the weapon (it's balanced different), and you won't have the precision you would have had you trained long blade. You're used to crushing larger areas of the body, as in arm or middle instead of upper arm or abdomen.

That's kind of the point...

This system would account for that.

Think recoil when you shoot big powerful guns in shooters... how your screen snaps back and it's hard to aim after? The same thing could be done with big heavy weapons when you have little skill. When they hit, it'll hurt oh yes, but you'll have a much tougher time "controlling" that hammer when the "swing recoil" is not predictable and rather large at low skill.

This is a surprisingly awesome idea.

Definitely agree on this. I hope to see this as the next step in combat design for TES. I think this idea could lead to stat distribution and player feedback combining pretty seamlessly together this way, and make it fun and varied to advance in different skills.

Using the warhammer example, I would love to see a lowly character start out with all sorts of difficulties handling his weapon due to his lack of str and skill, but eventually progress to a point where he not only hits harder (foes lose balance, slam against walls, break limbs shields etc) but also learns to follow through with his swings and build momentum as he attacks possibly leading to crit attacks or special moves.

However, I think this would involve more physical properties added to the weapons, there cant just be "slow" weapons and "fast" weapons that invisibly cut through enemies anymore.

Probably would take all their development time to make such a system, but man that would be amazing. Oh well, i'm pretty much prepared for awkward floaty swinging melee combat all over again anyhow.

I agree that with Action rpgs the "skill" of character vs skil of the player needs to be more logical.

To me, with action rpgs the "to hit" has to be completely up to player skill, otherwise it loses the appeal of the whole action part of action-rpg. However with the RPG part you need your characters skills/abilities to actually matter as well.

For example with Archery, the more skill you have the faster you can notch the arrow, as you mentioned. Then you can take it further by having the aiming crosshair focus quicker, and stay "in -focus" longer, whereas with a lower skill the crosshair becomes bigger the l ogner oyu hold your aim (like in real life, the longer you hold a drawn bow the less precise your aim).

Mount and Blade did this failry well imo as far as Archery and Crossbows went, a good way to have player controlled action/combat while stil having rpg mechanics.