And before the "I DONT WANNA IMAGINATE NUTTIN I WANT THE GAME TO BRING MY EVERY THOUGHT INTO REALITY" argument comes back, perks allow you to SPECIFY that your ability to use swords is better than your ability to use axes, even if you level up their same skill. Categories and subcategories.

Lol.

I've heard lot's of great stuff about the combat but I havn't really heard much of anything else.

I'm worried this game is going to focus too much or almost entirely on combat.

>Radiant story.

>Much more variety.

>Ability to affect even the ECONOMIES of towns and villages.

>Abilities to smith and cut wood.


Yeah, they are almost entirely focusing on combat.

Is this a joke?

Because it's melee combat. You are swinging a heavy sharpened object, when the day's at an end there's very little difference between a sword and an axe, they are both sharpened objects used for hacking opponents to bits. Is somebody is master swordsman, I don't think they'd be completely inept if they had to pick up an axe and use that instead. The same physical motions apply, you swing at your target and you hit your target.

I'm not saying they should be equal if you trained your sword skills but it's asinine to say that a swordsman wouldn't be able to use an axe quite proficiently as well.

:thumbsup: Yup. Basic actions raise a general skill, but SWORD or AXE PERKS allow you to get better in one but not the other.

I'm sort of liking the "perk" idea but I really wish they wouldn't call it perk. It just keeps nagging at me that this is another installment of falloutblivion.

They should really call it "abilities" or just refer to it as the "skill tree" since that's what it is.

While I think it's a good idea that you also become better at axe use, they probably shouldn't level up at the same rate, for obvious reasons. Sword should have influence on axe, but not THAT much.

I agree, but for different reasons. Swining and axe is different than swining a sword. The balance is different. A sword is ballanced around the guard with the weight pretty even throughout the blade, while an axe's weight is concentrated at the head where the blade is.

But using an axe in battles would give you experience not just with swinging in axe, but battle strategies in general. A master of the short sword could handle using a one handed axe, not because of his experience with a sword, but the experience of battle itself. Two handed weapons bring in a different style of battle, because you lack a free hand to do other things with. Thats why I feel that one handed and two handed weapons are different enough to get their own skill.

I feel more empowered to specialize now and roleplay than I ever did in Morrowind or Oblivion, frankly.

I no longer have to be locked into a class. I can do whatever I want through roleplay, and end up as whatever I end up as. I can choose from 180 perks (100 are just ranks, they said.) Any character reaching 100 in every skill is still only going to ever seen 50 of the perks according to Todd. That means my character is going to look and act a hell of a lot differently than yours unless we just happen to play and/or roleplay in extremely similar ways.

Now I can use a shield, give it perks, and actually have that be a progression that I chose for my character on the fly rather than something that I chose at the beginning and then can never change.

Before I would choose a class and BAM. That's it. That's my character. Now my character can change and evolve over time as I, the player, see fit. That's a lot more empowering to me as a roleplayer than declaring that, "I am contrived class name X, and forever shall be!" and then being that throughout the course of the game.

Now I can actually ROLEPLAY, and have my choices change my character's progression.

For example: I can do things like pretend to be a pacifist woodsman who lives off the land, and then one day see someone I took out with me as a companion regularly killed. I can feel severely wronged by that and devote my life to getting better at maces, even though that isn't what I've specialized in thus far, so that I can exact brutal vengeance because arrows just aren't destructive enough a fate for my target. I can actually have that thought, pretend to have those feelings, and then play that out. Before I had to choose a class and could never be as good at things outside that class as I could be at the things in it.

And there are still limits. There are still incentives to specialize. If I try to do everything I'm going to end up being weaker and lower level than my specialized character would be after playing the same amount of time.

That's just me, though. I can understand other people preferring the old method.

You won't get a Bioware game here. You will get a sandbox game though. If that's not for you, well, seeya.

True, it is more about knowing how to fight in general than how to swing with a specific weapon. From there it is perks that make you a good fighter, as long as your realize that trying to stab someone with a mace won't be nearly as effective as with a sword lol.

Which is why the perks are going to be very important and are basically replacing skills. Sure, you're going to be OK with an axe if you pick it up, but if you've been choosing sword perks, the axe is going to be [censored] compared to the sword.

I'm not really talking about that. I man the little touches most people don't think of like being able to sit in chairs and stuff.

*slams a stack of paper on the desk*
GENIUS!

My sentiments exactly.

It isn't much different from swinging a sword from swinging a mace. Two handed weapons are all similar thus if you can use one two handed weapon and you get good at them, you will get good at swinging and wielding another. Perks are what truly shows your mastery of a weapon. It brings out the mastery you have gained over a certain weapon rather than having a generalization skill do it for you. You can decide how deep you want to go into a perk for a certain weapon/spell.

Roleplaying is about making a character that is seperate from the roleplayer. The roleplayer and the character are two separate entities, even if the roleplayer is roleplaying as himself. The character that the roleplayer designs is human in his abilities. He cannot master every skill. He cannot do everything.

The skills and stats systems were, as a concept, was designed as a way to represent the abilities of the character as a whole. Where he succeeds, and where he falls short. He can be a good swordsman, but fail as a negotiator. He can be a good smithy, but fail as a tailor.

So let's take Stephen Hawking and Michael Jordan. Stephen Hawking, is good at quantum physics, but bad at basketball. Michael Jordan is good at basketball, but not at quantum physics. Stephen Hawking may roleplay as Michael Jordan, but since the character is Michael Jordan then he is limited to what Michael Jordan can do. Vice Versa.

The point I'm trying to make is that we shouldn't be able hit 100 in all skills, because then our character becomes... Something else.

What if you play as a character who would want to do that, though? What if that's the ROLE you're PLAYING? With this system, you aren't forced to be a jack of all trades. In fact, if you do try to max every skill, you're not going to be as good at any of them (perk-wise) as you would be if you had specialized. But you have the option to do it if your character is such that they would choose to do such a thing.

My worst fears written down. That's what I most fear Skyrim might be...

The problem with a large part of this community is that people seem to think "Role Playing" means 30+ skills (looking at you, Daggerfall), spending as much time number crunching as you are playing the game, et cetera. This is not the case and never was. Role-playing games are by their very definition a game where you play a role of your choosing. Some games do this through stats (Dragon Age, the early Elder Scrolls Games, Dungeons and Dragons) and others do this through choices and character interaction (Also done in Elder Scrolls, Fable, KOTOR, Mass Effect, etc) This has not changed in Skyrim. Instead of having a bunch of skills that are similar (blade/blunt for example), some skills are getting merged (not "removed", stop freaking using that term already) so that we can spend less time crunching numbers and more time playing. For those that want to focus on a specific weapon type (IE, playing the role of a swordsman for instance), there will undoubtedly be perks that make said role better so you can still do that. So stop worrying.

Then I suggest your read all of this thread and let you fears melt away.

I Think I love you.

Though I do disagree with the last thing said. If you hit level 60 or 70 I think you should be able to become godlike, just for the heck of it. By that point you'll have put so much time into the character that it's pretty much worth it.

hey yay the thing all of us was waiting for... another topic of complaints yay

...sarcasm obviusly

ALLOCATE NUMBERS ISNT ROLEPLAY

ROLEPLAY IS PLAY IN A SPECIFIC WAY!!

http://www.threadbombing.com/data/media/29/73c3e18c38546182abf1544952d56882.jpg

[quote name='shdowhuntt60' timestamp='1297581433' post='17167235'

The point I'm trying to make is that we shouldn't be able hit 100 in all skills, because then our character becomes... Something else.
[/quote]

I think from what Todd has said that even if you managed to 100 all stats you would be less powerful than if you had channelled you energy into a specialism as you would have missed more of the perks. He said literally said something like 'the powers in the perks'.

This.

shdowhuntt60 is among the few who actually understand the difference between RPG and non-RPG.

That is the main requirement to have a RPG, separation between Player and Character. the player can decide what the Character may do, but not how well will be done, be it hit a target, block an attack or persuade a NPC. Only the character can perform those action and the final result is only determined by the character skills. So, Morrowind (or Daggerfall) is A LOT more RPG than Oblivion, and maybe OB is not a RPG at all.

All the rest (stats, perks, exploration, interaction with NPC) is not needed to define a game as a RPG, but it helps to have a better RPG experience.
In my opinion, a great RPg must have a great character customization and development. Maybe perks could help, but skills are diminishing more and more (DF 36, SK 18, this may limit customization, but there are perks so, we will see). And, general attributes like strenght, agility, intelligence, gone? How can I define my char in general? By the skills?
Second, Interaction with the world, and action and reaction concept. I think that we can sleep well thinking about what will be in Skyrim.
Third, possibility to build a life or a career. Morrowind had a lot of factions, for example, Oblivion had only few. That did limit replayability for OB, at least if you wanted to make different quests with different characters.
Forth, Class limitations. A warrior has not the talent of magic, a mage will be severely disadvantaged with an armor. This also help immersion with your character. (If there arent limitations made by the game, the player may create them as he wishes, so it's not really a problem)

Based on this information, will Skyrim be a RPG? Probably NOT, but a great adventure game, yes that's for sure.