Im just saying its dependent on the skill of the character entirely.

People don't seem to grasp the fact that you ca get rid of levels and still make a game both 'role playing' and no player skill based.

You would still have the skill levels in the background, but instead of being (as i said) level 75 at swords you would be considered an expert,maybe an expert would be from anywhere between 65-75. Same goes for every attribute etc. It justfits in so muc btter with the principle of you get better by doing.

As some-one said scaling could still be implemented, i am sure in the background you could have a level, made from looking at you skills, this would be used for scaling.

As for Player =/= Character, I am worred that you really think i have shot 100 people in the head, my characterr might have, but I certainly never have.

I know it will be accused of being dumbed down etc. but that is just a get out claus for disagreeing, afterall i could say that having a number to accuratly tell you exactly how good something is seems pretty dumbed down to me. Of course I am used the leveling system, so it won't bother me in the slightest if it is never changed, i just thought that the OP was laughed off too easily by too many people without really thinkng about how it could be achieved.

What people mean by that is that a PC should be limited to their ability, and not aided by the skills of the player. If the PC has never touched a lock with intent to pick it, they should not be able to pass locks because the player manages to open them; nor make headshots with a bow they do not know how to use, just because the player knows where to aim.

*Its also the reverse... A PC that is expert with locks, should not be hampered if the player cannot pick a lock in the minigame, or if the PC is supposed to be a crack shot, but the player cannot aim effectively.

the day RPGs remove levels is the day they are no longer RPGs.

Wouldn't it be nice if future TES games asked what style of play you'd like (similar to NV's asking you about HC mode?).

Players could pick a stat based play, or the mode that lets them control every action.

This is super obvious on Pumas... I have amazing Block timing, but it doesn't matter if your block skill or shield quality is total crap, they still cleave off 2/3 of your HP. Add in that with the insultingly terrible "Puma pounce" spam animation, and I need to order a new mouse and/or keyboard.


Fallout 3 and New Vegas on the other hand, had was which the player could either trick or intentional exploits enemies (Not things like Terrain hacking). The Dart gun and mine spamming comes to mind. Nothing beats taking out the Deathclaw Alpha at level four.

You need levels as a milestone or a point of reference . A point to determine when you get new perks, stat increase or new vendor inventory.

Sure they could do away with them, but I would think the same thing would still happen' behind the screens', making it having no difference at all, besides the player not knowing when it will be happening.

Most likely mentioned, but TES is an RPG and most RPGs are based around building your character. This is either done by equipment or character lvl, and the tradition of TES is lvls so that is why they should not be removed.

Since neither of the games I mentioned were diceless or statless thats irrelevant. Level less RPGs have been around almost as long as RPGs in general.

2 main uses for levels that I can see.
1. When a character goes up in level their ability increases. Makes sense if the game is XP-based (although there are have been level less XP-based games where rather than going up levels XP are used to buy abilities) but not really sensible in a learning by doing system. In D&D your skills go up when your level goes up. In TES your level goes up when your skills go up. Other abilities like perks and health/stamina/magika could also be linked to skills cutting out the unneccessary middleman.
2. To provide a way for the game to calculate random enemies and loot. Its a pretty crude way of doing it since level isn't a good reflection of the PCs power in TES games. If levels were removed random foes and loot could either be area based or the game could calculate it taking into account your stats like best weapon skill, health, magika etc. The abstract mechanic that has no real or imaginary world basis would be invisible.

Name a few; I'm interested; cRPGs I mean.

(The point of the diceless mention, was that methods for PNP don't always apply well to computer games.)

That is a very interesting suggestion, imo. I am not in favor of removal of rpg "elements", but this is an interesting approach nonetheless. I mean how credible is it to have a "level" to tell you what you can and you can't do? "Oh, I'm level 15, in 2 levels I will unlock this quest/be able to tackle this monster/leveled lists will start dropping this ingredient" ?? >> this is not really helping immersion, which is also important in rpgs.


However, I am not saying levels should be removed entirely. They are useful for the game to assess your char's power, for leveled lists etc. So why not keep the level system, but hide it? The char could be level 5, 20 or 40, but the player won't know it. It won't show up on the stats menu. This way the player doesn't know exactly how powerful the char is, they just have a general idea (closer to real life, imo) Much better to keep you on your toes and make you hesitate. "will I be able to clean that dungeon?", "wow that new loot in dungeons was unexpected", etc.

I already have. Runequest (1st publ 1978), Traveller (1st publ 1977).

Levels aren't necessary for character development ( @Amazon Queen, Traveller and Runequest, ah the memories ), but most people tend to like them. It gives you an immediate sense of achievement, and I would go so far as to say it is a desirable 'dumbing down', swapping a more organic system ( health and magicka increase similar to skills, everything advances in isolation ) for a system that makes a game more enjoyable ; not only a sense of immediate reward through progression, but a sense of place in the world, your character would know whether they were capable of taking on an ogre, the level lets the player know.

Is it so different from say... years [as in age]...
"Oh, I'm 15, in 2 years I will unlock ~the car, and be able to tackle driving."

There is also a similarity to belts in Martial arts... where the white belt just isn't ready to try the advanced moves of the black belt; now one can say, "but its just a silly belt, and just because its a different color, doesn't mean I can't...", but its usually not true.

**Levels can also be thought of as milestone events in the PC's life; (This isn't always the case, but it makes sense that an intense event makes significant change for them).

:P Looks like you've thought more about this than I have. These are all really good points.

I would say, however, that the belts are more a recognition of your skills by your peers rather than yourself. This is why you have guilds, in my opinion. This gives you the impression of social accomplishment, your character is rising through the ranks of society and gains the respect of others. But I think it could be interesting not to have an indicator directly telling you your char's worth. Let it be shown indirectly! By npcs, by your prowess in combat...

As for the driving licence... uh I don't know good point. Isn't it more a social (in this case age) restriction put upon yourself by society, which means it has very little to do with your and your skills?

ITT: People panicking at the shear thought of removal of more RPG elements, no matter how justified it is...

It is possible to do a TES game without levels, actually, Final Fantasy 2 works exactly this way without any overall levels.
Only problem that this would basically kill level scaling...

Also in Skyrim levels have more impact than in Oblivion or Morrowind, mainly because of perks, so that's why we still have them.

Those aren't cRPGs, unless your talking about Mega Traveller for Atari.

On a side note Runequest rules were used for one of my favorite cRPGs, Ringworld based on Nivens Known Universe series.

That ones' up for debate... There are eight year olds that can drive a farm truck responsibly, and there are 28 year olds that can't drive a bike responsibly. :shrug:

(But its most often the other way around.)

Ultima Online (1997 - Current) and Darkfall (2009 - Current). There are no Classes/Levels, just Races (Which does not restrict which skills you can learn), and Stats/Skills. You raise skills by using them, and Stats gain alongside their associated skills. So yes, having a RPG game that is completely levelless/classless works. VERY well, might i add.

Cool.

(I didn't know UO was still active.)

This does not mean that PnP methods always apply well though, (or even that they are guaranteed any good :shrug: ; Not to say that UO isn't ~actually I can't remember it that well).

Levels just make it generally easier to allow your character to progress. I think Bethesda could easily do it for Elder Scrolls, but it would be a lot of work on their part, especially for level scaling. Probably the only game I've played (and it's a tabletop) that did a non-leveling system well was Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay (2nd ed). You would spend 100 experience to either gain a +5% to major attributes (like strength and toughness), a +1 to secondary attributes (like wounds and number of attacks), to gain training in a career-based skill, to become more proficient in a career-based skill, or to learn a new talent (kind of like perks). It was kind of a Fable-style approach with more variety (and most certainly more restrictions, but I would expect that out of a low fantasy game), but it worked out quite well. Bethesda wouldn't need to get nearly as detailed as that, but it would still take a lot of work considering their concept of leveling up after leveling skills, not by killing enemies.

What about for those of us who choose to stay at low levels by not sleeping?

Being too powerful and strong makes TES feel very empty. ie one shotting everything and being like a god.

keeping levels in gives us control.

Levels gives us an idea of how srong we are and is a good thing.

Levels are more than just for the player or even NPCs/enemies, lets talk about the real problem, leveled uniques. How do you think Beth will handle them in Sky? Hopefully like the Fallouts. Id take a level restriction over 5+ different levels of an item thats supposed to be unique and becomes pointless after a few levels.

Yeah, UO is still active. It actually holds 8 World Records in the Guinness Book of World Records, most notably for being the "Longest continuously running MMORPG in existence". It was also the first induction to the "Game Developers Choice Online Awards Hall of Fame" that was launched in 2010, for being "the game that pioneered the MMORPG genre".