If you like simplicity you must be a dumb Halo-playing idiot!

Real RPG fans likes needlessly complicated systems, because complexity is only for the more intelligent elite we are.
There's no middle ground. Oh, and the first group has no business with RPGs, they should stay with their Gears of War...

Seriously... :facepalm:

Right. Because having a light armour and a heavy armour skill is a "needlessly complicated system".
There's a point where simplicity becomes stupidity.

Yep, like I posted in the the thread, learn about the lore of armor in Nirn. Arseth and myself have posted links to books that defend differing skills armor wise. Some people want this to turn into a Fable game, those people dont really care about the series.

The armor skills in Oblivion and Morrowind are both very stupid. While I agree that armor styles differ, I never liked the whole "You get more AR with higher skill" approach that Morrowind in particular uses. How exactly does getting hit in armor increase it's actual durability?


That makes less sense then having just one armor skill. No amount of skill will actually change the physical properties of a given material, which is how Morrowind and Oblivion portray the armor skills. What would be better is static armor scores independent of skill, but different bonuses for being skilled in armor use. Just off the top of my head, without putting too much thought into it;

Heavy Armor: 0-10 Critical chance against the player increased. 11-24 No penalties. 25: Reduces encumbering stamina costs. 50: Critical hit rate against the player reduced. 75: Reduced Stagger Rate against the player. 100: Small chance of a Blow against the player inflicting "Minimal" (1) Damage.

How this differs from "Armor Skill = Higher Armor Rating" is, it better simulates actual training and condition, rather than transmorphing the material into a better material. Untrained users leave the weaknesses of the Heavy plated armor exposed, increasing the chance for critical strikes to be scored against them. Basic training compensates against those. More conditioning allows the user to use the armor for longer durations without fatigue. Advanced training allows the user to overcompensate for weaknesses in the armor design, lowering the chance he has for a critical hit to be scored on him. And in the expert conditioning, the wearer now knows how to absorb and deflect blows using the armor, reducing the chance an impact will stagger, and in some cases, with extreme training, almost completely negate the impact altogether.


Personally, I'm okay with there only being one "Armor" skill, but perks associated with different armor styles. It accomplishes the same thing as multiple armor skills, while opening up a few skill slots for perhaps better, more differentiating skills. That's just my opinion though.

No, but having a skill for medium armor would be.

Also I'm just criticising this "RPGs should be as complex as they can, and if anybody disagrees they should return to their X-box" mindset...

I personally think it's fine to have only one armor skill, if the perks pick up the job of keeping the types distinct from one another. What would be interesting, though, is if they put in ways to dodge blows, like for example what Techland showed in the Dead Island trailer. You know, actually giving some maneuverability to light armor users.

At least the new halo has little toys to play with making people think a little... COD... lololololololol

Some FPS games have you thinking before you act Original ghost recon/Rainbow six

Its the trend like merging RTS with RPG qualities. I can see it for DOW because that lore allready has RPG elements in it. COD/Halo/fps/rts games in general dont have this but are trying to force it in their games.

Back on track. I dont like things becomeing simplified just because. Is there a reason why they take out. I also dont like over complicating. To me Morrowind and Oblivion had a good system. Blades are differnt from axes maces are differnt from swords etc etc same with armor You can over simpliy it by saying your weapon skill has increased for all weapon types. but thats to simple or you can divide one handed axes 2 handed axes 1 handed blunt 2 handed blunt etc Armor was fine. Light medium Heavy you can even add massive dont know why becuse heavy is pretty heavy to begin with. I will say that ok make it simple you have the armor skill. now you have perks for ech armor type. You must now choose the "perk" for the armor you use. Choose wisely as perks do not cross from light to heavy or heavy to light.

The case for medium armour is debatable.

The "complex as possible" view is one extreme, but to be honest I would rather support that over the other "simple as possible" extreme . But of course the ideal situation is a healthy medium (armour?) between the two. However, in light of recent simplifying of skills, I want to make people realize that the simplicity or "streamlining" case is a slippery slope, and that we should perhaps stop short in the simplifications, lest we slide too far down into the chasm where the fallen Fable 3 and ever-damned Dragon Age both lie. I would rather Elder Scrolls be a bit too complex than much too simple. That is where my concern lies.

On this point I do agree.

:gun: :turtle:

Always wanted to do that

Not really on topic, but how "FPS" and "COD" are used on these forums, the profanity filter should be expanded to include them... Halo in particular, is up there with Fornication Under Consent of the King. See what I did there?

People think perks are cure-alls, I dont think those people know what perks, skills and attributes mean. Do I like perks? Yes, but they dont replace everything, nor should they.

Agreed. The term "perk" has come into use more and more loosely as of late, and it's starting to get irritating. Eventually we may see all 18 skills compacted into one almighty "Skill" skill, with the perks governing everything else, abolishing the old intuitive skill system of Elder Scrolls that many of us know and love.

ME2 simplified the skill tree... Oh look I got 4 skils... Because I have a stronger magical attack means I can hack computers right?

Elder scrolls has always been about complex RPG... TO simplify it just because its the trend is a silly thing. In the 80's it was the trend to wear sunglasses indoors but it was dumb and pointless. In the 90's and even now it was the trend to wear your hat so its amlost covering your eyes or wear it crocked and sideways or your pants at the knees... Is it pointless and makes you look dumb? Yes But its the trend. Just because its a trend does not make it good. Complicated systems that make you think on what you are doing before you do it thus making that thing between your ear work a little harder than normal is a good thing it engages the player into the game and makes the player explore the build he/she can make. Not oh lets see Im good at everything ok done.

These "what will they remove next time" woes amuse me... :rolleyes:

I find that rather offensive, not on my behalf, but on a level of sportsmanship.

I'll elaborate on what I stated in the other thread. Depth is not one of The Elder Scrolls strong points. When items flow like water, be it from loot or from merchants in a terribly abused economy, the actual items you have are less important. Mixed with the fact that armor itself has little difference in actual penalties and benefits, the need and benefit for different types of armor is quite diminished. A distinction is still necessary, so heavy and light will stay, but we are not losing a whole lot coming from Oblivion by moving to a single armor skill plus perks.

I don't have brand loyalty and it appears that TES series is moving toward more action oriented game play to cater to demand. If you really want depth in an RPG then my friends and I are always looking for more D&D players.

I understand all that you're saying, however I don't think the improving of AR in Morrowind/Obliv was meant to imply the strengthening of material of armour. As I interpreted it, the higher rating was an overall "lump sum" of those effects which you described, ie dodging, leaving critical spots open, etc. So the skill itself didn't improve the material, but improved the user's ability to wear and utilize whichever type of armour they wear. I guess it was up the interpretation of what the "skill" meant. I never took it to be the "transmorphing" of materials

Well, that's exactly how I felt. And considering the overwhelming evidence of Higher skill = Higher AR... I'm not so sure how you can draw a different conclusion. The irony is, you're arguing for "Increased diversification" yet interrupting exactly the opposite, as a feigned sense of differentiation. Much like my stance on Attributes, if we have to choose either Keeping the current (Oblivion) system, or scrapping it altogether, I choose the later. Optimally, they'd rework it, and that's what I always hope for, but hope in one hand, defecate in the other, see which fills faster.

What do you mean? I never denied the higher skill = higher AR relationship, and it does not negate my point about the higher AR being the sum of effects like dodging and evading among others. As I see it, AR is a measure of overall protection the user has while wearing a specific type of armour. If you think AR is actually a measure of how many newtons of force it can withstand, or the elastic limit of the material before it breaks from friction, then you might be taking the term a little too literally. The skill reflects the user's overall adeptness in the armour type, even if Beth didn't have the ability or time to implement all the little "dodging" or "minimizing critical openings" animations.


Please explain.

Then let's have a dodge skill or a "defense" skill. With different perks for different situations: unarmored, heavy, light etc. Because dodge is a skill here. Strength and stamina are factors too. But I can't find a way to rationalize armor as a skill.

I don't know what there is to explain. You're feigning information here. Nowhere is it even implied that anything but the durability of the armor is increased through the mechanics of the game. For one, Critical damage wasn't even a part of TES3-4 outside of Sneak attacks. I totally get where you're going, but I don't understand how you can come to that conclusion on your original stance of "Diversification" as justification for the armor types.

I mean, honestly, it sounds like you just want the skills for their own sake, and nothing more. Just put a bit more thought into it. Features without meaning are useless baubles. As far as I'm concerned, Fallout: New Vegas had the best armor diversification without the need for actual armor skills.

Well.. as I said in the other thread, I think the best way to deal with this (and many other things - most notably weapons) would be with a much more dynamic skill system - one in which you could gain skill in overarching fields AND in specialiations within those fields. And no - I don't mean perks - I mean actual skills.

To clarify a bit:

Have a basic skill in, say, "defense." That would be available to any character who fights melee at any time. There are basic techniques of defense that can be learned by any character, no matter what s/he's wearing, even if it's nothing. The overarching "defense" skill would represent the mastery of those techniques. Then start breaking it down further. Have skill progression for unarmored that would represent learning to dodge and maneuver. For the armors themselves - don't divide it up by weight - divide it by type. Have skill progression for padded armors, chain, partial plate and full plate (at least). Skill increases in each of those would represent learning how to maneuver in them and how to use them to best advantage - learning where to take blows and such. Have some overlap between them, and between the specialization skills and the overarching "defense" skill, to represent that a character who learns techniques for taking hits with minimal damage would be able to apply at least some portion of those techniques to other forms of armor, but only have enough overlap to represent that a character with experience in one type of armor who switches to another would have essentially a head start over a character with no experience with armor at all.

Or....... something like that.

Very well said, I was trying to figure out how to articulate that point, so I'm glad you did it. Certainly couldn't have done better. :goodjob: :trophy: :wub: :clap: :icecream: All for you.

Just because it makes sense doesnt mean it makes sense mathematically with how they want skills to work to balance the game.