Looking back at how leveling used to be in Daggerfall, Morrowind and Oblivion I kept more time micromanage that I used correct skills to avoid leveling up getting bad stats. I was very skeptical to hear that attributes are gone, but when I saw the system and I did some levels it all made sense. Finally a game that allows me to play the game enjoy the fun rather then have to think about micromanaging things I wouldn't want to micromanage in the first place. I must say the statless and classless system is one of my favorite features of Skyrim, finally I can make what I want to be without being limited to a general class by major and minor skills and stats.

Removal of stats is the correct way, attributes are nothing but an old outdated way of looking at RPG's and there is absolutely nothing complex about it at all. Want to make a thief, boost the stats that gives you better sneak and steal abilities, for a fighter you boost health and strength, etc.

You can't have a uniquely defined character who can progress in the game without numbers. Even if you, the player, don't actually see the numbers, they have to be there.

...

This is what I mean about people trying to trivialize the importance of attributes when they clearly have a complete lack of understanding of how RPGs work.

You, friend, do not know how the leveling system works, and it is blatantly obvious.

You cannot "level up one set of skills" and then become "totally awesome in another by investing all your perks there", because there are skill level requirements for perks, thus, forcing you to level up "related" skills if you want to invest your perks into them.

Agreed, There was nothing complex about the stat system whatsoever. Especially when you consider that it was possible to get 100 in every stat if you wanted to.

Perks should be like that.

That's where your specialization and character development come from.

Because, it basically made every character the same at end game. In TES IV: Oblivion, my Nord Warrior who worked up his magic skills to 100, could cast just as well as my Breton Mage who had her magic skills at 100, and she could melee just as good as him too since she had 100 Blade skill. It really made the whole idea of classes and specialization redundant at end game. It turned you into a Jack of All Trades, Master of All. The only difference whatsoever, was early game leveling. If you picked a certain class at the beginning, and didn't like how it played, you basically had to start your game over, since a "Mage" had atrociously slow skillgain in wep and armor skills compared to someone who selected "Warrior" at the beginning. Not to mention that the mini-game management of gaining the most out of your attributes was tediously boring and ridiculous.
Now in Skyrim, leveling up actually matters. You're acually able to specialize your skills thanks to Perks. A Nord could have 100 in every skill, and be perked in Two Handed, One Handed, Block and Heavy Armor, while a Breton could have 100 in every skill, and perked in Destruction, Alteration, Restoration and Conjuration, yet both have radically different strengths/weaknesses and strategies/tactics, despite both having 100 in every skill, due to perks.

Be careful how you hold people to those terms, while you are holding yourself to some other standard. No one person is right in this. These arguments have been going and evolving since before there were PC game (and I remember those days).

I for one cannot beleive the comments of some the people in here, to call the Attributtes system used in ANY decent Role Playing Game, Irrelevant and pointless, they are showing me that they have no real concept of what defines a Role Playing Game over the other Genre's,

I will spell it out to them as best I can. a RPG, or Role Playing Game, is defined by the core mechanics of the system which gives the Player of the game, absolute choice in the creation and progression of the Character they create, while it is true most CRPG's do not give the absolute control such as look as well as mechanics, most give a good amount of detail to work with..

The common 6 Attributes used in RPG's and CRPG's define the physical make up of the character, from Fitness to Intellect and learning, to Charisma and Spirit.
the reasoning behind these is that no two people are exactly alike so while one Nightblade, is a wizz with the magic, the next one might be Stronger and faster. that is, if he or she even has the prerequisite to become a Nightblade, just as in real life not all people have what it takes to become a Doctor, or a Computer Programmer, or a Cop or a Marine Sniper, not all Characters in RPG's have what it takes to take on a class.

Though this is something Skyrim has avoided by removing Stats and Classes from the Character Development, and this is why Skyrim can be likened to being Redguard 2
, since choices have been taken away from us,
this said I like the Perks System, and many other new additions to the game, that were not there in Oblivion.
but I miss the Attributes and Classes, neither of which were inherently difficult to understand, if one bothered to take the time..

there are quite a few missing features from this game that have been present in most other Elders Scrolls games, that I cannot understand, such as no Mithril items and how Silver Weapons are so scarce, yet silver is in abundance and works against Undead of which seems to be in plague proportions in Skyrim, (much as it was like in Cyrodil)

In my opinion Skyrim is less like an RPG, and more like an Action Adventure game with some RPG Elements, which Console Gamers seem to love more than PC gamers, perhaps it is the control devices, I do not know,
I for one want Atrtibutes back since they give an element of realism that is now gone from the screens, while I am sure the engine still counts them, it means that one cannot really boast having the strongest Nord or the smartest Breton since there is no way to be sure now..

Why the heck doesn't everything go my way. I JUST DONT GET IT!! Forget you Bethesda. Forget you for having your own ideas on how your game should be designed and played. You should leave the major decisions up to us!! GOOD LORD!!

We all must follow pre-cut molds. How dare you act out on your own and try something refresing and new. What, do you think this is the next rock and roll movement?? WOW!

Bethesda used to care about posts like this, then they took..... use your imagination. WAIT... could that be applied to the game as well????

I understand how roleplaying works.

What PnP and video game RPG's have tried to box "roleplay" into is not what "roleplaying" is.

It's "rollplaying". And it is not the same as playing a role.

My Skyrim characters are plenty uniquely defined, by specializing in specific areas that make them unique beyond just a 1-100 number. A perk system truly allows a character to have strengths and weaknesses. A 1-100 skill and attribute system means that all characters become a master of everything eventually. Every Conjuration character is the same as each other, every Heavy Armor character is the same as each other, every Sneak character is the same as each other, whereas perks allow for different types of each skill to be specialized in.

Thus, making every character unique and individualized. Thus, enhancing roleplay.

The definition of RPG around this forum is inherently flawed, and ignores the most important part of the term "Role playing game", and completely butchers the meaning of it and turns it into something it's not, by definition, supposed to be, which is "roll playing game".

Needing the game to hold your hand and tell you what your character is through numbers, instead of YOU telling the game what your character is through actions, is incredibly simple minded. This mentality of needing numbers displays a clear lack of understanding of what "roleplaying" really is.

You don't know what an RPG is because you've been brainwashed to believe that it means you need stats and dice rolls. Thats not RPG, an RPG is a game (any type of game) that puts you in another characters shoes and gives you the ability to change or alter the world around you. You can roleplay in a 1st person shooter game, you can roleplay in BF3 if you wanted to.

I have been playing D&D since the 2nd edition rules, one of the first things the Dungeon Master guide tells you is that you should use the rules at your own discretion. Dice rolls can make the game fun but they also make it tedious in some respects. Bottom line, its theoretically possible to play a full campaign of D&D without rolling a single dice. Its the imagination that creates the RPG, not vice versa.

Me too


Same here

I was digging through my old Oblivion characters not long ago. They all had 100s in every stat except the same two. Warrior, mage or thief it didn't matter nearly all the stats where pegged at 100.

I never found the stats system confusing.

In fact I wish people would stop saying that like it is Bethesda's sole reason for the overhaul (especially as I have heard very few people since Morrowind or Oblivion complain about them being confusing) and extrapolating "those people just doesn't have the capacity to appreciate RPGs" since I am yet to see proof of that.

If a handful of people. If. If.

Fact is there is no set in stone mechanical system for RPGs. There is a traditional model that served perfectly ok since the first RPG came into the world with PnP. Is it the only model? No. Does it need to be the only model? No. Can it be improved up? Undoubtedly. Are there better out their? Oh yes.

What would be a mistake? Clinging to tradition for traditions sake.

I have said my piece on it - I am much more interested in the RP part than G (mechanics) part. I am happier when attributes/stats/etc are behind the scenes. I am happier when I don't see health bars/ammo counts/etc on the screen because they are behind the scenes.

That is why I am not complaining the old style attributes have gone away. Not because I can't hack them. If I couldn't then at least two of my long term hobbies have been terribly mistakes and I don't know why I would have stuck with them and had so much fun (which includes playing PnP systems that practically need a spreadsheet, calculator and many different kinds of dice to run and make those found in TES look about as "dumbed down" as... I have no idea. They are a lot simpler then plenty you'll find). No. Because I think Skyrim's system is a good move and with some polish there is an enormous amount of potential there for a game system that will let me better RP in a series I love.

And again - "I think you just have to draw the line and say that those people just doesn't have the capacity to appreciate RPGs". :ermm:

Or we do understand, and we also understand its an over-done concept. Hey bud, no one is forcing you to play Skyrim. If you don't like it, PLAY SOMETHING ELSE! I can promise you one thing. They wont be adding attributes to the game. Maybe their interpretation of an rpg has nothing to do with numbers, but rather play style and freedom to "play a role" free of a perfect leveling technique. Maybe they want you to play freely, and see if you succeed.

This. 100%.

I can't believe all these RPG gamers, who love to fly the flag of being so complex and in depth with their gaming, are in actuality so simple when it comes to their perception of RPG.

Their definition of RPG is not one of complexity or depth, but rather that of having no control or say in the outcome of events, but rather, having the game dictate to you EVERYTHING by sheer chance of a "dice roll".

That is not roleplaying. That is not even playing a game. That's a computer telling you what happens.

I would much prefer to tell the game who my character is through my actions, than for the game to tell me who my character is through dice rolls.

The definition these people defend is not a "role playing game", but rather a "roll playing game".

Well, if that's how they define "RPG" these days, then I take it as a compliment when they say Bethesda and Elder Scrolls are no longer RPG's, because I find the "roll playing" definition to be an insult, and degrading, to me as a role player.

I totally agree there, in my last post I mentioned how it seems many do not understand the difference between RPG's and other Genre's..
I admit to be some prejudice there, as for the last 20 years, people have continued to mix genre's calling Non-RPG's an RPG simply because the lead Character has a Sword and some Magic Potions.
and while I hold to much of my earlier post, I do agree that as far as the key Subject (Skyrim) goes, no one is right or wrong..
Bethesda chose to make the game this way and they did a rather good job of it, (except for making people sign up to steam without even a steam logo on the Case to warn us, but that is a separate issue)
I have been involved in RPG gaming since the 1980's as far back as then RPG's had already been defined by such games as Ultima and Pool of Radiance..
but sadly people will still be arguing over this when Skyrim will be too old to run on the newest computers, (say when Windows 12 is released..)

Skyrim has a system to sort this by allowing you to choose specialization by choosing perks. sure you have 100 in smithing but no perks there so you know how to smith iron daggers perfectly, but you are not a realm smith as you cannot produce anything else. You have 100 in sneak, this means you are a decent person when it comes to avoid being seen, but still you are nothing compared to a person who have maxed the tree out with perks. That is where the uniquely defined character comes in, you can make the character as you want to and by adding perks you can choose specialization and thus make a unique character. The only limit to this is your own ability to create a unique character, if you cannot see the possibilities in the perk system it doesn't mean it isn't there.

You've made some great posts in this thread, I particularly liked this one.

Well said.

That's untrue for one who role plays their games and even those who make that choice. Oblivion and before were designed to make your choice of class work for you. You make it sound as if one wanted to be a warrior when they they chose to be a mage, and that is simply making a broad statement when most gamers know how and what they want to play their games. Not only that, if one wants to use magical powers, but still use a sword, they could choose those attributes and assign themselves that being a "battlemage" (sign) and get the proper leveling they should get. Even then you can still level up using other skills that are not the primary skills of your setting and race, and they still add up to leveling up. They just don't level up as fast. This actually works the same way in Skyrim when you choose your race as well and make a choice of "standing stone".


In a sense , it works against you since you have to choose a perk to make that skill enhanced, where as in Oblivion and before, you chose to assign the points to where you wanted them for the character you wanted to build. This is where some are being either uninformed, inexperienced in previous TES games, or simply being disingenuous between the two systems. If I am leveling in Oblivion, I don't have to assign my points to being a mage though that's my character sheet. I can assign those points to attributes that would make my melee fighting more potent, if I felt I had enough in the mage type attributes otherwise. Oblivion and before actually offer more choices. I love Skyrim, I really do, but it is a step backwards in a sense, but I think they can build on this system to make it better than any of the TES games preceding.

Yep, i too played UO in it's Beta, up until about 2008, and it was by far the best MMO i had ever played, and one of the best games i've ever played period. But it not only had Strength, Dexterity and Intelligence, it also had a skill system. No Lvl/Experience system whatsoever. You gained in skills by using them, and each time you gained a skill, there was a chance that you'd gain in an associated stat. Wrestling/Macing were great skills to train for gaining Strength, while Fencing/Musicianship were great skills to train for Dexterity. UO was a skill based, open sand-box MMORPG, much like the TES series. Hell, Todd Howard even stated during a video that one of the biggest influences for TES series, was the Ultima series.

What is this new issue everyone has with complexity. Why does everything have to be complex in order you pad your ego. Whats complex about any roleplaying game. They aren't. There's some crazy [censored] happening, you need to stop it and restore order. Woa. Complex. Deep. So sick of seeing this need for complexity. Its a game, not a anthropology final. You are problem solving and theory crafting. Not constructing a new thesis on the presence of religion in the USA.

Be a hero. Kill some dragons. If beating Skyrim is considered a life accomplishment for you, maybe you need to re-evaluate the purpose of existence. There's some complexity for you.

I don't think most of you understand what an RPG is. Managing stats is INTEGRAL TO RPGs. So what, TES is now an action adventure game? Maybe the next installment shouldn't have ANY stats or perks at all. You simply pick THIEF, MAGE, or WARRIOR from the start and go on your uber leet adventure.

Sigh. Just shoot me now if this is where the gaming world is headed.

Perks, in theory, aren't a bad addition if they're there to compliment attributes and skills. The problem with Skyrim is, they're almost treated like a substitute... and progression relies far too heavily on them. They're just not adequate for that. And you talk about the old system resulting in generic all-powerful characters... but Skyrim really isn't much different. In fact, i'd argue that it's worse considering perks make progression so much quicker. If I made several pure melee characters in Skyrim, they're all going to be very generic after just 30 hours of gameplay. Sure, they might choose different weapons and armour, but aside from that they'll pretty much feel like the same character.



Did you even read my post? :confused: Attributes and Skills aren't simply labels that tell the player their character is powerful or weak. They're an important part of the game which actually allows the player to properly define their character. More attributes / skills = more possibilities for roleplaying. Why is this so hard for some people to grasp?

That's the point, you're painting those into a corner that do not fit your style of what an RPG is, and that is simply wrong. I have seen this too many times over the past 35 years. While I found Oblivion's sytem easy to understand, it doesn't mean some won't get it while they may excel in a system that dumfounds me; see what I mean? I can never ever say who, how and why someone can appreciate an RPG, because I would only be projecting my view of an RPG, and no one view is the standard as much as that genre has evolved over the past 40 years. Again, from your posts, your style more aligns with mine, but I won't dig at those who don't align



I know where you are coming from. But, there are those who give constructive comparisons, and those who flame. I think you can tell who has the lack of understanding from that POV.