You can get skill training in Skyrim.

Definite Big No, would ruin the series if implemented. I would argue that it's one of Fallout's biggest flaws and that game series would benefit from a skill system like the Elder Scrolls. Doubt it will happen because people would then say it's too similar to Skyrim and I would half agree with that statement. Skyrim's skill system is fine, any problems with it can be corrected by balance patches or restraint from the user, I'm doing the latter when it comes to Smithing.

Sorry, I removed my response. After further review, the OP's ensuing comments doesn't warrant mine. When he called Fallout 3 a third person RPG, that was it while then taking the low road on Beth still having their tag on the Vegas box.

Absolutely, but you don't learn how to fight while fighting, you use what you're taught and stick to it to survive. Anyone who competes in combat sports will tell you the same thing. when everything is on the line, you fall back on what you already know, you don't learn anything new other than perhaps what a particular type of enemy does, and therefore how to deal with it next time.

The point I'm making is that skills increasing by doing is no more immersive than the fallout system for the simple reason that it's just not plausible. If they really wanted immersion, you'd have to train with a trainer to develop your skills, and could only gain trivial skill increases in battle; basically the opposite of how it is now.

im very undecided on this actually. i like TES use it get better at it system, but then i do find fallouts exp system to be far more "enjoyable" simply because i can just jump in and play it. skyrims system is fine as it is though so im not bothered

You should be able to nominate the skills that increase your level, it's that simple.

You just described exactly what Skyrim's skill advancement system does (emulate learning from experience). If you survive a battle, you learn from your mistakes.




Self teaching and training is entirely possible, as is learning from your mistakes/experiences. Also, lets not forget that every skill in the game starts at 15.

Uhm... Yes, you do?

Except learning how to deal with the foe is what the player does. Knowledge of how to deal with a particular type of enemy is not only specific to that enemy, but does not increase your skill. What is being done with the current system is a double increase; the player learns how to deal with the foe (the realistic development) and then all of a sudden his sword does more damage (completely unrealistic and non-immersive). Skill increases from combat should be at best trivial on this basis.



It is possible, but it won't get you far against someone who has been taught properly. Do you involve yourself in any competitive sports at all? Have you ever competed against somebody self-taught? Learning from your mistakes doesn't increase your skill in any significant way, it lets you know what you need to work on.


Put any 'street fighter' against any fighter from a full-contact fighting sport under any situation, including the infamous 'street rulezzz', and 9/10 times the one trained properly will wipe the floor with the guy who 'learned while doing'. It doesn't make sense.

Haha no

This is a very key point. Deus Ex Invisible War made this mistake, half of that game was doing fetch quests that had nothing to do with the story and the only reward was cash to spend on health packs you didn't need.

Morrowind Tribunal had the nice balance of Hard Quests with Epic Rewards Please return to that model of RISK vs. REWARD balance. Running time consuming quests in Skyrim, to be rewarded with useless gold is very frustrating.

i'm sorry, witcher, but your argument just doesn't hold water. I could see your point, if it weren't for the fact that you seem to think that "learning from experience" is crazy bananas, whereas "learning from thin air" is a reasonable way to go.

You're confusing what I'm saying then clearly. I'm saying that learning from experience doesn't increase your skill, it increases your knowledge. You don't learn how to swing a sword better during a fight, you learn that in training. Plus, I didn't say that learning from thin air was the way to go (nice exaggeration there), I said that learning in advance of entering a situation where those skills are needed is more realistic than running into battle swinging a sword and expecting to learn anything other than what it feels like to have a big hole in your chest.

I'm a pretty good cook (or mediocre, at least) and I've learned exclusively from experience. So, there you go.

The point in Skyrim (as many have pointed out) is just that: learning from experience. As people actually do in real life, all around you.

Your argument doesn't hold water since it describes a system where you literally learn from "thin air" (Fallout) as more "immersive" as one where you actually learn from experience (as in Skyirm, and real-life).

You say you want to train. So train. You can do that in Skyrim, too, you know.

Lol cooking is non-competitive, there is no real consequence for taking a trial and error approach. Ever taken part in a combat sport? Rugby? Any competitive sport where entering the fray and basing your learning on trial and error can result in serious injury?

Learning from experience is almost entirely knowledge based, and that is what the player learns when dealing with different enemy types; we learn how to kill dragons, how to kill soldier, how to kill bears etc.. learning how to deal with something doesn't make you better at using a sword, it makes you better at dealing specifically with that enemy, which is what you personally gain from that anyway.

Again, I didn't say that learning out of thin air was realistic or immersive, I said that learning in advance of doing is more realistic. You're another person trying to argue against things which simply weren't said. In fact, I didn't mention immersion in support of my argument at all, only that learning in advance of doing is simply more realistic.

IMO all perks should be gained when you meet the skill criteria for unlocking it, do away with perk points.

But you start at level 0 (apart from racial bonuses) for all skills, they make it much more difficult to level up your skills, get rid of the exp boosting standing stones, change the first perk requirement to 10, 30, 50, 70, 90 for that skill and stop the exploits that you can use te level skills fast (muffle for illusion ect).

This would make it more interesting to carry on trying out new skills at higher levels, instead of starting over because of perks ect. I would prefer a system like this, but they would need to make levelling skills more difficult.

I'll just quote Levanon from up here and leave it at that.



I wonder what strange world you live in, where people do not learn from experience. Hmm. Anyway, case closed.

I didn't say you don't learn from experience. I challenge you to find a post where I say that.

The only thing I have said you don't gain from experience in any significant way is skill. You gain knowledge, which is represented in the player being able to deal with those enemies more effectively. If you had simply said you prefer the other system, or had argued in its favour independent of what I said, then you'd be fine; what you did, was try and create a strawman argument, and then argue against it despite the fact it's not actually what I said.

EDIT: in case it was unclear to anyone who wants to talk about cooking or chopping wood etc, my reasoning is based solely on combat, where the stakes are far higher.

It looks like you''re saying he should play it as you think he should, but that flies in the face of Bethesda's play it your way mantra. I would have liked the freedom to focus on the mundane crafting skills like logging, mining and smithing (maybe even cooking), refine my skills to a suitable level so I could set up shop, work up my skills to master craftsmanship levels so I could start trading my wares to further flung corners of the map and build a strong enough reputation to establish my own caravans and outlets across Skyrim (and possibly beyond). From that point I could then begin acquiring unspeakable levels of wealth to invest in the development and expansion of my town and the surrounding lands and then when the philanthropy, wealth and a life of leisure no longer did it for me, I could become a dilettante adventurer and grind my way up the skill ladder to become the peoples' hero. What I wouldn't expect from that lifestyle is to rush headlong into the fray against foes from the top end of the level ladder - that'd probably send me reeling back home to build bigger walls and buy the services of a large private army.

i seem to remember a mod in oblivoni that would only let you train up skills with a trainer. that actually sounded like a good idea at the time and i think i will try it if someone makes a mod like that for skryim. it would eliminate the "cast same spell" or "hit another bear with axe" issue that you get in TES games.

The problem with implementing something like this in the vanilla game is that most people don't want to be trapped in a training yard training up their one-handed and block skills in an open-ended sandbox game.

Also, to say that someone self-taught can't be as good as someone who's trained is absurd. Self-taught people have won Ironman Competitions of all stripes, for example.

Ironman again is not a high stakes activity in the same way as combat, and the cardio events are something that can absolutely be trained solo.

As if it was not clear before that I'm speaking about combat, find me some self taught boxers or MMA fighters who have become champions against those who were trained; better yet, as even self-trained people have trained before going out there and fighting, find me someone who has entered a fighting sport and won a title despite nothing but a couple of weeks or so of training in any description.

In many things being self-taught and learning by doing is viable, in combat it is not; especially when the result is that the loser dies.

EDIT: How plausible do you think it would be for an army to send soldiers out with almost no training and tell them to learn while doing? That's essentially what we're talking about here. Sure, there's a chance they'll get a shot off, but without those hours on the rifle range learning how to shoot, they plain won't learn to shoot properly. They're not going to learn to shoot properly while things are kicking off, it's as simple as that.

We're arguing semantics. Regardless of whether or not the ycan be, the system is still far more realistic than Fallout's, in which your character cannot even boast being self-taught.

To argue otherwise is, well... absurd.

Yes but the point is how is it better?

I haven't argued anything other than the fact that training skills before entering the fray is more realistic than training skills while in the fray. That is the only respect in which I have said Fallout's system is more realistic. I have claimed nothing else.