I stopped picking locks when it became clear there was no point to it.

I wish they did away with the mini-game system and went back to a setup where it is completely stat-based. No way a warrior picking a lock for the first time in his life should be able to pick the hardest of locks.

Not only that but it makes you a Warrior forced to use a Rogue skill ... and level up from using it. Do I really want to fight tougher monsters because my Lockpicking skill keeps increasing? No, not really.

Whether you know it or not, Arena, Daggerfall and Morrowind incorporated what you call "Inferior" RPG mechanics of the past. These "New" RPG mechanics in Oblivion and Skyrim, other than the combat, are what is wrong with Oblivion and Skyrim.

Classes and Skills are part of RPG's and you can't remove them and expect it to still be an RPG.

If TES stayed exactly the same since Arena then it would be crap, TES is the best RPG out there because it has evolved with every sequel. Bethesda is not going to [censored] the mechanics just to please a handful of people who could just go play a [censored] RPG that did not evolve

In real life, if I weigh less than 100 pounds, and have low upper body strength, that is not going to stop me from picking up a 2 handed sword and attempting to use it. Making it so you can't even equip the item in a video game is an arbitrary requirement that is not based upon anything.

In real life, I would not be effective with that weapon, but I can still use it. That is reflected in the fact that with a low strength rating, or a low skill rating, I won't be effective.


I am not as experienced with Arena and Daggerfall, but as far as Morrowind goes, the only "inferior" RPG mechanic that it really has is that everything is determined by dice rolls.

I'm curious as to what you would call these mechanics, because as far as I'm concerned, there is nothing wrong with Oblivion and Skyrim.

Classes aren't necessary to an RPG, and Elder Scrolls has proven that since Daggerfall since the class system has been entirely thrown out the window by allowing you to create your own characters with your own combination of skills that don't take those arbitrary classes into consideration.

Skills are important to tell you what kind of character, and what you are good at, not to tell you that you cannot even equip certain items because you haven't reached a made up stat requirement.

Completely agree, I think they should merge pickpocket and lockpick into larceny. I would never take any lockpick perks, absolute waste of a perk tree.

The sound and light generated by an open spell is negligible, if previous games are anything to go by, and the magicka consumption will immediately regenerate. Since you're typically not in immediate danger when opening locks, you can just sit around for a moment after casting and your magicka will be at full again.

Strength requirements are very arbitrary because the numbers are arbitrary. Why would you need a strength of 50 to wield a daedric warhammer? Why not 45 or 55? It's actually rather annoying when you have strict number requirements (need 50 but only have 49? bleh). This is why TES's system is better. You can wield it whenever you want, but if the needed stats are low, you'll be crap with it.

Maybe also trap detection/disarming, too (it does seem rather odd that disarming a trap used the lockpick minigame..). Bashing and Open Lock would guarantee setting off a trap, whereas a security expert would be able to notice and disarm it. TES would need to make better use of traps, though. Oblivion didn't have any doors or chests trapped, and the number of trapped doors and chests in Skyrim is low (and even the ones that were, they were easy to spot and avoid).

I'd like it to be real-time. It would be a crime to be caught lockpicking (or bashing, or Open Lock'ing) a door, so you'd have to be very careful about doing it in the open.

For dungeons, I'd actually like to see random spawns comes back. In Daggerfall and Morrowind, if you tried sleeping in a non-friendly place, there was a chance you'd get woken up prematurely because of an enemy. Having the same apply while in lockpicking (the longer you're in the minigame, the greater the chance you'll be ambushed by an enemy and forced to stop; possibly setting off a trap) would be good. Then the higher your lockpicking/security skill, the less chance you'll be ambushed while lockpicking.

Obviously because previous games were broken in some way it can never be fixed.

Open lock requires ability and training in alteration. Lockpicking requires no ability or training in lockpicking but for some reason that makes the skill as the only solution better?

To that, I will add this:

In Morrowind, there were some locks that were highly, highly difficult to open. They were "trapped" with very powerful spells, locked with a "Master" lock, and they were guarded by high level creatures or NPCs (to make sneaking difficult). Specifically, I'm referring to the Vaults of the Great Houses, which usually contained ungodly amounts of loot in them.

Now, it was perfectly likely that you would come across the vaults on your first trip to Vivec, and be utterly and completely incapable of even planning to open them. To me, that was glorious. It gave the thief character something to look forward to. You had to build up skill, make preparations, maybe even come back and try again and again and again at different points in the game, to see if you could manage it.

Some of those locks couldn't be opened until the player was nearly a demi-god.

In Skyrim, all locks and all treasures can be unlocked or found with a few lockpicks, a bit of patience, possibly a quicksave. Inside these "master" locks you find a gem and a few hundred gold. Maybe an enchanted dwemer mace.

Bland.

Skyrim needs to seriously buff up their locking system. I have no problem with encountering master locks that I have to "leave unopened." At least for a while. Besides that, I would love to see the return of vaults, instead of just boss chests. Why aren't we finding entire rooms full of loot that are ridiculously hard to get into? I don't understand the regression in the security aspect of the game, while watching combat and magic get so much forward movement.


Two things. Firstly, we could tie some of the "thief" skills back together like they used to be. I wouldn't be entirely opposed to a security skill that mixes pickpocket and lockpicking again. That's unlikely though. Bethesda split them for a reason. Also, I think you have good thoughts on traps in an http://www.gamesas.com/topic/1368268-lockpicking-minigame-too-easyskill-worthless/page__view__findpost__p__20703578 above this one.

Rather, would I think would be better for all of us, is a security system that utilizes all three "classes" at the same time.

• Complex mechanical locks that can only be opened by the clever "thief" lockpicker and his picks.
  
• Powerful wooden chests that could be smashed open by "warriors" and their heavy object of choice.
  
• Enchanted safes and strong boxes that can only be opened by carefully weaving through the sealing magics by a mage or wizard.

And of course, combinations of these.

• Locks that could be opened by any of bashed, picked, or opened with magic.
  
• Locks that can only be opened by picks, smashing, or magic.
  
• Locks that require more than one of these combined.

Lastly, there needs to be more variety in the things that you open.

• Entire dungeons should be locked, and instead of using those impenetrable "needs a key" locks, just put a heavy, heavy lock on it that requires more than one skill. That way, I'd at least have a chance to break into labrynthian to get that Radiant Quest item that was put in there by the fighters guild or something, without needing to go and join an entirely different guild to get in.
  
• Vaults and Treasuries should exist and be locked up with ridiculous, high security locks. However, the player should, eventually, be able to get in.
  
• Boxes, Chests, Safes, Crates, Ship Cargo Holds, Jails, Jail Cells, I could go on and on. All of these should have locks, varieties of locks, for different purposes.

Now then, you can tie the perks and skills in this "security" concept into the same tree. Have all three classes share a skill tree.
Besides, there's no logical reason that a skill tree can't do cross-tree checks for its perks. Before you can get the high level bashing perk (to reduce damage to contents), you have to have a 2-handed skill of 50 or a 1-handed skill of 65. What's wrong with that?

Before you can unlock those enchanted security skills, you have to have an alteration skill of 70, and have also unlocked the [insert random alteration perk]. Nothing seems to be wrong with this concept, despite my having encountered vehement opposition to it.

I rather think pidgeon-holing each skill into it's own "tube" of a skill tree is actually the weaker option. There should probably be more cross-skill checks in the perk system.


Firstly,
I think you and I substantially agree on this. I've outlined my thoughts above, perhaps you'd care to comment. We have more or less the same concept of lock "classes" that can be mixed, or purely within, a particular class.

Secondly,
I disagree. I actually think the mini-game is a nice idea, it just need to be much, much harder. The odds of actually solving it need to be placed more squarely on player skill. I wouldn't even object to a random chance of the mini-game being impossible (no solution) if your skills are too far from the required skill. However, the "representation" of character action is always nice, instead of just a silent, invisible dice roll in the background.

To build on that, I think they need two more mini-games. I think unlocking enchanted chests should have it's own arcane mini-game, and another for the bashing mechanic.

Pickpocket has been mixed with Sneak since Morrowind. It was likely separated out to try to balance the skill trees, so each of the archetypes the same number of skills.

I'm all for locking more things, but I imagine the Needs A Key locks (or equivalent; e.g. the Dragon Claw doors, or even the wall of wind behind High Hrothgar) would still be needed, or else you'd have problems for when the player needs to be kept away until reaching a certain point in a quest. Granted the number of such locks should be kept to a minimum, but I doubt they'll be able to go away entirely if you want to be able to tell a progressing story through quests.

There's not really a "skill" here to put the perks under, though. I'm all for perks that rely on multiple skills, but a skill on its own should have a use besides just being for a collection of perk boosts (*cough*magic*cough*). I see no reason why 1-handed and 2-handed can't have separate Lock Bash perks, for example, as you still need some skill in wielding a weapon if you want to properly bash with it. Just because you can "bash" open a lock with a dagger doesn't mean you'll be effective with a battle axe, and vice versa. Alteration and Security would have similar perks for helping with locks.

The mini-game is a fine idea, but its difficulty isn't the problem. The problem is that your character skill has too little influence on the overall success. To reuse an example, take combat. Combat is not hard, it's easy to learn, and "master". No matter how low your weapon skill, you can still hit and do damage, and no matter how low your armor/block skill, you can still mitigate damage. But despite that, if you have a low skill you're not going to take out a high level enemy (without cheating). You won't inflict or prevent enough damage in the grand scheme of it to kill them before they kill you.

Likewise, lockpicking itself need not be hard or difficult to master. You should be able to "get it" no matter what your skill as a character is. But a low skill means you're not going to be able to "take out" a high level lock (without cheating). You just can't do enough to best the lock without a higher skill.

Yep. I think it's fine having been split out. It was just an idea.

I agree. However, perhaps entire dungeons should not be locked like this. Limiting it to just certain story-relevant areas of the dungeon would help to bypass the problems associated with Raidant quests dropping quest loot in locked dungeons. I can't tell you how many times the mages guild radiant quests have asked me to get a book from http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Skyrim:Dustman%27s_Cairn. That's exceedingly frustrating, because you can't get in there without joining the companions.

I say we should be able to get in there, but not access the areas that trigger quest updates.

A perfect example is http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Skyrim:Ilinalta%27s_Deep. You can get into that dungeon early if you like, but the related quest areas are locked off by a giant stone block that collapses when you start the relevant quest. That sort of solution is much better than simply rejecting attempts to open a lock by saying "you need a key." That's awkward at best. So I can pick almost every lock... except this one?

I disagree with that solution. Creative ones like the stone blocks and the Wind Barrier at Hrothgar are nice.

Well, I disagree. You can have a "security" skill that all three branches are under. What would the skill do as it increase? Have it do something unrelated to opening the lock, such as reducing the probability that you will be interpreted while trying to open it, or even increasing the value of the loot inside.


Hmm. Agreed.

I agree in principle, but I could still see some issues with that. Imagine clearing out a dungeon, then getting a quest to go to that dungeon for a unique encounter in its "hidden" room. The majority of the place would be devoid of enemies and treasure, and it would be boring (particularly if it's something big like Blackreach). One of the ideas behind Radiant Quests was to make it so you don't have to go trudging through the same dungeon over again when it's already empty.

The problem with Radiant Quest targets ending up in Dustman's Cairn I'd classify as a bug regardless, though. A quest target shouldn't be set to a place that's locked off, whether the place is locked off for good reason or not. A place like that should be off-limits as a RQ target, until you get access to it. Though knowing Bethesda, they'd probably expect you to join the Companions, because aren't the guilds cool you want to join them right we know you do so go ahead and join its okay (I'm looking at you, Thieves Guild and College of Winterhold o.o).

Decreasing the chance of interruption would only matter for lockpicking, as an Open Lock spell is instantaneous and Bashing would alert enemies anyway. An ability like that would be best with the Security skill, or maybe some Security/Sneak perks (a Sneak perk to reduce the overall chances of being ambushed would be useful).

Increasing the value of the loot inside would only be useful if there's enough money sinks. Daggerfall is the only TES game I've seen that managed that well, which is not surprising given the size of the game (there were so many cities you could buy houses in and it wasn't afraid to make things cost a veritable fortune, where they literally cost more than your (carry) weight in gold; seriously, gold had weight and you had to use banks and bank notes to afford some of this stuff). The problem is, it's inevitable that you end up getting a lot of gold and treasures anyway. So that brings up two issues:

• By the time the skill would really start to take affect and get you some nice extra loot, you'll already be rolling in the money.
  
• There's little you can do with that excess money.

That's partly why those Lockpicking perks to increase the loot you could find were crap, because they gave you things you had no use for.

Would there be anything wrong in adding a master level conjuration spell "Bound lockpick"? I'm pretty sure that would cover the mage angle for lockpicking issues.

You're describing poor implementation of strength requirements. Obviously they'll be arbitrary if implemented in nonsensical ways. Strength requirements are hardly an arbitrary concept, however. If a game prevents you from using a weapon entirely, that's simply shorthand for "You are puny and won't do any damage with this weapon." Would I prefer your character be able to attempt it anyways, forcing the player to figure out that they lack the ability to effectively use this weapon? Sure, but it's not a high priority.

In every other instance, strength requirements are going to be implemented on a scale. Using a weapon bigger than you will result in negative modifiers placed on your attack/movement speed/whatever. This is not arbitrary, but a reflection of reality.
Agreed. I was surprised when this wasn't how lockpicking was implemented given that Beth tried to keep the world moving at most other times (dialogue, crafting, etc)
I generally like the idea of a variety of lock types. I also very much support a wide variety of lock difficulties. Morrowind had many. Some locks would be 50, others 15, others 85, some 45, etc. There was no clean break like you see with the five difficulty levels in Skyrim. With a wider range of lock levels, your skill suddenly becomes far more useful at all times, rather than a sudden jump in usefulness whenever you cross some arbitrary threshold.

I'd also like to see a change in equipment. First, bring back lockpick levels (apprentice, journeyman, master, grandmaster, etc). Have those factor into your score, allowing you a chance at besting high level locks even if you don't have all the necessary talents. Second, replace lockpicks with lockpicking kits. Give these lockpicking kits a limited number of uses with the number dependent on the kit's quality. I really don't like lugging around hundreds of lockpicks. It really bothers me that I'm breaking a dozen odd picks on some master lock. It feels ridiculous. Shouldn't a master lock just be harder to pick, not hard on my picks? I mean, I'm tapping with the same force as on a low level lock, but my pick snaps like a twig.

This is partly the justification for a time limit on each lock. I don't want to leave four dozen broken picks in every dungeon I stumble through. Either I'm capable of picking a lock or I'm not. But lets not unnecessarily clutter my inventory with hundreds of the same item. Just give me one item that works a hundred times. Conceptually, I like this more as well. Instead of buying a single pick, I'm buying a kit that includes several types of picks, probes, and other useful tools. It feels more like I'm actually a proper lockpicker rather than some guy with a hairpin.

Honestly, I'd rather skip a minigame for dispelling magical seals or bashing off a chest's hinges. The lockpicking minigame works for me from a conceptual point of view because it is what a lockpicker would actually be doing. They'd pull out their picks and rakes and probes and shove them in a keyhole. But wizards and warriors do not do that. They cast spells and they hit stuff. There is no need for another layer. Just have the brute attack the chest (either they exceed the required damage threshold or they don't) and the wizard cast a spell (either they're powerful enough to dispel the wards or not). Ideally for me, they'd simply play an animation for regular lockpicking as well, but I am able to better rationalize the lockpicking minigame.

Morrowind handled it well. Find an item, use it if you want, but if you're not proficient in that skill, you're going to be worse off with the Daedric Warhammer than you would be with the Iron Dagger.

Yea. The area you would have access to would have to be small. Restricted to the first part of the dungeon, more or less. But a better idea would be to stop the Radiant quests from dropping their loot in the plotlocked dungeons. However, http://www.gamesas.com/topic/1369989-radiant-quest-target-locked-in-guild-dungeons/page__fromsearch__1 got exactly zero attention.


Ahh, no need to be so hasty. Let's not jump to any conclusions about the Open spell or the Bash mechanic. They need not be any more instantaneous than the lockpicking game. This is especially true in light of the fact that we've both agreed it would be nice if they had their own mini-games.


I agree with you here. We can safely say that much of Skyrim needs to be re-balanced. I have often said that http://www.gamesas.com/topic/1368316-put-a-hole-in-my-wallet/page__fromsearch__1.
However, this thread is about lockpicking. While I agree that a lack of things to spend money on does present a problem, it shouldn't. Generally, more loot/money should be a good thing. Thus, a skill that increases the amount you get from a chest should, in theory, be fine.

The fact that it doesn't is another, separate problem to fix - and one that shouldn't change the calculus here.

Has anyone noticed a difference in sound around the area where the sweet spot is? I've tried this several times and I feel like I get it right far more often than happenstance would provide. Any confirmation/refutation?

You sir, have an avatar of my all-time favorite game. That's all I wanted to say to you. I almost wet myself when it came out on the psp with new cutscenes and voice acting.

Maybe reflexes isn't the right word, hand/eye coordination may be a better way of describing it. In Oblivion if your skill is low and the lock is hard, you need to be able to watch the tumbler and if it is moving slowly then push the button at the top of the chamber. My problem is that by the time I discern the movement speed of the tumbler it is already on its way back down and I push the button too slow. Sometimes I think the tumbler is moving slow and push the button only to realize that the tumbler was moving fast. So I would call that bad hand/eye coordination.

One other thing I noticed about Oblivions system that I find more frustrating but would seem to make for a more challenging system, is that in Oblivion, if you break a pick, the tumblers reset, so you are back at square one (assuming a low Security skill). In Skyrim, even if you have a low Lockpicking skill, the lock does not reset unless you exit. So, every broken pick provides the player with new information that will help in ultimately opening the lock (provided you approach lockpicking with a methodical approach to finding the sweet spot).

I think this explains why breaking a pick in Skyrim is less frustrating for me -- I view it as a learning event on the path to opening the lock. In Oblivion when you break a pick it is just a setback. Breaking a pick in Oblivion does not give you information that is useful in opening the lock and in fact does just the opposite by dropping tumblers, thus putting you further from your goal. I get very frustrated picking locks in Oblivion but picking Skyrim's locks is actually a calming process for me and a welcome Zen moment in between epic battles.

I did it all the time. I knew that at lower levels, I was not going to open many locks. So, I would note where the locks were I could not open, then came back for them when my character was better skilled at locks. Which is the way it should be, if the area thing is too tough, then go away until you get better. Being able to just break lock picks until you get it open is dumb, even dumber is you don't have to break any lock picks to pick any lock in this game, if you know what your doing.

I think they do this cuz like in real life people value things as higher than you might, for example I can value a golden spoon that is really worth very little but it was a family item in a hard to open safe, someone cracks this hard to open safe and finds the spoon, it may seem like it was worthless to them but it isnt to me.. I hope that makes it easier to understand, I like how they did it, makes it seem more real.

I wouldn't say its too easy I'd just say lockpicks are too common, I mean, you pick up lockpicks faster than you can break them.