Since the last topic got locked (btw, a software company can't handle a message board with > 200 posts? Really?)

You can't be the do-everything, be-everything, master-everything god character that you could in past games. In some people's eyes (including my own) that's a good thing. There was no point to character definition if everybody just became the same uber character by the end of the game, anyway. I can honestly argue that it's a superior leveling system to Oblivion and Morrowind: much superior, in fact.

You think that if you use the term freedom you'll sound like you have a principled idea. You don't. Characters are free to build up as much, or as little, of any skill tree that they want. If I give you $100, what you spend it on is up to you. The fact that it's not $4,000,000,000,000 so you can't buy everything you would ever want doesn't change that fact.

I'm L39 with 10 perks in the bank. Why? Because I'm focused on what I'm doing. I'm not trying to master smithing AND master enchanting AND master 1-hand AND master light armor AND master destruction AND master restoration AND master alteration AND master sneak AND master archery. I have 1 point in sneak. One. I have 8 pts in Destruction. I have 6 pts in Restoration. I have 6 pts in Enhanting. I have 6 pts in Archery. I don't waste my perks. I don't put points into perks willy-nilly and then realize 10 levels later that I didn't care about that skill. If I decide to branch out into something else later, I can. I'll probably do another play-through after this game (first time I'm doing this in a TES game) to do a warrior type and do heavy armor, 1- or 2-handed weapons, and smithing. My characters have definition. And I'm free to define how they are. The scarcity of the perks give them value and meaning.

The OP of the original thread didn't like the perks because he thought that they could be more interesting. Say you could have an orc-slayer perk which gave you 15% bonus in killing orcs or an arcane researcher perk which gave you 15% bonus in finding spell tomes or whatever. And that's fair. There could be more done with the system. It could be made even better. But even as it is right now it's already better than what did exist in the previous games.

I think perks can be viewed either way.

Personally I think they define my character. When my character practices and uses Archery Constantly, and then I reach level 50, I want to FEEL like the master of the Bow. The perks help me. The perks give me power in that role, because thats the role I practiced in. This is a roleplaying game, don't forget. I can't suddenly become a powerful mage after 50 levels of practicing the bow... it just doesn't make sense. If you are unhappy with your character, who was a warrior, and wish to be a powerful mage then just create a new character. Create a character who TRAINS to be a powerful mage.

That is all.

This did not need a second thread. No one cares.

Also, yes, they can handle a thread over 200 post. It's just a rule from a long time ago when they couldn't, and it just stuck. No need to change what works.

I think the discussion of the perks is one of the more interesting discussions to be had. It's one of the biggest changes in the gameplay and one that could be left intact but still broadened in the future. If you don't care about it, then read something else.

If they can handle it at this point but still lock threads at 6-7 pages, that's dumb. I don't see how it "works" other than one can continue to do it. But I've seen discussions that definitely get more involved than that arbitrary limit and some, like this, where people post a new thread to continue the discussion.

Read the rules of the forum, if you don't like it send a message to a mod. Otherwise, stop whining.

About the "200 posts rule":
@SkyrimFTW!:
The excuse of "don't change what works" is a very lame excuse in every sense of the word. Why did they change the system to support more than 200 posts when it works then?

@CasualPlayer:
They do it because people are more inclined to read the 6th page of a 7 page discussion than the 7th page of 24 pages discussion. It helps to keep people up to speed of what is currently being talked about, and by the time you reach more than 200 posts, the discussion is most likely very different from the one the original post talked about.

Most people even simply refuse to read the last page and decided to reply only to the original post. Keeping the thread locked every 7 pages or so alleviates the "nothing matters but the 1st post" problem, as the guy who creates the 2nd page would most likely be motivated enough to include the latest discussion


On topic:
I whole-heartedly agree that the Perks system is not better than Oblivion's. While some people simply don't want to be the master-of-all-trades, this does not allow me to change my playstyle halfway through the game

Perks should stay in future TES games. In Oblivion, you leveled up but the gameplay didn't change. You basicly playd your character at high lvl the same as you did at low lvl.

Bethesda should just change or replace the current perks.

the perk system is nice, but, its ridiculous to not see how many of the perks are useless, redundant, noninnovative and boring. some of the skills are also useless.

the more i play this game the more i see it's glaring faults. faults that need not have happened since they had their own games and others already laid out before them to improve and implement.

I agree that most of the perks are non-innovative and boring. That's pretty much all the Y skill is X% more effective type.

And there's a pretty full number of useless for a game that is designed primarily around combat. Basically all the lock-pick, speech, and pickpocket trees. But someone who wants to roleplay a thief or a merchant might do them to fill out their role. They could be made valuable for the game by giving gold more value either by making it more scarce or drastically raising the value of the items that you buy in shops. The question is if that raises too high of hurdles on everyone else. These games are all about moving parts.

But the first category still have value insofar as someone who wants to really fully utilize the skill will want to pick them up. Indeed, many people (and oftentimes the same people) argue that the perks in Skyrim svck and then say and they also, as a player, don't have enough of them. Kinda funny when you think about it.

You cannot go all-in as one playstyle and then, at L35, decide that you want to completely switch over to another playstyle. That's true. All I have to say is to repeat what I said before and that some people like it that way. Starting over with another character to play that other playstyle isn't so bad.

Re: the post limit, people get a life. I made a passing comment that I subsequently defended. I think it's silly but that wasn't and isn't what I really want to talk about.

Skyrim's perks don't make my character individualized. They feel like "add pentagram to wizard hat" (or maybe it's a crescent moon. Depends on the perk), or "eat with unwashed bare hands, because using two-handed sword" (or "dress as a tin can", if it's an armor perk), or "lives in forest, because uses bow" (or "has human waste on his shoes from living in the sewers", if thief).

It's a gigantic endorsemant of all of the tropes that bad fantasy authors pay homage to, and the good ones try to break. It's just a matter of "do I put 5 pentagrams on my hat, or none? Do I need to wash my boots, or not? do I go bare-chested under my tin can, or not?"

Imagine if Bethesda had made a "Riposte" perk for one-handed (timed weapon block deals damage to attacker), or if Alchemy had a "Field Medic" perk that let you dispense (pre-selected by player) potions to injured companions, or if Destruction had a perk that allowed you to sacrifice health to increase damage (would only work on charged spells, but still). Those would have been individualizing. The only opne I wouldn't take of those is Field Medic, and that's because I despise the companion characters.

So... bad perks designed around repeating the characters we've had since like 1970 in fantasy plus being handed levels constantly = no fun.

Personally, I think Sky is Freedom.

You have the freedom to use perk points, or not. You can invest them in any skill you want, or not.

You may have to put some points in perks you don't want/need to get to the one you really want, but that's part of playing the game. Use what you select carefully.

What I don't understand is why are you still playing the game. You seem to have this need to go on and on about this issue.

There is another freedom - play another game that makes you happy. Or not.

Good luck.

The Equilibrium spell allows you to sacrifice your own health for magicka, essentially trading your own health for spell damage. The Heal Other spell lets you heal your companions.

I do think that they could create perks that were more interesting. And hopefully, they will in the future. But even if they did, then people would still look at the different trees and say, "Oh, get this perk because it's good. Don't get this perk because it's not worth it." Again, it's kind of funny. People say they want more individualized perks but then gripe that X% of the current perks are "useless." Well, they're not useless. They're not as effective as some of the other perks. And they don't do what you want them to do. And in a straight combat trade-off, they don't help you as much as these other perks. But they do do something.

I genuinely think there's room for both systems. So far I really like the Perks, minus a few quirks here and there. I still miss the Attributes though. I feel that the old Attribute system (maybe more like the Natural Levelling mods), with Perks every time you level up would be excellent. Possibly add in both Skill and Attribute based Perks.

There's definitely room for improvement, but the Perks have brought something interesting to the table.

*double post*

*triple post?!?!*

They can. It used to be mandatory, now it just sticked since everyone got used to it and is the easiest way to control the threads for the mods. No one is going to read a thread with over 500 posts, most people read the 1st page or two (if) and skip. So really no need.


Finally. I don't like all of it, but when I heard about perks I was horrified. Now that I actually tried it myself I have to say it works perfectly for me, and it perfectly forms a class. You can be a master in one thing and pretty good-average on one other or both. That's a pretty good thing imo.

I utterly resent having to choose a perk which is completely unrelated to the character that i'm playing, I value my perks & wasting a few on unrelated skills that are in the way of what i want is a little difficult to tolerate, Especially since i have the skill.
I also fail to understand this mindset which has been used in several responses on both these threads.

"You may have to put some points in perks you don't want/need to get to the one you really want, but that's part of playing the game. Use what you select carefully"

That's not freedom of choice in character specialization & if you have worked hard to level your skill to the appropriate perk giving level why do you need to be punished further by selecting unrelated perks?

Perks are a good thing in Skyrim overall, However the implementation could have been a hell of a lot better.

For all those on the PC, I'd like to refer you to http://skyrimnexus.com/downloads/file.php?id=1943, http://skyrimnexus.com/downloads/file.php?id=1175 and http://skyrimnexus.com/downloads/file.php?id=3717

I use the last 2, and I'm enjoying it very much.

The 200 posts limit could very well be about technical constraints, like the indexing for search function etc. Just a guess though, and it's like that in many forums. So no need to freak out.

I think this TES episode is very themed on the nordic / viking aspect and that's why somehow the focus is on brutal characters, and maybe less viability for mages (no spell craft says it all). But on topic I agree that the perks system is not the best made. It should be used along with attributes, and perks should be maybe more specific and original. Some are, but some are just attributes benefits replacers, which is a shame imo.

Perks seem like an attempt to have characters choose a "class" to accent their playstyle without having to do it at the beginning of the game.

Looking at the lists, it's almost as if they threw some perks in just to make you spend extra perk points to get something useful. There are around 250 perks, and most people will stop in their 50s. That means you'll get about 20 percent of the perks.

The problem I have is that some trees are useless. Lockpicking, pickpocketing and alchemy seem pretty weak. There may be a useful perk here and there, but you have to waste a lot of points to get there.

Consider Speech. You gain levels by talking to people and buying and selling goods. To get the first useful skill (merchant) you need a speech skill level of 50. By the time I had bought and sold enough to get there, money really wasn't an issue. I took it to save time.

The 1H and 2H trees are pretty much the same tree.

I'm using the first one, Non smithing version of course & i'm enjoying my umpteenth playthough without my usual simmering resentment, Now my perks feel like they're worth something.

I like the idea of perks, and I like most of the perks that they placed in.
What I don't like is the fact that a skill tree without perks is almost useless. I think the perks like novice-....-master and Shieldwall-1 to 5 should be given to the player automatically.

I will be creating a mod for this problem as soon as I can.

I like the idea of perks, but the implementation is really only half-baked. As a lot of people have pointed out already, by the time you get a perk, half the time its no longer useful. The way perks are doled out has to match the pace of the rest of the game.

It also has to match the available content. They could have easily invented an interesting and worthwhile Speech tree...but they'd also have to implement occassions to use it. The lockpicking perks (novice, apprentice, etc., locks) would have been useful if the mini-game was much harder. So much harder that players felt that the perks were a worthwhile investment. Hemming and hawing only waters the game down to the point where little challenge meets little utility.

When they designed the game, they should have asked themselves: what if I'm a player and I want to focus on developing this one skill exclusively? Is there enough content to justify me devoting a whole character to it? Once the content is there, it becomes much easier to design perks that take advantage of the content. A lot of the problem with creating perks for the existing skill trees is that there isn't enough content of the right type in the game to find ways to use it.

Take the Speech example: I can easily think of several different character types that would make this skill the main skill in their repetoire if the content allowed it. How about a rogue who uses deceit and disguises to infiltrate enemy locations? There are two perks right there: a perk to improve your chances of lying successfully, and a perk to improve the quality of your disguises. Those are specific things that a character can be good at or not good at that allow the player to differentiate his or her character. They also make sense and don't feel like filler. I'd love to be able to put on bandit gear, walk into a bandit fort, and smooth talk my way past all the other bandits (using Lying/Disguise checks) all the way to the chief for an easy execution. How is having those two Speech perks in any way worse than having combat perks in this case? If anything, they seem overpowered. Unfortunately, you can't implement them because the content isn't there. I'm sure I could easily come up with a dozen similar perks for Speech.

So the implementation of the perk trees feels half-baked in part because there isn't enough content (enough different ways of doing things) to support the architecture. Why can't my pickpocket steal stuff from people in broad daylight without having to sneak? Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure that's actually how pickpockets work. It's called distraction. Why not make that a perk? You could easily come up with a list of several hundred perks to refill all the trees in a way that is interesting and balanced, but without the content and game mechanics it will be impossible to implement.

First of most of those perks aren't unrelated, inside a tree, perks in a branch relate to those that came before it, except maybe for branching points.
Secondly it's not about total freedom do whatever without consequences. This about character building and the consequences of that and it is one of the only real place were our decisions carry a consequence.
You also don't have to work all that hard except for crafting to a certain extend or speech and pickpocket.
And as a last, though I concede there are perks whos use in the game is a waste, not every perk you find useless is useless to everyone.

Also, question.

Some perks go hand-in-hand, like Eagle Eye and Steady Hand. How would we be able to have something like that if not for a skill tree?