It was said that these TES4 mods could have been used as "inspiration" for better role system in TES5
Even on X360 or PS3

Thank you.

Yeah, it had nothing to do with all the weight training he'd done to increase his strength.

Force equals mass times velocity, not acceleration. A determining factor of a punch's velocity also includes strength. I've never said that strength is the be all end all of how hard you hit, I've just said that by excluding it totally you are not correct. It is most certaintly a contributing factor. If you have two people able to apply the exact same technique, the strong one will hit harder, although there will be diminishing returns at the upper end of technique and strength. Strength, defined in terms of how much you can benchpress, most certainly does have something to do with it.

Muscle mass does not equal strength. Both of those men have also done strength training otherwise they wouldn't be nearly as big as they are nor strong. You seem to now be mistaking size with strength. Just look at Butterbean, a whole lot more strength than technique.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJT99suKerg

Does the new perks system then resemble whatever mods your referring to?

The most concrete reason I have heard is to stop people from playing for 3-10 hours then rerolling a character because of a mistake during creation.

1. dagger damage is somewhat taken care of in one handed skill. if youve ever practiced using it you will be better at it.

2. bethesda didnt dumb it down they tried to change how characters evolve around skills. they didnt want to let characters get better at things they never even bothered to have taste at. of course ppl could say those good at two hand should be better at one hand too and so on, but then again the logic rather has no boundaries. one could say a guy with good smithing should inflict more damage with weapon than a mage when both have same skill level in a weapon skill. this makes perfect sense to me but its gonna disrupt skyrim's system where skill is very important with perks!

if ppl start to nag about things making sense in real life that is not in the game they probably should open another discussion board

To be blunt you don't seem to have a CLUE what RPG stands for.

It certainly doesn't stand for attributes, it stands for ROLE playing game. Stats does NOT have to be a certain way to qualify to be an RPG.

Perks take up a lot of the slack of the REDUNDANT and sometimes plain idiotic stats that did the same thing.

Stamina takes care of How long you can run, how much you can carry and how much stamina you have to swing and make power attacks etc.
Health is health, and magicka is magicka instead of leveling INT and WILL.

Agility and acrobatics was silly too, if you are acrobatic you most certainly would be agile ffs.

They were fluff stats to make it look more and it was convoluted and redundant.
You can achieve exactly everything you could in previous games, just now you have more options and you get perks that directly affect things instead.

Also what they did that is smart, you level up whatever it is you use, PLAIN logic.

The "dumbing down" bull I keep reading is also so silly, RPG does not mean increase +5 stats. Not only that but you can now make a lot of varied builds and make it pretty damn complicated.

It's not as easy as just throwing on a perk, you first need to level the skill to the appropriate level before you can proceed to put in more perks in it. Which means you actually have to pay attention to what skills you use in order to max out those trees to have a fully fledged Thief, or Mage etc.

Before it was just empty stats, now it is actually doing something by using perk system.

Just think about it, when a game have you jump around like a jack-rabbit so you can level up acrobatics and gain speed and jump, well it's silly and stupid.
The sprint system makes much more sense, also it drains the stamina so it affects you in ways as well, you clearly become fatigued an if you "RUN" into a bandit you might be all out of stamina as well.

I for one think this is SO much better.
I remember in Oblivion how I chose 7 major stats to increase more than others and then finding out I wanted to do archery more but it was a minor stats so even if I used it a lot it hardly ever increased.
That made me feel like I messed up my build, with this system I will actually level up what I ACTUALLY USE.

Yes and no (it is complicated)
There were mods that made skill levels matter more (I have played some related to alchemy) and there were some that made attributes more relevant
(for example additional quests where you could intimidate with high strength or persuade with high Speechcraft- this was indeed done in FO3, so some things from PC mods gets used in further games)

Have you by chance played Baldur's Gate for the PC? I think the way it was handled there was better.

You 'rolled' for the values of your attributes at the start and could re-roll as many times as you wanted to get one you where happy with and then re-distribute whatever you had whilst in character creation at the start.
All attributes where lower a value of 10 being the base line for that attribute being usable while anything around 20 was impressive. You only got one point to add to your totals per level and in Baldur's Gate II you got to choose a perk every three levels, my favourite being one that allowed you to use your dexterity attribute as opposed to your strength when determining how much damage you could do in a fight.

That was a great game.

All of this makes me laugh a great deal.

I have been playing RPGs for a good long time. I was a HUGE BG1/2, PST, FO1/2, Arcanum fan. I enjoyed Morrowind, Oblivion to a lesser extent, and even the new Fallouts. Many of these RPGs used different systems to define characterization. Ultimately they were all a great deal of fun. The overall experience is what makes the game entertaining.

In Skyrim - I am kind of glad they removed the stats. This is not because I do not like stat-heavy RPGs, but I am not attached to it for any particular reason either. The reason I like it better is that TES to me was always about the immersion, the locales, the world. Reading books, mucking around, killin' stuff. Whatever it is that one enjoys, you just kind of go do. The stats felt really "gamey" for lack of a better word. It might have been great for power gamers, or people who wanted to fiddle with all the nuances of getting +5 to stat x. I personally hated that. I think Skyrim will actually end up being MORE replayable since the soft level cap likely creates scenarios where you kind of have a framework of the type of character you want to be on a given playthrough. Morrowind/Oblivion always gave me the vibe that you didn't really play the type of character you wanted by picking the skills you were going to use. You picked skills you weren't going to use, or were very controllable to min/max a lot of things.

I very much like Fallout's "static" stats system. I do not think that Skyrims Health/Magic/Stamina Stat system enveloped over Skill-Centric Perks is going to be anywhere near a deal breaker at all. It's even a non-factor. I think that Bethesda may in fact of hit the sweet spot for accessibility and RPG-nerdgasms with this game. Those of us who like numbers can still anolyze and pick a part to a heart's content the skills, perks and H/M/S distribution to get that "perfect" build. Or we can free-wheel it, and play intuitively, or (there's several other ways I am sure). I think some of you fellas are getting too caught up in stat removal. It doesn't matter, what matters is that the end result is a quality, enjoyable experience.

Just sayin'

Sorry for being a little ranty.

No, it really didn't. It had more to do with the fact that he could tap the button with exceptional accuracy,



No. Everything here is wrong. Kinetic energy equals mass times velocity.

I was not excluding it totally. It is a contributing factor, but it is very, very minor, and certainly overshadowed by almost every other factor. And in terms of the Elder Scrolls, it is a very smart decision to fold all of its effects into the skills it affects rather than have it stand alone.

If you have two people able to apply the same technique, barring huge inequalities (child vs. powerlifter, for example), the rule of thumb is the faster one will hit harder.

Strength, defined in terms of how much you can bench press, matters about as much in a combat situation as how mean your glare is. Sure, you might scare the person, but when push comes to shove, there is a certain threshold of strength that is useful, and everything above and beyond is basically pointless. And that threshold is very, very small. Once again, the WEIGHT of your muscles would be more useful in this equation than the pounds they can lift.



Brock Lesnar is much, much stronger than Cain Velasquez. Brock is 285 pounds of solid muscle. Cain is 240 with a light coating of fat. Disputing this is a moot point. Vague hand-waving excuses cannot account for the disparity here that completely unravels your logic.

Also, here's a tip: Butterbean is never the answer to anything.

I'm neither glad nor annoyed that they removed the stats. They claim to be able to do everything that stats did without actually having them, and that remains to be seen... at least by me. I have my doubts, but given that it looks like they're using the skills to -replace- attributes, it could still work out. It just won't be as flexible as having skill-independent reserves of ability that alter multiple skills' behaviour at once.

And you seem to be confusing the literal definition of roleplaying with the RPG genre. Technically, you can "roleplay" in a wide variety of videogames (most notably adventure games)... but it's things like character definition and development that make a game an RPG. (Before you even think of replying to this, do us both a favour and go and look up the definition of adventure games on wikipedia or something. It might surprise you just how similar they are to RPGs, and may help you understand that the use of stats/numbers is really all that separates the two genres).

Did I say that Skyrim doesn't qualify to be an RPG? No. It's still an RPG - just a flawed one.


Perks are stats. That's the thing a lot of stupid people can't seem to get their head around. If you pick a perk that increases damage by 10%, how do you think the game recognises that change? It's all just numbers.

And this is dumb. In real life, a weight lifter can carry heavy weights, but they're not necessarily going to be good long-distance runners. Nor is a marathon runner necessarily going to be very physically strong. Consolidating Strength and Endurance into one thing (Stamina) is just oversimplification, pure and simple. And all it does is reduce roleplaying possibilities.


Both are gone, which again, is stupid. If you cannot fathom why some characters should be more agile than others, or why some characters should be better at jumping than others, then i'm wasting my time on a simpleton.

Wrong.
I can no longer roleplay a fast, agile character. I can no longer roleplay a character who is physically weak, but has good endurance. etc. etc.

I don't deny that perks add a bit more complexity, but they should be viewed as an addition, not a substitute for attributes. This is the thing so many stupid people can't seem to grasp - why not have both?

The way Acrobatics was implemented in previous games wasn't ideal, but it needed fixing not removing entirely. And besides, what kind of [censored] of a player abuses the levelling system like that?

Two things should determine your sprinting abilities:

Endurance / Stamine (how long you can sprint for)
Athletics (how fast you can sprint)

In the real world, people don't all run at the same pace, do they?

...

But I guess stupid people will be stupid.

Happy to be corrected here.
Actually you were excluding it by virtue of saying "Everything here is wrong."
Ok I'll certainly agree when it comes to punches strength would have less of an effect at the point of contact. When it comes to a 20lb sledge hammer, strength would have a much more significant influence up to a point, the diminishing returns I mentioned above. Where swinging a sledge would be much more like Torque with the axis being roughly the shoulder, strength and gravity being more the Force and the length of the sledge multiplying the resultant collision effectiveness.
This whole set up is like saying a MotoGP racer will get beaten by a Grand Prix Racer in a Grand Prix Race, two different yet similar sports. Like I said earlier, Attributes are more like innate (in this case untrained) ability and skills are trained (in this case technique). They should combine for an overall result. Also like I said above the old bonuses for Attributes are being replaced by the perks, or words to that affect.


Because it debunks your whole technique argument?

Dumbing down goes on all platforms. Morrowind wasn't dumbed down as you say and had attributes and was on PC and Xbox. From what I have heard they removed them because the system never really worked right or some s**t.

They also removed them to make people like the OP ask why????..............

Happy to help.


That's because everything WAS wrong. It had nothing to do with argument at all, really. It was the simple fact that the way you were explaining things was wrong, pure and simple.


Yes, when you are using the weapon, strength is important to manipulate the object.



No, because it's irrelevant. Butterbean is the king of the fat guys. He's not strong, fast, has no technique, and no stamina. He just has more of these things than the other fat guys he fights. Trying to bring that into an argument that's quickly spiraled completely away from it's original premise is like releasing the elephant on a cargo ship that is sinking. Pointlessly destructive.

Wake UP oblivion was the worst attribute/skill implementation in human history.

@ the fighters up there:
2 more important skill in a fight is speed and precision then technique.

Strenght cannot do damage to something that ain t ther anymore.
And any technique cannot be applied if your not precise.

You dont need technique to burst an eye, kick the groin of get out of the way of a punch, but you need speed and precision.

Strenght is a factor that can superseed technique, althought most time its the oposite.

Now you are contradicting yourself. I said strength was a contributing factor then you said yes it was but now you are saying all that was wrong? Yes some of what I wrote was wrong but it all pertained to the discussion. That I beleive that strength has more of an effect to hitting something than you do.
Most of those guys in that video had no fat at all...
It has everything to do with this, that I believe and have shown footage, not just a couple of images, that strength can be just as significant. His whole technique is to rush in and overwhelm with heavy hitting blows.

Edit: Even Bruce Lee believed strength was important and he knew a lot more about Martial Arts than I.


Edit 2: Another simple example is the hammer and bell setup at showground fares. Swing the hammer and make the bell ring, same hammer yet only the strong can make the bell ring. A bit of a silly example but it does illustrate my point.

I'm pretty sure Speechcraft skill gave a lot more detail in what his body and mind (mainly mind) is capable of than Personality which was just some supernatural aura of friendlyness.

What I don't understand with all those complaints about dumbed down game is, Oblivion and Morrowind attributes were awful. Just plain bad, they did nothing for the game enjoyment at all.

I do believe it's to Bethesda credit to understand that. Understand that this part of their past games was bad, yet those games were loved. It can only mean that people loved those games DESPITE those flaws. And from that to conclude they'd still love the game without them. In fact, they'd probably love the game even more. I did use mods in Morrowind and Oblivion that for all purposes practically nullified the attributes effect in the game and it was for the best.



Skyrim is Oblivion and Morrowind without the flawed and bad attributes. It can only be considered the better of the three by that change alone! Why should Bethesda spent time and energy into remaking the whole attribute system at the risk of putting instead something that is still bad when the game is without any doubt improved just by removing them?

they didnt remove the attributes they just never added them in skyrim!

It svcked. Simple as.

This forum is really starting to mess with my internal clock.

First I see threads about people playing the game, and I think that I must have slept all the way through to Friday. Then I see threads like this, and I think I dreamed that it was November already when it's actually 6 months ago.

Exactly this.

Well, some of the attributes everything boiled down to. Personally, I don't like how they removed such attributes as Jump Height, Move Speed, Attack Speed, Stagger Resistance, and similar bonuses the attributes granted from past games.

Because levelling in earlier TES games was a chore and a micromanaging nightmare.