The actual role players.

The same kind of people who thought up the idea that a Drow Elf could become a Ranger? The same people who speced Dwarven Druids or Priests when Dwarves are much better known for crafting and melee combat.

Like I keep saying: Each race has starting bonuses to skills as well as their racial ability. It's way more than cosmetic. Just because Bethesda didn't force me to choose a High Elf to play a mage doesn't mean that a High Elf isn't best suited for the job with their racials. If you make one race "too" good, then what's the point of picking anything else?

I agree about there being issues with change in the TES series. Races being cosmetic however has always existed within TES. Look back at Daggerfall. The only differences were your starting attributes, that you could make up for - no different than Skyrim (which is now Skills instead of attributes). I think TES could benefit from Races being a little more special than they are now, but I do not think they should penalize players for wanting to play say a Khajit Warrior. Does it make sense? No, not really - but this is TES not D&D. I am not trying to be difficult, I come from where you come from with RPGs.

So in other words, hopelessly gimping yourself in some kind of RP story driven attitude? Why? What's the point?

There are racials in this game, there are races that are better for certain styles of gameplay, they're just not crazy unbalanced.

There are exactly 18 classes in the game with their own experience levels and every Dovahkiin is a serial multi-classer. When you level up, you can get feats that helps you be more effective in that class. Think on that for a second. It will make sense sooner or later.

That's your opinion and I respect it. I just see it differant. Why should someone be penlized more for wanting to be a Orc mage? High Elf has Highborn and +50 magika already. Can't that be enough?

TES has been more about choice than consequences. But I would rather have the choices.

Starting bonuses are worthless by mid-late game. Everyone can reach 100 in various skills by level 81. So... you're starting bonus is now worthless and carries no weight. Games are balanced from end to beginning, not the other way around. If you make all races able to do everything equally as good, what's the point in picking one race over the other?


Really? So... what's the Orc's racial trait, other than the one-a-day Beserk? How does a level 1 Orc start out differently, either weaker or stronger, than everyone else?

Perhaps this will help you better to grasp what I am suggesting:

http://www.gamesas.com/topic/1338714-expanding-racial-traits/

Read it, discuss. The above link proposes putting a larger difference gap between races.

I looked at the starting stat bonuses as a "nudge" in the right direction, to show me what Bethesda had in mind as the best race for the job-- but, at the same time, not forcing me down a path. Racial abilities, on the other hand, are never worthless. As for reaching 100 in various skills, this was the same in Morrowind and Oblivion-- if you want to be a super hero you can, that's the Elder Scrolls.




The "one-a-day berserk" is incredibly powerful as a melee fighter. Like I said, the stat boosts are a nudge in the right direction. I don't see how it's better or more fun to be forced into picking a particular race for a particular class. As others keep saying, Elder Scrolls are all about giving the player more choices.

You keep thinking that I want to force people down an intended path. That's not it in the least. The "best" option should have nudges, what I am saying however is that each race should also have basic differences.

Beserk is incredibly powerful... once, there are no other Orcish traits, other than the slight nudge in Skills, that make Orcs any better of a fighter than a High Elf. That's the point. Things like naturally higher health, or a natural bonus to weapon damage (on top of the Skill bump) is what I am suggesting. These kind of changes won't mean anything to someone who makes an Orc Mage, but they would still be there and would make an Orc more prominent.

Just for the record, I love Skyrim as-is, I'm just missing a few things that a lifetime of role playing has ingrained in me. I'm new to TES with Oblivion being the first of the series for me, and there are so many flaws in the world of Nirn to me, again based on my past role playing experiences. That aside, I feel that extremely basic things that have always been a part of role playing systems really are missing. Freedom is great, but I can't get used to a hard core mage just swinging away with a 2 handed sword that he should barely be able to lift, much less have any skill at using. That's where stats come in. Basic stats, that barely change throughout the game, should set a natural limit for what you can do physically and mentally. Give a greatsword a min. strength requirement, problem solved. Give spells a min. intelligence requirement, problem solved. Since Beth did away with stats, I'm turning my attention to perks and traits. The essence really is that creating your character should also let you set up their strengths and weaknesses right from the get go, no just based on how you develop your skills throughout the game. There's more to a person than skills, and Skyrim has NO way to reflect those traits and personalities.

Again, all I read is your unwillingness to simply add self imposed restrictions. Can't get used to a hard core mage swinging a 2H Sword? Neither can I-- so guess what? I won't equip a 2H sword with a hard core mage! Problem solved! I'm playing a Baldur's Gate styled Cleric, so I won't touch edged weapons or 2H weapons. Do I need the game to tell me I can't do it? No! I just don't, because that's the class I've chosen!

And yet you're playing a pre-made class that has specific limitations...

At level 81 all skills are at 100 and the game was balanced to level 50. This was stated before the game release. Aluin is the only enemy that levels past 50. I am willing to bet that the majority of players won't even hit level 50 when you consider that the people on this forum are a small minority of the overall players.

I think you'd lose that bet.

The only reason you get a couple spells (some races get 3) is in case you want to be a mage. The spells you start with are certainly nothing wonderful, and you don't ever need to cast them if you don't want to be a mage. It just means you'll have to rely on potions for healing and a bow for ranged damage, no biggie.

Not according to this.
http://www.gamesas.com/topic/1336426-what-level-are-you-in-skyrim
Yes it is a small sample but it shows the trend. I am sure a majority of people on these forums will or have hit 50 but there a lot of casual gamers out there playing it.

Polls such as those are not in the least bit accurate.

Exactly, because that's how I want to play. I don't want Bethesda telling me that I don't have a high enough intelligence score to learn a specific spell in the Alteration school, I want to play how I feel my character should play. (no jokes about low intelligence, that was just an example )

And yet you're pulling from a game that did exactly what you are going against.

No they are not. But I would say that it is more accurate than either of our opinions of how others play.

And in the end that is what it come down to. I will play how I want to play and you will play how you want to play. There is no sense trying to make others play the way you or I want them to. They have the choice.

Again, never did I say that.

If you read the link I provided, you might better understand what I am suggesting.

You're clearly missing the point. Some of my all time favorite games (i.e. Baldur's Gate) had a rigid attribute system, and I loved it. Attribute systems still have their place in modern RPG's, but the Elder Scroll series has always been about total and complete freedom. I'm not against attributes and classes at all, but I am against it in this game. Bethesda has created a new level of freedom with Skyrim, more so than any installment in the past, and I only hope they use this system to build on it in the future.

Also, in short, it looks like your argument is diminishing to nothing more than grasping at straws.

I just think the current differances are good.
Just a differance in opinion.
I say keep it the same based on my opinion you say change it based on your opinion.

If there was a larger differance the people would complain about being forced into a raise. Just like people complain about being forced to use the crafting systems. No matter what is done someone will not be happy and will want it changed.

I never once made the suggestion that TES should use a rigid attribute system, ever, in this discussion. How have you not seen that?