lol lets set aside the buzzword for a moment and think critically.

If the game does not support OR atleast give some kind of support to "defining the char" somethings wrong no? why my guy no get better at H2H? I've been punching all day D:.

You don't need stats to RP you can go outside and do that. but since the game isn't -you- the game should give you the option to -reinforce- your mental machinations so to speak. but here we go talking about stats and not classes lol.


I DISAGREE DROID,

Morrowind "perks" were gained as "magical effects" or "boosts"

Oblivion "Perks" got expanded and made automatic+tied to skills.

Skyrim "Perks" were expanded even more and made manual.


Aside from a few effects like slowing down time and alot of percentage increases, I don't see this "more complex" since they do exactly what they've always done, benefited the player with skill boosts.

I know i have the upper hand because I have better weapons and armor, and I have the proficiency to use them.

You are rarely ever in fist fights, so its no longer about buff guy vs weakling. If you give that weakling a machinegun, it doesnt matter how buff you are. The simple fact is, you are going to lose.

Oh how I love the classic clash of Ideology

What I dislike about no classes is that its just one less thing the game has now.
I liked thinking about what kind of character Id like to make beforehand, and I especially liked naming my own class.
Now that is gone, so basically I have less game for my buck.
I like stats, I like things such as equipment screens, Skyrim puts most of that behind the scenes and doesnt even tell me what holds I have what reputation in or what my ranks in the various guilds are.
I suppose it goes with the design of the game, like the minimal questlog and health bar that doesnt appear on the screen.
Still, I liked those things and I especially miss not seeing on my screen anymore what spell effects are active.

Imagination only goes for far in a video game.

BOTH should define world interactions. Why is that so hard to grasp? Attributes and Skills are all just numbers... but they're numbers that play an equally important role in defining different aspects of your character.

If TES had ever done Attributes properly (The last one to do so was Daggerfall, then you might have a point. However, in Morrowind and Oblivion, you have only limited control over your attributes - The difference in strength between a Warrior and a Mage when starting out was only 5 points (20 points if you use a Birthsign, but that's not part of your "Class")

Skills, perks, and equipment define my character just as much as Skills and Attributes did in past games.
If that's the case, then Skyrim did not cut "attributes"

Could be just me, but I feel your posts aren't complety coherent so I don't get what you are saying. Are you saying that perks and chosing magica/health/stamina when leveling does not define your character?

Edit:
Morrowind did not have perks, only bithsign and some questbonuses.

Oblivion had perk directly tied to the skill level, hence called mastery perks, but there was no limit in which you could get.

Skyrims perks are more complex than the previous attributed becuase they are more limited so you have to chose which to use since you can only get some of them. That alone makes the characters more varied than earlier, no matter how you see it.

The more I think about this, the less sense it makes.

Stats are just an arbitrary number restricting your character's ability and skill advancement. Reaching certain levels of an atribute unlocks the selection of skills and provides a small bonus to your character's general ability.

This behavior can be found in the game now. Instead of restricting skill selection, and ability bonus, to the value of an atribute it is now restricted by your skill level. The bonuses are provided at level up when you raise your MAG/HP/STA.

Everything is there, this is why I cannot make sense of the issue at hand.

not really, you just set definitions to that enemy in yoru sentance. IF you put that into a "generic" system like in skyrim he would be a "weakling" because there is no str attribute everyone is the same i nthose terms. If you put them into a system with attributes that influance the outcome of actions then weakling can be measures and his aim can be accounted for and so forth. So yeah you could win jus tas easily as lose. If he can't hit anything yo ucould kill him with a knife.

Hardly.

Every time I levelled up in Skyrim, I just alternated between Stamina and Health. And when it came to perks, it wasn't long at all before I was able to max out all the trees I was interested in, with plenty of points to spare.

The problem with perks is they're not really there to add complexity to the game as they should; they're there to simplify skill progression and wrap everything in neat little packages.

See thats why I'm arguing in FAVOR of Attributes to return and have a better impact of character. Attributes are gone, they just have provided there derived stats to be effected independantly.

We quickly shelved both D&D and AD&D for other systems like Runequest and Rolemaster. So yes, at least I think so.

What you described is EXACTLY what skills do. They measure ones effectiveness with things. You dont need strength, you dont need willpower, you dont need endurance attributes to swing a [censored] sword. You need proficiency and stamina. Thats what the system gives you.

As was said, equipment and skills now define your character, not attributes.

No, Attribute should have major effect on skills (just in TES they don't). IE you can know all about how to work a gun but if your hand eye cordination svcks your not going to hit what your aiming at much. So yeah Attributes and skills are alot different.

Just because you got the perks you wanted and only used two of the stats doesn't make it less complex. The system as a whole is more complex than before. Now you much chose how to put your health, magica, stamina and perks based on what is important to your character. "Simple" characters like warriors will be pretty straight forward, while hybrid characters will be more spreadt and versitile.

For example on my Crusader build I must decide how much magica is worth this level comparred to health or stamina, and wheter I shall enhance my magic or combat abilities with the perk, or if I should discard the stamina attribute completely and rely on potions and spells to have the option to powerattack which again will have a consequence since I must now switch away from my warhammer and use spells to restore it making me voulnerable for a short while, but giving me more magica for other purposses.
In Morrowind I would go: "Oh well, I take Intelligence for more agica, endurance for more health and fatigue and strength for more fatigue and melee damage. No biggie".

So I have a question: You cannot see how the system itself supports more complex characterbuilding at all?

Except hand-eye coordination is a skill that can be learned.

What does "completely audio base" mean? Anyway, you don't make sense. You're all but saying you imagine your role playing which allows for meta-gaming your character, which is fine, I do that too and did in Oblivion, Morrowind, etc. Oblivion allows for this more-so since there are "stats" involved with your skill-sets. The problem with Skyrim is, it doesn't really matter what race you choose as "classes" have been thrown out of the mix. I want to be a mage, but in choosing so, the game still allows for too easy and fast skill leveling of non-mage skill-sets. In Oblivion, if I choose a class (and I mostly did a custom set), I was held to that since using other skills outside of being a mage (for example) would result is very slow leveling. Not so in Skyrim. Just swing away and rise quickly to become adept at one-handed. This totally takes away for me to role play a mage because I am not held to my choices. I think Skyrim should have been been advertised more as an action/adventure game, it would have been more fitting, my opinion of course .

What nonsense is this? You can't "know how to work a gun" (IE be skilled with a gun) if you have poor Hand/Eye coordination. Your ability to use your hand-eye coordination to aim your gun is the definition of the skill.

And simplification of the interface is bad because......?

Because it gives you less control, because there simply is less to do in the game.
Simple is not always good.

I also spend a total of 8 hours planning my character before the game was released just based on leaked perks. And upwards of 30 hours testing the effectiveness of different perks and builds against huge number of enemies to come up with my current min-maxed build which is as powerful as legtimately possible.

Skyrim has a far more complex character system than Oblivion those complexity almost solely lies in spell making. And i am the kind of person who knows all the hidden secrets to Oblivion spell making that few ever tried, including how to make a goblin into world killer.

True, but when it gives more control and more consequences it is. Which it happens to do in Skyrim.

its not light in rpg mechanics, no way, they may of taken out things like attributes but the classes are still there, there's 81 perks you get to take, 18 skills, you pick magic, health or stamina each level, standing stones that define your character as well, racial traits, its plenty rpg, you can play almost any way you want, there's plenty of character customization, its far from rgp light. its not a stat fest, but using an old measuring rod to define rpgs is archaic, rpgs have evolved into much better games than they were in the past...there's far more in skyrims gameworld then any rpg game in history, it has so much going on thats its in a class of its own, it defines modern open world rpgs.

XD

XD

So you can't know how a gun works without shooting it? XD

EDIt: Damn it did it again! XD