I prefer races to be largely cosmetic, myself. If I want to play the best possible warrior or mage or whatever, I don't want to have to choose a race I don't like in order to get the best goodies.

The biggest problem I see with this is that if you make a racial perk tree that says as you suggested with Orc Berserk, how do you apply it to all possible builds so that people won't get shafted, which is apparently one of the angles the anti-difference side has on this subject.

You would need to be able to tie all the racial perks into many, many things.

And to Jack, about the "flavor," I'm sorry, but to me the "flavor" is about as bold as water. I love flavor in games, that's why I really want the NPCs and such to treat the player in the same fashion as the narrative suggests that they would normally be treated, but if you're going to go with "flavor," go with something bold, not water.

Race should NEVER be a strict factor in what class you should play, in my opinion. That it affects you near the beginning is good enough. I can't stand it when so-called RPGs force rigid stereotypes on my character.

Topics liks this always bewilder me. Just play how you want, or use a mod if you want to be further restricted. It's not the game's job to limit everyone else so that one's own idea of their character fits.

My character is a strict magic-only (and magic staff) character. I don't have any problem avoiding melee, but I sure would be extremely annoyed if it were forced upon me.

I'm not sure you understood the OP at all...

RPGs are very story driven and lore based. Racial bonuses or specializations are consistant with that. Picking race mattered in more ways than just special abilities or unique traits; other NPCs, based on their own race, would treat you differently or have a lower/higher disposition to you. Imagine, if choosing to play a Khajiit in Skyrim, guards would arrest/attack you on site if caught inside a city after dark, merchants constantly screwing you in transactions or outright refusing to trade with you at all, other NPCs not willing to speak with you, give out quests, etc. Heck, most Stormcloak affiliated Nords would probably treat ANY non Nord that way! That would add such a huge dimension to the game.

Instead, we seem to be going the opposite direction, removing any distinction between races, minimizing the the way the world treats different characters. It's kind of sad. I'm a big fan of the Civilization series of games as well, to me, removing racial differences in Skyrim would be like removing a civilization's special traits and unique units in Civ....one you've played one race/civ, you've played them all.

Sounds like a well thought out idea to me.

My argument isn't "that's just the way it is", far from it. I just thought the reasons were obvious from what's been stated about Skyrim and character creation plus what Skyrim actually does in those regards. If you think you have the be-end all solution to end all discussion with no objections, I salute your ego sir.

In any case, it's obvious to me that Skyrim did not want to overload the player with choices at the beginning of the game. They did not want the player to be stuck with choices they made at the beginning of the game simply because at the beginning of the game one is not well informed about everything. They wanted a mold your character as you go type of play style. Having a front heavy character creation system goes against this philosophy.

They've mentioned countless times that any race can become who they want to be, it just might take slightly longer for an Orc to become a Mage but just merely due to do some minor skill allocations in the beginning. I agree with this ideal. I'm not a fan of racial separation. If I want to play as a certain race I would like it to be for role playing reasons as opposed to game-play and combat build reasons.

You say you want to add all this exclusive game-play and combat build options for specific races, and I say why? All that creativity could easily be applied to every single race and it doesn't need to be racially exclusive. If you apply specific options for specific races that open up specific play styles for specific races then you're just creating racial separation for the sake of racial separation. I shouldn't have to pick a specific race to play a certain way from a game-play perspective excluding dialogue related role-playing options (And other role-playing scenarios). Fortunately for me Bethesda also feels this way as is shown by Skyrim.

I'd like to add that just because I say that Bethesda agrees with me doesn't mean that it's a "that's just the way it is" argument. Far from it. If you don't bother to read between the lines that's on you, not me. I'm not here to hand hold anyone through a discussion.

Well, my idea takes something that already exists in the game (racial abilities) and extends it so that it applies to more builds. People complaining about racial differences 'compelling' them to chose a specific build should have more of a problem with vanilla racial abilities than the racial perk trees I'm suggesting, which are entirely optional and customizable to different builds.

In vanilla, all Orcs have Berserker Rage. That's a clear impetus to build an Orc warrior character. In my mechanic, Berserker Rage wouldn't be an automatic ability, but a perk that could be purchased. Alternately, one could purchase a perk that allows them to apply Berserker Rage to the damage inflicted by Destruction magic instead of melee combat. In other words: I've made the racial ability more flexible and optional. Later, as the player progresses, they could purchase the perk they didn't purchase the first time if they wanted to. No one is being limited or channeled down a specific build path. This embryonic tree already applies to warrior, mage, and battlemage builds, which is more than you can say for the vanilla ability.

More importantly, by making the perks optional, and by using the same pool of perk points, one could opt to play an Orc who doesn't have Berserker Rage (maybe they were just born 'different' or refuse to indulge in it) and instead spend the perk on something else.

The reasons aren't at all obvious unless you refuse to examine them. And I don't think I have the 'be all and end all' solution, though I'm far more interested in working toward a solution than rejecting every suggested solution out of hand.

I understand that the design is to allow the player to develop their character naturally through play. I have no interest in changing this, as I like it myself. But the solution I proposed isn't 'front heavy' at all, which should have been clear from my post. How is having a racial perk tree that gives each race different but equally useful perks for both combat and magic any more 'front heavy' than the existing perk system? It's less front heavy than vanilla Skyrim, which gives you a racial ability which isn't optional and which can't be extended to support different builds. I didn't say: "Give Orcs a whole bunch of perks which makes them better at combat but nothing else" and "Give Altmer a whole bunch of perks that makes them better at magic but nothing else", I said: "Give Orcs perks which can make them better at combat in specific ways, and perks which make them better at magic in specific ways and do this for all the races so that they are all equally good at combat or magic but for different reasons". This is all flavor, but of a stronger variety than currently exists.

Every race can still be an equally powerful warrior or mage, but now they will all be slightly different, with a little more character that better embodies our understanding of what it means to be an Orc or an Altmer. This isn't creating racial separation for the sake of separation, but for RP reasons. If you want to play a peaceful Orc healer, don't spend any perks on Berserker Rage, spend them on Restoration instead. The extra points you would get to spend on racial perks could be invested in other perk trees. I don't see any reason for anyone to feel compelled to play a certain race/class combo. And applying 'all this creativity' to everyone doesn't make sense. Should everyone have Eye of Night, Ancestor's Wrath, and Histskin if they want it? Racial abilities only make sense in the context of races. As far as I can see, the only build that would suffer from this mechanic are builds like: "I want to play a Bosmer that has Berserker Rage" or "I want to play a Breton that has Claws" or "I want to play an Imperial with Fire Resistance". You can't do any of those things as it is.

And JB, just to reassure you: there is no one here who needs you to hold their hand. Now that's ego I can salute.

Again, to me Jack, the "flavor" the races add is about as bold as water. When I boot up Skyrim, I actually feel the opposite of what you are getting at. I feel like there is no way for my character to "stand out" because every other character of every other race can do the exact same thing and do it with the exact same level of ability. To me, that "flavor" is bland because I feel like I'm just another cog in the wheel and nothing very important.

Seems a lot of the arguing boils down to "freedom vs. diversity". I find myself sympathizing with the diversity camp. A little constriction never hurted anyone. Why have races at all if there aren't any real differences other than looks? You could just leave the whole race thing to modders. The concept of racial differences adds another dimension to the game, and this game is in grave need of dimensions. More specifically, depth. Maximizing player freedom ultimately results in a static and shallow game world.

The problem is that if you have a "Racial Ability Perk Tree," what's going to be the route of all the perks? Am I going to have to unlock Histskin to get Highborn?

Moreover, how would you explain how a Nord would have "Claws" or "Histskin" or any of those other abilities that are clearly built upon different physiology?

I mean give each race its own perk tree that is only accessible to that race and a few additional perk points to spend that they don't have to spend on racial perks if they don't want to.

Essentially, you would have an Orc perk tree that allows you to invest a perk in Berserker Rage or Berserker Magic when you create your character. Then, later, you could choose to invest another perk in the same ability or invest it in the other one or spend it on a skill. Khajiit would have trees that include Claws, Eye of Night, enhanced smell, muffled movement when not wearing boots, etc. Argonians would have water breathing, different levels of Histskin, poison resistance, etc. You wouldn't be able to build a Nord with Claws. If you balanced the perks properly, an Argonian warrior would be as good as an Orc warrior, but for different reasons: Histskin, poison resistance, etc., instead of Berserker Rage. A Khajiit mage would be as good as an Altmer mage but for different reasons, etc. You'd have to figure out the perks and a do a bit of playtesting to balance them, but that task would be no different than balancing perk trees for other kinds of builds. In this case, you'd be using a race in place of a skill but the mechanics would be identical.

Personally, I'd love to be able to play a cat warrior that feels like a cat warrior, not because it would give me an advantage in combat over other races, but because when I fight as a Khajiit, I would actually feel like I'm a Khajiit. The mechanic is supposed to enhance RP without limiting options. Unless you want to be a Nord with claws, I don't see how it would limit anyone.

No offense, but I'd rather not have to plug three or four perks into a character to get racial abilities (like waterbreathing or night eye) that a character would have since birth.

Because those traits are more or less"class neutral. Although, one could argue they lean towards a stealth play style....if only Skyrim nights and dungeons were actually dark!

No offense taken.

All humans can learn how to swim. Not all humans know how to swim, and many drown because they don't know how. I don't see why waterbreathing couldn't work the same way for Argonians. If the Argonian never learns how to breath water, they drown. What if you were raised in the desert? Where would you learn it? Seeing in the dark could be a learned skill for Khajiit. Some Khajiit could be born with claws that aren't long enough, sharp enough, and strong enough to be used offensively. I don't see lacking any of these racial abilities as being inexplicable. Certainly not more implausible than a Nord with 50% frost resistance or an Imperial's 'magic shout'. (Incidentally, why didn't the Imperials just use Voice of the Emperor to calm the Nords into submission?)

And you'd be given extra perk points to invest in racial perks. They wouldn't come out of your normal perks, though you could invest them in skills if you wanted to. Net result is that you've lost nothing, but potentially gained something.

Edit: My apologies to the OP for completely hijacking the thread. I'll get down from my hobby-horse now.

Interesting idea, but I hate it. Racial abilities shouldn't be optional. Some Nords never "learned" to be genetically resistant to cold? Some cats never "learned" to see in the dark? Some amphibians never "learned" to be amphibious? You're killing me here.

I agree but I DO want a bigger difference in races.

It is creating racial separation for the sake of separation. You're setting artificial limitations for something that could easily not be limited and still be used in the same manner. It's quite simple but I'll restate. If you apply specific options for specific races that open up specific play styles for specific races then you're just creating racial separation for the sake of racial separation. I don't see how race as a limiting factor is particularly needed for the role playing reasons to be present. It's just something artificially set because someone is stuck on dated rulesets.

And you say "You can't do any of those things as it is", while you're right to an extent, it doesn't matter because the current racial abilities and bonuses aren't significant. They're not game changing or play style changing. The racial perk trees you suggest are. That's the difference.

As for the front heavy comment, it's as simple as choosing a race now makes sure you're stuck with their racial perk tree at the beginning of the game. You could argue day and night about all the races having equally useful perks and what have you but it doesn't change the fact that it's a front heavy decision. Might as well bring back classes and birthsigns, right? You know what? Lets not.

And there's no one who needs me to hold their hands? There's a reason why I made that statement. Make of that what you will. :Salutes:

Only if the limitation on classes are soft. What you described is perfect. I hate the notion that a Nord can't be a Mage or a High Elf can't be a Warrior. I get that genetics matter but an individual's genetics also matter. But these soft limitations are good as they still show the race difference. Not to mention that it gives races with genetic potential in certain classes to excel faster.

As for racial reactions, they should be VASTLY improved. I find it kind of absurd that the Stormcloaks will accept a High Elf just as fast as a Nord. Elves and Imperials should really be pushed harder during the recruitment test. The beast races should be shunned by non-important characters.

Skyrim should still do the "You can do anything" mindset. It should however, be much harder if you're going against the genetic norm.

It's realistic, immersive, and causes more dynamic balance between the races. After all, if you aren't genetically fit to draw things, it'll be much harder for you to learn how to draw than someone who comes from a long line of Leonardo Da Vinci people.

i agree besides skill bonuses there should be differences in health magicka and stamina between the races and maybe even different training speeds for skills like for instance orcs would learn combat skills quickly but learn stealth and magic skills slightly slower than other races.

It's not absurd at all. If an eskimo was born and raised in a tropical region and visited siberia mid-winter when they were thirty years old, would they find the experience easier or harder than an african who was born and raised in siberia? Many of the things we think about as racial traits (even in the real world) rarely even reach the level of genetic predisposition, but usually are an assumed adaptation to a normal -- as in normal for their race -- environment and culture.

And in the realm of fantasy, it's not hard to imagine that when argonians are hatched, their gills aren't any more fully developed than the rest of their bodies. When born in the black marsh, their gills develop as naturally as their limbs grow, whereas if born in the deserts of hammerfell, their gills may not grow to their potential from lack of use (a perk in a racial-tree, e.g., would represent the PC having stimulated their growth through use).

And just because a Khajiit has claws doesn't mean it's good at using them in combat. Again, their ability to use them as effective weapons comes from practice and use, which would have begun in childhood *if* they come from an active khajiit background.

And since Magician suggests that every player start with two or three perks to distribute, any player would be free to either invest one or more of those perks into their racial tree for a more typical racial background, or if the player chose to make an argonian who's a fish out of water (sorry, couldn't resist), they could ignore their exclusive waterbreathing trait at the beginning -- and even until end game if they wish.

I personally love the idea as it adds even more potential flavors to any RP.

The only thing I haven't seen mentioned so far is the lack of racial diversity in NPC's and how, for me, that reduces immersion. As far as I understand it, NPC's currently benefit from passive traits (e.g, fire resist for dunmers), but never utilize active traits -- when was the last time you saw an NPC orc use berserk? If I see an orc thug in HA with a 2-H, I should fear both his passive *and* active racial capabilities in that archetype, because if I let him get up close and personal, I better be prepared for him going berserk.

In this regard, if something like racial traits were setup like skill perks, NPC's should vary in their use of those traits somewhat. Maybe that orc thug could go berserk, maybe he can't, but either way, I better be prepared for it.

Edit: Actually now that I think about it, I'm wondering if NPCs should stay within usual racial abilities, regardless of whether the PC gets to choose -- that ability to choose is what helps us feel unique. Either way, it'd be nice to see NPCs benefit from the active traits and would help add depth to races as a whole.

I am feeling like I have just kept repeating myself in this thread, and some people agree with my opinion, and some people disagree, so I might as well go off at a tangent.


We have rules to impose artificial strictures which focus gameplay in everything from baseball to chess. Rules are pretty basic to game design.
Computer RPGs inherited DnD's races as a way to apply a layer of variables in a format that needed as many avenues to apply those variables as possible. DnD meshed game with story, but to be marketable it needed to be a game with rules that could remain consistent for consumers. The story part is generally the fun part, and while all of the rules and lists and numbers and categories and boundaries are necessary to make the story work, they are artificial. If there was a way to be inside the story without being constantly reminded of the boundaries - if the rules were as much of a background as the physics we pay little attention to in the real world - wouldn't it be more fun?

Single player role playing games are evolving. In the context of open world games, game engines and AI are developing less rule oriented challenges for players - as environment. Sure, Skyrim is still bound by formulae and a very finite set of options to achieve 'outcome A' or 'outcome B', but organic design that will eventually evolve to strip away the artificial feel of RPGs is progressive to me, not backward.

Regressing to a design where race A has cap X, and race B has cap Y is like hanging on to what you know because you are afraid to let it go. As The Magician has pointed out, we now have the perk system which can be used to introduce a vast variety of strategic choices. A system he/she describes could theoretically be designed to create many different role play options from early through mid game, but as I've stated previously my concerns are:

1. In my opinion, the choice of Race should not be a choice made because of Rules (not a strategic choice). It should be a choice made because of Story.
2. No matter how diverse the path to end game is, end game is inviolate. This is not a multiplayer game. There is no competition. If the player plays to the caps, they have the right to be the best at whatever they want to be best at. No matter what Race they've chosen.

Limiting a character's potential in the world through their race is like saying at the start of the game you need to roll your age and IQ, and you get stuck with their effects until you stop playing. And don't tell me that if an Orc gets a bonus that makes them strategically better as a Warrior, this is not a limitation for an Altmer.

An Orc is naturally born with better combat skills, no? Then why is he the same as my Altmer. My Orc should be better than my Altmer in combat at the endgame because they are natural fighters. Beserk isn't justice enough for that IMO. Altmer are not natural fighters, they are great magicka casters and SHOULD still have the magical weakness. Its really that simple. Doesn't stop me from making an awesome Altmer warrior. Yes, if I had picked Orc he would be "that much" better but it really shouldn't matter unless I'm playing to win, and if I'm playing to win, then why does it matter what races I am anyway. If I RP then my Altmer SHOULD be a lesser warrior than my orc warrior.

Everybody in a game is a stereotype?

All Altmers are better at magic? All Altmers are not good at fighting? No Altmer can learn to be a better fighter, no matter how hard they work at it?

All Altmers are born with magical prowess. Doesn't mean I can't be a magicless warrior but it does mean its not my natural trade. An Orc or Nord would do it better because they are born with combat prowess. My Orc can still be a mage but he wont be the best.

Yes, I'm saying that the Altmer ARE the best choice for a mage but like I said, if I'm RP'n I don't care about what negatives go with it. And if I'm playing to win I will pick an Orc for my warrior character because I want tot be the best. Not having racial differences significant enough to FEEL different is like having only one race but we still choose a birth sign.