i disagree, they are only specialization perks if they were groups in a similar section, since they are given the same importance as all perks, you cant call them specialization, or you have to call all them specialization which neutralizes the point regardless.

and its a glaring flaw in many rpg's, its not fun to do more damage if it looks exactly the same, but given new abilities that alters how you do said skill, is fun

It doesn't make any kind of sense that I can up a level from picking a lock and then put that perk in blocking.

I agree

beating the game is as easy as smithing-alchemy-dual weilding-heavy armor

while the fun perks end up unused because wipping out the oposition is the priority

I think they should have made perks availlable through quests of increasing difficulty,
where someone tag along and make sure you use said skill (or even a specific weapon or spell)

If you lock perks in to a particular tree, then you need to give out more perks and have more levels to do so.

Not exactly. A self-control argument is someone eating too much and getting fat.

What we're talking about is maintaining the spirit of the game. Just look at what gets banned in various sports. You see salary caps in football to keep rich teams from buying championships. Materials are banned from certain gear to keep people from engineering an unfair advantage like with super golf balls or super clubs. There is a max speed for race cars with the restrictor plates.

Consider exploits like mortal kombat where you could bomb a guy into the corner and keep him reeling until death. That's a cheap move and gentlemen don't play that way but it frankly shouldn't have been in the game to begin with.

Technically speaking, anyone on a console could hack the game file and give himself über everything immediately. That's not satisfying. We want to get to that spot by earning it. But when the mechanics are broken, what's the difference between playing, grinding and exploiting?

How does this even address my post? Are you seriously arguing that Bethesda has to restrict content and leveling so that we will have the fun it dictates? Sandbox games should be about self-control and doing what you want to do. If you make the choice to level your character in such a way that the game is not challenging that is your choice.
Every example you listed is a competition between multiple people or multiple teams. Skyrim obviously does not meet the same criteria and not just in a semantic sense; there is significant difference where there is no competition. My enjoyment is my own, I set the parameters in the game. You will not have the same experience I have with the game. I can drone on about what I find most satisfying about the game but that's not the point of this post. The self-control argument does apply because you set the parameters of game play you can enter console commands to give you everything in the game. But what you are advocating is that Bethesda needs to limit content because you can't control yourself. The mechanics of the game are not broken, you don't need smithing, enchantment, or alchemy, to play the game at is most challenging levels.


TL DR: The difference between playing the game and grinding is the difference between forging a 1000 daggers (grinding) and clearing 100 dungeons (playing the game).

oh its another one of these threads, " skyrim is not an rpg because....." I stopped reading after that. Its new, its different, they will learn from this game hopefully and combine the system from fallout and skyrim, using the best features of the two games, move on, and for the love of sithis, stop these ultra redundant posts. You are beating a dead horse that has been revived, burnt into ashes, re assimilated, and blasted to oblivion.

If you continuously smith iron daggers you will get better at smithing. You may not ever become a true master until you take your knowledge and begin experimenting with new techniques but your general technique and aptitude will definietly increase. A guy building spec homes for 15 years may not be able to initially compare to master amish house builder but the formers years spent bullding spec homes will greatly have increased his general aptitude for building and upon approaching new building techniques will be able to advance much more quickly than someone with no experience.

My problem with the Perk System is that it allows you to completely negate the weight behind going with one particular thing or another. A Perk that allows Heavy Armor to weigh nothing negates the disadvantage of using Heavy Armor in the first place.

They had the same effect in oblivion, when you got to level 70, it weighted nothing, and didnt hinder you. It was just automatic tho.

True, but then... that's level 70. If you put all your Perks into Heavy Armor on each Level Up, I wouldn't be surprised if you could make your Heavy Armor weightless by Level 20.

You can also negate your speed disadvantage with Perks if I remember correctly.

Yeah but you didnt even need armor in Oblivion. Clothes enchanted with shield was all you needed to be godlike. At least in Skyrim armor has a use and there is a restriction on the max you can have.

Wait, I thought I read somewhere that the wieght perk for heavy armor did not remove the actual wieght from the inventory but just made you faster and more silent with it.

I think its on the guide, I will check later.

The problem with perks & skills is that everyone seems to be obsessed with considering everything from the standpoint of "end game".

Light Armor skill is useless because 70 Hvy Armor perk makes it weightless.
Magic reduction is useless because 100 Enchanting.
________ is useless because .


Here's the thing.

1) These features weren't designed around the fact that certain specific (frequently very involved) things might make them no longer useful.

2) Those perks were still useful while you were playing the earlier stages of the game.
? 100 Enchanting made your mana cost zero? That's fine, the 50% cost spells let you play/cast/survive long enough to get to that 100 Enchanting.
? Craft Dragon Armor makes Craft Glass Armor useless? No, because a.) you got use out of your Glass Armor for a range of levels until you got to Dragon armor, and b.) the perk also had the feature of "unlocks next perk up tree". That's part of what you're paying for.



The journey is important too - the destination isn't all that matters. Who cares if Skill/Item/Tactic/Expense X is no longer useful at level 50 - it got you there.

That's the puzzling part about some of these complaints. It's like they assume only at maximum level matters.

It's a good thing people don't have restrictor plates. Cause it would be nonsensical to assume that lithe, acrobatic, unarmored people move at the same speed as fully armored tanks that have never sprinted further than 50 ft....

Oh wait...

ill clear this up, ahem.....its the first time bethesda has done ANYTHING like this so its not going to be 100%, but its way better than the old leveling system by far. and how is this streamline "pick up and play"?? how many rpgs do this? thought so, this sytems allowes you to define your class as you play creating new playstyles as you level and not encouraging crappy menu. sorry your points are good but its somthing we all know by playing the game.

Yeah I think the perk system was poorly implemented. Not entirely for the same reasons, but still similar ideas.

I think too many perks svck and or are boring.

I think the perk tree system limited perk design far too much. no multiple skill perks, no general perks with no skill requirement, far too similar builds since you have to take the previous perk with no options to get the higher perks(They could of had 4 or 5 perks per tier any of which would allow you to get to higher level perks)

The 1 perk per level design does not work well with a system where the majority of power comes from the perks and not skill advancement. You bump into 2 primary problems.

One as you are perk advancing a skill other skills that you are improving are not really improving, so your shield skill for example is not improving on your sword and shield guy even though you have put hours upon hours into improving it since you might be putting perks into one handed, heavy armor, smithing and just have not had the time to get any into your shield skill yet. Improving the skill and investing time into it should you know actually improve the skill.

Second it turns a wide assortment of skills into pointless grind skills, which is bad on two levels one it is a poorly designed power level system where you are improving your one handed by improving your destruction skill, and two assuming level 50 you just might not have the perks to invest into a skill but you may have wanted to put time into that skill and for no gain which made the improving of that skill not just a grind but a pointless grind.

If they wanted one perk per level they should have the meat and potatoes of the skill come from raising the skill and the perks would add well perks extra bonuses that would make your sword not just hit hard, but in new and unique ways. If they wanted the power to come from the perks you should gain perks not by your character level but by the skills level.

Personally I'd of gone with 1 perk per level and not had perk trees at all. Some perks would of had requirements, some wouldn't, some would cover multiple skills some would be about a focus in a single skill and the goal of all the perks would have been to add new and interesting features and not be a substitute for skill advancement. A quick not fleshed out example of a multiskill perk a perk that required one handed and destruction skills of 25 a piece, your X power attacks gain Y points of elemental damage and cost magicka instead of stamina. To me that is a hell of a lot more interesting than one handed weapons do 20% more damage 5 times.

Edit to add. This isn't to say I wish they had not added perks, I do think they are a good idea, just that they were not implemented right.

,Exactly. I have five characters currently in play, and only one of them uses enchanting, and she doesn't wear armor. Let's not take away different ways of doing things, otherwise you will only be able to create one style of play, and replaying is nerfed.

You have some very good points, OP. That said, even though it isn't perfect it is still a huge step forwards. Let's just hope they se what they did wrong and improve it in the next game.

Which would svck.

Pretty much all of my characters Enchant, because it tends to be necessary for how I play, however I would never want Enchanting to be mandatory because then my characters that don't use it would be royally screwed.

Yup. Perks were a good add, they were done wrong in a few ways but that can be fixed and improved. Lets hope they don;t go cut happy again and remove perks entirely from ES 6.

You don't move from the same spot when you grind, and that's extremely boring

And I know how grinding feels. I grind my Smithing by forging hundreds of Iron Daggers, and Speech by abusing that guy in Riften. It is boring as hell

Still, it's there for those who wants to grind. It's not satisfying? Try to tell that for the guys who do it: they get to the max level much faster than you

The problem with your example is that clearing 100 dungeons will NOT improve your smithing skill, so your example is 100% moot.
To improve your smithing, you need to forge that 1000 daggers. Maybe there's a dungeon or two in between each batch, maybe you get the materials from dungeon clearing, but you'll have to get to that number eventually