Skyrim is worse than Oblivion in every way

[Commissar Draco]

High Smithing + One hand blades? More way to craft weapons making them more sharp (Higher Criticals) and balanced (higher AR)

High Heavy Armor skil + Smithing? Weak points in oponets armor lowering His AC... Come on Bethpizda I'm not payed to be creative... You DO.

Of course 90% of NPCs are hostile on sight outside Towns so...

 

[Utgard-Loki]

(actually, there seems to be one place where there is a destruction check involved - initial dialogue with J'Zargo)

there also is a few checks for the court mage in whiterun if you don't wait for the jarl to talk to him. *trivia*

 

[Bahamut]

Well, there is some logic to that given that your typical Falmer known as such is currently barely more than hideous, degenerate beast, so he might be willing to distance himself from the rest of the race even at the cost of adopting human nomenclature.

But it should be backwards really, reserwing Snow Elf for those pointy eared blind gollums, but guess the damage was done to revert it in DLC

Aside from very Speachcraft checks I spotted none, shame even F3 got them (misssused but still)... Bethpizda had to be too lazy to play FNV.

And what checks would you implement in Skyrim? Attributes are gone* and none of the skills but speechcraft are particularly relevant to dialogue. I could see a few checks using magic skills when talking with other wizards, but other than that?


*)

I really hoped they lerned something from their shitty fallout 3 besides slomo killcams, but mabye its good because we dont had to see their glorious INTELLIGENCE checks


Now i really look forward to Fallout 4 with SPECIAL removed

 

[DraQ]

Amway, I wrote a blog about Skyrim. Read it if you're a bit bored.

http://thebaneofqueequeg.blogspot.co.uk/2012/08/what-is-up-with-skyrim.html?m=1

I've already spotted some bullshit - for instance:

Skyrim breaks basic balancing restrictions that have been in place in RPGs since they began. There's a reason why mages aren't able to use heavy armour. Usually this is given as some gubbins involving "energies" but it comes down to game balancing. Somebody who is able to destroy vast areas of the world needs taking down a peg or two. You've got to give them some kind of vulnerability. Fighters can't cast spells and archers are bad in melee for exactly the same reason. Guess what? Skyrim gets rid of this. If you want to be a walking tank in heavy armour, shooting flames out of both hands then you go for it! There is absolutely nothing in the game to stop you, or even encourage you not to do this.

For starters, D&D restrictions are bullshit. They do not deal with the issue, just arbitrarily cut off perfectly legitimate options that may cause the issue to become apparent (and remember that even fucking Gandalf was wielding a sword).

Second, TES has dealt perfectly well with this issue while also doing away with arbitrary restrictions since at least Morrowind (since Daggerfall if we allow custom classes and player configured restrictions as it was perfectly possible to make spell slinging plate tank without crippling yourself).

Also, while removing attributes and forcing you to become a JoAT at start are both shitty, moronic design decisions, it generally pays off to specialize, especially since you can't get all the perks and level scaling (another moronic, shitty decision) waits for no one, so if you spread yourself to thin, you'll get pwnd. Of course this highlights how inept bethesduh is at achieving their own goals (build flexibility) but it's a case of two wrongs making a right.

Finally, while the amount of C&C should make Beth ashamed, the game still soundly beats oblivious in this regard as you at least get some, including major, if monotonous questline.

Of course you're perfectly right about lack of quest and faction restrictions, about menu and so on.

 

[Gord]

For starters, D&D restrictions are bullshit. They do not deal with the issue, just arbitrarily cut off perfectly legitimate options that may cause the issue to become apparent (and remember that even fucking Gandalf was wielding a sword).

Well, it's not an legitimate option if it's against the inherent rules and laws of the setting:
If there's a plausible (in-universe) explanation, this is hardly arbitrary.

If you are in any way interested in a balanced game, you will need some kind of restriction to prevent powergamer munchkin superhero characters that ultimately serve nothing more than provide an ego boost to the basement-dwelling neckbeard that came up with it.

There's the "natural" restriction in skill-point based systems - you usually can't do everything simply for the fact that there aren't enough possibilities (read: available exp) to increase your skills/talents far enough to become all-powerful (well, technically you can reach some very high values in most skills in TES, but at that point you have long-since become an unstoppable killing machine anyway, plus it's single-player only, so who cares?).
From a purely technical point of view, this might be enough, already.

Not all games govern everything through skills, though.
Even a skill-happy system like The Dark Eye doesn't have an armor skill, for example.
In that case you need to come up with something else.
To keep with the armor-wearing mage, this is usually the "magical energy doesn't like metal" argument - although some systems go for slightly modified ones, like the restriction of movement by armor hindering the execution of necessary gestures, etc. Meaning, while some of those systems might allow you to wear armor, it will result in more difficult skill checks (or less effective spells) when performing magic, or magic might be outright impossible in too-heavy armor.

 

[Tommers]

Heh. Point taken about Gandalf - but what I mean is that Skyrim allows (or even encourages) players to become game breakingly powerful, because it removes any balancing factors. I get what you're saying about level scaling and how it forces players to specialise (and what that shows about Bethesda's ability to implement their own ideas) but you need restrictions in order to enjoy something. And yes, I agree that TES has dealt with this perfectly well in the past, but it doesn't now. I've been reading other players on forums saying things like "OMG! I enchanted some armour that makes me completely invulnerable to spells!! This is great11!!!11" and I just think "fuck me, how boring would that be?" I mean yeah, level scaling makes it better to focus on a particular approach but is that it?

I suppose that traditional classes were there to separate roles within a party too - and you're on your own in TES, so they want one character to be able to do everything so that nobody misses any content.

And I must admit I did think of the civil war stuff that has consequences but you know, it fit a theme so I just went for it.

 

[ohWOW]

After civil war is over, you can't even wipe out rebellians, as their leaders in camps are still immortal, so fuck such consequences.

 

[Kahlis]

And what checks would you implement in Skyrim? Attributes are gone* and none of the skills but speechcraft are particularly relevant to dialogue. I could see a few checks using magic skills when talking with other wizards, but other than that?

They doomed themselves. We could've had nice pen-and-paper style encounters in dungeons, but reading text boxes is obviously not immersive enough for Bethesda's "core fans." You could wedge boulders with a strength check (or alternatively, try to move them with magic). A mix of agility and intelligence checks for trying to disarm or even jury-rig traps found in said dungeons. Or even have character-skill based arm wrestling in taverns using strength and endurance. But instead we got brawling, because it's SUPER MANLY NORDLIKE:

*left hook* *left hook* *right hook*
"Oh no, I'm losing!"
*drink potion*
*left hook* *right hook* *right hook* *left hook* *left hook* *left hook*
WINNER

The problem with Bethesda doesn't seem to be a dislike of RPG mechanics altogether, so much as it is the fact Todd thinks the full extent of player interaction in the game world boils down to killing things and bribing things. I wouldn't even expect him to know that skill checks are a thing, seeing as how his primary source of inspiration for Skyrim was Bioshock 2. He probably was too busy playing that to even notice New Vegas.

 

[DraQ]

Well, it's not an legitimate option if it's against the inherent rules and laws of the setting:
If there's a plausible (in-universe) explanation, this is hardly arbitrary.

And in what universe a mage is physically prevented from putting on a suit of armour or grabbing a sword with his hand (unless his intention is to put it in his inventory rather than wield it - swords are smart like this and can detect whether you intend to wield them or not, their hilts twisting into a knot or growing thorns if it's the former and you're a mage)? In what universe cleric is physically prevented from grabbing an edged weapon?

Sure, there might be adverse consequences - for example mage may be unable to cast while wearing a full plate, while cleric may piss off his god by using non-blunt weapon against people (nevermind that the source of this restriction was horribly off to begin with), there might be issue of item being simply incompatible with character's mode of operation or stats and thus more of a hindrance than help, but the act of wearing or wielding stuff should be perfectly possible.

There's the "natural" restriction in skill-point based systems - you usually can't do everything simply for the fact that there aren't enough possibilities (read: available exp) to increase your skills/talents far enough to become all-powerful (well, technically you can reach some very high values in most skills in TES, but at that point you have long-since become an unstoppable killing machine anyway, plus it's single-player only, so who cares?).

And it's also present in Skyrim, even moreso, as you have finite amount of perks, and there is tradeoff inherent in increasing three resource pools (previously derived attributes).

Not all games govern everything through skills, though.
Even a skill-happy system like The Dark Eye doesn't have an armor skill, for example.

I'm actually vehement opponent of armour skills*. Armour should have fixed (although modifable through wear or upgrades) stats and stuff like plate should be inherently more protective than leather. Choice of armour type and amount should be facilitated via stats and skills determining gameplay style. For example a monk relying on extreme mobility in combat or thief who sneaks a lot would be hindered more than helped by a plate, unless forced into typical mass head-on charge. Mage would typically be too scrawny to keep up essential minimum of mobility and stamina when adventuring in heavy armour, though experimental builds like an armoured guy who tries to remain stationary while casting a lot would be possible and potentially find their niche. Of course there would also be hybrids, but they wouldn't be as good at either fighting or casting as characters focused on either.

To keep with the armor-wearing mage, this is usually the "magical energy doesn't like metal" argument

Sure, but you need to go all the way with this one - metal jewellery would also harm spellcasting ability and there would be proliferation of alternative armours - I'm not speaking of just leather (and it's possible to make quite decent armour), but lacquered wood, bone, even more exotic ones like densely packed lattice of obsidian shards fastened to leather or ground down bones glued into layers a'la Morrowind.

Heh. Point taken about Gandalf - but what I mean is that Skyrim allows (or even encourages) players to become game breakingly powerful, because it removes any balancing factors.

It's better to have implicit tradeoffs than explicit restrictions and Skyrim actually has more effective ones than previous TES games, despite needless simplification, see above.

The main problem is that stats no longer affect content you can access like guild questlines, rewards and so on.

Of course there are also balance problems with stuff like crafting, but it's not like you couldn't make stupidly effective enchantments in DF, CE restore health in MW and >100% magic resist/chameleon in oblivious.

*) I'm opponent of passive or zero cost skills in general - like athletics, acrobatics, armour skills, possibly even sneak - in use based systems as they don't allow for effective anti-grind measures, so their role should be delegated to either base attributes (or some combination of thereof) or bonus perks to active skills.

 

[JarlFrank]

while cleric may piss off his god by using non-blunt weapon against people (nevermind that the source of this restriction was horribly off to begin with)

Well, it does make sense... kinda... if you look at the historical source. In the common Latin translation of the bible, "thou shalt not kill" was written as "thou shalt not spill blood", therefore catholic clerics who went to war for their liege used blunt weapons because they're less likely to spill blood. Therefore no sin when killing. MAKES PERFECT SENSE DOESN'T IT?

Then again, I'd fucking love to see a religion in a fantasy RPG where the members try to as creatively circumvent rules as the Catholic clergy often did. Also a fantasy religion where the reaction of a god isn't always so clearly apparent, and where you can even doubt the existance of the gods instead of the gods always directly intervening in things.

Also, about balance of character classes - who gives a fuck? It's a single player game. So, if magic is overpowered, then it's overpowered, as long as some enemies are still challening - especially magic-using ones, why should I care? If the warrior and thief paths feel different enough from the mage path, or even offer some unique content, that's a lot more of a reason for me to try these paths even if they're underpowered than if they were all similar. Balance in a single player game isn't important - just make sure every character is equally challenging and fun to play.

 

[Gord]

And in what universe a mage is physically prevented from putting on a suit of armour or grabbing a sword with his hand (unless his intention is to put it in his inventory rather than wield it - swords are smart like this and can detect whether you intend to wield them or not, their hilts twisting into a knot or growing thorns if it's the former and you're a mage)? In what universe cleric is physically prevented from grabbing an edged weapon?

More often than not this is more a problem of implementation in the computer games than an explicit rule stating "mages have a mental blockade that forbids them to touch swords" - although actually a mental blockade and breaking it could be a cool thing from a lore-based point of view, see e.g. Wellington Yueh's Suk conditioning in Dune.

I'm actually vehement opponent of armour skills*. Armour should have fixed (although modifable through wear or upgrades) stats and stuff like plate should be inherently more protective than leather.

If it has a skill it should govern mobility or potential effects on fighting skills, not the effectivenes of the armor.

To keep with the armor-wearing mage, this is usually the "magical energy doesn't like metal" argument

Sure, but you need to go all the way with this one - metal jewellery would also harm spellcasting ability and there would be proliferation of alternative armours - I'm not speaking of just leather (and it's possible to make quite decent armour), but lacquered wood, bone, even more exotic ones like densely packed lattice of obsidian shards fastened to leather or ground down bones glued into layers a'la Morrowind.

This can be easily governed by the total amount, type and maybe position of metal - noble (or maybe non-magnetic, or whatever you prefer) metals might be ok, an iron helmet on your head might be worse than an iron boot. A ring or a small necklace will be negligible. Other materials are indeed a good idea, maybe with the exception of restricting movement which might be necessary to cast some spells.
Of course one might also just say that everything hinders casting, except clothes made from the silk of a rare moth living only in the far-away lands of De'Usex Maci-na.

Finaly, there's also law/tradition/pride.
To take an example from The Dark Eye again (simply because I know it best):
Mages aren't allowed to wear most weapons like swords due to their laws and traditions (with some few exeptions) and most wouldn't wear armor for very similar reasons.
But with the exceptions of iron-rich or stiff armors, there's probably no direct detrimental effect from doing so.

 

[DraQ]

They doomed themselves. We could've had nice pen-and-paper style encounters in dungeons, but reading text boxes is obviously not immersive enough for Bethesda's "core fans." You could wedge boulders with a strength check (or alternatively, try to move them with magic).

Why so outdated? There's no need for textboxes or alienating your "core fags".

How about this instead:

1. You need some attributes (don't throw them away you moron!) and physics engine (ok, you have that one), you will also need most of your old spell system.

2. Make it so that while one of the move controls is pressed character accelerates in that direction at rate dependent on strength times traction divided by the sum of mass of character's body and inventory, until it reaches velocity determined by their speed score, make this work via forces acting on character's body in simplified manner as if it was a point mass (you don't want it ragdolling and you probably don't want to go overboard and make a successor to Cortex Command although that would be nice) - you already have engine that can do that pretty much automatically.

3. In any physics engine boulders will have mass and there will be certain minimum amount of force that's needed till object resting on some surface starts moving on given surface of given inclination.

4. Because of 2. and 3. pushing against boulder will exert force proportional to character's strength, which will make it budge or not depending on your strength score.

5. Casting feather on the boulder will reduce either its weight or mass (preferably the former) so it will be easier to move due to less static friction.

6. You don't need fucking textboxes, or scripting, you just drop the boulder of desired weight wherever you want it in the world and it will work, complete with visual cues regarding how well player is doing courtesy of your physical engine you already have.

while cleric may piss off his god by using non-blunt weapon against people (nevermind that the source of this restriction was horribly off to begin with)

Well, it does make sense... kinda... if you look at the historical source. In the common Latin translation of the bible, "thou shalt not kill" was written as "thou shalt not spill blood", therefore catholic clerics who went to war for their liege used blunt weapons because they're less likely to spill blood. Therefore no sin when killing. MAKES PERFECT SENSE DOESN'T IT?

Well, OTOH Catholic clergy, including archbishops, didn't have any problems running around with fucking swords and other sharp weapons during crusades, and if you brain someone with a mace they will likely splatter quite a lot, even if it isn't spiked or flanged one.

although actually a mental blockade and breaking it could be a cool thing from a lore-based point of view, see e.g. Wellington Yueh's Suk conditioning in Dune.

Keyword being "breaking".

If it has a skill it should govern mobility or potential effects on fighting skills, not the effectivenes of the armor.

It would still be hard to control growth of the skill in use-based system. Use based and passive skills simply don't go together very well.

Use-based works best with skills that have assessable success chance for each use.

This can be easily governed by the total amount, type and maybe position of metal - noble (or maybe non-magnetic, or whatever you prefer) metals might be ok, an iron helmet on your head might be worse than an iron boot. A ring or a small necklace will be negligible.

As long as it leads to an interesting mechanics rather than derpy "no, u cant" - why the fuck not?

Other materials are indeed a good idea, maybe with the exception of restricting movement which might be necessary to cast some spells.

Or to perform adequately in combat.

Finaly, there's also law/tradition/pride.

That's shitty excuse because it doesn't account for outliers and, if forbidden combo is extremely practical (and balancing effect of forbidding it conversely most useful) then the law/tradition/pride would quickly yield to obvious superiority of the opposite or be crushed by those who are less lawful/traditional/proud, but more opportunistic and generally smarter.

 

[JarlFrank]

But the crusades were a special case, the pope said god would forgive all your sins if you killed tons of infidels in the holy land, so it was allowed.

Loopholes, man. Loopholes. Every religion needs those.

 

[ohWOW]

The funny thing is, the Christianity has some strong basis for statement above, so it's not quite a loophole. Yeah, there are some loopholes, but crusades aren't one of them.

 

[kris]

For starters, D&D restrictions are bullshit. They do not deal with the issue, just arbitrarily cut off perfectly legitimate options that may cause the issue to become apparent (and remember that even fucking Gandalf was wielding a sword).

Well, it's not an legitimate option if it's against the inherent rules and laws of the setting:
If there's a plausible (in-universe) explanation, this is hardly arbitrary.

Strength requirements. not one to be able to wield armour/weapons, but one to be able to do it properly. Or in case of armour movement penalty. As a mage in a real time game you sure don't want to be slow. Also, shooting lightning in an full metal armour should have its consequence.
Or encumbrence.

 

[DraQ]

Strength requirements. not one to be able to wield armour/weapons, but one to be able to do it properly.

Preferably some curve rather than simple threshold.

For example you'd need some pretty nifty str and agi scores to wield a polearm effectively and maintain your balance as a lone combatant (not just poke it in formation - everyone can do that).

Or in case of armour movement penalty. As a mage in a real time game you sure don't want to be slow.

It's also hard to maintain concentration and chant verbal components when you're panting and desperately trying to catch your breath, which is what your typical bookworm will be doing after jogging a short distance in 30kg plate.

A sword also doesn't do you much good if you don't know how to use it properly.

Also, shooting lightning in an full metal armour should have its consequence.

:D

 

[JarlFrank]

Personally, I think skill should matter a lot more. Low skill means you just don't know how to use the shit you're using, at least not the way it's supposed to be used, and that you're not used to using it.

A knight who has trained his entire life to wear plate armor can do things in it that most people would consider impossible in such heavy armour. Someone who's wearing it for his first time is going to feel really uncomfortable and notice the weight after just a little time. Also, he doesn't know how to properly move when wearing it, making all his movements awkward. Someone who is a sword master can do cool moves, but someone who only knows that the pointy end goes toward the enemy won't be able to do much against a skilled swordsman, instead he'll only clumsily beat at the enemy with his blade.

Thing is, such things can be implemented for awesome effect in action RPGs. See Gothic, where chaining a combo in melee combat is really fucking hard at the beginning and combat feels clumsy, but it becomes more and more fluid the higher your skill becomes.

 

[felipepepe]

Personally, I think skill should matter a lot more. Low skill means you just don't know how to use the shit you're using, at least not the way it's supposed to be used, and that you're not used to using it.

A knight who has trained his entire life to wear plate armor can do things in it that most people would consider impossible in such heavy armour. Someone who's wearing it for his first time is going to feel really uncomfortable and notice the weight after just a little time. Also, he doesn't know how to properly move when wearing it, making all his movements awkward. Someone who is a sword master can do cool moves, but someone who only knows that the pointy end goes toward the enemy won't be able to do much against a skilled swordsman, instead he'll only clumsily beat at the enemy with his blade.

SkyRe does some stuff like this, the Heavy Armor tree improves the bonus from the heavy armor, makes it lighter, you move faster on it and get stunned less. And it includes especiallization for each weapon, so there's a bit of C&C in you training your bro into a mace fighter but finding a good sword, not just "bigger DPS wins!" anymore.

 

[DraQ]

Personally, I think skill should matter a lot more. Low skill means you just don't know how to use the shit you're using, at least not the way it's supposed to be used, and that you're not used to using it.

Sure, but attributes should also matter.

A knight who has trained his entire life to wear plate armor can do things in it that most people would consider impossible in such heavy armour.

There is one little issue though regarding implementation of such skill in use-based system - it's hard to monitor progress of such skill. If a skill can be said to produce singular outcomes of defined probability (like single attack, single block or single casting of a spell), each attempt of using it can be assigned some value determining how much the user has learned from it, preventing obvious grinding exploits and unchecked skill increases, but it doesn't apply to skills like athletics or armour - what would be an instance of use and how would one determine different outcomes?

 

[JarlFrank]

What about giving you + to armour skill whenever you use another relevant skill while wearing such armour?

When fighting while clad in a full plate suit, you get ++ to heavy armour whenever you use your combat skills - so when you block you get + block and + HA, when you strike you get + melee and + HA, etc.

 

[Multi-headed Cow]

Fuck it, picked up Dawnguard for $15. Originally intended to wait for a lower price, but I do play the absolute fuck out of Bethesda RPGs (Even Oblivion god help me) more than most any others nowadays. And Skyrim was a damn sight better than Oblivion (And Fallout 3) so fuck it gonna kill me some vampires.

Plus I found a rape mod, so

 

[Manjuice Nutella]

I found a rape mod, so

link or didnt happen

EDIT: The most ridiculous thing about Dawnguard is its "one or the other path" execution:

Spoiler

even when you side with Dawnguard, you are able to;- nay, you are forced to become a Volkihar Vampire Lord in order to complete the Main Questline (that or soul trap yourself in order to enter the Soul Cairn) .

Oh, and after the main quest, regardless of your affiliation, you can blot out the sun anytime you want for a period of time.

 

[Erzherzog]

I figure wearing armor should impede the use of other skills. Such as, swinging a sword or blocking or using magic should be more difficult, and as you improve, wearing armor impedes your other skills less.

At any rate, armor is shitty when tied to a skill system. I generally prefer it to be derived from attributes. I would say tying it into a feat system is decent too but on second thought, no.

Fuck it, picked up Dawnguard for $15.

Yeah, I bought it, too.

It's simply more content for Skyrim, nothing game changing. The Soul Cairn is interesting in concept, it's more or less a non-linear huge dungeon, but at the end of the day it's just not that good. All you really do is run around and beat up on Bonemen all day.

 

[Manjuice Nutella]

All you really do is run around and beat up on Bonemen all day.

That and

Spoiler

 

[felipepepe]

EDIT: The most ridiculous thing about Dawnguard is its "one or the other path" execution

I hated that on the original quest line... both factions are douches, the only BRO in the whole Skyrim is the Jarl of Whiterun, yet you have no choice in the Stormcloak questline besides attacking him... I was emmotionlly engaged and got very dissapointed in myself when he said "You...I expected more of you, dragonborn..."

FFS, I should be able to betray factions at will! Like taking the crown to the Imperials or something... shitty RPG...