Elder scrolls- two steps forward, two steps back?

[WoW Killer]

One of the biggest fallacies I see with gaming in general is people trying to say "well there were 10 weapons types in X games, but only 5 in this one, so its dumbed down/simplified", when in reality, those 5 weapons in the newer game, do more mechanically then the 10 weapons from past games did.

Yes, very much. Every melee weapon in Morrowind was the same. They had different damage amounts for different attacks, but you always used the most powerful attack at each and every opportunity regardless of the weapon (and there's even an option to automate this). So you only have three distinct mechanics: melee, archery, and magic. Three mechanics. In Skyrim you have six distinct mechanics: two-hand, sword/board, duel-wield, battle mage, archery, and magic (not even including one-hand + free-hand). But still you get post after post lamenting that Greatsword and Greataxe don't have separate progression bars, or that Spears aren't in the game any more.

 

[SajuukKhar]

Yes, very much. Every melee weapon in Morrowind was the same. They had different damage amounts for different attacks, but you always used the most powerful attack at each and every opportunity regardless of the weapon (and there's even an option to automate this). So you only have three distinct mechanics: melee, archery, and magic. Three mechanics. In Skyrim you have six distinct mechanics: two-hand, sword/board, duel-wield, battle mage, archery, and magic (not even including one-hand + free-hand). But still you get post after post lamenting that Greatsword and Greataxe don't have separate progression bars, or that Spears aren't in the game any more.

Not to mention the fact that
-Axes do bleed damage
-Maces have armor piercing powers
-Swords do bonus critical damage
-Bows can stagger
weapon mechanics that didn't exist in Morrowind.

 

[The_Lost_King]

Oh no it takes the magic out of magic! that is a bull shit answer in my opinion. The magic doesn't feel like "an arcane force" seeing as in later levels a daedric sword does more damage than your fiireball. Spell making would fix that. Plus I want to be able to make cool spells liek a flame spell that can calm people down. Plus the mages talk about making spells and I can't make one. That is complete bull.

The highest fire damage a vanilla weapon does is 30, while the base fireball spell does 40, and with perks, it does 60. Even the fire spell right below it, firebolt, does 25 base damage, and with perks it does 37.

Generic Magic Weapons - http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Skyrim:Generic_Magic_Weapons#Fire_Damage
Destruction spells - http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Skyrimestruction#Spells

I wasn't taking about frie damage. I was talking about over all damage. That Daedric Great Sword with 30 fire damage does 24 damage on top of that, plus smithing which can increase the damage to crazy high numbers while there is no enchant that can do that to spells

Plus I want to be able to make cool spells liek a flame spell that can calm people down.

That is exactly why they removed it. Smithing/Enchanting/Alchemy exploits only just take the already existing mechanics to higher levels. Spellmaking allows for abusive new mechanics such a damage while calm spells to be made.

That was the fun of spellmaking though. Plus a level six character can make a sword that does a million some damage. How is that less broken?

 

[SajuukKhar]

I wasn't taking about frie damage. I was talking about over all damage. That Daedric Great Sword with 30 fire damage does 24 damage on top of that, plus smithing which can increase the damage to crazy high numbers while there is no enchant that can do that to spells

The tradeoff is though that swords require you to get closer to enemies to damage them, you do more damage, but set yourself up to take more damage. Spells do less damage, but since you sit back you have a lesser chance of getting hit, and can take more time dealing with enemies.

Although I do admit there should be a +destruction damage enchant.

That was the fun of spellmaking though. Plus a level six character can make a sword that does a million some damage. How is that less broken?

Getting a 1 million damage sword requires that you exploit alchemy and enchanting to an absurd level, which requires significant time, and a number of perks, to pull off. You actually have to use a large number of the limit number of perks you get in order to exploit smithing that high, which can only be done by someone who power-games, and that is their choice to power-game.

Spell making requires nothing to exploit, it just IS exploitable. It's TOO easy to break.

Seriously though, if you go onto some of the more specialized/hardcore RPG sites, Daggerfall might be the most loved ES game over Morrowind. It's pretty close though and def those 2 games more than any others.

I've been to those sites before, and frankly, they are worse then the Morrowind nostalgia people, they are everything wrong with videogame players nowadays.

Those "hardcore" RPG sites are filled with people stuck in the past, using obsolete systems, and hating on the current gen because it is different. they are the "old man who hates the younger generations music" stereotype defined.

Dice-roll combat only exists in the D&d board game because you cant recreate real-time combat against dragons IRL, games had a similar limitation during the old-days, which is why they needed it, but those technological limitations are gone, and thus it isn;t needed. Similarly, attribute systems only exist in D&D boardgame because the boardgame cant accurately simulate your powers, game also had a similar limitations, which now, no longer exist. D&D, and its ilk, are only "complex" because technology sucked so much to where it couldn't properly reflect a player's ability so they have to create proxy systems to simulate it.

However, due to technological progress, those proxy systems are no longer needed, and making games in that style just because you like it more is only the same as using a old 1980' brick cellphone and calling it "complex" because it is harder to use, sure its more complex, but that's only because its so out-of-date.

I have no desire to see the return of old-school RPG systems that only existed due to technological limitations outside of a few niche retro games. I would much rather play an RPG based on MY ability, not come computer throwing up RNG BS that takes most of the game out of my hands.

 

[The_Lost_King]

I wasn't taking about frie damage. I was talking about over all damage. That Daedric Great Sword with 30 fire damage does 24 damage on top of that, plus smithing which can increase the damage to crazy high numbers while there is no enchant that can do that to spells

The tradeoff is though that swords require you to get closer to enemies to damage them, you do more damage, but set yourself up to take more damage. Spells do less damage, but since you sit back you have a lesser chance of getting hit, and can take more time dealing with enemies.

Although I do admit there should be a +destruction damage enchant.

While that is a valid argument it doesn't warrant an extra 40 damage, plus magic requires magicka while swinging around a heavy greatsword requires nothing(not even stamina unless you do a power attack).

Also in Dragon Age: Origins, mages were still able to feel powerfull and feel more powerfull at higher levels and this felt like true arcane force and you actually compared yourself favorably to that warrior guy over there. While in Skyrim
you somehow feel weaker as the game progresses compared to that warrior guy over there. Spell Creation could fix this because you could create spells equal to the warriors damage or even greater than if you want to go that way. Spell making gives you freedom that the mage lacks, well he atleast lacks freedom in my opinion, however it would still be more freedom.

That was the fun of spellmaking though. Plus a level six character can make a sword that does a million some damage. How is that less broken?

Getting a 1 million damage sword requires that you exploit alchemy and enchanting to an absurd level, which requires significant time, and a number of perks, to pull off.

You actually have to use a large number of the limit number of perks you get in order to exploit smithing that high, which can only be done by someone who power-games, and that is their choice to power-game.

Spell making requires nothing to exploit, it just IS exploitable.[/quote]
an exploit is an exploit whether is is easy or not. Those who won't won't. Plus it is as ingle player game. What the fuck does it matter if I use an exploit. also to paraphrase your argument, an exploit of the spell making system is only done by someone who exploits, and that is thier choice to use exploits.

 

[SajuukKhar]

While in Skyrim you somehow feel weaker as the game progresses compared to that warrior guy over there. Spell Creation could fix this because you could create spells equal to the warriors damage or even greater than if you want to go that way. Spell making gives you freedom that the mage lacks, well he atleast lacks freedom in my opinion, however it would still be more freedom.

I will admit that Skyrim's destruction magic system is broken. However, spellmaking is not needed to fix it.

To fix Skyrim's destruction magic it needs to
1. Scale as you level your destruction skill, as sword damage does when you raise your one-handed skills. This would cancel out the additional damage swords have
2. Have +destruction damage enchants

an exploit is an exploit whether is is easy or not. Those who won't won't. Plus it is as ingle player game. What the fuck does it matter if I use an exploit. also to paraphrase your argument, an exploit of the spell making system is only done by someone who exploits, and that is thier choice to use exploits.

If you are going to exploit, then there should at least be some consequence for it. Being the "smith anything to X" god exploit requires you spend many perk points, if they could create a similar system for spell making, requiring you to spend many perk points in order to be able to exploit it, I would gladly accept it.

There is also the fact that such exploitative spellmkaing ruins the believability of the world. If making a spell that could one-hit kill Vivec, and immortal god-king, was possible, then Vivec would have been dead long ago. A game's systems should at least somewhat reflect the lore of the world, or else you end up creating a game that doesn't match the world the game itself is trying to pass off.

 

[SajuukKhar]

Action games have been around forever.

Except during the time when technological limitations prevented action heavy RPGs from working well.

The only person who is "spewing nonsense" are people who deny the reason why D&D is the way it is.

D&D the boardgame only exists in the form it does because it is impossible to accurately simulate a person's ability in a boardgame, and thus the use of proxy systems is needed, not because it is some holy-pure-and sent by god-perfect RPG system, and had it been possible to accurately simulate a person's ability in a boardgame, there is no doubt it would have been made that way.

and video-games that use the D&D system only do so because
1. Video games were unable to do large scale RPgs in any other form and not suck chunks.
2. Because people hate change and will cling onto systems, no matter how outdated, simply because they are more use to it, and not because they are more "deep" or "complex".

And that will never stop being fact.

 

[SajuukKhar]

Fact only in the world of Khar.

Actually its fact in the word of anyone who takes an objective look at D&D, its systems, and why its systems exist in the form that they do.

 

[Thoric485]

I'd say it's two steps forward, one step back, which is far better than most long-running video game franchises. And it has a very active modding community to inject additional variety and complexity into the games.

 

[The_Lost_King]

While in Skyrim you somehow feel weaker as the game progresses compared to that warrior guy over there. Spell Creation could fix this because you could create spells equal to the warriors damage or even greater than if you want to go that way. Spell making gives you freedom that the mage lacks, well he atleast lacks freedom in my opinion, however it would still be more freedom.

I will admit that Skyrim's destruction magic system is broken. However, spellmaking is not needed to fix it.

To fix Skyrim's destruction magic it needs to
1. Scale as you level your destruction skill, as sword damage does when you raise your one-handed skills. This would cancel out the additional damage swords have
2. Have +destruction damage enchants

Ok Yes that would fix the Destruction damage, I will admit that.However, it still wouldn't be as fun as it would be with spell making. Like I said it lacks the freedom.

an exploit is an exploit whether is is easy or not. Those who won't won't. Plus it is as ingle player game. What the fuck does it matter if I use an exploit. also to paraphrase your argument, an exploit of the spell making system is only done by someone who exploits, and that is thier choice to use exploits.

If you are going to exploit, then there should at least be some consequence for it. Being the "smith anything to X" god exploit requires you spend many perk points, if they could create a similar system for spell making, requiring you to spend many perk points in order to be able to exploit it, I would gladly accept it.[/quote]
Well the higher damage speels usually use a lot of magicka so you have to be a pretty hight level to use them unless you are using other , enchanting exploits which you need perks for. Happy?

There is also the fact that such exploitative spellmkaing ruins the believability of the world. If making a spell that could one-hit kill Vivec, and immortal god-king, was possible, then Vivec would have been dead long ago. A game's systems should at least somewhat reflect the lore of the world, or else you end up creating a game that doesn't match the world the game itself is trying to pass off.

You could easily replace spellmakingwith smithing and 1 hit spell with a million damage sword.

 

[SajuukKhar]

Well the higher damage speels usually use a lot of magicka so you have to be a pretty hight level to use them unless you are using other , enchanting exploits which you need perks for. Happy?

They tried that with Oblivion's spell making system, and people were still able to make spells that paralyzed people for like two full minutes, and did 10 damage a second each second for those two minutes, and that cost nearly nothing.

You could easily replace spellmakingwith smithing and 1 hit spell with a million damage sword.

Smithing by itself doesn't make swords OP, 100 smithing skill+dragon smithing perk, can only take a Dragonbone sword up to 75 damage, and even with 3 +25% smithign items, it only goes up to 100, which is low considering most higher level Drauger have 1000+ hp, many higher level Falmer have like 900, and higher level dragons have 3000+. Smithing+alchemy+enchanting exploits combined with a butt ton of perks, and potions, and enchanted objects,make smithing OP. But each of those skills in itself isn't.

There also is a very large difference between just making a overpwoered spell, and power gaming with a bunch of specially made items and potions in order to do something like smithing exploits.

 

[zehydra]

The only thing I disagreed with was the Skyrim stat/perk trees. I much prefer that system than the arbitrary increase in points to particular skills. Morrowind had a terrible stat system.

 

[WoW Killer]

Not to mention the fact that
-Axes do bleed damage
-Maces have armor piercing powers
-Swords do bonus critical damage

Well I wouldn't dwell too much on those differences personally, as they're all passive effects. More important for me is that say a Sword and a Greatsword are genuinely different playstyles, and whether you use a shield or not is a mechanically different thing. This wasn't true in Morrowind.

While in Skyrim
you somehow feel weaker as the game progresses compared to that warrior guy over there. Spell Creation could fix this because you could create spells equal to the warriors damage or even greater than if you want to go that way. Spell making gives you freedom that the mage lacks, well he atleast lacks freedom in my opinion, however it would still be more freedom.

The problem I had with spell creation was that there was little use in moderation. If you have 100 Magicka then there's no point in making a spell that costs 50 Magicka and two shots a target as opposed to a spell that costs 100 Magicka and one shots them. It felt like a very linear exercise like "I've got an extra 10 Magicka now, I'd better recreate all these identical spells making them a bit more powerful". I would like to see a proper spell creation system for future games, but it's not like the old system was anything to cry about losing. It sounded like a great idea, but it didn't actually do anything mechanically different.

The only thing I disagreed with was the Skyrim stat/perk trees. I much prefer that system than the arbitrary increase in points to particular skills. Morrowind had a terrible stat system.

Just to reiterate: Yes! This was a big deal for me, and I know I'm not the only one.

If we're on the subject of D&D, has anybody played much of DDO? That's the most mechanically faithful video game representation I've seen. It might not be the best example of RNG versus skill mechanics though, as it has its own problems aside from RNG. If you start to introduce bigger numbers from the inevitable power creep into the D20 system then you start to see a lot of the mechanics break down. But that isn't the RNG basis bringing it down, and other RNG based mechanics would still work out.

 

[SajuukKhar]

Well I wouldn't dwell too much on those differences personally, as they're all passive effects. More important for me is that say a Sword and a Greatsword are genuinely different playstyles, and whether you use a shield or not is a mechanically different thing. This wasn't true in Morrowind.

I get what you are saying, I was just trying to show that, on top of one handed, two handed, dual weilding, etc. actually being different in Skyrim, there is another layer on top of that in giving weapons special effects like that, that add onto the increased diversity of weapons.

 

[BreakfastMan]

Plus I want to be able to make cool spells liek a flame spell that can calm people down.

That is exactly why they removed it. Smithing/Enchanting/Alchemy exploits only just take the already existing mechanics to higher levels. Spellmaking allows for abusive new mechanics such a damage while calm spells to be made.

Hey, what can I say, I like having interesting choices that can exploit the system. I like finding creative new ways to solve problems and conquer challenges. That is kind of the point of the emergent gameplay that RPGs do so well.

OT: Yeah, the Elder Scrolls series likes to experiment and change a lot with each entry. I really like that about them though; unlike many games, they are not averse to change, sometimes radical change, and no two games in the series are alike. I really wouldn't have it any other way. Still, I would like it if they merged all the most interesting/best parts of previous games into one big game, but oh well. XD

 

[Baralak]

-The back story was neutralised and bland. The main storyline was incredibly generic. Whereas morrowind had grey areas of "did vivec realy kill nerevar?"

Vivec admits to killing Nerevar in the 36 lessons of vivec
/quote]

Yeah, but the books in-game are 99% propoganda, and not entirely true.

 

[Burst6]

Yes, very much. Every melee weapon in Morrowind was the same. They had different damage amounts for different attacks, but you always used the most powerful attack at each and every opportunity regardless of the weapon (and there's even an option to automate this). So you only have three distinct mechanics: melee, archery, and magic. Three mechanics. In Skyrim you have six distinct mechanics: two-hand, sword/board, duel-wield, battle mage, archery, and magic (not even including one-hand + free-hand). But still you get post after post lamenting that Greatsword and Greataxe don't have separate progression bars, or that Spears aren't in the game any more.

The thing i hate most about oblivion and skyrim is that they're in a very very uncomfortable position.

While earlier games had a lot of RPG depth, the modern games removed all that depth and made a very half assed attempt to include action. The combat is basically skilless and usually boils down to going up to someone and hitting them repeatedly, so all those nice new melee styles that are available mean almost nothing. The only difference between most of the melee weapon types is whether you're trading damage for the ability to block well.

In a lot of action RPG's the weapons are very different. In, say Dragons Dogma, the sword and shield lets you attack faster, climb monsters quicker, attack while defending at the same time, taunt enemies to attack you, hold enemies in place while doing large damage, easily take down flying enemies, do evasive attacks and more. And this is only for one class. Another class can use their shields to enchant weapons, reflect attacks with magic fireballs, place magic sigils on the ground, summon rock spikes to impale enemies, etc .. A greatsword gives you wider attacks, easy knockdown hits, powerful counterattacks, and massive damage charge attack.

Yes skyrim got new mechanics, but they aren't anywhere near the levels of depth that most other action RPGs have gotten to and they don't make up for the loss in RPG elements.