AjaxSt

Unfortunately, thanks to the engine, when it's raining, it rains everywhere until you enter an interior cell. It's impossible to fix this, it's an engine thing.

You already have hotkeys in Skyrim. If you pull up your favorites menu, highlight what you want to assign and hit any number, 1-8, it will assign it that key. As for limiting what's on the hotkeys, I dunno about that.

I agree. Would like to see some more variety. I have quite a few songs I would like to add to the bard's repertoire.

I heavily, heavily endorse this request. PLEASE, someone make this! PLEASE! And Fman, if/when this gets made, could I put in a request for an insignia and colors for a set for my personal use?

Why would this request upset anyone? I mean...NO! I'm terribly offended you want a man to have long braided hair in a world that already has long-ish hair that is partially braided! That's just WRONG!!! :blink: Anywho, I would like to see this, too. Not just because of the Dothraki connection, but because of other reasons. Lack of male hairstyles, and it's ability to be used for hair from other cultures, as well. Would be cool to see it. I vote in favor (as much as my vote counts around here...)

I got a few I would like to see... Balian of Ibilen's Armor Eddard Stark's Court Clothing Boromir's Travel armor Ulrich's Armor Beowulf's Armor Guenevere's Armor Galahad and Gawain's armor Gawain's Armor I'll probably update this list with more when I think of more. XD

Updated the first post... If anyone is interested and wants more info, they can PM me.

I have a wide variety of mod ideas, and I figured that rather than clutter the forum with a thread for each, I'll just list them here, and modders can pick and choose which ones they want to do, if they want to do them at all. 1. Horn removal. The one thing that irks me the most in vanilla Skyrim, is horned helmets. I know the Nords love their horns, just as much as the real vikings, but IMO, horny helmets just look stupid. It's not intimidating, it makes the helm awkward, and it's just not practical for anything but getting your helm knocked off. 2. New Hairstyles. I would like to see a variety of new medieval hairstyles, specifically, The Norman, The Lady, Tied Back, The Princess, Curly, The Bowl Cut, The Tonsure, The Stark. More if you wish, but those are the main. 3. New clothing. The clothing variety is surprisingly poor, both vanilla and custom. I would like to provide a few references for new clothing. Nordic Peasant, More Nordic Peasants, Keyhole Tunic, Imperial Clothing, Prince. 4. Working castle for every villiage. Within about 15-30 in-game minute's walk from each villiage there should be a full, working castle, with guards and a Thane. When the player becomes Thane of a hold, he's granted one of these castles (Whiterun grants the Rorikstead Castle, etc.). When the Empire or the Stormcloaks conquer a castle, the Thane is replaced with a thane of their faction, and the guards change, just like in the basegame towns. Perhaps an option for no change, as well. 5. Expanded guard armor. Rather than everything be the same outfit recolored for the different factions, how about we have four different armor types, Levy, Light Guard, Heavy Guard, and Thane. Levy would be little more than padded shirts. Light guard would be a mix between Mel Gibson's Lamellar armor from Braveheart and the existing guard armors. Heavy would be chainmail with a tabbard draped over it, with the emblem of the city it's with on the front. Thane would be, basically, the light Iron Armor deorated with the symbols of the knight's house, with the symbol of his city in the center. 6. Better children. I'm not talking just new faces to allow for customization, I'm also talking add in new varieties. One mesh for infants, one for 3-6 year olds, one for 7-10 year olds (Basically what we have now), one for 11-14, and one for 15-18. And allow the 11-14 and the 15-18 ones to be playable. Anyone of the age of 15 and up are marriagable, and some in the 11-14 range are lords in their own right. Jarl Balgruf's (SP?) kids would have one in the 15-18 range and the other in the 11-14 range. And more. I'll update with more ideas when I have the time.

I agree. I found it rather annoying that I could carry 300 lbs right off the bat. It would be lovely to start with, say, 100, and work it's way up the same as it does in basegame?

Can you do weapons, helmets, or shields? I'll have a few things for you either way, if you're interested. :D

Ah, crud...thought this was a Skyrim thread for some reason. Must've been blind, tired or both... I do agree that there needs to be an infrastructure in Cyrodiil. I've got a mod in the works that, when I get to modifying the worldspace, will add plenty of gold, silver, iron, and ebony mines, as well as new towns, improved towns, and castles, and much more, but the rest of the mod may not be what people want. If there is a mod to add mines and such to the world, I'd DL it.

I never said I hadn't worn armor of any kind, I was directly referring the plate armor I had mentioned in the previous sentence when I said that I hadn't worn any. I have worn chain armor, and I have worn a plate curiass, just not a whole set. While true, I haven't worn an IBA either, I was commenting the weight recorded by multiple sources based on their own research for full gear, prepped for battle with extra ammo, rations, IFAK, and other essential combat equipment, which would weigh in to pretty close to 60 pounds, if my research is correct. And that is all hung off of the MOLLE straps on the chest piece, whereas on plate armor, the weight is distributed evenly across the entire body, with a tiny bit extra hanging off the belt. So, comparitively, a combat-ready chest piece of modern armor weighs in at about 40-60 lbs, while a medieval chest piece, with all the trimmings, weighs in at under 20. Plus, most plate armors, especially early plate armors, contained joints that allowed a knight to bend over and touch his toes. But of course, since I have never worn any of these, my points are all moot. I apologize for not bowing down to your obviously superior mind. Now let's get over this petty pissing match and get on with this topic.

I spent 8 years of my life in a re-enactment group, some one whom did handle plate armors. I haven't personally worn any, but I have seen it demonstrated. One thing that was of importance while making armor was the idea that a knight had to be as flexible in his armor as he was without it. There are contemporary documentation and stories of knights who were able to tuck and roll, run and rump, and do other acrobatics while in a full, 60-pound suit of steel plate armor. In the latter centuries, armor became more decorative and less functional, increasingly so after the invention of firearms, and then accurate firearms. Those balls of lead were sometimes able to tear through plate armor like it was butter, and non-ranged weapons became obsolete. By the 18th century, armor was all but abandoned, thanks to it being useless in most scenarios. Even by the 16th century, the time period this design is from, armor was becoming increasingly impractical. Also, medieval plate armor is superior in almost every way to modern Kevlar body armor. Main advantage of modern armor: it can stop bullets. Medieval armor was far more flexibly, slightly lighter weight, and covered almost every part of your body. Modern armor, you're lucky to get shoulder or crotch protection, most only get chest and head.

You have to do what we did in Morrowind. Buy a couple high-expense items while selling the item you want to get rid of, then sell the lower-priced items back to another merchant or to the same one after they have replenished their gold. You don't get quite as much as you would if you sold the thing outright, but you still get quite a bit.

You can tell that that is actually designed as parade armor, and not really designed for fighting. It would be a little rigid for combat (You can tell because there is no joints in the chest piece, making it almost impossible to bend over, among other things). That said, it is a nice-looking piece of armor, and it would lend to a sense of history to the world, I endorse this mod idea!

Bloodmoon, an expansion for Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind.

Honestly, I'd like some kilts, too. They got the famous Braveheart half-face war paint available in-game, now let's make some more! :D

Actually, it's both. It's a type of helm known as the War Hat, or Kettle Hat. A design so popular that it saw use from the late Middle Ages all the way up past WWII. Actually surprisingly effective. It keeps the sun out of the eyes, keeps you field of view unrestrained, and any incoming projectiles other than the ones aimed directly at you (which would rarely hit in medieval times) would simply bounce off. I would like to see this as well.

Norway doesn't have awesome battles? Have you heard of the Vikings? They hailed from Norway. Have you heard of Berserkers? Naked warriors wielding heavy weapons, able to shrug off blows that would take other men's lives. Also, Norway has Thor, Loki, Odin, Ragnarok, the Runes of Mystery, and the Wolrd Tree. Scotland has Braveheart? Norway has: The 13th Warrior Beowulf & Grendel Beowulf Berserker Dark Kingdom: The Dragon King Erik the Viking Grendel Grendel Grendel Grendel Valhalla Rising The Virgin Spring I'm not saying Scotland is less awesome, I'm just saying that Norway is equally awesome.

The answer to the second question is no. Bethesda will slap you with legal action if you put Skyrim items into Oblivion. You have completely remake them, but you can't just put them into Oblivion. For a few reasons: 1. The skeletons are different, so you would have to completely re-rig the models. 2. You would have to remodel it anyway because of the body sliders and the mody shaped that Skyrim has over Oblivion. 3. It's illegal to port content, and Bethesda will slap you with a Cease and Desist if you even try. Bioware doesn't care as much, so long as you're porting their content to their games, and not to games from other devs.

In medieval times, only the rich had outhouses...and they were little more than a small room tacked onto their houses held over a river with a hole in the bottom. Others would do their business in a bucket and chuck it out in the street at night or in the morning. Sanitation? What is this devilry? :P

I like this idea, but I think there should be a few changes to it... There are five levels of locations to take over, each with their own bonuses and downfalls. 1. City - Like Whiterun and Solitute. These give you the most money once you have them, and are the second easiest to defend, but you can't hire very many troops from them. 2. Town - These give you quite a bit of money, and provide food for your armies. They are not easily defended, but they are easily attacked. 3. Keep - These are the castles. You don't get much money for owning these, but they are extremely easy to defend, and you can hire far more troops to use in all your holdings with a castle. 4. Camps - These give you no money, are the worst thing to try to defend, and don't net you a lot of soldiers, but you can easily strike out and ambush soldiers more quickly and quietly with a camp. 5. Hideouts - These are fairly defensible. More defensible than towns, less so than cities. It's a cave or other location that could be taken over, it allows you to store troops in hiding for in case something happens to a nearby town of keep. Camps are offensive locations, used strictly to attack, and serve no other purpose. Hideouts are defensive locations, allowing you to keep reserve units for when you're under attack.Keeps are offensive, allowing you to gather troops and strike out with speed, while not leaving a location vulnerable to enemy attack. Towns are an economic boon, supplying your food and money to keep your army supplied. Cities provide you with the funds necessary to keep a large campaign going. The size of your army is determined by three things, what locations you hold (Hideouts and Camps give you 8 troops, Towns give you 10, Keeps give 12, and Cities give 14), how much food you have (10 units of any type of food = 1 troop), and how much money you have (Cost of the troops varies by quality). So if you hold a keep, two towns, and a camp, you can have a maximum of 40 soldiers in your army, your keeps supply you with enough food to feed 6, your camp enough for 2, and your towns enough for 12 each, you can feed a max of 32 soldiers, and your money to buy your soldiers, which varies depending on where that location is. You have several types of troops... 1. Knight/Huscarl - Most expensive, but are the toughest types of warriors around. All heavy armor, one-handed weapon and shield or two handed sword, and tough as nails. 2. Man-at-Arms/Carl - Second most expensive, faster then knights, able to take them on and win on occasion, they are professional soldiers. They wear heavy armor with light boots gloves and any type of helm, and wield one hand with shield only. 3. Berserker. - Third most expensive unit. Wields ONLY two-handed weapons, and never wears armor. They hold a bonus to damage, and are able to demoralize the enemy. 4. Archers - Second cheapest unit. Wields a bow, 48 arrows, and a one-handed weapon. Wears almost exclusively light armor, and are very useful. 5. Levy/Fyrd - Cheapest unit. Wields whatever weapon they can find, including pickaxes and woodcutter's axes. Wears light armor sometimes. Peasant troops. EDIT: Whups...double post. D:

I like this idea, but I think there should be a few changes to it... There are five levels of locations to take over, each with their own bonuses and downfalls. 1. City - Like Whiterun and Solitute. These give you the most money once you have them, and are the second easiest to defend, but you can't hire very many troops from them. 2. Town - These give you quite a bit of money, and provide food for your armies. They are not easily defended, but they are easily attacked. 3. Keep - These are the castles. You don't get much money for owning these, but they are extremely easy to defend, and you can hire far more troops to use in all your holdings with a castle. 4. Outpost

Actually, no. I'm not taking the ugliest out of the medieval pot. There are plenty uglier racial reconstructions out there (Look for Copernicus and Simon of Sudbury for two prime examples. And not all of the refs I gave are truly that ugly. Robert Morley, Cleopatra, the Leasowe Man, and Peter the Great of Aragon are all not that bad, even by today's standards. Peter the Great even kinda looks like Aragorn as played by Bill Pullman. That said, there really are only a few facial reconstructions that you can find images of online. I'll see if I can find some more, but those were the first few I found. And actually, it's only in the last couple hundred years or so that humans have been overly concerned with beauty as a whole, in the middle ages, beauty was held to a completely different standard (fat was good), and only for the rich. Here's a few more: Jarl Birger Magnusson - 1266 Klaus Stoertebeker - German Pirate in 1402 The Bocksten Man - 14th-century farmer The Haplo Group - Bronze Age family King Tut Another Peter the Great of Aragon - This one with a profile view. Saint Nick - The real Santa Claus

The top two were in a Scottish castle, who can trace their ancestry back to the same Celts that gave rise to the Danish and other Nordic Vikings, so they would work. The third one is an actual viking woman (Not a very attractive one, true). And the Spitalfields Woman was also found near Scotland, so she would count. Though she can trace her ancestry back more to Italy, so... There's a full-body reconstruction of Duke William of Normandy (William the Conqueror) out there somewhere, and he can trace his lineage back to Viking raids in France. Not sure about many other Norse reconstructions, I'd have to do some research.