MidevalGuy

The magic system may not be broken, but it is counter-intuitive and the majority players would rather have increased damage at higher levels (character level, difficulty level) than have spell cost reduction. That's just majority opinion, and it's because every other RPG does magic LOGICALLY in this regard. The higher levels you achieve, your spells do more damage. This isn't rocket science and it doesn't mean people expect to one-shot kill things, either. It wouldn't be so bad using the cost reduction system IF the spells were worth their cost... But a lot of them aren't at Expert and Master Level for what they do. This is also because they don't scale like magic does in other games, so people don't like this system, overall. You can call it the further "dumbing down" of Skyrim, but here is a text book case of Bethesda trying to be different for the Hell of it and this is why you have so many mods that overhaul it to a more logical and familiar system.

This is why I use mods that deactivate the respawning bandit, giant, dragon, necromancer, hostile creature clutter that just happens to be on your hearthfire property! Having these events was on purpose, by the way. Bethesda wanted your homestead to be "exciting" and not just a place to rest your sword after a long day of adventuring... The very opposite of why most players wanted Hearthfire, and similar BYOH mods in the first place: A respite from the constant on-slaught of death and destruction the majority of the game is filled with. There are certain mods that landscape the property and literally remove things like animal dens, sacrificial altars, etc. You know, stuff that would not be conducive to raising a family safely?

The Vampire Lord is intended for mostly Mage characters, ironically. They're basically buffed Illusion Mages mixed with a little Destruction (Drain Life) for good measure. It makes sense from a lore perspective since Vampires are all about deception, confusion, misdirection, etc. So, if you are a mage who specializes in Illusion, you'll have a much easier time making the transition to VL because it's just a more "extreme" version of that build in a lot of ways. Also, there are mods that fix the Vampiric Drain nerf when Serana is around. One of them actually makes her more deadlier than the stock version Dawnguard shipped with, but she relies more on Destruction (Lightening) and Conjuration (Gargoyle) than Vampyric Drain which allows the player to Drain Life as it should have been from the start.

ASIS is one. I also like... http://skyrim.nexusmods.com/mods/40491//? <-- Enemy AI Overhaul. It's not really an overhaul in the grand sense, but it makes the AI do things they should do by default e.g. Vampires transform into Bats, Vampire Lord form when fighting, Dragon Priests summon ghostly minions to help them, Drugar use shouts and not just the bosses, etc. http://skyrim.nexusmods.com/mods/28033/? <-- Better Reactions. The days of Bandits not searching for you even after you put an arrow through their neck are over. What is sad is this is such a basic function that should have been in the game from day one, IMO, but because it was not has become the running joke of Skyrim: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lHbF9ynGZV0 :wink: Oh, almost forgot. The one major mod that I use that I also feel should have been in Skyrim from day one is... http://skyrim.nexusmods.com/mods/12615//? <-- Locational Damage. This is a must for any build and applies to all combat types including ranged and magic. It applies to both players and NPCs. It's fully configurable through MCM, and I set mine to exclude instant head shots for player (death) because of the aimbot accuracy of the enemy Archers in the game at any level.

Here are my go-to mods for Magic balancing/overhauling: http://skyrim.nexusmods.com/mods/4374/? <-- Better Magic. It's an oldy, but still goody and covers all the DLCs, too. In conjunction with this, I also use... http://skyrim.nexusmods.com/mods/45021//? <-- Simple Magic Rebalance. This is what flip/flops the cost reduction with increased magnitude as you level. Both work well with one another because they compliment one another in what they are trying to do. They also don't radically alter the skill trees and keep the perks as close to vanilla as possible with obvious benefits, of course.

That reminds me... The thing I wanted to comment on regarding all the difficulty mods is a lot of them don't address the core issue that plagues Skyrim and that is they don't provide better AI that knows how to fight like a human does by working in groups better, using real tactics (charge, fall back, etc.). Most of the difficulty mods simply buff enemies to make them do Godly amounts of damage while nerfing the player's damage, so they have to "fight better"... Except players aren't fighting "better", they're just mashing the attack button more than they would on normal difficulties. These kinds of mods are rehashes of the game's default difficulty system and provide nothing new even if they promise it on the description pages. If you want a challenge, seek out the various modular (and smaller) AI mods that turn the AI into smarter enemies who do things human players do automatically e.g. Mages put up wards with one hand while firing away with firebolts, or lightening with their freed hand. They also fall back and heal themselves when they take enough damage like any creature practicing self-preservation would. These mods make even Adept more challenging and higher levels even more so, obviously. I just thought I would mention these things because while I applaud a lot of the reduxs and overhauls, I prefer the smaller ones that address the root of the problem instead of trying to make things harder through artificial means like a lot of the larger difficulty mods tend to do.

I sound like a broken record (because I've posted this in several related magic threads), but if you are playing the vanilla magic system without mods... Bethesda did not balance it properly and it seems you are experiencing this imbalance as you play. Bethesda opted for a "higher levels = less magicka needed to cast spells" vs. "higher levels = more powerful spells". This is why it takes way too much magicka to kill things at higher levels... Because the spells cost more, but aren't doing the proper amount of scaled damage they should be to off-set the increased costs. The worst part is like most people, you don't realize this since at lower levels the magic, especially destruction, is more than enough to take care of most threats, but as you gain higher levels, even with the perks, you are not doing "better" with the spells, you're just getting slight reductions in how much certain spells cost to cast... Which is negated by the insanely high amount of magicka required for mid-to-high-level spells, anyway. This is why you need mods to reverse/overhaul the current magic system, so as you level up your magic levels up, too, as far as spells doing more damage (overall) and/or spells lasting longer e.g. Alteration, Conjuration, Illusion, etc. By the way, you don't have to go this route, but if you stick with the vanilla system, your goal will be magicka cost reduction via potions and enchanted gear. This is where the game breaking practice of getting magicka cost to zero came into being out of necessity until mods started to appear that overhauled the system entirely and made magic scale properly. So, the choice is yours. Most people, myself included, prefer "higher levels = increased spell magnitude" vs. magicka reduction because it's more intuitive and has more benefits at higher levels, obviously.

The problem with vanilla magic in general is Bethesda opted for a "higher level = less magicka cost" instead of "higher level = increased magnitude (more powerful, or longer lasting depending on school)". Melee, Archer and Stealth builds do more damage the higher they go whereas mages get magicka reduction and slightly more powerful spells... Which is negated by how much those higher levels spells cost and how short they last e.g. Master Alteration spells like Dragonflesh that cost a sh1t ton of magicka and only last two minutes, if that. Of course, this is why (as we are discussing on the Sanguine Rose thread) Bethesda probably made certain staffs and artifacts available early on (Dawnbreaker, Storm Atronach staff, etc.) to give mages a head start and/or to balance out non-magic builds as well. As for best build overall... Another poster already wrote, the "best" build is the one you have the most fun with for whatever reason. Statistically there are "best builds" if we go purely by math, but even that is subjective because of game breaking exploits and/or gaps in game design that allow players to just over charge weapons, armor and everything else so they do insanely high damage a.k.a one-hit swords, axes, bows, etc.

SPERG is good, but it makes the game even easier at high levels, unfortunately. Even though it only touches the perks (vs. SkyRe that also adds to the trees), the perk adjustments become overpowered late game. The author even admits this, but the mods main draw is auto perks and making the perks actually useful instead of just skill tree filler. Conjuration's main purpose is to allow character builds who DON'T want to use followers, but who still want the option of backup in situations where they might be outnumbered. That's why the creatures are so powerful even at lower levels. The familiars are good for low levels, but once you hit level 10, you're going to want to be using Storm and Flame Atronachs because they deal more damage and are ranged, respectively. Also, Cindhna Mine is a cake walk if you use bound weapons because you can never be disarmed... Because you were never armed in the first place, get it?

I recommend using the Sanguine Rose alongside mods that overhaul the default magic system and give you increased magnitude (more powerful, longer spells) instead of less magicka used per spell. This way, the Sanguine Rose serves a balancing purpose for non-magic users which might have been Bethesda's original intent?

What I would love to see is an advanced and user-friendly GUI to command your followers IN-GAME, similar to JIP's Companion Command & Control, for Fallout: New Vegas. http://newvegas.nexusmods.com/mods/50468//?

Bethesda tried to balance out "Magic for everybody" by making spells cost less at higher levels, but also do less damage as a result. Thus, all the mods that reverse this and give you increased magnitude of spells vs. reduced casting costs the higher you go. It's an interesting approach, but it's main purpose is to try and break out of the D&D fixed class mold, for better or for worse.

See, I wouldn't count that as a valid argument - anyone who trains with a weapon will get used to it and adapt to be able to use it, whether it's lightweight or not. If a weapon requires brute strength to use, and the one wanting to wield it is determined enough - they will train and work to gain the strength they require to use it. That works for either gender. Lightweight weapons make it easier to use them, taking out the strength factor in either genders case. The point I am trying to make is being effective with a modern-day weapon doesn't come down to just how well (or not) somebody can aim it. It has a lot do with how effectively they can transport it, draw (wield) it, reload it, fix jams, etc. True, any gender can train hard enough to be proficient with a particular weapon, but a man may have a slight strength advantage as far as carrying and then deploying a weapon like the 30lb Barrett M82 anti-tank rifle compared to a female. Both may be expert marksman once the weapon is deployed, but during combat the male may have an advantage over a female since he can more easily pick up (or collapse) the weapon faster than a female due to his increased biological strength. This is where proficiency (not just accuracy) plays a role and part of that proficiency may be dependent on raw physical strength. Also, even if I disagree with how the OP stated it, I think he may have been trying to say a woman will never be able to swing a sword, or battle ax as hard as a male due to biology. I agree based on biology, but that doesn't mean I believe all females should be relegated to non-combat, or caregiver roles like he may be implying, however. This is where we have radically different points of view and even basic understanding of certain concepts. None of this really applies to Skyrim since it is fantasy, however, most fantasy is based loosely on medieval times and this is where we loop back around to the semi-real world and how different biologies may effect performance even if both genders train equally as hard.

Political Correctness started out as a way to address disparities in how society treated marginalized groups. It's evolved into something entirely different now, unfortunately, but the original intent was equality and not "anti common sense". Also, there are statistically more women on the planet now than men (or will be if trends continue), but that doesn't mean all of them would become soldiers, so there being "very few children in the future" is not an accurate prediction at all. No offense, but these two remarks give me a pretty clear idea of what your basic understanding and underlying premise is, so I am going to remove myself form this discussion at this point to avoid any flame wars, or pointless circular debates.

I did a stealth play through and I made myself a "stealth suit" by disenchanting a circlet that gave 25% better sneaking and then enchanted four pieces of light armor. So, my stealth rating was 100% (or 85, 90%, whatever the total detection reduction rating is) along with my 100 Stealth Skill rating. I could literally walk right past guards and other NPCs who should have been hostile toward me, but were not. It also worked with a majority of high-level creatures, Dragons, Dragon Priests, etc as well. Of course, the game became boring very quickly, so I stopped using my stealth suit, but the fact I could create something like this shows how "broken" (depending on POV) the game is at a fundamental level if you can get certain reductions down to zero, or buffs to max without any penalties whatsoever.

Yes, females are weaker then males on a physical 1:1 basis. Women cannot hit as hard as a men. That is biological fact. I don't think even most women would deny that. However, females have certain advantages over men as far as modern combat goes that has nothing to do with Testosterone, or lack there of: -Higher pain tolerance (child birth) -Steadier Aim (less nerves due to biology) -Multitask better (different thought process between men/women) -Strategic thinkers (different thought process between men/women) The main issue some modern societies have with women serving on the front lines in combat is the female menstrual cycle. It is a matter of hygiene and also females possibly becoming ineffective soldiers at certain times of the month. This is what the "debate" is really about, but if we were to remove that element besides certain other physical demands (women can't carry a 100lb mounted machine gun on their back) men and women can be equal as far as soldering goes. In the modern world (vs. Skyrim) combat is now digital and/or doesn't require brute strength to prevail. Most firearms are made of lightweight metal, or resins, so anybody who is trained can wield and be effective with them. Drones are now replacing troops on the ground, so a qualified pilot (male/female) doesn't even need to worry about G-Forces, or being shot down any more when they are sitting at a console in a bunker flying a drone thousands of miles away. The other issue is one from the "other" side and that is women are a distraction for male soldiers. This is probably the main reason why many men (soldiers) are not in favor of females in combat, regardless of a female's effectiveness, or not. I apologize if I want off topic, but if we are going to have a serious discussion about gender equality and representations of gender equality (or inequality) in games like Skyrim, we need to hit some of the underlying issues first, so then we aren't tip toeing around the elephant(s) in the room :smile:

I am sure you are aware, but the reason for Essential NPCs is to ensure proper story progression & protection due to the new Radiant system introduced in Skyrim. In previous TES games the element of chance did not factor heavily into how quests and stories played out. In Skyrim, if an NPC quest giver is not essential there is a high probability he/she will be killed due to a random event such as a bandit raid, vampire attack, werewolf attack, etc. This prevents the player from interacting and receiving a quest if the NPC is dead. This doesn't matter for small side-quests, but NPCs needed to stay alive for the main quest is paramount since it is one continuous story (set of related quests) until the end. An example of why essential NPCs are... Well, essential... To the MQ is if you set any of the MQ characters like Ulfric, Delphine, Esbern, etc. to non-essential, there is a chance they can be killed on their way to various quest locations thus, stopping the MQ quest and all associated side-quests entirely. Essential NPCs exist to make sure the game can't be broken by random events that are out of the players control. I agree it is immersion breaking, but the trade off is a broken game (literally) if an "essential" NPC -- An NPC who is vital to a major questline like Tulius, or Balgruf -- Is killed by a random event and prevents the player from going any further.

Culture, society, ethnicity, personal experience and other factors shape how an individual perceives gender roles. In some cultures, there is less gender role separation, so a woman wielding a spear and hunting wild animals to feed her children would not seem out of place if you were born into that culture. In modern societies, certain cultures still equate feminine with being weaker than masculine with regard to "traditional" male jobs like soldier, construction worker, pilot, etc. This has everything to do with Skyrim because if you come from a culture where masculine roles are associated with soldering, hunting, etc., then you might view the game as being "Politically Correct", or having a quite-un-quote feminist agenda... Whereas somebody from a culture where feminine is equal to, or even greater than masculine would find female warriors, Jarls and other positions completely normal to them. The other thing to consider is the Fantasy genre is built on certain conventions (tropes) just like any other literary genre. So, female Wizards, Geriatric Dragonslayers, Dwarven Little People, etc. is common place and doesn't inherently reflect any cultural, or societal views (bias) about a particular group one way, or another unless the author him/herself states that was their intent.

The easiest way to do it in the game is to just make a save and then make ANOTHER save after that. Keep track of the save numbers in the load / save screen and DON'T save over the previous one in the list; just keep saving over the latest one with the highest numerical value. As for archiving saves... All you have to do is copy/back up your "My Documents\My Games\Skyrim\Saves" folder. Be aware, Skyrim saves are pretty big... even non-corrupt saves... And depending on how long you have been playing they can be in the GB size for a normal MQ and additional side-quests.

Bethesda could surprise us all and have it take place in Somerset Isle... Either after, or before the Great War depending time period... So, it isn't a completely hostile environment to humans and other races? They could even include the Dwemer as a way to tie up everything as far as continuity goes, IMO. They could also do what Rockstar Games has done with the past (and probably future) GTA games and that is just remake their previous games with better technology. Most TES fans have been screaming for Morrowind on a modern engine, or even Oblivion, so it would not surprise me if they just released remakes of those games as the next two entries in the series while adding new features and expansion packs, of course. I can't speak for anybody else, but I wouldn't mind this strategy as long as they weren't just graphical updates and actually brought new and interesting game play that we've been discussing in this thread. The other thing that had me thinking is... What if they take the core concept of an RPG a step further and include things like lineage (being able to have children), aging, etc? This would be a logical way to cover changing time periods and show how your character's (and their descendants) actions have a real impact on the future... Similar to how Fable did it, but much more fleshed out and serious. Hell, if they have to stick with one character then start the game as a child and the MQ takes you through young adult, adult and finishes with elder (think Gandolf, King Arthur in his later years) and could span about 50, 60+ years? That would be epic... no pun intended... But it would also allow for the many innovations we've been discussing to be woven seamlessly into the narrative and the game play as a whole. Those perks we've been discussing could influence how your children turn out if they allowed simultaneous characters (parent, child, grand parent, grand child, sibling, etc) at certain parts of the story. Look at stories like Harry Potter. They are BUILT around families and family legacies. Your actions would actually mean something if it effects your heirs and the world they inherit... Just like real life. This kind of model wouldn't take away any of the action and adventure aspects TES has been built on. In fact, it would enhance it and make it more meaningful if what you did on a certain side-quest had lasting and real consequences on you, your children (no matter the age) and loved ones. It would give the game gravitas that no other RPG has come close to, IMO. It would be a way to bridge the gap between fantasy and reality, casual and hardcore gamers because family is a universal aspect in real life and in the arts since time began.

As we were discussing earlier, they can get rid of classes by giving players more base traits/attribute-type things at the start. Your comment about tabula rasa vs. specialization when creating a character is accurate, but they don't have to conflict with one another, IMO. In fact, they should enhance each other because role playing is about having (at the very least) a general idea of the character you want to roll whenever you play the game. For one play though, I wanted to play a female rogue, Han Solo-type, and I even searched for Han Solo-type gear on the Nexus. I found a cool Thieves Guild Duelist Armor set for Females as her main outfit, and I even used the Flintlock Pistol mod, so she had a "blaster" type weapon to augment the traditional sword & arrow combat as well. So, while I was able to customize how my female rogue to looked, I was then limited by the actual abilities and skills because of the limited and linear perks. Had the perks been more specialized (diverse?), or had Bethesda put in more options other than Thief, Mage or Warrior (because a Rogue can be in-between all three) I could have role played that character more fully than with the current system. Right now, players are limited to what amounts to virtual cosplay in a lot of instances compared to other games that allow you to "become" the character(s) you play. This all circles back to underlying core design of a player creation & progression system that automatically influences other elements like the story writing, dialog acting, combat mechanics, etc. No one element can stand on its own, or all you have is what we have now and that are specialized mods that try and address different areas, but will never be a cohesive gaming experience because they are mods and it's the core game that is limited by default.

It's interesting (to me) because a group of us are talking about how single-player RPGs like the ones Bethesda produce are changing, for better or worse, and coincidentally TESO is now Bethesda's first entry into the MMO genre even if another developer is handling the logistics of the game. Similar to the on-going evolution of RPGs, I think MMOs are also figuring out how to do things that fulfill multiple criteria, the main one being able to sustain themselves through various pricing models that cater to a wide(er) range of players. The model I favor is buy the base game once and then buy any expansion packs that are released if you want to continue playing the game beyond the base content (which the majority of online players will, so it's a basic evolution of content and the same and possibly new players for each installment. Tom Clancy's "The Division" (Xbox One, PS4) will follow this type of model. Players buy the base game which is designed as an MMO and can play online via Xbox Live and PSN. I am sure during the course of the game Ubisoft will come out with DLC and Expansion packs, so again, it's the normal evolution of player content and gradual audience growth that happens with all games by default. I like these kind of models because not only does it guarantee a player base, but it also means the company has budgeted enough to support the game without having to resort to F2P, or P2W which is the death of all MMOs when they reach that point as evidenced by SWTOR.

The underlying issue we're addressing in Skyrim perks is quality and quantity. There aren't enough of them to make a unique character and the ones that exist aren't very good, either. Why is "50% Chance to Decapitate Enemies" a perk? I'm being serious. An effect (finisher) like this should just be an inherent part of combat mechanics and always active behind the scenes, IMO. My character being able to decapitate an enemy 50% of the time doesn't make me different from any other warrior out there, let alone "better" just because I can do it. Also, why is this kind of perk only reserved for melee characters? If I am a high level mage and hurl a flaming ball of etherial fire at an enemy, there is a pretty good chance I might take their head off if I'm not aiming for the largest target (body). Or for that matter what about taking off a leg, arm, etc? This brings up another shortcoming... location-based damage... But that's a whole other discussion unto itself and just say, thank God for mods. Going back a few posts... Everything we're discussing feeds into and enhances itself if done properly. I know it's easy to play armchair game developer because we have the luxury of being fans and not having our lively hood dependent on higher ups approving, or not allowing some of the design changes we're discussing here. That being said, Bethesda needs to figure out what they want to do and where they want to go as far as "evolving" the RPG genre... And in a lot of ways it looks like they aren't advancing it at all and are instead doing a lateral "evolution" and turning TES into more action-adventure oriented games like Zelda, or Fable where RPG elements aren't the main focus compared to traditional RGPs of the past. It's their IP and they can do whatever they want, so my hope is they will figure out how to properly evolve their vision of RPGs, or maybe even realize certain things aren't working and may never work and go back to tried and true methods that give more freedom to players in the long run, ironically?

In my opinion, Bethesda's approach to perks is the exact opposite of what they should be used for when leveling up. All the Skyrim perks currently refine a single skill/trait and raise it to the level of what the developers feel it's maximum potential should be. That's not choice. That's predetermination. For example, the Archery skill tree. It's focused on making players a better archer, obviously, but that's all the perks do. They don't allow players to DIVERSIFY what KIND of Archer/Ranger they want to be. This applies to almost all the other skill trees, too. The worst of them is the two-handed tree that mashes up different weapons and even combat styles. I know there were complaints of too many in Oblivion, but they could have diversified a bit more with Skyrim at the same time, IMO. That desirable middle-ground is there, but they were either rushed, or thought the majority of casual gamers wouldn't understand/use a slightly more diverse model, perhaps? A perk should be something that not only benefits my character, but that makes my character DIFFERENT from other characters... Even characters in the same class/build. This is what I liked about the perks in New Vegas, and especially the Mods for NV that added tons and tons of perks that went further in differentiating your character from everybody else in the world. Perks can also just be plain silly, too. A perk that gives your character enhanced brawling (unarmed damage) if they drink some ale would be great for some of the brawl challenges you have to partake in, but at the same time hilarious if moments after the brawl ended your character puked up the ale, too. It sounds disgusting, but it would actually be realistic in a lot ways as well, but... The main emphasis on this perk is makes your character different and rewards you with a bit of humor for choosing it. Another variation might be you pass out for one game hour after the brawl and then wake up with different NPCs staring down at you until you stand up. Again, it rewards you for choosing it, but it also makes your character "diverse" because he/she can't hold their liquor.

The most significant change that may be coming is a true open world with no cells, or loading screens. GTA and countless other games do this already, so it's time TES does, too. The new consoles should have more than enough power (let alone gaming PCs), so the old cell-system should be a thing of the past (the Gamebryo engine is over 11-years old now!). Even games like "The Sims" now have open world game play that span entire towns with upwards of 50+ AI residents, so this element alone should raise immersion 10 fold and bring TES into the 21st century. Now, this might sound odd and like a step backwards, but I would love it if Bethesda went back to how RPGs used to be played and that is similar to Bioware and Obsidian RPGs that use the distribution of numerical points at level up to increase different attributes (along with perks). Bethesda has taken that away in favor of "using a skill raises that skill", but this method is very limiting, ironically. The only real thing that gives you any customization options are the perks... Whereas with the old D&D system, you can specialize as you go. FNV is the most recent example of this kind of RPG, and it's one the reasons it has so much replayablity compared to others. If I want to be a "Diplomat" and pump points into speech and use non-violent means to solve potentially volatile situations, the old system allowed for this kind of character build as long as the writers put those speech options in. We don't have any of this in Skyrim, or any Bethesda games, for that matter. Conversely, if I want to specialize in certain weapon types, or types of combat I can do that, too. I can't do that in Bethesda games. For all the freedom they give you in exploration, they limit player character development by taking away specialization and choice, the very reason to play an RPG in the first place. They should also have attributes similar to the standing stones, but not as superfluous as the star signs in Oblivion, IMO. If I want to play a survivalist character, then I should be able to pick traits/attributes that this kind of character would have e.g. resistance to extreme weather, can live off the land (harvests more ingredients) better, has better hunting instincts (can spot dangerous animals from farther), etc... And then I should be able to develop those starting traits further with numerical skill distribution and perks. This is what the Sims 3 actually does. If I want to create an optimal Sim who specializes in being an underwater treasure hunter, I give him/her traits like "loves being in the water", "athletic", "loves the outdoors", "at home in the tropics". etc. It's simple logic, but the system put in place in The Sims allows me to actually improve and benefit from those core traits as well as unlock hidden ones as well. If I master them all, the game allows me to pick a bonus trait, too. This is where I can actually enhance my build further, or deviate a little bit... Like adding the "Logic" trait that allows my Sim to better figure out a tombs traps easier than a Sim who does not have this trait. This is the basis of role playing and character customization and it strikes me how shallow Bethesda games are in comparision even though I like them and play them to this day.