Skyrim Features "Perk" Trees Instead of Weapons Skills

[brodie21]

we need spears, how epic would it be to fight a dragon with a big ass spear?

 

[Namewithheld]

Sounds a lot like Dark Messiah.

If more games were like Dark Messiah - in other words a heady cocktail of awesome mixed with badass - then I'd be a happy happy gamer.

Seriously, Dark Messiah is incredible.

 

[Vanguard_Ex]

Sounds a lot like Dark Messiah.

But better.

 

[Vanguard_Ex]

[HEADING=1]NO[/HEADING]
NO
NO
NO

the skill leveling was what made Oblivion so good
that's why Oblivion still gets play time while Fallout 3 gathers dust

EDIT: wait, hold on... are they changing the skills from "swords" and "axes" to "one-handed" and "two-handed"

because I'd be okay with that

Yeah, that's what they're doing.
You level yourself in one-handed, two-handed or archery, then the specific weapons such as axes, swords, claymores etc. are perks.

At least, that's the current idea...

 

[Jaqen Hghar]

How can so many people fail at understanding this. When you use a one-handed weapon this time, you increase your one-handed weapon skill. When you hit certain levels of it, you can choose perks, which can make you better with axes, swords, daggers etc. The system has not been replaced with choosing perks at a general character level up.

This system makes a lot more sense to me, as you generally use all of the one-handed weapons in the game in the same way. Same with two-handed. And if you like to use a mace, you will choose perks related to the mace, making it even better.

*Begin rant* More proof that things are changing for the sake of changing. A fe wpoints, because I don't feel like fighting against a lost cause at this point.
1) Different weapons have different styles. Nunchucks are one handed. Do they work the same as a Short Sword? No.
2) Leveling by hitting things makes sense. First time you cut a tomato you probably didn't do a good job. Practice and training help
3) I don't want "Generic Fantasy Game" that looks like "Generic Post Apocalyptic" or "Generic Science Fiction" with a couple changes in texture. I want The Elder Scrolls
*End Rant*
Logical rebuttals welcome

1. The one-handed weapons in the game work the same way. They will not put in weapons that don't make sense in the game. We are in Skyrim, why would they have nunchucks there? Far as I know, that weapon has never been in any Elder Scrolls game. One-handed weapons will most likely include swords, daggers, shortswords, axes and maces. All which you can handle in the same way. Sure, some of them are better at stabbing, while some are better at swinging. But you do handle them mostly the same. The perk system then simulates you getting better with one weapon in particular.
2. Exactly. Which is why that skill progression system is still in the game. You only choose perks for the weapon(s) you want to focus on as you get better in the skill-tree of one-handed, two-handed etc.
3. The land of the Nords are different from Morrowind and Oblivion. Just the fact that they have regions which will look different speaks volumes about how much they care about not making it "generic" and boring. But seriously, the country is what it is. I don't want them to throw in something there to make it more mysterious like Morrowind just for the sake of making it mysterious. I hope they make the Land of the Nords. Period.

 

[Jekken6]

SPEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAARSSS! i miss them so much

QFT

I play Morrowind for the sole purpose of getting the Daedric spear are level 2 or 3 from the ebony mine quest and then just screwing around, because spears are fucking awesome.

Seriously Bethesda, spears are badass. And remember to include an animation where you impale someone.

Edit: Also I want a perk for spears called 'Harpooner' where you throw your spear at a dragon, get stuck in it, then climb up the spear onto it's back and keep stabbing it. And IT WOULD BE AWESOME.

I want this. Bethesda, do it.

 

[blankedboy]

Spears... spears are... gone?

FUCK NOOOOOOOOOOOO
Game is now has ruin. It probably wasn't going to be very good in the first place
I'll probably buy it out of love for Morrowind oO

 

[SyphonX]

Yes, it is a bit silly that this game is supposedly about dragons and possibly the hunting down of said dragons, and there are no polearms.

 

[CoL0sS]

Good system, but being limited to one or two weapon types in Morrowind and Oblivion is what made look for best combination of piercing/slashing weapons, explore world and fight overpowering foes just so I could get that magical blade sooner. But again it will eliminate that stupid feeling of having an awesome 2h weapon and not being able to use it efficiently. This perk tree will probably be similar to that in Fallout, only a bit more varied.

 

[Dusk17]

They need to be careful in how they design this new system or it will turn into shit. And yes spears are gone get over it.

 

[Bloodstain]

But...I was looking forward to stabbing bears with spears! I don't normally use them, but it would just feel so...right.

 

[binvjoh]

Sounds a lot like Dark Messiah.

If more games were like Dark Messiah - in other words a heady cocktail of awesome mixed with badass - then I'd be a happy happy gamer.

Seriously, Dark Messiah is incredible.

The combat is, yes.

Bit iffy on the rest of the game.

 

[Dogstile]

"Perks" And there's the obligatory CoD reference, have we really sunk so low?

Do you really think perks originated from COD? I do not envy your lack of experience

OT:

I want spears. At least throwing spears, give us SOMETHING

 

[Slash Dementia]

How do spears not make the cut?.. They're the best weapon, and were in Morrowind, and I miss using a halberd.

I'm disappointed in this system because it seems overly-simplified. I mean, it was already simple in Oblivion. Not that this will stop me from buying or liking the game, it's just that it seems to be too user-friendly now.

 

[Jake the Snake]

Question: How does unarmed fit in to this?

My guess is they might have scrapped it as a skill. You can probably still punch, but they're probably figuring, "Are fists really going to do that much against a dragon?"

 

[Michael O'Hair]

Game may or may not involve killing large reptiles. Possibly.

No spears.

...

Okay.

 

[James B Hamster]

This is the most amazing thing ever. The character optimization rules are what stopped me from finishing TES III and IV, IV in particular: I don't consider myself a power leveler by any means, but when you set up a system where I have to play a game a certain way and perform certain actions within a certain range of times but not over or under, I will feel compelled to meet that benchmark otherwise I know that I will have lost out on the opportunity forever (you'll always have squandered the potential for extra ability points).

While compulsions are compulsions, eventually just grinding becomes intolerably boring for one's leisure time, and I abandon the playthrough outright. Maybe this way I can actually play through the buggering game without having to auto-run into a wall for three hours to get optimal.

 

[AzrealMaximillion]

See the average guy can move to the side faster than a horse intent on charging them can turn to catch up. That and what if the person moves to the side where the lance isn't? The lancer has a lane in one hand. The other is holding a shield. So even if the horse turns quickly it essentially going to lead to the guy on it doing fuck all while his horse has the chance of getting slice up the side of it's gut. This is why one on one a mounted horseman is as at disadvantage to the grounded infantry unit. They can move a short distance faster.

I'm having a hard time finding that notion plausible nor can I find anything to support it historically. Also why are you insinuating that a lance is stuck into one side of the horse. You brought up jousting earlier, that's almost always done across the horse on the same side as the shield. And you're still further ignoring the horse in this situation as well, trying to instep at the last second before the rider can move the lance to the other side is far more likely to get you run over and trampled. Just cause Russel Crowe does it in Gladiator doesn't mean that's a good basis for an argument, as you pointed out with using 300 as a basis for spear combat.

Any attempt at this kind of maneuver would have to be done at the last possible second. Too soon and it's easy enough to correct. If you try to step out, it takes less force and they can create a faster transversal at the lance tip by moving their arm. They only have to pivot at a fulcrum, you are trying to move your whole body.

So that leads trying to step in, which means you need to cover at least ~4 feet(average width of a horse) to avoid being trampled. I'm willing to bet that the best case scenario is you avoid being trampled or hit by the lance, but you are in no stable footing condition to strike out. So the whole situation repeats and eventually the horsemen is going to grind you down.

Besides you logic doesn't work with the claymore (or zweihander), a sword specifically made to disrupt pole-arm combat. This sword was on average just as long as a lance but with better maneuvering obviously due to it being a sword. This sword had two uses. to break the weapons of pike-men, and to chop off the legs of charging horses. And since horses charging in can't change direction like a person on foot can, the advantage one on one goes to the guy with the 6 ft sword in his hands.

I believe you're confusing some facts here. Zweihänder were historically deployed against foot pike-men, you are correct in that their alleged purpose was to break the pole-arm, but they were not touted as anti-calvary weapons, that's what pole-arms were for. A 55-60 inch great sword is not "just as long" as 3-4 meter lance, I don't know where you are even getting that notion. And I couldn't find any definitive records indicating practice in chopping out the horses legs, the standard practice against a calvary charge was actually to place a hand on the ricasso(blunt) portion of the blade and to use them as a short pole-arm. Chopping at the legs would actually ignore the classic problem of this mounted vs footman scenario, the lance would hit you before you could strike perpendicularly to the legs.

Some Asian cultures did have "horse chopping" swords, but these cultures also lacked lanced calvary like our discussion.

Now a proper pole-arm against a rider would be another story.

You keep on thinking I'm talking about sidestepping a charging horse a the last moment. Of course not. That's just silly. But in one on one if a horse is charging at a person full speed with the intent to trample or with the horseman's intent to impale the grounded unit with his lance, the grounded unit can run faster either left or right depending on which side the lance is on. Even better would be moving diagonally towards the direction of the charger and to either left or right at the same time to force the charge to break, giving you a chance to run in and hack at the horseman. There's no way in hell you're going to tell me a horse can slow down from a full charge speed to turn and go after a grounded unit moving like that one on one. Even if the horse got close to the grounded unit there's no way that the lancer is making an effective charge at that point. And what's he going to do then? Try and impale the infantry unit with his lance at close range? He's essentially waiting to get hacked unless he's dropped his lance and pulled out a sword at that point.

Also, my mistake about length of the zweihander. Late night. Tired. But I do know that it was used against horsemen. It's just logical as it had no other use besides disabling pike-men. I I did search that up and found every article I looked at reference me back to Wikipedia which says that the zweihander was also used to dismember horses. It really would just make sense. It's like I know that the Nodachi (a 5 foot katana essentially) was used primarily against cavalry units in Feudal Japan.

 

[Slycne]

You keep on thinking I'm talking about sidestepping a charging horse a the last moment. Of course not. That's just silly. But in one on one if a horse is charging at a person full speed with the intent to trample or with the horseman's intent to impale the grounded unit with his lance, the grounded unit can run faster either left or right depending on which side the lance is on. Even better would be moving diagonally towards the direction of the charger and to either left or right at the same time to force the charge to break, giving you a chance to run in and hack at the horseman. There's no way in hell you're going to tell me a horse can slow down from a full charge speed to turn and go after a grounded unit moving like that one on one. Even if the horse got close to the grounded unit there's no way that the lancer is making an effective charge at that point. And what's he going to do then? Try and impale the infantry unit with his lance at close range? He's essentially waiting to get hacked unless he's dropped his lance and pulled out a sword at that point.

Sure they can, it's not like a horse is some immovable object of inertia that's bound to a single path. Go look at horse barrel racing for instance, that's a 180 degree turn at speed. They get slowed down a bit by it, but we also are not talking about a full turn either in this scenario.

So I still don't understand how you think you can run perpendicular or diagonal to the horse to dodge its path. They only have to make minor changes to catch you if you are not trying to move at the last second before they have a chance to respond.

Also, my mistake about length of the zweihander. Late night. Tired. But I do know that it was used against horsemen. It's just logical as it had no other use besides disabling pike-men. I I did search that up and found every article I looked at reference me back to Wikipedia which says that the zweihander was also used to dismember horses. It really would just make sense. It's like I know that the Nodachi (a 5 foot katana essentially) was used primarily against cavalry units in Feudal Japan.

That's the thing though. If you dig deeper you'll find that much of this is based purely on post-medieval speculation. There is no evidence to suggest that they were effectively used against cavalry. Their most famous user the Landsknechts, it was thought to only be used in a relative minority of their numbers, most preferring pike, halberd or partisans. Some historians go so far as to say they were almost solely ceremonial weapons, that never saw much actual combat. This [http://www.thearma.org/essays/2HGS.html] has a pretty good cited breakdown of the rise, fall and use of the two-handed great swords.

Just because Japanese cultures had them(and even the Nodachi is recorded as not being commonly used and the Zanbato is historically debated to be used at all), doesn't mean it's a logical comparison. Their warfare was quite different than Western. They almost exclusively didn't fight with shields, for instance. And they were facing riders without the extreme reach of Western lances, so being able to effectively attack the horse before the rider came into reach would be a much more viable tactic.