Skyrim Character Building » Discussions


The Character Build Archives

  • Member
    September 5, 2013

    If 0AR tag is introduced the Unarmored tag should be changed to Alterer or something like that. Do you have suggestions for that? I have put it a lot of thought when CB Archive was just being established and couldn't think of anything. Now, if someone comes searching for 0AR build without knowing anything about categories he'd choose Unarmored as its logical. An Alterer or something like that will not show the idea behind the build not using physical armor.

  • Member
    September 5, 2013

    What I'm saying, is that despite what platform the majority of players play on, everyone's opinion will matter, without discriminating between PC and Console. But if someone says something that insults the other half its not good, no matter where does it come from. The expressions like "one of these days I'm going to stumble on to an amazing build that is based around a mod, and that will kill my soul." have no place here.

  • Member
    September 5, 2013

    "When mastered, unarmored gives an armor rating of 65" - Morrowind

    Discussions about Unarmored or Unarmed are based on made up conventions.

    Morrowind example on Unarmored: the only pre-defined class using Unarmored and none of the Heavy/ Medium/ Light Armor skills in Morrowind was THE MAGE (who had further access to magical armor/ shielding through magic skills).

    In Oblivion, there's no Unarmored skill. The trick in Skyrim is to decide what rules and particularly how strictly these rules your Unarmored character would follow.

    Unarmored was a skill in previous TES games. Unarmed was not. Hand-to-Hand was (or H2H) and "hand-to-hand" should be what "Unarmed" refers to.

    Many, MANY builds here are actually very loosely based on actual skill sets from previous TES games. And some are quite highly rated too... Fair? No.

  • Member
    September 5, 2013

    It's not about the spell its about playstyle. 0AR builds have other mechanics that help them survive. Builds with mage armor rely on that heavily, you need to take into account magicka cost, always be careful for it not to run out etc. The Mage Armor tag doesn't reflect that, I'd never go looking for clothing-using builds under that tag. Its because that spell can be used by anyone, even Heavy Armored brute warriors. It's the clothing that makes the spell important not vice versa.

  • Member
    September 5, 2013

    yeah sorry when I wrote that I just got back home and I was really irritated after reading some more I realize maybe im just being really irritating but I think I made my point. sorry guys just had a stick up my butt (not literally of course).

    I can see both arguments now clearly and understand the arguments for the pc users

    also vazgen you cheeky devil taking what I said out of context like that you would make a great politician

  • Member
    September 5, 2013

    You're speaking of a convention of your own (even though it makes perfect sense). I do the same. Are we trying to make this convention become the rule?

    I, for one, don't see the point in deciding to wear clothes, thus penalizing your character with having less to no AR, but at the same time try to increase your AR through other means (although Role Playing fans could beg to differ). It only makes sense within the confines of an already set system of rules (like the previously mentioned Mage class in Morrowind) since nobody can rebel against that.

    On the other hand, Unarmored NEVER meant 0AR. It always meant "no usage of light/ medium/ heavy armor allowed".

    I agree that there has to be a more precise/ strict system of categories/ tags. If so, "0AR" would have to be a "child tag"/ "subtag" or "child category"/ "subcategory" of "Unarmored" and whenever using the category "Unarmored" you would be prompted to add also at least one child/ sub tag/ category. But I have no idea if this is possible.

  • Member
    September 5, 2013

    Made a few minor modifications

  • Member
    September 5, 2013
    I see armor as a skill to be taught. One can't simply put on Steel Armor and act like he always wore it. The characters wearing armor had to be taught how to use and move in it before the events of Skyrim. Alteration on the other hand is not the magic armor you conjure and put on. It changes the physical properties of your very flesh (see spell names) and therefore do not require special training in wearing them. In terms of RP the only difference I see between someone using Alteration and someone with 0AR is that the latter wasn't taught the spell before. On the other hand the difference between wearers of physical and magical armors is very significant for me.
    In terms of gameplay clothing allows more speed and mobility than any armor. Sure you can take Steed Stone or the appropriate perk and get the same effect but not everyone does that. I don't think there is a way for subtags :)
  • Member
    September 5, 2013

    @ Vazgen

    "I see armor as a skill to be taught [...] The characters wearing armor had to be taught how to use and move in it before the events of Skyrim."

                        Sure it is. But even if you start wearing Light Armor/ Heavy Armor in Skyrim, there's progression through gaining perks. And that's valid for all skills, including Alteration, which benefits considerably in this regard by the Mage Armor perk.

    "One can't simply put on Steel Armor and act like he always wore it"

                         Well, nothing stops you from just putting on a Heavy Armor Set and becoming a sort of very clumsy ball of steel, only to survive some power attack or to get protection while using spells on your opponent, since in Skyrim there's no penalty on spellcasting because of wearing armor or having low Stamina. But even if you do that, it makes sense since the armor adds it's base AR temporarily, as you don't have any perks in the skill itself. It makes sense all the more if you like it and decide to use it and to specialize in the skill.

    "Alteration on the other hand is not the magic armor you conjure and put on."

                         No, that used to be Conjuration. Not in Skyrim though.

    "It changes the physical properties of your very flesh (see spell names) and therefore do not require special training in wearing them."

                         Yes, by adding a leveled base AR. There is also an implied progression, based on spell availability/ cost/ and magicka cost in using the spell (Oakflesh < Stoneflesh < Ironflesh < Ebonyflesh). And the ultimate "armor" spell in Alteration, Dragonhide, instead of adding a leveled base AR, it works as a fixed intake melee damage reduction... which makes sense since there is an armor cap, which you'll most likely (if wearing armor) try to hit. Dragonhide is a life saver though, if you play on higher difficulties.

    "In terms of RP the only difference I see between someone using Alteration and someone with 0AR is that the latter wasn't taught the spell before."

                        Based on this, if I play a Dunmer, although I landed in Helgen knowing the Destruction spell Sparks, I can't ever use it, nor can I play any classes that would use Destruction as a skill. Which I totally can, based on my own conventions.              

    "On the other hand the difference between wearers of physical and magical armors is very significant for me. In terms of gameplay clothing allows more speed and mobility than any armor. Sure you can take Steed Stone or the appropriate perk and get the same effect but not everyone does that."

                        Yup, same here. Mind you, I could play a Heavy Armor character and still use Alteration, maybe even use the flesh spells or Dragonhide, particularly in the early stages, although, I know I'm playing according to MY RULES. Because instead of a flesh spell, I can gulp a Fortify Heavy Armor Potion. Because I can use a Fortify Health Potion. Because I can just use a Poison of Paralyze. Because I will try everything to not get hit. Because... we are playing by our own rules.

  • Member
    September 5, 2013

    I have no quarrel with "playing by our own rules" statement. In fact, I don't even get what we're doing here. We're not arguing and it seems we're talking about something completely off-topic  To summarize my thoughts on the topic of Unarmored tag: I think it should stay the way it is. It can only be replaced with 0AR (or left the same but cover only 0AR builds) if a such new tag is implemented that from looking on it a person would know that the builds under that don't use physical armor and use only Alteration spells. 

    On our conversation (if you'll have more remarks on this, I suggest using PM, just not to fill the comments of this post with off-topic replies):

    1. Agreed

    2. What I was saying is that wearing Heavy Armor and moving in it like the player can do from the start of the game requires some skill and previous experience. And if you decide to specialize in it, it makes sense in terms of RP to get some training before starting wearing it. 

    3. Didn't play Oblivion 

    4. The Alteration spells are different in that regard. It still requires practice and training, but unlike physical armor its a spell that you learn from a spell book. On the player's agility with it, Its like your skin suddenly becomes so hard that it can stop enemy weapons from penetrating it. Much like Crysis 2 (link).

    5. Don't see the connection here. I compared Alteration armor users and 0AR builds. The characters for me differ in not using the Mage Armor (obviously), which can be seen as them not being taught it before. My wording was not good on this, sorry. 

    6. Again agreed. Only a note: Fortify Heavy Armor potions affect skill level and in terms of damage reduction (or AR) don't come even close to Mage Armor spells (without Alchemy/Enchanting grinding). Same goes for the Fortify Heavy Armor enchantments.