Remember a time when vampires sucked?

[Dagmar]

Breaking hardcaps is obvious, and beyond a reasonable doubt not an intended implication for the mechanic.

It's only obvious because the actual effects of the Fortify Restoration potion are contrary to the described effects of the potion just as the actual effects of the Necromage perk are contrary to the described effects of the perk.

If you cast heal against a vampire, its not going to not heal him because of the word against.

You don't cast heal "against" a target. That's just more butchery of the English language. The descriptions of healing spells don't use the preposition "against" because it's an obvious misuse of the word. Since healing effects don't utilize that preposition in the descriptions provided by Bethesda your statement has no relevance. It merely shows an affinity to mutilate the English language by ignoring the actual meaning of the word "against."

You can categorize it however you want but I've simply pointed out that the effects of the Necromage perk both exceed and contradict it's description and nothing you do or say changes that fact. The English language simply isn't that mutable. If your defining criteria for an exploit requires the explicit admission by the game developer that the effect is unintended then so be it, but then you have no basis to assert that there are any exploits in the game. Some of us prefer to believe that Bethesda actually means what it says when it describes how things are supposed to work in the game.

 

[Xarnac]

It's only obvious because the actual effects of the Fortify Restoration potion are contrary to the described effects of the potion just as the actual effects of the Necromage perk are contrary to the described effects of the perk.

You don't cast heal "against" a target. That's just more butchery of the English language. The descriptions of healing spells don't use the preposition "against" because it's an obvious misuse of the word. Since healing effects don't utilize that preposition in the descriptions provided by Bethesda your statement has no relevance. It merely shows an affinity to mutilate the English language by ignoring the actual meaning of the word "against."

You can categorize it however you want but I've simply pointed out that the effects of the Necromage perk both exceed and contradict it's description and nothing you do or say changes that fact. The English language simply isn't that mutable. If your defining criteria for an exploit requires the explicit admission by the game developer that the effect is unintended then so be it, but then you have no basis to assert that there are any exploits in the game. Some of us prefer to believe that Bethesda actually means what it says when it describes how things are supposed to work in the game.

Its an opinion on whether it is an exploit. People that think the bold, must be new to the series and Beth, since Beth has made countless screw ups in that regard throughout the series. Until you grasp the fact that something can be cast against you and have an inadvertent positive effect, there's no need for you to respond anymore, since it is an opinion.

 

[Uther Pundragon]

Vampires have never sucked (no pun intended) in any TES game. At least not from a role playing perspective. Game mechanic wise, yes, they have been lacking. Whether or not this continues in Dawnguard... well, only XBOX 360 users can attest to that so far.

I can not speak for everyone but I have always enjoyed role playing a vampire in TES. I think this will continue and evolve once I get my hands on Dawnguard.

 

[Dagmar]

People that think the bold, must be new to the series and Beth.

How so? Can you point to a specific example of a game from Bethesda where the ingame description of the effect contradicts it's actual effect and Bethesda has explicitly stated that it didn't mean for it to be described as such in the game?

 

[The Seeker]

Vampires have never sucked (no pun intended) in any TES game. At least not from a role playing perspective. Game mechanic wise, yes, they have been lacking. Whether or not this continues in Dawnguard... well, only XBOX 360 users can attest to that so far.

I can not speak for everyone but I have always enjoyed role playing a vampire in TES. I think this will continue and evolve once I get my hands on Dawnguard.

Ahh, you caught my joke, lol. I can't believe no one said anything about it yet, but yea I totally agree.

 

[Xarnac]

How so? Can you point to a specific example of a game from Bethesda where the ingame description of the effect contradicts it's actual effect and Bethesda has explicitly stated that it didn't mean for it to be described as such in the game?

Easy, one of many was Acrobatics fall damage in Oblivion. Go check any countless bug and name fix patches on the Nexus, or Workshop. Each game filled with mistakes of that nature. Either not doing what was said, or doing something that wasn't. Silver weapons in Skyrim don't show enchants, but you can enchant them, is another example.

Ahh, you caught my joke, lol. I can't believe no one said anything about it yet, but yea I totally agree.

Yes, having an RP from Dagger to Skyrim, is quite rewarding, regardless of the strain game play changes.

 

[Dagmar]

Until you grasp the fact that something can be cast against you and have an inadvertent positive effect, there's no need for you to respond anymore, since it is an opinion.

It's irrelevant that something that can be cast against you can have an inadvertent positive effect. Putting aside that they aren't spells (which automatically makes the perk exceed the stated effect) the positive effects of Fortification enchantments are not inadvertent, they're intended. The issue isn't whether the intended effect of the enchantment is beneficial, it's whether enchantments are supposed to even have the effect apply on them (they aren't spells after all), and whether intentional, not inadvertent beneficial effects were ever meant to be affected by the perk. The specific use of the word "against" in the description of the perk implies that the intent was that only non-beneficial effects are supposed to gain a boost in effectiveness.

Easy, one of many was Acrobatics fall damage in Oblivion. Go check any countless bug and name fix patches on the Nexus, or Workshop. Each game filled with mistakes of that nature. Either not doing what was said, or doing something that wasn't. Silver weapons in Skyrim don't show enchants, but you can enchant them, is another example.

None of these are examples of what I asked for or what you implied earlier. While you didn't even bother to describe the first example, Bethesda has never stated that the intended effects of Acrobatics were misstated in the game. The second example is even worse than the first one because there isn't even any ingame description that contradicts the ability to enchant Silver weapons. Their innate damage bonuses aren't considered to be enchantments

I asked you to cite specific examples of where Bethesda expressed that it had provided incorrect in game descriptions of effects and you've failed to do so. If you can't do any better than this then I'll assume you were simply making an appeal to false authority with your previous assertion that Bethesda doesn't mean what it says when it describes how things are supposed to work in the game. The fact that they don't end up working that way is exactly why players refer to them as glitches or bugs and refer to a specific subset of them that can be used for the character's benefit as exploits.

 

[Xarnac]

Nope, you just don't know the difference between an opinion and a fact. Also, my examples were fine. Plenty of mechincs that did more than what was said, but was intended by Beth. A vet doesn't really need to explain things to someone who purportedly knows the series. If you don't know what Im talking about, play the series. Until Beth states intention, it will always be opinion. Learn more about the ES and Beth, and know this is nothing new, and that it's an opinion on whether it is an exploit. And nothing you say will ever change that. Like Seeker, I'm done with you. I need a real discussion on the IL, after this silliness. Good day to you good sir.

 

[Dagmar]

Also, my examples were fine. Plenty of mechincs that did more than what was said.

That's not what I asked for and that's not what you implied. I stated that I assumed that Bethesda means what it says when it places descriptions of what things do within the game itself. You implied that Bethesda has a history of saying things it doesn't mean when it places descriptions of what things do inside the game. The only way such a conclusion can objectively be supported is by pointing to an instance where Bethesda actually made a public statement that it provided an incorrect description which you apparently can't do, so now you've backpedaled and changed your position.

...but was intended by Beth.

Based on what? You've provided zero evidence of Bethesda's alleged intentions regarding the mechanics you cited. Merely saying something over and over again with no evidence to support it wont make it any more credible no matter how many times you say it.

I'm reciting Bethesda's own descriptions and pointing out that the perk not only does something that it doesn't say it does, but that it also contradicts the description. If you don't want to accept that it supports the notion that it's an exploit that's your prerogative but based on your own criteria your assertion that anything is not an exploit when it doesn't match up to it's described effect is no more valid regardless of self-appeals to pseudo authority as a vet player.

It's equally your prerogative if you want to make infantile characterizations of this discussion simply because you don't like having your assertions challenged and the fallacious nature of certain of your claims exposed. It does nothing to validate them.

 

[Xarnac]

Still an opinion, one in which you seem to be in the minority of.

 

[Mi-Ilu Yahaz]

The only time I thought vampires sucked in the series was in OBlivion (dodges flying chair). In Morrowind it was awesome because the three vampire clans you could join were like factions. You even had the option of being a clanless vampire. In oblivion the only thing I remember enjoying about being a vampire was the curing quest you get from Count Hassildor... So I'm kinda excited about what they do with this new DLC

 

[Dagmar]

...one in which you seem to be in the minority of.

In your mind. Again, saying it doesn't make it so, and to me the value of an opinion isn't measured by it's popularity. I'll value an opinion that is in the minority because it's supported by rational thought and logic over a popular opposing opinion that is not.

 

[Uther Pundragon]

In my opinion. The whole vampire/necromage thing is an exploit.

 

[Xarnac]

In your mind. Again, saying it doesn't make it so, and to me the value of an opinion isn't measured by it's popularity. I'll value an opinion that is in the minority because it's supported by rational thought and logic over a popular opposing opinion that is not.

You could be in the majority, it is still an opinion.

 

[Dagmar]

...it is still an opinion.

So what? You make it sound as if giving something the status of an opinion renders it without value when the fact is that we give truth values to opinions all the time based on the observations, facts and arguments provided for and against them.

 

[Xarnac]

So what? You make it sound as if giving something the status of an opinion renders it without value when the fact is that we give truth values to opinions all the time based on the observations, facts and arguments provided for and against them.

No, I act as I always have, stating no opinion of my own, other than it is an opinionated subject itself. And as can be seen, debatable.

 

[Dagmar]

No, I act as I always have, stating no opinion of my own.

Breaking hardcaps is obvious, and beyond a reasonable doubt not an intended implication for the mechanic.

Plenty of mechincs that did more than what was said, but was intended by Beth.

 

[Xarnac]

Within context to Necromage being an exploit, I gave no opinion, which is what I said. I gave reasons, but never my opinion. Way to selective quote though.

 

[Dagmar]

Within context to Necromage being an exploit, I gave no opinion, which is what I said. I gave reasons, but never my opinion. Way to selective quote though.

You stated an opinion on whether the Fortify Restoration potion was an exploit based on no more than the same basis for assessing whether the Necromage is an exploit.

On the other hand you stated that the other mechanics weren't exploits with even less basis (that since Bethesda didn't come outright and deny that they weren't intended effects that, contrary to your supposed position regarding the Necromage perk effect, that it's conclusive proof that they aren't exploits).

The lack of any logical consistency in how you form your opinions about exploits and the fact that they contradict your assertion that the only basis for concluding whether something is or isn't an exploit is if Bethesda explicitly states it to be an exploit are all the context that's needed to illustrate your claim that you adhere to that assertion is a sham and that your basis for deciding what is and isn't an exploit is actually very random.

 

[Xarnac]

You stated an opinion on whether the Fortify Restoration potion was an exploit based on no more than the same basis for assessing whether the Necromage is an exploit.

On the other hand you stated that the other mechanics weren't exploits with even less basis (that since Bethesda didn't come outright and deny that they weren't intended effects that, contrary to your supposed position regarding the Necromage perk effect, that it's conclusive proof that they aren't exploits).

The lack of any logical consistency in how you form your opinions about exploits and the fact that they contradict your assertion that the only basis for concluding whether something is or isn't an exploit is if Bethesda explicitly states it to be an exploit are all the context that's needed to illustrate your claim that you adhere to that assertion is a sham and that your basis for deciding what is and isn't an exploit is actually very random.

Opinions, we have them.