So many comparisons are being made with it like a warrior's sword or what have you. However it's neglected that the warrior is also using other skills! It makes for an unfair assessment.

Try this: Make a warrior who ONLY uses one handed (or two handed); no armor, no blocking, no spells and definitely no cheap alchemy/smithing/enchanting. Now when people who complain about how weak destruction is they are trying to argue one skill vs three when comparing a mage to a warrior are doing it. Is that going to be easy? No, but it's a much more fair comparison. You can play how you want, but there are limits to what will be successful and what won't.

With regards to spell damage not scaling with destruction skill that's a whole other issue. It comes down to you need to use those bigger spells and invest heavily in to regen magicka. I would like to see the lower level spells still be useful and scale up too. I don't think however that would make destruction any more powerful, just more dynamic and fun. It could be a bug but not likely. Since weapon skills work this way I think it should be moddable.

TL,DR: Destruction magic is just as viable as a one handed; you just have to use alteration in place of heavy armor and restoration in place of blocking otherwise your comparison is flawed.

Why do all other skills scale but not destruction then?

Exactly.

As I said in another similar thread, you can't specialise in just 1 skill tree and expect to kick ass. You need to compliment that skill tree with a secondary or possibly third.

Well...some bugs need fixing first. Like augmented fire/frost/shock not working for runes, cloaks, etc, and dual-casting not doing anything for those spells as well (except taking 2.5x magicka).

OP, i did that in a sense. My level 24 character is a Nord who goes around wearing bum clothes, and only uses a 2h weapon... I can run around 1 and 2 shotting things (I get the the finishing moves left and right), and even against multiple enemies, only the occasional health potion is needed. I've died maybe 3 times so far total

edit: Oh, and I'm playing on Adept difficulty, not novice or apprentice

So you're saying that for warriors to do decent damage with a melee weapon, they have to put points into more than 1 tree?

Do you think that people who play mages are stupid? It's a moot point that you have to put skill points in more than one tree. But destruction is the go-to tree for mage damage, just as one or two handed is for warriors.

That's why there's a focus on Destruction. Because as important as it is to level enchanting and alchemy, they're not going to DIRECTLY make your DPS any better.

I would say it's for balance reasons. Much easier for them to balance what a 100 two handed skill w/ daedric warhammer does vs a master level destruction spell.

The problem is that it seems like there's a large gap to get from the apprentice to journeyman spells which can really discourage mages in the early to mid game.

the point is, warriors can improve its main dealing skill(be it one/two handed) with other skills. mage cannot. now that destruction is streamlined to the MAX limited to only elemental damage, it clearly stands out for mages as their main dealing skill. but guess what you can't rely on it nomatter what other skills you utilize. if mages could improve their destruction damage with proper enchantments there wouldn't be ANY ranting about magic system.

ppl just keep in mind there are literally tens of thousands of guys and gals that looked forward to playing skyrim with all new revamped magic system as destruction mages. you have to admit casting lightning or frost shards is way much cooler than conjuring up dead bodies everytime you encounter enemies. we wanted to play with destruction as our main skill, but there's no way we can rely primarily on this cause we cannot improve its damage output late game whereas melee can.

There's more than just dps to calculate, that is another often overlooked advantage of destruction. If I can whittle an enemy down to half health before he reaches me then I only need half as much dps as a melee warrior to achieve the same result.

Are people who play mages dumb? No, not the people, but the play style has a harder learning curve that is for sure. I am convinced very few destruction mages set up dual cast runes before a battle for when the bad guys get to them as a sort of, "finishing move".

I agree. Magic is ranged, while warrior weapons are not.

Another person who has no idea what they're talking about, but feels the need to chime in anyways.


What? Destruction is one of the strongest skills early on. It's later levels, around 30+ where problems begin to arise. The reason being is that destruction dosen't scale like other skills.
EX: An Iron sword will continue to do more damage as your one-handed skill increases. This isn't the same for destruction, no matter your level a spell will always do the same damage.

The forum is starting to fill with "don't complain" threads lol...

Destruction does scale its damage, just in a very different, non-intuitive way. I do agree that it would be nice to have magic skill assist in the scaling though but only so as to allow more versatile spell casting to remain viable.

I guess it's more akin to as a warrior your damage jumps up when you get a better weapon. That is the same as when a destruction destruction mage gets a better spell. Do you ever go back to that old weapon? No, because it's weaker. Same thing with the destruction spells. If the spells scaled the older spells would still be weaker than the new ones so magic damage scaling with skill wouldn't solve anything. If Beth decided to allow the older spells to scale up better than the new ones then no one would use the new ones. The best compromise would be to allow say the flame spell to scale up to be stronger but not as strong as say firestorm.

Xeth, the numbers are out there and readily accessible. You can have this discussion internally, there's no reason to tell people with high level mages how their mage works.

There are just TOO MANY points I can make that say mages overall are underpowered compared to warriors that I can write a book on it. Here are just a few

1. Destruction never gets stronger.

2. Mage spells are either too weak or cost too much mana to sustain in a fight.

3. Mage runs out of mana, has to run. Warrior runs out of stamina, continues to pound heavy damage.

4. Mages do less damage than warriors AND are 10-100x less durable in battle.

5. Master level destruction spells take 5 seconds to cast, cost too much mana, and don't get stronger after you get them at level 50 while monsters get stronger.

6. Warrior late game can have insanely strong legendary armor and weapons that do 500 damage per regular swing without power swing and tank like a god, mages have the 100 damage master spell that takes 5 seconds to cast when they are vulnerable.

7. Warriors can faceroll through the game with 2 skills and two hack buttons. Mages need to constantly switch spells, run around, drink potions, use shouts, use lydia, ect just to get by.

8. Robes with magic regen/cost reduction is nowhere near as good as the armor that makes warriors unstoppable late game.

9. Warriors with heavy armor and weapons can whip out their flame spell anytime and do as much damage as a mage while able to tank so much more, mages who want to fight with swords end up getting [censored].

10. I have yet to find a pure mage at any level able to complete the main quest line, I see warriors level 20ish complete it easily.

11. A TON of people complain about destruction being underpowered and mages in general compared to warriors. No one complains about warriors be underpowered, only overpowered.

12. This is a TES game. Players should be able to play how they want. If they want to focus on destruction without much help in other magic fields they should be able to do that. Game favors warriors heavily to faceroll through the game.

13. In even decently balanced games, warriors can always tank more damage while mages do much more damage and can nuke from afar. Mage destruction spells are mid-close range spells and can't nuke while warriors do more damage. In league of legends we see spell casters like ryze who die instantly and move slowly but can nuke so well and does more damage than tanks like malphite who are very hard to kill but barely do any damage. Imagine if malphite did more nuke damage than ryze. Who in their right mind would want to play ryze then? Everyone would want to play malphite. Same thing is going on here. People play the more balanced characters and like to play by what is better. This is an elder scrolls game and people should be able to play how they like but instead are forced to be melee or struggle through as a mage.

There's no point man, leave posters like xeth alone. You're going to end up getting reported or something.

We'll just be in our little corner with our facts and math. Let them stay in their bubble, it's too frustrating to get them to understand the subject. I mean no disrespect, but you don't try to teach a 2nd grader algebra.

Then why did you have to post here yet a third time in the thread saying nothing? Go troll someone else's thread. All I can tell it you are focusing on the no scaling damage part of my argument which isn't even the biggest issue since I AGREE it should, just for different reasons.

You have some good points, however most of your reasons make many assumptions about the character in general. Who said this had anything to do with wearing armor or not? Or smithing/enchanting or not? Anyone using destruction as their primary damage source can take advantage of those same benefits.

All that being said it is still viable but I never claimed it was as easy as swinging a weapon. It requires better combat planning and tactics and of course a different play style (such as you mention in point 7). Is it for everyone? No, not everyone wants to play that way. A lot of people want their instant nuke rocket launcher spell and for the game to be even easier. Me, I roll with master difficultly and wish I could crank it up more. I play several characters though and like all TES games am constantly struggling to find ways to not make my character ridiculously overpowered. Destruction this time around makes the game fun for me and other who like a tactical game and that's just fine too (your point #12).

The way I see it is that they don't scale because there are different versions of the spells you must buy.

Why should a weak version of a spell become more powerful just because you got better at casting it? Go get a Master version instead of continuing to use your Apprentice version.

I am trying to save us high level mages from getting frustrated. Communicating facts to you is impossible, so I`m trying to save us the effort.

Smithing and/or enchanting cannont increase the damage of destruction spells. They can dramatically increase the damage output of weapons, however.

OP, in your entire post you made no valid points.

youre either lucky or lying cause i went out without armor and was killed 2 shots by a bandit

Its getting really clear a lot of people don't play mages completely are entitling themselves to be an expert

There is only 1 master level spell of each type, takes 5 seconds to cast and less effective than firebolt.

Yep, the math that states that you are dead whether you are damaged 1 point over your max health or 1000 pts over your max.

Funny how I am playing a pure mage focusing mostly on destruction with no trouble, but I'd have problems playing a warrior because I just do not get into that type of play.