not saying that magic needs changes. but it was to my understanding that the reason we dont have a bunch of spells that doo the same thing such as a spray of fire that does higher damage for each level was because the magic was to scale with us. so there would be no need for spell creation or higher renditions of the same spell.

In this regard, destruction magic is a bit stagnant. Now I dont think it should be an off the chart scaling. a small amount of scaling was hinted at by Todd in his interview on magic. will have to search for the vid. will edit when I find it.

300, there's a 3 point perk which adds up to triple it if you're wearing no armor. Still, you're better off just wearing actual armor.

Wow I never knew saying nothing could...say nothing. At least I'm providing facts. I don't make up this stuff off the top of my head. It IS a problem. Why you are fighting so hard not to believe it is a mystery.

Yep, armour really is a moot point considering mages can have the exact same defensive stats with heavy armour as warriors if they so wish... for the exact same amount of perk points.

Someone mentioned earlier that a mages max damage is 100, it's not it's 150. Still a drop in the ocean when comparing to the other classes but it is a pretty powerful amount when you see how much it knocks off the enemies health bar, the issue with it is though that you're rooted in a cast animation for 3-4 seconds before it actually fires off.

A small amount of scaling added and the final mastery spells being reworked and i'd honestly be happy with destruction.

He can successfully explain his position, you can't. I don't think your ad hominem at the end there really proves anything, just reflects poorly on your character and emphasizes the previous fact. Your username is appropriate, at least.

Bows + Conjuration >>>>>>>>>>>>> Destruction + Conjuration

Conjuration >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Destruction

Conjuration can be used as a stand alone skill, or with the support of other skills.
It is viable by itself.

The point is:

Bows can be used for dealing damage without the help of another damage-dealing skill.
One-handed can be used for dealing damage without the help of another damage-dealing skill.
Two-handed can be used for dealing damage without the help of another damage-dealing skill.
Conjuration can be used as your ONLY skill.

Bows without ANY PERKS (but with bow skill leveled naturally through use) are more powerful than destruction spells.
The Fire Atronach's fire spell is more powerful than the fire-mage's fire spells.

...

Restoration and Alteration suffer a bit from uselessness as well.
(Alchemy and enchanting does everything alteration and restoration can do, probably better)

1 - Destruction is nerfed compared to previous games.

2 - I do believe I was told I could "play what you are". Well I'm "Waste Enemies with Bad-Ass Destruction Spells Dude"... where are my "B. A. Destruction" spells?


[...cuz I pity da fool that makes me mad once I get them.]

IKR. It's easy for me to get a kill like that.

Much of what he said was wrong or misleadingly incomplete, including:

-Mage max damage - Flat out wrong.
-Mage max armor - wrong, even when limited to spell armor, exacerbated by...
-Completely ignoring the fact that mages can wear the exact same armor as warriors.

Then there's nonsense like:
I have heard of mages using 3/4 of their magic on a single -regular- enemy.

Which is just impressively ignorant, given that it's no secret that one can trivially get 100% mana reduction.

So, he's not "successfully explaining his position" - he's explaining a position that is rooted in error and omission.

Additionally, that was not "ad hominem". That was a mere insult, which is not the same thing. This is a rookie mistake that is pretty commonly made by people who learned everything they know about logical fallacies from Wikipedia.

An insult: You are stupid. This statement may or may not be true, but it isn't using the assertion that you're an idiot as a means of showing your argument to be wrong, ergo it is not an "ad hominem" argument - it's simply an insult. Rude, uncivil, possibly incorrect, but not logically fallacious in the strict sense.

Ad hominem: Your argument is wrong because you are stupid. This is asserting that the fact that you are stupid must surely mean that any argument you put forth will be wrong.

everything you say is true, either fully or partially but some things are worth pointing out

1- you are using the alchemy/smithing/enchanting/heavy armor exploits... that waste 33 perk points to make a "god like" geared melee'er... if you like exploits that arguments stands nicely, if you are like me and dont like and dont want to resort to exploits, then a warriors damage isnt that much over 100, if it goes over 150 I'd be surprised (you can put in power attacks and dual weilding in there, but then again so can casters to a degree)

2- mages burning 3/4 of their mana on regular enemies is just not true, unless the mage in question doesnt know what he is doing... you can 2 shot regular mobs early on in the game (lvl 10 or so), the real problem are the leaders and bosses with huge health pools, you need to have standart enchanted gear to overcome this problem with -spell cost preferebly but strong +mana and regen helps too

3- IIRC my full alteration cloth geared mage had about 130 ye thats pretty low, as I painfully was made aware, a pure cloth mage is prly better off relying on paralysis if he wants to spec alteration

4- a mage can wear armor too so whatever armor a warrior can get a destruction battlemage can too

5- you are focusing too much on the fact that spells damage dont scale and neglecting all the wonderfull stuff they CAN do that melee cant... like mass and powerfull aoe, traps, staggers, debuffs, drains etc.... and... its ranged.

first parrt is absolutly true... especially because most pros that destruction has requires mobs to be on you not on summons or companions, not to mention aoe spells dont synergize well with them either...

as for destruction not being "viable on its own" thats just not true... I played a pure mage focused almost entirely on destruction followed by alteration and restoration to lvl 30 in master difficulty and felt just as viable and powerfull as my warrior... save from an anoying early stage where I couldnt find the -spell cost enchant and my enchanting skill was too low to give me a realiable mana pool to spell fling with.

Again, we're getting pidgeon holed into taking enchanting and using a possible exploit to make Destruction playstyle viable on Master. (and I say possible, so don't be mean to me!)

You were implying he is childish and or stupid and that that was the reason you couldn't explain your position to him, therefor attacking his character rather than his argument. Ad hominem. Also I'm pretty sure if it was indeed an insult(obviously was both ad hominem and an insult), that's a reportable offense.
Also even if his position is wrong, that doesn't mean he didn't successfully explain. You even said yourself that you understood why he believes the things he does - therefor he successfully explained his position.

I would be lying if I said that not resorting to enchanting would make my mage experience on master fun... it would surely be doable... but surely not be fun to be chugging pots, and relying on either a weapon skill or a staff with a truckload of souls to fuel it.

having that said, even without putting perks in it, using enchanting to boost the mana pool is still viable... but really to have a viable mana pool against anything that isnt a regular mob... you really want the extra mana regen/mana pool/spell cost reduction that enchanting and its perks give you.

I'm slightly confused by this whole thing. The 'breaking the game' thread shows you need 31 perks to obtain a method for creating a weapon / armor of massive damage. Where are the magi putting those 31 perks?

In order for a 'warrior' to get to the 1-2 shotting things range they need to branch to Enchanting (magic skill) Alchemy (Thief Skill) Smithing (Warrior Skill); Why should a destruction mage (single tree) be as powerful as a build that spans four times the skill trees at a minimum? (One that also admittedly abuses the system.)

Now forgive me if I'm mistaken, but doesn't this game also have weakness to elements poisons like Oblivion? And potions of fortifying destruction? Could you not... poke a target with an arrow / dagger coated in (theoretically) 100% weakness to ______ poison? And then take down a destruction spells do more damage potion?

If stacking consumables isn't your thing, branch out into other spell trees. The ending the world warrior didn't get his what-ever-mega-damage-weapon by only going down the two-handed tree.

What I'd also like to know; what is the average damage range of weapons only exclusively using a single tree (only one-handed perks)? How about dual wielding or one-hand / shield?

I like using Poisons with "Weakness to Element" before dual casting magic. Hagraven? Hit her with an arrow poisoned with "Weakness to Fire", then dual cast Fire spells on her and watch her go "I'M MELTING! I'M MELTING! MY WORLD! MY WORLD!" as she get's incinerated into a pile of ash within seconds. Works on just about anything, except for crap immune to Poison.

I have my 33 perks in restoration, altertion and destruction. LIke the last 2 tes games. This doesn't make me hit 4k like a warrior.



Please lets have a civil discussion, don't start that kind of thing.

Try looking at it as a different flavor; you trade up-front "I kill everything, there is nothing that can challenge me" damage for all of the buffs / healing powers of your other two trees.

Or, if you're to focused on the pure numbers: realize the only reason warriors even hit that hard in the first place is abuse of multiplicative perks from the aforementioned crafting skills. It has virtually nothing to do with the warrior's offensive trees; other then the fact of all you see is someone running forward and swinging a sword. If anything were to change it should be decreasing (or capping) the effects of stacked temporary craft bonuses: not warrior skill tree's damage, not destruction tree damage.

Couple of posts have gone away.

Please remember you're responsible for the manner in which you choose to disagree with others. Keep it civil, guys.

Thanks.

How is this any different than a melee character being "pidgeon holed" into taking smithing and enchanting to produce the numbers you and your ilk are so envious of?


Did it ever occur that perhaps destruction and magic is fine its just smiting + enchanting is way too filled with rewards?


And again, this is a SINGLE PLAYER GAME. Nothing I do will impact you. Nothing you do will impact me. If you want to smith/enchant legendary weapons to crank out absurd damage then go right ahead. But don't come here crying that you can't do something similar with one school of magic.

"Hey this is broke, I want my [censored] broke too."

Good logic.

Ok, so a pure destruction mage has it hard. . Mage game play = more challenging than warrior game play. Bigger challenge = more rewarding experience. Perhaps, upon success, you feel a greater sense of accomplishment. Games used to be like that all the time. Now, people complain when the hardest difficulty is "hard". The game must be broken. Maybe you should try playing a warrior, and it won't be so "hard". Maybe turn down the difficulty.

Mages not doing the same damage as warriors does not equate to broken mages. It's a different play style. The magic system was intentionally designed that way. You lose pure damage output and gain flexibility. It's a challenge. It takes a different mindset, not just point and shoot. You have to play smart, be careful, approach encounters cautiously.

Don't just complain about the difficulty until Bethesda caves and makes it easier. And yes, this is what it boils down to. You want to kill things easier, like warriors. You want the best of both worlds. "I get all the cool spells, and I can output damage like a pure warrior". You want the easy button.

I have a mage character and a warrior character. I am enjoying them both. I am not playing on master difficulty. I find it too hard. I play at the level that I enjoy. Maybe, once I've played for a while, I'll be ready for master diffculty. Until then, though, I won't be complaining that master difficulty is too hard.

By level 45 I will have enough enchanting skill and desctruction skill to equip -100% Destruction cost and cast Master level spells for practically free... Pumping out 180-300 dmg for free seems pretty damn nice to me. I will be leveling normally and enjoying the game at a reasonable rate. I will just have to adapt to the scenario with my other skills.

I will be happy to give my take on this when I'm level 50, but that will take some time. No hurry or major complaints here.

I have never seen a +elemental damage item. I don't think they exist. You're right there. But so what? Casters get other enchants that melee users don't have a corollary to, like a reduction in the cost of a school or increased mana regen. And I would take +mana regen over +damage any day of the week. If you expect to drop a boss with a single spell, you're dumb. You don't expect to drop a boss with a single power attack, do you? No, you don't. So how does a mage differ from a melee? The melee runs in and hacks and slashes and hopes to god he can kill it before it kills him. A mage casts spells, at range, all the while dancing around/out of the way of the bad guys attacks. A good mage might take a little longer to kill something than a good melee, but the mage will emerge completely unharmed. Good luck doing that in melee. And one last thing, if you dual cast a Destro spell, most enemies get staggered. 99% of the time, I just sit there and spam dual hand firebolt over and over and the bad guy can't do a damn thing about it. He's too busy being perma-staggered. Also, calm the hell down, it's a game. No need to have a coronary.


The +50% is calculated in the tooltip.


+50% damage to the elemental type from the perk. And dual casting does WAY more than 10-15% more damage, at least in normal (I'm level 39). In my opinion, it does more than +100% damage. I have to cast the same spell 2-3 times one-handed to get the same amount of damage I get from a single dual hand cast.

@kidico4life2, You're post was long. Some of the things in it are totally valid. Not quoting cause it would take half a page. Just gana say this. A.) I snipe with fireball/firebolt ALL the time from EXTREME range...so far away the monsters have no idea what to do and just stand there and die or run a little, then stand their and die. Obviously, this only works outdoors, but still, long range for mages? Check! B.) Yes, mages in Skyrim aren't nukers. But there is a reason. In games like LoL or WoW, you need nukers for the game to work. DPS is DPS. In Skyrim, you aren't forming a raid. If the mage was a classic nuker, the game wouldn't be even the least bit challenging for a mage. This should be obvious. Please don't try to compare apples to oranges, as WoW/LoL and Skyrim are COMPLETELY different games. C.) If you want to focus on a single school of magic, what the hell else are you using your points for? ALL non-combat skills (pick pocket, lock picking, speach, etc)? Well no wonder you svck in combat. 1/5th-2/5ths of your dood is combat oriented! This means you svck at comabt! That is a perfectly valid choice, but don't complain about it! D.) The tier 4 spells do 90 damage after the 50% buff from perks BEFORE the buff from dual casting (it's in the tooltip), so I am sure the tier 5 spells (which I don't have yet) do more than 100 damage. And E.) Lvl 39 pure mage (no other combat skills), normal mode, just recently beat the main story (finished just before I leveled to 38). I have 0 perk points in Conjuration, and the only Conjuration spell I have ever used is Soul Trap. There you go. :OD



This is the truth...Wake up people. Magic might be a little less powerful than an uber-twinked out, dual wielding maniac. But you can get thru the game just fine using it as your primary, or even only source of damage. I do it. I did it. Others have too. If you can't, well, maybe don't play at RetardedHard difficulty as a mage, cause you ain't ready for it.

Bethesda could just rename the difficulty slider to the balance slider and squash most of these arguments.

Everyone just keeps saying "take conjuration" or "exploit enchanting"

You do realize if they were to just take bow and smithing instead of destruction they would kill way faster and have more magicka to spare.

The problem is that any other dps skill is better than destro atm. They go up in damage while destro does not.




IT IS doable, its just not fun. People want to get stronger as they level.