Why not swap destruction damage buffs from alchemy with enchanting? Potions should decrease cost and enchantments should buff damage.

Seems like a quick and easy fix to me.... wish i wasnt stuck on console =p.

ALSO: i think dual cast should be 220% power 200% cast cost, instead of 280%.....

I don't see that big of a problem with destruction damage. It isn't scaled enough for playing on master unless you want every fight to take forever, but on adept it is fine if you use enchantments to keep cost down. You don't need 0 cost, but some cost reduction is key. My advice is 25% reduction by level 10, 50% by lvl 20, 75% by 30, 90% by 40.

Dual casting expert level spells fully perked is doing around 200 damage per hit. Considering most enemies have 500 health at that level with some in the 1000 ball park(deathlords) you are killing most enemies in 3-5 hits, and if the enemy has a weakness to an element(deathlords don't like fire) it takes less. Figure in that those attacks are staggering your enemy you are set.

I play dead is dead, and I have often complained about destruction damage.... but my two characters who have done the best playing dead is dead are both destruction mages. One died at level 72, and the first time he even saw the "Your health is low" warning was when he was using equilibrium with transmutate to create gold and knowingly dropped his health low. He died because he jumped off a cliff and had recently used a shout so couldn't use ethereal..... The second is my current character, level 34, no problems so far.

The primary advantage to magic is not damage... it is not getting hit. If you don't get hit, you don't take damage, and you don't die. Destruction mages don't have the damage of melee characters or archers, but they are more mobile than both and capable of tying up their enemies to keep the distance. Archers are not very mobile while attacking which leaves them vulnerable if someone gets close. Mages on the other hand can move while casting, and when you figure they aren't wearing armor they can run the fastest if they need to. Now add impact(stagger), conjuration(decoys), and illusion(chaos) and pure mages can go through entire battles without getting hit.

I actually prefer the lower cost rather than damage, which is different that my original position. Right now at level 34 with 85% reduction I can dual cast an expert level spell about 5-6 times doing 1000-1200 damage. Or I can switch to a weaker spell getting a lot more casts and more damage but taking a lot longer to deal that damage(useful against mammoths). If I had to pay full cost I would only be able to dual cast once and at +160% damage(if it was the same as melee & archery) I'm doing 520 damage before I'm out of magic. Basically half the damage I'm currently doing. So now I'm chugging either cost reducing potions or magicka potions all the time.

Sorry... I like it how it is right now .

I think enemy mages' damage scales, so their ice spikes get deadlier and deadlier while yours remains the same forever. Destruction is incredibly unviable in vanilla, and is completely dependent on the schools of either Alchemy or Enchanting to mitigate its horrendous downsides.

If my ice spike would scale just like the enemy mages', I'd have no problem.

Enemy mages' damages do not scale. It's just your imagination and svck that scale.

Why does Destruction *need* effects outside its skill purview to be effective? All the other kill skills are improved by things outside and can stand on their own merits; Destruction seems to be the only one that requires external aid to be useful in the first place.



However, enemy magic cost is a drop in the bucket. Ever notice how relentless an enemy mage with an AOE spell in their spellbook is? There are fireballs and ice storms flying all over the place, and it seems it only ends when you drop the mage dead.

I did a test one time... I did a "GetAV Magicka" check on a mage before and right after casting. He had just cast an Ice Storm at me (not sure if single or dual cast). 10 MP drop. Ten. He had a Conjuration blackrobe on, so that wasn't a cost factor.

So basically... Lightning's MP draining is pointless. It's a very good thing that Lightning projectiles are hitscan, otherwise it'd be absolutely useless.

I think people's idea that there is scale is because the mages damage is increasing in the same way your's does. The 50% increase thanks to perks, and dual casting. That and ice spike and ice spear look very similar. Someone could be getting hit by dual cast ice spears thinking that they got hit by an ice spike. One does 25 damage, the other does just under 200 damage! The same goes for lightning bolt/thunderbolt, and fire bolt/incinerate. If a single hit does 200 damage you tend to notice.

See one thing you said, Noxious, really stuck out to me. "Destruction mages don't have the damage of melee characters or archers" That just doesn't seem like it should be right to me. Mages, especially pure destruction mages, should hit the hardest out of anything, however, they should also be much easier to kill than melee characters and a bit easier to kill than archers. Then again in this game mages can go around wearing full platemail and not have it affect their spellcasting so yea... Mages should be restricted to cloth armor because they need nothing in between them and the world to properly go about casting magic but they should also be able to nuke like no other. Beth seems to have forgone that and made mages weaker but let them wear whatever armor they want.

Really? Play at level 50 with an ebony sword that has not been improved with smithing, and without any enchantments to increase damage. Tell me how that works out.

All the offensive skills need something else to work. Archery, one hand, and two hand all benefit from smithing and enchant, and can benefit from alchemy. Destruction just needs enchant.... really it needs the least to work.

Yes conjuration helps, the same way that armor helps a warrior.

I agree completely. And when I first played Skryim that logic lead to the death of my first mage. Mages should deal insane damage, but be limited by magicka, and be very vulnerable after the fact. I see what Beth did though. They didn't want mages to be ranged warriors just running in casting away and everything died. They wanted mages to have to play 'smart' because mages are suppose to outsmart their enemies. You can also see this in rune spells and wall spells, both great ideas that really svck in the game. Knowing this my mages have done very well... by outsmarting my enemies.

And mages shouldn't wear armor.... because not getting hit at all should be their primary goal. Not cutting the damage when they do get hit. Robes are great for a mage because of mobility. You can avoid getting hit. Now I do wear boots and guanlets for some protection but they don't really slow me down.

Easy. Drop 5 perks into the Armsman stack, to double the damage, put three perks into the Bladesman perk to get crit hits out the wazoo, get the Fighting Stance so I can power attack more, Savage Strike so I can do a bit more damage in a stand-still power attack, and Critical Charge to boost my crit chance even further when going Leeroy Jenkins at someone (IE: sprint power attack). All within the purview of the One-handed skill and perks.

What damage-boosting perks does Destruction get? Oh... two perks per damage type for a 50% boost and... er... that's it.

Now, expand to all methods to increase damage?

One/Two-handed get...

• Basic skill increase
  
• Graduated weapon material tiers
  
• Five perks for 100% damage boost
  
• Critical damage (via various perks)
  
• Power attacks
  
• Sneak attacks (3x/6x for all, 15x for daggers)
  
• Smithing
  
• Potions
  
• Skill-boosting apparel enchantments
  
• Weapon enchantments

What does Destruction get?

• Graduated damage spells (which have a significantly worsening damage/magicka cost ratio as they get more powerful)
  
• Six perks for 50% damage
  
• Alchemy potions
  
• a Restoration perk that specifices Undead and nothing else
  
• Dual-casting (which makes the above mentioned damage/magicka ratio problem even worse... 2.8x cost for 2.2x damage)

10 versus 5 ways to increase damage.

Actually, I've had many playthroughs with zero investment in smithing, enchanting and alchemy. My warriors have done just fine.

I appreciate you actually measuring things and not basing your opinion on your imagination, unlike some of our colleagues. My measurements are consistent with yours: about 10 magicka for each shot of Ice Storm from level 50 Arch Cryomancer (1091CD).

On the other hand, I find this cost to be quite reasonable. It costs my moderately equipped Destruction (Skill = 80) Mage 15 magicka per shot of Ice Storm. I imagine that the cost will drop to 10 or 12 magicka as my destruction skill goes up more and get slightly better.

I'm okay with the way high end mages damage output and magicka reserve level and magicka usage. I find it plausible and reasonable. As a Nord with good Frost protection boots, Arch Cryomancers are not really a threat. Arch Pyromages and Arch Electromancers give me slightly more trouble, especially if I'm surprised, but all in all, they are all manageable.

I think people who have difficulties with high end magic opponents should invest in better protecting themselves against magic, instead of accusing the game of cheating and damage scaling.