Indeed. A mere 50 points and your light armor will weight just as much as the Dragonhide spell. 70 for heavy armor. But that's a bit off topic.

No. Being A LOT weaker -like 3-4 times- and also being worse in the enemy-controlling department, and not having anything else positive IS broken.

If they gave us a skill that did a fixed 1 damage per second, that would be fine by your standards I guess... Since you are blinded by your fan-boyism, I guess anything goes...
Really, how blind can you be to not see that they did the balance thing right in most things, then dropped the ball horribly in Destruction? =_= It is simply too weak damage-wise if they were opting for the classic destruction magic, and too weak side-effect-wise if they were opting for anything else. It doesn't make the game any more difficult, it just makes it 5x as tedious to play as a destro mage instead of a swordsman or an archer. And that is the problem here.





All that is useless, since your mage could simply WEAR ARMOR... but that is another topic, about how Skyrim magic in general is broken in some parts...

Unfortunately, there's no word yet on any of this being fixed. 1.4 does not seem to be addressing this grievance.

So what you're saying is that glass cannons doing less damage than max defense melee is okay because you can spam fireballs if you reduce casting cost to 0 or drink tons of potions, which would be a brilliant argument if anyone were arguing that Destro can't kill enemies at all. Unfortunately, nobody are making that argument and consequently your argument is beyond crap. The argument is that Destro isn't balanced with the other damage-dealing skills, kills slower, and isn't as efficient.

I laid out my max defense build previously and that build still does more damage than a glass cannon Destro build. That does not make sense and I guarantee you that any fireball-spamming on your part won't make up for the limited damage output. As an FYI, weapons can be spammed too and they don't require any enchantment abuse to get to that point.

As a final note, I can't kill dragons in one hit with my sword and I won't get there unless I abuse alchemy and restoration, which I'm not planning to do. I don't think anyone wants to one-hit dragons with fireball, but it would be nice if fireballs from a master wizard don't end up feeling like burning snowballs of tingling either. There's quite a difference between packing a mean punch and feeling like you're throwing stones after a tank.

And then your regen rate is going to suffer as well as not having cool magicka resistances. Plus if you wear armor you are going to level armor which means at max level in Heavy armor v. 15 (or default) in heavy armored you are approximately 8 levels higher and facing enemies 8 levels above what I am. If you want to say that Alteration leveling is the same as heavy armor that's fine but you can't include smithing which most melee use to boost damage and defense.

Delete double post

As with all arguments, there are plenty of exagerations on BOTH sides. Destruction is not horribly broken and completely un-fun, but neither is fine as is. It could use some tweaks, but actually, I think really very little needs to be changed to make it as viable and fun as melee or archery.

I've played a warrior type character and 2 mage type characters into the 40s. I've also played a sneak-archer type into the 30s. My first mage, I felt badly underpowered for a very long time, until I was able to cast the conjure dremora lord spell. Then, it felt like the game was playing itself for me. Not so much fun. I then tried the enchant to zero magicka cost destro + impact, and again, found it very unsatisfying. I had made some mistakes with the perks, so I decided to start all over, and this time, made my mage differently. I didn't go for the zzero cost, but I did have to considerably lower it. Destro (and really all magic) is just too expensive to mess with otherwise. By the end, I ended up with 94% reduction in cost (50% from perks, 15% from arch-mage robes, and 29% from self-enchanted item). I also use the Morokei mask so I have 200% normal magicka regen.

You know what I found? The magicka regen is still too slow. Before I hit 75 in destro, and was able to get the perk, I simply could not usse the expert level spells. Even with 200% normal magicka regen and having put 4 to 1 level up points into magicka vs health, I couldn't cast enough expert level spells to kill anything that was on par with me. I still had to use adept level spells. Once I got the perk, it was different. It still wasn't all that satisfactory though. It's fun, but it still doesn't compare to the fun when using either melee or archery.

However, I don't think it needs a complete overhaul to make it work. Just a couple of small tweaks:

1st, increase magicka regen in combat to between 50 and 66% of out of combat rate (currently 33%). The actual amount could be found through testing.
2nd, the increased damage perks (which cost 6 points to get for all elemental types) should be upped to 33/66% or maybe even 50/100% (currently 25/50%).
3rd, overall magicka costs should probably be lowered a bit. Maybe not much, and actually, the first point should be put in and tested before tackling this one- it may not even be needed, once magicka regen is useful.

To balance, there should be some corresponding nerfs:
There should be a cap on how much magicka cost reduction can be applied to any school, maybe 85 or even 90%.
Fortify Destruction potions should also be brought to a more reasonable level (especially if you can get 100% more damage from perks).

tl;dr: Destruction isn't "fine", but it also isn't broken. It just needs a few minor tweaks.

No, you are not gonna have regen issues, because like the smart mage you are you will enchant your armor with 4x fortify X magic school, total of 2 schools.
Also, the enemy leveling is not a problem, because:
a- Mage will be wearing robes until his smithing and enchanting are high enough, so he won't gain levels at that, and for the 25 or so hours it takes to get there he will get the easy stuff out of the way, like easy dungeons and beginner guild quests, some Daedric quests etc - ones that do not need much combat.
b- When he does wear that armor, he will be a mage in full enchanted Daedric. Do you think he will give a **** about the enemy levels?

Okay he's wearing armor, back to the original point why isn't he as protected as a melee fighter using the same armor? Oh and let's conveniently ignore the resistances and absorption you get from Alteration.

See Edit:

In vanilla, I could reliably kill... one, maybe two foes (if #2 was a weakling compared to #1) with the heavy stuff before my magic bar is depleted. Or I can stand there for minutes on end running away and plinking them to death with less inefficient lower-expertise spells.

My point is that Destruction requires other skills to be useful, unlike 1H, 2H, and Archery which can stand on their own without supporting skills. You either have to have great Speech so you don't get emptied out of coin buying every restore magicka potion you can, have great Enchanting or outright commit enchanting abuse by coating yourself head to toe with fortify destruction or regen magicka effects, or high Alchemy so you can mix restore/regen magicka potions by the gross. It can't stand on its own, and has far less ways to increase damage than the other three kill skills (as I listed).

This. ^

I agree.

If you removed Impact I doubt this thread would even exist, most people consider it a vital and necessary part of using Destruction.
The potential of Destruction, compared to any other damage dealing skill, is pathetic.
My belief is that the only reason Destruction still works (And therefore is not technically broken) is because the game is incredibly easy on any difficulty.
I can fight off an infinite number of any enemy in the game (with spells, or weapons, or even barehanded) except for Draugr Lords, and only then because they can FUS you into the wall indefinitely.

It's like talking to a brick wall with these people isn't it? Even when we point out the anomalies in their argument, they refuse to accept it.

For melee users to maximise their damage potential, they have to use other skills...but the destruction people expect to be able to gun down the opposition with destruction alone...and the argument that melee wielders can do basic strikes without using stamina, which makes destruction broken is just illogical. If you throw destruction magic around, don't you think that you would maximise your regen rate?

Out of all these arguments, I am yet to see someone say that dual-cast destruction magic is weak. Hey, flinging a fireball double-cast is 100 - 120 damage (if I recall), which is far more damage points than a comparable level melee based player can cause in one strike, even a power strike. For me to get my melee damage up to that point, I have to put in a lot of time and effort...just to reach the same damage that a destruction magic wielding mage can do at the low to medium levels.

But you can swing and swing and swing and swing more. The mage at those kind of low levels won't be doing many such dual cast fireballs I tell you before he's out of juice. It's fine when all you do is fight Draugr one after the other with a regen break inbetween each. It's more annoying then there's a 1500 HP draugr boss with his 3-4 minions.

Indeed, melee and archery can still consently fight while mages have to stop. It's akin to them inforceing full stamina payments on power attacks and then you being only allowed to power attack.

Yhea - a non smithed, non enchant-fortify one hand Daedric Sword hits for a whooping 40 points of dmg. What the end game boss has 5000 health, so that is 125 hits! All kill skills need the crafting skills to be effective. Except Conjuration.

You mean the resistances and absorption you have to spend perk points to get? The same resistances and absorption you get as a passive ability not tied to your flesh spells? I can get that and nothing's stopping me from walking around in Heavy Armor.

For a few reasons.
1) Block
2) Amount of health
3) Quick Reflexes perk
4) Shield Charge perk

My idea of max defense is sword and shield with 0 magicka and at least half spent on health. That's a lot of health behind a lot of armor behind a shield. Lord stone, Mara quest, and Alterration magic resist adds up to 70% magic resistance. Elemental Protection perk further adds an optional 50% fire, frost, lightning resist when blocking. You'll take 15% damage from mage attacks and you still haven't spent an enchantment slot on resistance. That's great defense, isn't it? And when someone power attacks after you, you can run away and you'll get a big head start. And if you're boxed in then block + sprint clear things out right away.

What can a mage do that even comes close? Less health, no shield, no shield perks.

Ok, i've been lurking on this topic for a bit and decided to join and throw my .02 cents in.

lets compare archetypes real quick

standard warrior vs standard mage vs standard thief

the warrior:

high defense
high dps
medium single hit
high health

the thief:

medium/low defense
medium dps
high single hit
medium health

the mage:

low/medium/high defense*(if casts spell)
low dps
medium single hit
low/medium health


now the warrior and thief don't have to keep downing potions to be able to attack while the mage does(unless they abuse enchanting).

now i believe the main issue is that destruction doesn't properly level with you. it's damage is static, i'm level 25 and my flames is still 8dps i'm sorry but thats nothing to an average bandit at my level.(hell my x3 28 damage bow sometimes does less than 30 percent of health damage). I'm sorry but magic should have almost equal dps with everything else as you level. the previous versions of elder scrolls didn't fall into this because of spellmaking and multiple tiers of the same spell.

That's because there's nothing to fix.

The game plays exactly the way the developers intend it to play.

Like most complaints regarding the latest Elder Scrolls game this appears to centre around the game not playing exactly like the previous Elder Scrolls game.

I can clearly see the things individuals personally dislike about the way destruction plays in the latest Elder Scrolls game but nobody has yet made a compelling case to prove that destruction is 'broken' as claimed.

Azrael
The Nord with the Sword

there are 7 spells with 3 elemental variations. compared to previously in which there were potentially hundreds if not thousands. not really broken, it works fine. Only in hindsight its complete [censored] as a replacement for what we used to have.

idk, maybe we give different meanings to the word "broken".
now I can understand if someone says "blood on the ice" is broken, or horses are broken, because they are not functioning well.
destruction only gets less powerful than expected, that's all, they'll never fix it, it is probably meant to be like that.

Tell that one to my Khajiit, who was punching dragons to death.

I tried using destuction once but kept running out of mana. That same dragon I killed with my more combat oriented character killed me at least five times when I tryed playing a mage (and had better armor, and was higher level with more perks...). I can't really say for higher level characters but at level 7? Destruction is worthless. Playing a mage in Skyrim is frustrating to the point of not being any fun at all.

Why not use cost reduction gear you can find or buy anywhere to lessen the cost of spells and be able to use higher grade spells sooner ?
Why not use a staff with spell hand or 2 staffs that do expert level dmg when your low level.
Using staffs at a low level does more dmg and only costs soul gems that are abundant. You can get both at the mage guild without even trying.

Unless you alchemy smith enchant loop, your bow will not be as strong as dual wielding incinerate, and if you say it is, you are just talking out your ass, cuz i am using just smithing at the moment, and have an ebony bow and it only does 100 damage, incinerate dual wield, does 180, so yeah, shut it.