What if Beth patched in an update that each level of spells that you perk (apprentice, adept, expert, master) also raised the damage by all destruction spells by 10%? Even 5% would work I would think. Thoughts?

Maybe. Or damage could increase a little as your level increases.

Then your top end spells, at master and expert level, would be massively overpowered compared to anything else (although the master spells are pretty overpowered now...that lightning one has five times the range of any other spell, and is far stronger than any non-power buffed bow).

They also take five seconds to charge, use both hands and eat magicka like a starving man at a buffet. Only Lightning Storm is arguably worthwhile, but destruction is basically -100% mana cost + impact anyway.

Definitely this. Not only is Destruction adequate already, but the buffs you're suggesting are way overpowered, especially if more spells are added via DLC. Destruction svcks on its own, yes, but then again, so does almost any skill in the game outside of Conjuration and Illusion.

I just made a thread about Destruction and Alchemy, and I'd appreciate it if you checked it out; it might help you. I think Alchemy isn't the first thing that comes to mind when people want to make more use of Destruction (because usually people talk about mixing it up with other schools, which is still perfectly viable).

http://www.gamesas.com/topic/1357428-new-thoughts-on-destruction-looking-for-criticisms/#entry20467345

Fixed.

Give us weakness spells back....would work wonders for destruction

A good substitute can be the Marked for Death shout.

Apart from that, I was initially concerned about Destruction as well. Not anymore, as I don't specialize solely in it. If you combine it with other magic schools too, you can get some spectacular results. It's actually fun

Good piece of info, thanks. Maybe I should trigger the dragons, but would be nice for spells for those of us that put off the MQ

i have never liked the fact that Bethesda forces you to waste valuable perks on things like Novice Destruction, Alteration etc... Apprentice, Adept and so on, or Armsman 1 to 5. They should have been automatic when you reached level 25, 50 75 and 100 in those skills.

I'm no mage, but I thought the issue was this:

Melee dmg - augmented with skill level, perks, alchemy, enchanting, and smithing
Bow dmg - augmented with skill level, perks, alchemy, enchanting, and smithing
Magicka dmg - augmented with perks, alchemy, enchanting

Compared to what? Abusing smiting, enchanting, and alchemy to make it so you can do 2000 damage per hit with a sword?

The fact that I can't do 2000 damage with a fireball indicates that Destruction is not overpowered at all if I want it to be.

This is actually why mage builds blow, most people do not level these skills at all and instead opt for 100% magic reduction while putting every point in Health.

Otherwise you end up doing all sorts of contrived stuff to actually play the game.

yea I sorta agree with this. I never really put much into those individual perks, maybe novice destruction or adept destruction cause you have to unlock that before getting to the next tier of perks.

Here's an easy way. When you take a perk that reduces the level of magicka used for a certain level of spells it also raises the amount of damage done by all lower spells by 5%. So when I take the perk that allows me to cast Apprentice level spells for 1/2 magicka, I also get 5% more damage on my Novice spells. Reaching Master would add a total of 20% to the Novice spells, 15% to the Apprentice spells, and so on. This would allow lower level spells to scale a bit better while keeping the upper level spells from becoming overpowered. Expert spells would only gain %5 total, and Master spells wouldn't gain anything using this method. Doing it this way would allow us to keep using some of the earlier spells, while keeping the higher spells within reason.

It's the same tradeoff for archers. The shout that reveals any kind of nearby enemy, is far more viable than the various detection spells. Ok, so we choose not to do the MQ, then we suffer a penalty for that decision. To me that spells action and consequence.

Worse, smithing gives an 50-100% buff where daggers benefit most and two hands weapons less.
However enchanting give an +40% weapons damage while it just reduce casting cost for mages. An 160% damage bonus is pretty devastating.
Now add that with enchanting and alchemy you can boost smithing 250 points
Result is weapons who do 500 damage, now an sneak attack with an bow kills everything except deathlords and dragons.

The spell has the benefit of doing an friend/ foe identification, however it does not detect undead or machines, so you use the spell to see if the guys in the camp ahead of you are friendly and the shout to see if it's anybody around.

Hi, I have a level 55 mage, primarily destruction/alteration, and I do not believe a mage build blows by any means. I have a mage with 100 in every school of magic. The game is really easy. I do not understand why people believe destruction magic is underpowered or broken. The destruction tree benefits those that invest in the tree most. I can understand why people with other types of builds that don't invest heavily in the tree will complain, but if you're going mage build and invest in the destruction tree, there is no reason to complain. I almost feel the game is a little too easy going full destruction. My only minor complaint is how firestorm doesn't really fit into the fire damage spell archetype. Blizzard is astoundingly useful in multi-level fort fights where enemies are scattered above/below/to the sides. I can typically kill Elder Dragons with lightning storm in less than a minute--the range is ridiculous and they can easily be nuked while they fly. Normal enemies can be stun-locked with Impact+Incinerate. Magicka is never an issue with maxed Enchanting and custom gear. Add +destruction damage alchemy potions (not like they're ever really needed) and an indestructible meat-shield follower like Mjoll the Lioness and you're good to go. As long as you're not a total bonehead and understand that each enemy type has a major resistance to a particular magic type (usually) and you don't use that magic type on them, you'll be fine. Is this an issue of people not knowing how to play a mage class properly? Or am I missing something here?

It's not a waste at all! You can look at it like this: you are essentially playing 4 skill points to make Expert destruction spells 50% cheaper to cast or 5 points for Master level spells 50% cheaper. The bonus is, along the way, as you level, you can make your lower level spells cheaper to cast.

I like to focus on Destruction with Alteration for Mage Armor and Restoration for Magicka Regeneration. And then later in the game I may advance in Conjuration and Illusion. I want to be a pure mage, even though you can consider Alchemy/enchanting to be mage skills I think of them as separate non-battle skills. I just hate the thought of having to use potions to make me more powerful or enchanting gear to make me powerful. I like to find the equipment that I wear so enchanting isn't what I usually do. I usually only use potions for healing/magicka if I found them as well. I just don't like to create my own potions/enchant gear with this character. I like to focus on finding equipment that gets my Magicka regeneration really high, unfortunately during battle the regeneration is terrible. This is just my style, I like wearing robes and putting points into the Magicka attribute only. I like the thought of a Glass Cannon, deal ridiculous amounts of damage but at the cost of dying very easily by a single mistake. It's just how I enjoy it.

We're back onto this argument about 'other skills can be enhanced by buffs, but not destruction'.

That's only partially accurate when skills are taken in isolation....

Sure, you can uber buff a sword or axe using a combination of one-hand skill leveling and smithing leveling, but without power leveling that will take you (technically) twice as long to reach those high levels because it's two skills being compared to one. People tend to forget that to maximise destruction magic potential, you need three other skills - enchanting, alchemy, restoration (yes, it has a perk that makes destro spells more effective against undead, and if I recall it also has a spell that exchanges health for magicka).

Destruction magic also has the advantage of range...which swords, clubs and axes don't have. Destruction can also stun at range...which swords, clubs and axes don't have.

A destruction centric mage can pick up a sword and do a passable job of bashing someone or something, but a sword and board warrior can't cast an expert or master level spell...and I mean can't...it just isn't physically possible if you don't have the magicka.

This game doesn't apply the 'make your original stuff better over time as you grow' formula...basically, early level spells equate to early level weapons...no matter how much you buff an iron sword, it will never be better than a similarly buffed daedric sword. In Destruction, this is reflected that your early level spells stay the same power, although cost reduces (if you take the perks)...what improves are the spells you can use.

Okay, I accept that there's not a lot of variety...but that isn't an effectiveness issue, it's a personal problem. Remember, a sword is a sword as well. I doubt that there's two many warrior type characters wandering around out there with 'a sword for all seasons'...and of those that do, I doubt that they think in the middle of a fight "Oh, I'll change my sword of crispy critters to my electro-blast 2000, and then I'll use my 'hand axe of glacial conditions'"...For most of us who do chop and change weapons we probably carry no more than three or four, and that pretty much consists of a two handed weapon, a one handed sword and perhaps an axe or mace...and certainly in my case, I use the weapon appropriate for the situation I'm fighting in...two handed swords are more trouble than they are worth in confined spaces with a follower getting into the fight. Using that sort of rationale, you would probably see a lot more variation in weapons if Beth included weapons hitting walls etc and being blocked by surroundings, which we don't see at the moment, but that is just a gripe from a melee based player.

Destruction magic can't be relied on by itself...this game isn't designed that way. A player needs a balanced skillset to maximise potential...it's as simple as that.

And again, Destruction magic CAN be enhanced within the Destruction tree. Intense Flames/Deep Freeze/Incinerate will ADD EFFECTS to spells. Impact ADDS a perma stun-lock capability to dual-casted direct damage spells. Augmented Flames/Frost/Shock increases damage. What more do you want?!!! To do well with Destruction, you need to invest in Destruction. That's how it should be.

It is a waste because we're wasting valuable perk points on things that should technically unlock when you hit those levels: 25, 50, 75, 100

If you are investing perks into a skill tree that you wish to focus on, then they are hardly wasted perks.

Sure, if you wish to become a 'jack of all trades' mage, then you use an awful lot of perks up...but if you do that, then you don't need uber-buffed destruction skills. If you selectively focus on destruction, then those perks are valuable...a lot more valuable than the comparable melee weapon perks I might add: 50% damage increase opposed to 30% chance of critical damage.