we need illusion runes and an increase in the the amount of runes that you can drop, being able to drop a fire and a frenzy rune at the same time would be a game changer, i also think destruction runes should get a sneak attack bonus.

How useful is a 50 damage rune on enemies that have 1200-1400 health? and on master difficulty it only does 25 points of damage. I know you can dual cast them but really they are pretty much as useless as t-its on a nun.

The paralysis runes from the Gamejam video would be incredibly useful, hopefully that gets put in the game.
As for the elemental runes, I have to agree. They are kinda useless.
There should be perks for placing 2 or 3 down. I would rather have that then being able to place them 5 times further away.

I like them early on around the level I first pick them up. Unfortunately they never scale and are all but useless late in the game.

For me, the initial motivation to use runes was the fact that it is cheap and very good for gaining experience. A Draugr Deathlord has maybe 600 health. And in Master, I would have to hit it 24 times (600/25 = 24). A melee deathlord has strong attacks but is sluggish, so it's very easy to outmaneuver him and never get hit if the room is big enough. There are times when I feel that the situation is rather dangerous for my character and feel the need to dispatch the opponent quickly, in those cases I guess I would use incinerate, or firebolt with impact if my magicka reserve is not high enough. Other times, it is quite safe to kill an opponent slowly, especially if it's giving me extra XP points.

Destruction spells have some advantages over melee or archery. Destruction has longer effective range than melee, and they are more mobile than archery. At this point, my personal preference for weapon damage in late game is around 50 damage sword and 100 damage bow on adept, and 100 damage sword and 200 damage bow on master. For me, Destruction magic falls within "fun" range on adept and on master. Some people like to play with 600 damage swords. I think it's rather boring to play it that way, and I wouldn't want to play like that, but I have no problem if other people want to play like that. Those that prefer playing with 600 damage swords would probably find Destruction rather weak.

The only way I can kill that [bleepity bleep] draugr deathlord in Labyrinthian as a mage is a combination of fire atronachs and fire runes. Not useless. It's all in how you use them.

They'd be perfectly fine without that limit. Three or five runes would be great, though I can imagine infinite runes could get messy, bug-wise.

Yeah, runes would be a lot more useful if you could use more than one at a time. Maybe that should have been a perk?

I just remembered that we already have something similar. The wall spells. I haven't played with them much, but they are very cheap and seems very good.

Runes and the wall spells are usesless at high levels because the perks that are suppose to enhance them don't.

I like the idea behind the rune spells, I just wish we could set more than one down at a time......

Runes svck.

I like runes. But if Bethesda decided they wanted to change them, I'd have no problem with it.
The change I would like to see is maybe runes will output damage overtime. This would make it interesting if you did a paralyze while a baddy is on a rune. Or useful for engaging enemies in a small area and be able to cause damage behind the first enemy attacking you.

Maybe it's just because I haven't played my mage to a super high level, but I love runes. They do massive damage and allow for you to have a place to fall back on if you get low on health or need to run for some other reason.

I would like an "upgraded" rune spells, I mean it happens with other destruction spells (firebolt -> fireball -> incinerate...). Runes then seals that deal more damage but are smaller and take a while to cast. Barriers that block enemies but deal a very small amount of damage. This would genuinely be cool.