Honestly, I play a melee character. I get my face pwnt off everytime I encounter a mage npc. When I have difficulty chopping them down with my weapons, I pull out dual flames and torch them down with almost no effort. Granted mana runs out quick for me (I am 120/120 primarily due to the fact I only use mana for resto/healing.) I think if I jam packed some points into mana instead, I wouldn't have any problem maintaining constant dps. As it stands, I get my butt handed to me quite often as melee. I rely on fatigue, and some mana to keep my health up. Granted I can take a beating, my dps output isn't anywhere near as great as a dual caster. So I totally disagree with saying melee doesn't have to rely on all 3 bars [stamina, mana, health]

I feel the game is greatly balanced, and even at a default difficulty the game proves challenging. So it's not a stroll in the park? Turn it on novice if you think it's too hard. This is just my opinion, no intention of trolling intended.

Ignorance is bliss.

Destruction tree does not scale. Once you hit 35-40, you will be hitting like a wet noodle because SKILLS DO NOT SCALE in this tree.

Heavy armor mage is the way to go?

In b4 play a pure-mage

NPC mages are very, very different than PC mages. They're not playing by the same rules as PC mages at all.

what the anbove poster said is one of the biggest problems. They also don't scale like other combat skills, which is probably the biggest issue.

the reason why mages are hard as hell is because even though YOU can't use destruction as a viable skill, for some reason ENEMIES can. Enemy Mages hit like a freakin' tank, even at High levels.

you're also a melee player, you don't play a pure mage. Try doing that, then come back and see if you can still say that it's not underpowered.

all beth has to do is put out a patch that levels destruction spells as accurately as all other skills and we're golden.

Uh-oh... wait... even if you have that 75 dmg a second spell at expert level?

I am not claiming to be an expert here, and if you can show me the numbers and your sources I will cooperate.

Having said that, are you still trying to use novice level spells? I mean I have to upgrade my weapons, so you should have to upgrade your spells as well, right?

lol OP , one of the silliest posts i've read , really is silly.

To judge something as being 'balanced' when you havent even played it is a bit mad , you have no knowledge to base anything you said , it's just complete and utter guesswork .

I haven't played Skyrim yet, and I don't quite get what you mean. How do the other trees "scale"?

I'm coming from Morrowind and Oblivion, and I don't remember anything about scaling...

I have played one. I am sorry for not specifying. My girlfriend created a pure-mage class that I play on regularly.

The perennial problem with mages in most RPG's: weapons users' damage scale dramatically with weapons, but mage abilities scale much more slowly.



PC mages need some of those favorable rules to help them too



At what level, and on what difficulty?

The individual spells don't scale in damage. Unlike melee damage which can be continually be improved through smithing and enchanting, destruction (as the primary mage attack) cannot be improved. It's like upgrading from iron to steel and then being stuck with steel weaponry for the rest of the game.

I double up on destruction. One hand fire and one ice. Works nicely.

I love this exchange:

OP: "Hey I played a bit and things seem balanced to me."

Jerks: "No way, it's totally broken and you can't possibly understand. Get some evidence if you want to be taken seriously." (gingerbill)

Me: "Where the heck is your evidence? Put your money where your mouth is. If you have to resort to insults, you are probably wrong."

Ohhhh. Ok, I get it now. What about buying better spells? Or are these "better" spells not very good, either?

The thing that really irks me is that certain spell effects in Destruction become absolutely useless. Personally, I loved the Flames spell. A jet of fire leaving my hands was awesome. It makes no sense why I suddenly can't use that spell effect anymore. What would have been nice was to either have spells scale or allow each individual spell to be improved upon. That way, if someone doesn't like Firebolt but likes Flames they can make Flames the stronger spell...in other words, spellcrafting.

The reason why there's frustration is because people have posted about this again and again in other threads. If you want evidence, you can look at them.



You can't get spells any more powerful than the most powerful ones out there...

My point exactly. A poster a bit ago says "It's like upgrading from iron to steel, and being stuck at steel the rest of the game." I take that as "It's okay for me to use one spell the whole game, but you have to buy your weapons. When you do, I am going to rage about it because it's not fair"

My brother has a level 30 pure mage, and has most if not every single perk in Destruction.

He kicks the [censored] out of everything in 1-2 hits with a single fireball.

I think all the mages who are saying destruction svcks are either playing on a stupendously hard difficulty mode, or just don't know their craft very well. Or maybe none of you are taking perks in the tree.

Although, most examples I see of why destruction is bad are coming from mages using the worst spell they can against certain monster types. Like ice against a dude MADE of ice.

No you don't understand. You can upgrade a steel sword through smithing and that is increasing its damage output while remaining in the same weapon tier. You can't do that with Destruction. Even once you get to Daedric weaponry, you can still continue to improve its' damage and even enchant it to continue to provide more damage. You can't do anything of the sort with Destruction. A spell of 50 dmg will stay at 50dmg forever. In the end, what this means is that a warrior-type character still has options at higher levels. But a Destruction mage does not.

Not to mention the magicka costs are horribly jarring. Rune spells are very costly

No I don't get what people are trying to say here....
Are they saying the higher your one-handed skill the higher damage output? Because I thought all weapons had a constant damage rating?
For spells you can use perks to definitely increase their power. Using all the schools of magic though, is a mage's best line of defense...or offense...or wtvr the hell you wanna call it.

I love the Dwarven Axe quite a lot because of the look of it. It appeals as an awesome weapon just by looking at it. BUT, I am not going to use it the entire rest of the game and complain that melee svcks. Skyrim is not meant to play like WoW.

Try playing a pure mage and come back to tell us your opinion.

its not possible to go into combat without a companion as a pure mage. While offensive magic can deal out hefty damage, it's simply not possible to rely on it, or rely on magic at all.


If you dropped all your melee weapons and only used fire, the first enemy that you fail to kill with your first destruction burst would lodge an axe in your face, and there is no way to avoid it. I have 400 magicka and lots of destruction perks, I started a dual-weidling character to comapre, and its not een funny how easy the game is in stealth or fighter mode.


Conclusion: Magic is a very effective sidearm, but it simply cannot be relied upon in combat as a primary weapon, you have no fallback.

Every five hours someone comes on here looking to prove themselves with some godlike opinion that magic is not under powered. The topic swiftly degrades into people blurting out the same correct answers and the topic poster getting an epiphany. Can we please get a sticky or something?