NPC mages get magical damage buff that players cannot get as difficulty slider goes up.

And playing pure mage is not difficult per say. You can always have zero mana cost range stun lock.

Problem is that it's so boring.

Mages don't get armor lol. It hinders magic damage if I'm correct?

Because few creatures can resist spells and you can create shields, mages are very powerful. They don't need armor as they can lighting fast heal and do damage at the same time. You need to play your class right.

the thing is, I'm feeling Like when you play Spellsword its more of a spellSWORD. Basically, I end up pittling all my magcika away on one foe and then having to come out with my weapon (luckily one that gets 15 points magcika every strike) to kill them. I think this is wrong. Now maybe you shouldn't be able to one hit kill or even two hit kill with single handed magic, but at least it should to a much larger chunk of damage without spamming fireball after fireball after fireball etc. etc. It seems that even though my Magic technically does 75 damage now and my Epic Ebony Axe does 52, running up to them and bonking them over the head still does more DPS by a long shot, most likely because you seem to be able to spam standing power attacks very quickly and strike much faster. IMO Destruction Needs a Major Buff.

If you had bothered to read the thread or play as a mage you would know that while this goes for Oblivion, it is most certainly incorrect for Skyrim.

delete. Glitch double post

Well, that's the idea... Spells and robes are a mages sword and armor.



There's always been 3 types of Atronach, coniciding with the 3 elemental schools of destruction...

Magic doesn't scale well, because it doesn't scale at all. That's the only issue with it.

From my personal experiences i can easly say that mages are fine on adept and expert difficulties. Trick is slowly getting cost reduction enchanments after level 20. Destruction cost must be reduced by (at least) %80. After level 40 one should go for alchemy and get the increase damage potions but this is a obligation for only master difficulty.

I first played a mage and svcked after level 30. Then played a warrior and thought how hard mage svcks. Then got bored and played another mage(my leg is broken so i have time, m'okay?) this time it svcked at 20. Now playing another one at level 50(expert) and it's just perfect.

Destruction could use some damage boost like another +%50 perk but then it may break adept and expert difficulties.

I think this is the point of clarity right here. On Adept, at level 51 I am still kicking butt. If my destruction damage was boosted even more Adept would become much much easier.

If playing on Master feels hard, people should turn it down.

I love mages, Destruction, Alchemy and Conjuration = win. Just let giants take care of dragons....Because honestly, that is where mages svck

Just that there are like 5 robes and 96 spells...
wich is bad.. and not unique/rare spells either... AND NO SPELLMAKING! >:(

Mages get considerably less artifact/named gear. And most of them are actually pretty bad.

but the most powerful mages wear heavy armor

This is 100% right mage play style is the only one the forces you to use specific perks.... last time i checked you dont need a one-handed perk that says you can use ebony swords. Perks svck in skyrim how do you have cool perks in fallout then make this game and have most boring perks ever. most mage perks are "now work on a higher level npc" you know mages need to spend 25 perks points just to use all spells.... thats 25 out of 81 and warrior and thiefs need to spend 0 ya 0 perks points to get there better stuff.... why not have better perks like "raised zombies now have a damage health cloak because they spread disease" or zombies now do 10% more damage or maybe they now have a base 10% damage reduction..... there are no cool perks like that there is only one for conjuration and it's only 100 hp which is near usless late game. atros also have 1 perk to make them better. A expert master perk for illusion could be that fury now has a small chance to spread to other people on cantact(hit) that would be cool.

My Illusion is only 30. Lol.

My destruction is the highest, next to my conjuration.

Saying conjuration is doing your work for you is like saying the fire I cast from my hands is "doing the work for me".

Wannabee mage is wannabee.

Pure mage works fine. Armor slows you down, so don't use it (unless you want to and take the movement penalty).

Different people play different ways. I have a level 20 Breton pure mage with Destruction in the 40s and Enchantment in the 50s, no problem on Master (oh, Alteration also in the 40s, but only perks in those three... no Alchemy needed until much higher level). The toughest fight I have had (and it was REALLY tough!) was a Dragon + Krosis, especially since I want to keep Lydia alive. The fight was tough because I was saving perks and had not yet put anything into Destruction at all (this was in the teens).

Randomization can also affect how you decide to develop your character. For example, one character I played had a fire staff and lightining staff early on, plus two zombie staves. The current one I just mentioned received a low level Fury staff (level 4) and Courage staff, so this required a different approach if she wanted to use the staves at all (and she usually doesn't except for using Courage to attract the blasted deer for catching petty souls for enchanting and selling weapons). In fact, even the enchanted random stuff will have this effect because that's where you get your enchantment possibilities from, of course. I didn't find any "Fortify Destruction" until just recently with this particular character (and no, I am not going to break my role play and go out of my way to find something that she doesn't know exists in the game world).

If you play mages properly, they are fine. As far as perceptions of any problems, the same applies to any game. Morrowind had complaints, Oblivion had complaints... the latter had specific issues on max difficulty and suggested guides, even for the tutorial and early levels, were to simply use in game help for enemies (i.e., guards, summons, etc) because such help would not face the gimping that the PC did. I saw one thread where some people claimed that Dragon Age: Origins had a much better magic system, more variety, flexibility, etc, and I couldn't believe it because DA:O has one of the most boring and broken magic systems ever offered (too many stun locks and no strategy except cast AoE through walls, etc)

I didn't say I didn't want depth, I said I didn't want a fire spell doing 20 points of damage, then a fire spell doing 21 points of damage, then a fire spell doing 22 points of fire damage, and that trend continuing onto infinitity trying to find a simple light spell. You could not delete spells like you can drop swords, that anology is completely false. Imagine you could drop or sell anything then come back with that comparison. I would rather have fewer spells than 100000 million versions of the same spell if it meant the difference meant something.

I would like a way to delete spells but I still prefer the magic in Skyrim over Oblivion.

This is still the funniest argument on this site.

I have a spellsword type character, who uses destruction for ranged attacks, and one handed for melee.

As a magic user, you can just use destruction to dish out damage at range, for the same reason that as a combat skill user you can just use archery to dish out damage at range.

Destruction is broken, full stop. All of the other damaging skills stand alone, especially with the presence of shouts. .

You could delete spells in every game upto Oblivion.
This is an odd statement to make. "I cant delete spells, so very few spells is a good thing."
No.
You add an option to delete spells, something that wasnt in Oblivion for an unfathomable reason.
It really isnt hard.

Your list of spells also is a bit odd.
Its as if you never realised that with spellmaking you could customise area of impact, delivery, duration, strength of up to seven effects in a single spell.

I actually wrote a thread about this very subject. I'm from the point of view that the biggest problem is people trying to fit themselves into pre-perceived character archetypes that are from the old D&D era. You can create a very fun and entertaining magic using character without falling into the old "I am a wizard and therefore must only revolve around throwing fireballs at squirrel's (poor squirrels)." The disscusion became very heated. Lots of people taking a strong stance on one side of the fence or the other. Check it out at: http://www.gamesas.com/index.php?/topic/1291509-why-mages-are-not-broken-and-why-we-dont-need-balance-in-skyrim/

Read it.Your argument was totally flawed. No one thinks mages should be able to fight the same way as warriors. People are saying that magic should at least be viable, whereas it has been castrated and mutated into something that doesn't even resemble TES magic anymore and is only viable if you use exploits, kiting and tonnes of potions. Of course mages shouldn't be able to go toe to toe with a warrior, but they should be able to take them on in a battle.
If there was a way for people's PC's to fight each other there is no way a mage would last even one minute, even using exploits and summoned creatures. Magic is just woefully inadequate. Using it is a chore. Take previous TES games, pretty sure a mage PC could give a warrior a damn good fight, probably win if they had made the right spells (yes the biggest travesty in this game is the removal of spellmaking, and as the reason given was to prevent OP characters, when we end up with the Smithing, Alchemy, Enchanting synergy making warriors supremely OP even though they are pretty OP even without it, makes it seem pointless to remove it).

In effect, no matter how well made your argument was, as it was from a flawed viewpoint, it doesn't really matter.

Reintroduction of spellmaking could go some way to improving this game. Too bad it will never be in.

not everyone likes all playstyles m8...

I loved playing my pure destruction-alteration-enchanting mage, master difficulty lvl 53, am now experimenting with hybrid battlemage builds but cant seem to find one just as fun and effective as the previous mage, master is demanding >_<

It's funny how this is how it always work.

Something is different, it has it's own issues -> EVERYTHING WAS BETTER IN THE OLD WAY, WHY CHANGE, RETURN THE OLD THING!


In other words, no spellmaking will do nothing.
Add more spells, that's it.

You serious?

Chameleon 25% x 4 = God.

You do that in any armor = Invincible God.

Nope, sounds like he's complaining about all the schools, hence the reference to restoration and conjuration.

I agree, more or less. I can't imagine using a pure mage would be very exciting for extended periods of play, but it wasn't hugely amusing in the other games, either. It's usually best to mix it up with another class archetype.