There better be paralysis self spells and paralyse others for a stupid long time as I want to have fun when not roleplaying.

Oh goody for us, we get to use a "ton" (count a few dozen) badly defined developer prefabricated interactions! How creative of us to be able to figure out what the developers wanted us to figure out, as opposed to making our own totally unique spells that many others may have not had the idea to do. Not only do we get told what we can or can't combine, but we get told whether our spell will or can even had a duration or area of effect! How fun and creative of the devs to limit our scope to whatever THEY thought of.

Have you ever heard of emergent gameplay? Allowing the players more freedom such that entirely new possibilities form that the developers never thought of? Now that we work only with prefabricated interactions, and can only use two spells at any given time, that chance of emergent gameplay has been severely limited. You say creativity isn't a good argument, and to that I say bull crap. If there is anything TES represents in its very nature, its allowing the players to be thoughtful, creative, and to experiment. The lack of a spell making system spits right in that idea's face.

I completely agree.

Oh, "totally unique" my aching ass. You combined pre-existing spell effects to create a "totally unique" combination of spells that you could have cast separately for the exact same [censored] effect. Spellmaking was not some grand canvas upon which your imagination could run wild in prior games, it was essentially creating a hotkey that cast several spells at once. If you combined fire damage and ice damage in Morrowind, what you got was a fireball that also did ice damage. How exciting. I can guarantee you that pretty much every damn spell combination you created was tested in some capacity during beta, too, so they developers know about it and in fact had to program the [censored] combinaton. So no, you're not being a brilliant artist summoning forth beauty from the ether and splaying it across reality like a veritable god. You were casting one spell instead of three in a row.

:facepalm:
Is it so hard to understand. :cold:

Yes, I really want spell crafting, unique spells just means that they're allpremade, its a natural result, doesn't mean its better or worse. I'm against anything tha takes away uniqueness and creativity I'd say.

It's similar to if they'd jst make 80 some different gear veriosn you could have and just that, and then they each have some unique super power, instead of letting us gear ourselves out. bad open RPG design.

It has already been pointed out that casting 3 spells in a row is not the same as all in one spell.
Yes, they were totally unique and if you dont see that then that means you have never played mage who crafted spells. Its as simple as that. Its like looking at a cat and saying its not a cat because cats dont look like that.
Id like to turn the tables and ask that it shouldnt be proven the world is round, but that instead you prove it is flat.
So why is a static system better than a dynamic and customisable one?

And it's coming from the same people that praise Smithing, Enchanting and alchemy. Yet, Spellmaking is bad. :banghead:

Dynamic is good.

No, actually, it hasn't, not in a convincing manner. Exactly how is one spell that has fire damage 35 for 5 seconds on touch + paralyze for 3 seconds on touch + demoralize 50 in 35 feet on touch different from having these different spells cast separately? Oh, I know: the number of keystrokes. Such a difference. And I did play a mage who crafted spells. I just didn't think I was an artistic genius for mashing together pre-existing things and thinking it was something exciting and different. The new system is dynamic, by the way. In actual gameplay I'd say it's more so than the prior system.

The number of keystrokes actually made a huge difference. Also the time between taking effect, wich with firing two spells is lots of game ticks more than all in one.
No.
You are deliberately misunderstanding in a way that I feel Im talking to someone who insists the world is flat or there is no climate change.
Well, if you insist on feeling that way I cannot stop you but Im sure as hell not spending anymore time trying to talk sense into you.

Cast time. Combinations of effects, etc. The difference between a second in the life of a mage can mean death. We don't have armor like warriors do. We take a lot of damage and it hurts. Let me tell you this, with the new spell system, would it be possible to have Weakness to Fire for 1 second, Fire damage for 1 second, and Paralyze for 5 seconds? No, not unless you cast them at the same time, which you can't. It would also defeat the purpose of that spell; to be aggressive while also letting me get further from my enemy or do other things in the mean time. Casting those spells seperately DEFINITELY doesn't achieve the same effect. THe weakness to fire for 1 second MUST accompany the Fire damage for 1 second, since they only last 1 second. Paralyze can try to come before those spells, but then it wastes my time by making me cast the other two using those 5 seconds, effectively making the spell pointless. Casting paralyze after I cast the other two isn't a very good option either for what I want to do, because I might have taken a fatal blow by then.

The ENTIRE POINT of that spell is that it stops them in their tracks AND deals them some good damage. If I deal the damage but don't stop them, I might die. If I stop then and then deal the damage, that's more useful, but then I still don't get to have the original point of the spell, which is to allow me to hurt them and then give me some free time to heal up or run away.

Functionally, these two implementations of this combination could not be more different.

I'd like spell crafting to remain, especially if poison makes a return to destruction magic.

Illustrate how it made a huge difference. I see a minor one: enemy positioning might change a bit in the one second between each casting. Regardless, the spell I described is not a unique effect. It has two effects on one guy and another one that affects a larger number of people. That's not unique, it's just convenient.



Why do we have weakness to fire and fire damage at the same time? Unless the enemy is fire-resistant to begin with a higher-damage fire spell does the same damn thing. And if your objective is to paralyze him and do damage while you get away, you'll be able to do that in the new system by equipping a damage spell on one hand and a paralyze spell on the other. I'm sorry, but I'm not convinced. I don't think it will be a major detriment to the you know what [censored] it. I'm done. Done done done. Sick of arguing about this [censored]. Have your way, the game is ruined forever by the transition from a menu-based spell combination mechanic to a gameplay-based one. Don't [censored] buy it then.

Its not as big of a deal for me now since I'll playing on PC, but I'd definitely want spellmaking if I were playing console. When I played Oblivion on Xbox, spellmaking was one of the most RP-oriented features in Oblivion, I could make a Blessing of Stendarr restoration spell to buff me with fortify block and shield or any number of other combined effect spells for my Shaman, Spellsword, or Nightblade characters. Its certainly a feature I'd like to see return if the devs can make it work with the new system.

But I certainly can see no "joy" in the elimination of an entirely optional feature.

I dont have to illustrate in the same way I dont have to prove the earth is round. Go look at the UESP.
For the very last time, if you want to present an incongruous argument, you are the one that has to provide proof. And you havent. Besides "they look more cool now", at wich I laugh.
By the nine, I dont understand why I even put up with this. Thats it, Im not replying anymore. Have fun convincing people left is right and straight is crooked.

If you have max damage fire, then you can't go any higher. Weakness to fire allows you to do that.


Too bad that damage spell won't be able to penetrate resistances or deal more damage if the damage is capped. That's what the weakness to fire is there for, but I can't cast that and paralyze and fire damage at the same time.

and you can not dual wield weakness to fire and a fire spell? wait.... please think through your arguments

You will likely have to make a decision, just like the melee classes. Which is more important to you, doing some damage with some defense (fire and paralyze), or a lot of damage with no defense (weakness and fire). This is right up there with not allowing dual-wielding people to block. You are trading the defense for extra attack power. This is the biggest reason that I see them not having spell making. This would essentially allow you to have 5 or 6 "hands" worth of power at any given moment. The combat system is much more of balancing offense with defense, you can no longer be great at both.

Also, since all we know about casting right now is that we have two hands, there are roughly 85 spells, and some have special combinations, it is really hard to make any assumptions about how the new system is going to function. Spell making was a lot of fun, but it may not work to well with the new system. How would you make your spell listed above have three different casting modes (like flamethrower, fireball, fire trap)? Or would that be one of the limitations of created spells?

1. Yes, but there will be no way to fix the inevitable hole in the spell list. Such as a custom restore speed on other to fix your horses speed attribute after it is poisoned.
2. This is called a delete spell option
3. That will be the case so long as enhantment is around. Same magic on both sides will not fix that problem.
4. Good point.

You forgot about paraylze. I already addressed these dual wielding issues here:


Please read more carefully next time.


Thank you for providing a clear and solid argument. I can actually agree with this, as Bethesda HAS made it clear they do want players to make these kinds of decisions, but I still sour at the loss of spell making.

Not really, haven't we already gone over this before? Just because some people wouldnt, or couldn't think of anything novel to do with it, doesnt mean that others couldn't either.

Post limit.