The People Who Say Destruction is Fine Haven't Played It At : V - Skyrim

» Sun Dec 11, 2011 12:24 pm

It svcks only if you do nothing to improve it. My 56 mage regens 50% the cost of a double casted fireball in the time it takes for them to recover from the stagger. That's a very useful amount. Robe 150% + 3 items at 62% +50% from restoration perks.

Oh look, put some effort into your character not being gimp, and they are not gimp.

That's a level 100 enchant you got there. With that available, my mage regens an Incinerate cost before I even finish casting it personally and I put most level ups in HP. Waste of enchant slots.

» Sun Dec 11, 2011 4:24 am

It's not that. They do, during the "normal" levels range. Once it gets to 'high", they no longer do, while melee and bows still do, that's what they're addressing

You can play as a pure destruction mage until you hit the "problematic" level range, at which point you are forced to change your play style, while "playing the way you want" is the series' slogan

Which makes me think the defenders never payed Oblivion, where level scaling was the bane, and the higher you went the weaker you got. The defenders are basically saying that that's alright with mages in Skyrim. That leveling up and becoming more powerful really means you should be less powerful. Makes no sense at all.

» Sun Dec 11, 2011 1:58 pm

And another thing that makes no sense at all. Why are people going on about it takes a mage X seconds to kill a mob but a melee takes Y seconds therefore it's bad?

What on earth makes you think only X = Y is balance? How on earth does that make sense? By that logic the fact that a sneak kills in one hit means both mages and melee need to be adjusted to kill just as fast!

Different classes play different. Different builds kill things at different speeds. This is a good thing and has absolutely nothing to do with balance. It means that choices we make actually results in differences in how you play and how combat plays out. Otherwise the game would be so incredibly monotonous and boring.

Sneak kills are balanced because they can only be done once (generally). I believe that the perk that lets you keep re-sneaking and re-doing sneak attacks is broken because it removes the element that makes sneak attacks balanced. In the same way, magic is usually balanced by a high risk, high reward philosophy. Magical spells deal a lot of damage, but in return mages are squishy and prone to dying. Skyrim got the squishy part right, but it didn't get the damage part right. Melee generally do less damage than mages, but that is balanced out by the fact that they are hard to kill. In Skyrim, they are both harder to kill and do more damage. See how that breaks the system?

So yes, different classes play differently. And different should mean exactly that. In Skyrim, though, different means weaker, at least with regards to destruction and mage damage.

» Sun Dec 11, 2011 1:46 pm

Yes! I thought Destruction magic was fine...until I hit Level 30. Thank Azura I was a Battlemage or else I would've been handed my own backside more than I already had. I almost died quite a lot of times when relying on Destruction magic.

*sigh*...at least I can one hit skeletons and low level draughs.

» Sun Dec 11, 2011 4:25 am

So you're saying that a character who can run into a room, with nearly no regard for his own well-being, and smash everything up in a (relatively) short amount of time, is balanced compared to the character who can get one-shot, has to carefully maneuver around enemies, and has to cast spells that kill enemies even slower than the reckless berserker's axe swings? Yes it's a different playstyle, but it shouldn't be a worse one.

I didn't say it was balanced, you dolt. I said it doesn't matter. Yes, it's harder, yes it's worse. So what? You can still beat the game.

» Sun Dec 11, 2011 7:37 am

>Impact perk
>Dual cast spell
>Opponent staggers
>Rinse repeat
>Destruction is fine

» Sun Dec 11, 2011 4:52 am

All of these topics look like this:

Randomperson: Destruction svcks, it does no damage once I hit X level and I keep running out of mana!
Nonmagicplayer: LOL, ur a nub, L2p, Mages r not supposed 2 one-shot stuff. If u want 2 do that, turn down difficulty!
Randomperson: Uh, I don't want to one-shot anything, I just want my damage magic to actually damage things and it doesn't do that very well!
Elitistapologist: All you need to do is max out Enchanting and then you can stunlock everything.
Randomperson: I don't want to have to use some other random tree just to get another to even work at all, that doesn't make sense.
Elitistapologist: You can't expect to beat the game with just one skill. Warriors NEED Smithing, Enchanting, Alchemy, Restoration, Archery, Heavy Armor and a sword and a shield or they cannot possibly get by!
Randomperson: My damage isn't even anywhere comparable to melee or archery damage though. I do more damage with a bow!
Elitistapologist: You don't have to get close though, so you have the ranged advantage!
Randomperson: My Warrior kills anything in 1-3 hits, and it doesn't matter if I have to get close or not, because I'm at the armor cap and don't take any damage anyway!
Elitistapologist: You have the ranged advantage and can stunlock enemies for ten minutes.
Randomperson: Archery does more damage and has better range. I don't need to "stunlock" anything with it when I can just kill something outright.
Elitistapologist: You have the ranged advantage over melee and can stunlock for ten minutes!
Randomperson: ...

Ah now i'm an apologist.

Good thread.

:tops:

» Sat Dec 10, 2011 11:04 pm

A mage that wears armor, is a battlemage, not a pure mage. game mechanics for a pure mage, using alteration encourages you not to wear armor.

Only in your own head is a pure mage someone that doesn't wear armor.

» Sun Dec 11, 2011 7:43 am

Perhaps in your books. Only in your own head is a pure mage someone that doesn't wear armor.

Lore and the game series disagrees. Know more about the Elder Scrolls. Not only do NPCs (specifically followers) in Skyrim have classes, but the lore and in game books, and previous games are filled with them.

therefore, a pure mage wears no armor, a mage that wears armor, is a battlemage.

» Sun Dec 11, 2011 12:48 pm

Lore and the game series disagrees. Know more about the Elder Scrolls. Not only do NPCs (specifically followers) in Skyrim have classes, but the lore and in game books, and previous games are filled with them.

No, in lore, mages PREFER light armor or robes because it doesn't inhibit them from casting their spells and concentrating. However, mages can wear heavy armor. Just look at the bandit mages, they wear heavy armor and cast lightning spells. Look, there's a difference between many mages preferring something and having to abide to them.

A battlemage is somebody who fights with conventional methods such as a sword and uses spells to help defeat the enemy.

» Sun Dec 11, 2011 4:23 am

No, in lore, mages PREFER light armor or robes because it doesn't inhibit them from casting their spells and concentrating. However, mages can wear heavy armor. Just look at the bandit mages, they wear heavy armor and cast lightning spells. Look, there's a difference between many mages preferring something and having to abide to them.

A pure mage wears no armor. A Bandit mage isn't a pure mage is it? Its a bandit mage. The NPCs in Skyrim do have classes. therefore the original person I quoted, who quoted me, was wrong. Not to mention they are called Bandit Wizards, not mages. and even they use daggers. And its not about what they can and cant do, its about what they are and who they are. Of course a pure mage can put armor on, but hes no longer a pure mage. Even in game terms. For some reason newbs (not you), think that just because they got rid of choosing or making a class at character creation, that they also got rid of actual classes. They didnt.

» Sun Dec 11, 2011 12:22 am

Hey nerds!

Why don't ya cast a spell to take you back home to Cry-odiil!

Ahahahahahaha!

/goes back to The Companions hall for another mead

» Sun Dec 11, 2011 1:59 pm

Destruction does seem to put out pretty mediocre damage on Master even before 50. You're not a glass cannon like you'd expect; either your magicka will dry up or your enemies will be right up your butt LONG before you've even dented the health bar of a powerful enemy. You NEED companions/summons ANYTHING to keep the enemy occupied while you spam nukes, and even when you're free to chain nuke stuff you'll be doing a fair amount of sitting around waiting for your magicka to replenish. Unless you consider your summons an extension of you it's tough to feel individually powerful as a mage.

This is all not abusing crafting and when you don't abuse crafting warriors have the same problem. Everything is technically winnable on master, but even a sword and shield warrior will have to retreat from a mage who's swinging a dagger at him if a couple of cuts get past his shield. Nothing makes you feel manlier than being in full plate with a shield and not being able to go blow for blow with a guy in a dress wielding a letter opener.

Master is easy enough to beat but the real challenge is not exploiting crafting and still carrying out fights in a way that doesn't feel like AI exploitation and cowardice.

» Sun Dec 11, 2011 8:13 am

^ Yes, we saw it the first time. It wasn't any funnier then either. Since when did they start serving mead to 12 year olds?

» Sun Dec 11, 2011 12:36 pm

200+ posts

In my opinion "Pure mage" means armor is avoided, and weapons are used as a last resort. I've been playing a pure mage in Skyrim (my first ever in a CRPG) and while I always keep a knife at hand I rarely use it. At the moment I do have a pair of light armor gauntlets on (I haven't found an enchanted item to replace it) and I have an enchanted mask which counts as light armor. I haven't pursued the light armor skill at all so I'm still comfortable calling myself a pure mage.