I think you shouldnt be able to draw your weapon while invisible, and by doing that the spell breaks.


A weaker magicians "Invisibility" should be detected by wolves or other animals, maybe Khajiits aswell?, people would hear steps and maybe breathing, also an equally strong mage could be able to detect you with a spell, a really strong mage could be able to sense you using magic and break it compleatly, dont know if a spell like that fits though, so I could live with the mage just sensing "active-magic" and then use "Detect Life".

A Great Mage though using "Invisibility" would not be catched by animals or even a weaker magician using "Detect Life"........

another thought maybe when you start out you cant move while being invisible, still use it to avoid a guard passing by.
:toughninja:

Unfortunately, the tendency - both on the part of this forum and, more disturbingly, Beth - seems to be "if it's not balanced, eliminate it."

I'm not sure why balancing it is so rarely seen to even be an option.....

Invisibility should cost a lot of magicka, but still definitely keep it. Also, most undead should be able to see through invisibility.

If you go invisible and someone is in combat with you, there should be some kind of special response from the NPC other than "blink, blink". Like going to the spot and using the listening ability to try tot track you down for the smarter NPCs, and flailing around wildly where you were when you went invisible for the dumber ones.. Thus in order to truly escape from intelligent enemies you'd also need some kind of stealth ability.

Make up your mind. If you believe that invisibility (the way it works in Oblivion) is not a cheat then I can post videos or give a long list of examples why it is. No glitches or bug exploits needed, you don't even need to be very smart to use it as a cheat (as in get rid of all possible challenges). So if you did use invisibility you probably noticed that it can turn your character into a god. If you didn't use it, then I wonder what you want to prove.

The 'don't like, don't use it' attitude is something I never understood and never will understand. This works for mods maybe, but when I actually play the game I just want to play with the rules the game offers me. That is usually what a game is about, so it's pretty hard for me to understand how someone can possibly have fun while he ignores a lot of stuff going on in the game only because of his 'personal rules'. I can only repeat, it's like arm wrestling with a five year old boy. Is it fun if you win or annoying if you lose? No, because it is not a real challenge. If you win it was far too easy to be satisfying because the boy is obviously no match for you. If you lose you only lose because you let him win, which is also no fun. That is how invisibility feels to me. If I ignore it I feel like I let the 5 year old boy win on purpose. If I use it I feel like I'm winning against a five year old boy. Both options are no fun. Instead I want to turn the five year old boy into a young advlt man with a physical condition equal to mine. If I win it will be satisfying, if I lose it will be annoying, but at least it was a challenge.



If you think something is wrong...then why should you not want to change it? Because there are some people who don't care about it being wrong? It has nothing to do with tolerance, if something is broken then fix it. And I'm not sorry for the people who like broken game mechanics or don't care about them. Why should I?

That presupposes that whatever you think is axiomatically true and anyone who disagrees is axiomatically wrong. Is your ego really that immense? It's entirely possible - likely even - that those who disagree with you do so not because they "don't care about it being wrong," but because they don't think it is wrong. Your disagreement with that counts for nothing, much though you might believe otherwise.


If you believe something is broken then you're free to advocate fixing it. If enough others don't believe that it's broken, you're out of luck.

Who said you should be sorry for them? You should simply acknowledge that there are people who don't share your opinions of the game mechanics and their opinions are neither more nor less valid than yours.

I don't like chameleon. I don't use it. I very rarely use invisibility (really, just the once, to get away from Castle Leyawiin after the dinner party). That's the way I prefer to play, so that's the way I play. I know that there are others who love 100% chameleon. I don't understand it, but I can't deny that they exist. And since I don't use the effect anyway, and it's a single player game, their existence makes absolutely no difference at all to me. And I really, sincerely, have no idea why it does make a difference to anyone else.

Nobody's asking you to "be sorry for them." But it's not entirely out of line for you to simply acknowledge that they exist and that they have just as much right to play the game as they please as you do.

I dont get why its always mages that get the short-end of the stick. Probably because they end up being the best class and/or characters in every game.

"Take off Invisibility"

"Screw levitation, it's over-powered!"

"Nooo, take off Chameleon, drain the mage while Invisibility is cast, give the caster a viral infection and if re-cast condemn him to eternal damnation in an infernal plane of choice..."

Not to mention that they took the skill of Mysticism away but I digress.

Mages should still be fun to play regardless.

I never had any problems with being able to (over)use Invisibility. Most of my characters either have too much offensive power or a high sneak skill when they get access to Invisibility spells. It didn't add much to them in the long run, since they could already get through the game without it.

I don't see much of a point in adding all those fancy ways to foil Invisibility and make it 'harder' to use. Determined players will just figure out how to get around it and then it becomes easy again. Detect Life and a smarter AI should be more than enough if something has to be done about Invisibility.

I wonder what the developers think about Invisibility? How do they feel about people arguing over how their game is supposed to be played, implying there is a universal right and wrong way that everyone must follow.

Personally I'm fine with Invisibility. I would also like silence to have an "on self" component so if you are a mage character with no sneak skill you could still have a way to remain silent.

Also, I'm fine with making it easier for enemies to become alerted to your presence via sound (if you don't have an "on self" silence spell) or by smell (by a few creatures like wolves, as was mentioned). But just becuase they might hear you doesn't mean that they can automatically zero in on your position and attack without penalty.

And I also think that if you attack someone and then go invisible they should take actions to either try and find you (maybe swing a weapon or cast a spell in your last position) or take a more defensive position (maybe put a shield up to block an incoming attack)

Edit: Wouldn't it be interesting, if as Todd suggested that you can set things on fire, if you attacked and went invisible and your opponent had an AOE fire spell and they launched it at your last known location you could catch fire and they could track you that way until the flames disappeared.

Yes but it should cost a lot more and be hard to cast. Don't just take things out. It's a very lazy practice

I do because its invisibility. INVISIBILITY!

Yes they should tweak it quite a bit but not just throw it away.

I want invisibility to stick around, but be rebalanced.

Almost all creatures should still be alerted by sound, if you are not sneaky enough. Some (most wild animals) should be alerted by scent, which is not directional, but depends only on how close to them you are. A few creatures (vampires, incorporeal undead, others?) should have constant Detect Life, and thus be completely immune to the effects of invisibility.

Once they've realized an invisible person is in the room, enemies should make an effort to counteract you, somehow. Those who can should cast Detect Life to locate you better. Others might set off area-of-affect spells, trying to flush you from the woodwork. Those stuck with entirely mundane means of retaliation would fire arrows randomly or swing their sword about, hoping for a lucky hit.

And, oh yeah: Getting hit should definitely break invisibility.

About Chameleon, I don't know. Personally I see it as just another implementation of invisibility with different balancing. It was useless at low levels and overpowered at high levels. Again, I wouldn't mind this sticking around, but rebalancing is very much needed.

The long and short of the matter is that invisibility/chameleon/sneak will be better balanced if enemy AI is improved.

so invisibility for you is like fast travel for other people
you think that it shouldn't be there becuase it is so tempting
you think that if you use it you skip over a lot of the content
and that it is cheating
and to fix this you want to remove it, or limit, or replace

Somehow, these sorts of threads make me think of prohibitionists. Like it's not that far removed from people out marching in the streets, holding up signs that say things like "Invisibility must go!" "Say NO to invisibility!" "Save our children from invisibility!"

:shrug:

The necromancers don't use it because they have spent their time studying and excelling in the necromantic branch of conjouration and of mysticism. Illusion is not their forte. Not every mage is an archmage. There are five very distinct schools of magic. The argument is not "dumbified" ( a word I do not believe actually exists, mind you).

The argument being proposed is that the game lore and the game world should defy itself for the game experience. That powerful wizards should not be able to do the things one would expect of a powerful wizard. . . because it could lead to the game being easier than it should be, by your estimation. That is the height of silliness. It is immersion breaking as well, in that it is incongrous with lore and with common sense.

Someone else said game designers shouldn't count on an honour system. . . but, frankly, the business of Game designers is that as many people as possible enjoy the games. They are not in the business of trying to police peoples games to make sure that they are equally hard for all players, or to ensure that all players play the game in a certain way.

What the "nix illusion" advocates are basically attempting to do is to encroach on other peoples games in order to make the game more pleasing to them, yet it is entirely uneccessary because the feature in question is OPTIONAL. What an authoritarian bunch some gamers are. Lol.

Also, I have had a number of encounters with vampires where they became invisible. It also occassionially happened with Daedra, and it happened during Botheia's tournament of Champions.

Anyway, if invisibility was really that powerful, it would work against the damned guards. Their omniscience more than balances the game. lol

It is actually the exact opposite of "deal with it". "Deal with it" applies to situations in which options are limited or non-existent. If I say, for example, "I'd like to play with a friend in couch co-op," And you say, "well you can't, so tough. Deal with it," the phrase has been applied in a way that makes sense. It is rude and callous, but it sums up the situation. It isn't an option in the game. Tough, but all one can do is svck it up. Not so with the many optional features. If you don't like them, you don't have to deal with anything. You just don't use them. Don't like blue or pink or purple hair? Don't choose that colour for your hair. Don't like mowhawks, or ponytails? Don't wear those styles. Think Daedric armour is inappropriate? Don't wear it. Most mortals are not worthy to wear Dremora, Aureal or Mazkan armour anyway. But don't try to roll up on other people's games, with arguments about how blue hair doesn't fit the game setting, and no one in Tameriel should be allowed to sport a mohawk, and that Daedric armour needs to be permenantly off limits because its defense rating is to high. "Don't play that way, " is not a cheap assault, or a way of saying "deal with it" when you really do have the option of NOT PLAYING THAT WAY.

what your saying is that if i want to use invisibility then im stuck using something that is OP. how is it OPTIONAL if i want to use something and it makes the game uber easy. i enjoy using the spell but i dont want my game to become a cakewalk because of it. most people arent advocating getting rid of it.......just balancing it so you cant go on a genocidal invisie killing spree.

i can still see the vampires that use invisie fairly easily if they are indeed using invisie instead of chameleon. if they are going to give my character complete immunity from detection then it should work both ways. if an npc uses invisie then he should be completely invisible not just a shimmering that is easily spotted whent they are running around. if indeed the player can cast invisie over and over again and become completely invisible and do sneak attacks over and over, then the npcs should have the same ability as well. otherwise it makes the gameworld seem completely illogical.

I say dump chameleon and make invisibility awesome. Invisibility should not be dispelled by actions, but it should also not extend to anything not on your person while you cast it. So you shouldn't be able to take things off shelves and not be noticed, yet you can attack someone with your knife without them being able to see you afterward.

'Political correctness' is a nice thing for sure, but sometimes things are simply black or white. And that has nothing to do with my ego. If you can solve 50% of the quests in the game with no effort at all by using a certain spell (and again - not by using exploits, glitches and bugs) then the game mechanic for that spell is broken. Period. I could give examples, but I think the spell itself should be self-explaining. You cast the spell, no matter where you are and what you do and suddenly you cease to exist for any actor in the game. You can cast the spell anytime without any restrictions, as often as you want, wherever you want. It's not that hard to understand even if you never used invisibility. It is a fact that invisibility makes the game too easy, just like a 1000 damage sword you find at the beginning of the game would make the game too easy. It has nothing to do with accepting other people's opinions or hurting their feelings.

If people don't care about the spell or never use it in a way that makes the game easier for them, that's of course fine. But then I wonder why they have a problem if other people ask for the spell to be changed. I actually think that is far worse than my behavior. It wouldn't change anything for them, yet they insist on having it their way. And the few people who actually like to have an 'official' cheat - well, that's not what a game is about and there is always the console and the difficulty slider. Plus I'm sure Bethesda will add a lot of other broken game mechanics anyway, just like they did in previous games.

Its not a cheat though.
A cheat is something like the button combination on Morrowind that replenished your health/ magicka/ fatigue.
A bug or glitch is something like floating paint brushes in Oblivion.
An intended game mechanic is invisibility and chameleon.
Its simply not a cheat.

Could it be better balanced?
Yes.
Should it be removed or gimped beyond recognition?
Absolutely not.

Invisibility was a master level spell with a hefty skill requirement.
You didnt have access to it fresh out the sewer, you have to purpously work to attain the spell and appropriate level.
I have been level 40's who couldnt cast invisibility.
You can choose not to train your illusion.
I have no sympathy for people who clamour to rid the world of something they dont like but lack the self-control to avoid,
thereby denying people that do like it the content.

With invis id make it such that it requires a fair degree of skill and magicka to pull off at all but even on the lowest end the spell lasts a good length of time so you can in fact sneak past things you dont want to face.

On chameleon it realy should be a sustained shield effect that requires both hands to pull off and if you drop it it fades just fast enough you can get a few shots in before they can find you.

I agree that 'cheat' is maybe the wrong word for it, my mistake. I would replace it with 'broken game mechanic'.

The weakest invisibility spell is journeyman. You can buy it either from a mages guild member or a Dark Brotherhood member. There are also invisibility potions, all you need is journeyman alchemy level and a few common ingredients. While I agree that it's not something you get when you come out of the sewers it's hardly a master level spell effect.

I think I elaborated long enough about self-control regarding official game rules to not repeat myself over and over. It's a concept I don't understand. If I play Poker and draw four aces then I don't throw them away. Simple as that. If I constantly draw four aces while all other people playing with me draw crap because of the rules then I try to change the rules rather than throwing away my aces all the time and leave the rules as they are. Because I want a game to be challenging and fun (which is the same to me). If someone else likes the rules as they are and wants to throw away his aces all the time instead of changing the rules then I have to wonder why. Isn't it easier and more logical to change the rules and prevent myself from drawing four aces all the time in first place? It doesn't make sense to leave the rules as they are, unless you like winning all the time with no effort or challenge at all.

If you don't like it, then you don't have to use it. I don't want annoying MMORPG-like tuning of everything to the point where your character isn't special.

Stopped paying attention right there.