The Debate: Are Destruction and Aleration or Weapons and Armor Better? - Page 8

quote psiberzerker

At least to me, funner is better.

Yes, that is a good point. I am not playing a warrior at the moment because I want to max out on everything. I could actually have better armour than I am wearing at the moment, but I chose not to. & some of the quests I have done with this charater have been ones to which his skills are not well suited & he has drunkenly blundered through them, resorting to violence unecessarily at times (and sometimes to the detriment of the quest).

For instance I "rescued" some dude from a Thalmor fort & half way through I & my companions burst into a Thalmor mess hall with a load of mead & ale in it. Rather than sensibly waiting until the end of the mission, my warrior drank heavily before proceeding to the next fight.

quote skythelegend

Skills, Perks and the quality of their equipment/power of their spells are what matter here.

Well, in that case, eliminating enchantments, and smithing equipment up past Legendary, I guess it comes down to how you like to play. In terms of survival, though, it's definitely Warrior>Thief>Mage. (Going by the stones.) Heavy Armor is plenty of protection, right out of the tin, and 2H weapons dish it out in massive portions. Light Armor, Archery, and 1H is actually more versatile, as you have range to start the damage counter sooner, and combined with Sneak and Backstab multipliers, they can be at least as deadly. Mages not only have to spend Magica on protection, but then switch to an offensive spell, while the tanks are charging in, and arrows are already doing damage. Sure, you can get Dragonhide, eventually, after a long quest depending on a Radiant item, after killing at least 1 Dragon, and Priest, until then, _flesh spells are far inferior to equally leveled armor, even light, in a school with no offensive capabilities, and the penalties you already mentioned.

That's all right, a mage isn't a tank, is never intended to be, and that's not how we fight. _flesh is good enough to not get 1 shotted. Unarmored, and with spels in your hands, you can run circles around clankers, and close to within range of archers faster than they can backpedal. You can even sprint, full speed with 2 spells charged without a perk. An Altmer is the fastest thing on 2 legs in battle (barring Giants, and Trolls.) Add to that all the things you can do with magic besides damage, and it's actually the most fun Stone.

That doesn't change the fact that you don't have to play a Pure Mage, Theif, nor Warrior. I maintain, a Redgaurd, or Dunmer Spellsword owns any of the three. Firebolt, and a Skyforge Steel Battleaxe are available in the first city, after a couple hours of gameplay, and can last you through most of the fights, if you know how to use them.

quote Army_Man92

Is...is this really a debate? Obviously weapons/armor are way better. It's not even close. They absolutely destroyed magic, taking away thousands of spell possibilities, limiting the player to like three destructive spells that all suck. The magicka to damage ratio is laughable, when one normal swing of any weapon (which doesn't take any stamina) does as much as an expert level destruction spell.

Bethesda just mucked up magic, both in the simplification process and in terms of its objective power. I guess in their attempt to make Skyrim a nordic place, they had to diminish the power of magic. Unfortunately there simply is no reason to play as a magic character other than for fun. And that doesn't even take into account the shouts, which allow for most of the spells' effects without any magicka cost.

Well, there's no Lightning Breath Shout, but I hear ya. More powerful doesn't necessarily mean "Better", but don't play a Mage unless you really like it. Either of the other two are way easier.

quote psiberzerker

In terms of survival, though, it's definitely Warrior>Thief>Mage. (Going by the stones.)

Going by the stones, it is hardest for a Thief character. Mages are stuck in the middle because while their offence and defence sucks, they have both. Thieves have no offence whatsoever until they get the Pickpocket Perk that allows the placement of poisons. And even then, I doubt they work on the undead, or dragons.

Sure they have Light Armour, but Mages still have versatility, they just need it more now than they did before.

quote skythelegend

Going by the stones, it is hardest for a Thief character. Mages are stuck in the middle because while their offence and defence sucks, they have both. Thieves have no offence whatsoever until they get the Pickpocket Perk that allows the placement of poisons. And even then, I doubt they work on the undead, or dragons.

Sure they have Light Armour, but Mages still have versatility, they just need it more now than they did before.

1 Handed, and Archery, both Tief skills, are plenty of offense. Can you really tell me a lvl 1 Bosmer isn't capable of killing anything?

quote skythelegend

quote psiberzerker

1 Handed, and Archery, both Tief skills, are plenty of offense. Can you really tell me a lvl 1 Bosmer isn't capable of killing anything?

Sorry, but they're Warrior Skills. They raise faster under the influence of Warrior and not Thief, meaning if you play a pure archetype, Thieves are the weakest as they have to level up Pickpocket in order to get any offence whatsoever. Sure you get the boosts to One Handed weapons, Bows and Daggers/One Handed, but playing as an archetype means basically using only the Skills affected by that stone.

So as far as archetypes go, Warrior>Mage>Thief. You can make Stealth based character builds, but like you stated yourself, you have to use One Handed and/or Archery for it to be effective in combat, for anything other than running away I mean.

MM. In that case, you're right. A pure theif is pretty useless, as having no offensive capabilities=suicide. I know all about Bound Weapons, mind you, as well as the rest of the Conjuration tree. Just to be clear, we're only talking about what's affected by the Leveling Stones, none of these are in any way useless outside of Pures. Anyone can train any skill, it just takes longer from 15. I know you know this, just making it explicit for anyone else reading this. Don't want to cause any confusion.

According to uesp, Archery gets a skillup boost from the Thief Stone despite being considered a Warrior skill in other cases. There's a little note under the list.
http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Skyrim:Standing_Stone

So that shifts the balance a bit in the above discussion. Archery's quite powerful and would give the thief some form of quality offense at least. Also taking away the main ranged threat of the Warrior. Going by the "what the standing stones dictate" style anyway.

For me, Warrior's always the go-to choice above others. Not only because it's powerful & well protected, but because I'm more comfortable playing that style. Thief would be second because I can be decent at sneaking & sniping. Pure mage, however, is not my style at all. I hate the idea of my armor spell wearing off. If it's hitting the fan there's a good chance I'll fumble around with what to do because I don't have my precious heavy armor & shield. Kiting isn't an instinct of mine. The list goes on. I still play mages now & then because they're a challenge for me, but they also frustrate the hell outta me.