Does anyone else think that firebolts mana cost is way too high, and d

[ProfessorCup]

I started a mage character the other day and managed to scrimp up enough gold to buy Firebolt to replace Flare as I enjoy projectile spells more. It is definitely more satisfying to cast than just holding down a button for flamethrower, but I'm noticing its damage output is way too low compared to flare to be used practically. The reason being is that if you spam flare on and off you get the bonus damage for the target already being on fire and so melee range targets die much quicker. Currently it costs me about 33 mana for firebolt which does 25 damage, at level 2-3 a few of these shots consumes all of my mana pool leaving me defenseless for the time being. The major flaw is that with the bolt you can't use the same spam technique as flare to abuse flame damage, and it is more difficult to aim, or rather, actually requires aiming which puts it at a much lower priority than just flaring. So I thought I'd ask if anyone else thought the same as I do, as well as the following questions. Should firebolt really be so underpowered for its cost? Is being a projectile spell that much of an advantage when considering its low DPS and high mana cost?

 

I remember back in oblivion, Flare was the basic projectile starter spell which did 6 damage for 11 mana. This would allow you to use flare over ten times in a row, IMO making it a better "weapon" than what we have today. Perhaps it wasn't amazingly strong, but it was very well balanced.

 

Thoughts?

 

 

___

Note: While the mods I'm using may scale the mana costs and not allow me the same perks as vanilla, I do think that comparatively what I say holds merit to the vanilla game.

[EnaiSiaion]

There is no flare spell in Skyrim. :tongue:

[GrimyBunyip]

I'm pretty sure *flame doesn't actually cause you to deal more damage as they are on fire.

 

the description is a bit misleading, but it just deals some extra damage over time. Firebolt does that too.

 

And no I don't think firebolt exclusively is too expensive, maybe destruction as a whole is, but isn't firebolt the most cost effective in terms of damage per magicka to single targets?

[ProfessorCup]

There is no flare spell in Skyrim. :P

"Flame" :happy:

[blacksupernova]

technically, firebolt is more efficient than Flames, firebolt cost 1.32 magicka for 1 damage, flames costs 1.75. Of course, on fire effect makes flames more attractive but firebolt remains an effective long-ranged weapon against powerful foes like dragon which would very likely kill you if you get close enough to use flames. it also raises your skill faster than flames

[ProfessorCup]

Oh jeez, I'm an idiot. All this time I thought firebolt was a novice destruction spell, not apprentice level. This would explain why the first perk didn't change it. :whistling:

 

 

 

Ignore this post.