Destruction vs. Marksman

[Quantum Entanglement]

Note that all points highlighted in red are explained in further detail below.

Marksman

Advantages

• Unlike spells, the physical damage dealt by ranged weapons cannot be absorbed
• Unlike spells, the physical damage dealt by ranged weapons cannot be reflected
• Unlike spells, ranged weapons deal 50% more damage when a sneak attack is successfully executed
• You have a 25% chance to retrieve the ammunition that hits a target after its death

Disadvantages

• Unlike spells, ranged weapons are only capable of damaging one target at a time, making them impractical against several foes
• Numerous creatures are immune to the physical damage dealt by ranged weapons
• The enchanted effects used against creatures that are immune to physical damage can, like spells, be absorbed
• The enchanted effects used against creatures that are immune to physical damage can, like spells, be reflected
• The enchanted effects used against creatures that are immune to physical damage can, like spells, be resisted
• Ranged weapons rely on a steady supply of ammunition, which can be expensive to replenish, depending on their quality
• Unlike spells, ranged weapons, and their ammunition, have weight

Destruction

Advantages

• Unlike ranged weapons, spells are capable of damaging several targets at a time, making them practical against several foes
• Ranged spells, unlike ranged weapons, can be endlessly cast without depleting your supply of Magicka
• Ranged spells, and the Magicka required to cast them, have no weight

Disadvantages

• Unlike the physical damage dealt by ranged weapons, spells can be absorbed
• Unlike the physical damage dealt by ranged weapons, spells can be reflected
• Spells can be resisted
• Unlike ranged weapons, ranged spells do not deal 50% more damage when a sneak attack is successfully executed

Notes

If you add the effect "Drain Intelligence 100 pts on Self" to any spell, you will instantly replenish your supply of Magicka once it is cast, thus, removing the necessity of a separate spell, potion, scroll, and/or item with which to replenish it. This works extremely well with ranged spells, which you can then cast endlessly without delay. Also, the addition of this effect does not in any way significantly increase the cost of Magicka required in order to perform the spell, nor does it significantly decrease your chances of casting it. Though some may consider this to be an exploitation of the system, it is not a glitch, nor is it, by definition, a cheat.

Also, any foes resistant or immune to a specific type of spell or enchantment can still be damaged by it effects if an effect that reduces a particular resistance for a period of time is added to the spell or enchantment (or a separate one is used altogether). It should, however, be noted that this can be absorbed, resisted, or reflected as well.

What are your opinions?

What do you think? Any and all input on the subject would be greatly appreciated. Also, note that you can change your vote once it is cast, should further discussion of this topic change your opinion.

[Ragnarok]

First, even resistance to normal weaons can still be damaged by normal ammunition such as iron arrows fired from a bound longbow or the like. Second, is having to execute a successful sneak attack to gain an extra 50% damage really an advantage? Third, destruction can do damage over time (DOT) that normal ranged weapon attacks can't. I don't really see a comparrison since Destruction can also be a viable alternative to replace any and all weapon skills, including melee with touch range spells.

*edit*

almost forgot one. spells always hit provided sucessfully cast and target doesn't move or dodge.

*edit*

another point I almost forgot. magic bypasses armor and doesn't damage the armor unless using that effect (damage armor). in other words, magic always does full damage. ranged weapon attacks are still subject to opponent armor damage reduction.

[Lazy Waysef]

I would say that Marksman is debatably better against some heavy reflection enemy, but even then, getting 100% reflect is probably a better course of action. Also, adding a bound longbow to the equation I've found makes a lot of scenarios much easier in the earlier game, but I generally tend to side with Destruction as a clear winner between those two.

I however, put other as I've always liked Mysticism quite a bit as a ranged attack, especially a mysticism spell with a 50 foot AOE. Candidates I most frequently use are Absorb Health, Absorb Fatigue, and more rarely Absorb Speed (if I've elected not to use boots of blinding speed, which I elect not to do often), Absorb Strength (Though I much, much prefer Damage Strength to this). I also enjoy that mysticism has a lot of my favorite skills other than these as well. All the travel spells (which I don't like using enchanted items for after a certain point in the game), Detect Creature (but only after downloading whichever unofficial patch it was that made it work on people, and only on sneaking builds where I'm trying not to load a lot), detect enchantment and key if I decided to drop some stuff somewhere in favor of weight or less clutter, soultrap, telekinesis for traps and thievery, and honorable mention to spell absorption and reflect though I really don't usually make spells that have those but rather use enchanted items.

Anyway, I like the idea of gaining whatever my enemy is losing, though there is definite merit to damage attribute spells since they're permanent, I guess I just feel a bit bad using them sometimes. I don't really understand drain spells though, other than drain intelligence on self. Its a tough call, I like both destruction and mysticism so much.

[Milder Despues]

I'd go with marksman.

Like the the Lazy Waysef says, it's generally more effective early in the game due to "Bound Longbow" and prohibitive magicka costs for destruction spells. Plus it's easy to stay undetected at a distance, which is why the critical multiplier is lower for ranged weapons in the first place.

As for resupplying, I'd worry more about a shortage of magicka than ammunition. I think ammunition (even expensive varieties) is cheaper to obtain than potions of restore magicka. Not sure about alchemy though, you'd have to through the hassle of finding ingredients as well but it might be offset by the effect. I myself wouldn't use the drain intelligence effect. If I had that mentality I'd just play version 1.0 and get the Robe of S:t Roris.

Anyway, rate of fire might be interesting to factor in. I don't think the difference is all that great though, unless counting enchanted items and thrown weapons. Speaking of thrown weapons, Dwarven darts might be the primary reason that I'm leaning towards marksman as a skill. You don't need many, or even even need to have a high marksman skill, to mash stuff up when flinging those. They basically allowed me to breeze through the final Bloodmoon quest with a marksman skill of 30-something and like 50 of them.

Now, even if all this is true, the difference in damage output when increasing the difficulty might change things a lot, since magic isn't affected by that (right?).

[MadManMorris]

Good points everyone! I've always started with my usual woodelf archer and just drop things that are on the other side of the warcloud. Marksman for me has always been my go to skill (besides sneak- which always manages to reach 100 before anything else).

[Ragnarok]

I do have to admit, I really enjoy Marksman more in spite of the benefits of Destruction. There's just something infinitely satisfying about scoring a "one shot, one kill". I find Destruction wielding mages running around hurling fireballs and lightning bolts a little too cliche, but that wasn't the question. the question as it was presented and posed was which one was more efficient, not which one was more fun, hence my argument for Destruction's efficiency.

*edit*
and on that note, Lazy Waysef's point about Mysticism and Absorb effects are actually the *MOST* efficient, performing the dual function of damaging an enemy's health while simultaneously restoring your own for the same casting cost as a damage health effect, which only performs that one single function.

[OblivionDuruza]

For me, Marksman seems a more viable option for a non-Mage, based upon the limits of the Magicka pool of a character not geared towards Magic. In addition, the ability to enchant arrows and bows gives the player the ability to increase the damage output of the Marksman skill, so for an all rounder or a mixed character, I'd be leaning towards Marksman, although not as a clear better alternative. In terms of sheer power and the capability for power, I'd probably be leaning towards Destruction, but would want a character geared towards casting high cost spells multiple times over before it became really effective.

[dragonalumni]

You missed an important disadvantage to marksman..

Arrows in Morrowind have weight, unlike all other TeS games. I just sold 250 arrows and 100 bolts and that was 35 units of weight!

[AddictedtoMorrowind]

[*]Unlike spells, ranged weapons, and their ammunition, have weight[/list]

Really?
Based on the pros and cons of both Marksman and Destruction, I'd say that Destruction is better overall, but I prefer Marksman. Wait, can't you enchant arrows or bows with an area damage effect?

[Lazy Waysef]

"Cast on strike" enchantments do not work on bows, since the arrow is doing the striking and not the bow. If you want to enchant a bow, you should use constant effect or "cast when used." Please note you HAVE THE OPTION to enchant a bow with a "cast on strike" enchantment, and you'll be able to create the bow, the enchantment will just never get used. If you want "cast on strike" enchantments get some good arrows, though you will not be able to enchant them yourself, ammunition is not enchantable.

[AddictedtoMorrowind]

Aw, dang, cause I was thinking that you could enchant one of the two with an area effect damage effect, like Fire damage.

[WW2Gamer]

marksman and destruction are the two I work on last as far as combat and its always in that order. I love using my daedric bow with silver arrows or the dwarven crossbow with the Orc bolts - silver are good too. When there are lots of targets I try and have a rock or something between them and I. Other than that, area effect arrows are a good touch. But at high levels its fun shooting at skeleton bowman across the way.

[Kerr]

I like Marksman, crossbows are awesome. I don't have to worry that much about cliff racers swarming me.

[Golden Sinner]

If you have Tribunal, you get Centurion Archers that spawn, Each one you destroy has several Dwarven Darts (weight .2, does 20-50 points of damage). Anyone can use them, you can carry lots of them and with a high strength a hit will knock your opponent back so that they can’t attack you or cast spells. Enchant an item to cast “Fortify Marksman 100 levels for 12 seconds on self”, and you are a terminator one on one.

[Xibir]

The argument really relies on a character's capabilities, thus the player's preference. If you like using magic all the time or using weapons. I prefer weapons because I despise carrying lots of equipment like potions. I have armor, primary, secondary (weapons), arrows if need be. Much easier than hauling about tons of restore magika potions.

[Sunny]

There is some stuff you missed though...

1) Arrows are faster than ranged spells (I once cast a shockball at a kagouti that was some distance away, I waited for some time, then when it nearly hit, the kagouti got bored and decided to move away, and I missed.)

2)marksman's ammo are arrows, ranged spell's ammo are restore magicka potions.

3) if you get a more damaging bow or more damaging arrows, it doesn't decrease the chance of hitting and use up more than one arrow, however, better spells cost more magicka and less chance to cast them.

Most of these points support marksman, but I favor detruction. Although in my old save, (about level 26) I used marksman, and there are some epic arrows in GOTY.