UESP Forums

What's the point of having all three of them?

The Blizzard spell takes 200 damage with 474 mana spending (With the 50% perk)
The Lightning storm spell takes 600 damage with 496 mana spending
The Fire storm spell takes 100 damage with 611 mana spending.

So, why waste money on blizzard or fire storm? Why did Bethesda make them so underpowered?

i like incinerate

my guess would be becuse almost no one is imune to shock, while you have a lot of frost and ice imunitys

Thats the base damage, Fire deals more damage if the target is on fire and deals extra damage by setting the target on fire

Ice spells also drain fatigue, so enemies can no longer use power attacks on you.

I would say it's a tad imbalanced, but enough to now screw the game over.

Wow, never saw that.

IMO it should be exactly the same damage:magicka ratio.

To the above posters; just like frost drains stamina, spark drains magicka, so why does frost get the bad deal?

frost and fire are over an area if you read the descriptions. they can do that damage to every person ina room at once for that magicka cost. lightning is on target. which is actually the source of my irritation. i hate aoe spells as they have too much opportunity to hurt friendlies. fire and frost aren't any weaker as the op believes but they are cumbersome which is what bothers me. I don't think they all need to do identical damage for identical cost like some ppl because it takes from the uniqness of the spells but they should all be the same type or atleast have the same types available. if frost has a aoe so should lightning. if lightning has an on target spell at master level so should fire and frost.

becuse most eemeys in skyrim dont use magic