UESP Forums

I'm planning a new character at the moment, to be created after I've completed the main quest with my current one. The basic build will be an Imperial or maybe a Nord who wears heavy armour, wields two-handed weapons and has smithing as a complementary skill. But I also need an offensive skill effective at long range, because of the dragons. Firstly, because they land so seldom and secondly, because I use a dragon-enhancing mod that makes going near them not so sensible an idea, as their physical attacks are devastating.

So, the question is: Archery or destruction? Which one would be better, seeing that it would be a strictly secondary mode of attack? On the other hand, with smithing I could boost bows to do loads of damage. But on the other, that bow would be dead weight in addition of armour and a huge battleaxe, so Destruction would save weight and give me a wider variety of effects. But then again, is it viable as a secondary skill, or only as the main mode of combat? I have thus far used destruction only for a mage dedicated to it, so I don't really have clue if it would be workable in higher levels if the character's preferred weapon was something else.

Archery. Classic adventurer standby.

If you use magic, you'll have to add perks to a skill tree, and use attribute points to increase your magicka reserves.

With archery all you have to do is add perks. It doesn't spread your character as thin if health and stamina are important to you.

I must ask, is the offensive range strictly for dragons or as just another means to attack.

If the former, destruction no doubt. You may need to spend some perks, and maybe spend some points in magicka or wear enchantments to help supplement your short comings(I recommend magicka regen). It really aids to have means to stagger.. Or a constant vector of damage if you bother to master. If I'm not mistaken, since shock damages magicka.. If enough is drained then no shouts will be made

If the later, archery, the means to buff your bow and how little in perks may be needed, it benefits more than some situational offense. Sneak multipliers, bolts or powerful arrows, and the use of poisons afar certainly can become overkill. Given many of the linear paths in dungeons, using a ranged weapon from the shadows is all too perfect. Also, if I'm not mistaken on this too, arrows are capable of setting of pressure plate traps or attract foes much like a certain shout

BetaB17 wrote:I must ask, is the offensive range strictly for dragons or as just another means to attack.

I intended it as a battle opener, a way to weaken an enemy group before engaging in melee. But if there were no dragons, I'd go full melee. Namely, this time I'm not going to do any sneak archery. I've done that with so many characters in all TES titles I've played that it's become almost boring. This time around I'm going to play a gung-ho, all-out brawler type that literally cleaves through hordes of enemies.

Well, it seems that archery is the best option, since smithing can make it deliver formidable damage even with relatively few perks. Hmm, maybe crossbows? That way melee would be the main course in battles anyway, since an unsneaky character can't get more than one or two shots in before the enemies close up, but it would be very effective against dragons. Now I only have to decide if I'll take up some restoration too, or rely entirely on bought or looted potions for healing needs. In addition of sneak archery my latest two characters have been alchemists, so I'd like play without that, too. I'm not going to use much enchanting, either, to preserve some challenge. Namely, I ruined the fun with one of my characters by making her adept at all three crafting skills which made the game a cakewalk. I mean, she had a crossbow with both fire and ice damage enchantments smithed to do some 175 damage, and a sword to match, and wore dragonscale armor which was also smithed to top shape. There was no fun anymore, since not even mammoths or draugr deathlords could do more than scratch her.

Having ranged offense is a good idea for hard-to-reach enemies, but I don't think you'll really need it for dragons. If you hit them from a distance, you'll be hit with their shouts, which are also very potent. You'll be relying on magic resistance, but you said you don't want to use enchanting. Might as well make full use of the armor, and hit the dragons up close. I've had little problem taking bite attacks with sufficient armor rating and block skill (this is with Deadly Dragons). And dragons can be staggered with block-bashing. In this case, archery would be more beneficial than destruction, for the focus on health and stamina.

Don't forget there are offensive shouts as an alternative to destruction - Drain Vitality, Fire Breath, Frost Breath, Ice Form, Storm Call (tricky with followers), all very useful in addition to dear old Unrelenting Force, plus Marked For Death and Slow Time to do more damage more quickly. Once you've got Dragonrend you don't need ranged attacks to deal with dragons.

Thinking a bit out of the box I'd like to throw in Conjuration as an alternative to both Destruction and Archery. I like to think of summons as self-propelled ranged weapons; best are those who have ranged attacks of their own, like Atronachs. If you don't feel like investing into Conjuration perks and magicka, collect scrolls. If you're playing with the Dragonborn DLC and go to Solstheim you've got another alternative: I wouldn't bother with Restoration unless you're playing with a mod that disables vanilla health regeneration or plan to specialize in undead-hunting since IIRC the anti-undead spells from Dawnguard are Restoration spells. Healing potions are to be found all over the place, you should do fine.

Using Bound Bow would eliminate the need for carrying around a regular Bow, eliminating a few pounds of weight.

Well, there quite a few very good suggestions. I've never bothered with summons, but I might give them a try. Also, bound bows sound a good idea, too. I have to think about it, but for the moment I'm still leaning towards plain old physical archery. Namely, concentrating on health and stamina seems to be the best course for my intended build. But on the other hand, bound weapons don't demand that much magicka. Hmmm...

If you use a bound bow, you'll still need the skill/perks to use them on top of the skills and perks you'll need to cast it.

It's difficult to mix combat and magic skills effectively. If you're a magic oriented character it's easy to tack on another magic school. If you're a physical combat oriented character it's easy to tack on another combat skill.

With that said, I'm not saying you can't do it. It's more interesting. I just find it difficult to cultivate a character exactly the way you want it in the first place without adding additional skills. I use one handed and archery on every character I make. Shouts sort of act as free magic for physical combat characters so I've been intimidated to make a magic user. There never seems to be enough perk points to get everything you want. Only what you need.

ElderSkillz wrote:If you use a bound bow, you'll still need the skill/perks to use them on top of the skills and perks you'll need to cast it.

there's only one perk that actually affects the performance of the bound bow spell for combat purposes. Mystic Binding. That effectively acts in a similar manner to a temper effect for a regular bow.
The turn/banish effect and then soul trap effects are also around, but I find them to be less than ideal for most builds.

Otherwise teh bound (or mythic if perked) bow functions exactly like a regular bow except for the weight and ability to temper. scales off your bow skill to use. Get teh spell and treat it like a handy bow. It even provides you with some arrows for use.

Though the base cost is over 200 =/
may need to be lvl 50 in conjuration before you see it on a vendor (I could be wrong on that though)
cost reduction perks and armor may be useful depending on what you spend magicka on.

Nord85 wrote: ... I intended it as a battle opener, a way to weaken an enemy group before engaging in melee. ...

Approach ranged combat that way, and it won't matter if your shoot fireballs or arrows— the only purpose of such attack is to make the bad man angry enough to charge so you can have the 'real' fun with your oversized dinner knife.

Try to twist it around: the ranged attack as the primary means to fighting, the melee only coming into use when a badly wounded enemy manages to make his way through the ground you command with your 'guns'.

Dark Spark wrote:Approach ranged combat that way, and it won't matter if your shoot fireballs or arrows— the only purpose of such attack is to make the bad man angry enough to charge so you can have the 'real' fun with your oversized dinner knife.

Try to twist it around: the ranged attack as the primary means to fighting, the melee only coming into use when a badly wounded enemy manages to make his way through the ground you command with your 'guns'.

Well, now that I created the character and started playing, I've actually found something of a compromise between only tickling the enemies and using archery as the main means of attack. In the dungeons I use almost exclusively melee. In the wilderness, though, I thin out enemy hordes with my bow by shooting the weakest ones first. That way I can grabble face to face with the meanest guy and not worry about the mooks flanking and bumrushing me. And, of course, if someone shoots me from further afar than some twenty yards, I'll use bow to retaliate. Otherwise, it's the waraxe. At level 15 my archery skill is maybe 10 points lower than one-handed. Thanks to smithing, both deal respectable damage and are viable.

Dragons I shoot if they won't land. If they do land, then I'll fight them with the axe. It actually makes my character feel a bit badass that he can survive going toe-to-toe with a dragon. My earlier ones were so lightly armoured they had to keep away from those beasts if they wanted to survive.

Nord85 wrote:

Dark Spark wrote:Approach ranged combat that way, and it won't matter if your shoot fireballs or arrows— the only purpose of such attack is to make the bad man angry enough to charge so you can have the 'real' fun with your oversized dinner knife.

Try to twist it around: the ranged attack as the primary means to fighting, the melee only coming into use when a badly wounded enemy manages to make his way through the ground you command with your 'guns'.

Well, now that I created the character and started playing, I've actually found something of a compromise between only tickling the enemies and using archery as the main means of attack. In the dungeons I use almost exclusively melee. In the wilderness, though, I thin out enemy hordes with my bow by shooting the weakest ones first. That way I can grabble face to face with the meanest guy and not worry about the mooks flanking and bumrushing me. And, of course, if someone shoots me from further afar than some twenty yards, I'll use bow to retaliate. Otherwise, it's the waraxe. At level 15 my archery skill is maybe 10 points lower than one-handed. Thanks to smithing, both deal respectable damage and are viable.

Dragons I shoot if they won't land. If they do land, then I'll fight them with the axe. It actually makes my character feel a bit badass that he can survive going toe-to-toe with a dragon. My earlier ones were so lightly armoured they had to keep away from those beasts if they wanted to survive.

When using Archery as an opener, I always target the "long range" enemies first. Take down the opposing Archers and Spellcasters from a distance, and the battleground becomes a lot more comfortable for you. When the enemy's artillery has been silenced, you can concentrate on the melee infantry by sticking arrows into the heavy armor grunts first as they close the distance between you and them. Soften up the big armored guys first so they'll be damaged by the time they get toe-to-toe with you; the peasants running around in scraps of fur present the least threat and should be your lowest priority. Melee is best for mopping up stragglers and malingerers.

Use distance and cover to your advantage. If you're stealthy, you'll find that Archery is very effective in dungeons too.

^I might try your approach, Evil-i. But this far my reasoning has been that as my character is clad in heavy armor and can block pretty effectively (I changed the planned two-handed focus into axe-and-shield combo), he can fight it out one-on-one with nearly any opponent. If there are many enemies, they can surround him and even if most attacks are weak, those stack up to considerable amounts of damage when there are three or four of them attacking from the rear and flanks. That's why it's best to eliminate the weakest ones first to reduce the herd.

As for sneak-archery, I've done that with most of my characters in every TES game I've played. It indeed can be devastating, but as I've grown a bit bored of it, I'm not using it this time around. As I stated earlier, the only reason I need far-range offense in the first place are dragons. But now that I use it against them, it's just sensible to use it against other opponents, too.

I used to split classes up into their pure forms, physical melee, physical ranged, and magic users. I felt like if you were going to make a class, the best approach is to go pure and focus on emphasizing that narrow strength. I even went so far as not using shops and collecting gold and potions exclusively, as to avoid gaining mercantile skill levels.

I find lately, that I split classes into two groups: Physical combatants and magic users. They are only categorized by the means of offense though, as I've lightened up on gaining non combat skill levels. I still pick-and-choose which skill books I read, but I don't mind gaining other skills I don't plan to perk. Because of this I tend to have pretty well rounded characters but I still can't bring myself to mix Physical and magic. It's very costly for perk points.

ElderSkillz wrote:Because of this I tend to have pretty well rounded characters but I still can't bring myself to mix Physical and magic. It's very costly for perk points.

Well, it's doable but indeed needs some careful perk planning. For instance, Illusion and Archery mix surprisingly well together. Pacifying or panicking opponents before they get to you and then peppering them with arrows is a very viable strategy as I found out with my previous character. I threw alchemy into the mix as well, which among other nice boosts made that character able to use even melee in last-ditch situations with some efficacy. But I found Illusion and alchemy both demanded the lion's share of the perk points to remain competetive. After distributing the most of the rest into archery, there was very little left for light armor and none for one-handed. Also, magicka demanded so much points at leveling that the character's health is comparatively mediocre and her stamina is still 110 at level 40. So that character is a glass cannon; able to deal serious damage with her bow and to counfound enemies with spells, but if any stronger enemy gets close she's dead in a few hits.

With the current character I'm sort of going into different direction than you have done. Because at least three of my previous characters have been hybrids of some kind or another, this time I'm going to try a purer warrior approach.

hmm... i don't think it's all that costly to get perks for a wide variety of stuff. You just need to map out what stuff you'd need and think about how much you really need some things.

Base game's skills don't do much for weapon skills. Heck you can match the bonuses you get from weapon skills with blacksmithing (no perks, no exploits, just temper the weapon) and then for times like stamina costs or stuns you can do some enchantments.