Oblivion talk:Fire Shield

When I enchanted an item with THIS spell, it did not actually increase my displayed cumulative armor factor. I think this only shields your spell resistance, and not your actual armor rating as well. Krep 11:05, 30 October 2006 (EST)

Looks like I am utterly and completely WRONG. Perhaps what confused me was, when you equip an item with "Fire Shield" or "Frost Shield" or the like effect, your diplayed armor rating does increase by the same number of points but I was expecting it to show up on the magic effects page or that the armor rating number would turn green like other magically enhanced attributes/skills/etc. (note that, 7% fire shield is not your armor factor times 1.07, rather it's just 7 more points of armor factor which is 7% more absorbtion provided you are still under the 85% cap). It adds directly to your armor and it doesn't say in the character's "currently active magic effects" page that it's adding your armor factor - nor is it listed with the "resist fire" total. Rather, it is separate from the effects (such as "Shield" and "Resist Fire" effects) and listed as simply "fire shield".

Note also that possessing the "fire shield" spell effect will not give you access to "frost shield" or "electric shield" effects, those are considered separate when it comes to spell-making or enchanting. Krep 11:05, 30 October 2006 (EST)

NOT an "offensive" shield.Edit

In other RPGs, shield spells and effects with elemental annotation usually have an "offensive" quality, in the form of "Enemy takes X (Element name) Damage when striking player". It would appear that the Elder Scrolls developers opted to keep these elemental shields purely defensive, as shield spells and effects labeled with an element simply split the difference between Physical protection and Elemental protection. This fact should be noted on all the Element Shield pages, as veterans of D&D and Dungeon Siege and the like may be confused as to why their shiny new Fire/Frost/Shock Shield isn't causing extra damage to enemies who strike them. Predcon 14:23, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Good thought, but i dont think that we should compaire oblivion with other games in a page like this. Well, that`s what i think, but we can wait and see some other opinions. --Archain 14:41, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Oh, and adding the exact same statement to three different talk pages are not going to get extra attention; if you want the Community's attention in this matter, I suggest using the Community Portal. I'm going to delete the two newly created talk pages now. --Krusty 14:47, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

I'm not saying we need to compare Oblivion to anything else in the article, I'm simply saying that it should be noted that "(Element Name) Shield" doesn't actually mean "Shield of (Element Name) that will harm enemies who strike it", as a great many may take for granted as its meaning. Predcon 15:00, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Actually, I was still thinking that this is what the spell does (i.e. being "offensive") until reading this, and I'm not even the player of neither D&D nor Dungeon Siege. So I agree that it could be noted. - ZuTheSkunk 15:15, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

(←) It says in the first paragraph of the page exactly what it does. First, just like Shield, it adds M% directly to the Armor Rating of the target (without negatively affecting the target's Spell Effectiveness). Secondly, it provides M% Resist Fire, thus reducing Fire Damage by M% Why would you need to say what it does not do? --DKong27 ^{Talk Cont} 15:41, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Agree. I just dont think it fits in hear. --Archain 15:52, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

I'm with Dkong here, unless we want to start mentioning that swords do not shoot arrows, or that warhammers can not perform algebra this should not be included. --AKB ^{Talk Cont Mail} 15:54, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

It can't hurt to be thorough. Even the icons used for these shield effects look like they're meant to be used offensively. Predcon 19:19, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

How is it being thorough to mention things that aren't true? If it was explicitly implied that they were meant to be offensive, such as through dialogue or in-game description, but that is not the case here. As I said there is no reason to mention this simply because it isn't true. The only way I could see this being added is if it mentioned that the Morrowind fire shield did damage. But even then that probably wouldn't be notable on this page as it is about a different game. --AKB ^{Talk Cont Mail} 19:28, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Yes. There is no real need to compare spells in these games to spells in other games. Otherwise we would be cluttering up the listings with differences in every single spell, such as saying that levitate spells in Morrowind can be used to move horizontally, while in D&D you can only move vertical. --Brf 19:34, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Well... It would seem to make sense that they would do the same thing as in Morrowind - where they do 1 point of (element) damage to enemies that hit you as well as absorbing damage, so I think it would be a good addition.--Ghurhak gro-Demril _{or TAO}^Yes? 20:38, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

(←) Hmmm... I have never used the Elemental Shield spells in Morrowind. If the effect is so different, it should probably be mentioned here then. --Brf 20:41, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

The best place for this is on the Oblivion for Morrowind players page. Arguably unless you want to mention every difference between the two on there respective pages, creating a bunch of unwanted redundancy it should go there. --AKB ^{Talk Cont Mail} 20:47, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Stop. Please stop. Before assuming that the Morrowind pages are correct, can we do some testing here? I just did a very quick test with two self-made Fire Shield spells in Morrowind - on self and on touch - and neither caused any damage to nearby NPCs (at least, they never attacked). The change on the MW article came here and then here, and was never challenged. It's quite possible that the user who changed the info was wrong. It certainly looks that way to me. rpeh •T•C•E• 20:58, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Yes, because, according to the way it is (or was, anyway) it only affects things that hit you. — Unsigned comment by TheAlbinoOrc (talk • contribs) at 21:35 on 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Yes to what? rpeh •T•C•E• 21:39, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

"neither caused any damage to nearby NPCs"

"Yes [...] it only affects things that hit you"

Maybe? Legoless 21:45, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

I'll repeat what I said earlier: can we do some testing here? My tests demonstrate that the spell is not considered to be hostile: you can't cast a hostile spell on a friend without them turning on you. That means there's no damage component. Now show me a spell that works differently depending on whether you cast it on a friend or on a foe. In other words: as far as I can tell, the MW pages are wrong. The Fire Shield spell does no damage. rpeh •T•C•E• 22:04, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

(←) Well... I just did some testing in Morrowind. I made an amulet with 100 points of fireshield and let a rat wail on me. I can confirm he was taking some damage, but I do not know how much, because I did not want to kill him with my weapon. I gave it a love-tap with an iron sword first to almost kill him, then he hit me like three times with the fireshield on, and he died. A rat only has like 23 HPs, so it was taking only like 1 or 2 HPs per hit.--Brf 23:26, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

@Rpeh: It's a reaction to you taking damage from something. It would work the same way if you got in front of something friendly attacking, say, a cliff-racer, as if you got hit by that same cliff-racer. It's not an attack spell, or it would kill you.--Ghurhak gro-Demril _{or TAO}^Yes? 01:57, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Okay, having done actual testing instead of speculating on what might happen, I can confirm Brf's results. I used a spell rather than an amulet (20-50pts on self) and let a cliff racer attack. Each time it hit me, it lost about 1.5 points of health (checked using the gethealth console command). I let the spell expire and confirmed that it no longer lost health when it hit. rpeh •T•C•E• 08:25, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Fire Shield Spell oddityEdit

When comparing the 3 default Fire Shield spells to the 3 default Frost and Shock Shield spells there is a very noticeable discrepancy. Specifically it seems that the Master level spell "Flame Shield" (Named StandardFireShield3Journeyman in the Construction Set) was supposed to be given the effect at 20% for 30 seconds but was instead set to 30% for 60 seconds. Just to be clear, the page is correct and the oddity is found in the actual game as well.

With weird little oddities like this there is usually a note directly under it pointing out the oddity. Should that go here? Is this pointed out on another page I didn't see? Am I crazy and completely wrong about this? --70.26.47.137 01:33, 11 March 2015 (GMT)

Weakness to elemental spells and this spells interactionsEdit

I have played for a long time but recently I have played an Altmer wizard. I noticed the 20 point elemental shield spells are giving me 35 points instead. It seems the weakness to fire, frost and shock 25% allows this spell to become stronger? This is the only interaction I can think of that would give results like this. I will try later to make a fresh new character with custom weakness to fire and fire shield spells. I wonder if resistances reduced the effects.