Is it possible to enchant a set of fortify alchemy equipment that will allow you to create a more potent fortify enchant potion then using the potion recreate a more powerful set of alchemy equipment? Can you repeat this to continually increase the power of the enchanting potion? Has anyone tried this? What kind of increase was seen between alchemy sets?
Unlike in Oblivion, you can stack skills over 100 with a combination of enchanting and alchemy.
You can easily wind up with something like this:
There's not enough recursion within the enchanting / alchemy skills to increase arbitrarily high, but you can definitely get some pretty nuts items regardless.
the trick here is not to simply use enchanting to up alchemy to up enchanting etc. so u have a very good enchantment on your items, but to get an overpowered smithing enchantment on your items so you can then smith your items up waaaaaay beyond legendary aswell
I did the smithing/potion trick with armor and weapons. So a 130% boost over my 100 smithing. 2 pieces of armor at 20% each, ring and necklace at 20% each and 50% boost potion. Then enchanted necklace, ring, and armor to boost stamina health magician regen, bow and one handed damage. So 120% damge up with bow or sword depending on which set of ring/amulet i equipped. I could go higher with alchemy custom potions but don't feel like it.
So results without alchemy boost: Smith/enchant 100, Heavy armor 100, one handed 100, and bow 70. Daedric short sword; 268 damage. 1-2 hits on adept in standard combat. Daedric bow; 300 damage. 1-2 hits kills Draugr death lords on adept with sneak attack. Regular dragons go down in 1-5 slashes, ancient in 5-15. Daedric armor with shield equipped yields 1500+ armor rating. Can you say game breaking?
protected by Community♦ Nov 23 '11 at 9:30
Thank you for your interest in this question.
Because it has attracted low-quality or spam answers that had to be removed, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site.
Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?