As a casual, form.

If I was chasing meta, function.

Form is completely irrelevant to me. Even if I wasn't "chasing the meta". I play eso as a game according to the rules.

I guess in some sense form may have some value to me, but only in the sense of exploring gameplay opportunities -- like different play styles.

There was always some sort of compromise, since Weapon/Guild/World/etc skills didn't always match the particular ''theme'' you wanted for a character.

Nowadays it seems you also have to ditch 2/3 of your Class skills unless you want to underperform. When I selected Necromancer in the character creation it was because I wanted to play a Necromancer, not fire green lasers from a book or spit fire from my mouth.

This game is literally funded by cosmetics; how can ZOS not figure out that if I don't like how my character skills look then there isn't really much reason to play at all.

Form over function is a fail every time. EVERY TIME

Obviously both, like you said. But form over function. By form, I don't mean theme, but what makes sense for a class.

With subclassing, form has gone out the window.

The poll was updated to include item sets, since that is a significant factor to consider alongside skills. I don't imagine many people will vote differently if item sets are included in the conversation, but if they would, then they can specify with a written response how they feel about the Form vs Function of skills vs of item sets.

I'm also surprised to see such an even split between the poll options for so long. I assumed most of the community here would have voted one way more heavily.

If a skill is bad I'm not using it. I love how Grave Grasp looks especially the Ghostly Embrace morph, but both morphs are bad for PvP so it's never going on my bars same for Mist Form I'll slot it, because I like the look and I always end up swapping it for RaT since it's so much better as a skill.

They've also made "Form" a selling point so eventually all skills should have an aesthetically pleasing look for most players. Just make the skill bar Icon match the style we're using.

If I'm playing for fun, form over function.

If I'm playing for rewards, function over form.

Function is really what I am after, but form is the deal breaker. If something is strong, but I can't reconcile it with my character because it looks silly or otherwise unacceptable, I won't be using it.

The changes in the last few years have really made it easier to build somewhat competitive kits with my self-imposed restrictions.

Both ideally look cool and be useful at the same time.

Doesn't have to be the best in slot but does need to be good enough at what it is trying to do, to justify getting one of the spots on my skill bars for harder content.

Function, except the ones that have floaty balls on like Pearlescent Ward. I hate those with violent passion.

I prioritize function but I still choose things over their thematics when I can, so I kinda do both.

Ideally both. On the one hand, a class should have skills that are thematically appropriate and visuals that also fit its theme, but it should also have a skill set that's well-rounded and covers a variety of functions effectively. On the other hand, as a DPS I have to use the skills that are the most effective, since my role is based on damage output, but it does bother me to use skills that don't fit my character's identity at all. Alas, subclassing has made it so.

Form every time. My goal is to play a character in a fantasy world. I don't care if a skill does 15% less damage or whatever if it looks good and fits the idea of the character I have in my head, I'm happy.

There is a single exception to that and that is if a skill feels fundamentally useless; and I don't mean "there's better options" I mean "there is no circumstance in which having this on my bar would be worth it, even if it looks cool, because it's so far behind everything else that literally an empty slot is probably doing as much good."

The main skill that is the target of that ire for me is the Storm Calling skill Mage's Fury - it requires the enemy to have such an unbelievably low level of health already that there's just zero reason to ever use it. Maybe it's better on hard targets where 20% HP lasts longer?

But in regular casual overland play it's just... casting it takes longer than any benefit you get from it.

And I hate that because I *adore* how it looks. It reminds me of the Thane from Dark Age of Camelot; and it'd be a great option for my druid to have a Call Lightning spell. But it's that bad - bad enough that looking cool cannot cover for it.

That said there's a lot more skills that I dislike the look of but are functionally strong (ie: most of the Aedric Spear line... love the idea of a spear weapon, the animations themselves are cool... but 'I have a lighstaber spear that comes out of nowhere when I use skills but otherwise I'm wielding something else' bugs the crap out of me. Also not really a fan of the floating blades skill for dual blades, which feels like a complete WTF to me. (If it were in another tree, like some sort of metal-manipulation magic? Okay sure. But why is it in Dual Blades? Name one rogue in the history of fantasy who's casually summoned a sphere of blades around themselves because "I have two swords so I can do that"??)

YMMV of course. It's not wrong to prioritize one or the other, and ideally both would be catered to evenly.