So we all know that you can dual wield spells (ie. fire ball in right, shield wall in left etc.) similar to weapons (ie. 2 daggers, one dager one long sword etc.) What im wondering is if there will be spells that are "more powerful" that requires you to equip to both hands?

I think todd said somewhere that if you equip 2x fire ball that it = big fireball (correct me if im wrong) But i think having a few uber spells with cool effects that required both hands would be cool.

You can cast spells with two hands. will they be required? I don't know.

From what I can tell, spells are one-handed -- but some spells combine to make a new effect.

Well, this is what Bethesda is aiming for, but they are -- according to various articles -- still working on it. It may not be in the final game.

You guess is as good as mine :shrug: . I imagine they would impose that on powerful spells like paralysis and silence.

there apearantly are four ways to use a spell

1= one handed ''throw''
2= "flamethrower" like
3= two handed for greater blast
4= runes for traps(?)

Well, in the trailer we see the player use both hands manipulating an orb of Fire. Also in the trailer is the scene where the player causes an explosion of Fire, hitting all the nearby undead. I believe that is the effect of using two hands. I believe in the GI article they mention what you can do with your Fireball spell: Fireball, Flamethrower, Rune. Not sure if it's only possible in one hand, but this selection from the GI Skyrim Hub's "Building Better Combat" suggests that the different ways your spells can be casted won't be limited to one hand:



It doesn't say that you can cast all aforementioned ways of Fireball in two hands, but it does say that you can cast the normal Fireball with both hands to greater effect. Perhaps you will be able to cast your flamethrower with both hands and create that explosion in the trailer. This means that, in order to cast that awesome explosion of Fiery delight, you must use both hands. But perhaps that was the Rune effect that caused the explosion, I'm not sure. It looked like he slammed his hand on the ground, or punched it, so perhaps he imprinted the rune on the ground, or slammed that orb of Fire into the ground. Maybe the Rune's area of activation is large, who can say. I'm sure it's a two-handed cast, though. And I'm also sure that it will be one of many effects that will require two hands.

:flamethrower: :flame:

I think that using one hand is for weaker effect and two for greater and that's that.
Don't think that there will be spell that actually requires two hands in order to be cast at all, but that's just me.

How 'bout putting one spell in one hand and another on the other? Say self healing on one hand and a destruction spell on the other?

Depends on what you consider I separate spell I guess. To me a tiny fireball shot with one hand isn't the "Same Spell" as a massive fiery artillery shell launched with both hands, and said artillery shell will no doubt require both hands to be used, so in a manner of speaking yes there will be "spells" that require two hands.

On an unrelated note I hope that two handing the shield spell will create a visible orb of force around the caster that deflects attacks from all sides (spell or otherwise) using that with the dragon shout for teleportation (blinking) and quick switching to massive two handed destruction spells would make me feel like a badass wizard indeed.

That is kinda nice, but it would be even better if spells had either other "clusters" of spellcasting ways, or just more options. For example, I really wish for some kind of channeling spell. Two-handed, obviously, without ability to move. Like Blizzard in WoW. TES always had a spell named "Ice Storm", and I think that channeling is best way to launch something with that name.

So, for channeling spells...

1 - equip in one hand and press corresponding attack button once: starts channeling. For a few seconds (perhaps depending on your magic skill) nothing happens, except for ominous magickal winds roaring and some spellcasting animation. If you'll move your feet, channeling will stop. Then, after few seconds passed, the spell effect begins to manifest at the point of your crosshair. You can move now, spell will continue to burn. It can be dispelled by, duh, Dispel.

2 - equip in one hand and hold attack button: same as first at start, some charging, I suppose it should be shorter. Then spell manifests, probably in more savage way (flamethrower instead of firebolt, duh). For example, in Ice Storm case, instead of classical "Blizzard" effect with falling pieces of ice, it could be turned into "Icestormthrower", with more weaker particles of ice flying from your hand towards poor victims. Oh, and it shouldn't always be a variation of a flamethrower for all spells - it also can be either standard channeling process, yet with larger-but-less-damaging (or smaller-but-more-painful) area. Or, say, a huge ball of [something], which is thrown like a standard spell, but it is way more powerful, because it is harder to cast. This way of spellcasting should continue to drain your magicka while it is active. And, at least without perk, you shouldn't be able to move while "throwing" channeled spells.

3 - equip in two hands and press attack button once: same as first, but more powerful. It channels longer, though. Probably additional effects, such as magicka, fatigue or health continuing drain should be more pronounced in this variation of spellcasting, not just "more damage". If I want to strike some mage with a lightning, emptying his magickal reserve, and I mean it - this is the way to perform it. Oh, additional knockbacking is welcome.

4 - equip in two hands and hold attack button: same as third, not as second. It continues to drain your magicka and/or health while you are holding the button. You can't move without a perk while using this way of spellcasting. Effect is similar to standard (1 and 3, not 2), but more savage and less controlable. It continues to burn for a while even after you stop holding the button, and yes, it still drains your magicka/health during this (could be lessened/eliminated by skills/perks). Basically, this way of spellcasting should be used when you are totally in need of damage (or something) no matter what.

5 - equip in two hands and press defend button: shockwave. Very ineffective in magicka cost, probably eats at least a half of remaining magicka. Drains noticeable percentage of current health. Basically this is an explosion of spell effect with you at the hurricane's eye. Everyone around you gets both primary spell effect of channeled spell and, also, is knockbacked. Resistable, of course.

6 - equip in two hands and hold defend button: eye of the storm. It channels the spell just as it should in third (not fourth) case, very powerfully but without hurtful side-effects. The difference is that it is centered upon you, excluding yourself from the area of effect.


I don't think that runes-traps way of casting is good with these hypothetic channeling spells. They just feel too "heavy" to me. Traps are fine with standard spells, though.