hecks no thats totally cheating in the long run. lol. cuz if u let u do that with a sheild while ur running... u culd do it while ur fighting.... so i would fight someone and paralyze them then beat them to death. r

I think the Paralyze spell in general was pretty OP.

@ Deity Matrix: The combat in Oblivion weren't exactly the most immersive one. You practically just swung the sword X times and the enemy died. at level 20+ you basically just stealth-ran all over the place and snuck up on enemies and one-hit killed them with a 202 damage Goldbrand (30 x6 + 22 Fire).

The clue here is "effort" - how much effort do you actually use. Many things can be very easy to do, but it still requires an actual, active effort. Usually the effect is also greater if you know the system better and you perform the right combo or whatnot. Oblivion had no such thing, the game was literally effortless at certain points. That's never fun.

Of course.
I want to choose if an enchantment is on self, on strike, on cast or constant effect.
The very last thing I want is enchanting in the style of sigil stones/ dragon age.
Its all about choice.

I think it'd be coolest to enchant a shield with like a protective or reflective spell. It feels weird to use a shield as a weapon in itself.

There is some hate on this forum.... I like it! :brokencomputer:

If you don't care, then don't ask me why I want something in a singleplayer game. :goodjob:



Cool story, bro. :goodjob:

Shields were not ALWAYS purely used for "shields." They were also used for bashing/paralyzing AND weapons. Have a shield and word in the real Middle Ages? You bash with your shield, trying to disorient your opponent, hit him in the face if you can. Knock him off his feet. Swords were not the first choice of weapon, and they didn't fight with them like people popularly believe. Your goal, also, was to not clash swords as it was the way to ruin your sword. And what will you do with a broken sword? Anyways....

So yes, having a "paralyze" or disorient effect on them sounds realistic and great. I'd love it. Did you also know that morning stars, and more particularly flails, were used to remove shields?

It wouldn't make it OP. No more OP than a mage who makes a spell that does damage and paralyzes at the same time. People and their QQing... Hey... let's remove paralyze. And restoration. It makes us OP. We should only be able to heal by sleeping in a bed. Stop nerfing Skyrim!!!...

It would be cool if an enemy would get paralyzed if you blocked his attack.

After reading the title, I just got the image of Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time when you have to use your shield to deflect the fire and ice beams.
http://i.ytimg.com/vi/a2Ctp1PFGkw/0.jpg :facepalm:

So does similar to this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yGV57Q8GOqM cannot be added to Spell Breaker Dwemer unique Artifact as awesome scripted ability?
Nothing wrong with it and fit to lore as well.
Spell Deflection 2.1
http://elderscrolls.filefront.com/file/Spell_Deflection;80013

I'm ok with deflecting spells but not just shooting them. Deflecting them is defencive, whereas the OP is talking about offencive spells. Reflecting an ice beam with this effect would be cool, but not just charging your shield up and shooting.

Yeh, Id love to be able to write "Your mother was an ogre" on the front of my shield too.

That sure would be cool if shields had unique enchantments, being that they are technically weapons, but are also basically armor, such things like spells that turn on when you hold the block button

Well, I'm pretty sure the only thing the OP implies is using offensive enchantments such as fire damage, paralyze, etc. "on contact" only on the shield bash ability. Read it again to see what I mean. THAT would be practical and not OP if the enchantment was properly limited in either number of "on stirke" effects, or limited in the power of said enchantments.

Anything beyond something like I just stated would be wither OP or superfluous in practical melee combat.