Dual wielding spells

Post » Tue Sep 21, 2010 7:27 am

This was actually something I was wondering about as well. In the concept art and in the gameplay teaser, we saw the player wielding a staff and a sword. I suppose, by the very nature of the dual wielding system, that we can indeed dual wield staffs.


I'm sure it would look silly . . . but not as silly as dual wield shields!
I'm actually afraid that the ability to dual wield staves will make mages a bit overpowered . . . You can find some powerful enchantments on those things, and just imagine the chaos of having two Apotheosis staves and blasting away at everything that moved!
User avatar
nath
 
Posts: 3463
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2007 5:34 am

Post » Tue Sep 21, 2010 11:47 am

How dare you disrespect Confused Turtle mode! Next you'll start ragging on sword-chucks.
User avatar
Cassie Boyle
 
Posts: 3468
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 9:33 am

Post » Tue Sep 21, 2010 1:44 pm

Ahaha, one of my characters is going to be a Confused Turtle battlerager. He will run around with no clothes save a helmet and his two shields, and he shall run across the terrain of Skyrim, shield-bashing all that oppose him -- after getting suitably drunk off the Nordic equivalent of Mazte of course.
User avatar
[Bounty][Ben]
 
Posts: 3352
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2007 2:11 pm

Post » Tue Sep 21, 2010 12:18 am


I'm actually afraid that the ability to dual wield staves will make mages a bit overpowered . . .

As opposed to the ability of warriors and thieves to dual wielding enchanted blades? As opposed to the ability of ANYBODY to dual wield staves, since they aren't governed by a skill?
User avatar
Bitter End
 
Posts: 3418
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2006 11:40 am

Post » Tue Sep 21, 2010 12:06 am

As opposed to the ability of warriors and thieves to dual wielding enchanted blades? As opposed to the ability of ANYBODY to dual wield staves, since they aren't governed by a skill?


Well, if you first cast 100% elemental weakness spells on the target Apotheosis could dish out a hefty 200 damage in one strike. Two Apotheosis' would a) negate the need to cast the weakness spells for ridiculous amounts of ranged damage and b ) would make 400 damage if you were toting around elemental weakness spells. You could blow away Minotaur Lords with that kind of firepower :gun: :shocking:

As for the class I suppose it wouldn't matter. Dual-wielded staves in general sound like a lot of ranged damage. Not that I won't enjoy abusing this . . .
User avatar
james tait
 
Posts: 3385
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2007 6:26 pm

Post » Tue Sep 21, 2010 12:08 am

- no one is making you dual wield any of those spells.

- it makes much more sense that you can't just shoot a fireball around your sword0


Im not worried about what makes sense. Im worried about what comabat system affords me the least stress.
User avatar
Blaine
 
Posts: 3456
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 4:24 pm

Post » Tue Sep 21, 2010 12:23 pm

If you have two skeleton spells in each hand as opposed to one, how does it benefit you? Unless you can have more then one summon at a time.... which hasnt been done before in an ES game.

Wrong.

Morrowind let you summon as many monsters simultaneously as you wanted.
User avatar
Lucky Boy
 
Posts: 3378
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2007 6:26 pm

Post » Tue Sep 21, 2010 7:08 am

Wrong.

Morrowind let you summon as many monsters simultaneously as you wanted.


I was unaware of that. But still. If duel weilding two spells makes you summon two skeletons, you could, with the oblivion system, double cast, and summon two skeletons. (if they let mutli summons in skyrim and brought back the oblivion system.
User avatar
Madeleine Rose Walsh
 
Posts: 3425
Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2006 2:07 am

Post » Tue Sep 21, 2010 1:05 pm

I was unaware of that. But still. If duel wielding two spells makes you summon two skeletons, you could, with the oblivion system, double cast, and summon two skeletons. (if they let mutli summons in skyrim and brought back the oblivion system.

If I understand what you're saying, you're thinking that dual wielding a conjuration spell in Skyrim will confer you the benefit of summoning 2 creatures at the same time?

I don't really care what they choose to do with that in regards to dual wielding a conjuration spell in Skyrim, cause almost anything will be better than Oblivion's conjuration system.

Although a cool idea (I think) would be to allow the player to summon up to 5 creatures, and dual wielding a conjuration spell would buff a single creature with more health, str, spells, or whatever, and you could summon up to 5 of these suped-up versions of that creature (or 5 different suped-up creatures).
User avatar
Misty lt
 
Posts: 3400
Joined: Mon Dec 25, 2006 10:06 am

Post » Tue Sep 21, 2010 12:29 am

We know too little about what spells are in and how they work to say dual wielding conjuration spells won't have any point. I can easily see a skeleton summoned by casting two of the same time (one in each hand at the same time) would not only make it more powerful, but last longer.


Indeed, I would assume that the original poster said that dual wielding conjuration spells would be pointless under the assumption that you couldn't have more than one summoned creature at any given time, but we don't know that. Maybe when dual wielding conjuration spells you can summon two creatures, one with each equipped spell, or combined the spells to summon a stronger version of the same creature, and I'm not sure how mysticism fits into this (Especially since mysticism doesn't exist any more.) or why alteration spells should be pointless when dual wielded.

I'd say that we really don't know enough about the dual wielding mechanics for spells to judge them, but in any case, if you want to play a battle mage, then you should just wield a sword in one hand, and a spell in another, which of course means you can't dual wield spells or use a shield, making a concequence to choosing that approach. Now, I'm not sure if I necessarily like that or not, because I liked being able to cast spells without putting your weapon away in Oblivion, but that was partially because Morrowind's system required you to awkwardly switch between having your weapon drawn and entering a "casting stance", whereas the new approach sounds a little less awkward and more tactical, but that aside, saying dual wielding spells could be "useless" seems to mostly be an assumption made based on how spells worked in Oblivion, and how they work may have changed in Skyrim, so we can't rightly make such a statement until we know more about how magic works in Skyrim.

Well, if you first cast 100% elemental weakness spells on the target Apotheosis could dish out a hefty 200 damage in one strike. Two Apotheosis' would a) negate the need to cast the weakness spells for ridiculous amounts of ranged damage and b ) would make 400 damage if you were toting around elemental weakness spells. You could blow away Minotaur Lords with that kind of firepower :gun: :shocking:

As for the class I suppose it wouldn't matter. Dual-wielded staves in general sound like a lot of ranged damage. Not that I won't enjoy abusing this . . .


But we don't even know if such a powerful staff will exist in Skyrim.
User avatar
Damian Parsons
 
Posts: 3375
Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2007 6:48 am

Post » Tue Sep 21, 2010 2:41 pm

Dual wielding spells will be fun.

Left hand : continuous fire stream spell
Right hand : short duration paralyze spell used to keep targets in the fire stream longer, or strong heal spell to soak up damage they apply on me in melee, or strong shield spell to mitigate this damage

The ability to have two spells active at the same time if it's available would sure open up some interesting combos :)
User avatar
J.P loves
 
Posts: 3487
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2007 9:03 am

Previous

Return to V - Skyrim