Lets discuss this like true gentlemen, and ladies of the evening.

in the effort to show im not a troll, i will answer this legitly
i feel that no blocking while duel wielding is BALANCED
as you can see from examble f3

further more the lack of duel shielding is outright!

*examble f3
1H+shield 50% damage 100% block
2H 100% damage 50% block
duel wield 150% damage 0% block
which makes sense under the perks
1H 40% with 5 ranks
2H 20% with 5 ranks
so if a 1h wep has 1 damage and 2h wep has 2 damage you get

1H wep with 3 damage (tripple) with just one weapon
2H wep with 4 damage (double) with just one 2h weapon
and duel wielding gets 6 damage, 50% more than 2H

- John Locke N7

I would not indeed like to block with two weapons. It t'would be silly to do so, considering the overall balace of this game.

But I am indeed for the utilization of dual shields. It is a most gentlemenly fighing style.

Excellent point, but my contention that this being a single player game. Should not elements of the system be allowed to be better then other ones? as an example duel spell shielding.

I will not complain about a game that I have not yet played because it has not yet been released.

Also, I'm totally going to try out a Breton swordspell, an Argonian assassin, and a Nord warrior...

Not sure which order though...

Why did you call it "duel" wielding, but "dual" shielding?

It's either both duel or both dual (both dual is correct btw), not one or the other.

I am going to be doing a full high elf mage based of earth sea's sparrow hawk, and then for my next play through I will be doing a battle mage tiger man based off a book I cannot remember the title to right now.

no my good sir
it is my my devout believe that even in the confines of a singleplayer video games, it is crucial, nay IMPERATIVE that the experience be balanced!

further more it should be under the deligation of mods un and OFFICIAL to supply the player with over powered trickets of delight

It was in response to a previous thread. A bit of light hearted jesting if you will.

lmao @ this thread
dude your halarious

So you don't believe having an intentionally harder class available is a good thing? For example in demon souls the mage class is the "easy" class while the warrior is the medium, and finally the thief is the hardest.

AAAH but you see that was unintentional!
in darksouls, they made an effort to BALANCE the mage class.

EDIT: now it svcks

Ahh, but the thief class is still inferior to the mage, and warrior build.

Edit

Well it just makes it a forced mage sword not that big of a deal plus you can still just keep equipping a spell to increase it's overall charge allowing for a spell to have like 80 charges if you want to.

i never really used block .. per say
allways seemed like i wanted to just rush in and woop the guy and not caring about damage i took but, idk .. recently have tried to use blocking as of a few months ago alot more seriously

ur plyinit wrng

A gentlemen's discussion requires that each combatant has rapier, epée, or similar, and a main gauche, or similar well crafted and filigreed parrying blade. In that case, of course blocking while dual wielding makes sense. Something tells me that fights against rapier wielding gentleman will be the most singular occurrences in the fair land of Skyrim.

Well it is a hard tactic to get use to especially with most game barely rewarding blocking. Also I just figured out you can actually dual shield it's not just a joke. If you use to different magic shields lol.

the problem before was that blocking was boring old blocking.

now Skyrim is saying we can shield bash

Blocking will be blocking/attacking.

Which basically means you'll be duel wielding in a sense... (or dual wielding... out of respect to previous threads)

It looks like it's going to be some serious fun. Can't wait.

you block with rapiers?
i thought that was just glancing another sword
you cant block a warhammer or a frost troll

Hmm. After pondering this topic futher, I feel the need to expand upon my ideas.

Firstly, it appears as if each weapon is capable of holding two enchantments. Given that a weapon is supposed to kill things, I feel that a weapon is best enchanted with some form of offensive spell, such as fire or paralyze. Given that a Dual Wielder is capable of having two enchanted weapons, It seems logical that the style is supposed to be purely offensive, so that would mean that at least one offensive enchantment should be put on both weapons. Also, It is probable that there are defensive enchantments, and depending on one's preferences, one could have 2 defensive and 2 offensive enchantments, or any combination thereof.

I feel that Bethesda, having been working on the game for over 3 years, has made a good descision on this matter. Given the ability to block, dual wielding would be overpowered in combination with enchantments and perks. And balance is also important in a single player game such as Skyrim.

NUH UH I GOT LEET SKILLZ

Poppycock!

For certain, dual wielding does and always shall put forth the absolute purest quality DPS.

Blocking is indubitably brutish and unrefined when compared with the astonishing grace of dual wield's natural form.

Why then, did they not allow us to duel wield SHIELDS for duel PASSIVE enchantments?

You could enchant the shields with offensive.... erm... enchantments...

NO U CANT IS ARMOR!