Do you think that two-handed weapons should be more powerful than they were in Oblivion?

IMO, I felt that two-handed weapons were underpowered in Oblivion; I could use one-handed weapons and still be just as deadly as any two-handed weapon user and I could carry a shield. Now with the addition of dual-wielding and shield bashing, I think that two-handed weapons should be made more powerful so that it would remain an attractive choice. I want two play as a two-handed weapon Nord guy in Skyrim, but I'm afraid it might be underpowered.

Also, I read somewhere that different items have different blocking capabilities, so hopefully two-handed weapons can absorb/deflect more damage than a one-handed weapon.

Absolutely. Honestly, an Iron Warhammer should deal more damage than a Daedric Mace if used by someone with equivalent skill / attributes.

As far as parrying, that's not something I know a lot about, but it seems to me that a two-hander would be more difficult to parry with (slower), but more capable of doing so if successful because of the mass of the weapon.

I think all the weapons will have a buff, but the strength of two-handed weapons should be it's ability to push you opponent back. Regardless of a successful block, a warhammer should force you to take a knee. Claymores should force you oppenent back with every blow. That alone would make them more attractive.

Edit: If this was the factor, a more powerful parry wouldn't need to be implemented, due to your opponent not being able to get hits on you.
The power of heavy weapons IRL is the ability to dominate the fight. Constantly putting pressure on you oppenent to move and block, unable to attack.

Yeah i`d prefer them to deal more damage than they did in Oblivion. Maybe make them harder to hit or get a crit chance until higher levels but then they should do some serious damage. Perhaps more chance for the victim to dodge or avoid due to slower speed.

Lets face it, if you get a 6ft muscular Nord swinging downwards a heavy and very sharp two handed sword/axe with all his strength, if it connects, it`s going to either shear off a limb, cleave a head, or do a lot of crushing damage to an armoured part of the victim. Humanoid or smaller victims should crumple under a full impact blow. Yeah 2 handed should be brutal!

Yes, you must be able to crush the skulls of your foes with a single powerful blow...

The only note I'd make is that blocks and parries are a deflection rather than absorption. Blocking a Warhammer with a shield might be more difficult because of the force of the blow, but a successful block wouldn't make you take a knee by default, just as it wouldn't make the attacker get thrown off balance on every block.

I guess since you can't use spells with them like you can with a one-hander, they'd have to be pretty powerful to make up for that.

Yeah, they should be more powerful, it needs to be balanced out. Though they do also have an added range. I think they should make the heads on warhammers slightly smaller though. Looked a bit silly in Oblivion, but maybe that's just me. And there should probably be a weight limit on 2 item wielding, not only to give 2-handed weapons another advantage, but also because it's actually incredibly hard todual wield long swords in real life.

I agree. Whacking a Bandit in the face with a Warhammer tens of times without even fazing him in Oblivion took to realism and fun right out of the combat. I would love to see two-handed weapons have the ability to knock back or knock down your opponents.

In Dragon Age : Origins, two-handed weapons had an active skill which gave you a chance to stun your opponent with every blow. Still, I'm hoping two-handed weapons get a distinctly better raw damage than one-handed weapons, but not overpowered.

Definitely this and more damage with successful hit, even more, if not an instant kill on some enemies, with a successful critical or charged power attack. Don’t remember if that’s what it was called when you held the attack button.

Power attack, if I remember correctly.

I don't know about instant kill, but it really shouldn't take more than two or at most three hits without parries/blocks to kill a similarly-sized humanoid creature.

Yeah but this is a videa game not real world stick fights.

All the more reason not to make it so a Bandit with a Warhammer causes me to fall over on every blow even if I parry.

Perhaps parrying could take into your strength compared to the bandit's? That way, if you are stronger than the bandit you can parry the blow without staggering too much.

I wouldn't have a problem with that, block skill, with opposed strength VS agility or speed.

The main thing is to keep it realistic enough without making it so that the player is being knocked around like a pinball like could occur in Oblivion.

I think two handed weapons should have the ability to power through and enemy's block, or even break their shield. I was just playing Oblivion and a guy blocked my Ebony Claymore with his Silver Dagger. I was like "YEAH RIGHT!"

That would be pretty tough, though it would be a deflect rather than a block... even so, it souldn't occur a whole lot.

The make of the weapon shouldn't matter much though. An Ebony Claymore wouldn't be any more difficult to block than an Iron Claymore, though the weight might make a difference.

Yes because the dagger was the best weapon in melee in oblivion, given that it was enchanted ofcourse. If s long sowrd would do 50 damage, a claymore should do atleast 75, maybe 80.

That made me think about disarms. I don't know if they have it in Skyrim, but if they do a hit like that should send the dagger flying away from his hand or break his wrist if it doesn't, but that's just what I think should happen.

Slower, but more powerful.

Off topic, but---I'd also like to see more realistic weights for some weapons. I remember in OB, I think it was the Ebony Blade that you get from one of the Daedric quests, was a one handed katana-like weapon that weighed ~50 pounds. C'mon, really? Those type of weapons should be light.

Enchantment was pretty ridiculously overpowered in Oblivion.

It's amazingly different to play a character who doesn't use any magic, increases the tedium by a great deal because of the low damage output.

I'm hoping for damage ranges somewhat like you're mentioning. Hopefully weapon damages will be almost the same between the Iron and Daedric versions of weaponry too.

i voted yes but within the weapons on right.

claymores, battle axes, and war hammers should hit the hardest and unless you have a high enough strength and defense should put you on your [censored] or cratered into a wall or tree. but the move slowly at first and pick up speed with momentum if you keep them moving.

while staves and pole arms (if we ever get them, ie spears, halberds, glaves) would be fast and hard hitting but wouldn't not you off your feet.

What's with the myth that 2-handed weapons are slower than 1-handed, especially on defence? While I could see the argument that a 1-handed weapon doesn't take as much effort to actually swing, a 2-handed weapon is much easier and faster to maneuver into a defensive position than a 1-handed weapon. Reach should be one advantage... another should be the ability to maneuver the weapon around defences instead of just swing it like a club... but I doubt that will happen.

We'll still be treated to wall-banging Static Edge Blocks, instead of the proactive "Disrupt and Counterstrike" defenses of historical parries.

I hope they get relative weights right as well. In real life, a standard Arming/Long sword weighed 2-3 lbs, while a Scottish Claymore weighed 5-6.5 lbs.

Yes. 5 or 6.5 lbs. A claymore was lighter than a gallon of water. They are fast, deadly, and maneuverable weapons. Not clumsy sharpened Spudbars.

If there isn't much difference in terms of damage between Iron and Daedric weapons, then what would the main differences be besides a little damage, aesthetics and possibly ethereal-killing? Perhaps weapon mass could factor into breaking an enemy's block, or maybe they would have different enchantment capability, but I still think Daedric weapons will inevitably have quite higher damage than Iron weapons.

i agree that claymores are not as slow as every one thinks. they think the its heavy then it must be slow... nope. yes they were a lil "slow" starting off (compared to a dagger or long sword) but this was more an illusion from its length. you wouldnt be able to just simply step out the way because the blade would still be on you fairly fast and you would still have to compensate for the length of the blade.

the fighting method behind them was to keep them moving and to use your body to boost its momentum. that way the blade would actually gain speed and still hit hard.