Even if blocking with weapons were capable (which it's very likely it's still in) you'd still have less defense because you have less area to protect you/block with. Also it's easier to block with a shield than it is with a weapon, the weapon can't take the hit as easily as the large surface area of a shield would you'll lose balance from the hit, unless you were parrying of course.

If you can't block while dual wielding i will stick to the good old sword-shield combination. And if you can't block with 1 sword (+ spell in another hand) i would be outraged. I understand that dual wielding gives you stronger offense so it is pretty logic they make blocking more difficult with it (but removing it? Hell no). And the ability to not block with 2 spells in every hand is a good idea. We all saw how he owned some npc's with his spells ^^

Really ruins the feeling of being a bad ass fast assassin character if you can't block with your two swords. I had feared for this and to be honest it's bad form Beth. Thumbs down if true

If balance is the issue (and it isn't, the lack of available buttons on consoles are) then why not just make the blows from two handed weapons do less damage. Less force behind each blow. Bethesda talked about working so hard on making the combat feel real and now we hear this

it would be nice if you could hold down both triggers/mouse buttons you would block and if you hold them longer then you would do a two sword power attack like shield bash

well thats good to hear, and I'm sure I'll never dual wield so i have nothing to worry about :celebration:

Pretty sure they confirmed you held down the two buttons/triggers/L1&R1

Get those thumbs ready to point down.



Prepare to be outraged.


I'm glad you can't block while dual-wielding. Gives a reason to not dual wield. People aren't really thinking clearly with this. Dual Wielding allows amazing combinations like Axe+Mace which can grant an attack that ignores armor, plus a follow up DoT bleeding effect. Two-handed weapons don't get that, Shield doesn't get that, so why should we give all the offensive might to wielding two spells or weapons, and neglect the efficacy of the two-handed weapons (In particular) and Weapon/Shield combos. Spells get even more wild. And then there's the Spell/weapon and Spell/Spell combos which look like they can get exceedingly wild. Frost spells alone look like they'll be the battlemages best-friend, as they slow down the enemy, making it easier to dodge and evade, you won't even need to block!

Pretty sure blocking while dual-wielding will be in, but it had better damage the hell out of your weapons when you parry. (or try to, don't try to parry giant attacks, kids)

I always block punches with my face if I get in fight! :bonk:

Like a boss.

Source? Also, you wouldn't be able to do that when dual wielding staves.

Great point!
Hopefully we can assault our enemies so fast with dual weapons, that we stagger them so that we don't need to block their strikes.
Or anything that prevents us from being staggered over and over again just because we can't block.

Well done on finding that screen shot i would have completely missed that detail. But with dual weapons we should be able to slay our opponents quickly so block isn't really required. Blocking whilst dual wielding will be in ( that punch to the face was more than a punch). We will have to wait and see i guess

What kind of "bad ass fast assassin character" needs to block in the first place?
Isn't that the point of a "bad ass fast assassin character" to kill stuff before it sees you? Or kill stuff faster? :shrug:

If blocking with dual wielding is in, the timing must have to be beyond your typical "RPGer" which would be a fair tradeoff for sure, but I'd make a wager that just as many people would complain that it's now a "Twitch" game.


You should really stop saying "Dual-wield blocking is in" though, we don't actually know, and this is how 100,000 threads called "Bethesda lied to us, they promised " on launch day, when they actually never did.

Looking at how fast quick buttons worked I wouldn't be concerned even if you can't block when having a spell and sword equipped at the same time...
Of course it may become a problem for console players.



Badass assassins knows that dual wielding is clumsy and ineffective. :whistling:

I just think its really silly (yeah, I said silly, so what? Wanna' fight about it?) to think such a decorated game dev like Bethesda would leave something as big as this out.
I'm not sure how they'd do it. But I'm certain they've got it in there somewhere.

And for people blaming consoles again, why be so aggressive its clearly not that? There have been loads of ports before, and just because a controller has X amount of buttons doesn't mean that the PC version only uses X amount of keys. That's just stupid.

So you can make a "Captain America" Battlemage: Shield in one hand, spell in the other, Shield Bash maxed out and so forth. Then you shouldn't have a problem with not being able to block.

As for dual wielding, it's obviously a console limitation*: You can attack with both weapons at the same time, but there are no more buttons that could handle blocking. But this isn't a combat game in first place, its a RPG IIRC. Or at least it was, last time i checked.

*Edith: I don't blame the console gamers for that, it's a design choice that bethesda took, so no platform rage please.

In the end i dont care. I use a shield when i wish to block. and i rarly have to block as an assassin.

I was watching some more the dual wielding game play, after the PC does a power attack with the left sword, he holds the blade out horizontal, like the player was holding the trigger to long, causing the PC block maybe? That's how it looks to me at least, a man can dream.

On Pete Hines' twitter he said that LT and RT is how you bash with your blocking hand.

Blocking with a weapon was always weak...

Learn how to dodge...

I'm with Fearless hero and Seti, this is a real sticking point with me.

The thing is if you have one sword would can use one trigger to swing and the other to block. But with two swords both triggers will cause the swords to swing, so how would you block.
Perhaps you can hold both triggers and the swords cross and can block?

Possibly, but it's also possible that clicking the button/pushing the trigger mapped to your off-hand will simply result in a punch.

That would actually be more in keeping with the "button for each hand" approach. An empty hand wouldn't equal the absence of a hand, it would equal a fist.