Can we have a One-Handed skill line?

kieso

No, we should not have a One-Handed skill line.

you don't want to know what'll be in my other hand...

Nhilandra77

Yes, I would like a separate One-Handed skill line.

like fencing? A dualist type guy with parry and moves like that. interesting. I'd prefer tho a new race. dead a. For people who get to vetran 14. something like city of heroes peace bringer idea. A reward for your long hours of gaming

Zhoyzu

No, we should not have a One-Handed skill line.

i want unarmed and spears first

Layenem

It doesn't matter to me.

Kego wrote: »

dodgehopper_ESO wrote: »

Think Akaviri katana, Kendo, or even Fencing. This is the style that would be nice for this purpose.

• Katana is often used with two hands or together with a Wakizashi.
• Fencing is not fighting style for wars.
• Kendo is fought mostly two handed.

Kendo also uses a lot of "Locks and Breaks" that require a free hand. As a matter of fact, one of the deadlier styles of fighting include a 1 handed weapon and a free hand that provides all sorts of utility for both offensive and defensive purposes.

Petros

No, we should not have a One-Handed skill line.

No no, no no no no no.

AlexDougherty

No, we should not have a One-Handed skill line.

AngryNord wrote: »

AlexDougherty wrote: »

Sallington wrote: »

It would need to be a dodge and parry based skill line. Strong vs. melee but weak versus ranged type of deal.

There is no reason for it to be strong against melee.

Two handed would dodge as much, but have another weapon to hit with.
A shield would mean you can block, and get less damage.

Having a sword (or axe, or hammer) and nothing in the off-hand has no benefit.

Only in Duels did this happen, and even then they usually had something in the off-hand. Outside of a rigid set of rules it's plain stupid, forget what you see in the movies, you just die quicker.

Not quite right, in the era after sabres replaced swords, and the sabre was mostly a back-up weapon for a pike, musket or pistol, no Shields were used.

Yes, but in that era it was common to use a dagger as an off-hand weapon, if a dagger was unavailable, the second most common practice was to wrap your cloak around your off-hand and use that as a makeshift shield.

Another practice that fell briefly in to fashion was to carry a lantern in your off hand and use that to distract your opponent. It rapidly fell out of fashion when duelling schools taught their pupils to stab the idiot using a lantern in the heart (no, I'm not joking, they reasoned that if you were mucking about with a lantern, then a focused stab would get rid of you)

Which brings me back to my original point, some five months after I made it, outside of the ridiculous set up of a duel, using one weapon has no advantage, were as using an off-hand weapon or a shield (even a makeshift one) has several advantages.

Wolfsspinne

No, we should not have a One-Handed skill line.

I voted "no" since I think this is all about the existing smashing weapons.

However I'd love to see a one-handed Fencing skill line that uses Rapiers and/or Sabers.

Chuggernaut

Yes, I would like a separate One-Handed skill line.

Sounds awesome and I'd assume if it was added, the skill line would add a dodge bonus to the user since sword and board adds defence already.

*removed extra if

Beerbill

It doesn't matter to me.

I have mixed feelings about this, I truly don't see the point to add this skill line but, in can't come with a good reason to not add it as well.

The only thing that make not support this feature is the fear that people will complain that they are under performing compared to other skill lines.

Lord_Draevan

Yes, I would like a separate One-Handed skill line.

Beerbill wrote: »

I have mixed feelings about this, I truly don't see the point to add this skill line but, in can't come with a good reason to not add it as well.

The only thing that make not support this feature is the fear that people will complain that they are under performing compared to other skill lines.

If they do add it, I assume ZOS will find some way to compensate, likely it will be faster than two-handed and/or one-handed and shield or something like that.

AngryNord

Yes, I would like a separate One-Handed skill line.

AlexDougherty wrote: »

AngryNord wrote: »

AlexDougherty wrote: »

Sallington wrote: »

It would need to be a dodge and parry based skill line. Strong vs. melee but weak versus ranged type of deal.

There is no reason for it to be strong against melee.

Two handed would dodge as much, but have another weapon to hit with.
A shield would mean you can block, and get less damage.

Having a sword (or axe, or hammer) and nothing in the off-hand has no benefit.

Only in Duels did this happen, and even then they usually had something in the off-hand. Outside of a rigid set of rules it's plain stupid, forget what you see in the movies, you just die quicker.

Not quite right, in the era after sabres replaced swords, and the sabre was mostly a back-up weapon for a pike, musket or pistol, no Shields were used.

Yes, but in that era it was common to use a dagger as an off-hand weapon, if a dagger was unavailable, the second most common practice was to wrap your cloak around your off-hand and use that as a makeshift shield.

Anytime from mid 19th century until WWI: Typical issue for an officer - sabre + revolver. For a cavalryman - sabre + carbine. Maybe some officers would have a dagger in the left hand when they drew their sabres (such as when commanding a bayonet strike) but it doesn't seem to me to have been very common. A cavalryman would almost definately use just the sabre when on horseback, since the other hand would be needed to hold the reins.

Rezzy64

Yes, I would like a separate One-Handed skill line.

I would love to see a One Handed Weapon skill line. For those who say it's completely pointless due to lack of usage of the other hand is obviously not thinking of the most obvious solution which would just simply be, compensate in active and passive skills to make up for the loss of an off hand weapon. I mean it's really not that hard to imagine a compensation for the lack of defense or damage.

The first thing that came to mind to focus a one handed skill line would be to compensate with speed. Two Handed has higher burst damage and One handed with shield has higher defense, than the most obvious choice for One handed only would be speed and lower damage with higher attack frequency. On the logic side of justifying this idea would simply be that having a one handed weapon with no off hand weapon would simply be lighter and more accurate (which others have already mentioned in the thread and it's a simplistic and good idea).

The skills could easily reflect this, passives that boost attack speed, movement speed, dodge rate, and critical hit would be obvious choices.
As for actives, a little more creativity might be necessary. Besides obvious buffs that would involve increasing movement speed and/or attack speed. I think the active damage skills should be a little more powerful than other weapon tree attacks for the distinct purpose of compensating the lack of weapon damage. As an example, an attack skill that would involve two types of attacks simultaneously, the first set of damage could be determined by the weapon damage of the one handed weapon with the second set of damage being solely determined by magic damage (like a two strike attack that has two different ranges of damage, with the magic attack occurring from your unused hand).
Someone else mentioned the idea of their off hand being used for grappling. There could be an attack relative to "Ambush", where your character sprints forward towards the enemy grabs them with the unused hand which could apply a stun and then slashes them with the one handed weapon.
Not saying these ideas need to be used if such a skill line were created, but skills like these could definitely push a single one handed build in the right direction and make the weapon style appropriate for competent game play that can be on par with the other combat styles.

I would love to see weapon tree like this oriented towards speed and DPS, mostly because as we currently have it, we don't really have any particular weapon tree that is focused on increasing your weapon speed. Sure we have Night Blade's Haste, but that's class oriented. No particular weapon style encourages true DPS. All the weapon styles as we have them now are mostly divided into having consistent damage, ranged damage, and burst damage. Dual Wield gets pretty close to having a proper DPS style, but it really has to be compensated by the class you choose (IMO Dual Wield is not really proper DPS until you add in a move like "Haste").

Single One Handed is not pointless, it would probably be a really fun style to play, it would probably just need a large damage compensation (or significant DPS increase) where as compared to other weapons.

NotSo

Yes, I would like a separate One-Handed skill line.

I imagine a one-handed skill line would revolve around parries and mobility:
-move speed bonuses while attacking,
-jumping around ground-targeting ability style,
-reducing effects of slows and snares,
-negating damage from single-target melee attacks and possibly reflecting damage or stunning (like how sword/shield has a reflect magic on activation),
-active ability that changes your light/heavy attacks into a kickass sword combo (for next 5 swings, or something like that)
-your off-hand's gotta have something to do so maybe you can stop somebody's sword mid-swing and hard stun them with proper timing (just for a bit, not overpowered like vampire feeding)

OrphanHelgen

Yes, I would like a separate One-Handed skill line.

Awesome idea. It could be something utility skill lines. Like more move speed and dodge chances, attack speed and stuff. Who uses attack speed btw? I would if it applied to the number of times you can to weapon skills. But its just for light attack, and I actually tested this. It is not good.

Gidorick

Yes, I would like a separate One-Handed skill line.

If for no other reason than I really want to recreate this scene:

Emencie

Yes, I would like a separate One-Handed skill line.

I just want to use a 1 hand and shield for damage... For some reason it has been decided in all high fantasy that one handed and shield is for defensive only, and 2 handed or dual wield is for damage...

I honestly dont mind 2 handed so much but dual wield always bothered me and frankly I think it looks ridiculous.

I just want to be a soldier! Let me DPS with a sword and shield!

Breg_Magol

It doesn't matter to me.

Noctisse wrote: »

... the mildly ridiculous image of a pompous male Altmer doing fancy rapier moves while wearing leggins came to mind.

If they bring in a rapier weapon skill, they'll have to create an extra slot for a big fancy armoured COD-PIECE with filigree around the edges in line with racial motives that can be buffed with glyph's as well ... this could utilise the 2nd spot normally reserved for dual wield (off-hand) or shield.
Obviously a Nord's would be humungous framed in hairy bear-hide; Bosmer's and Argonian's would be miniscule; Dunmer would be dark and mysterious while an Altmer's would have an attention grabbing flashing LED on it.

AngryNord

Yes, I would like a separate One-Handed skill line.

Breg_Magol wrote: »

Obviously a Nord's would be humungous framed in hairy bear-hide; Bosmer's and Argonian's would be miniscule; Dunmer would be dark and mysterious while an Altmer's would have an attention grabbing flashing LED on it.

There are no cod-pieces big enough for Nords, we use parts of a set of cast-off greaves in stead.

Medakon

Yes, I would like a separate One-Handed skill line.

I say yes to this, and reason not to carry a shield? you will be lighter weight of course! This means if you go 1 handed sword you will be able to dodge alot more attacks with passivs and this could be a greate combinations with alot of builds. Also your attacks would be faster and more accurate wich increase your crit chance. This for me seems like a great idea!

Anex

Sounds a bit like wasted potential to me using only 1 hand.. I mean, if you're not gonna use a shield, why not arm your other hand?

The polearm idea is nice, but that requires two hands, so I don't see the point in this conversation.

The only other thing that MIGHT sound logical is what @Medakon‌ seems to be hinting at here.. that the free hand be given some sort of skill that would be required a free hand.. something like dodge potential.. or ambidexterity that would allow you to move your weapon to the other hand to free a hand for some sort of movement.

At the moment, ESO isn't as realistic in fights for that though, so again I just see it as wasted potential.. but I AM also going the rogue/assassin route, and well I am more deadly with two blades than one

Ozgur1988tr

1H weapon can be good choice for agile builds. Shields are heavy and dual wield requires ambidexterity which most of us lacks. Not heavy as 2H but fast as Dual Wield this style can offer mobilty. Can be supported with thorwn daggers or axes as offhand. Also specter and tome can be done with casters.

AlexDougherty

No, we should not have a One-Handed skill line.

AngryNord wrote: »

AlexDougherty wrote: »

AngryNord wrote: »

AlexDougherty wrote: »

Sallington wrote: »

It would need to be a dodge and parry based skill line. Strong vs. melee but weak versus ranged type of deal.

There is no reason for it to be strong against melee.

Two handed would dodge as much, but have another weapon to hit with.
A shield would mean you can block, and get less damage.

Having a sword (or axe, or hammer) and nothing in the off-hand has no benefit.

Only in Duels did this happen, and even then they usually had something in the off-hand. Outside of a rigid set of rules it's plain stupid, forget what you see in the movies, you just die quicker.

Not quite right, in the era after sabres replaced swords, and the sabre was mostly a back-up weapon for a pike, musket or pistol, no Shields were used.

Yes, but in that era it was common to use a dagger as an off-hand weapon, if a dagger was unavailable, the second most common practice was to wrap your cloak around your off-hand and use that as a makeshift shield.

Anytime from mid 19th century until WWI: Typical issue for an officer - sabre + revolver. For a cavalryman - sabre + carbine. Maybe some officers would have a dagger in the left hand when they drew their sabres (such as when commanding a bayonet strike) but it doesn't seem to me to have been very common. A cavalryman would almost definately use just the sabre when on horseback, since the other hand would be needed to hold the reins.

Yes, but in the case of the pistol and rifle, it was because the sword was becoming obsolete (and nobody hangs on to obsolete weaponary like the Army). The pistol would have effectively been the main weapon, shooting first, stabbing anyone you missed.

In the case of horseback fighting, well as you pointed out the other hand is busy, earlier cavalary would have used a shield and horse armour, but they slowed horses down, which made them vulnerable to being sniped by riflemen.

In the periods before guns, you would have used a shield, because the benefits outweighed the negatves. I get why people want a one-handed (no shield) skill-line, it's just outside of hollywood it wasn't practical.

AlexDougherty

No, we should not have a One-Handed skill line.

ian92415b14_ESO wrote: »

I imagine a one-handed skill line would revolve around parries and mobility:
-move speed bonuses while attacking,
-jumping around ground-targeting ability style,
-reducing effects of slows and snares,
-negating damage from single-target melee attacks and possibly reflecting damage or stunning (like how sword/shield has a reflect magic on activation),
-active ability that changes your light/heavy attacks into a kickass sword combo (for next 5 swings, or something like that)
-your off-hand's gotta have something to do so maybe you can stop somebody's sword mid-swing and hard stun them with proper timing (just for a bit, not overpowered like vampire feeding)

move speed bonuses, a buckler (very small shield) would match that, and have the bonus of blocking.

Jumping around, um no, unless you are an acrobat or martial artist you wouldn't be able to pull that off, and definately in any armour heavier than light armour.

Reducing effects of slows and snares, WHY??, how does having a free hand give you that?

Negating damage, definately not, that's what a SHIELD is for.

Active ability to change attacks into baddass sword combo, um, where to begin with that one, lets just say highly unrealistic.

Your offhand stopping a sword attack, ROFL, the whole point of a weapon is it cuts/shatters any limb trying to do that. Ok, maybe you mean a punch in the face at an opportune time, that would be incredibly hard to do, I doubt they could pull it off.

TheShadowScout

Yes, I would like a separate One-Handed skill line.

Actually if its practical or not depends on the situation.

True, in medieval battlescapes, holding a shield in your offhand is more then worth it. On land. The single sword was more a backup weapon for people who usually fought with other weapons (shield&lance for knights, though they usually kept their shield when going for dismounted combat, but more imortalized by archers like robin hood, who could not carry a shield, but usually had a short of long sword as last ditch weapon if the enemy closed to their position)

When it comes to sea battles many fighters would rather leave their shields so they'd have a hand free to grab unt something when the roiling sea threatens to ditch them overboard. But then, fighting in lively seas didn't really become much of a thing until the "Pirates of the Caribbean" times... and by then the offhand also could quickly grab a flintlock to shoot one opponent before engaging the next with fancy cutlass fencing moves (who am I kidding, most pirates were more hack and slash brawlers then schooled fencers)

Off the battlefiels the "single sword" style was more prominent, since it was socially acceptable for noblemen to carry a blade, but anyone trying to bring a shield would rightly have been stopped by the guards as someone trying to start trouble. And when people are allowed one blade but no shield, they make up moves for that, including punching your opponents in the moment your blades lock, yes?

Cavalry was based on lances, with a shield for defense, they lost the shield when advances in weaponry (crossbows and later muskets) made it less effective then trusting in a quick horse - heavy cavalry had lost its role as the main hitters by then. And without the need to lug a shield around, cavalrymen again had their one handed swords, and the other hand free to better direct their horse, or (again) grab a flintlock and shoot. And again, outside the battlefield cavalrymen still had their sabers at their hips, and in a society with some code duello, styles to use them without some other weapon.

In the end, there are way too many instances where that kind of fighting was used in history. Not in the least because most people suck trying to fight with their offhand, so they better tuck it out of the way once the time of big shields was over.

Back to the game though...

I for one like the "sword and rune" idea best for the spellsword feeling. if one "single blade" (or mace, or axe) style was introduced, that's the one I'd like to see most...

ArconSeptim

No, we should not have a One-Handed skill line.

No because this is not the musketeers or some pirate game etc. one handed would look terrible without shield and that's it, you can now try to equip one hand sword without shield and look the result like a milky guy swinging around with a stick, samurai crap etc...

Bloodfang

Yes, I would like a separate One-Handed skill line.

Enodoc wrote: »

Makes no sense to me. What are you using the other hand for? Every weapon line requires you to fill both hand-slots; not doing so is inefficient.
One-handed is just half-way between Sword-and-Board and Dual-Wielding, and I see no purpose to it.

I wonder what would the "First Sword of Braavos" say to you

Kleptis

Yes, I would like a separate One-Handed skill line.

Combat choices and variety are good, but I'm not going to lose sleep over whether or not they implement this. The only way I can think of to make this work within the games mechanics (and make it unique) would be to make it a hybrid of melee and medium/short range magic.

Quick and nimble strikes with light attacks and magic with a heavy attack.

AlexDougherty

No, we should not have a One-Handed skill line.

Despair9 wrote: »

Enodoc wrote: »

Makes no sense to me. What are you using the other hand for? Every weapon line requires you to fill both hand-slots; not doing so is inefficient.
One-handed is just half-way between Sword-and-Board and Dual-Wielding, and I see no purpose to it.

I wonder what would the "First Sword of Braavos" say to you

Not much, wrong universe

Sauce_Revolution

Yes, I would like a separate One-Handed skill line.

My two cents on this is that a one-handed line should be like a rapier styled thing, i.e english civil war swordsmen where it's all about piercing attacks rather than slashing, so have skills that are designed around relatively fast stabbing attacks with a high crit chance, I'd play the hell out of that, feels more sophisticated.

Thymos

No, we should not have a One-Handed skill line.

One handed skill line would forever be gimped. You limit your ability to equip sets, and will have less stat improvements with an empty hand. I already have a bad enough time when it comes to two handed weapons.