If only we could have - one handed staffs!

NadiusMaximus

Yall want to have a wand/ staff measuring contest? Now that is some hardcore freakin geek outage there man.

Whip it out, and grab the measure tape.

Expose..o... Enormous

Palindrome

staff damage is already the same as other 1handed weapons. they need to buff staff base damage to be on par with other 2handed weps and then add in wands so you can wand shield FTW!

brimits

Gix wrote: »

What kind of skills would you want in dual-wield that shouldn't be in a main 2-h staff tree?

Personally, I'd rather see other schools of magic within the weapon skill lines. I want to see a Mysticism 2-h staves tree where most attacks pushes/pull targets away/towards you depending on the morphs.

That's kind of a different subject but one I have also considered. For example in Skyrim it is possible to have all different classes of magic and different types of destruction on the same character. Conjuring is good against multiple enemy and then zap 'em with a destruction spell. Conjurers can get a destruction staff but destruction mages cannot get a conjuring staff.
How can that be fair?

brimits

eventide03b14a_ESO wrote: »

brimits wrote: »

Natjur wrote: »

If they allowed using two staffs at once, tanks will start asking for two shields at once. Both are silly.

I know what you mean. Where does it all stop?

You mention tanks with two shields though and that's fine if that's what they want. They wouldn't do a lot of drawing the opposition away without a weapon though.

Two shields? Seriously? Nobody is asking to be able to use two shields that's a stupid argument. What people seem to be asking in this thread is allowing for two staves or staff and melee and it's based on what was allowed in Skyrim.

brimits wrote: »

eventide03b14a_ESO wrote: »

It's not that crazy. Skyrim let you have a staff and a sword. I wish there was a single weapon line. Call it fencing or something, where I don't have to use a second weapon or shield. I know crazy, right?

In the time it takes to switch from healing to attack we can be defeated if on low health etc.. However, when there are both ready to use, it would be much better.

It's also a shame that both weapons cannot be controlled separately in dual wield. We can either attack with both or block with both at present.

The good thing about staffs is that they do not seem to depend on your Magica or stamina except for blocking.

I have to disagree. One thing I hated about Skyrim is that you couldn't block while duel wielding and I think ESO just makes more sense in the way that was handled.

Not true - In Skyrim it is possible to block with dual wield it is just not as effective as having a shield.

AlexDougherty

Woolenthreads wrote: »

AlexDougherty wrote: »

Woolenthreads wrote: »

Shunravi wrote: »

What to you call a shortened staff?
A wand.

Not really a wand is usually about a foot long and not particularly thick. It would break if you tried to block with it.

Now sorry about this but I'm going to be pedantic.

But a wand has no predefined dimensions, in fact it can be as small as a toothpick or as big as a quarterstaff and still be called a wand. Fishing rods used to be called wands, and they were generally six to eight foot long (at the time they were called fishing wands).

In short wand is a term that has no size related parameters, D&D has given people the idea that it's a small stick (and Disney before them, and Brothers Grimm before that), but it's only been accepted as convention for a very small period of time (forty years or so).

There is no specific length parameter. There is a descriptive, though imprecise, thickness indicator:

"Wand: slender rod for carrying in hand or setting in ground as temporary mark; Magicians or Music-conductors Baton".

"Staff: (1) Stick or pole for use in walking or climbing or as a weapon. (2) Sign of Office. (3) Shaft, Pole as support or handle. (4) rod for measuring distances, heights etc, for measuring."

That being said, my Oxford Dictionary is dated 1987 , interestingly, to me, my Collins Dictionary added "something that sustains or supports" (though its example was an analogy). However I think that the operative word here is actually "slender". Yes you could call a fishing pole a fishing wand, most of the ones I've seen get extremely slender at the end. I stand by my sentence "It would break if you tried to block with it".

Thanks, for making me drag out my books Alex , I did actually get something out of it .

Yeah, I'll go with slender, that seems a fair qualifier.

Gillysan

Shunravi wrote: »

What to you call a shortened staff?







A wand.

Doesn't have to be a weapon. I can see a healing totem being used.

teladoy

I was thinking this yesterday when I realize that with 1hand and shield I have one crafted set and 3 pieces of a second one, but when I swap to the two handed sword only two pieces.

I will suggest give more options like an small staff in one hand and a book in the other.

Or in the case of swap weapon make sets to have the maximum bonus of the items equiped that gives more pieces.

Eg.

One hand and shield swap 1

Two hands swap 2

It doesn't matter which I choose I got the maximum bonus of the sets of one hand and shield.

Rune_Relic

I am in the middle of designing a system around this very idea.
Lighting/Ice/Fire 1h wand vs axe/sword/hammer 1h.
Shield (weapon resists) vs talisman/totem (spell resist).
Dual wielding wands gives you the ability to increase the power of one element or have the use of two elements at once (like axe+sword or sword+sword).
The large lightining/ice/fire staffs are the equivalent of two hand weapons.
Spell damage should be managed in the same way weapon damage is managed with 1h 2h and dual wield.

TBH the duality or parallels makes so much sense to me its makes me wonder why it was never included out the box ??? Even the skyrim gave you the eventual passive to combine one hand magic into a more powerful 2h spell of the same element.

brimits

Rune_Relic wrote: »

I am in the middle of designing a system around this very idea.
Lighting/Ice/Fire 1h wand vs axe/sword/hammer 1h.
Shield (weapon resists) vs talisman/totem (spell resist).
Dual wielding wands gives you the ability to increase the power of one element or have the use of two elements at once (like axe+sword or sword+sword).
The large lightining/ice/fire staffs are the equivalent of two hand weapons.
Spell damage should be managed in the same way weapon damage is managed with 1h 2h and dual wield.

TBH the duality or parallels makes so much sense to me its makes me wonder why it was never included out the box ??? Even the skyrim gave you the eventual passive to combine one hand magic into a more powerful 2h spell of the same element.

That's an interesting idea and the key to me is having the flexibility to use those combinations that we find are currently not available.

brimits

Palindrome wrote: »

staff damage is already the same as other 1handed weapons. they need to buff staff base damage to be on par with other 2handed weps and then add in wands so you can wand shield FTW!

Staves do need to be buffed, which is partly what makes them unattractive on their own but it's not wholly that. We need the choice of one handed and two handed like we have with swords. That would give us greater flexibility.

drschplatt

AlexDougherty wrote: »

Woolenthreads wrote: »

Shunravi wrote: »

What to you call a shortened staff?
A wand.

Not really a wand is usually about a foot long and not particularly thick. It would break if you tried to block with it.

Now sorry about this but I'm going to be pedantic.

But a wand has no predefined dimensions, in fact it can be as small as a toothpick or as big as a quarterstaff and still be called a wand. Fishing rods used to be called wands, and they were generally six to eight foot long (at the time they were called fishing wands).

In short wand is a term that has no size related parameters, D&D has given people the idea that it's a small stick (and Disney before them, and Brothers Grimm before that), but it's only been accepted as convention for a very small period of time (forty years or so).

The word has it's history in an old Norse noun that basically means, a switch or twig. The idea was a bendable stick or switch similar to that of a willow. Even today in German, wand means wall which has it's roots in the wickerwork used to thatch walls. It has nothing to do with heavy quarterstaves, rods or heavy branches of any type.

Rhavein

why not two shield then?

lolo_01b16_ESO

I'd really love to have one handed staves. Even if they were weaker than playing with 2-handed ones I would use them for questing / pledges / ...
I would like to use restrostaff + sword, standing in the middle of the fight, healing my allies and spinning around with an abillity similar to steel tornado.

Palindrome

@Rhavein‌ shield is an off hand item

Vizier

Staff should remain a Two Handed weapon, BUT there should be a melee component to their use IMO. Close range attacks use a physical strike that would be augmented with the staff characteristics. eg, a fire attack on strike with some physical damage for a fire staff, etc.

AlexDougherty

drschplatt wrote: »

AlexDougherty wrote: »

Woolenthreads wrote: »

Shunravi wrote: »

What to you call a shortened staff?
A wand.

Not really a wand is usually about a foot long and not particularly thick. It would break if you tried to block with it.

Now sorry about this but I'm going to be pedantic.

But a wand has no predefined dimensions, in fact it can be as small as a toothpick or as big as a quarterstaff and still be called a wand. Fishing rods used to be called wands, and they were generally six to eight foot long (at the time they were called fishing wands).

In short wand is a term that has no size related parameters, D&D has given people the idea that it's a small stick (and Disney before them, and Brothers Grimm before that), but it's only been accepted as convention for a very small period of time (forty years or so).

The word has it's history in an old Norse noun that basically means, a switch or twig. The idea was a bendable stick or switch similar to that of a willow. Even today in German, wand means wall which has it's roots in the wickerwork used to thatch walls. It has nothing to do with heavy quarterstaves, rods or heavy branches of any type.

Yeah, I wasn't suggesting that quarterstaffs could be called wands, merely that wands could be as long or even longer than Staffs.

Woolenthreads pretty much said that slenderness (a relative term rather than an absolute) might be the defining aspect for Wand. But flexibility makes sense too.

I was just pointing out that a short staff isn't necessarily a wand, or vice versa.

Dubah

See this is the way i saw it. Staves were for AoE stuff I.E. AoE Heals and spells like impulse. And wands were for single target stuff, just like the dual wield is better suited for single target and 2handed is for AoE. Or at least it should be.

Rune_Relic

drschplatt wrote: »

AlexDougherty wrote: »

Woolenthreads wrote: »

Shunravi wrote: »

What to you call a shortened staff?
A wand.

Not really a wand is usually about a foot long and not particularly thick. It would break if you tried to block with it.

Now sorry about this but I'm going to be pedantic.

But a wand has no predefined dimensions, in fact it can be as small as a toothpick or as big as a quarterstaff and still be called a wand. Fishing rods used to be called wands, and they were generally six to eight foot long (at the time they were called fishing wands).

In short wand is a term that has no size related parameters, D&D has given people the idea that it's a small stick (and Disney before them, and Brothers Grimm before that), but it's only been accepted as convention for a very small period of time (forty years or so).

The word has it's history in an old Norse noun that basically means, a switch or twig. The idea was a bendable stick or switch similar to that of a willow. Even today in German, wand means wall which has it's roots in the wickerwork used to thatch walls. It has nothing to do with heavy quarterstaves, rods or heavy branches of any type.

Like a maypole and winding threads then. Hence weaving magic. Perhaps the verb to wander add to that. And of course wicca work (wicker baskets) or wiccan/witch.

drschplatt

Rune_Relic wrote: »

Like a maypole and winding threads then. Hence weaving magic. Perhaps the verb to wander add to that. And of course wicca work (wicker baskets) or wiccan/witch.

I can't find any evidence in my etymology books of a connection between wand and wicca as they seem to have developed independently of each other. However, that doesn't mean it isn't there as a lot of etymology work is based on logical reasoning rather than hard evidence. There is a connection between wand, wander and wind (verb form) basically all of them meant having the ability to be flexible and/or easy to manipulate. The idea being a wand was a slim flexible length of wood, to wander means being willing to be flexible in your path, and to wind something mean to go around and around in a circular path until complete.

All three implying that the original direction/path can be changed.

brimits

lolo_01b16_ESO wrote: »

I'd really love to have one handed staves. Even if they were weaker than playing with 2-handed ones I would use them for questing / pledges / ...
I would like to use restrostaff + sword, standing in the middle of the fight, healing my allies and spinning around with an abillity similar to steel tornado.

Yes, that is how I see it, though I haven't yet discovered, "Steel Tornado".

Rune_Relic

brimits wrote: »

lolo_01b16_ESO wrote: »

I'd really love to have one handed staves. Even if they were weaker than playing with 2-handed ones I would use them for questing / pledges / ...
I would like to use restrostaff + sword, standing in the middle of the fight, healing my allies and spinning around with an abillity similar to steel tornado.

Yes, that is how I see it, though I haven't yet discovered, "Steel Tornado".

Basically a player based AoE whirlwind stike with dual wield

schneidtz

Look at Gandalf he uses a sword and staff at thr same time and its boss!

Forestd16b14_ESO

um isn't that called a wand. Like wands are present in ESO so I don't see why not just they have to add in a new weapon skill line maybe one handed only and fist too while there at it and they would have to make some draw backs like maybe be weaker than regular staffs but attack faster like greatswords to daggers.

mtwiggz

While dual wielding staves was viable in games like Skyrim, in ESO it would make some pretty blatant balance issues. In PvE it would probabaly be fine, as for PvP it would cause issues.

Going up against a player that gains benefits from both the Destruction and Restoration line passives on one bar might be a bit unbalanced. The only way I could see this working is if a new weapon line would come out as Wands or some nonsense.

As we all know getting content added to the game is similar to pulling teeth. I wouldn't hold your breath.

Tectonaut

Great sword=2 handed
Staff=2 handed

Dagger=1 handed for less damage or dual wield combo
Wand=1 handed for less damage or dual wield combo

Hell if you wand to wand/dagger have fun with ranged or melee, just know you won't exel in either.
How is it a tough thing to understand or implement?

Mishanya

One handed staff

AngryNord

schneidtz wrote: »

Look at Gandalf he uses a sword and staff at thr same time and its boss!

Gandalf isn't in ESO

Gidorick

Tectonaut wrote: »

Great sword=2 handed
Staff=2 handed

Dagger=1 handed for less damage or dual wield combo
Wand=1 handed for less damage or dual wield combo

Hell if you wand to wand/dagger have fun with ranged or melee, just know you won't exel in either.
How is it a tough thing to understand or implement?

This is pretty much it. 1 handed staffs not DUAL wielding staffs.