Wands

Volkodav

Rat-King wrote: »

Volkodav wrote: »

Rat-King wrote: »

OPO NEVER SAYS NERF ANYTHING!!

Neither do i say that he says. Just imagining how it would go

Volkodav

catalyst10e wrote: »

No wands. I know that this is just your attempt to bring harry potter to the TES universe, and it wasn't until someone mentioned "purpose" did any real substantial ideas appear. The topic should have just been "lets get as much harry potter into TES as possible."

As far as lore goes: TES doesnt even require a mage use a staff. Staves are largely symbolic, rather than function. Or in some cases it acted as a conduit for people less magically inclined to use a very specific skill numerous times, like a multiuse/rechargeable scroll. In oblivion you had to go and craft your own staff as a means of showing you were no longer an apprentice.

Any "wands" in the universe (as previously mentioned in this post) were more ritual items, rather than a focusing item. In the same sense as ritual daggers are used and you can often see a mage with a dagger equip. There's plenty of items/totems/focusing crystals that all do what those "wands" do.

A real Mage wouldn't need a staff to perform magic, and their skills often exceed that of any staff you can find or craft. ESO gets away with this because, obviously, it's an MMO and some things needed to be altered to fit that template. We can go as far back as Arena and see spells have always been cast from your hands primarily.

in short, No wands.... we don't need them.

Dont be stupid.
Mentioning wands doesnt mean I want Harry Potter in ESO.
What a narrow minded comment.I soo am not into those movies.If you read my first post you'll see that.The bit about Harry Potter,..I said so what if he had them,I dont care. It as a sarcastic comment.If you want to know,more movies than I could possibly name have used wands throughout time,not just those.
To think that putting wands into ESO is my "attempt to bring Harry Potter to the ESO universe" shows a really limited range of thought.
As to the rest of your comment:
1.There are no "real" Mages
2.it doesnt matter if "wands" were ritual items or not,as ESO isnt real life
4.your point about OB kind of contradicts your points about staves not being needed
5. In short,wands would work just fine.If you dont want to use one,..dont.Simple.Others here seem to think it would be a fine option for a weapon.
6. As I said above,a wand is just a shorter staff.
7.

catalyst10e

Volkodav wrote: »

catalyst10e wrote: »

No wands. I know that this is just your attempt to bring harry potter to the TES universe, and it wasn't until someone mentioned "purpose" did any real substantial ideas appear. The topic should have just been "lets get as much harry potter into TES as possible."

As far as lore goes: TES doesnt even require a mage use a staff. Staves are largely symbolic, rather than function. Or in some cases it acted as a conduit for people less magically inclined to use a very specific skill numerous times, like a multiuse/rechargeable scroll. In oblivion you had to go and craft your own staff as a means of showing you were no longer an apprentice.

Any "wands" in the universe (as previously mentioned in this post) were more ritual items, rather than a focusing item. In the same sense as ritual daggers are used and you can often see a mage with a dagger equip. There's plenty of items/totems/focusing crystals that all do what those "wands" do.

A real Mage wouldn't need a staff to perform magic, and their skills often exceed that of any staff you can find or craft. ESO gets away with this because, obviously, it's an MMO and some things needed to be altered to fit that template. We can go as far back as Arena and see spells have always been cast from your hands primarily.

in short, No wands.... we don't need them.

Dont be stupid.
Mentioning wands doesnt mean I want Harry Potter in ESO.
What a narrow minded comment.I soo am not into those movies.If you read my first post you'll see that.The bit about Harry Potter,..I said so what if he had them,I dont care. It as a sarcastic comment.If you want to know,more movies than I could possibly name have used wands throughout time,not just those.
To think that putting wands into ESO is my "attempt to bring Harry Potter to the ESO universe" shows a really limited range of thought.
As to the rest of your comment:
1.There are no "real" Mages
2.it doesnt matter if "wands" were ritual items or not,as ESO isnt real life
4.your point about OB kind of contradicts your points about staves not being needed
5. In short,wands would work just fine.If you dont want to use one,..dont.Simple.Others here seem to think it would be a fine option for a weapon.
6. As I said above,a wand is just a shorter staff.
7.

So right out of the gate your opening line discredits you.

You admit you mention harry potter, try and claim it as sarcasm (which can never be conveyed thru text) and yet it's somehow a fault of my own for saying you want harry potter in TES, by means of wands. Sure, I'm the narrow-minded one...

What movies use them is irrelevant, as we're not discussing movies that use wands. I was responding directly to something you said, Wands in TES, where you sighted Harry Potter. At no point did I mention other movies. Stay on topic, it is YOUR topic after all.

No, Simply mentioning Wands doesnt constitute wanting harry potter themed items, However specifically named Harry Potter, and Wands, (even "sarcastically") does convey that.

"Real Mages" in the context of the Lore, I can't even believe I have to explain that by starting out with "As far as lore goes:" it means "Within the context of the Lore surrounding TES universe" jeez...

Who mentioned real life? The context was LORE (again for emphasis, I said "As far as lore goes") if you read my comment you could have seen that. It sounds like you got part way thru, got salty and wrote this response.

Again, if you read and kept up.... Oblivion had you make a staff, as a SYMBOLIC GESTURE YOU WERE NO LONGER AN APPRETICE. Did you catch it this time? Doesn't that kinda sound like it's reinforcing the original point made that they are largly symbolic, and not typically seen as a mage's primary weapon?

I didn't debate the "usefulness" of a wand, tho to be quite frank it would infact be useless as the most it would do "different" mechanically is be a 1 handed weapon. Everything else remains the same, and it would kill the dual wielding side, as there becomes no drawback to dual wielding. At present someone who dual wields gets an added set piece and additional spell power but loses out on DPS and ranged LA/HA. That's the trade off of using a staff over Dual Wield, to add a Wand that can be both dual wield and long rang LA/HA kills the diversity of both, and EVERY mage would be forced to run dual wand because it literally has all perks and no drawbacks. Why does this even need to be said? You people have no idea about balance or what?

If it was truly a shorter staff then it's adding nothing new and is not needed, and as described above the most it could add would be to become a 1 handed weapon which again (since I apparently have to keep repeating myself for you to hear me) kills diversity.

Volkodav

catalyst10e wrote: »

Volkodav wrote: »

catalyst10e wrote: »

No wands. I know that this is just your attempt to bring harry potter to the TES universe, and it wasn't until someone mentioned "purpose" did any real substantial ideas appear. The topic should have just been "lets get as much harry potter into TES as possible."

As far as lore goes: TES doesnt even require a mage use a staff. Staves are largely symbolic, rather than function. Or in some cases it acted as a conduit for people less magically inclined to use a very specific skill numerous times, like a multiuse/rechargeable scroll. In oblivion you had to go and craft your own staff as a means of showing you were no longer an apprentice.

Any "wands" in the universe (as previously mentioned in this post) were more ritual items, rather than a focusing item. In the same sense as ritual daggers are used and you can often see a mage with a dagger equip. There's plenty of items/totems/focusing crystals that all do what those "wands" do.

A real Mage wouldn't need a staff to perform magic, and their skills often exceed that of any staff you can find or craft. ESO gets away with this because, obviously, it's an MMO and some things needed to be altered to fit that template. We can go as far back as Arena and see spells have always been cast from your hands primarily.

in short, No wands.... we don't need them.

Dont be stupid.
Mentioning wands doesnt mean I want Harry Potter in ESO.
What a narrow minded comment.I soo am not into those movies.If you read my first post you'll see that.The bit about Harry Potter,..I said so what if he had them,I dont care. It as a sarcastic comment.If you want to know,more movies than I could possibly name have used wands throughout time,not just those.
To think that putting wands into ESO is my "attempt to bring Harry Potter to the ESO universe" shows a really limited range of thought.
As to the rest of your comment:
1.There are no "real" Mages
2.it doesnt matter if "wands" were ritual items or not,as ESO isnt real life
4.your point about OB kind of contradicts your points about staves not being needed
5. In short,wands would work just fine.If you dont want to use one,..dont.Simple.Others here seem to think it would be a fine option for a weapon.
6. As I said above,a wand is just a shorter staff.
7.

So right out of the gate your opening line discredits you.

You admit you mention harry potter, try and claim it as sarcasm (which can never be conveyed thru text) and yet it's somehow a fault of my own for saying you want harry potter in TES, by means of wands. Sure, I'm the narrow-minded one...

What movies use them is irrelevant, as we're not discussing movies that use wands. I was responding directly to something you said, Wands in TES, where you sighted Harry Potter. At no point did I mention other movies. Stay on topic, it is YOUR topic after all.

No, Simply mentioning Wands doesnt constitute wanting harry potter themed items, However specifically named Harry Potter, and Wands, (even "sarcastically") does convey that.

"Real Mages" in the context of the Lore, I can't even believe I have to explain that by starting out with "As far as lore goes:" it means "Within the context of the Lore surrounding TES universe" jeez...

Who mentioned real life? The context was LORE (again for emphasis, I said "As far as lore goes") if you read my comment you could have seen that. It sounds like you got part way thru, got salty and wrote this response.

Again, if you read and kept up.... Oblivion had you make a staff, as a SYMBOLIC GESTURE YOU WERE NO LONGER AN APPRETICE. Did you catch it this time? Doesn't that kinda sound like it's reinforcing the original point made that they are largly symbolic, and not typically seen as a mage's primary weapon?

I didn't debate the "usefulness" of a wand, tho to be quite frank it would infact be useless as the most it would do "different" mechanically is be a 1 handed weapon. Everything else remains the same, and it would kill the dual wielding side, as there becomes no drawback to dual wielding. At present someone who dual wields gets an added set piece and additional spell power but loses out on DPS and ranged LA/HA. That's the trade off of using a staff over Dual Wield, to add a Wand that can be both dual wield and long rang LA/HA kills the diversity of both, and EVERY mage would be forced to run dual wand because it literally has all perks and no drawbacks. Why does this even need to be said? You people have no idea about balance or what?

If it was truly a shorter staff then it's adding nothing new and is not needed, and as described above the most it could add would be to become a 1 handed weapon which again (since I apparently have to keep repeating myself for you to hear me) kills diversity.

If you have been on the forums here very long you will know people use sarcasm all the time,..without having to explain it to domeone who decides to jump on them for it.
Right out the get you made a snarky comment and in this one you do it too.
Arew you really that dense that you cannot see the term "So what if HP has them,I dont care".Is that a contradiction? I think not.
You just wish to be rude and make it look as if you are intelligent doing so.
What is bothering you so much that you have to go at me? Because I mentioned t hat guy,or that I mentioned that word. "Wands".
XD
Who are you anyway.

Callous2208

This idea is terrible. The magic gauntlets and some other things mentioned seem pretty cool though. And whoever said they could see a tank wielding a wand and shield or wand and spell book...c'mon man. Get outta here with that silliness.

Volkodav

Callous2208 wrote: »

This idea is terrible. The magic gauntlets and some other things mentioned seem pretty cool though. And whoever said they could see a tank wielding a wand and shield or wand and spell book...c'mon man. Get outta here with that silliness.

Well,why is my idea of a smal lstick so bad and a gauntlet that does the dame thing seem ok? I keep saying that if domeone doesnt want to use a wand use a staff,..or,the guantlett,I guess.See? I have no problem with implementing the gauntlets,but you have a pr oblem that there might be a wand in ESO.
Some people seem to like the idea here.
Live and let live,ya know? I dont like PvP but I wouldnt say lets not have that.Get outta here with that silliness.

Recremen

While there is the occasional lore reference, wands haven't featured as prominent, or even existent weapon types for at least the last 3 major games, 4 counting ESO, so it might not fit the aesthetic they were going for at this point.

Volkodav

Recremen wrote: »

While there is the occasional lore reference, wands haven't featured as prominent, or even existent weapon types for at least the last 3 major games, 4 counting ESO, so it might not fit the aesthetic they were going for at this point.

I can kind of understand this point.However,why the aesthetics problem.It's all fantasy,so anything that had magika should fit in well;.There are things ingame now that arent in the other TES games. I dont remember having Guar mounts,Camel mounts,or all those pets in the other games.
There were no assistants,etc.They add a lot of things,so for a Mage to usae a wand wouldnt look weird.

Volkodav

I wonder why people talk against having something added to the game,without removing anything?
I am not asking the devs to do this.I just thought it might be a fun thing to use.Not even a suggestion.
I mean,people want Unicorns,for he-ll's sake.

Your thoughts for and against are interesting though.
Except for those who throw snarky crap out there.


(I hate having to add a smily just to make sure people dont think I am being aggressive)

catalyst10e

Volkodav wrote: »

catalyst10e wrote: »

Volkodav wrote: »

catalyst10e wrote: »

No wands. I know that this is just your attempt to bring harry potter to the TES universe, and it wasn't until someone mentioned "purpose" did any real substantial ideas appear. The topic should have just been "lets get as much harry potter into TES as possible."

As far as lore goes: TES doesnt even require a mage use a staff. Staves are largely symbolic, rather than function. Or in some cases it acted as a conduit for people less magically inclined to use a very specific skill numerous times, like a multiuse/rechargeable scroll. In oblivion you had to go and craft your own staff as a means of showing you were no longer an apprentice.

Any "wands" in the universe (as previously mentioned in this post) were more ritual items, rather than a focusing item. In the same sense as ritual daggers are used and you can often see a mage with a dagger equip. There's plenty of items/totems/focusing crystals that all do what those "wands" do.

A real Mage wouldn't need a staff to perform magic, and their skills often exceed that of any staff you can find or craft. ESO gets away with this because, obviously, it's an MMO and some things needed to be altered to fit that template. We can go as far back as Arena and see spells have always been cast from your hands primarily.

in short, No wands.... we don't need them.

Dont be stupid.
Mentioning wands doesnt mean I want Harry Potter in ESO.
What a narrow minded comment.I soo am not into those movies.If you read my first post you'll see that.The bit about Harry Potter,..I said so what if he had them,I dont care. It as a sarcastic comment.If you want to know,more movies than I could possibly name have used wands throughout time,not just those.
To think that putting wands into ESO is my "attempt to bring Harry Potter to the ESO universe" shows a really limited range of thought.
As to the rest of your comment:
1.There are no "real" Mages
2.it doesnt matter if "wands" were ritual items or not,as ESO isnt real life
4.your point about OB kind of contradicts your points about staves not being needed
5. In short,wands would work just fine.If you dont want to use one,..dont.Simple.Others here seem to think it would be a fine option for a weapon.
6. As I said above,a wand is just a shorter staff.
7.

So right out of the gate your opening line discredits you.

You admit you mention harry potter, try and claim it as sarcasm (which can never be conveyed thru text) and yet it's somehow a fault of my own for saying you want harry potter in TES, by means of wands. Sure, I'm the narrow-minded one...

What movies use them is irrelevant, as we're not discussing movies that use wands. I was responding directly to something you said, Wands in TES, where you sighted Harry Potter. At no point did I mention other movies. Stay on topic, it is YOUR topic after all.

No, Simply mentioning Wands doesnt constitute wanting harry potter themed items, However specifically named Harry Potter, and Wands, (even "sarcastically") does convey that.

"Real Mages" in the context of the Lore, I can't even believe I have to explain that by starting out with "As far as lore goes:" it means "Within the context of the Lore surrounding TES universe" jeez...

Who mentioned real life? The context was LORE (again for emphasis, I said "As far as lore goes") if you read my comment you could have seen that. It sounds like you got part way thru, got salty and wrote this response.

Again, if you read and kept up.... Oblivion had you make a staff, as a SYMBOLIC GESTURE YOU WERE NO LONGER AN APPRETICE. Did you catch it this time? Doesn't that kinda sound like it's reinforcing the original point made that they are largly symbolic, and not typically seen as a mage's primary weapon?

I didn't debate the "usefulness" of a wand, tho to be quite frank it would infact be useless as the most it would do "different" mechanically is be a 1 handed weapon. Everything else remains the same, and it would kill the dual wielding side, as there becomes no drawback to dual wielding. At present someone who dual wields gets an added set piece and additional spell power but loses out on DPS and ranged LA/HA. That's the trade off of using a staff over Dual Wield, to add a Wand that can be both dual wield and long rang LA/HA kills the diversity of both, and EVERY mage would be forced to run dual wand because it literally has all perks and no drawbacks. Why does this even need to be said? You people have no idea about balance or what?

If it was truly a shorter staff then it's adding nothing new and is not needed, and as described above the most it could add would be to become a 1 handed weapon which again (since I apparently have to keep repeating myself for you to hear me) kills diversity.

If you have been on the forums here very long you will know people use sarcasm all the time,..without having to explain it to domeone who decides to jump on them for it.
Right out the get you made a snarky comment and in this one you do it too.
Arew you really that dense that you cannot see the term "So what if HP has them,I dont care".Is that a contradiction? I think not.
You just wish to be rude and make it look as if you are intelligent doing so.
What is bothering you so much that you have to go at me? Because I mentioned t hat guy,or that I mentioned that word. "Wands".
XD
Who are you anyway.

Spellcheck is a thing that exists in 2016.

See? I can also completely ignore your argument and focus on some arbitrary part of it.

I can't believe I have to remind you again to stay on topic, when its your own topic... personal attacks is just going to get your reported, not get a point across try again.

Back ON topic, As I stated, Wands not only are a terrible idea since it doesn't fit the lore, the best it could hope for as far as mechanically speaking is to become 1 handed, killing nearly all magicka based builds, and make all sorcs into cookiecutter copies of each other. Maybe discuss that.

Volkodav

catalyst10e wrote: »

Volkodav wrote: »

catalyst10e wrote: »

Volkodav wrote: »

catalyst10e wrote: »

No wands. I know that this is just your attempt to bring harry potter to the TES universe, and it wasn't until someone mentioned "purpose" did any real substantial ideas appear. The topic should have just been "lets get as much harry potter into TES as possible."

As far as lore goes: TES doesnt even require a mage use a staff. Staves are largely symbolic, rather than function. Or in some cases it acted as a conduit for people less magically inclined to use a very specific skill numerous times, like a multiuse/rechargeable scroll. In oblivion you had to go and craft your own staff as a means of showing you were no longer an apprentice.

Any "wands" in the universe (as previously mentioned in this post) were more ritual items, rather than a focusing item. In the same sense as ritual daggers are used and you can often see a mage with a dagger equip. There's plenty of items/totems/focusing crystals that all do what those "wands" do.

A real Mage wouldn't need a staff to perform magic, and their skills often exceed that of any staff you can find or craft. ESO gets away with this because, obviously, it's an MMO and some things needed to be altered to fit that template. We can go as far back as Arena and see spells have always been cast from your hands primarily.

in short, No wands.... we don't need them.

Dont be stupid.
Mentioning wands doesnt mean I want Harry Potter in ESO.
What a narrow minded comment.I soo am not into those movies.If you read my first post you'll see that.The bit about Harry Potter,..I said so what if he had them,I dont care. It as a sarcastic comment.If you want to know,more movies than I could possibly name have used wands throughout time,not just those.
To think that putting wands into ESO is my "attempt to bring Harry Potter to the ESO universe" shows a really limited range of thought.
As to the rest of your comment:
1.There are no "real" Mages
2.it doesnt matter if "wands" were ritual items or not,as ESO isnt real life
4.your point about OB kind of contradicts your points about staves not being needed
5. In short,wands would work just fine.If you dont want to use one,..dont.Simple.Others here seem to think it would be a fine option for a weapon.
6. As I said above,a wand is just a shorter staff.
7.

So right out of the gate your opening line discredits you.

You admit you mention harry potter, try and claim it as sarcasm (which can never be conveyed thru text) and yet it's somehow a fault of my own for saying you want harry potter in TES, by means of wands. Sure, I'm the narrow-minded one...

What movies use them is irrelevant, as we're not discussing movies that use wands. I was responding directly to something you said, Wands in TES, where you sighted Harry Potter. At no point did I mention other movies. Stay on topic, it is YOUR topic after all.

No, Simply mentioning Wands doesnt constitute wanting harry potter themed items, However specifically named Harry Potter, and Wands, (even "sarcastically") does convey that.

"Real Mages" in the context of the Lore, I can't even believe I have to explain that by starting out with "As far as lore goes:" it means "Within the context of the Lore surrounding TES universe" jeez...

Who mentioned real life? The context was LORE (again for emphasis, I said "As far as lore goes") if you read my comment you could have seen that. It sounds like you got part way thru, got salty and wrote this response.

Again, if you read and kept up.... Oblivion had you make a staff, as a SYMBOLIC GESTURE YOU WERE NO LONGER AN APPRETICE. Did you catch it this time? Doesn't that kinda sound like it's reinforcing the original point made that they are largly symbolic, and not typically seen as a mage's primary weapon?

I didn't debate the "usefulness" of a wand, tho to be quite frank it would infact be useless as the most it would do "different" mechanically is be a 1 handed weapon. Everything else remains the same, and it would kill the dual wielding side, as there becomes no drawback to dual wielding. At present someone who dual wields gets an added set piece and additional spell power but loses out on DPS and ranged LA/HA. That's the trade off of using a staff over Dual Wield, to add a Wand that can be both dual wield and long rang LA/HA kills the diversity of both, and EVERY mage would be forced to run dual wand because it literally has all perks and no drawbacks. Why does this even need to be said? You people have no idea about balance or what?

If it was truly a shorter staff then it's adding nothing new and is not needed, and as described above the most it could add would be to become a 1 handed weapon which again (since I apparently have to keep repeating myself for you to hear me) kills diversity.

If you have been on the forums here very long you will know people use sarcasm all the time,..without having to explain it to domeone who decides to jump on them for it.
Right out the get you made a snarky comment and in this one you do it too.
Arew you really that dense that you cannot see the term "So what if HP has them,I dont care".Is that a contradiction? I think not.
You just wish to be rude and make it look as if you are intelligent doing so.
What is bothering you so much that you have to go at me? Because I mentioned t hat guy,or that I mentioned that word. "Wands".
XD
Who are you anyway.

Spellcheck is a thing that exists in 2016.

See? I can also completely ignore your argument and focus on some arbitrary part of it.

I can't believe I have to remind you again to stay on topic, when its your own topic... personal attacks is just going to get your reported, not get a point across try again.

Back ON topic, As I stated, Wands not only are a terrible idea since it doesn't fit the lore, the best it could hope for as far as mechanically speaking is to become 1 handed, killing nearly all magicka based builds, and make all sorcs into cookiecutter copies of each other. Maybe discuss that.

I misspelled "someone"and "are" because I have a nerve problem with my left hand.I do try to edit my comments,but once in a while one will slip through.Thank you for correcting me.
And since this IS my thread,I may respond to snarky comments as I see fit.As you have.Just an FYI,we're not supposed to threaten someone with closing a thread.

catalyst10e

Volkodav wrote: »

catalyst10e wrote: »

Volkodav wrote: »

catalyst10e wrote: »

Volkodav wrote: »

catalyst10e wrote: »

No wands. I know that this is just your attempt to bring harry potter to the TES universe, and it wasn't until someone mentioned "purpose" did any real substantial ideas appear. The topic should have just been "lets get as much harry potter into TES as possible."

As far as lore goes: TES doesnt even require a mage use a staff. Staves are largely symbolic, rather than function. Or in some cases it acted as a conduit for people less magically inclined to use a very specific skill numerous times, like a multiuse/rechargeable scroll. In oblivion you had to go and craft your own staff as a means of showing you were no longer an apprentice.

Any "wands" in the universe (as previously mentioned in this post) were more ritual items, rather than a focusing item. In the same sense as ritual daggers are used and you can often see a mage with a dagger equip. There's plenty of items/totems/focusing crystals that all do what those "wands" do.

A real Mage wouldn't need a staff to perform magic, and their skills often exceed that of any staff you can find or craft. ESO gets away with this because, obviously, it's an MMO and some things needed to be altered to fit that template. We can go as far back as Arena and see spells have always been cast from your hands primarily.

in short, No wands.... we don't need them.

Dont be stupid.
Mentioning wands doesnt mean I want Harry Potter in ESO.
What a narrow minded comment.I soo am not into those movies.If you read my first post you'll see that.The bit about Harry Potter,..I said so what if he had them,I dont care. It as a sarcastic comment.If you want to know,more movies than I could possibly name have used wands throughout time,not just those.
To think that putting wands into ESO is my "attempt to bring Harry Potter to the ESO universe" shows a really limited range of thought.
As to the rest of your comment:
1.There are no "real" Mages
2.it doesnt matter if "wands" were ritual items or not,as ESO isnt real life
4.your point about OB kind of contradicts your points about staves not being needed
5. In short,wands would work just fine.If you dont want to use one,..dont.Simple.Others here seem to think it would be a fine option for a weapon.
6. As I said above,a wand is just a shorter staff.
7.

So right out of the gate your opening line discredits you.

You admit you mention harry potter, try and claim it as sarcasm (which can never be conveyed thru text) and yet it's somehow a fault of my own for saying you want harry potter in TES, by means of wands. Sure, I'm the narrow-minded one...

What movies use them is irrelevant, as we're not discussing movies that use wands. I was responding directly to something you said, Wands in TES, where you sighted Harry Potter. At no point did I mention other movies. Stay on topic, it is YOUR topic after all.

No, Simply mentioning Wands doesnt constitute wanting harry potter themed items, However specifically named Harry Potter, and Wands, (even "sarcastically") does convey that.

"Real Mages" in the context of the Lore, I can't even believe I have to explain that by starting out with "As far as lore goes:" it means "Within the context of the Lore surrounding TES universe" jeez...

Who mentioned real life? The context was LORE (again for emphasis, I said "As far as lore goes") if you read my comment you could have seen that. It sounds like you got part way thru, got salty and wrote this response.

Again, if you read and kept up.... Oblivion had you make a staff, as a SYMBOLIC GESTURE YOU WERE NO LONGER AN APPRETICE. Did you catch it this time? Doesn't that kinda sound like it's reinforcing the original point made that they are largly symbolic, and not typically seen as a mage's primary weapon?

I didn't debate the "usefulness" of a wand, tho to be quite frank it would infact be useless as the most it would do "different" mechanically is be a 1 handed weapon. Everything else remains the same, and it would kill the dual wielding side, as there becomes no drawback to dual wielding. At present someone who dual wields gets an added set piece and additional spell power but loses out on DPS and ranged LA/HA. That's the trade off of using a staff over Dual Wield, to add a Wand that can be both dual wield and long rang LA/HA kills the diversity of both, and EVERY mage would be forced to run dual wand because it literally has all perks and no drawbacks. Why does this even need to be said? You people have no idea about balance or what?

If it was truly a shorter staff then it's adding nothing new and is not needed, and as described above the most it could add would be to become a 1 handed weapon which again (since I apparently have to keep repeating myself for you to hear me) kills diversity.

If you have been on the forums here very long you will know people use sarcasm all the time,..without having to explain it to domeone who decides to jump on them for it.
Right out the get you made a snarky comment and in this one you do it too.
Arew you really that dense that you cannot see the term "So what if HP has them,I dont care".Is that a contradiction? I think not.
You just wish to be rude and make it look as if you are intelligent doing so.
What is bothering you so much that you have to go at me? Because I mentioned t hat guy,or that I mentioned that word. "Wands".
XD
Who are you anyway.

Spellcheck is a thing that exists in 2016.

See? I can also completely ignore your argument and focus on some arbitrary part of it.

I can't believe I have to remind you again to stay on topic, when its your own topic... personal attacks is just going to get your reported, not get a point across try again.

Back ON topic, As I stated, Wands not only are a terrible idea since it doesn't fit the lore, the best it could hope for as far as mechanically speaking is to become 1 handed, killing nearly all magicka based builds, and make all sorcs into cookiecutter copies of each other. Maybe discuss that.

I misspelled someone because I have a nerve problem with my left hand.I do try to edit my comments,but once in a while one will slip through.Thank you for correcting me.
And since this IS my thread,I may respond to snarky comments as I see fit.As you have.Just an FYI,we;re not supposed to threaten someone with closing a thread.

It's like you don't read what I write and somehow have a conversation with me without me knowing... Who threatened to close the thread? I told you personal attacks such as: "Don't be stupid"and "Arew you really that dense" get YOU reported. I said nothing about this thread, and yet you continue to de-rail it without adding anything to the discussion.

Edit: lets go ahead and add this to the list as well for flame baiting: "Except for those who throw snarky crap out there."

Acrolas

Staves are basically wands with defense utility.

Because if you can't defend, you're gonna have a bad time.

Taleof2Cities

Volkodav

catalyst10e wrote: »

Volkodav wrote: »

catalyst10e wrote: »

Volkodav wrote: »

catalyst10e wrote: »

Volkodav wrote: »

catalyst10e wrote: »

No wands. I know that this is just your attempt to bring harry potter to the TES universe, and it wasn't until someone mentioned "purpose" did any real substantial ideas appear. The topic should have just been "lets get as much harry potter into TES as possible."

As far as lore goes: TES doesnt even require a mage use a staff. Staves are largely symbolic, rather than function. Or in some cases it acted as a conduit for people less magically inclined to use a very specific skill numerous times, like a multiuse/rechargeable scroll. In oblivion you had to go and craft your own staff as a means of showing you were no longer an apprentice.

Any "wands" in the universe (as previously mentioned in this post) were more ritual items, rather than a focusing item. In the same sense as ritual daggers are used and you can often see a mage with a dagger equip. There's plenty of items/totems/focusing crystals that all do what those "wands" do.

A real Mage wouldn't need a staff to perform magic, and their skills often exceed that of any staff you can find or craft. ESO gets away with this because, obviously, it's an MMO and some things needed to be altered to fit that template. We can go as far back as Arena and see spells have always been cast from your hands primarily.

in short, No wands.... we don't need them.

Dont be stupid.
Mentioning wands doesnt mean I want Harry Potter in ESO.
What a narrow minded comment.I soo am not into those movies.If you read my first post you'll see that.The bit about Harry Potter,..I said so what if he had them,I dont care. It as a sarcastic comment.If you want to know,more movies than I could possibly name have used wands throughout time,not just those.
To think that putting wands into ESO is my "attempt to bring Harry Potter to the ESO universe" shows a really limited range of thought.
As to the rest of your comment:
1.There are no "real" Mages
2.it doesnt matter if "wands" were ritual items or not,as ESO isnt real life
4.your point about OB kind of contradicts your points about staves not being needed
5. In short,wands would work just fine.If you dont want to use one,..dont.Simple.Others here seem to think it would be a fine option for a weapon.
6. As I said above,a wand is just a shorter staff.
7.

So right out of the gate your opening line discredits you.

You admit you mention harry potter, try and claim it as sarcasm (which can never be conveyed thru text) and yet it's somehow a fault of my own for saying you want harry potter in TES, by means of wands. Sure, I'm the narrow-minded one...

What movies use them is irrelevant, as we're not discussing movies that use wands. I was responding directly to something you said, Wands in TES, where you sighted Harry Potter. At no point did I mention other movies. Stay on topic, it is YOUR topic after all.

No, Simply mentioning Wands doesnt constitute wanting harry potter themed items, However specifically named Harry Potter, and Wands, (even "sarcastically") does convey that.

"Real Mages" in the context of the Lore, I can't even believe I have to explain that by starting out with "As far as lore goes:" it means "Within the context of the Lore surrounding TES universe" jeez...

Who mentioned real life? The context was LORE (again for emphasis, I said "As far as lore goes") if you read my comment you could have seen that. It sounds like you got part way thru, got salty and wrote this response.

Again, if you read and kept up.... Oblivion had you make a staff, as a SYMBOLIC GESTURE YOU WERE NO LONGER AN APPRETICE. Did you catch it this time? Doesn't that kinda sound like it's reinforcing the original point made that they are largly symbolic, and not typically seen as a mage's primary weapon?

I didn't debate the "usefulness" of a wand, tho to be quite frank it would infact be useless as the most it would do "different" mechanically is be a 1 handed weapon. Everything else remains the same, and it would kill the dual wielding side, as there becomes no drawback to dual wielding. At present someone who dual wields gets an added set piece and additional spell power but loses out on DPS and ranged LA/HA. That's the trade off of using a staff over Dual Wield, to add a Wand that can be both dual wield and long rang LA/HA kills the diversity of both, and EVERY mage would be forced to run dual wand because it literally has all perks and no drawbacks. Why does this even need to be said? You people have no idea about balance or what?

If it was truly a shorter staff then it's adding nothing new and is not needed, and as described above the most it could add would be to become a 1 handed weapon which again (since I apparently have to keep repeating myself for you to hear me) kills diversity.

If you have been on the forums here very long you will know people use sarcasm all the time,..without having to explain it to domeone who decides to jump on them for it.
Right out the get you made a snarky comment and in this one you do it too.
Arew you really that dense that you cannot see the term "So what if HP has them,I dont care".Is that a contradiction? I think not.
You just wish to be rude and make it look as if you are intelligent doing so.
What is bothering you so much that you have to go at me? Because I mentioned t hat guy,or that I mentioned that word. "Wands".
XD
Who are you anyway.

Spellcheck is a thing that exists in 2016.

See? I can also completely ignore your argument and focus on some arbitrary part of it.

I can't believe I have to remind you again to stay on topic, when its your own topic... personal attacks is just going to get your reported, not get a point across try again.

Back ON topic, As I stated, Wands not only are a terrible idea since it doesn't fit the lore, the best it could hope for as far as mechanically speaking is to become 1 handed, killing nearly all magicka based builds, and make all sorcs into cookiecutter copies of each other. Maybe discuss that.

I misspelled someone because I have a nerve problem with my left hand.I do try to edit my comments,but once in a while one will slip through.Thank you for correcting me.
And since this IS my thread,I may respond to snarky comments as I see fit.As you have.Just an FYI,we;re not supposed to threaten someone with closing a thread.

It's like you don't read what I write and somehow have a conversation with me without me knowing... Who threatened to close the thread? I told you personal attacks such as: "Don't be stupid"and "Arew you really that dense" get YOU reported. I said nothing about this thread, and yet you continue to de-rail it without adding anything to the discussion.

My comments are far less inflamatory than a whole lot of remarks in these forums,I assure you.I've been here for two years,and I know what the mods dislike.
Look,I would have been fine with you,had you not made that remark about me wanting Harry Potter in ESO.
That was just low and you know it,which is why you said it.And no one mentioned "reported" but you.
I would appreciate it if you stopped trying to own this thread.Your points about my missed spelling dont help matters.
Shall we quit and attempt to try this again,..without any rudeness? On either side?
Really,this wasnt even a suggestion thread.It was just a fun thought.
Thanks for your positive ideas.
They were actually interesting,though my thoughts rather differ.
Civility,shall we?

Volkodav

catalyst10e wrote: »

Volkodav wrote: »

catalyst10e wrote: »

Volkodav wrote: »

catalyst10e wrote: »

Volkodav wrote: »

catalyst10e wrote: »

No wands. I know that this is just your attempt to bring harry potter to the TES universe, and it wasn't until someone mentioned "purpose" did any real substantial ideas appear. The topic should have just been "lets get as much harry potter into TES as possible."

As far as lore goes: TES doesnt even require a mage use a staff. Staves are largely symbolic, rather than function. Or in some cases it acted as a conduit for people less magically inclined to use a very specific skill numerous times, like a multiuse/rechargeable scroll. In oblivion you had to go and craft your own staff as a means of showing you were no longer an apprentice.

Any "wands" in the universe (as previously mentioned in this post) were more ritual items, rather than a focusing item. In the same sense as ritual daggers are used and you can often see a mage with a dagger equip. There's plenty of items/totems/focusing crystals that all do what those "wands" do.

A real Mage wouldn't need a staff to perform magic, and their skills often exceed that of any staff you can find or craft. ESO gets away with this because, obviously, it's an MMO and some things needed to be altered to fit that template. We can go as far back as Arena and see spells have always been cast from your hands primarily.

in short, No wands.... we don't need them.

Dont be stupid.
Mentioning wands doesnt mean I want Harry Potter in ESO.
What a narrow minded comment.I soo am not into those movies.If you read my first post you'll see that.The bit about Harry Potter,..I said so what if he had them,I dont care. It as a sarcastic comment.If you want to know,more movies than I could possibly name have used wands throughout time,not just those.
To think that putting wands into ESO is my "attempt to bring Harry Potter to the ESO universe" shows a really limited range of thought.
As to the rest of your comment:
1.There are no "real" Mages
2.it doesnt matter if "wands" were ritual items or not,as ESO isnt real life
4.your point about OB kind of contradicts your points about staves not being needed
5. In short,wands would work just fine.If you dont want to use one,..dont.Simple.Others here seem to think it would be a fine option for a weapon.
6. As I said above,a wand is just a shorter staff.
7.

So right out of the gate your opening line discredits you.

You admit you mention harry potter, try and claim it as sarcasm (which can never be conveyed thru text) and yet it's somehow a fault of my own for saying you want harry potter in TES, by means of wands. Sure, I'm the narrow-minded one...

What movies use them is irrelevant, as we're not discussing movies that use wands. I was responding directly to something you said, Wands in TES, where you sighted Harry Potter. At no point did I mention other movies. Stay on topic, it is YOUR topic after all.

No, Simply mentioning Wands doesnt constitute wanting harry potter themed items, However specifically named Harry Potter, and Wands, (even "sarcastically") does convey that.

"Real Mages" in the context of the Lore, I can't even believe I have to explain that by starting out with "As far as lore goes:" it means "Within the context of the Lore surrounding TES universe" jeez...

Who mentioned real life? The context was LORE (again for emphasis, I said "As far as lore goes") if you read my comment you could have seen that. It sounds like you got part way thru, got salty and wrote this response.

Again, if you read and kept up.... Oblivion had you make a staff, as a SYMBOLIC GESTURE YOU WERE NO LONGER AN APPRETICE. Did you catch it this time? Doesn't that kinda sound like it's reinforcing the original point made that they are largly symbolic, and not typically seen as a mage's primary weapon?

I didn't debate the "usefulness" of a wand, tho to be quite frank it would infact be useless as the most it would do "different" mechanically is be a 1 handed weapon. Everything else remains the same, and it would kill the dual wielding side, as there becomes no drawback to dual wielding. At present someone who dual wields gets an added set piece and additional spell power but loses out on DPS and ranged LA/HA. That's the trade off of using a staff over Dual Wield, to add a Wand that can be both dual wield and long rang LA/HA kills the diversity of both, and EVERY mage would be forced to run dual wand because it literally has all perks and no drawbacks. Why does this even need to be said? You people have no idea about balance or what?

If it was truly a shorter staff then it's adding nothing new and is not needed, and as described above the most it could add would be to become a 1 handed weapon which again (since I apparently have to keep repeating myself for you to hear me) kills diversity.

If you have been on the forums here very long you will know people use sarcasm all the time,..without having to explain it to domeone who decides to jump on them for it.
Right out the get you made a snarky comment and in this one you do it too.
Arew you really that dense that you cannot see the term "So what if HP has them,I dont care".Is that a contradiction? I think not.
You just wish to be rude and make it look as if you are intelligent doing so.
What is bothering you so much that you have to go at me? Because I mentioned t hat guy,or that I mentioned that word. "Wands".
XD
Who are you anyway.

Spellcheck is a thing that exists in 2016.

See? I can also completely ignore your argument and focus on some arbitrary part of it.

I can't believe I have to remind you again to stay on topic, when its your own topic... personal attacks is just going to get your reported, not get a point across try again.

Back ON topic, As I stated, Wands not only are a terrible idea since it doesn't fit the lore, the best it could hope for as far as mechanically speaking is to become 1 handed, killing nearly all magicka based builds, and make all sorcs into cookiecutter copies of each other. Maybe discuss that.

I misspelled someone because I have a nerve problem with my left hand.I do try to edit my comments,but once in a while one will slip through.Thank you for correcting me.
And since this IS my thread,I may respond to snarky comments as I see fit.As you have.Just an FYI,we;re not supposed to threaten someone with closing a thread.

It's like you don't read what I write and somehow have a conversation with me without me knowing... Who threatened to close the thread? I told you personal attacks such as: "Don't be stupid"and "Arew you really that dense" get YOU reported. I said nothing about this thread, and yet you continue to de-rail it without adding anything to the discussion.

Edit: lets go ahead and add this to the list as well for flame baiting: "Except for those who throw snarky crap out there."

And here I just made a comment about us being civil and going on without rudeness.

Recremen

Volkodav wrote: »

Recremen wrote: »

While there is the occasional lore reference, wands haven't featured as prominent, or even existent weapon types for at least the last 3 major games, 4 counting ESO, so it might not fit the aesthetic they were going for at this point.

I can kind of understand this point.However,why the aesthetics problem.It's all fantasy,so anything that had magika should fit in well;.There are things ingame now that arent in the other TES games. I dont remember having Guar mounts,Camel mounts,or all those pets in the other games.
There were no assistants,etc.They add a lot of things,so for a Mage to usae a wand wouldnt look weird.

Not all fantasy is equivalent, though, there are some things that fit very well into one universe and not another. For instance, our Orcs are categorically different from Orcs out of any other genre. Sure, their early influence was pretty standard fantasy rubbish, but as the series evolved, they began filling in a much more nuanced and clever niche.

Ditto with guns. Other fantasy games have developed a setting conducive to firearms, but not so much ESO. Could they add them? Well, I guess, but it would be pretty danged travestatious. I'm not saying I'm against wands, but I'm not excited about them and I don't think they quite fit.

Volkodav

Recremen wrote: »

Volkodav wrote: »

Recremen wrote: »

While there is the occasional lore reference, wands haven't featured as prominent, or even existent weapon types for at least the last 3 major games, 4 counting ESO, so it might not fit the aesthetic they were going for at this point.

I can kind of understand this point.However,why the aesthetics problem.It's all fantasy,so anything that had magika should fit in well;.There are things ingame now that arent in the other TES games. I dont remember having Guar mounts,Camel mounts,or all those pets in the other games.
There were no assistants,etc.They add a lot of things,so for a Mage to usae a wand wouldnt look weird.

Not all fantasy is equivalent, though, there are some things that fit very well into one universe and not another. For instance, our Orcs are categorically different from Orcs out of any other genre. Sure, their early influence was pretty standard fantasy rubbish, but as the series evolved, they began filling in a much more nuanced and clever niche.

Ditto with guns. Other fantasy games have developed a setting conducive to firearms, but not so much ESO. Could they add them? Well, I guess, but it would be pretty danged travestatious. I'm not saying I'm against wands, but I'm not excited about them and I don't think they quite fit.

Well,guns would be going a bit too far. Hehe. I kbow WoW has them.I've used them,but thought it odd.I still stick to the idea of smaller staves.Just whittle them down to size. XD
Better yet,add a knife to whittle wood.Thatshouldnt bother anyone,as we can chop wood already.

catalyst10e

Volkodav wrote: »

catalyst10e wrote: »

Volkodav wrote: »

catalyst10e wrote: »

Volkodav wrote: »

catalyst10e wrote: »

Volkodav wrote: »

catalyst10e wrote: »

No wands. I know that this is just your attempt to bring harry potter to the TES universe, and it wasn't until someone mentioned "purpose" did any real substantial ideas appear. The topic should have just been "lets get as much harry potter into TES as possible."

As far as lore goes: TES doesnt even require a mage use a staff. Staves are largely symbolic, rather than function. Or in some cases it acted as a conduit for people less magically inclined to use a very specific skill numerous times, like a multiuse/rechargeable scroll. In oblivion you had to go and craft your own staff as a means of showing you were no longer an apprentice.

Any "wands" in the universe (as previously mentioned in this post) were more ritual items, rather than a focusing item. In the same sense as ritual daggers are used and you can often see a mage with a dagger equip. There's plenty of items/totems/focusing crystals that all do what those "wands" do.

A real Mage wouldn't need a staff to perform magic, and their skills often exceed that of any staff you can find or craft. ESO gets away with this because, obviously, it's an MMO and some things needed to be altered to fit that template. We can go as far back as Arena and see spells have always been cast from your hands primarily.

in short, No wands.... we don't need them.

Dont be stupid.
Mentioning wands doesnt mean I want Harry Potter in ESO.
What a narrow minded comment.I soo am not into those movies.If you read my first post you'll see that.The bit about Harry Potter,..I said so what if he had them,I dont care. It as a sarcastic comment.If you want to know,more movies than I could possibly name have used wands throughout time,not just those.
To think that putting wands into ESO is my "attempt to bring Harry Potter to the ESO universe" shows a really limited range of thought.
As to the rest of your comment:
1.There are no "real" Mages
2.it doesnt matter if "wands" were ritual items or not,as ESO isnt real life
4.your point about OB kind of contradicts your points about staves not being needed
5. In short,wands would work just fine.If you dont want to use one,..dont.Simple.Others here seem to think it would be a fine option for a weapon.
6. As I said above,a wand is just a shorter staff.
7.

So right out of the gate your opening line discredits you.

You admit you mention harry potter, try and claim it as sarcasm (which can never be conveyed thru text) and yet it's somehow a fault of my own for saying you want harry potter in TES, by means of wands. Sure, I'm the narrow-minded one...

What movies use them is irrelevant, as we're not discussing movies that use wands. I was responding directly to something you said, Wands in TES, where you sighted Harry Potter. At no point did I mention other movies. Stay on topic, it is YOUR topic after all.

No, Simply mentioning Wands doesnt constitute wanting harry potter themed items, However specifically named Harry Potter, and Wands, (even "sarcastically") does convey that.

"Real Mages" in the context of the Lore, I can't even believe I have to explain that by starting out with "As far as lore goes:" it means "Within the context of the Lore surrounding TES universe" jeez...

Who mentioned real life? The context was LORE (again for emphasis, I said "As far as lore goes") if you read my comment you could have seen that. It sounds like you got part way thru, got salty and wrote this response.

Again, if you read and kept up.... Oblivion had you make a staff, as a SYMBOLIC GESTURE YOU WERE NO LONGER AN APPRETICE. Did you catch it this time? Doesn't that kinda sound like it's reinforcing the original point made that they are largly symbolic, and not typically seen as a mage's primary weapon?

I didn't debate the "usefulness" of a wand, tho to be quite frank it would infact be useless as the most it would do "different" mechanically is be a 1 handed weapon. Everything else remains the same, and it would kill the dual wielding side, as there becomes no drawback to dual wielding. At present someone who dual wields gets an added set piece and additional spell power but loses out on DPS and ranged LA/HA. That's the trade off of using a staff over Dual Wield, to add a Wand that can be both dual wield and long rang LA/HA kills the diversity of both, and EVERY mage would be forced to run dual wand because it literally has all perks and no drawbacks. Why does this even need to be said? You people have no idea about balance or what?

If it was truly a shorter staff then it's adding nothing new and is not needed, and as described above the most it could add would be to become a 1 handed weapon which again (since I apparently have to keep repeating myself for you to hear me) kills diversity.

If you have been on the forums here very long you will know people use sarcasm all the time,..without having to explain it to domeone who decides to jump on them for it.
Right out the get you made a snarky comment and in this one you do it too.
Arew you really that dense that you cannot see the term "So what if HP has them,I dont care".Is that a contradiction? I think not.
You just wish to be rude and make it look as if you are intelligent doing so.
What is bothering you so much that you have to go at me? Because I mentioned t hat guy,or that I mentioned that word. "Wands".
XD
Who are you anyway.

Spellcheck is a thing that exists in 2016.

See? I can also completely ignore your argument and focus on some arbitrary part of it.

I can't believe I have to remind you again to stay on topic, when its your own topic... personal attacks is just going to get your reported, not get a point across try again.

Back ON topic, As I stated, Wands not only are a terrible idea since it doesn't fit the lore, the best it could hope for as far as mechanically speaking is to become 1 handed, killing nearly all magicka based builds, and make all sorcs into cookiecutter copies of each other. Maybe discuss that.

I misspelled someone because I have a nerve problem with my left hand.I do try to edit my comments,but once in a while one will slip through.Thank you for correcting me.
And since this IS my thread,I may respond to snarky comments as I see fit.As you have.Just an FYI,we;re not supposed to threaten someone with closing a thread.

It's like you don't read what I write and somehow have a conversation with me without me knowing... Who threatened to close the thread? I told you personal attacks such as: "Don't be stupid"and "Arew you really that dense" get YOU reported. I said nothing about this thread, and yet you continue to de-rail it without adding anything to the discussion.

My comments are far less inflamatory than a whole lot of remarks in these forums,I assure you.I've been here for two years,and I know what the mods dislike.
Look,I would have been fine with you,had you not made that remark about me wanting Harry Potter in ESO.
That was just low and you know it,which is why you said it.And no one mentioned "reported" but you.
I would appreciate it if you stopped trying to own this thread.Your points about my missed spelling dont help matters.
Shall we quit and attempt to try this again,..without any rudeness? On either side?
Really,this wasnt even a suggestion thread.It was just a fun thought.
Thanks for your positive ideas.
They were actually interesting,though my thoughts rather differ.
Civility,shall we?

Clearly I'm not the only person who made the same connection between Harry potter in TES universe based on your OP. I wouldn't call that "low" I'd call that the fault of your wording. You could have at least sited other games that use wands like D&D online (tho they used rods) Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning That used Wands for fast, light attacks, while allowing staves to be mid range, and deal heavier damage. Your ONE example was Harry Potter. SO forgive me for making that connection, I was going off the information presented.It was in no way shape or form a direct attack against you. You seemed to have invented that. For the record "reported" isnt the same as asking a thread to be closed, my point still stands. To comments on your spelling, I dont care about your spelling, It was a remark to act as an example based on the fact that you seemed to gloss over the points I made, took the first sentence I said and ran with it.

So fine, yes, "start over" however my points still stand.
For reference:

• Wands are not lore friendly
• Wands would kill build diversity

An open forum is designed to promote discussion, So meaning to or not, you've made this a suggestion thread. Otherwise The top comment of "no" would have been a sufficient answer. I will apologize if my tone comes across as rude or blunt, it is the logical manner in which I speak.

Volkodav

catalyst10e wrote: »

Volkodav wrote: »

catalyst10e wrote: »

Volkodav wrote: »

catalyst10e wrote: »

Volkodav wrote: »

catalyst10e wrote: »

Volkodav wrote: »

catalyst10e wrote: »

No wands. I know that this is just your attempt to bring harry potter to the TES universe, and it wasn't until someone mentioned "purpose" did any real substantial ideas appear. The topic should have just been "lets get as much harry potter into TES as possible."

As far as lore goes: TES doesnt even require a mage use a staff. Staves are largely symbolic, rather than function. Or in some cases it acted as a conduit for people less magically inclined to use a very specific skill numerous times, like a multiuse/rechargeable scroll. In oblivion you had to go and craft your own staff as a means of showing you were no longer an apprentice.

Any "wands" in the universe (as previously mentioned in this post) were more ritual items, rather than a focusing item. In the same sense as ritual daggers are used and you can often see a mage with a dagger equip. There's plenty of items/totems/focusing crystals that all do what those "wands" do.

A real Mage wouldn't need a staff to perform magic, and their skills often exceed that of any staff you can find or craft. ESO gets away with this because, obviously, it's an MMO and some things needed to be altered to fit that template. We can go as far back as Arena and see spells have always been cast from your hands primarily.

in short, No wands.... we don't need them.

Dont be stupid.
Mentioning wands doesnt mean I want Harry Potter in ESO.
What a narrow minded comment.I soo am not into those movies.If you read my first post you'll see that.The bit about Harry Potter,..I said so what if he had them,I dont care. It as a sarcastic comment.If you want to know,more movies than I could possibly name have used wands throughout time,not just those.
To think that putting wands into ESO is my "attempt to bring Harry Potter to the ESO universe" shows a really limited range of thought.
As to the rest of your comment:
1.There are no "real" Mages
2.it doesnt matter if "wands" were ritual items or not,as ESO isnt real life
4.your point about OB kind of contradicts your points about staves not being needed
5. In short,wands would work just fine.If you dont want to use one,..dont.Simple.Others here seem to think it would be a fine option for a weapon.
6. As I said above,a wand is just a shorter staff.
7.

So right out of the gate your opening line discredits you.

You admit you mention harry potter, try and claim it as sarcasm (which can never be conveyed thru text) and yet it's somehow a fault of my own for saying you want harry potter in TES, by means of wands. Sure, I'm the narrow-minded one...

What movies use them is irrelevant, as we're not discussing movies that use wands. I was responding directly to something you said, Wands in TES, where you sighted Harry Potter. At no point did I mention other movies. Stay on topic, it is YOUR topic after all.

No, Simply mentioning Wands doesnt constitute wanting harry potter themed items, However specifically named Harry Potter, and Wands, (even "sarcastically") does convey that.

"Real Mages" in the context of the Lore, I can't even believe I have to explain that by starting out with "As far as lore goes:" it means "Within the context of the Lore surrounding TES universe" jeez...

Who mentioned real life? The context was LORE (again for emphasis, I said "As far as lore goes") if you read my comment you could have seen that. It sounds like you got part way thru, got salty and wrote this response.

Again, if you read and kept up.... Oblivion had you make a staff, as a SYMBOLIC GESTURE YOU WERE NO LONGER AN APPRETICE. Did you catch it this time? Doesn't that kinda sound like it's reinforcing the original point made that they are largly symbolic, and not typically seen as a mage's primary weapon?

I didn't debate the "usefulness" of a wand, tho to be quite frank it would infact be useless as the most it would do "different" mechanically is be a 1 handed weapon. Everything else remains the same, and it would kill the dual wielding side, as there becomes no drawback to dual wielding. At present someone who dual wields gets an added set piece and additional spell power but loses out on DPS and ranged LA/HA. That's the trade off of using a staff over Dual Wield, to add a Wand that can be both dual wield and long rang LA/HA kills the diversity of both, and EVERY mage would be forced to run dual wand because it literally has all perks and no drawbacks. Why does this even need to be said? You people have no idea about balance or what?

If it was truly a shorter staff then it's adding nothing new and is not needed, and as described above the most it could add would be to become a 1 handed weapon which again (since I apparently have to keep repeating myself for you to hear me) kills diversity.

If you have been on the forums here very long you will know people use sarcasm all the time,..without having to explain it to domeone who decides to jump on them for it.
Right out the get you made a snarky comment and in this one you do it too.
Arew you really that dense that you cannot see the term "So what if HP has them,I dont care".Is that a contradiction? I think not.
You just wish to be rude and make it look as if you are intelligent doing so.
What is bothering you so much that you have to go at me? Because I mentioned t hat guy,or that I mentioned that word. "Wands".
XD
Who are you anyway.

Spellcheck is a thing that exists in 2016.

See? I can also completely ignore your argument and focus on some arbitrary part of it.

I can't believe I have to remind you again to stay on topic, when its your own topic... personal attacks is just going to get your reported, not get a point across try again.

Back ON topic, As I stated, Wands not only are a terrible idea since it doesn't fit the lore, the best it could hope for as far as mechanically speaking is to become 1 handed, killing nearly all magicka based builds, and make all sorcs into cookiecutter copies of each other. Maybe discuss that.

I misspelled someone because I have a nerve problem with my left hand.I do try to edit my comments,but once in a while one will slip through.Thank you for correcting me.
And since this IS my thread,I may respond to snarky comments as I see fit.As you have.Just an FYI,we;re not supposed to threaten someone with closing a thread.

It's like you don't read what I write and somehow have a conversation with me without me knowing... Who threatened to close the thread? I told you personal attacks such as: "Don't be stupid"and "Arew you really that dense" get YOU reported. I said nothing about this thread, and yet you continue to de-rail it without adding anything to the discussion.

My comments are far less inflamatory than a whole lot of remarks in these forums,I assure you.I've been here for two years,and I know what the mods dislike.
Look,I would have been fine with you,had you not made that remark about me wanting Harry Potter in ESO.
That was just low and you know it,which is why you said it.And no one mentioned "reported" but you.
I would appreciate it if you stopped trying to own this thread.Your points about my missed spelling dont help matters.
Shall we quit and attempt to try this again,..without any rudeness? On either side?
Really,this wasnt even a suggestion thread.It was just a fun thought.
Thanks for your positive ideas.
They were actually interesting,though my thoughts rather differ.
Civility,shall we?

Clearly I'm not the only person who made the same connection between Harry potter in TES universe based on your OP. I wouldn't call that "low" I'd call that the fault of your wording. You could have at least sited other games that use wands like D&D online (tho they used rods) Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning That used Wands for fast, light attacks, while allowing staves to be mid range, and deal heavier damage. Your ONE example was Harry Potter. SO forgive me for making that connection, I was going off the information presented.It was in no way shape or form a direct attack against you. You seemed to have invented that. For the record "reported" isnt the same as asking a thread to be closed, my point still stands. To comments on your spelling, I dont care about your spelling, It was a remark to act as an example based on the fact that you seemed to gloss over the points I made, took the first sentence I said and ran with it.

So fine, yes, "start over" however my points still stand.
For reference:

• Wands are not lore friendly
• Wands would kill build diversity

An open forum is designed to promote discussion, So meaning to or not, you've made this a suggestion thread. Otherwise The top comment of "no" would have been a sufficient answer. I will apologize if my tone comes across as rude or blunt, it is the logical manner in which I speak.

You want me to respond positively to your comments,but you seem unable to stop making derogatory remarks.If my spelling didnt matter to you,why did you say this:
"Spellcheck is a thing that exists in 2016."
I wanted this to downsize peacefully,but you wont stop digging at me for nothing.
I was willing to stop this and even commented that your thoughts were interesting,but you came at me again,instead of taking the offered white flag.
Yoir points are just fine,even if I dont agree.
It's my right to have a differing opinion,as it is yours,in a civil manner.

catalyst10e

Volkodav wrote: »

catalyst10e wrote: »

Volkodav wrote: »

catalyst10e wrote: »

Volkodav wrote: »

catalyst10e wrote: »

Volkodav wrote: »

catalyst10e wrote: »

Volkodav wrote: »

catalyst10e wrote: »

No wands. I know that this is just your attempt to bring harry potter to the TES universe, and it wasn't until someone mentioned "purpose" did any real substantial ideas appear. The topic should have just been "lets get as much harry potter into TES as possible."

As far as lore goes: TES doesnt even require a mage use a staff. Staves are largely symbolic, rather than function. Or in some cases it acted as a conduit for people less magically inclined to use a very specific skill numerous times, like a multiuse/rechargeable scroll. In oblivion you had to go and craft your own staff as a means of showing you were no longer an apprentice.

Any "wands" in the universe (as previously mentioned in this post) were more ritual items, rather than a focusing item. In the same sense as ritual daggers are used and you can often see a mage with a dagger equip. There's plenty of items/totems/focusing crystals that all do what those "wands" do.

A real Mage wouldn't need a staff to perform magic, and their skills often exceed that of any staff you can find or craft. ESO gets away with this because, obviously, it's an MMO and some things needed to be altered to fit that template. We can go as far back as Arena and see spells have always been cast from your hands primarily.

in short, No wands.... we don't need them.

Dont be stupid.
Mentioning wands doesnt mean I want Harry Potter in ESO.
What a narrow minded comment.I soo am not into those movies.If you read my first post you'll see that.The bit about Harry Potter,..I said so what if he had them,I dont care. It as a sarcastic comment.If you want to know,more movies than I could possibly name have used wands throughout time,not just those.
To think that putting wands into ESO is my "attempt to bring Harry Potter to the ESO universe" shows a really limited range of thought.
As to the rest of your comment:
1.There are no "real" Mages
2.it doesnt matter if "wands" were ritual items or not,as ESO isnt real life
4.your point about OB kind of contradicts your points about staves not being needed
5. In short,wands would work just fine.If you dont want to use one,..dont.Simple.Others here seem to think it would be a fine option for a weapon.
6. As I said above,a wand is just a shorter staff.
7.

So right out of the gate your opening line discredits you.

You admit you mention harry potter, try and claim it as sarcasm (which can never be conveyed thru text) and yet it's somehow a fault of my own for saying you want harry potter in TES, by means of wands. Sure, I'm the narrow-minded one...

What movies use them is irrelevant, as we're not discussing movies that use wands. I was responding directly to something you said, Wands in TES, where you sighted Harry Potter. At no point did I mention other movies. Stay on topic, it is YOUR topic after all.

No, Simply mentioning Wands doesnt constitute wanting harry potter themed items, However specifically named Harry Potter, and Wands, (even "sarcastically") does convey that.

"Real Mages" in the context of the Lore, I can't even believe I have to explain that by starting out with "As far as lore goes:" it means "Within the context of the Lore surrounding TES universe" jeez...

Who mentioned real life? The context was LORE (again for emphasis, I said "As far as lore goes") if you read my comment you could have seen that. It sounds like you got part way thru, got salty and wrote this response.

Again, if you read and kept up.... Oblivion had you make a staff, as a SYMBOLIC GESTURE YOU WERE NO LONGER AN APPRETICE. Did you catch it this time? Doesn't that kinda sound like it's reinforcing the original point made that they are largly symbolic, and not typically seen as a mage's primary weapon?

I didn't debate the "usefulness" of a wand, tho to be quite frank it would infact be useless as the most it would do "different" mechanically is be a 1 handed weapon. Everything else remains the same, and it would kill the dual wielding side, as there becomes no drawback to dual wielding. At present someone who dual wields gets an added set piece and additional spell power but loses out on DPS and ranged LA/HA. That's the trade off of using a staff over Dual Wield, to add a Wand that can be both dual wield and long rang LA/HA kills the diversity of both, and EVERY mage would be forced to run dual wand because it literally has all perks and no drawbacks. Why does this even need to be said? You people have no idea about balance or what?

If it was truly a shorter staff then it's adding nothing new and is not needed, and as described above the most it could add would be to become a 1 handed weapon which again (since I apparently have to keep repeating myself for you to hear me) kills diversity.

If you have been on the forums here very long you will know people use sarcasm all the time,..without having to explain it to domeone who decides to jump on them for it.
Right out the get you made a snarky comment and in this one you do it too.
Arew you really that dense that you cannot see the term "So what if HP has them,I dont care".Is that a contradiction? I think not.
You just wish to be rude and make it look as if you are intelligent doing so.
What is bothering you so much that you have to go at me? Because I mentioned t hat guy,or that I mentioned that word. "Wands".
XD
Who are you anyway.

Spellcheck is a thing that exists in 2016.

See? I can also completely ignore your argument and focus on some arbitrary part of it.

I can't believe I have to remind you again to stay on topic, when its your own topic... personal attacks is just going to get your reported, not get a point across try again.

Back ON topic, As I stated, Wands not only are a terrible idea since it doesn't fit the lore, the best it could hope for as far as mechanically speaking is to become 1 handed, killing nearly all magicka based builds, and make all sorcs into cookiecutter copies of each other. Maybe discuss that.

I misspelled someone because I have a nerve problem with my left hand.I do try to edit my comments,but once in a while one will slip through.Thank you for correcting me.
And since this IS my thread,I may respond to snarky comments as I see fit.As you have.Just an FYI,we;re not supposed to threaten someone with closing a thread.

It's like you don't read what I write and somehow have a conversation with me without me knowing... Who threatened to close the thread? I told you personal attacks such as: "Don't be stupid"and "Arew you really that dense" get YOU reported. I said nothing about this thread, and yet you continue to de-rail it without adding anything to the discussion.

My comments are far less inflamatory than a whole lot of remarks in these forums,I assure you.I've been here for two years,and I know what the mods dislike.
Look,I would have been fine with you,had you not made that remark about me wanting Harry Potter in ESO.
That was just low and you know it,which is why you said it.And no one mentioned "reported" but you.
I would appreciate it if you stopped trying to own this thread.Your points about my missed spelling dont help matters.
Shall we quit and attempt to try this again,..without any rudeness? On either side?
Really,this wasnt even a suggestion thread.It was just a fun thought.
Thanks for your positive ideas.
They were actually interesting,though my thoughts rather differ.
Civility,shall we?

Clearly I'm not the only person who made the same connection between Harry potter in TES universe based on your OP. I wouldn't call that "low" I'd call that the fault of your wording. You could have at least sited other games that use wands like D&D online (tho they used rods) Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning That used Wands for fast, light attacks, while allowing staves to be mid range, and deal heavier damage. Your ONE example was Harry Potter. SO forgive me for making that connection, I was going off the information presented.It was in no way shape or form a direct attack against you. You seemed to have invented that. For the record "reported" isnt the same as asking a thread to be closed, my point still stands. To comments on your spelling, I dont care about your spelling, It was a remark to act as an example based on the fact that you seemed to gloss over the points I made, took the first sentence I said and ran with it.

So fine, yes, "start over" however my points still stand.
For reference:

• Wands are not lore friendly
• Wands would kill build diversity

An open forum is designed to promote discussion, So meaning to or not, you've made this a suggestion thread. Otherwise The top comment of "no" would have been a sufficient answer. I will apologize if my tone comes across as rude or blunt, it is the logical manner in which I speak.

You want me to respond positively to your comments,but you seem unable to stop making derogatory remarks.If my spelling didnt matter to you,why did you say this:
"Spellcheck is a thing that exists in 2016."
I wanted this to downsize peacefully,but you wont stop digging at me for nothing.
I was willing to stop this and even commented that your thoughts were interesting,but you came at me again,instead of taking the offered white flag.
Yoir points are just fine,even if I dont agree.
It's my right to have a differing opinion,as it is yours,in a civil manner.

*sigh* you really need to read what I write to you. As I explained that already. "It was a remark to act as an example based on the fact that you seemed to gloss over the points I made, took the first sentence I said and ran with it." So to reiterate, I don't actually care about your spelling, it was an example on how you skipped my points ON TOPIC entirely to focus on one other thing I said previously, not on topic.

Who's digging? I'm responding to you being unnecessarily aggressive by not reading what I write and responding to things you're clearly misinterpreting. NOT ONCE have I attacked you directly, (the same cannot be said for you) Not once did I bait an answer out of you. I have thus far defended myself from the things you THINK I meant. I could make the argument you're the one dragging this on and digging at me. YOU have yet to be civil, the only civil thing you've done thus far has been the attempt to start over, which I accepted, and told you as much, ending with "you have yet to address my points, and I even re-stated them for you. If your answer to those points is simply "I disagree" that's fine, you're entitled to that. (it doesnt promote discussion but whatever..)

Volkodav

Oh,again.
Whatever.