Dualwielding shields please

I would really love if the game allowed me to dualwield shields. Heres an idea for an addition to the skilltree to support this:



Sincerely, a guy who wants to dualwield shields.


The not-able-to-use-normal-weapons part is optional, and I made it like that because of Astral Bonds keystone (double totem thing)

No.

Shieldbash? Yes.
Dual-wielding Shields? YES PLEASE.
Lose ability to wield weapons? No. This adds nothing to the game. As long as a character meets prerequisites to equip a weapon, it can be equipped. While keystone skills change the way the game is played, so far that has never permanently dictating your item slots, and that should never be the case.

Dual-wielding shields should be about enjoying a crazy off-the-wall build for shield enthusiasts, with obvious pros and cons; limitation self-inflicted by opting for dual-shields rather than disabled equippable content.
Also, if shield-bashes worked the same way as typical melee attacks, then it would have too much overlap with traditional actually-offensive melee weapons, which may result in a scenario where it could either end up grossly overpowered or underpowered without filling a niche of its own. I'd probably make shieldbashes deal absolutely pathetic damage but have massively higher chance to stun (or reduced stun threshold, whatever mechanics deliver the experience). Can still be satisfying, especially with appropriate soundbytes.

"

Crizaig wrote:

Stupid idea. There is a reason you can't dual wield shields in games. Because it is in fact, stupid.

Honestly I feel sorry for so-called "Shield Enthusiasts" who have been roped into the idea that dual-wielding shields is cool... probably because of some silly D&D character that they took too seriously.

While I don't think completely removing your ability to wield weapons is necessary, I love the rest of the idea! I've always wanted to fight with two shields on these types of games. It would a synergize well with elemental spells that charge your shields with retaliatory damage, like the lightning shield one we already have!

"

Crizaig wrote:

Stupid idea. There is a reason you can't dual wield shields in games. Because it is in fact, stupid.

Why and how? Shields can serve both offensive and defensive roles. Plus, it's just fun. I'm not sure why you'd want to be a stick in the mud for an optional play style that many people would enjoy pursuing.

"

XCodes wrote:

"

Crizaig wrote:

Stupid idea. There is a reason you can't dual wield shields in games. Because it is in fact, stupid.

Honestly I feel sorry for so-called "Shield Enthusiasts" who have been roped into the idea that dual-wielding shields is cool... probably because of some silly D&D character that they took too seriously.

I get the distinct feeling you two only play muscly fighters that swing swords, rangers that shoot bows, and wizards that fling fireballs. A video game forum is the last place you should embrace a traditionalist outlook on non-standard fantasy-flavored recreation; especially for a game with as much customizability and freedom as Path of Exile in such an incomplete, Open Beta state.
But hey, if you want a game with no room for shenanigans, I hear Diablo II's Sorceress has "Fireball" come right after "Firebolt" down the skill path.

TL;DR The game has lots of fun peices, it should be up to the player how to assemble them in the way that yields the most fun experience for the player.

"

BooleanCube wrote:

"

XCodes wrote:

"

Crizaig wrote:

Stupid idea. There is a reason you can't dual wield shields in games. Because it is in fact, stupid.

Honestly I feel sorry for so-called "Shield Enthusiasts" who have been roped into the idea that dual-wielding shields is cool... probably because of some silly D&D character that they took too seriously.

I get the distinct feeling you two only play muscly fighters that swing swords, rangers that shoot bows, and wizards that fling fireballs. A video game forum is the last place you should embrace a traditionalist outlook on non-standard fantasy-flavored recreation; especially for a game with as much customizability and freedom as Path of Exile in such an incomplete, Open Beta state.
But hey, if you want a game with no room for shenanigans, I hear Diablo II's Sorceress has "Fireball" come right after "Firebolt" down the skill path.

TL;DR The game has lots of fun peices, it should be up to the player how to assemble them in the way that yields the most fun experience for the player.

Well said.

"

Zazulio wrote:

"

Crizaig wrote:

Stupid idea. There is a reason you can't dual wield shields in games. Because it is in fact, stupid.

Why and how? Shields can serve both offensive and defensive roles. Plus, it's just fun. I'm not sure why you'd want to be a stick in the mud for an optional play style that many people would enjoy pursuing.

Because shields aren't designed to be used in this way. Yes, shields are weapons, but they are not things you just strap to each arm and then hit people with. It's a ridiculously ineffective fighting style and if you tried it you'd fail to defeat even a half-naked farmer armed with a rusty spork.

This is not cool, it's a joke build posted on some D&D forum somewhere because in D&D you can do a lot of different, pathetically terrible things with a Fighter, so why the fuck not make it something obnoxious like dual-wielding shields?

And, by the same token, why not make something off the cuff for this game as well? It's not as if PoE is exactly mired in reality. Last I checked, you also couldn't split arrows or dive through people with knives, so it doesn't take much suspension of disbelief to accept somebody pummelling monsters with weaponized shields, and furthermore, pummelling monsters with weaponized shields sounds fun!

This isn't a game about whether or not something is practical or traditional in the real world, it's a game about giving people the choice to experiment and have fun. The fact that at least a few people have come in here to show support for this suggestion shows that people think it would be a pretty entertaining thing to try.

What we come down to here is, should a skill or build path be excluded from the game just because it's something you're not interested in trying for yourself? Personally, I find barbarian type classes pretty dull, but you don't hear me calling for them to be removed from the game.