Originally Posted by Naqel
Originally Posted by Darkraign

You are right it is not working as good as it could be ( one of the problems the low AP cost has ) but Wand attacks only costing 1 AP while having a second weapon that gives you a bonus ( even if it is really small ) would make wand + sword > wand + wand. I dont think the game should be balanced for exotic builds ( wand+sword. sword + nothing ) but for normal builds ( wand+wand / staff / etc. ).


First of all, wand+wand is far more exotic than a sword+empty, while a wand+sword happens even in the very much mainstream Harry Potter.

Second, a major fantasy for a battle mage character is a melee weapon in one hand, with the other hand casting spells, be it empty or with an implement.

Finally, mechanical consistency demands that either both weapons contribute to an attack(as per proper dual-wield), or that the inactive one doesn't incur the cost.
It should absolutely not be done on a hand-full/hand-empty basis: if a weapon cannot be made active, it should be unequippable.

Obviously I'd prefer the combination be supported, rather than it be denied.


The problem as you already wrote is that one weapon + buff weapon for 1 ap is stronger than 2 weapon for 2ap.
Why would i use 2 wands if i could use just 1 with a sword? The sword would make my attacks a bit stronger ( not much ) but if we include everything you want give me attacks of opportunity und warfare/rogue skills while having no con at all. This would make dual wielding wands pretty much pointless. Adding to that you could attack more often because you could also attack more often ( you could also attack when you only have 1 AP left ) -> more dmg on earlier turns.
The best and only way to include it ( without it being a gimmick ) would be to add some new spells that only work with wand + sword. I would like that. But just buffing it and making wand+wand pointless is the wrong way to do it.