Destruction Dual Casting perk: same-spell only?

[Zefelius]

Po-tay-to, po-tah-to. They are both dual casting. The terminology is not clearly defined. You can cast two different spells at the same time, but each is effectively the same as single-casting. They just occur at the same time. No need to delve into the depths of semantics :D

 

Point well taken... Just thought RokHere deserved credit! :biggrin:

[RokHere]

I think your question was absolutely legitimate. Indeed, I had the same question and since this was the first time I visited this site I was pleasantly surprised to find this thread so quickly. Strictly speaking, as you yourself seemed to recognize, the word "dual" is ambiguous as to its referent: it's linguistically open-ended. It could refer to two similar spells or to the exact same ones. And even if someone argues above that it could only refer to the same ones, what counts as the same is still equally ambiguous, as it might be the same exact spells or merely the same kind or group of spells.

 

So that's why I don't think your question was at all silly or laughable.

 

Thanks, mate. The in-game hint that gave it away for me was the reference in the tooltip to "a spell"; that was a very strong indication that we needed to use the same spell in both hands. However, you know how tooltips can often by misleading or not even accurately worded in games, so I wanted to make sure. And frankly, I think Bethesda made a wrong decision by making he perk exclusive to same-spell use; I mean, electricity and water...come on, it would've been awesome to see Bethesda making the dual-casting of ice and fire producing the weakest damage, and dual-casting ice and sparks producing the deadliest damage. That would've felt genuinely sweet, especially because this kind of dual-casting is rare in games as it is. =)

[Rooker75]

It's "dual-casting" either way. Dual-casting two different spells means you do 100% of the damage of both spells added together. With the dual perk, dual-casting two of the same spell overcharges it to 220% normal damage (and stuns the target, if you also have that perk).

[chanchan05]

Yeah, you can dual-cast flames and ice, or ice and sparks (which is the one I would've assumed should be deadly and thorough too, since it would drain health, stamina, and magicka from the enemy). And you do that by assigning sparks to right hand for example, and ice to the left, then holding down both mouse buttons as you would when dual casting flames to get the perk benefit. My question was not about the possibility, because I know it is possible to dual-cast (dual is two, not same) different spells; my question was about whether that stronger effect only happens when the same spell is used, and this is confirmed: we have to use the same spell to get the perk benefit, that's all.

Lol thats not dual cast. You're not making use of the dual cast perk to make the spells stronger. You can hold spells on both hands without the perk.

 

Why exactly is that not dual cast? Because you're not getting the "perk"?? What does the perk have to do with English language? Dude, if you are holding both mouse buttons down in Skyrim with a mage readying a spell in each hand, then you ARE freaking dual-casting, regardless to WHICH spells are in your mage's hands, simply because that's ENGLISH! Whether I'm getting something related to the game mechanics, like the "Perk", or not, is a separate issue, and that's what my question was about! Two singers = duo, two spells being simultaneously cast = dual casting. Simple. English.

 

My point is that's two single casts, not a dual cast. It may simply perhaps differ on how we define it based on context. Even if its in English, as English is not exactly a stone cut language either, and allows for ambiguous definitions. Your definition seems to be, I hold it in two hands so its dual cast. I see that as simply, single cast on each hand. Even if I hold a spell in either hand and throw them both, I don't refer to that as "dual cast" because well, both are single cast/single charge spells. I defined dual cast based on the perks, or basically "in-game definition". Dual cast within game refers to casting the same spell on both hands, increasing its power. Because you "double cast" or basically "double charge" something.

 

Of course the problem is that there is no definite "glossary" for terminologies we have to encounter within game, but if we were to take "in-game" definition, the fact that there is a dual cast perk, which only affects when having the same spell on both hands, effectively means that holding two different spells on each hand =/= dual cast.

[thesapien]

I think your question was absolutely legitimate. Indeed, I had the same question and since this was the first time I visited this site I was pleasantly surprised to find this thread so quickly. Strictly speaking, as you yourself seemed to recognize, the word "dual" is ambiguous as to its referent: it's linguistically open-ended. It could refer to two similar spells or to the exact same ones. And even if someone argues above that it could only refer to the same ones, what counts as the same is still equally ambiguous, as it might be the same exact spells or merely the same kind or group of spells.

 

So that's why I don't think your question was at all silly or laughable.

 

Thanks, mate. The in-game hint that gave it away for me was the reference in the tooltip to "a spell"; that was a very strong indication that we needed to use the same spell in both hands. However, you know how tooltips can often by misleading or not even accurately worded in games, so I wanted to make sure. And frankly, I think Bethesda made a wrong decision by making he perk exclusive to same-spell use; I mean, electricity and water...come on, it would've been awesome to see Bethesda making the dual-casting of ice and fire producing the weakest damage, and dual-casting ice and sparks producing the deadliest damage. That would've felt genuinely sweet, especially because this kind of dual-casting is rare in games as it is. =)

 

That kind of dual casting would had been neat, too. Except you might then end up electrocuting yourself if you're dishing out ice and shock. How much DOES ice conduct electricity anyway? Yeah, it would had been funny to see fire and ice kind of cancel one another, too, maybe have the enemy stop and look at you funny.

 

Such combos are readily available in at least one other game I've played. In DA, for example, you can freeze or make brittle opponents before hitting them with a earth spell like a boulder, which shatters them. Used together, such combos do more damage than when used by themselves. I haven't discovered many combos in Skyrim, except my most favorite of just setting enemies on fire before slashing at them since burning targets take more damage. But that's about it. It's more about just knowing which spell to use on which enemy type, keeping things pretty simple in Skyrim.

[RokHere]

My point is that's two single casts, not a dual cast. It may simply perhaps differ on how we define it based on context. Even if its in English, as English is not exactly a stone cut language either, and allows for ambiguous definitions. Your definition seems to be, I hold it in two hands so its dual cast. I see that as simply, single cast on each hand. Even if I hold a spell in either hand and throw them both, I don't refer to that as "dual cast" because well, both are single cast/single charge spells. I defined dual cast based on the perks, or basically "in-game definition". Dual cast within game refers to casting the same spell on both hands, increasing its power. Because you "double cast" or basically "double charge" something.

 

Of course the problem is that there is no definite "glossary" for terminologies we have to encounter within game, but if we were to take "in-game" definition, the fact that there is a dual cast perk, which only affects when having the same spell on both hands, effectively means that holding two different spells on each hand =/= dual cast.

 

You can go on and on, however long you like, and even by in-game definitions, nothing in the game ever suggested that the label "dual casting" is exclusive to same-spell casting. The ONLY reference related to that is the PERK; the perk related to dual casting only applies when you use the same spell in both hands. Are you reading it properly now? The game never said that dual casting is when you cast the same spell; it only offers a perk that will apply only when you use the same spell when dual casting. Which means that you can use different spells when dual casting. And as I said, no matter how long you justify it, you'll only end up looking like a stubborn young child who is too cowardly to admit that they were wrong. And guess what? Nobody needed you to admit to being wrong; I simply would've used a much friendlier tone with you from the beginning if yo hadn't gone all "lol" at me, "lol that's not not dual casting". Had you said something friendly or neutral like, "But that wouldnt' be dual casting...dual casting is when you use the same spell in both hands", I would've replied with a friendly or neutral tone saying, "Why should that be? Dual casting is not a term specific to the game or to anything else for that matter; it's just a term that describes the action, like dual throttle, dual wielding, etc. Nobody ever said that wielding a dagger in one hand and a sword in the other is NOT dual-wielding, because dual-wielding is only when you wield two daggers, so why would we say that dual-casting is only when you cast the same spell? Not very logical." But of course, because you are a "lol" kinda person, I just put you to your place, that's all. Next time, try communicating properly so that people's answers don't humiliate you publicly so badly.

[chanchan05]

My point is that's two single casts, not a dual cast. It may simply perhaps differ on how we define it based on context. Even if its in English, as English is not exactly a stone cut language either, and allows for ambiguous definitions. Your definition seems to be, I hold it in two hands so its dual cast. I see that as simply, single cast on each hand. Even if I hold a spell in either hand and throw them both, I don't refer to that as "dual cast" because well, both are single cast/single charge spells. I defined dual cast based on the perks, or basically "in-game definition". Dual cast within game refers to casting the same spell on both hands, increasing its power. Because you "double cast" or basically "double charge" something.

 

Of course the problem is that there is no definite "glossary" for terminologies we have to encounter within game, but if we were to take "in-game" definition, the fact that there is a dual cast perk, which only affects when having the same spell on both hands, effectively means that holding two different spells on each hand =/= dual cast.

 

You can go on and on, however long you like, and even by in-game definitions, nothing in the game ever suggested that the label "dual casting" is exclusive to same-spell casting. The ONLY reference related to that is the PERK; the perk related to dual casting only applies when you use the same spell in both hands. Are you reading it properly now? The game never said that dual casting is when you cast the same spell; it only offers a perk that will apply only when you use the same spell when dual casting. Which means that you can use different spells when dual casting. And as I said, no matter how long you justify it, you'll only end up looking like a stubborn young child who is too cowardly to admit that they were wrong. And guess what? Nobody needed you to admit to being wrong; I simply would've used a much friendlier tone with you from the beginning if yo hadn't gone all "lol" at me, "lol that's not not dual casting". Had you said something friendly or neutral like, "But that wouldnt' be dual casting...dual casting is when you use the same spell in both hands", I would've replied with a friendly or neutral tone saying, "Why should that be? Dual casting is not a term specific to the game or to anything else for that matter; it's just a term that describes the action, like dual throttle, dual wielding, etc. Nobody ever said that wielding a dagger in one hand and a sword in the other is NOT dual-wielding, because dual-wielding is only when you wield two daggers, so why would we say that dual-casting is only when you cast the same spell? Not very logical." But of course, because you are a "lol" kinda person, I just put you to your place, that's all. Next time, try communicating properly so that people's answers don't humiliate you publicly so badly.

 

I seriously don't see a reason why you are so mad about a "lol". Or maybe I've been in other sites so often where "lol" is just ignored as a sort of placeholder. I only started typing "properly" when you seem to have become "agitated". Its a bit difficult typing on your phone in longer sentences.

 

Well, I don't find myself as a stubborn child refusing to admit I am wrong because in my point of view, there is nothing wrong with what I said, or what definition I see. As you said, we can argue back and forth, but I see a big difference in dual WIELDING spells, and dual CASTING a spell.

Edited January 17, 2012 by chanchan05