Mages using wands

General Discussion
This is just my own opinion and an idea I thought of and would like to share, I think one of the specs for a Mage should use a wand as their main weapon. I think that would be so awesome to have. And wands are in game but rarely ever used anymore. There are so many cool wands in game it would be nice to use them again. :)
Avada Kedav-No
07/31/2016 10:06 AMPosted by Rittz
Avada Kedav-No


omfg I choked on my skittle!
Fitzter, who for RP purposes has studied magic (and teaches it in Dalaran), has had a good deal of practical experience using wants, but I've always considered them to be limited use type items; like you could get a want that does a warding spell, but could only do that.

Making it too much like the Harry Potter wants would require the pre-existing magic lore in game to be readjusted.

I do want wands to be around more, but probably not as a main weapon like staves; I miss the off hand auto shoot.
07/31/2016 10:03 AMPosted by Shädöwpäw
This is just my own opinion and an idea I thought of and would like to share, I think one of the specs for a Mage should use a wand as their main weapon, and have spells that require it. I think that would be so awesome to have. I would definitely role a Mage. And wands are in game but rarely ever used anymore. There are so many cool wands in game it would be nice to use them again. :)


I hate wands and totally disagree with ya.....but still gonna upvote you're post. We should totally respect that others feel differently than ourselves. At least you put it out there that makes clear this is your preference alone.
Wands are cute
I'm actually surprised none of the artifacts were wands. Wands have been like a non-thing for a long time now
Do we get an owl for the offhand?
Having to use a 2H Staff instead of the main and off hand I usually try to use is a backward step for me. Yet another reduction in choice that has my enthusiasm ebbing.
I would think the use of a wand would only be necessary because a spell was too hard on the caster's body and needed a conduit. Swords, maces (in the case of priests), daggers, books, orbs, and staves are all sturdier than wands and would be able to channel more magic through them, harming the caster's body much, much less than a wand's paltry mitigation would end up doing. Warcraft magic is energy that can and will harm the body (Nexus makes that clear). I can only guess that casters use weapons to take some of the edge off of channeling the raw energy through their bodies.
I like wands. A lot of them have neat shiny effects. A lot better than spell daggers, in my opinion.
I don't know that I'd go so far as to make something wand-themed, though.
I am no longer allowed to have a wand in raid due to some unfortunate issues of boss pulling when I had one in MoP and I would target the boss the wrong way, because hey a caster we don't have to worry much, and suddenly Immerseus and I were having a heart to heart that no one was prepared for.

However, I like the idea of magi having them, but I still think of them more as using magic without being chained to a weapon, that they are able to wield those powers and be the weapon themselves. I blame David Eddings for forming my opinion of magic users.

However, I'm all for having more choices for people. Even if it's only to allow people to transmog it to whatever weapon they are using.
Maybe not using the wand to cast spells but having them as a main weapon wouldn't be too bad.
I agree with the OP: it should be an option, either as a "spec" with it's own set of caveats and trade-offs or (more realistically) as a separate spec, like how hunters can use a 2H weapon again or rogues can use a "ranged weapon".

My particular wishes on the matter is not because I'm a fan of Harry Potter, but more for an option to have a ranged auto-attack: instead of bashing about with a staff or sword when at melee range, why not a wand from range? The spec will have much less "burst" damage from spells that are cast or channelled but more consistent auto-attack ranged damage to make up for it and more mobility, for instance.

Maybe have an off-hand that provides either a personal or group buff.

Essentially, more options is what I'd like.
06/02/2018 01:13 AMPosted by Myrrh
I agree with the OP: it should be an option, either as a "spec" with it's own set of caveats and trade-offs or (more realistically) as a separate spec, like how hunters can use a 2H weapon again or rogues can use a "ranged weapon".

My particular wishes on the matter is not because I'm a fan of Harry Potter, but more for an option to have a ranged auto-attack: instead of bashing about with a staff or sword when at melee range, why not a wand from range? The spec will have much less "burst" damage from spells that are cast or channelled but more consistent auto-attack ranged damage to make up for it and more mobility, for instance.

Maybe have an off-hand that provides either a personal or group buff.

Essentially, more options is what I'd like.


two year necro
Staff or blade in one hand, wand in the other. I dig it.
Levio-

SUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUH
Duel-Weilding wands.
I doubt this will happen but honestly I'd love for all races to get casting animations that use the weapon. Just as it feels off to me to play a worgen who has to use normal spells/weapons instead of ripping into enemies with my claws and fangs, it feels weird being a mage with a big glowing staff, sword or wand....and just have it sit on my back or hip as I cast with just my hands.

I feel like adding casting animations that use the caster's weapon would be a small but impactful detail when it comes to immersion.
07/31/2016 10:06 AMPosted by Rittz
Avada Kedav-No

$ps -a | more
...
$Avada Kedav 2315
*POOF*
$_

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum