Curse

Kanyatta · Jan 06, 2008, 03:46 AM // 03:46

Ok, here's my beef, I'm kind of calling for a nerf, but in an indifferent way. Basically, the Ritualist "Weapon Spells" can be used on someone when they don't have a weapon held (i.e. Vengeful Was Khanei farming, you use Vengeful Weapon on yourself while holding an urn --- or, in GvG, when a Rt is holding the flag and uses Weapon of Warding on themselves, while not having a weapon, but a flag.

Basically, rename the Weapon Spells to straight up Enchants or something, or else make them use the functionality they're supposed to.

xvix83 · Jan 06, 2008, 03:54 AM // 03:54

unsigned.

if weapon spells are changed to enchants, rits would be useless...(besides spirits anyways)..rits have been nurfed too much already..

Biostem · Jan 06, 2008, 04:01 AM // 04:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kanyatta

Ok, here's my beef, I'm kind of calling for a nerf, but in an indifferent way. Basically, the Ritualist "Weapon Spells" can be used on someone when they don't have a weapon held (i.e. Vengeful Was Khanei farming, you use Vengeful Weapon on yourself while holding an urn --- or, in GvG, when a Rt is holding the flag and uses Weapon of Warding on themselves, while not having a weapon, but a flag.

Basically, rename the Weapon Spells to straight up Enchants or something, or else make them use the functionality they're supposed to.

I could get behind adding the requirement "must be holding a weapon" to weapon spells, but anything else and they lose any advantage. Perhaps add a few "removes weapon spell" skills among some of the other professions, but that's it.

doudou_steve · Jan 06, 2008, 05:36 AM // 05:36

/unsigned you can only have 1 weapon spell one you, instead of thousands of enchantments

HawkofStorms · Jan 06, 2008, 05:45 AM // 05:45

/signed for the first suggestion
Weapon spells should require that you hold a weapon. I mean... that just makes sense.

MithranArkanere · Jan 06, 2008, 07:48 PM // 19:48

The requirement of having to hold a weapon is logical.

That would prevent all item spell+weapon spell combinations, though.

You can't see me · Jan 06, 2008, 08:09 PM // 20:09

Weapons spells are not enchantments, and never will/should be.

On the weapon requirement part, I really never saw someone that wasn't weilding a weapon aside from towns/outposts, but I suppose it's logical, even if it does prevent item spell/weapon spell combinations.

Kanyatta · Jan 06, 2008, 11:13 PM // 23:13

The whole enchant thing would be a big nerf, in retrospect, so, I'll take that back, I was just thinking out loud kind of. But, it just seems logical to me that a GvG Flag should be a "Weapon" of Warding.

To the person that suggested it, I've been thinking since the Factions PvP Test Weekend, "Why isn't there anything to remove a Weapon Spell?" Not really part of this thread, but, I just don't understand why there aren't any. Like, a Mesmer could have "Shatter Weapon", just like "Shatter Enchantment", but removing a Weapon Spell instead of an Enchantment.

Giga Strike · Jan 06, 2008, 11:17 PM // 23:17

thats funny, i was just wondering how ppl could get benefits from a weapon spell if they aren't even holding a weapon.

/signed for the first part

ShadowsRequiem · Jan 06, 2008, 11:20 PM // 23:20

Flags can be used as a weapon :P not in game but really anything can be. Ever seen 3 Stooges? I'll smash a urn on your head ^^

Weapons spells are okay now, with enchantments you have to power of stacking them with weapon spells its one or the other.

Shayne Hawke · Jan 06, 2008, 11:46 PM // 23:46

I'm not convinced on this idea, purely because I see some weapon spells as more of a protective kind of buff rather than something offensive. I admit that it's odd to be buffed with a weapon spell while not wielding a weapon, but at the same time, I don't believe we opportunity to be shielded by other weapon spells should be taken away.

Kanyatta · Jan 06, 2008, 11:48 PM // 23:48

You don't see Weapon Spells as being offensive?

Warmongers, and Splinter Wep are some of the best Rit spells there are. Weapon of Fury isn't bad either.

You can't see me · Jan 07, 2008, 12:33 AM // 00:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shayne Hawke

I'm not convinced on this idea, purely because I see some weapon spells as more of a protective kind of buff rather than something offensive. I admit that it's odd to be buffed with a weapon spell while not wielding a weapon, but at the same time, I don't believe we opportunity to be shielded by other weapon spells should be taken away.

[skill]nightmare weapon[/skill][skill]splinter weapon[/skill][skill]warmonger's weapon[/skill][skill]vengeful weapon[/skill][skill]wailing weapon[/skill][skill]dulled weapon[/skill][skill]guided weapon[/skill][skill]weapon of shadow[/skill][skill]weapon of remedy[/skill][skill]weapon of fury[/skill][skill]Xinrae's Weapon[/skill]

I'd say they're fairly offensive. Versus these "Buffs" you speak of.

[skill]vital weapon[/skill][skill]weapon of warding[/skill][skill]weapon of quickening[/skill][skill]spirit light weapon[/skill]

thedeadlyassassin · Jan 07, 2008, 01:12 AM // 01:12

/unsigned

It'd hurt rits too much

JASON626 · Jan 07, 2008, 05:42 PM // 17:42

Weapon spells should not be removable. They already can be diverted or interupted. Magebane shot rangers... cannot be blocked.

Well holding an item in my mind becomes the weapon.

Being a flag runner and holding the flag is already at a disadvantage. You have less health and less energy.

/Unsigned

I like rits as they are.

scrump · Jan 07, 2008, 07:07 PM // 19:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by doudou_steve

/unsigned you can only have 1 weapon spell one you, instead of thousands of enchantments

That is why there are no weapon spell removing skills

TGgold · Jan 07, 2008, 08:21 PM // 20:21

/unsigned

Basically, it would gimp the ritualist class far too much. Not being able to use an item and a weapon spell is ridiculous, especially for defensive ones. For offensive ones, if you're holding an item, you're not getting benefit from the spell, no?

Did you ever consider some urns are actually weapons? So, by your logic, should all offensive item spells not conflict with having a weapon spell on you.

By another strand of logic, your character always has their weapon. If you use a defensive weapon spell on somebody, maybe it's just assumed that they have the defense granted from having a weapon.

Perhaps when not holding an actual weapon, the characters hands are considered to be the weapons in effect. Maybe their brain, or wherever a character's casting abilities come from.

Just think about it.

Cherng Butter · Jan 07, 2008, 10:57 PM // 22:57

Could be a buff if you consider that you can stack weapon spells to work together.

TGgold · Jan 07, 2008, 10:59 PM // 22:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cherng Butter

Could be a buff if you consider that you can stack weapon spells to work together.

Since when has he ever made it seem like you'd be able to stack them? O_o

Stackable weapon spell would be way too overpowered....

Dean Harper · Jan 07, 2008, 11:24 PM // 23:24

just create a few spells in the necro and memser lines that can remove weapon spells. simple