Curse

Gargle Blaster · Dec 07, 2006, 05:12 PM // 17:12

"For 10-30 seconds, your arrows strike for +5-13 damage if they hit and cause bleeding for 10-18 seconds if they are blocked."

there is an extra "if" in there

should read

"For 10-30 seconds, your arrows strike for +5-13 damage, they hit and cause bleeding for 10-18 seconds if they are blocked."

or

"For 10-30 seconds, your arrows strike for +5-13 damage, if they are blocked they hit and cause bleeding for 10-18 seconds."

Caleb · Dec 07, 2006, 05:26 PM // 17:26

You're misunderstanding the skill description I think.

If the arrow is not "blocked" or "evaded", it will hit the target. This clarifies the first segment of the skill description:
"your arrows strike for +5-13 damage if they hit"

If the arrow is "blocked" by an enemy using a stance/skill to block incoming attacks, the glass arrow shatters. Even though the attack did not hit (it was "blocked" after all), bleeding ensues for 10-18 seconds from the glass shards:
"and cause bleeding for 10-18 seconds if they are blocked."

Their wording is correct, as the bleeding and extra damage only occur under 2 different circumstances.

Tyggen · Dec 07, 2006, 05:30 PM // 17:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by Caleb The Pontiff

Their wording is correct, as the bleeding and extra damage only occur under 2 different circumstances.

Yes, but they could've made it clearer:
For 10-30 seconds, your arrows strike for +5-13 damage if they hit, if they are blocked they cause bleeding for 10-18 seconds.

I don't really care, I understood it anyway.

Faer · Dec 07, 2006, 05:53 PM // 17:53

Fur 10-30 secunds, yuoor aerroos streeke-a fur +5-13 daemaege-a iff zeey heet und coose-a bleedeeng fur 10-18 secunds iff zeey aere-a blucked.

Looks perfectly fine to me, logically and grammatically speaking (that sentence is a fragment, by the way, as there is no subject. It should read "The description looks perfectly fine to me, logically and grammatically speaking"). Anyway, as it has been explained and the answer of correctitude has been delivered, there is really no reason for this thread to remain open...