Talk:Magehunter's Smash

Hmmm this might hurt Boon prots even more than the actual boon nerf ... but then, so will it hurt MoR users. EDrain anyone? --Xeeron 09:10, 22 September 2006 (CDT)

Unattributed! Give it a <=4 requirement, like Earthshaker. Kamahl 23:16, 23 September 2006 (CDT)
 * What's the point of putting req 4 on it? It's a hammer attack, which requires a hammer anyway. Every time I've seen someone with a hammer in their hands, they've had 12~14 mastery with it Celestial Patch

Nevermind that, this is going to be on every hammer Warrior who even thinks about targeting Dervishes. Arshay Duskbrow 05:40, 26 September 2006 (CDT)

I don't get it... Is this really that much more useful than, say, Devastating Hammer? Yes, Devastating costs 2 more adrenaline, but it causes Weakness (not exceptionally useful) and it's unconditional. I don't really want a knockdown on my bar that stops being useful the moment people drop their Divine Boon maintainence. The conditional aspect really narrows its potential significantly. Ponder this: When Prophecies was the only version of Guild Wars, and top hammer builds ran Hammer Bash instead of Heavy Blow, even when they had Devastating Hammer. Heavy Blow is superior in every way when the conditions are met! However, what if the target weren't weakened? What if you just killed a target and went to your next, with a fully charged knockdown you couldn't use? What if the target got a condition removal at a key time causing your knockdown to fail?
 * Devestating Hammer is more useful for spiking (Fierce Blow double dmg), and is also an unconditional KD -Thomas 15:51, 5 December 2006 (CST)

Blessed Light monks that don't run enchantments on themselves are becoming more popular, and more solid non-enchantment monk skills are on their way. Is 2 less adrenaline really going to rate higher than the unconditional aspect? In my opinion, it's not. Merengue 13:01, 30 September 2006 (CDT)

That's what I was thinking. Weak because it's conditional. Yeah, it may have good use against boon prots or dervishes, but if you have to go beat on something else, it becomes worthless sometimes. IMO, this should have a 1/2 second activation, or a can't be blocked or evaded added to it.--GTPoompt 03:37, 15 October 2006 (CDT)
 * Like Magehunter Strike? Yeah, it should get a 1/2 activation time. DancingZombies 16:40, 23 October 2006 (CDT)

Boss in the SE corner of the Forum highlands (south of the connection to Jennur's horde). --Fyren 17:53, 28 October 2006 (CDT)

I like hammers, and this elite is rather dissappointing, its like a Counter Blow for casters. I can see where this skill could work good against a Dervish combined with counter blow for many KDs but its just not worth an elite slot. I'm sticking with Devastating Hammer and Fierce Blow. --Spark 00:49, 17 December 2006 (CST)

It's really nasty to have this used against you if you're running vital enchants such as attunes; it's not fun to be knocked down 40% of the time. At least it doesn't bypass blocking and evasion, like Magehunter Strike. Tycn 04:25, 27 December 2006 (CST)
 * But it needs to do that. Hitting an enchanted foe, such as a monk, usually results in a block, making this skill useless. DancingZombies [[Image:Aura_of_the_Lich.jpg|24px]] 14:30, 3 February 2007 (CST)

This skill would have been great if it had exsisted during the reign of Boon Prot monks, but as it is - a conditional, +0 damage knockdown - its uses are severely limited. DarkMishkin 14:10, 21 March 2007 (CDT)

Why is everybody talking about Monks? Aren't Elementalists the ones who always carry an enchantment? I mean, an ele build without an attunement is pretty much useless. I'm not saying this skill is any good, because it isn't, but it's not just a monk counter. --Rickyvantof 15:05, 26 April 2007 (CDT)

I also agree that this skill could be better. If the qualifying enchantment happens to be one that blocks attacks like Aegis or Guardian, which are both common on monks but by no means limited to monks, then this attack would likely be blocked - making it that much less useful.Ninjatek 10:45, 31 May 2007 (CDT)