Talk:Discord

Whats so great about this? is it because it's spammable? --Jamie 07:31, 26 May 2006 (CDT)
 * 80 armour ignoring damage every 2 seconds for 5 energy? Skuld  09:00, 26 May 2006 (CDT)
 * I guess Death necromancers might be doing something other than MMing then... --Jamie 09:02, 26 May 2006 (CDT)
 * Armor ignoring? I never got that from the description of the spell.  Because it's not shadow damage, isn't the damage still reducable? - &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by Xis10al (talk &bull; contribs) 13:55, 26 May 2006.
 * It's simply "damage" which means it's untyped, and thus ignores armor. - Greven 15:05, 26 May 2006 (CDT)

edit by Ixl Raiden Ixl: shadow damage is armor-ignoring but can be reduced with protective spirit or protective bond or shelter the spirit. not sure about the other spirits :-P

It's armour ignoring because that foe suffers 15...63 damage., not you deal 15...63 damage Skuld  15:08, 26 May 2006 (CDT)

Kinda too conditional a skill if you ask me. &mdash; Rapta   (talk|contribs) 23:39, 19 July 2006 (CDT)
 * The cost, cast, and recharge are all low while the armor-ignoring damage is high. It would be unbalanced otherwise.  --68.142.14.19 00:02, 20 July 2006 (CDT)

Anyone wondering about the damage should just read the various issues on damage and Talk:Damage. And yes, it's obviously quite conditional. That's because it's otherwise extremely powerful. --JoDiamonds 16:47, 20 July 2006 (CDT)

Boolean logic
Ok, following boolean logic, the target would need to be either enchanted OR (hexed AND under a condition) (paranthesis used to illustrate my point). So, either that's right, which would make it even stronger than I though or they definitly need parenthesis/commas in there. --Theeth (talk)   16:36, 25 August 2006 (CDT)
 * english has no prioritisation operator (like paranthesis in equations), so this is going to be questionable anyways. --Honorable Sarah [[image:Honorable_Icon.gif]] 16:57, 25 August 2006 (CDT)