Talk:Judge's Insight

I have tried to upload the skill icon, but it doesn't seem to like the  '  in the name, and tries to change it to Judge\'s Insight. The image appears to be here:, but when you click it, the page appears to be blank. How should we deal with this? Should we change it to Judges_Insight.png? --Hewus 14:13, 14 Aug 2005 (EST)


 * Reupload it with a different name. Images can't be moved/renamed.  And, amusingly, this issue is preventing me from deleting it, too.  --Fyren 11:43, 21 Aug 2005 (EST)


 * True, the image page is not working (Probably a wikicode bug), but it appears fine if you put it in the article. I doubt that there will ever be any need for the image page, anyway. --Talrath Stormcrush 14:44, 21 Aug 2005 (EST)

Holy Damage
Holy damage ignores armour, according to the damage page. Does Judge's Insight give 20% armour penetration against the base 60 AL for Holy type damage? 148.177.129.213 19:28, 12 Oct 2005 (EST)


 * That is how it seems to work (though the "60" will very with the smiting level of the caster, I guess). --Fyren 20:19, 12 Oct 2005 (EST)


 * holy damage isnt "ignoring" armor, it just sets all armor to 60. Judges insight makes that 40. Anoither thing is that attacks with armor penetration ignore strength.


 * Judges Insight on its own would cause your attacks to behave as if your opponent had 48 armor, not 40. 20% of 60 is 12, not 20.  Additionally, this skill stacks with other attacks that have armor penetration for greater damage increases.  Standard attacks made under Judges Insight do not ignore strength bonuses to armor penetration either.  So you can either stack the armor penetration from insight and strength OR the penetration from insight and a special penetrating attack.  See http://www.gwonline.net/page.php?p=158#ArmorPenetration --Squeg 03:25, 13 Oct 2005 (EST)
 * Exactly this article says "It is a very common misconception that some damage types (holy, chaos and dark) ignore armor by default. This is not the case". Thus, JI should not modify a target's armor level (besides granting 20% reduction). 134.130.183.83 05:17, 18 October 2005 (EST)


 * JI does more than just give +20% armor penetration. It's easy to test and see the damage increase is much greater than just 20% should provide.  --Fyren 07:10, 18 October 2005 (EST)
 * Have you tested against players with caster armor/naked? Of course, against warriors, they will also lose their armor bonus vs physical, and there's no way of knowing what whacky armors monsters wear. Plus there might be interactions with the attribute/lvl*3 thing. Quick testing didn't show any extraordinary bonus for my Mesmer cane 134.130.183.83 07:49, 18 October 2005 (EST)
 * If you use wild blow you get consistent damage and can easily work out armor values. Your attribute values don't modify wand damage (unless you don't meet the req) or anything but duration for JI.  --Fyren 08:18, 18 October 2005 (EST)
 * With wild blow, you can test physical (or elemental, if you use a prefix on your weapon) armor. Since it's a melee attack, you can't use it with wands, thus you have no way of testing armor against light/chaos/dark types. That's what i meant by "whacky" armor. And of course your attributes don't affect wand damage, but your level*3 does.. just as attribute does for weapons that have an attribute. That's why I wrote "attribute/lvl*3". *sigh* Since I thoroughly don't enjoy discussing this, I'll shut up and leave you with whatever article you want, unless either of us manages to test JI against a player with 30 (and no bonus) armor. If JI works as you think, the target should take more dmg without JI, if it does as I think, more with JI. 134.130.183.83 04:45, 19 October 2005 (EST)
 * 134.130.183.83 is right. All JI does is convert damage to Holy and add 20% penetration. I've used this skill extensively and it does not ignore armor nor set the default armor of the target to 60 (then add in 20% penetration).--Kiiron 09:13, 24 October 2005 (EST)
 * Holy damage does not treat the target's AL as 60, if it treated the target's AL as 60 then most Smiting Prayers spells would do more damage against low level targets than against high level targets, the actual properties of normal holy damage skills (or all holy damage skills if JI does light damage) are more complicated, see holy damage and damage for details. -- Gordon Ecker 23:58, 1 August 2006 (CDT)

OK. How about Judge's Insight and a Fiery Dragon Sword? Anyone tested this out? I assume Winter has no effect in this case - 'all elemental damage is cold' versus 'weapon damage is holy'. Shandy 08:03, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Why would you need to test it? What you assume is correct. -PanSola 08:12, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Well, it was only an assumption. The two effects contradict one another (W.R.T. Winter and JI). Now, does Judge's Insight turn a Fiery Dragon Sword holy? Or did you mean it does indeed do that? Shandy 08:42, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Well, if JI happens first, then winter has nothing to do, so Holy. If Winter happens first, then J.I. will still convert the cold damage into Holy, so end result is still Holy. -PanSola 17:50, 25 November 2005 (UTC)


 * I went ahead and added notes about working like light damage. The only question I have is whether the "holy damage" from Judge's Insight is actually doubled vs. necro tormentor's armor (or whether light damage from smiting rods might be as well!) i.e. whether it works like light damage in this particular case. --Sheap 22:40, 15 January 2006 (EST)


 * As per many accurate comments, Holy Damage does not mean that it ignores armor (much like Lightning Damage doesn't have built in armor penetration), it's merely the case that many skills that cause holy damage ignore armor. I clarified the nots to reflect this.  Damage types in Guild Wars are (apparently) very confusing. --JoDiamonds 03:50, 17 March 2006 (CST)


 * If that is the case, shouldn't it be "light" damage, like in smiting staves and wands, instead of holy damage? Lightning damage doesn't nessesarily haev penetration, so each skill comments on the amount of penetration, but in smiting skills, you don't see that, there is no "this damage ignores armor", so holy damage immediatly assumes that the damage ignores armor. I can only guess that this is a mistake of some sort then, since it seems to act exactly like light damage + 20% penetration Silk Weaker 00:12, 11 June 2006 (CDT)


 * That is one very, very common interpretation of it. It's been argued to death on Guildwiki; mostly, IIRC, on the List of skill anomalies. The short answer is that changing it to light damage and saying that holy damage = armor-ignoring light damage makes sense, but that there are detractors who will points out that there are stronger inconsistencies around (like, I think, Whirling Defense), so maybe the whole "damage type" school is wrong. &mdash; 130.58 (talk) ( 00:38, 11 June 2006 (CDT) )
 * the current accepted idea, until anet decides to tell us how the mechanics work, is that no damage types ignore armor, and that only skills can ignore armor. it is also accepted that light is holy damage, as well as shadow and dark damage being the same. unfortunatly, there is no Mantra of Light or Mantra of Dark so we have a hard time discerning that for sure. --Honorable Sarah [[image:Honorable_Icon.gif]] 17:06, 25 July 2006 (CDT)


 * When you say "the current accepted idea", and "it is also accepted", I take solace in the nity gritty detail that you didn't say "it is commonly accepted". I find the difference between "all skills dealing blah damage ignores armor, with rare noted exceptions" vs "all blah damage ignores armor, with rare noted exceptions" to be too academic even for me.  I have also never heard of any good argument of WHY, if light=holy and shadow=dark, that they are given different names in the same game.  Thus I cannot fathom how ppl accept them to be the same, nor am I aware of how many people think of them as being the same.  I know what you said agreed exactly with what SonOfRah wrote in his damage article.  However, I also know his damage article didn't quite get a bunch of stuff right.  Beyond that, it's really hard to judge the demographics and the population size of the ppl who accept what you said is accepted. - 00:07, 2 August 2006 (CDT)

Sundering
This may be a stupid question, if so at least it's a quick one. I suppose since it's +20%, it stucks with the effects of sundering weapons mod? I udnerstand that it wouldn't stack with something like penetrating blow/chop, yes?
 * Yes, see the Armor penetration page--Apocrypha 18:28, 22 June 2006 (CDT)

Does the sundering apply to wand/staff damage? Or is it restricted to physical damge (swords/spears/arrows)? --Countess

Damage type
It could easily be fire damage and not light damage. Why I say this is because fire also has damage bonus on undead.--Life Infusion 23:23, 6 July 2006 (CDT)
 * Light/holy doubles damage, but I'm certain that not all undead take double fire damage. --68.142.14.60 14:14, 7 July 2006 (CDT)
 * fire has no bonus against undead, but most undead have extra resistance to physical. scrimage with Mantra of Flame no energy bonus from JI attacks --Honorable Sarah [[image:Honorable_Icon.gif]] 17:06, 25 July 2006 (CDT)

Enchantments?
It said that it stacked with other enchantments such as primal rage, which is a stance, so I changed that to buffs Sean22190 14:35, 10 December 2006 (CST)
 * Enhancements. It said enhancements.  --Fyren 14:40, 10 December 2006 (CST)

Nightfall Trainer Locations
Anyone know where this is buyable in nightfall? --Mgrinshpon 08:41, 31 December 2006 (CST)

teh 1337 =-D ~ Taronde Naroth

Holy Damage vs Light Damage
I removed the note that indicated that this skill causes you to deal light damage instead of holy damage. This note was placed because the user claims that if the skill causes you to deal holy damage, this would ignore armor, and the 20% penetration would be pointless. This argument is based on the assumption that all holy damage ignores armor, but I do not believe that is true and have not seen evidence presented yet that confirms this. The Holy damage page currently states: This makes sense to me, and would mean that the description for Judge's Insight is correct. We can't assume a skill description is incorrect without proof. If you really feel that the assumption that all holy damage ignores armor is correct, this should be easy to prove. Just take a Dervish with Wild Blow and Heart of Holy Flame (which causes your attacks to deal holy damage) to Isle of the Nameless and attack a high armor target. Use Wild Blow while enchanted with Heart of Holy Flame, and while not enchanted with it. If all holy damage ignores armor, you should see a significantly higher amount of damage dealt while enchanted. If you prove that holy damage inflicting weapon attacks ignore armor, you can then update the holy damage article. Then we could consider adding a note to Judge's Insight indicating that the skill description is wrong. -- BrianG 11:18, 16 February 2007 (CST)
 * Skills causing holy damage ignore armor except for Lightbringer's Gaze.
 * Weapons causing holy damage (as a result of damage type conversion due to skill effects) do not ignore armor.
 * Do people still debate this misconception? o.O  It was known during beta that there's no such thing as an armor ignoring/penetrating damage type, just armor ignoring skills.  --68.112.142.241 05:40, 5 November 2007 (UTC)


 * That is correct, however some skills ignore armor while being a damage type, ie acid trap, a handful of smiting skills, plus judge's intervention (even though it's not said). Also, some say lifesteal is a damage type-damage type, while it is unique from all others (and excluded), many skills fit in the "life steal" catagory. Flechette 07:37, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Icon
To me it looks like some comic in a club with a lame back drop while he holds a microphone up to his mouth... Thats probably not what it is so does anyone know lol? -Echo Ftw is too lazy to log in
 * I think it's supposed to be a gavel(hammer jawn judges use to abuse wooden plates). But idk. --†Fallen† 19:22, 25 September 2007 (CDT)

Acquisition
I took out Dakk for Prophecies because there were two previous trainers. I left in Yak's Bend because some people skip Grendich Courthouse. -- Skax459 01:45, 5 November 2007 (UTC)