User talk:Tycn/Disarm

Nice one! Foo 09:42, 13 April 2007 (CDT)

Yea! Very simple, but very much needed in GW. Those things are unstoppable. -Samurai-JM - 13:07, 13 April 2007 (CDT)

Thanks, just hope that A-net hears our prayers... Tycn 20:33, 13 April 2007 (CDT)

Shit, I was going to enter this EXACT SAME SKILL under the EXACT SAME NAME. Great minds think alike, I guess.--Nog64Talk 21:27, 13 April 2007 (CDT)

Wow, a suggestion that's actually good. Amazing! Sirocco 21:28, 13 April 2007 (CDT)

It's a pretty obvious skill, others have probably thought of it before me. Tycn 01:23, 14 April 2007 (CDT)

Dang, this is good enough to be an Elite, almost...since it is Unlinked after all. Would be nice on any Frontline class, not just Assassins. I'd increase the cast time to 1 full second, and Recharge to 8 or 10, it's only fair. Else you can permanently remove any and all Weapon spells spammed on the target (considering the fast recharge), which is a pretty damn good counterskill for a non-elite. Or how about, keep it the samw way it is now, but change to: ''Skill. You and target touched foe lose a Weapon Spell.'' Then it would be like Rending Touch, which is pretty balanced imo. (T/C) 15:16, 14 April 2007 (CDT)

The thing of weapon spells is that it can't be removed, that's what's so good about it. If my Weapon of Warding can get removed, I'll just use Healing Breeze...know what I mean? ;/ --Rickyvantof 18:16, 14 April 2007 (CDT)

Weapon of Warding recharges in 5, the life steal ones in 3. Still, it might be a bit overpowered. 10 second recharge it is. Tycn 22:20, 14 April 2007 (CDT)

The beauty of weapon spells is that they can't be removed. You can only have one active at a time, they are perfectly balanced as is. If this skill comes out youd just use enchantments instead. - Skakid9090 17:30, 18 April 2007 (CDT)

It's touch ranged and has a prohibitive recharge. It's just a counter, and a conditional one at that. Tycn 20:13, 18 April 2007 (CDT)
 * Thats the thing, weapons spells were made NOT to be countered. - Skakid9090 21:11, 18 April 2007 (CDT)
 * Which is a bit overpowered IMO. Tycn 21:23, 18 April 2007 (CDT)
 * No, because then you could just use stackable enchantments instead. - Skakid9090 07:51, 19 April 2007 (CDT)
 * With a recharge of 15 seconds and touch range, it's not so gamebreaking as to stop people from using weapon spells. Tycn 22:29, 19 April 2007 (CDT)
 * Ill have to agree with Skakid9090 weaponspells are not suppose to be removable since you cant cast cover weaponspells and if they are to be removable atleast make the skill cost like 10 or 15. How many non conditional enchantment removers are there that cost 5 that arent elite or have a downside? (dont say that the fact that its a touch skill that makes it bad if you made it for assassins)


 * if I were to create an weaponskill remover I would have made an offenceve weaponskill for the rit class like "target foe has a Weapon of Pride which make target foes skills to cost 50% less. dur 20...5 seconds." this skill will replace targets current weaponspell and add a small bonus to not make the skill too good--[[Image:vik.PNG]] ( √ iktor ) 06:45, 2 May 2007 (CDT)
 * That's bending the rules of GW, giving enemies weapon spells. This is simpler and IMO more realistic really. Tycn 02:23, 3 May 2007 (CDT)
 * So how is removing previous unremovable weaponspells not bending the rules of gw but replacing them for another is?--[[Image:vik.PNG]] ( √ iktor ) 02:50, 3 May 2007 (CDT)
 * Giving enemies weapon spells is like enchanting them, but it isn't explicitly stated that weapon spells can't be removed, so IMO this is less unorthodox. Tycn 03:09, 3 May 2007 (CDT)