Talk:Spiritual Pain

One more reason for Mesmers in PvP- I can see the spam already.
 * I wouldn't call 10 energy spammable, as one spirit would require ~30 energy to be destroyed. I don't see how this skill could be used over Unnatural Signet - even a one to two second increase in killing spirits due to fast casting doesn't justify the huge energy cost. Maybe a double damage against spirits or a 5 energy cost would make this usable. -- Sai Qui 07:30, 24 September 2006 (CDT)


 * Use Glyph of Lesser Energy before, and you get 2 free casts of Spiritual Pain, and a unaware Ritualist is dead.
 * It's excellent for taking back the mines in FA on the Luxon side. --Ufelder 11:41, 24 September 2006 (CDT)


 * Mesmer always needed some Aoe damage spells to be more played in PvE glad they got one --FirstBornSon 07:21, 26 September 2006 (CDT)

I think it is more of a way to kill spirit spam than to kill one spirit.--Life Infusion 20:18, 28 September 2006 (CDT)

This skill is very effective against the ritualist who is summoning the spirits since it rechages whenever it damages a spirit not only when it targets one, I'd choose the skill over unatural signet any time.Viktor 15:14, 4 October 2006(UTC)

This combined with Unnatural Signet to a normal target does over 160 unblockable damage in under 2 seconds (assuming some Fast Casting of course) That's pretty good, very useful addition to a spike. I would likely use these skills and forget they conferred some bonus when used on spirits. &mdash; Feurin Longcastle 21:15, 26 October 2006 (CDT)

This skill puts an end to spirit spamming and anyone else whose foolish enough to stand in the AOE. Spirits aside, this is just a nice unconditional AOE spike skill. It never leaves my mesmer's bar.Avatar of Lyssa 22:37, 10 December 2006 (CST)
 * I doubt that, anyone foolish to spam this skill on a ritualist is just going to drain all of their energy. (Terra Xin 04:45, 13 December 2006 (CST))
 * Spam it with a Necromancer with decent Soul Reaping and use Signet of Lost Souls for additional energy recovery. I've faced several spirit spamming teams using it at low power (9 Domination) and found it extremely effective - very rarely had to stop doing damage, and then less for lack of energy and more because the other team decided I was the best target. See Build:N/Me Painful Leech. Zdain 17:23, 5 January 2007 (CST)

I removed the note stating that a spirit has to be the target to get the instant reload, a spirit in the area of effet is enough.
 * Incorrect note

It's STILL not enough to kill spirit spam in HB, the one with 1 Rt, 2 Monks, and the Sin. Something really needs to be done about this.

"Clarification" note
The note that's supposed to clarify the description seems to hinge around two points: I'd rather just remove it, but maybe someone can rewrite it if they thing the description isn't actually clear. --Fyren 13:59, 22 February 2007 (CST)
 * 1) Using both near and nearby is confusing. I don't really see how it is.
 * 2) "Hits" is ambiguous. I don't think it is and then says "struck" as if that somehow resolves any potential ambiguity "hits" might have.

A need to update the notes
1. Spiritual Pain may have lost its popularity after the desvastating nerfing of the january 2007 update. It is not anymore a general purpose AoE spell. And the ratio energy/damage has been lowered, now it does not anymore fit as a spike: 79 damage/10 energy and 30 seconds recharge, plus Area of Effect damage if the target is near a non-allied spirit, may make of this skill to have a single excluve purpose..., to counter Ritualists.

2. Spiritual Pain does not have synergy with allied spirits. I have tested this in the Isle of the Nameless.--mariano 09:32, 24 February 2007 (CST)

Range?
Is the range nearby or in a spirits effect? I htink it should be put in notes either way, due to the, oh, 20 skills that are incorrect to the way anet words em (Not a fifty five 21:18, 11 March 2007 (CDT))

AoE condition
If I target a spirit, and there are no other spirits nearby, does the AoE still trigger? Ie, is a spirit considered nearby to itself? -PanSola 06:54, 9 April 2007 (CDT)
 * Yes. --Fyren 07:54, 9 April 2007 (CDT)