Talk:Reversal of Damage

This would be TOTAL leetsauce if it hadn't been linked to smiting -Thomas 15:41, 26 September 2006 (CDT)
 * I disagree. [[Image:Chuiu Me Icon.png]] (T/C) 15:50, 26 September 2006 (CDT)

This totally rocks for Air of Enchantment-Smiter, another nice spammable spell that even increases damageoutput. Thumbs up by anonymous

Comparison
Vengeful weapon for monks--Life Infusion 19:37, 28 September 2006 (CDT)


 * Not quite, since vengeful heals the ally as well, vengful weapon would more accurately be a combination of both this and RoF together, with the (slight) benefit of not being removable from enchant removal.


 * Also, recharge is way to long. Vengeful is only 3 sec recharge AND it steals life. --GTPoompt 20:12, 8 October 2006 (CDT)


 * However, Vengeful doesn't prevent damage to the user. It may steal life, but it's possible to kill someone with Vengeful Weapon cast on them. VegJed 20:36, 8 October 2006 (CDT)


 * Imagine catching an Axe Spike with this. People go into Frenzy to deliver the spike, so if you catch Eviscerate or Executioner's Strike, you'll easily deal back 160 damage (If you've got smiting maxed out) since those skills typically hit for like 100 damage. Vengeful Weapon, however, won't be doubled by Frenzy because it's life stealing. --Shadowleaf 02:44, 10 October 2006 (CDT)


 * this triggers divine favour, that's a pretty major plus. Try RoF on an x/mo and see what I mean.Phool 03:34, 24 October 2006 (CDT)

8 recharge, ouch. Soa > This. Otherwise, it looks pretty good even with low smiting. Too bad on the recharge.--Silk Weaker 07:14, 16 January 2007 (CST)

The recharge is now 6. Hopefully, this skill will see more use.67.20.226.28 20:46, 5 April 2007 (CDT)

I would have liked to see atleast a 4 on recharge *sigh* Zulu Inuoe

Useful even at 0 smite, especially when you see a boss' Spirit Rift rising on a clueless tank Mocax 23:23, 28 May 2007 (CDT)
 * Sounds like you're the clueless one with that comment. 68.2.201.35 20:13, 4 June 2007 (CDT)


 * Umm... no... boss's spirit rifts are massively powerful and this negates ALL damage. Mind the NPA --Gimmethegepgun 20:58, 4 June 2007 (CDT)

Me/Mo Smiter + MoR any1 ^^ ./C_E

THE Abaddon Killer
Experienced it yesterday. That skill alone can kill Abaddon in the last mission of Nightfall. Team just skills the two mobs on the right and left (not the middle one), walks back near the bridge and uses this skill to return the damage taken and Abaddon slowly kills himself oO --Birchwooda Treehug 06:35, 1 July 2007 (CDT)

Notes: disambiguation
I have a conflict with the current wording and would like further input to ve/cla-rify the resultant of two opposing skills that should by right not work in combination due to the effect of death not being targetable and that the damage SHOULD be inflicted accordingly. I am talking about Destruction, just tested in Scrimmage and the damage was NEGATED after a full 30/s of duration. Maybe its just me, but having read the highly informative descriptions of the effects and triggers, this should simply not be triggered. And hence the wording of the first note of this page : "This spell will only trigger when the damage is being dealt by a foe that can be targeted.". This to me is wrong because clearly the Death or Forced Death of a Binding Ritual, specifically in the case of destruction, is targetable albeit spirits when they die leave no Exploitable Corpses, hence not targetable. Destructions wording is to the effect of after its death dishes out AoE. More concisely: "When this spirit dies, all foes in the area take 1...4 damage for each second the spirit was alive.". Clearly the spirit by this description is dead before AoE is dealt, hence NOT TARGETTABLE by return fire of RoD, hence... cheers ./C_E - Quick Edit, this was raised over at Talk:Destruction by The Painballer.

Your opinion on a change to this skill ...
Would it be overpowered to make this skill more spammable, say, put it on a 2 sec RUT? Currently, Smite has no real spammable skills. It would be nice if this change were implemented, to make Smite builds more viable. A damage reduction would be reasonable in this case.

Nerf
No longer stops all damage...ouch...--Ryudo 18:57, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Now that it doesn't stop all damage, they BETTER lower the recharge... *grumbles*Paragon City 23:49, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
 * /agree. Zulu Inuoe 19:01, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
 * To further explain myself: Vengeful Weapon for comparison isa much better option because A)It is in an overall better line, B)At same attribute levels (Let's say 12) Vengeful Weapon -Always- effectively has a 102 Health change, whereas Reversal of damage depends completely on the enemy. Why is this important? Well because more often than not your enemy will trigger Reversal of Damage with 5 points worth of damage. I do realize Reversal obtains the Divine Favor bonus, but as it stands Vengeful is much better solely because of the shorter recharge, even if it can at maximun do 122 points of health exchange (Which is not effective since it's damage rather than life steal) it is not worth using because of its recharge time and skill line. Make this Recharge in 4 plx. Zulu Inuoe 02:02, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

"Reversing Death"
Today (A few minutes ago) I was in the Rata Sum looking for a party to do Magus Stones in Hard Mode, this Monk joins my group (You know the type, black armor, chaos gloves, full cock suit) and while coordinating builds I noticed he had a LoD/Protection build, but had 9 points in Smiting and had Reversal of Damage. I asked him why, and he says something like "It gives more DP", which as to my understanding makes no sense, so I asked him what he meant by DP. He went on about "Don't you know what it means?" "Do you know what RoD does? Then why are you asking" "gl finding another monk" (With much worse grammar by the way) and leaves. I keep kept asking in PM and he then said "its euro for death" and so now I'm wondering what in the world the guy means by "gives more death" and I ask him. As usual he says "learn more pve builds pls" and sets me on ignore. Could ANYONE explain what the hell just happened? Zulu Inuoe 18:44, 6 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I think he meant that it does damage --- [[Image:VipermagiSig.JPG]]-- (s)talkpage 18:45, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
 * He probably meant DPS. And he was dumb. [[Image:Felix_Omni_Signature.png]] 19:22, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Very. Because, you know, everyone has points to split Heal/Prot/DF, have them effective, and still put 9 in smiting. --Shadowcrest 19:24, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks mates, I thought the Europeans had made some new secret weapon for a second there. Zulu Inuoe 09:54, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
 * 'If you can't dazzle them with brilliance - blind the with bullsh*t.' Is I think, the philosophy you encountered there 09:59, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh my god what a complete and utter moron. I wish I got my hands on him Blue.rellik 10:13, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
 * That guy gives Monks everywhere a bad name. Aggro [[Image:Isk8.png]]  Sk8  10:40, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Human monks are over rated anyways, I'd take the silence and quick reaction speed of talkhora and dunkoro over some PUG anyday.69.145.194.67 10:43, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
 * AI monks are better but I never use them. They burn energy like it was paper Blue.rellik 10:54, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Heroes are decent, but have too many flaws, as stated by Blue Rellik. Being a primary monk myself, speed and management the key.  Watching other pugs trash monk kind just pisses me off. Aggro [[Image:Isk8.png]]  Sk8  11:04, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

(Reset) Healing Hero monks are fine, and very competent as long as you give them skills that are straightforward and inexpensive. (I recommend Ethereal Light and Signet of Rejuvenation among others.) However, Hero prot monks have serious energy management issues, because the skills you most want on a prot monk (i.e. Protective Spirit) are both energy intensive and quick to recharge. This is a bad combo for heroes. For hero protting, you're probably better off with an N/Mo with generous Soul Reaping and Signet of Lost Souls, although I personally prefer a defense-minded Paragon hero... Arshay Duskbrow 11:48, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
 * AI monks only burn through energy if u build them wrong. You know, a program or machine is only as good as the human who built it, stop blaming artificial intelligence :) For instance: I use a HB build on tahikora that uses cheap 5-energy spells and inspiration magic side-dish (p-drain, leech sig, etc), and she can manage her energy very well, while having extraordinary speed (HB and I use essence on vquishes/dungeons) and reflexes. Protection can be done the exact same way, but I rarely take a prot monk these days, my usual paragon (me), rit and monk configuration works fine NightAngel 11:51, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
 * You guys didn't say anything I didn't. Pure heal monks aren't 'good' but they're good enough for most of PvE so there's no reason to think hero monks are bad Blue.rellik 11:59, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Sigh. the old "oh, any old crap is good enough for pve". So tired of this stupid cliché. Yes, you can "win" missions, dungeons or whatnot with any crap. I'm concerned with doing it WELL. Very quickly, very efficiently and with minimum consuption of any kind of extra and with as little death as possible (ideally, none at all). In HM. And for that kind of goal, blue, "good enough" won't cut it. it has to be "good". Ok? sigh. As if I didnt hate pvp enough....NightAngel 12:13, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I have no idea what the hell you are rambling about because you are describing how I do things Blue.rellik 12:27, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Riight. Cause your AI monks burn through energy like paper, so you only take human monks. That's pretty damn efficient right there :) NightAngel 13:03, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually no. I tkae henchmen monks Blue.rellik 03:05, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Competent humans often play monks, but humans do not always make competent monks. [[Image:Felix_Omni_Signature.png]] 03:13, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
 * To blue: "AI monks are better but I never use them" "I tkae (sic) henchmen monks". Ever heard of logic, blue? Last I checked, henchment were considered AI :)) lol. NightAngel 16:07, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Kill me now. I said 'AI Monks' instead of 'Hero monks'. Kill me now for this heresay and blasphemy Blue.rellik 03:27, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

ANYWAY, we all agree there are some retarded Human Monks out there, and ANet could have done MUCH worse on the Monk A.I. Zulu Inuoe 22:33, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
 * So your argument is that henchmen monks have good energy management, and heroes don't, even though they presumably use the same A.I engine. Therefore, what you're saying is that you can't build a monk hero to be at least as efficient as a henchman, let alone MORE efficient. Ouch :) Oh, and it's "hearsay". :) Which, by the way, makes no sense at all on your sentence, it means "rumor". NightAngel 11:13, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Enough. Can we all drop this now? Everyone has their own opinions on Heros vs Hench vs Human and we could argue all day and night about it, but the only thing we would agree on is that everyone has there own prefernces. Himm Taeguk  (T/C) 12:01, 10 January 2008 (UTC)