Talk:Ward Against Harm

Other Damage
Has anyone tested this to see if its armor against all other damage or just armor against all other elemental damage or physical? | Chuiu 18:49, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
 * It's like watch yourself!--Life Infusion 15:46, 15 August 2006 (CDT)

I predict... this will make a return in HA due to the frequency of Searing Flames. Kamahl the Fist 16:47, 30 November 2006 (CST)


 * Thats a prediction? Its nearly december :p &mdash; Skuld 17:15, 30 November 2006 (CST)


 * Why would they waste their elite slot for this to counter SF? Extinguish me plx <>Spark 22:12, 18 January 2007 (CST)

Greater Conflagration combined with this would work yeah? Unless someone was using the nature ritual winter I mean? No problems that anyone can see? Faction 21:17, 1 December 2006 (CST)

When it says 50 armor it means 50 additional armor right?--62.252.128.28 16:10, 3 December 2006 (CST)


 * LOL. That'd be painful.--Silk Weaker 05:10, 12 December 2006 (CST)
 * Anyone using this skill? looks like the most worthless elite I've ever seen...and keystone signet..--Shady 14:18, 14 December 2006 (CST)
 * I honestly think this exists solely to make Hell's Precipice easier. BigAstro 13:37, 22 December 2006 (CST)


 * It's the elite version of "Watch Yourself!". In other words, a waste of an elite slot. 213.84.230.131 11:05, 25 December 2006 (CST)


 * Not really. &mdash; Skuld 11:22, 25 December 2006 (CST)


 * it actually is pretty decent, 24 bonus armour amounts to someting like a 34% damage reduction from all forms, pretty decent i'd say. A viable non ergey storage elite for any water magic eles 88.106.131.8 11:10, 8 January 2007 (CST)


 * just had some fun with it killing "The Drought" in that nightfall mission (can't remember name). Use it in conjunction with a ranger with winter to firstly eliminate the 50% dmg bonus The Drought and all the droughtlings get vs you and secondly provide (along with ward vs elements) a huge damage reduction to everyone inside both wards. Shame greater conflagration doesn't effect elemental dmg too :P I just stuck all 3 skills on a ele hero 88.106.131.8 19:04, 8 January 2007 (CST)

How effective is this mixed with greater conflaguration? -Isidore Robespierre
 * It has the potential to be useful, but requires committing the elite slots from two characters. Note, though, that greater conflagration does not have an effect on elemental damage, so no additional benefit would be noticed when fighting non-fire, elemental damage. --[[Image:SmallMapleLeaf.jpg|User:ImbrilShadowfire]] Imbril Shadowfire  22:07, 18 January 2007 (CST)

I've always really liked this skill. It's hard to use, as there's very few Water skills that it synergizes with, but I've run it just for kicks in PvE a few times and it's prevented a wipe or two. If you make a hero bring Greater Conflag, it's better, for reasons which should be obvious and have been adequately stated above (not that WaH + GC is anything new, of course, but it's a lot easier to fit it onto a hero's bar than to convince a party member to bring it), particularly in higher-level areas. None of what I just said is any new information by any stretch of the imagination, but I'm just expressing my support for it. On a somewhat related note, I love Keystone Signet. You want worthless elites, haul out Archer's Signet, Shared Burden, Unyielding Aura, or Scavenger's Focus. Then we'll talk. Zaq 03:16, 7 February 2007 (CST)

Creation
If this Ward was indeed created by Aziure, I think she wasted her time. Come to think of it, no foes in Pre-Searing deal Fire Damage besides Charr Fire Callers and Bandit Firestarters. Also, the foes that attack Aziure during the quest deal cold Damage. I still find this skill Overall, useless... But given the proper conditions and allied skillsets, it can be one hell of a life saver.. --MagickElf666 23:52, 1 May 2007 (CDT)

Uh... maybe she was preparing it for the Searing, but didn't get finished in time. It would help against big frickin fireballs falling from the sky, no? --65.185.196.228 15:10, 7 May 2007 (CDT)


 * It's fairly obvious why she was developing a ward against fire damage. They were fighting the Charr, after all, a race that worships fire gods and uses fire for just about everything. Hashmir 19:58, 7 June 2007 (CDT)


 * Then comes the question: How did a tree in the Shiverpeaks learn this skill? - [[Image:Ayumsig.jpg]] Ayumbhara [[Image:Ayumsig.jpg]] 13:19, 27 June 2007 (CDT)

Related Skills
Really now, how is this related to WY and Shield's Up? This is a ward, the other are shouts. This is a effect that works as long as you're inside it. Those are unremovable (outside of death). There's more but those two points were the main ones. I nominate them being removed --Blue.rellik 05:52, 27 June 2007 (CDT)
 * Armor bonus is relatively similar to "WY!" and they only affect those within a certain radius. WAH is also unremovable except for death or moving outside it. --Kale Ironfist 06:06, 27 June 2007 (CDT)
 * That's silly. WY is a adrenaline skill, this is not. WY gives a flat rate and once it's been applied, it doesn't matter where the player goes it will still stay there. This will not. They only relation is they protect the party and they give roughly same armour level (which is two related points). With that logic someone could say penetrating blow is roughly the same lightning strike, +damage and sundering bonus (nevermind everything else is different). And that's just WY, SU is even less related --Blue.rellik 07:07, 27 June 2007 (CDT)
 * That's an exaggeration and you know it (Penetrating Blow has to hit, and the damage it does ignores armor, whereas Lightning Strikes' damage IS affected by armor). The overarching reason why they're related (at the time it was put in) was that it gave an unconditional armor bonus to those within range, and it couldn't be removed by foes. If you want to remove them, go ahead, but at the very least try to look at it from both sides. I have no idea why "Shield's Up!" was ever put there in the first place. --Kale Ironfist 07:32, 27 June 2007 (CDT)
 * How is it an exaggerated? WAH and WY's only relation is that they give an area wide armour bonus and even then it's iffy since one of them doesn't matter where you go and the other does. One of them gives bonus against one element and the other doesn't. There are much more things that are not similar than there are similar. In my example their relation was that they both did sundering damage, this case the only relation is they both somewhat give bonus armour. In my case penetrating needs to hit, in this case you need to stay within the ward to get the bonus, as you can see the only similarities between the skills is also conditional. With logic used here then Dolyak signet should be similar to Obsidian Flesh, both slow the user down and give a nigh-unremovable armour bonus. --Blue.rellik 07:52, 27 June 2007 (CDT)
 * You're proving my point here. THAT is the relation used when it was placed in the related skills list. As for Dolyak Signet and Obsidian Flesh, is there similarity? Yes, very much so. Does the fact that they belong to a different subcategory of skill types change their similarity in effect? No, it does not. --Kale Ironfist 08:16, 27 June 2007 (CDT)
 * And you're missing mine. Just because some skills do similar things doesn't mean they're related. Fireball and Chain lightning are both AOE ele spells that are best when the enemy are close together but that doesn't mean they're related --Blue.rellik 08:27, 27 June 2007 (CDT)
 * Fireball and Chain Lightning aren't in any way similar OTHER than the damage dealing. They deal different damage types/amounts and deal it differently (Chain Lightning bounces from one target to another until it either hits 3 targets or there isn't any within it's jump range, whereas Fireball deals damage wherever it lands, and splashes to whatever the AoE is). At the very least use an example like Liquid Flame and Ice Spikes. --Kale Ironfist 09:15, 27 June 2007 (CDT)
 * WAH and WY aren't in any way similar OTHER than unconditional armor bonus. What's your point? - Auron 09:27, 27 June 2007 (CDT)
 * (resetting indent) My point is that both skills give an armor bonus within an area from where the skill is activated, give relatively similar unconditional armor bonuses for similar attribute ranks, which is why it was there in the first place. I'm not against removing it, but at least have reasons for why they're being removed. I don't believe skilltype is enough cause for removal, that's all. --Kale Ironfist 09:51, 27 June 2007 (CDT)
 * You're missing the point from my example, if there are some monsters together then fireball and CL will hurt most of them. Yes one does fire damage and one causes exhaustian and w/e but that's MY point as I'm using it as an analogy here. They're both ranged spells that hurt units that are close together and the similarities stop there. WY and WAH are armour bonuses in an area and all similarities stop there, one can be removed (move a few steps to the left), one is charged by adrenaline, one is a spell/ward while the other is a shout, one gives bonus against fire etc etc. There is only ONE similarity, everything else is completely different. --Blue.rellik 10:03, 27 June 2007 (CDT)
 * On the skill removal point, it's the fact that it can't be removed by foes that's more important than the fact you can walk right out of it. As I said before, I don't believe skilltype should factor into skill similarity, and the point on armor vs fire makes no sense, as both skills provide armor and this is an elite, so it should provide something on top of the armor bonus (yes, I'm lumping the effects together under the banner of armor bonus, as that's what they are, never mind the fact that the higher bonus is conditional on fire damage).
 * To clarify my point on skilltype, have a look at Endure Pain. Defy Pain gives an armor boost over Endure Pain, and is an adrenal skill instead of an energy skill. Signet of Stamina is a signet of all things, and has a clause to end if you hit with an attack, yet all three are linked together through the 'related skills' argument. The only thing you have going for the removal of "Watch Yourself!" is that it's not in the Elementalist line, which you've never stated. --Kale Ironfist 10:28, 27 June 2007 (CDT)