Talk:Divine Boon

/Archive

Ordering
It might also be useful to note, that the healing from Divine Boon is applied before anything else ... this is very evident when using a spell like Word of Healing when the party members' health is just a tad below 50% ... the boon will put them over 50, and you don't get the bonus from Word.Geblah187 16:44, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
 * That has been changed a LONG time ago d-: -PanSola 01:49, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Oops I was thinking the Divine Favor bonus. Just verified the above claim is true using lv1 bone fiend.  But not sure whether this note belongs in Word of Healing or here. -PanSola 02:04, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Nightfall Preview Nerf
As of last night, Boon still had a 10s recharge IIRC. Has it been de-nerfed yet? --Lemming 17:03, 1 August 2006 (CDT)
 * No, none of the changes the patch notes said were temporary have been restored. (They never changed the Balthazar's aura description, but it's been 8s since the patch.)  --68.142.14.106 17:08, 1 August 2006 (CDT)
 * Phew. I was panicking after I saw that Balth's Aura's description said 10s again. Guess who didn't play smite over the weekend? ;) --Lemming 17:23, 1 August 2006 (CDT)

Reverts
Back and forth and no discussion hehe. Lets just say: Most people dont use P&H together with boon, because (even in the same attribute line) P&H is just a bad energy management skill. --Xeeron 06:28, 15 September 2006 (CDT)

I reverted bcos it doesn't even make sense. So what if it counteracts the loss of one pip - what about the main energy loss - the +2 cost to skills??? No reason not use an inspiration elite &mdash; Skuld 06:50, 15 September 2006 (CDT)


 * That is, 63 healed for 2 energy, just because thats not your style of energy management doesnt mean it's not a valid way of monking. I have been using boon and PnH together for a very long time, and I know many other monks who do also. I Don't have energy problems because all of my 5 mana heals are huge spike heals. IMHO MoR and OOB are a waste, and just because you disagree that is no reason to remove a note mentioning it. When I first capped PnH my first thought was: I can go pure monk and boon heal. If you want to fight about different healing strategies take it to a forum, Boon and PnH is a valid and usefull healing combo that is widely used and as such there is no harm in it being mentioned here. Mercurius Ter Maxim 15:09, 15 September 2006 (CDT)


 * There is much harm in mentioning it here - wiki no being taken seriously by such a poor suggestion :| &mdash; Skuld 15:11, 15 September 2006 (CDT)

You had no right in reverting that without talk. I don't know where I stand with RV1.. can anyone help here? &mdash; Skuld 14:18, 15 September 2006 (CDT)
 * Everyone, stop reverting. There are 5 reverts in the recent history. Discuss this first. The way I see it, yes you can monk with boon and P&H. I can also monk with breeze and the henchies do it all the time. Look, in GW, you can make a lot of different builds but I don't think we should list any suggestions except those that are extremely common and the general consensus of the community. If we list stuff like "well I've tried it and it works decently", then the skill articles will be filled with...less useful info. P&H is specifically designed for use on multiple monks. This comment only indicates using it for yourself. Thus, it is less useful. --Vortexsam 16:07, 15 September 2006 (CDT)


 * Please show your sources from GW devs showing that it was " specifically designed for use on multiple monks". If as I suspect you do not have one, your comment is just speculation, and as such you really shouldnt pose as an authority on the matter. Mercurius Ter Maxim 17:41, 18 September 2006 (CDT)
 * The same request could be made of your statement below "pnh was made for boon". Also, keep in mind that your statement "Finally this isnt the place for people to impose their opinions" applies equally well to yourself. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 17:44, 18 September 2006 (CDT)


 * I apologize for my comment. I have no "proof" of such designing and wrote something different from what I meant. What I meant was that P&H is best utilized by using it on multiple monks. If maintained on 3 monks (which is fairly reasonably possible), the net total energy gained by all 3 monks is 0.25 to 0.27 (attrb: 8 to 11+) times 3. So between 0.75 and 0.81 energy gained/second. That beats out MoR on level 12 (which monks won't have anyways) and easily beats out MoR level 10 (0.62). But what makes it so good is that it doesn't use up the elite spot of all 3 monks; only 1. So, the other two monks get to have monk elites or even more energy management with their own inspiration elites.
 * Again, I'm sorry with the wording of my comment. Honestly, though, with a name like "Peace and Harmony" and a skill icon showing two hands holding each other, it seems rational that Anet wanted you to use this skill on more than 1 person. But, that kind of rational reasoning may not be apparent to anyone or everyone else. --Vortexsam 18:36, 18 September 2006 (CDT)
 * There are a bunch of charts at energy management, but that page is a bit of a mess. Anyhow, 3-monk PnH looks good on paper, but it has its problems. First, in any sort of semi-difficult environment (with enchantment removal) your energy gain will be nil. Either PnH will be removed or you'll waste energy trying to cover PnH. Second, it's not energy on demand. If you're using PnH and out of energy, you're just sitting there with maybe a sig and a +15 set, which you really don't want to use. A monk with inspiration skills can just target an enemy or ally, grab more energy, and go straight back to monking. -Savio 01:39, 19 September 2006 (CDT)

Comparison tables
Mercurius, take a look at these two tables (copied right from the skill pages of P&H and MoR), especially the "energy per second line". --Xeeron 16:22, 15 September 2006 (CDT)


 * Yeah, suggesting a trashy elite is bad. A much better note would be to suggest Mantra of Recall or Energy Drain for elite energy management. Also, a link to Boon prot would fit nicely in there too. -Savio 18:46, 15 September 2006 (CDT)
 * Added a couple links, removed the P&H note as Mercurius is the only one arguing in favor of it. --Fyren 19:05, 15 September 2006 (CDT)


 * --Where is the healing loss table from wasting attribs on insperation? and where is the 10 cost for mor, the extra 5 cost for CoP (you mentioned boon prot) or the fact that 1.) you need to be in agro range to use energy drain, and 2.) it requires target foe to have the energy required in order for the gain to be the expected amount. Finally this isnt the place for people to impose their opinions. pnh was made for boon.


 * with a 20% enchant mod at 16 divine favor it is basically a FREE pip of energy the difference between 12 and 16 DF for boon is 12 + 13 thats 25 healed.


 * Perhaps if there were a table that actually took all variables into account yours would be a valid argument, as of now it's just more groupthink. Mercurius Ter Maxim 17:36, 18 September 2006 (CDT)


 * I shall try to help make things more clear. The initial 10 energy cost is factored into the energy gained/second for MoR (net energy gain divided by 21 seconds). Secondly, using CoP for MoR is not common. Usually, MoR runs out on it's own. CoP is not suggested with MoR. As for E-drain, not quite. Spell range is just outside aggro range. You can start casting spells on enemies before they will notice you. As for not having enough energy to drain optimally, well, that just means they might have zero energy which hopefully means less damage for you to heal. I haven't played Mesmer much but I've never had a problem draining in PvE.
 * As for healing loss, I don't think you miss that much. Consider this: you can have 12 in Healing and DF and a little bit leftover, or 11 in DF, 10 in Healing and 10 in Inspiration. Yes you'll lose more than 25 on your healing (I can't do the calcs right now) but consider that if you use P&H on yourself only, you'll gain 0.3 more energy/second (nearly an extra pip, by a rough estimate) with MoR.
 * The reason we don't have a "healing loss table" is because no one made one. These tables were already calculated and used for reference.
 * Do you understand more clearly now? This is a place to discuss, not impose. --Vortexsam 18:48, 18 September 2006 (CDT)

Merging talks

 * The following post and the initial replies were merged here from User_talk:Xeeron

Please give a response to the variables I have mentioned here: Talk:Divine_Boon If you are able too. If as I suspect you are not, I suggest you ponder your practice of mindlessly repeating the ideas of others and enguage in some independent thought. &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mercurius Ter Maxim (talk &bull; contribs) 18:02, September 18, 2006 (CDT).


 * Sign your comments by using ~
 * If you have come to my talk page to insult me, get lost. I am already in a very bad wiki mood without someone trying to be witty about insulting me.
 * The reply you wanted:
 * Where is the healing loss table from wasting attribs on insperation?
 * Going without inspiration means going 12/12, going with inspiration means going 11/10/10. So you lose 1 attribute point of divine favor and 2 attribute points of healing. The tables are at the respective articles, go look them up yourself.
 * and where is the 10 cost for mor?
 * It is in the table if you know what the term net means.
 * the extra 5 cost for CoP
 * CoP is a great spell, but you are not forced to cast it to regain energy. Therefore it has no negative effect on MoR.
 * you need to be in agro range to use energy drain, and 2.) it requires target foe to have the energy required in order for the gain to be the expected amount
 * Therefore I recommended MoR, not drain energy. The later only makes sense in PvP.
 * Finally this isnt the place for people to impose their opinions. pnh was made for boon.
 * I was to let that stand without comment, but maybe I should point it out: Who is trying to impose their opinion here?


 * PS: Yes be petty and oppose me becoming admin because I disagree with you over P&H energy. That definitly will teach me a lesson, haha. --Xeeron 18:18, 18 September 2006 (CDT)


 * Aw, this makes my comment look like ugly. Even though it's the same thing, this one is much nicer. Poo. --Vortexsam 19:07, 18 September 2006 (CDT)


 * Yeah thats why I opposed you and that little quip isnt petty in the slightest. /sarcasm. I think you have a shitty attidude and from reading your comments in many places I also think you are somewhat of a parrot as I mentioned in the original talk page. Now lets all continue to attack me while dismissing my comments and talking about me attacking people. Mercurius Ter Maxim 10:23, 19 September 2006 (CDT)
 * So, it's okay for you to ignore the issue and attack people, but not okay for them to do the same. I see ... --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 11:19, 19 September 2006 (CDT)


 * Wow, this is just my 2 cents but I read all the applicable pages to this little "issue" and... is it just me or does this guy seem to get more and more childish with each new post? He takes something that isn't personal at all at the start and twists it into something that is.  lol, this guy needs a wikibreak more than anyone else.--Azroth 18:33, 18 September 2006 (CDT)


 * Xeeron has gone to the trouble of making a table to try to illustrate his point, that's well beyond the call of duty and is still happy to continue the discussion despite your personal attack. You're welcome to vote however you like on our RFAs, that's your right and your own business but it certainly doesn't help your argument, only sticking to the relevent facts, evidence and arguments at hand will. --Xasxas256 18:39, 18 September 2006 (CDT)

1.) the table was pre-existing. 2.)I still havent recived answers that make any sense just parroted nonsence 3.) there was no attack as my honest opinion of Xeeron is expressed in the comment, and its stated in civil language.

Do you actually monk without any runes? Mercurius Ter Maxim 10:23, 19 September 2006 (CDT)


 * To some of your comments to date ...
 * You've dismissed the contents of the table as pre-existant and calling it simply groupthink. When additional text is added to clarify your questions on it, you don't reply to the statements calling them "parroted nonsence ".
 * Your failure to grasp the information presented does not make it nonsense. If you are unable to follow the data presented in the text and tables above, ask for clarification rather than dismissing it outright.
 * Your statements "mindlessly repeating the ideas of others and enguage in some independent thought" and "you have a shitty attidude and from reading your comments in many places I also think you are somewhat of a parrot" were attacks, admittedly a minor ones.
 * You claim other peoples comments are speculation and demand evidence, but you also make the statement "pnh was made for boon" with no evidence.
 * Your statement "Finally this isnt the place for people to impose their opinions" applies equally to you. You have stated an opinion that is not supported by the majority here, yet you are trying to impose it.  If you want to change things, convince others that your argument is stronger than the evidence they've provided.  If you have the stronger argument, people will see your side.
 * Making a vote on an RfA simply because someone has a difference of opinion from you is petty and childish in the extreme.
 * --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 11:19, 19 September 2006 (CDT)