Talk:Caretaker's Charge

From GuildWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Some kind of cheap selfheal with a destructive side-effect, not a real damage spell. --Parabellum 04:12, 29 September 2006 (CDT)

No you woulnd't expect it to be, but it does lengthen the combination chain with Channeled Strike and a channelling item spell. Consider this as a transition skill that guaruntees the use of your next skill, hence a popular choice for constant pressure. (Terra Xin 10:51, 7 October 2006 (CDT))
It's a decent skill for keeping up a string of channeling skills since it essentially casts for free with an item in hand. Kessel 02:05, 8 October 2006 (CDT)

Has anyone else noticed that the descriptions for this and Offering of Spirit may be mixed up? --Wil 01:30, 21 October 2006 (CDT)

I agree that Offering of Spirit is confusing, where is the strike aspect? But Caretaker's Charge looks correct.
Logic being: when you siphon, you move something from one place to another but there is no loss, with this skill 51 health is lost somewhere and gained elsewhere and 5 energy is lost and gained so no net loss, just a movement from one place to another (siphoning). --Heurist 04:58, 21 October 2006 (CDT)
Yeah that logic would make more sense than Offering of Spirit would. It has its relatiions to spirit siphon as you make one thing happen at the direct result of another thing happening. The only question is why Offering of Spirit is named the way it is? (Terra Xin 05:16, 24 October 2006 (CDT))
The way I see it, while Caretaker's Charge does work with it's current description, it would also work with Offering of Spirit's description. Offering of Spirit works with Caretaker's Charge's description (much better than with it's own). If they were switched they would both make sense instead of just one of them. I hope that made sense. --Wil 16:36, 24 October 2006 (CDT)

Update[edit source]

Now called "Caretaker's Charge" and gives 7 energy while holding an item. Damage dealt remains the same.

Location?[edit source]

Does anyone know where to cap this yet? If anyone finds out, please post it asap, thanks! -- BrianG 19:51, 3 November 2006 (CST)

I feel bad for him[edit source]

This guy looks like he's really pukin' very badly. Bad luck for him.—Cheese.jpg Cheese Slaya (Talk) 01:12, 11 April 2007 (CDT)

It's the other way around! He's sucking in some, I dunno, pure Energy? He's gonna ned some serious cough drops after spamming that for a while. ShidoSig moebius2.gif 12:00, 7 May 2007 (CDT)
Actually, I'm thinking that this guy is sucking away my bandwidth...no wonder my internet is so slow...--Manbeast15 14:51, 28 May 2007 (CDT)
I think he's just eating noodles to take care of himself xD --Tomoko's Cookie.jpg (talk)
IMA CHARGIN' MAH LAZER! Chilos
SHOOP DA WHOOP! Zulu Inuoe 06:57, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
I'm very surprised that blue rellik or someone of the insane caliber hadn't said that yet. Flechette 08:24, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
Are you saying I'm not insane? I'm insulted my friend. Zulu Inuoe 08:47, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
It depends, as gaspode once said, mad is frothing at the mouth, insane is frothing in the mind. Flechette 09:14, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
That would explain why my ears are always backed up. Zulu Inuoe 12:52, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
He is actually firing is laser...

Silly renaming notes[edit source]

The renaming notes are contradictory. What was it renamed from? Issa Dabir 14:00, 15 April 2007 (CDT)

Fixed. Deleted the "Spirit Strike" line. It was the old name of another elite skill (source). --Battleguard 07:29, 25 May 2007 (CDT)

don't know how you fixed it cause it still said "Spirit Strike" under trivia... I renamed it to Syphon, the correct name. Rcollins779x 18:11, 7 June 2007 (CDT)

Renewing memories?[edit source]

This isn't an item/weapon spell... Silver Sunlight SSunlight.jpg 13:40, 7 May 2007 (CDT)

Yeah, I'm dumb. Whoops. ShidoSig moebius2.gif 22:51, 8 May 2007 (CDT)

"Gain 5 energy and x health"[edit source]

This isnt really very important i was just curious but does this mean its gain health as in aura of faith etc wouldn't effect this?

Presumably, however, ANet has been known to screw up with their descriptions --Gimmethegepgun 17:38, 15 December 2007 (UTC)