GuildWiki has been locked down: anonymous editing and account creation are disabled. Current registered users are unaffected. Leave any comments on the Community Portal.

Talk:Direct damage

From GuildWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

I'd have to agree that the effects of Immolate would be called DD-then-DoT based on the dialects I've been exposed to. (I admit to some uncertainty about DoT in Guild Wars since GW has two types of DoT: repeated damage over time, and health degenerations, and sometimes both at once from the same spell!) However, depending on how word usage varies between other games and this one, I'd consider Flare to be a Bolt rather than Direct Damage since the Flare takes time to travel to its target and can miss and/or be dodged. At least this is how the damage spells were divided in Dark Age of Camelot, and I got the impression there that the terminology was imported from Everquest and had also made its way to Asheron's Call. Anyone know what term if any the Guild Wars devs use for the dodgeable ballistic projectiles including flares, staff and wand zaps, Glint's breath, arrows, etc? Saucepan 10:33, 15 Jul 2005 (EST)

Well, in GW, I can't say I've heard anyone use bolt, but I can't remember much use of DD or DoT, but I would assume everyone would know the latter two. It could be useful to separate the auto-hit, no LoS spells from ones like flare. But, if people in GW don't use the term 'bolt' it wouldn't go under the jargon category. --Fyren 06:39, 16 Jul 2005 (EST)
I haven't heard the term "bolt" used this way before either, but I sort of agree with Saucepan that some distinction could be made towards straight DD (which I would define as "inescapable" damage a la Lightning Strike vs. spells such as flare or Lightning Javelin, which can miss. Maybe it is as easy as emphasizing this in the spell description?--Jackel 06:58, 16 Jul 2005 (EST)

As far as I can remember, DD and DOT was, in Everquest, the two ways spells delivered damage, regardless of the fact that it may take time to get there, and regardless of the fact that spells always hit, or had a chance to miss, hit, and perhaps get resisted. Of course, terms do change meaning over time.

Question about definition[edit source]

From the current reading of the definition, I conclude that storm spells (fire storm, meteor shower, chaos storm etc) are not direct damage. Is that the intended implication? -SolaPan 01:27, 27 March 2006 (CST)

With the classic definition, they'd be DoT. I'm unsure if any older games had degeneration-type "smooth" damages at all, so DoT was usually like "X damage every Y seconds." --68.142.14.36 11:00, 27 March 2006 (CST)