Talk: Earth damage

I'm curious - does anyone know what ebon damage is good for? I mean, fire, for instance,. works well against ice elementals. What's ebon good against?

At the very least, it's a type of damage most creatures are not prepared for. i.e. most people will wear armor resistant to fire dmg or physical damage. --Karlos 17:28, 10 Oct 2005 (EST)

Anything in PVE reliably use earth damage? I'm assuming the Stone Elementals will; what else? --Nunix 22:04, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Stone Summit elementalists (not ice golems) use earth. It seemed like many Maguuma creatures used earth, but it's been a while since I've gone through Maguuma. Scytale 22:10, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Though it is not labeled as such, Aftershock does cause earth damage. Since I had been curious I verified this myself with Mantra of Earth active while fighting Sand Drakes in Diviners' Ascent. DaveK 20:50, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Earth Resistance/Vulnerability

moved to Talk:Cold_damage#Cold Resistance/Vulnerability

Usefulness in PvP?

I've noticed whilst perusing PvXwiki that in many cases it lists the weapon choices as follows: Vampiric for spiking, Ebon for Warriors, Rangers, and Paragons, Zealous for energy management. Any clue why this is? Matrim 00:45, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Vampiric gives more damage than anything else for spikes, Zealous should be obvious, but I've never understood why ebon was the preferred either. Someone said because people often bring shields against Fire/Lightning damage, but not against earth. Which doesn't make sense, because if everyone is supposed to bring ebon bringing fire/lightning would give them the advantage. --Shadowcrest 00:48, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

That's probably because outside of Ebon weapons, earth damage is almost never dealt in PvP. 00:50, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Also, Ebon is NEVER used against Rangers, you use Sundering for them, cause you DO NOT want to use elemental damage against them --Gimmethegepgun 00:52, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Warriors have higher armor versus physical damage. If you are fighting a warrior, switching to an elemental weapon is often beneficial. Ebon tends to be chosen because people are less likely to have ebon shields than cold, fire, and lightning. As far as I know, it doesn't matter that much. Ebon however shouldnt be used against Rangers in place of a physical weapon because they have more armor versus elemental and against paragons it really doesnt matter. they have equal phys and ele armor. —♥Jedi♥Rogue♥ 00:55, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Ok, thank you, and I said ranger cause I thought there was another in that list, I just couldn't think of it. Obviously it wasn't ranger, I thank you all for clarifying this issue for me. Matrim 00:59, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Against Paragons you'd probably be better off using a Sundering like with the Ranger anyway, because then sometimes you'd get better damage off on them, and the ebon won't change a thing. Basically ebon is for Warriors exclusively --Gimmethegepgun 03:28, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

"Earth Damage"

How exactly does something take damage from earth? I mean fire damage is heat, icy damage is icy cold, lightning is shocking, earth damage is physical, but considered a elemental. A rock hitting you should be physical damage for example. Its just always bugged me is all.-- 09:07, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Then what damage do you take from Ray of Jugdment? UV Light damage? :P --- -- (s)talkpage 09:22, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Well holy damage is well holy, from gods. Chaos is afflicting the mind, shadow/dark is evil spirit energy assaulting you. But "earth damage" doesn't really have a fantasy involvement. -- 09:32, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

You could be stoned out of your head ;) --- -- (s)talkpage 10:01, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Holy hell, right as I started typing, my screen goes black, comes back in some godly small resolution, goes black again, and back to normal! And then it tells me it will restart in a couple minutes to update. Happened twice now as Im typing.

Anyway, that would be chaos still, I gotta see if my computer is stoned now tho.- 3 times...- 10:07, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

If you fall from a tall building, when you hit the ground you are taking Earth Damage --Cobalt | Talk 11:15, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

That's physical Blue.rellik 11:29, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

And getting cold isn't physical? I don't follow. Avalance 11:30, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

The damage done to your body from falling off a large building is the same as getting smacked with a hammer, just on a larger scale. I was using the terms used in the game, physical = blunt/slashing/piercing etc etc Blue.rellik 11:34, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Actually, falling would be armor ignoring pure damage, even plate armors not gonna help then.

Thank you for missing the point Blue.rellik 12:00, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

No offence but, that was more of a joke, and if you read below you will see that I haven't.

But yeah, in terms of magic vrs being hit earth damage doesn't make sense to me.-- 11:39, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

I died from falling twice in EQ2 today RT 11:39, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Play a fae/(evil fairy name I cant remember) or a scout then. Why do I remember that...? I think the flying carpet mounts kept you from taking falling damage too, not sure tho.-- 11:41, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

I had a mount at the time - which meant falling grace didn't activate RT 11:43, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Actually I'm pretty sure it doesn't, anyways I think fairies, scouts and one of the mystic buffs are the only thing that will really save you from a fall. What level/class are you anyways?-- 11:45, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Think of it this way: The magical aura surrounding the earth projectile gives it power beyond physical possibilities (A rock thrown via magic would be more powerful than one thrown with your hand), that's what "Earth" damage is, I guess. Zulu Inuoe 12:27, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Actually falling from a tall building isn't physical damage..well, clearly it is, in as much as the harm is definately physical...but then so is fire damage. However, if the earth was not there, then you would not fall as there would be no mass, therefore no gravity, ergo, it is earth damage ¬_¬ --Cobalt | Talk 12:31, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

There is a difference bettween the release of energy (Fire or Lightning) or the absorbtion of energy(Cold) and the use of energy to move mass and cause harm(Physical). Gravity is a force, so is your arm slinging the hammer, so yes, falling from a building is Physical damage, and so is hitting with a sword. It's not about the damage it causes really, it's how it was caused. Not the force in use, but how that force was put into place. There's no -clear- distinction from Earth damage and Physical damage as of yet. Zulu Inuoe 09:15, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm guessing that "earth damage" is defined as physical damage which uses or originates from dirt, rocks, the ground, etc. I can't think of a single Earth damage thing which could not be called physical. (T/C) 09:50, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Thinking scientifically, there's no much difference between earth and physical damage, comparing a thrown rock to a blunt hammer. Of course there are things like Magnetic Surge... But after all, it's just a game with magical elements. =) J Striker 10:00, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

I've always thought that earth magic could be defined anything happening without any phsyical contact or intervention. None of the spells could be replicated relatively well or quickly without using magic. Flechette 10:09, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Stop. Trying. To. Make. Sense. Of. Magic Blue.rellik 10:15, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Begone, we were happyily trying to make sense of logicalised magic till you came around. Flechette 10:17, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

If Copernicus had that attitude, we never would have discovered America! 10:18, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Amerigo would of. Flechette 10:21, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

I take that back, Karl Franz would of. Flechette 10:22, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

*Would have. This is harder'n college. 10:23, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Take out the "would" in your copernicus sentence and he wouldn't of helped either. Flechette 10:27, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

D: I was speaking ironically. I'm a history major. 10:30, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

"we never would have discovered America!"

and this is a bad thing? *flees*. Seriously though, why are we even debating the physics behind in-game magic, magic being a force, which by definition, does not follow the laws of physics. Also, if we say earth damage is just the same as physical damage, then you could argue lightning damage is the same as fire damage, as it is the resulting heat that would cause the most damage to you if you were unlucky enough to be directly struck by lightning. However, not wanting to kill this meaningless debate....dosen't one of the hammer skins have a stone head...is that earth damage o.O!? --Cobalt | Talk 17:16, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Magic doesn't follow the laws of physics? You and I have a bone to pick, my friend. I take the explination of Magic very seriously, almost as seriously as I take comedy, and that is no joke. Just to clarify: Nothing in my last statements were a joke or sarcastic. Zulu Inuoe 05:38, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Since im no longer sure whos joking or what sarcasm is, i will choose to respond to that statement. Surely the idea behind magic is that it allows the user to manipulate natural and supernatural forces in abnormal ways (not that there is a 'normal' way for supernatural forces to behave, lacking the crucial element of existence, as they do). Therefore, since the resulting behavhior is not normal, and does not conform to the normal principles of science, it defies the laws of physics and thus is referred to as 'magic'. While the effects of magic may conform to scientific principle - e.g. a rock flies through the air and hits someone in the face, causing them to die, the cause of this does not follow scientific principle - e.g. A guy is chanting with an odd golden symbol over his head. There is no visible force lifting afformentioned rock and then giving it enough energy to fly through the air in a specified direction and hit someone in the face with enough force to cause fatal harm. The force may have been provided by the magic, however this method of transferring energy is certainly not 'normal' and therefore it defies the laws of physics which state that energy can neither be created nor destroyed - the spell is giving the rock energy which has come from nowhere - therefore it is creating it. *rests case* --Cobalt | Talk 16:46, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Discussion necromancy. Physical damage is purely kinetic, while Earth damage is primarily psychokinetic: and, specifically, the kinesis of rocks and earth (geokinesis). Or to go with the /noshit answer, the difference between Earth Damage and Physical Damage is that one is reduced by Rangers and the other by Warriors. zzz. I win. :D 14:56, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

IIRC, in the early game there was no earth damage, and all earth spells did some form of physical damage. This would also explain why there was no Conjure Earth...

Conjure Earth: Run salt in opponents wounds. Target foe begins crying and suffers from Rust and Cracked Armor. --Macros 15:03, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

OMG broken. 15:06, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

lamest disscussion ever