Talk:Skill/Archive 1

Hotkey Question

what is the hotkey that "shows off" the skill, i cant find it anywhere

If you mean holding CTRL, which causes a message to appear in team chat saying any action you press, then sign your posts by adding ~~~~, please | 72 {U|T|C} 00:36, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

New Skill Idea

I think that it would be a cool addition to the game if there was some sort of skill that caused the next skill you use to affect the whole party, and not just your target. It could be a paragon skill that you cast on someone so their next skill affects the whole party, or a no attribute skill that only works on the caster. It would have to have a long recharge, cast time, and cost a lot of energy for obvious reasons, but I think it would be a nice addition maybe as a faction-related skill like the kurzick and luxon ones are. Just something for you skill balancers/creaters to keep in mind :)

Skill Quantity Table Needs Work

The skill quantity table needs a little work. It isn't very user friendly for people trying to figure out whether they have all of the skills for a given attribute or profession because of the poor treatment of pve skills therein. Please consider reforming/adding skill quantity breakdown by attribute (which can then be compared directly to in game skill sort values).

"there is no dagger attack"

Blades of Steel: Dual Attack. Must follow an off-hand attack. If it hits, this attack strikes for +5...14 damage (maximum bonus 65) for each recharging dagger attack. Savio 12:53, 8 February 2007 (PST)

I guess its just a blanket term for lead, off-hand and dual. Not mentioned ingame anywhere else though.. >.> — Skuld 13:04, 8 February 2007 (PST)

Exactly. Each dagger attack is classified under the three types of attacks. Perhaps linking to something like "Skills that require daggers". — Rapta (talk|contribs) 13:07, 8 February 2007 (PST)

No, they give it that one mention and thats enough for me, make a dagger attack page imo — Skuld 13:08, 8 February 2007 (PST)

While we're at it, what about Ritual (only Ritual Lord refers to Rituals) and Touch Skill (nothing is explicitly called a touch skill)? Savio 13:26, 8 February 2007 (PST)

Reviving this discussion, should touch skills and half-range spells be included in the list? They're not defined skill types, but many skills do make reference to those kinds of skills. Savio 20:30, 10 February 2007 (PST)

Also, what about the skill type "Skill"? Skills like Troll Unguent and Throw Dirt come to my mind immediately as not belonging in any of the hierarchical skill types listed. Striken 18:25, 11 April 2007 (EST)

Skill is the root skill type which all other skill types are subtypes of. -- Gordon Ecker 03:02, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

All must start on Lead attacks then Off-Hand Following then a duel attack if you may. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:207.74.115.23 .

How about Golden Phoenix Strike? You don't need to have a lead attack before it. Just to proof you false. ;) I think dagger attack makes things quiet clear, even if this expression is not from ingame. Der moon 09:13, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

It's an empty supercategory like ritual. -- Gordon Ecker 09:46, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Tabular Data

Are the skill tables considered factual information? That is the skill/attribute spread 17..52 being 0..15? Lojiin 14:17, 8 February 2007 (PST)

Could you elaborate? The algorithms that calculated gwg skill tables were correct. ~ D.L. (msg) 14:38, 8 February 2007 (PST)

My question isn't one of correctness ;). If the data is considered factual then it does not fall under a license and can be copied over from Guildwiki. I don't think you can license a tabular format for presentation so that information could simply be migrated saving a certain amount of work. Lojiin 14:41, 8 February 2007 (PST)

Well, there was someone who created them. The FAQ states that the person in question would be the one to ratify the transfer, right? Well, in terms of templates, styles and margins, that tables certainly hold an artistic value... ~ D.L. (msg) 14:49, 8 February 2007 (PST)

The transfer only needs to be ratified if the material in question is subject to the licensing agreement which factual data is not hence my question. While there may be some artistic value to the tabular data its a basic presentation tool and I don't believe its subject to licensing. After all it can simply be stated that its the easiest and most logical way to present the data that I, or anyone really, came up with on my own. I believe its similar to copyright provisions that prevent copyrighting obvious useful things. Like slicing bread with a knife. Lojiin 14:57, 8 February 2007 (PST)

We agree. If you need my approval to copy skill tables from gwg, there you go. ;) ~ D.L. (msg) 14:59, 8 February 2007 (PST)

From what I recall in doing guides before, the specific formatting used to present the numbers is copyrighted by its author, but the numbers themselves would be property of Arenanet. Savio 15:01, 8 February 2007 (PST)

Skill list

User:Skuld/Skills list (posting so it doesn't get forgotten ;p) — Skuld 23:52, 8 February 2007 (PST)

Forgive me if I have have missed something. In this case I'm someone who doesn't really know where things are (OTOH in GuildWiki I do know where things are).

As of right now to get to a list of all skills I need to go through several pages from the main page. First I need to go "Professions:skills", then scroll down to the bottom of the page and see "see also:index of skill lists".

While there may be a quicker access, this is the first, easiest, and most obvious way to get there - and is what most web users will be looking for (my three main uses are skills, quests, and missions in that order). From a user standpoint it would be much better to have the skill list easier to find - at the least at the top of the page instead of at the bottom in the "see also".

From a usability standpoint you guys may want to reorder some information on the pages. No big deal adding an extra click if the index is at the top, but if I am confused for a bit (and irritated afterwards) then others will be also. Not that I am that great or anything - but that it isn't obvious one of the main uses of the wiki.

are we going to make a skills list similar to the one on Guildwiki? all the skills listed in a nice table? or would that constitute some kind of copyright complication? Avatarian86 13:43, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

It is a large enough change I do not feel I need to be the one to make it. If no one wants to do it and thinks it is OK, I will. But since it will be my first or second edit on both this or the other wiki it is more major than I want to do. Strcpy 04:23, 27 February 2007 (EST)

Yeah, without copy/pasting all of the coding from the other wiki, it would be a massive coding job...they had it set up such that the table drew it's info from the skill articles themselves...which sounds fairly complicated, and well beyond my knowledge of coding.Avatarian86 15:46, 4 April 2007 (EDT)

I am currently working on a new format to the skills lists that anyone can look at and make suggestions for improvement of by checking out my user page. Feel free to come and look!!Scars reminder 08:42, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Links to skills

Should there be links to all skills of a certain type on the skill type-pages? That is should there be links to all pet attacks on the Pet Attack-page etc.? I for one think this could be very helpful at times, but on the other hand it'll be a lot of links. What would be even better, in my opinion, would be to have a skill table with the skills of the type in question. Bottom line; there would be nice to somehow get to skills of that type from the skill type-page.Beppe 18:49, 28 February 2007 (EST)

Wouldn't that information get available through Categories? If every skill gets its appropriate Category assigned, the Category page would show exactly such a list. --CoRrRan 19:08, 28 February 2007 (EST)

GW:EN

Why does it say that there are ten skills for each profession included in Eye of the North. ANet never said that the 150 skills would be evenly distributed (i.e. They might give Paragon/Dervish more due to their lack of skills compared to other professions). Bottom line is: The information should be excluded until we have proof this is how the skills will be distributed.

[1] Says it will be spread across the 10 professions, so isn't it safe to assume that? — Rapta (talk|contribs) 21:27, 28 March 2007 (EDT)

Not to mention it has been even in every other campaign (at least where elites are concerned, I was too lazy to count all the regular skills) Unless the class was new, but eye of the north has no new classes, so I agree it sees to be a safe assumption --Lemming64 21:30, 28 March 2007 (EDT)

I edited the main article before reading these two last comments, but I won't revert my change for now. Soon enough we'll know for a fact whether the skills are spread evenly or nay, no need to make any assumptions till then. If one of you guys disagrees with that opinion, feel free to revert it, I won't kick and scream about it. :P --Dirigible 21:33, 28 March 2007 (EDT)

I love how in that article it says you need GW:NF to run it. They obviously didn't read the same press release I did.. --Lemming64 21:37, 28 March 2007 (EDT)

Additional skill costs

Should a mention of costs other than Energy cost be made in the Properties section? There are lots of skills that cost Adrenaline, HP (Sacrifice) or cause Exhaustion. MarkL 15:15, 3 April 2007 (EDT)

meh

why can't they just link their database to skills pages so there'd be no need for people to manually update the skills every time they change... then this wiki would actually be "official" :s --130.102.0.176 21:04, 3 April 2007 (EDT)

Because then we'd run out of things to do =P No, really, it's because that would be a total pain to code, and because this is a community-run site. Even though ArenaNet does pay for the site and support us in the back-end server-side things, everything else (more or less =P) is done by normal contributers. Even if they wanted to, it's not really feasible - too much work for too little gain. Once we have the whole section up and running, it's fairly easy to maintain. MisterPepe talk 21:11, 3 April 2007 (EDT)

Skill list templates

I have attempted to implement the skill box list template like guildwiki...but it is proven too complicated for me, or..just too much work.Lightblade 22:26, 9 April 2007 (EDT)

What is the life stealing icon that appears on the side

Some times when in arenas and pve on the side where what skills your being hit with appears. Sometimes this apears on the side Life stealing, you steal 0 health from your opponet. what is this. Is it a glitch or what i mean it does nothing literally.

When you are hit by a vampiric weapon, that life steal icon shows. It's slightly bugged, as it shows information from your perspective, rather than your opponents - for example, if you're hit by a Meteor, mousing over the icon on the side would give detail of the Meteor spell. However, as you weren't wielding a vamp weapon at the time, it read the data to be given as 0. Or perhaps it just read the default data, instead of a scaling data (again, a Meteor icon would show the 0..12 progression, but there's no such thing for life stealing). Armond 01:42, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

QRs

Quick Reference tables. Please. I just went to look for some Warrior skills and the page is nigh-useless - I don't want to have to click over a hundred skills to try to find seven that I like. Unfortunately, I have no idea how to do this, or if it would count as guildwiki copyright violation. >.> Armond 01:44, 17 April 2007 (EDT)

Skill Lists

The way the skills are sorted out now you need to click on each individual skill to see what it does, this makes browsing through skills almost impossible now since nothing is going to "catch my eye" because I cant see what it does. Just an opinion and I realise how much effort has gone into this so I know you cant change it just cause of me, but for skill browsing sake I would prefer to see all dicriptions pet proffesion on the same page 86.153.40.248 12:13, 23 April 2007 (EDT)

Unfortunately, we don't use the template-system for skills like Guildwiki does. This results in the problem that QuickReference lists are a lot harder to create. As far as I know there hasn't been a useful way found to do this. But I agree, the quick reference list like Guildwiki uses is much more useful than the Skill lists we currently have. -- CoRrRan (CoRrRan / talk) 07:41, 24 April 2007 (EDT)

Actually, that "unfortunately" shouldn't be there in your sentence, CoRrRan. :) The decision to not use templates was taken because there are better options available to us. There's two different ways to do these quick reference lists, the onlyinclude method (another discussion), and the DynamicPageList method, both of which allow results of the same kind as the template system, while avoiding splitting the templates from the actual skill pages. The only reason these lists haven't been started yet is because no one has gotten around to it yet, I guess. Might want to bump either of those discussions (or both), to get some activity going there again. --Dirigible 08:20, 24 April 2007 (EDT)

Hehe, well, I used that term, since AFAI(Knew) there was/isn't another way. I had no idea that the DynamicPageList thingy would be our savior. (Or the includeonly/onlyinclude-tags.) Hey, I'm just a wiki-noob! -- CoRrRan (CoRrRan / talk) 08:37, 24 April 2007 (EDT)

DPL can do much more than just skill lists (check out the examples that Rezyk gave on that page). No one is bothering on supporting/objecting to it being installed, though. It's sitting there half-forgotten. =\ --Dirigible 08:40, 24 April 2007 (EDT)

Hmm, I think you're right. It looks really promising. (Although for someone just clearing the first wiki-hurdles, some of the code looks quite complex (looking at the DPL-website example's).) As far as I understand, DPL is able to retrieve the parameters that are relevant from a page and parse it into whatever you want it to parse into. I guess we would be facing one major hurdle for skill pages: every description is just written as is, it's not a part of the "skill infobox" and thus doesn't hold a parameter. But I think we'll have to kickstart that proposal. -- CoRrRan (CoRrRan / talk) 08:54, 24 April 2007 (EDT)

Uh...yea I dunno. I would at least like a picture on there...extra info isn't really important, but a picture of the skill at the least would be kind of nice...--Exodus 19:39, 2 May 2007 (EDT)

i dont know anything about wiki code but i am a fanatic user of data bases liek the skills one and other from different games and i know that the skills section as it stands is almost not a toolbox liek the origional guildwiki's one was. in that one there was energy costs/recharge times/ activation times and the skill discription. it realy needs to be there and i cant see why it would be soo hard. it may even be an option to jsut cut and paste the whole section as it is public information. basicly i wont even bother using the skills section on the official wiki because it jsut isnt a usefull tool. i may as well go to the temple of balthazar and look in the unlock section.124.190.3.146 01:43, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, GuildWiki has better skill quick references. IIRC our quicrefs are on hold until we get DynamicPageList installed, allowing transclusion. -- Gordon Ecker 04:49, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

noticed that the skills lists have been changed to be liek the old wiki. thanks to whoever did it.Jesus 12:32, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Skill Bar thingy

Some one please move the bar that lists the classes so that the bottom of the box lines up with the underline on "Properties"

Thx

Cost-based skill types

Should sacrificial skills be considered cost-based? Er, then again (refuting myself), the sacrifice occurs after the spell is cast, allowing you to kill yourself if the sacrifice is more than your current health, so it's not necessarily a cost but instead a side-effect. I suppose it could be argued either way, though. Whaddya all think? -- Mafaraxas 23:42, 1 May 2007 (EDT)

I admit, I have no idea what to make of the cost-based paragraph. From its current set-up, I think sac and exhaustion spells should be listed there. ~ dragon legacy 00:46, 2 May 2007 (EDT)

Greywind trainer

Someone has added Captain Greywind as a skill trainer for a bunch of Prophecies monk skills, anyone know if this is correct or not? I thought GuildWiki had the correct list, but I have no chance to check what he offers before it's unlocked since I have them all. - Anja (talk) 03:27, 3 May 2007 (EDT)

I don't think those edits are correct. Still, I can't disprove them either. ~ dragon legacy 06:43, 3 May 2007 (EDT)

No, me neither. Why would someone discover that now of all times, Prophecies has been out for a loong time. I think Aberrant has reverted the most of the edits already. - Anja (talk) 06:47, 3 May 2007 (EDT)

These sections are in need of major cleanup

These sections are completely messy and if no one objects, I'll organize them. Jack 03:31, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Why 15?

Maybe I am missing something, but why do all the skills have the 12 point and 15 point columns bolded? Wouldn't it make more sense to have 12 and 16 bolded since 16 is the max that you can get without a skill or +1 item?

I assume that it is because 15 is the max you can get without a headpiece, but that just seems silly since everyone wears a headpiece in some attribute or another...I always look at stuff and think that I am seeing the max and then realize that it is one off. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User: 161.28.144.43 .

This has been done, since 12 is the maximum for secondary characters to achieve and 15 is the value used in the game to calculate all other values. Attributes at 0 and 15 are also used in the Game Update notes by A.Net. --  (CoRrRan / talk) 21:01, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

(edit conflict) There's also even more explanations over here - anja (contribs) 21:04, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

I suppose I see why it has been done, but it still seems silly to bold the non-max 15 as opposed to the max 16. Could the 16 values be listed in another color? Maybe a vertical line that would indicate "This is the general max." IMO, they really need something to set them off as max. BTW, I am not complaining about how well everyone has done putting this site together, just trying to help make it better!

New Sunspear Skills

Wasn't sure where to put this, but the new sunspear skills are here AT(talk | contribs) 22:52, 15 June 2007 (UTC) Before we add these, how is attribute progression going to be handled? As far as I know, current templates use 0..15, but these are dependant on sunspear rank, which is obviously 0..10. AT(talk | contribs) 22:59, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

I was thinking maybe we could add them to the skills list at the side as a separate page to see all of them compiled under one location in the skills section of wiki. Elites have one so maybe we can do the same for the sunspear skills.Scars reminder 08:45, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

What about something like list of title-based skills? --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:Gordon Ecker .

There's Sunspear skill at the moment, but nothing for Allegiance rank afaik AT(talk | contribs) 09:10, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm. Looks pretty good. May I suggest a reference to what profession each belongs to. This way you don't need to open each skill page to see it. It can all be right there.Scars reminder 09:20, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Something like this? AT(talk | contribs) 09:29, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

LOL. Thats pretty cool, but the skill picture is a must too.Scars reminder 09:58, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

See above - List of title-based skills looks great! Gordon has it covered, it seems :p AT(talk | contribs) 10:08, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Dang. I completely missed that one. And yeah it looks awesome. I know the editors like to keep everything as close on appearance as possible, but I wonder if they could slip that one in because it does look good.Scars reminder 10:35, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Title-based skills or PvE-only skills?

Currently we have two lists: PvE skills and Title Based skills. This page links to the later, but I would rather have a link to the former: I think it looks more like the other skill pages, it would be easier to update to the "Quick Reference" mode once that mod is instaled, and I think it's more intuitive to find those skills when looking for PvE only skills than when looking for Title-based skills. But I haven't worked in either of those pages, so I don't think confortable in making the change myself without hearing what other people think first. Erasculio 13:48, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

New Class Based Skill Lists

The new class based skill lists display too much info and functionally are inferior to the old way. I suggest making some quick reference skill lists that display only the skill name and icon by chapter for each class. It is much more useful. Many players know what the skills do and just need to pick out a few skills to check break points on stats. Now it is just a clone of GuildWiki, it used to be better. -Warskull 21:36, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

How is a quick reference list which actually displays useful skill information functionally inferior to one with nothing but the name, icon and campaign? I agree that we should also have simple lists like the ones we used to have, and I think that "list of X skills" should be a simple list, with the DPL quickrefs at some other article name, such as "summary of X skills" or "X skills quick reference". -- Gordon Ecker 02:03, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

If you liked the simple lists better, use the categories :) Start at Category:Skills and work your way down to what you need. I don't think we need simple lists since the categories are easily browsable. - anja 07:09, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

You don't need to know the description and stats of every skill. When you are making a build you are going to use 8 skills and you have a pretty good idea what those skills are. You then can click into the skills you are actually interested opening them in new tabs. The old skill lists fit on one to one an a half pages, the new skill list is five or six pages worth of stuff to sift through. Hence, bringing back the old skill pages as quick reference wouldn't be bad. Just have both of them available. -Warskull 17:47, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

If you know the skills already then finding them in the category or using search will work just as well. Those lists are meant to be references for those that aren't familiar with skills. If you already know the names then you don't need a list - just type it right into the address bar. - BeX 00:59, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

You guys just don't get it at all. Pull up 5 skills using the new lists or the above methods you mentioned. Then load up one of the old list and pull up 5 skills. Ask yourself which was faster. You had a very efficient and well organized list and threw it completely away. -Warskull 02:36, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

And then use the category, there are no images, so it's a lot faster :P poke | talk 23:06, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Skill Quantity

Althought they are called the same and can't be equiped at the same time, both Kurcixk and Luxon skill can be obtained. So the number of skills in Factions is 20, not 10. MithranArkanere 12:37, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

I added a note. -- Gordon Ecker 22:35, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

I'd rather change the whole table. You can't equip two elites at the same time and there are other 'copycat' skills, but they do count in your skills lists. If you sort 'by profession' they will both add up to the number of skills of that profession. I don't think that having the same name it's reason enough to leave them out, since the gw client already counts them as separate skills. MithranArkanere 03:14, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

I changed the common skills listing to better incorporate PvE-only skills and so that it is consistent with the format that the profession-based skills have. It looks really ugly, and you can't really alter it without changing the whole table itself. Also worked on the note that was added and introduced the 10 other factions PvE only skills onto the table. It might be worth the trouble to make a note saying that all PvP skills can be used in PvE, but not vice versa. Just for anyone that might not know. I just dont know how to put it.(Terra Xin 05:50, 2 November 2007 (UTC))

I made a final fix. 13 Nightfall PvE skills were counted, but there are only 10 profession, 2 common and 1 elite PvE skills. It seems that Lightbringer title effect was counted, but since the EotN title effects were not counted and no one of them appear in the Skills and Attributes panel, I removed it. Now the maximum is 1319. A shame to lose the round number, but now the table is perfect. MithranArkanere 23:25, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

10 + 2 + 1 = 13? I still get it to 1320 when I count, I may have done something wrong though. - anja 17:16, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Luxon/Kurzik Faction Skills

→ moved from User talk:Gaile Gray

Will the faction required to max these skills ever be reconsidered? I don't think I remember seeing even one person happy with the unreasonable grind to max them. I know the grind is optional but the current time requirement to gain a high rank in these skills seems very unreasonable considering you need to farm faction very frequently to do so. Maybe retain the current title system but have the skills max out at rank 6 or 8 or something. Dancing Gnome 05:34, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

What about the people who have already attained the max rank? What would happen to them? -- Salome 13:33, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

There have already been plenty of suggestions. Like: Leave the title as is, but do not require max title to get the max benefit from the skills. --Xeeron 13:43, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Did you read my post? I said the title stays the same, but the faction skills are re-adjusted so at rank 6 or 8 they are max, anything above that is just the same as it is now, only it doesn't increase the effectiveness of the skills. The point being most players won't ever see rank 4 let alone rank 12 for these skills - because the grind is too extreme. 58.106.236.159 05:16, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Most of these skills have been designed so that they are still effective, even at rank 1; you don't need them maxed any more than you need a superior rune over a minor one. --Maestro Ed 19:20, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Skill Totals Table

The table needs a little work. It isn't very user friendly for people trying to figure out whether they have acquired all of the skills for a given attribute/profession etc. because of the poor treatment of pve only skills.

I don't think we can make the table any bigger without turning it into a mess, but more detailed, profession-specific skills could fit in the profession articles. -- Gordon Ecker 03:07, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

PvE Skill Images

I'm making a site about GW, but the fansite kits on guildwars.com does not include any PvE skills. Could the wiki provide me a .zip or something alike with the PvE skills of both NF and GW:EN? If not, does anyone know where I can find them, besides saving the images of every skill here on the wiki? Thank you. BlazeRick 17:47, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Question about Progression

Since there is no page titled "Progression" this seemed like the most logical place to bring this question up. Why do all the Progression charts for skills go all the way up to 19 when I can't seem to raise any one attribute past 13? Once I reach 12 I can no longer add my attribute points to the attributes but can get in one more by having modifiers, but these are non stacking.--Worldly Tutor 05:02, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Runes can bring attributes up to 16. Awaken the Blood and Glyph of Elemental Power provide a +2 bonus to certain attributes. In PvE, it's possible to temporarily raise attributes to 20 by using several consumable items or a combination of consumables and blessings, and monsters can have attributes as high as 20 in Hard Mode. -- Gordon Ecker 06:25, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Recharge time?

I changed the Recharge time section to more closely match the Recharge time page. The old one was pretty lame - it claimed you could influence recharge with knockdowns and interruption, neither of which actually do (even though interrupts can also disable). The stuff about adrenal skills is increasing out-of-date, so I took that out as well. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:Louai (talk).

The part about adrenal skills was not out of date, over 90% of adrenal skills still lack recharge times. -- Gordon Ecker 06:02, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

I've re-added it, but I've replaced "nearly all" with "most". -- Gordon Ecker 06:20, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Buy unlock skills

When I started with a Me in Prophecies, I saw that I could buy skills that were unlocked in the PvP account(not Elites), maybe make a note of it.--ShadowFog 15:39, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

This is already mentioned on Skill trainer, and as it only applies to trainers, I don't think it is necessary here :) poke | talk 19:34, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

WHY LESS SKILLS FOR THE NEWEST PROFESSION??

(its a question asked ..to A-net maybe)

Im wondering(always have) about the distribution of skills between the 3 chapters of GW - Prophecies have arround the 140-142 skills for each professions. Faction-professions have only 110 skills and with Elona, its getting even worse with only 85 skills for the 2 newest professions?

It seems like a very UNeven distribution to me - yes.. they can use the other skills as sec-profession, but to me the old professions still hold a upperhand by having more skills to choose from than the new professions!! ..we r talking about 55 more skills?! And as the skill-nerfs keep comming, the skills for the new profesion gets less and less powerfull(wont call them useless), making the difference(140>85) between the new and the old professions even bigger(the new skills was maybe a little overpowered from the start, but I was thinking that it was because of the 55 lesser skills?)

Maybe its the explanaition why most ppl still prefer playing the old profesions(W, E, Mo, Me, N, Ra) for the new one(A, Ri, D, P)??? - Yes many do play the new professions, but if u look closer its allmost allways in combination with one of the old professions(the new professions have there biggest succes as SEC-profession - who wonder?!)

My big question is.. Would'n it be more fair if ALL the professions had 140(or 85, or 110) skills total?!?

Looser--81.161.189.146 10:15, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

I highly appreciate your thoughts. You shall people for a "petition". I'd surely sign it, thus I'm a great fan of dervish. Thanks for mentioning it 86.101.55.163 16:29, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

the reason that the new proffessions have less skills then the old one is quite simple.
there only 40 core skills (35 non-elites, 5 elites) for the 6 core proffessions,
all other skills are linked to one specific campeign, a Warrior does not have more skills then a Sin by default,
but if you own all campeigns you indeed do have significent more skills.
Just look at the Skill Quantity Table, in NF warrior have: 35 core non elites, 5 core elites, 15 nightfall-only non-elites, 10 nightfall-only elites.
A Dervish has: 60 nightfall-only non-elites & 15 nightfall-only elites.
So, Elite quantity is equal, but a Warrior has 10 less non-elites. (similair situation with Factions) - (84.245.21.57 12:07, 23 August 2008 (UTC))

With 22nd May Update

Was thinking, how will the separation of the skills will effect the skill pages on wiki, do we have to create a PVE, PVP version of all affected skill? or we will add 2 description per page? Personally I would prefer 2 pages per skill with the disambiguation page when the user type in the skill name. --MageMontu 19:35, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

See Guild Wars Wiki talk:Formatting/Skills#Skills with separate PvP versions :P -- Brains12 \ talk 19:39, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

oh, I should pay more attention to the recent changes page :P --MageMontu 19:41, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Eye of the north elites

can a list be made and then have it be redirected so we can see all the elites you can cap in eye of the north?75.165.102.213 01:52, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

There's a list at List of elite skills by Eye of the North capture location, but it's sorted by area, not by attribute. -- Gordon Ecker 04:40, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

i reaized this like 3 seconds after i posed that sorry75.165.102.213 09:54, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Printing Skill Tables

I found in some cases, it's useful to have a paper copy list of skills for a particular profession. So I copied and reformated the list of Elementalist skills as a test and it works well (at least for me ;-). It comes to about 7 double sided pages, 3MB. I have 2 questions for all of you:

1. Would it be useful to have a link to a printable version of skills by profession?

2. If so, is it possible to upload files to the wiki other than image files? (e.g. PDF)

Luke1138 18:25, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Question on Secondary Skills

Can a character, through their secondary profession, learn all of the skills of that profession? Can a E/Rt learn every single Ritualist skill? If so, this would be helpful to mention on the skills page, as I'm sure I'm not the only one wondering. SaikoGW 13:28, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it is possible for a character to learn skills of any profession and therefore eventually learn every player skill in the game. This is implied by under Learning and unlocking skills: "Switching secondary professions" and "...If the sum is 1319, the character has learned all available skills. Feel free to amend the page if you feel it needs to be stated more clearly. - TheRave 13:33, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Metal skills?

Does anyone use this term? Searching for "metal skills" or "metal skills" and "guild wars" barely gets any hits, and most of those are only tangentially related to Guild Wars. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 08:23, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Possible Bug?

I've noticed just recently that when attempting to use a skill on a non-existant opponent while running, you'll pause momentarily a few moments after the No Opponent dialogue pops up, resume running, then completely stop a few moments later. Any idea or explanation? I'm doubtful that I'm the first to have ever noticed this. 128.255.195.88 21:06, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

How do I get skills for my heroes?

I'm not entirely clear on how to get skills for my heroes when those skills aren't available from any Hero Skills NPCs. For example: I just unlocked Olias and added him to my party; how do I get the Necromancer skill "Blood of the Master" for him? The skill trainers who have it won't teach it to me, and the quest that awards it won't give it to me, because I'm an E/R. - 216.189.208.114 21:31, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

You can by them by changing your secondary profession to necromancer. If you have a Nightfall character, Profession Changers' services become available after completing Nightfall's fourth mission, the Hunted! quest and Building the Base: Prisoners of War. For Prophecies and Factions characters, you have to either complete the first four Crystal Desert missions or the fourth Factions mission (either of which will also unlock profession changes for Nightfall characters). See the profession changer article for details. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 03:52, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Or, of course, by unlocking the skill via Balthazar faction or the PvP-unlock pack from the store. --Nkuvu 05:06, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Allegiance skills

The note under the skill quantity table says that you can't equip any of the skills of one allegiance along with any of the skills of the other one. The Allegiance skill page on the other hand says that skills from both sides can be combined, as long as it's not the same skill. Which one is correct? Zeptozoid 22:45, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Elementalist form and Djinn henchman/hero

Per that lst idea, keep in mind the skill balancing won't work well. Bad idea. But my idea to spice up Guild Wars 1 is to have the Elementalist change form like the Dervish but into a Djinn. Depending on what elemental attunement skill he/she uses, they are granted 36-55 seconds of Djinn form (ex:see air attunement skill, nothing changes on the skill bar just add "turns into a Sapphire or Diamond Djinn....etc.) Also, since the arrival of M.O.X. how about a Djinn hero/henchie? --The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.2.247.107 (talk).

Where to start... Ok, first, sign your comments. Second, feedback goes in the Feedback portal. Finally, there's no need to say the same thing in multiple places, but it would be appreciated if you put it in the right place (see Feedback) in the first place. ETA: Actually, one more thing, new comments go at the bottom of talk pages. -- FreedomBound 13:06, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Campaign, profession and attribute

IMO each of these traits should have its' own entry. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 11:09, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

If you really like. However, I see it as a hierarchy where the skill first selects a campaign, then a profession from that campaign, then an attribute from that profession, so they are interdependent and narrowing. (If you do choose to split them up, that order is probably best. I'll drop by with the ol' My Opinion of a Rewrite Stick later.) | 72 (U|T|C) 13:59, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Misleading link in "By profession" sidebar

The bottom link in the aforementioned sidebar, labeled "All", actually points to List of elite skills by profession, which is inconsistent with the behavior of the other buttons in that sidebar, each of which points to a page containing all skills that match its respective qualifier (Warrior, Ranger, ..., Common) regardless of elite status. It seems there is no master list of skills, (presumably because such a thing would be unwieldy and slow-loading,) but I would suggest either changing the link to point to such a page, or else changing its text to "All Elite". If no one has any alternative opinion within the next day or so, I'll just change the link. --Mercenary 09:00, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Needed edit fix

Someone changed all professions to say "I'm so glad that the internet aollws free info like this! Warrior", the easy way to see this is on the skill page but it effects the entire site. Can someone with more wiki experience fix this? --The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.87.255.138 (talk).

The vandalism has long been fixed, it was just a cache issue, purging the page fixed it.–alistic 23:26, 24 July 2011 (UTC)