User talk:BDJace

How to...

Resign your comments from when you just used an IP signature? .-. - ~BlakDoxa~ 17:28, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

For unsigned comments you need to check who made that particular unsigned edit from history. Then you put {{unsigned|username}} after that edit/comment. In case it's anon IP, you should put {{unsigned|username|ip=true}} instead. However, if you signed your edits as an anon IP, there's really no need to re-sign them (you can if you want but it's tedious and there's no quick way, I haven't heard of bots to be used for that either). As long as the edits are signed, or marked as unsigned with that template, it's all right. I hope this answers your question. Mediggo 08:00, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Problem

Since I have no clue what to do about signing on IP signatures... (Dynamic IP) I'll be re-writing this here.

Using a Warrior (race doesn't matter) equipped with a Sword and Axe. The Swordsmanship trait is equipped.

Now JUST with the axe attack skills Dual Strike and Whirling Axe you attack something. These skills are both off-hand AXE skills but they involve using BOTH weapons. The Swordsmanship trait states that "Your sword attacks cause bleeding" so I'm wondering whether sword hits are counted when using the off-hand skills.

If the sword hits are counted for each strike under Whirling Axe, for example, you can reach the maximum stack of bleeds easily. A stack of bleed could be applied either by "per hit" or on alternating hits between axe and sword on Whirling Axe.

The questions are, Do sword hits also count on the off-hand axe skills and if so, will the Swordsmanship trait activate on every hit applying bleed? - ~BlakDoxa~ 04:19, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

I am very much inclined to say that only every sword attack connected during both skills will cause bleeding, as would any other sword attack traits. There is a difference between off-hand skills and off-hand traits; the trait Swordsmanship affects the weapon, and not the skills, whereas certain other sword traits affect the skills and not the weapon. Nothing is conclusive until we can test these things, of course. :)

On unrelated note, welcome to the wiki! - Infinite - talk 09:23, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome! I heard that Anet is doing something with the traits system again, but that would have been nice to confirm though! - ~BlakDoxa~ 13:39, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Guild Conglomerates?

Dedicated guilds are now faced with the fact that members might dislodge and run off to other guilds, given this new multi-guild joining system. I'm thinking these guilds will take measures to prevent this by dividing their guild into smaller parts (PvE, PvP, Racial, Location) and recruiting as many people as they can. These smaller parts will have their own leaders but still run under the umbrella of the parent guild.

I really think something like this will happen...something like mega guilds. - ~BlakDoxa~ 22:37, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

To me it seems like the role of guilds is shrinking, as there are no guild halls, towns to control or alliances (so far). Only rivalry there can be between guilds is World PvP. Looks like many people are also going to unite many of their characters under the same guild. I always though hoarding members is silly. I preferred to stick with people I know and recruit new players and tutor them. How guilds will develop in GW2 really depends on community, and admittedly, that is quite unpredictable. Mediggo 07:05, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

I've read quite a few articles about what people think on the new guild system and I've changed to having a more positive view on it. It just requires more effort for a guild that wants to encompass the PvE/PvP aspects of the game vs guilds specifically made to take on only one. - 98.67.48.21 14:21, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

What...though I was logged in... - ~BlakDoxa~ 15:46, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Difference Between Races and Species

I don't get it... Why do people distinguish between Norn and humans thw=e same as Charr and human?? From what I understand Norn are human too in the same way there are Tyrians...Canthians...Elonians...and even the dwarves! The only differences between the are their respective cultures. As for the rest of the so called "races" they are just really separate species. I just not understanding this hang up people are having with the Norn and the other human races. - 98.67.48.21 14:21, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Bleh, thought I was logged in for this one too. =/ - ~BlakDoxa~ 15:48, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Norn aren't human at all they just look like large humans. --The Holy Dragons 16:15, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

So they appear physically like a human...but we count them more in the same way we see a bird or even a horse? That's not making a lot of sense... We have the Charr (which appear like giant horned felines) and the Sylvari (litterally plants). But it feels that's saying the Norn are more similar to the Charr than the Humans! I don't know whether they are like a sub species or something completely on their own. All the other races have fine, distinguishable points but between the Norn and the Humans there's nothing at all?? - ~BlakDoxa~ 21:55, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

The norn are anatomically different from humans (though they may not look it). Also, when crossing norn with human, there will not be offspring. This puts them biologically apart enough to justify them being different species. The term "races" is ArenaNet's house of style, but they obviously don't mean actual races in the proper sense of the word. - Infinite - talk 22:03, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

hu·man·oid [hyoo-muh-noid] - having human characteristics or form; resembling human beings. Venom20 23:58, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Think the difference between a cougar and a houscat: superficially similar if you ignore size, but not the same. It's possible humans and norn are in the same Family (which would put us about as close to them as to apes), but without a much more detailed understanding of norn internal physiology, we wouldn't even be able to conclusively call them primates. Long story short, scientific classification is a lot more complicated than one thing externally looking like another. Plus humans can't turn into bears. Lil difference there.

Also, since no one's mentioned it explicitly: Tyrian dwarves aren't human either. - Tanetris 00:23, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Also, no one ever said that the Norn are more similar to charr than they are to humans. It's simply that charr=/=norn=/=human. They are three very different "races"/"species" and while norn are similar to appearance to humans, the difference between human and norn is equivalent to the difference between human and charr. Aqua (T|C) 01:41, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

I'm getting confused here... So it's better to think of them as a "human skinned" species? I don't of any lore that points to their origins. There are the Kodan, but they don't give a lead either. Far too obscure. I don't think it's right to call them shape shifting humans either but more like a shape shifter species on their own. Haha, kind of reminds me of vampires! Although I not sure whether that is a good or bad analogy. - ~BlakDoxa~ 03:57, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

As Venom said; humanoid. A F K When Needed 22:25, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Problems with Thief

It seems that ANet is trying to mash together archetypes into the Thief... [1]. Such as a pirate, robber and assassin, but it doesn't look to be working out that well... They are really hacking away at their Thief and sowing other ideas on, to the point where is it even a thief anymore??? -- ~BlakDoxa~ 18:16, 19 November 2011 (UTC)