ArenaNet talk:Skill feedback/Ranger/Poison Tip Signet

A. von Rin's Discussion
This proposal would also allow it to be useful with Volley/Barrage--74.61.209.219 01:26, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
 * And this would be bad? A. von Rin 02:22, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Would this be good?--Underwood 02:27, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Better, yes. At a normal Wilderness Survival attribute level you wouldn't poison 1 foe but 2 (considering every single arrow triggers). Wow! Not really a problem, just a bit better for primaries... A. von Rin 02:31, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
 * But if I'm a primary ranger I would use expertise to reduce the cost of apply and not have to re-apply Poison Tip Signet every other attack. But idk that's just what some people would say. I really don't care what happens to this skill.--Underwood 02:33, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Apply doesn't work with barrage. That is also likely to be the reason that Poison tip signet does not: They dont want rangers keep an entire group poisoned with a single skill. --Xeeron 13:11, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Technically, this does work with Barrage / Volley, but since it only last for a single attack and barrage / volley are considered multiple attacks, only your prime target is effected Dargon 18:06, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

I like this suggestion. Dark Morphon  (contribs)  16:08, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
 * referring to Xeeron's point, bah, If that is the reason, we rangers can already do that. --  nuke7    [[Image:Nuclear7 sig image2.jpg|11px]] 00:36, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
 * This skill is fine as it is, it costs no energy. You get what you pay for.
 * Following this logic every single signet had to be useless, but I heard some signets were good... A. von Rin 21:42, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
 * What he means to say is "The effect is dilute because it is free, and I think he was referring to Xeeron. -- NUKLEAR  [[Image:User NuclearVII signature 3.jpg|19x19px]] IIV  14:03, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Seeing as this is an old topic and there really is no issue, I'm putting a deletion tag unless anyone objects.
 * The issue would be "fairly useless". I would argue in favour of keeping it. -- NUKLEAR  [[Image:User NuclearVII signature 3.jpg|19x19px]] IIV  15:00, 15 September 2008 (UTC)