Talk:Deep Wound

I have a feeling this article may be a bit confusing, especially the part about including the damage from Deep Wound. I'd appreciate if someone could take a look at it and see if it makes sense, and change if it doesn't. Dunno if it's just me, but when I write something and changes and reads it a lot, nothing sounds right after a while. Beppe 14:01, 5 March 2007 (EST)
 * Makes sense to me, though that may be just because I play a PvP monk =P I'm not sure if we should add a mention the 33% healing reduction cap here, but it might be a good idea. I fixed a couple small grammar things, but, as far as readability is concerned, I'm probably the wrong person to ask, since I wrote that particular article =P Pepe talk 14:06, 5 March 2007 (EST)

As a first time reader and relatively new to GW, it is a little confusing for me.

Regarding max health / actual health, the line "The health lost is also removed from your current health which is why a Deep Wound can be seen as a damage of 20% of maximum health until it's removed." Does this mean that if, for example, I have 200/400, then suffer a deep wound, deep wound not only reduced my max health but also my actual health by 20% - to 120/320?

Bullet 3 is confusing, as it seems to contradict itself. "Deep Wound can never kill you by itself; you will always have at least one point of health regardless of how much health you have lost. If, after being healed, your health is still below zero including the health removed by Deep Wound, however, you will die. Health regeneration won't kill you, but you will only gain health when you reach positive health, including the health removed by Deep Wound." How can you always have at least one point of health and have health below zero at the same time?

Colossus 15:16, 3 May 2007 (EDT)Colossus

useless
tbh, why bother with DW when you can do MOAR damage with instead of spending time DWing Droks 19:03, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
 * With...pizza? Monks? Cadberry creme eggs? The suspense is killing me. Damage != (Translation: not equal) spike. -- Chaiyo Kaldor talk contribs 19:06, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Deep wound is essential with a spike, since its essentially taking off 20% of your health with one hit. A very nice condition to add, if you ask me. ~[[Image:User Wandering Traveler Oie User Wandering Traveler Sig2.png]]  Wandering Traveler  19:08, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Droks, Idk if you've ever applied a DW on a foe with ~40% maximum health, but it lowers it so much that 1 good attack skill or 3 normal attacks can kill that foe. It's the whole point of Shock Axe warriors, Reaper's Sweep etc. Ninjas In The Sky  18:06, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I can understand its usefulness in a spike, but what makes it so great when applying pressure? 145.94.74.23 09:02, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
 * The reduction in healing. You have to increase your dps by 25% with whatever skill you are taking instead of a deep wound to get the same pressure effect. That doesn't even factor in the added pressure of having to remove the condition. Misery  09:22, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
 * You still get the same amount of healing % wise. And when the DW is removed, you get the difference back too. So no, I still don't understand you reasoning. 145.94.74.23 22:10, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
 * The point is: even if it's a temporary health loss, it's a health loss, which means it's easier to kill. So, say someone is low on health at 200 health. If you apply a DW, the are down to 100 health, which means it's a lot easier to kill them. And as a bonus, they get less healing also. --JonTheMon 22:13, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, that's my point: they don't get less healing. They just don't get more healing. Healing someone with Deep Wound will make the same percentage of his red bar go up as someone who hasn't got Deep Wound. Deep Wound is useful in a spike, and when applying pressure, if you would normally get a person to a 100 health, you'd kill him instead. But it does not make enemy healers less effective percentagewise. 145.94.74.23 06:39, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Healing is reduced, but damage isn't. Essentially, you're increasing the damage:healing ratio on the foe by 20% as long as the Deep Wound is on.  [[Image:User_Raine_R.gif|19px]]  Raine   - talk  09:09, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I think many of you don't realize what this condition really does. That's ok I've questioned this before too because I didn't fully understood it. This condition is major thing and I don't think I'm overreacting when I say it's the most powerful too. What you can get from this goes like that: lets say you dmg 22 and you use a skill that does +18 dmg and DW. Let say your target got 500 max HP. DW is applied before any dmg is done so 500 - 20% = 400 then you add the dmg 400 - 22 - 18 = 360. So in the end of the day... You get a 140 dmg spike in 1 skill not only the fact that your target's max HP is now 20% lower and recive's 20% less from healing --Aartist21 19:12, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

"You don't need a followup to apply its effect"
In contrary to popular belief, you don't need a followup attack/skill to apply the effects of the Deep Wound. The only thing that changes when the target is hit again is what his health bar looks like. The one that get hit by the DW doesn't get his HP reduced when he is hit again, it is reduced just as the DW hits. The Health bar only updates for player X when player X hits the target again aslong as player X isn't the one being hit by the DW. Its the exact thing with skills that increase HP (i.e Endure Pain, Defy Pain, etc).

However since the DW can't kill a target by itself, you need to hit the target once again to kill it if that players HP has been pushed down to 1 due to the DW. -- Treasure Boy   Talk  10:56, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * No. The health decrease that deep wound applies doesn't actually take place until that player's health changes. So if you apply a deep wound to a target with 3 out of 600 health, that player's health will be reduced to -97, even though your target will see it as 1. But it doesn't count until an effect changes that player's heath. So, if that target is healed for less than 97 health it will die because the health reduction kicks in and it will be left with less than 0 health. Same thing with . The notes explain this clearly. --Boogy [[image:User Boogy Sig.jpg]] (Talk/Contributions) 11:06, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * What you see is only the health bar updating itself. A DW wont kill a target by itself, I know that. But the health loss from DW applies when the DW applies. Try it yourself with a guildmate. Have him/her use a DW skill on you and see how it goes. What you are going to see is the exact same as I did. When the DW applies you lose alot of health, and when he hits you again, you wont lose any more health than what the attack striked for. Say your friend strikes you with Decapitate and you have 60 AL. Decapitate will remove a total of 220 health if you had more than 500. If he then cast a spear on you and you take 3 damage, you will only lose 3 damage and nothing from the DW. However, your friend will see alot of health removed from you, but thats not really "health loss". What he sees is just the game updating itself. There is no health loss going on there. -- Treasure Boy  [[Image:User T-boy sig.jpg|19px|I love this skill :D]]  Talk  06:30, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

end confusion, dw DOES NOT kill
If a target is at 99 hp and deep wound hits without the attack doing any damage (rare case scenario), then they will only be reduced to 1hp, requiring a follow up attack to kill. 82.34.128.19 14:37, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Has anyone ever used a skill like distracting blow after a dw that lowers the health below 1? --JonTheMon 14:52, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Welcome to 2005. People have always run followup attacks. Eviscerate -> executioner's, KD -> crushing -> autoattack, wounding strike -> mystic sweep, etc. It's common knowledge that you need a followup, but deep wound reduces healing and is a free ~100 damage, hence people saying "deep wound kills." - Auron 14:57, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
 * WS doesn't need a follow up; the bleeding has the same effect (your 1 health degens away and you die, takes 1/6 of a second). So 40% health squishy (without DW, of course)?  FATALITY!  [[Image:User_Raine_R.gif|19px]]  Raine   - talk  18:33, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
 * WS needs a followup because you never wait to use it. You spam it on recharge and you spam the other attack skills until the target drops because you're maintaining deep wound on the entire opposing party. You never play wounding strike like eviscerate, only hitting key targets - you deep wound anything and everything. - Auron 18:43, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Right, you DW everything, but in the event that you DW something that's already dying (or even remotely close), you don't need a second attack to push their health below 1; the bleeding takes care of that. [[Image:User_Raine_R.gif|19px]]  Raine   - talk  18:48, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Don't take chances on a fast infuser. 82.34.128.19 18:52, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Or a hct RC. - Auron 19:01, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Fair point, Auron! 82.34.128.19 19:04, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
 * lol wut? wounding strike on 2+ targets > RC 64.149.24.114 19:02, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Draw on WoH. 82.34.128.19 19:04, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
 * You're missing the point. The point was, "DW skills can't make something die with the deep wound".  My point was, "The bleeding on WS effectively bypasses that limitation."  So, if the DW on WS pushes something's health below 0, they die.  As opposed to using Eviscerate, where they'd still have 1 Health until something else causes their health to change.  If you want to talk practicality, RC doesn't exist in HA because Signet of Humility is imba.  So the WS kills the WoH monk, then Draw doesn't exist, either.  Then the RC monk dies.  [[Image:User_Raine_R.gif|19px]]  Raine   - talk  19:40, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

In short, the DW doesn't kill. It just aids the kill to the point where the person can't even be healed and live. 82.34.128.19 19:06, 17 November 2008 (UTC)


 * circular logic. it still kills 64.149.24.114 19:08, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Vamp yourself to about 150hp, draw deep wound off someone. You won't die. Switch back to vamp or take any damage, you will. 82.34.128.19 19:24, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Right. Welcome to 2005. We've known this for ages. - Auron 20:55, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
 * True, but it technically means Deep Wound is a non-lethal condition, yet it is extremely powerful and results in stuff dying. A good analogy is the AIDS virus. It weakens stuff to the point that it dies from something normally non-lethal. Napalm Flame 20:59, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Too bad anet would never call it aids, would be kinda controversial...but fun...Crap! the monk wont die! no problem ill give him aids!Problem solved

Fleshy creatures...
Does it work on non-fleshy as well as fleshy creatures? --216.119.178.127 08:41, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * The Fleshy page indicates the only conditions that non-fleshy creatures resist are Poison, Bleeding, and Disease. So, yeah. --חיו Chaiyo Kaldor  02:30, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Find Their Weakness
Shouldn't "Find Their Weakness!" be mentioned somehow? I'm not sure where it would go, because it isn't an attack skill, but it does cause Deep Wound, and it is related to the condition. Green Arrow 13:14, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
 * It's already there... But I updated it with the new, non-conditional requirement. Freedom Bound 13:18, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Dismiss Condition Note
Well not just Dismiss Condition but other condition removal spells remove the Deep Wound first, and then heal. Should there be a note about this? Than 19:36, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Not in Guild Wars 2
Apparently we won't have to deal with Deep Wound (or Disease or Dazed or Cracked Armor) in Guild Wars 2. Ramei Arashi 18:50, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
 * It's close counterpart seems to be vulnerability, now. ---  Ness [[File:User Ness Hrin SigIcon.png]] Hrin | 18:52, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Source? &mdash;  Raine Valen  [[Image:User_Raine_R.gif|19px]] 19:05, 20 Jul 2010 (UTC)
 * Here for vulnerability in general, but given the name and the other conditions, I can see this acting as a "take more damage, less healing" condition. ---  Ness [[File:User Ness Hrin SigIcon.png]] Hrin | 19:13, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
 * That's disappointing. Deep Wound was one of the more important conditions in the game.  Actually, I'd say it was probably the most important, as just about every team build with a spike throughout GW has included it in some way.  It's a shame about Disease, too, I liked how it spread.  Not going to miss Dazed much, tbh.  Pisses me off.  –Jette 19:26, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
 * "That is not to say that we don’t have interrupts, but with our lowered emphasis on healing, it is much less important."


 * ArenaNet: They Know How Their Game Works. &mdash;  Raine Valen  [[Image:User_Raine_R.gif|19px]] 19:32, 20 Jul 2010 (UTC)
 * That whole article demonstrates how the game design fits in perfectly with most other relationships between GW1 and GW2: it has nothing to do with it. –Jette 20:44, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Icon
Should we make a trivia note that the icon greatly resembles the icon for dismember?--Four Year Strong 03:33, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
 * It doesn't 'greatly resemble it,' it is it. They do this with a lot of skills: goof with the color scheme and flip it horizontally. Most people don't notice, but I have a five-digit IQ and can spot patterns from space. For instance, almost all of the Kanaxai aspect environment effect icons are copies of other skills. I keep asking for high-resolution versions of them, but ANet keeps telling me to fuck off. –Jette 13:41, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
 * So yes/no on a trivia note?--Four Year Strong 17:24, 6 July 2011 (UTC)


 * I think greatly resembles is fine. It looks like a re-colored, rotated version with some minor details altered (as if attempting to avoid a copyright dispute, but failing miserably). — Tennessee Ernie Ford ( TEF ) 17:26, 6 July 2011 (UTC)