Talk:Healing Ring
The only use I can imagine for this skill is either a minion master healing bone fiends or if there was some effect that triggered on healing. I'll check that, if so this could actually be deadly for farming.Invincible Rogue 19:30, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
- Good for Griefing = fail. --Life Infusion «T» 04:24, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
I put this on a minion master hero build, and the hero never used it. He'll spam Heal Area and Karei's Healing Circle like crazy, but he didn't touch Healing Ring. Can anyone confirm? Jehryn LOA 20:13, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
- Too bad, it could have been the one ring to heal them all. - Elder Angelus 19:13, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
- Lmao. Over a year late, but still....genius =D 82.42.138.114 18:10, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
- Too bad, it could have been the one ring to heal them all. - Elder Angelus 19:13, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
The Notes[edit]
Orly? Like any1 didn't notice that at first sight. Remove? Dark Morphon(contribs) 08:36, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
- Reduced it to the relevant part. Backsword 10:40, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
Stop adding obvious notes, the spell clearly states it heals all creatures in the area, also creatures is blue so you can find out what it means.----Final Abomination 05:55, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
- Problem, these notes aren't obvious. New players think that Heal Area/Karei's Healing Circle etc. heal only your allies. To be honest, I had this problem in the first place until I read the skill more properly. Don't say it's common sense either because common sense is not so common. --kaheiyeh 06:56, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
Concise description on the same page says this heals foes. Not needed, However.... Karei's Healing Circle does not state it heals both so I kept the note on that one. --Final Abomination 04:36, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
Stop adding it heals foe and allies, on the page it clearly states this in the description, don't say newbies won't know this... they will read the page if they typed /wiki on it or even searched it.----Final Abomination 05:31, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
- Only in the concise description is it clear. "Creatures" can be ambiguous, since a person may not consider a "human being" to be on the same level as a "creature" (which in RPGs usually refers to a wild animal or such). People's assumptions usually override any inquisitiveness to determine the actuality. --8765 06:36, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
- Not all players use the concise descriptions; I do not use it myself as I prefer the originals. Look, the wiki is here to help players. To accomplish this, you should put as much information as possible, even if it is obvious to the majority, a minority may not understand (I certainly did not when I started playing!). The wiki is a place where players come looking for information; if they knew exactly how things functioned, what's the use of the wiki then? That is why we need a note here, no matter how obvious it sounds to you, if it's not explained clearly in the description, no matter original or concise, then the note should be added. More information is better than no information. I will refrain from a revert war until this is sorted out. --kaheiyeh 10:30, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
- The difference is that here the information IS on the page. It's in the concise description. I'd say the note is superfluous. Misery 10:41, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
- The problem is that players won't go finding details of the skill from the description when they first hit this page as they are under the assumption that they've probably already examined it well enough in-game. When they come here, they usually bolt for the notes section first. --kaheiyeh 23:57, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
- That's 100% true for me. I'm usually looking at the scaling, and the next thing that catches my eye is the notes. Regardless of what any of the descriptions say and how this wiki is arranged, there will always be people who think this skill (and its counterparts) heal only allies. --8765 07:29, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
- The problem is that players won't go finding details of the skill from the description when they first hit this page as they are under the assumption that they've probably already examined it well enough in-game. When they come here, they usually bolt for the notes section first. --kaheiyeh 23:57, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
- The difference is that here the information IS on the page. It's in the concise description. I'd say the note is superfluous. Misery 10:41, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
- Not all players use the concise descriptions; I do not use it myself as I prefer the originals. Look, the wiki is here to help players. To accomplish this, you should put as much information as possible, even if it is obvious to the majority, a minority may not understand (I certainly did not when I started playing!). The wiki is a place where players come looking for information; if they knew exactly how things functioned, what's the use of the wiki then? That is why we need a note here, no matter how obvious it sounds to you, if it's not explained clearly in the description, no matter original or concise, then the note should be added. More information is better than no information. I will refrain from a revert war until this is sorted out. --kaheiyeh 10:30, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
There are no notes, so you have nothing to bolt too and you can read the very small descriptions EXPLAINING it heals allies and foes. Case closed. ----Final Abomination 03:19, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
