Talk:Perma Shadow Form

From Guild Wars Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

The mesmer version is now obselete. Permasinning now requires 3 Campaigns/Expansions. Fun. Hylas 01:09, 18 December 2008 (UTC)Hylas

I dont see whats wrong with that - and you dont need eotn -- C4K3 User C4K3 Signature.jpg Talk 14:42, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Ya I guess they got so sick of Perma Form spamming that they made it only maintanable by dedicated gamers xD. --Crazyejackson715 18:58, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Don't you get it? That's the only reason why broken builds are allowed to exist. The more chapters required, the more money for Anet. Skill means nothing on Build Wars anymore, it's become a Korean cash shop MMO, particularly with the last update.
Its not like guild wars is expensive, i mean you can buy the 3 campaigns and eotn for about 50 dollars -- C4K3 User C4K3 Signature.jpg Talk 15:31, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
I still remember the days when anet did state on the gw official website that owning all the campaigns wasnt making you more powerfull. I think they must still be rolling on the floor seeing how they can make us believe anything. Yseron - 10:57, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Lol I paid $50 for each campaign xD -- Halogod35 User Halogod35 Sig.jpg 03:37, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
Well the "reduced price" feature with the trilogy, millionth edition, and complete collection isnt a fake add i suppose lol C4K3 User C4K3 Signature.jpg Talk 15:13, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

What if...?[edit]

I don't have NF,I don't have Deadly Paradox,still, can I replace it with Serpent's Quickness and a Red Rock Candy?-KlinH4xx0r 08:11, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
Red Rock Candy only reduces skill activation time, not recharge. Theoretically, it's possible to maintain Shadow Form using Serpent's Quickness and an Essence of Celerity. Practically, however, the required 11-12 Wilderness Survival really limits the potential usefulness of the build. 21:44, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
Well you could use it for running, i mean for running you only need shadow arts, so youll have 103 skill points available, although it would be kinda expensive to run with it becasue of the cost of BU's, a more realistic use would be to use serpents quickness and quickening zephyr for farming, although then you would have to use PvE-only skills which aint the fastest ^^ C4K3 User C4K3 Signature.jpg Talk 17:33, 22 August 2009 (UTC)


Is it true they are going to nerf perma? The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk • contribs) at 15:24, 3 August 2009 (UTC).

No, arenanet have stated that they will keep a close eye on speed clears, although they will leave shadow form alone C4K3 User C4K3 Signature.jpg Talk 15:13, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
Yes, arenanet have stated that Shadow Form is on their list of things to do this year. Manifold 16:50, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
Nah, they will never nerf the most overpowered thing in Guild Wars. They'll continue to nerf things that don't need nerfing. 02:44, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Rit Version[edit]

I see 2 reverts about it... I think the rit version should be kept in this page (as variant) since it is referencing all possible means to maintain SF. Even if rit version doesnt seem very viable. Elephant 13:56, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

If it's overly inefficient, I don't think it should be documented. There are a lot of ways to beat the game (HH wammos for example), but we don't recommend them because they're not that great. A Rit perma would have plenty of problems. First, 4 skills instead of 3. Second, by creating a spirit you open the door for aoe effects to hit you. Third, Ghostly Haste has a pretty small window for casting, only 6s. Fourth, the spirit could get killed before you finish casting. Enough reasons for me to not take it. --JonTheMon 21:51, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
This page is to document about maintaining SF, not vanquishing or solo farming and Not How to beat the game but just any working build. SF break the game anyway, it doesn't beat him.
Versioh To add with consumable : Serpent Quickness + Dwarven Stability + SF. THis one is sometimes used bcse deadly paradox disabe attack skills, and optionnal anti-KD. Elephant 18:40, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

As I tested, the Rt build can be viable only with 5 skills including Spirit Siphon, otherwise it cannot be maintained indefinitely (without getting energy from foes in any way) because of lack of energy regeneration in SF cycle. Also it cannot be used in hard environment with lot of foes around, when Spirit of Destruction can die in 1-2 sec. The good thing is, 3 optional slots can be filled with Rt skills useful in some cases, like Death Pact Signet for hard resurrection in a party with "traditional" A/E SF builds.
16 Shadow Arts, 12 Channeling Magic, weapon with 20% of enchanting and +5 energy, channeling focus. --Slavic 05:18, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Ghostly Haste.jpg
Deadly Paradox.jpg
Shadow Form.jpg
Spirit Siphon.jpg


moved from Talk:Shadow Form/Maintaining

With Perma Shadow Form Seems more complete information is on that page...--The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:MrPaladin (talk).

Ah of course.. I didn't know about that page. It would be nice if the numbers were merged. I'd put everything on the other page. --User Karasu sig.png Karasu (talk) 12:47, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Essence of Celerity[edit]

moved from Talk:Shadow Form/Maintaining

With an Essence overall cost per cycle should be 25e (10 for Shadow Form and 15 for Deadly paradox), please fix the table too. Have I missed something? --Slavic 10:45, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Ah.. ofc - Fix'd that for you. --User Karasu sig.png Karasu (talk) 11:01, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Quickening Zephyr[edit]

moved from Talk:Shadow Form/Maintaining

This option should be Assassin/Ranger surely? Tong2 12:41, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Ack, my bad - I guess its as part of a Team Build. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:Tong2 (talk).


Do we need this? This is something that should be kept on PvX, not here. Mentioning that it can be maintained and maybe listing a skill or two to do it in the SF article is enough. Even if it's worth keeping, it should be put in the main article, not kept on its own page in the mainspace. –Jette User Jette awesome.png 17:24, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

This is a widely used build, GWW:BUILD says keep C4K3 User C4K3 Signature.jpg Talk 19:34, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
SF Hate blocked Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ аІiсә User Aliceandsven 1.png ѕνәи Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ 21:06, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
The job of the wiki is to Catalog the game and what goes on in it. I think you would agree that Perma form has become a big enough part of the game to deserve its own page. Also, If your going to delete this then you need to delete every single page that has anything to do with strategy on the wiki. Becaus Perma was and is a tank strategy. The single most popular tank strategy in the history of GW. It has earned its place on the wiki. Good or bad it is definitely important enough to be notarized. --Master BriarUser Briar Sig 2.jpg 17:35, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
Strategy is one thing. Complete builds are another. Basically, this page lists out "here's your build with a bunch of variants". The page could just as easily say "shadow form can be maintained with these skills, here's some math to prove it. because of this, it's a very common tanking/farming build", but without all the PvX-style clutter. -- Armond WarbladeUser Armond sig image.png{{Bacon}} 01:11, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
What's really the use of deleting the page? I do think the page is PvX'ish. But hey, we got this edit-button on top of the page! - J.P.User J.P. sigicon.pngTalk 01:20, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
If you want to cut out 80% of the article, be my guest. But, at the same time, since the policy doesn't state that there has to be a page for all the commonly used builds (and as no one in their right mind would check here before PvX for common builds), and there's no page for Legoway, Minion Factory, Heroway, etc, why keep it? -- Armond WarbladeUser Armond sig image.png{{Bacon}} 01:23, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
Because perma is not a way. Perma is a build. Just like MM or imbagon. --Master BriarUser Briar Sig 2.jpg 01:27, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
Team vs. solo is completely unrelated to the topic at hand (see also: Ranger spike, -way). But: Oh, it's a project of yours? Feel free to remove the tag then - just say something in the edit summary about it, is all I ask. -- Armond WarbladeUser Armond sig image.png{{Bacon}} 01:29, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
Yes. Team IS irrelevant in this conversation. Which is what I was trying to point out. Your trying to say that this is comparable to a team build of some sort and its not. Because its not a team build. Its just a build. Not a team. --Master BriarUser Briar Sig 2.jpg 01:31, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
No I'm not. I'm trying to say that just because a build is common doesn't mean the wiki must automatically absolutely have to necessary ZOMGGET a page on the build, regardless of the size of the required team. There are team builds that are and are not on wiki, just like there are solo builds that are and are not on wiki. Get your common sense straight. -- Armond WarbladeUser Armond sig image.png{{Bacon}} 02:12, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

(Reset indent) My common sense is fine. 55 imbagon MM perma. These are the 4 Staples of guildwars PvE play. You can't just remove a build because you don't like it. It needs to be re-written. That much is obvious. But this build is a massive part of GW history. FAR more in demand than any of the other 3 builds you don't seem to care about keeping. There is no good reason to delete this build. None. Rewrite yes, delete, no. It was and still is a huge part of GW PvE play. And should be cataloged. --Master BriarUser Briar Sig 2.jpg 02:19, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Feel free to come back when you want to comment on the topic at hand. In the meantime, please stop posting red herrings and complaining about things I've already addressed. -- Armond WarbladeUser Armond sig image.png{{Bacon}} 02:41, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
moved to User talk:Briar
We need an article on the way perma works as it's one of the most common "builds" around and has been for quite some time. If the current article isn't good enough, then feel free to add a {{rewrite}} or {{cleanup}} tag, or better yet rewrite it yourself - improvement is better than deletion. As to whether we keep builds on the wiki, we do keep notable ones, and this is definitely notable. I do agree that there are too many specific builds, skills, variants, etc mentioned, so it does need cutting down; but not outright deletion.
Armond, some people will check here before PvX (and some might not check PvX at all) - F10 or /wiki is easier and quicker than opening a window to PvX. They don't need to be looking specifically for a build, just the overall concept, which is what we try to document. One could also argue that policy doesn't say any article is necessary, therefore why keep any? It's a terrible argument. -- pling User Pling sig.png 16:34, 7 April 2010 (UTC)


"Nuking This is just a fire elementalist, with Fire Storm and other high damaging AoE skills. "
Made me lol, how long has Fire Storm been high damaged? 18:20, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Change to "historical" article?[edit]

^ --Kyoshi (Talk) User Kyoshi sig.png 04:24, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Agreed, with the new update to the skill this type of Perma Shadow Form will not work as it used to, and as such it needs to be changed to an historical article. --Abbess Katherine 22:39, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

No it doesn't. Perma still works and is still the predominant tank ANYWHERE you go. The article itself needs altering, But it is by no means historical. --Master BriarUser Briar Sig 2.jpg 17:37, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
Why would people still use this? Oh, right, they haven't unlocked any other skills. ~Shard User Shard Sig Icon.png 02:03, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
"Why would people still use this?" Because permanent maintainable Spell invincibility is fucking GODLIKE in high end PvE. And using it makes sure that more important stuff doesn't get fucked with. --Master BriarUser Briar Sig 2.jpg 02:09, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
Oh, also, Duh? --Master BriarUser Briar Sig 2.jpg 02:14, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
Spell immunity is good, but physical damage in high end hard mode pve goes for 100-300 per hit. You'd think armor (% damage reduction) would be more popular. idk, I don't keep up with the pve scene too much. ~Shard User Shard Sig Icon.png 02:16, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
No no shard, Not good, Say it with me... GODLIKE. Making 4 different professions completely useless Is GODLIKE. And when your doing it right the bonder can give you 100% Physical immunity. And lets say that the bonder isn't doing his job, once you get to 50% health, you are immediately turned into a hybrid mutant off spring of an Escape Ranger, a Mystic Regen derv, and an obby flesh tank. So one more time, Say it with me bud, GODLIKE. --Master BriarUser Briar Sig 2.jpg 02:23, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
Also Duh?--Master BriarUser Briar Sig 2.jpg 02:24, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
Things aren't true just because you say them, bro. -- Armond WarbladeUser Armond sig image.png{{Bacon}} 02:43, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
Have either of you ever actually been to DoA/Deep/Urgoz/UW/FoW (pretty much anywhere elite?) Because I'm guessing, From this little conversation alone mind you, that you haven't. Ill let you in on a little secret, Perma's are still the most used tank in GW because they are still the most durable tank in guildwars. oh and thats not true just because I say it. Its true because you cannot come up with any other build in this game that can stand more abuse than the perma/bonder team. Can-Not. --Master BriarUser Briar Sig 2.jpg 02:50, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
You're quite wrong. Permanent SY and TNTF are pretty much good enough. -- Armond WarbladeUser Armond sig image.png{{Bacon}} 03:02, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
Good enough =/= better. Which perma/bonder is. --Master BriarUser Briar Sig 2.jpg 03:05, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
...That doesn't mean you need SF in the first place, especially when party-wide SF is an option. -- Armond WarbladeUser Armond sig image.png{{Bacon}} 03:15, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
I didn't say you needed it. I said it is Better. Because for its intended role, The role of agro-ing enemies, Balling them, And living through the process, It is the best. --Master BriarUser Briar Sig 2.jpg 03:29, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
First of all, the correlation between "most run" and "best" is irrelevant. Most people in America voted for Obama, but he's still a terrible president.
Secondly, lolwut? I've done the Deep, FoW, and UW many times in HM without shadow form, and successfully. Shadow form is by no means required to beat these areas. You'd be surprised what a brain can do for you. Good players + poor AI = win.
Lastly, if you think a 60 armor target who stands still (or are they 70, I never remember) is more durable or even better than a 150 armor target who can bring damage+knockdowns, you need to play some Tetris. Good day, sir. ~Shard User Shard Sig Icon.png 03:36, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
(Edit conflict) So a 70(+10blessed+8shield+10shield) with armor of earth, stoneflesh, Shroud of Distress, Life Bond, and Life Barrier is going to take lots of damage from all sources? He also didn't say it wasn't possible without SF, he said SF was the best, and, as far as pve is concerned, fastest=best. Try to get a 42 minute Hm doa with a physway, it won't happen. Don't comment on PvE if you haven't participated in the meta for who knows how long. 03:49, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

(Reset indent) where the hell did you pull that from? what part of I DIDN'T SAY YOU NEED IT TO COMPLETE THESE AREAS are you not getting? And what part of 100% damage reduction are you not getting? I'm gonna let you in on a little secret there shard ol pal, If you put Protective bond on your tank, it doesn't fucking matter how much armor he has! He CANT LOOSE MORE THAN 5% HEALTH FROM ANY DAMAGE PACKET ANYWAY! If after that you Apply an enchantment that Cuts all damage from any source by 50% and then another one that does the exact same thing as the first your tank only takes 1 damage maximum from anything in the entire game! no matter how hard it hits! You seriously aren't getting that are you? And on top of having that 1 damage from any phsyical source in the entire game, You get a bonus of never having to worry about pesky spells and lets just say you somehow manage to find yourself at 50% health, you immediately Start blocking everything, Gain a shitload of regen, and have a bonus enchantment to trigger stop that last 1 damage from coming through. Really Shard. Im serious bro. Stop putting words in my mouth. Ive done deep with trip frontline too okay? Your not the only one thats beaten an elite area. I do this kinda shit on a daily basis. I know wtf I'm talking about. --Master BriarUser Briar Sig 2.jpg 03:45, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, but PvE is easy, so completing areas doesn't mean that you learned anything. Again, how is SF on one person better than SF on eight people? -- Armond WarbladeUser Armond sig image.png{{Bacon}} 04:07, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

In practice people still use Shadow Form for tanking, farming and speed clears so your argument is pretty stupid. You can try and convince the metagame that it is wrong if you like, but our job is just to document the game as it is, or in the case of historical articles as it was. Misery 11:49, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

to all of u that still love an adore permas and the meta game i say this to u stop being simpletons try something different just because it's the best dosn't mean jack diddly squat all it means is that everyone uses it and it's the most reliable but here's the thing everything can be done without the need of a godlike superpower not to mention tell me what happens when the perma messes up.....and yes it can happen and when it does the perma gets bitched at for all it's worth i should know I've ran perma and i hated every second of it.. why? because i can't stand being a useless aggro grabber that all they can do is well stand there and look pretty. u call it godlike i call it a waste of teamwork... perma is an overrated trash icon and u all need to move on to a different means of utilizing every profession to their own heights and advantages not count one as being god.. and don't u dare say "but it's the meta." i have 3 word to that response.. "Fuck the Meta!!!" (Misurugi) --The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk).

Its been a dead issue for a while but as long as someones going to throw around silly argumetns, I guess I can take a moment to quash them. Meta is Meta for a reason. Its not because its the most fun, or because it requires the most skill to play with, or because it "Works". Meta is Meta because It works well. In fact generally, it works the best. Your idea may be spending 3 and half hours on the deep or urgoz, But mine is not. Your idea of fun might be playing with new builds and finding something that works for you, but mine is not. What do I think is fun? Thats irrelevant. As is what you think is fun. For the purpose of tanking and general farming, perma has been and continues the be the single most effective way of doing pretty much any dungeon or area in the game. And while spamming "SY!" may seem like a comforting notion, I fail to see how save yourselves will do anything whatsoever to mitigate Degen, Interrupts, Armor ignoring damage, enchant strips (for your casters), etc, etc, etc. Save yourselves is a nice addition to any team, to be sure, But it hardly grants you the same protection that Shadow form does. Nor does it come close to providing the safety to a team that a perma tank does. Its a cute notion, Spamming a shout that, quite frankly, gives more armor than armor does. But every RPG has a tank. And perma is the tank of choice for this one. Its the best. And by best I don't mean fun, I don't mean interesting, and I sure as hell don't mean Challenging (which is just a fancy way of saying "Difficult"). By the best I mean its the most efficient for its job. Hands down, no exceptions. Best is not determined by opinion. Best is determined by efficiency. And whether you like efficiency or not, Perma has it in spades.--Master BriarUser Briar Sig 2.jpg 08:25, 26 August 2010 (UTC)


I hate these guys. They drive skill and hard work into the ground, while at the same time making the word 'elite' a joke.--03:39, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

"Generic Elitist Bullshit" --BriarUser Briar Sig 3.jpgThe Spider 03:47, 10 June 2011 (UTC)