Guild Wars 2

Remove Dmg Component.

Allow to protect (block) attacks on 1 ally for the duration of the channel.

We need more skills like this.

Less dmg, more ~active~ blocking/protecting.

I’m not sure lowering mace’s damage further is an entirely good idea. I was under the impression that it did already block for allies, just not a channeled block which is what I think you’re suggesting.
I’m all for improving the Guardian profession and I think Protector’s Strike needs a little bit of tweaking (whirl finisher whether you block or not) but I still think shields are designed for blocking, maces are designed for crushing haha! Yeah, yeah, I know, magic and stuff.

Otherwise, a good suggestion

as in, are you asking for the “shield” to be able to block all attacks on one given ally for the duration of the channel? does that include blocking for ourselves? would be very welcome indeed. then again, might be too strong. something is missing for this skill regardless though.

but yes, active blocking AND for allies i believe to be something that could be incorporated into the game or the Guardian profession.

and just a quick clarification: as it stands, if i activate this skill around 3 allies, and a mob or enemy cleaves them, do i block all 3 of those attacks? or just one of them?

This actually already existed, the block bug, you probably just didn’t realise it existed in pve.
It was extremely gamepbreakingly overpowered, so technically it has already been tested and we know this is a very bad idea. Sorry!
Aegis already exists for a reason, so do blinds. Additional blocks I really don’t approve of, it would make the Guardian way stronger than it already is.

Currently if you use prot strike and somebody more than one player inside the area it will block for one (unless the skill specifies hitting a single target and going aoe like a sigil then it will block once but it won’t aoe onto all of them).

I’ve tried using it against big AoE hits and I think it’s saved all three(?) of us but there could be other things altering that outcome as I wasn’t specifically testing for it. I always thought a protector should at least protect their allies. Surely it should block once for everything in the tiny shield area.
I still think it should also be a whirl finisher regardless of whether it blocks or not because c’mon, you spin around regardless. It’s only long enough to send out one bolt anyway and that bolt usually just flies UP or something lame….

Edit: Oh! Idea, imagine the crazy trait synergies you could get if, instead of simply blocking, it applied aegis once per ally up to five allies! You still get protecty blocks from it whilst channeling, a dash of synergy with Altruistic Healing, a nice party support block application AND you get all the nifty synergy with all the aegis traits. It’s balanced enough if you ask me as allies would have to be in that tiny radius to get the aegis anyway. Ah well, just a thought.

That being said, I’d rather they increase trait synergy with other weapons too, mace already has it pretty good.

Silver.8023:

I’ve tried using it against big AoE hits and I think it’s saved all three(?) of us but there could be other things altering that outcome as I wasn’t specifically testing for it. I always thought a protector should at least protect their allies. Surely it should block once for everything in the tiny shield area.
I still think it should also be a whirl finisher regardless of whether it blocks or not because c’mon, you spin around regardless. It’s only long enough to send out one bolt anyway and that bolt usually just flies UP or something lame….

Edit: Oh! Idea, imagine the crazy trait synergies you could get if, instead of simply blocking, it applied aegis once per ally up to five allies! You still get protecty blocks from it whilst channeling, a dash of synergy with Altruistic Healing, a nice party support block application AND you get all the nifty synergy with all the aegis traits. It’s balanced enough if you ask me as allies would have to be in that tiny radius to get the aegis anyway. Ah well, just a thought.

That being said, I’d rather they increase trait synergy with other weapons too, mace already has it pretty good.

Blocks once for one person.
And your suggestion is still way overpowerd.

As an avid mace user, I’m not sure the skill needs to be changed =/. Its a pretty powerful skill.

In tpvp, it can force people off my mid. Meaning a smart choice to handle a guardian with Protector’s strike up and get away from him and hit him with ranged. Normally that moves them off my point.

In WWW, its a catch 22. Don’t attack me and let me buff myself and my allies, or attack me, get blocked and take a lot of AoE damage.

I love the damage of Protectors Strike, I would hate to see it go away. Just really starting to use mace and it can push a good amount of damage. I’m personally seeing 6K+ off of a Protectors Strike.

Blood~

I quite like mace the way it is too, I mostly use it as it unfortunately suits my playstyle a whole lot more than sword does . I do think Protector’s Strike could stand to have some very minor tweaks just to tighten it up. Granted, Protector’s Strike already does so much for one skill.

It might be an idea to tweak how the protection boon it gives is applied. Something like a chain skill to activate the on block effect on demand, similar to how the Warrior and Mesmer counter-attack skills work might be a good usability addition. I dunno, maybe they didn’t put that in for some kind of balance reason.

Removing the damage component would set a horrible landslide for the mace. In doing that, you’ve practically made the mace an auto attack weapon with a damaging symbol. Guardians already have one of those, and that is the hammer. You also still want to be able to kill things, having a reactive damage component for the mace is fantastic, especially against multiple enemies.

I strongly disagree with this idea unless you plan on overhauling the mace which I don’t think needs to be done.

Absolutely not. Mace is already a relatively low damage weapon.

Your suggested changes would reduce the damage of the mace to next to nothing. The mace would then become worthless in most game modes (PvE, WvW) except as a secondary slotted defensive “niche” weapon after you run in with the “real” weapon or as a purely defensive weapon which goes against Arenanet’s design philosophy.

If you what you want is blocks, I suggest sword/focus.

For the record, I play a wvw support role and use a mace/shield and would drop it in 5 seconds if this change was implemented.

I don’t know why you’d propose an idea to lower an already kittenty damaging weapon. If anything, you should have the #3 passive null dmg from teammates while maintaining all its other use.

I also want to add as well, the focus also grants 3 blocks. Remember, this game doesn’t have the same formula as other mmos. Certain weapon setups should grant more protection with the offset of damage, but not to the point where one setup relegates you to being a meat shield.

Remove protectors strike damage? Horrible idea considering its what MAKES the mace. My god, yeah just make it useless…. It already has a block, then some damage. Its fine the way it is.

I think our blinds should activate, block the attack and all attacks done during that second from the character. This would make them less useless against classes that use fast chain attacks to nullify the block.

Samis.1750:

Absolutely not. Mace is already a relatively low damage weapon.

Your suggested changes would reduce the damage of the mace to next to nothing. The mace would then become worthless in most game modes (PvE, WvW) except as a secondary slotted defensive “niche” weapon after you run in with the “real” weapon or as a purely defensive weapon which goes against Arenanet’s design philosophy.

I just took a look at Mace’s damage. Its slower than sword but hits harder. It also has a symbol for damage. If you look at the dps of Sword Auto vs Mace Auto+Symbol they are actually quite close. In practice its lower if the target moves out of your symbol and don’t get a damaging PS on cooldown. I think that ppl tag Mace as a low dps weapon simply because it feels like it should ‘Tank’. Sword will give the best sustained dps but Mace really isn’t too far behind when PS is used for damage. At least that’s what I’ve been seeing.

Blood~

I love how everyone thinks that by taking away the damage, the weapon would become useless.

lol

Clearly this just goes to show the general mentality of MMO players: more damage = better.

As to those of us who realize what the block would be…

Yes, having it channeled and effect “everyone” (up to 5) within it would definatly be overpowered, which is why the block bug was fixed. But to limit it to 1-2 players would not be OP.

We need more “Active” Defense abilities tied to our weapon and the mace is a perfect canadate for this due to it’s “support” features.

As it stands, Protectors Strike really is only for damage because the 5s of “Protection” isn’t that great (even with 80% boon duration) and more often than not it’s blocked rather than let run out.

And yes, I know ~EXCATLY~ the kind of damage the mace can put out… and it’s good.

Amins.3710:

I love how everyone thinks that by taking away the damage, the weapon would become useless.

lol

Clearly this just goes to show the general mentality of MMO players: more damage = better.

As to those of us who realize what the block would be…

Yes, having it channeled and effect “everyone” (up to 5) within it would definatly be overpowered, which is why the block bug was fixed. But to limit it to 1-2 players would not be OP.

We need more “Active” Defense abilities tied to our weapon and the mace is a perfect canadate for this due to it’s “support” features.

As it stands, Protectors Strike really is only for damage because the 5s of “Protection” isn’t that great (even with 80% boon duration) and more often than not it’s blocked rather than let run out.

And yes, I know ~EXCATLY~ the kind of damage the mace can put out… and it’s good.

Yep, this is great. Sums up my thoughts almost exactly, especially the ‘active defense’ comment.