Guild Wars 2

The balance update just came out and people are immediately asking for more buffs in the thief forum. The buff requests i’ve been seeing start at impulsive and end at asinine.

Thief doesn’t need more sustain for the time being since anet has increased some of our crappier heals and the spectrum of condition cleanse on other traits. Our damage has been increased and loaded onto AA so we can feel more comfortable using initiative for their utility and survivability instead of burning it down to nothing trying to kill before they are killed.

This has given thief a more impactful presence in pvp. The next step is working to increase diversity followed by adding content to the profession (like some decent long ranged combat instead of MOAR MELEE). But that isn’t going to happen if we start asking for things like shadowstep-tracking on some of our more powerful skills instead of something, let’s say, faster cast.

But crazy ideas are not the only thing I want to address.

What is the problem with this forum and passives? Thief is the least passive profession out of all professions. Even with the few passive traits we have, none of them impact the meat of the profession (weapon skills and initiative) at all which is the main source of our active gameplay. It is okay to be concerned about having too many passives as it makes classes more braindead the more that get piled on. But to be as anti-passive as some of the people I have seen posting… that is equally asinine.

Sprinkling any class with passives allows players unfamiliar to the profession to easily pick it up and use it but not excel at it. It helps create a more vibrant community within the class and provides opportunities to apply fresh perspective to old knowledge. And secondly, it helps curb toxic elitist BS. The last thing this community needs is toxic elitist BS. Please don’t let it get to that point.

And what is wrong with Acro? It makes vigor better and easily accessible for any build that uses the line. Don’t stop turns 2 conditions that usually screw thief over into a minor threat. And if any of you forgot, Hard To Catch used to be the worst trait in the game. Assassin’s Reward which was statistically a pile of kitten got a noticeable buff. Let’s also talk about the other minor number buffs pretty much everything else in the line got this last patch…

Seriously I think the lot of you are overreacting. Most of these buffs were asked for at one point in time. So it is a good idea to remember that anet is actually listening to us now and that asking for unnecessary buffs could lead towards undesirable results. Consider that if said buff is asked for enough, that anet might give it to use and push us into the realm of OPAF and the profession will not only be back to square one, but screwed up aswell. Think before you ask, please.

Thank you.

I agree with the bulk of your post. In reading the boards sometimes it feels it just a contest to show which person/class is the most disgusted with Anet.

Another thing that bothers me is the attitude that if everything that theives proposed on their boards was not implemented then the DEVS are stupid and do not listen. I know for a FACT that on the thief boards it was proposed that upper hand cooldown be lowered. It was. it was suggested upper hand had something added. It got regen which while not what was suggested is something that is beneficial.

It was suggested that assassins reward needed a significant upkeep in healing power. We got that.It was suggested GI threshhold be lowered to 75 percent. It was. It was suggested that torment and confusion be added to the list of conditions removed. They were added. Many wanted Fleet of shadow moved to SA. It was moved. Just because preparedness not added baseline , it becomes “no one listens to us”.

The thief did very well by this update in my opinion. We are in a much better place.

Across all boards there far too much hyperbole and “they hate our class” and “our class unplayable” and “this strait/traitline/ crap”. It hard not to think of the Monty python skit with the 4 welshmen speaking of how bad they had it as kids because they were so poor.

yolo swaggins.2570:

What is the problem with this forum and passives? Thief is the least passive profession out of all professions.

The evades are passives – you hit someone and evade at the same time.
There’s too many of all of it around in this game. It’s fine – but the game has got nothing to do with skill anymore. And; you can’t play this game without overloading yourself with passives. Not a problem I have with thief but this game in general.

yolo swaggins.2570:

Sprinkling any class with passives allows players unfamiliar to the profession to easily pick it up and use it but not excel at it. It helps create a more vibrant community within the class and provides opportunities to apply fresh perspective to old knowledge. And secondly, it helps curb toxic elitist BS. The last thing this community needs is toxic elitist BS. Please don’t let it get to that point.

Thieves have always been elitists and passives are poison to any game that isn’t PvE. I was fine learning thief without most passives – but alas back then I had a good sustain line which I’m now missing.

yolo swaggins.2570:

And if any of you forgot, Hard To Catch used to be the worst trait in the game. Assassin’s Reward which was statistically a pile of kitten got a noticeable buff.

Yeah, now it’s a passive.

Don’t really get your post, tbh. I know that a lot of guys are overreacting but so are you with this post and truth being told: it isn’t that thought through.
Our sustain line was SA, the training wheel – lies murdered in the gutter.
Even if there were a similar traitline we’ve got overpowered class a, b and c and revealed a, b, c – you can’t learn this class or learn how to play anymore as it’s all more or less RNG.

Just logged out: SA was changed, really?
I’m taking CiS in GM personal though – anet hates me.
But I don’t think it would change that much anyway – it’s just that I don’t get this descision at all.

Well, my P/P main got literally nothing at all different and useful in this balance patch, so she’ll continue to be in ‘log in for the reward, run around and shoot stuff for a few minutes, being all cute and funny, log out, play another MMO (with a far smaller Dev budget than GW2) for a few hours, with good dual pistol skills’ mode for at least the next three months I guess? At least she didn’t get nerfed….

You guys think you’ve still got it bad? Luxury! BTW, Babazhook, it was Yorkshiremen:-

Not being pedantic there, but if you lived oop north, you’d understand.

I agree with the overall vibe of the OP though. A few passives here and there don’t do any harm, even if it’s just to help you survive when a game thing happens (lag spike, dat camera moment etc). I mean in general, and not saying anything about the specifics here. And being reasonable and disciplined in what we ask for is the way forward IMO.

I guess a little thanks and giving credit where credit’s due, from those who feel like they have been buffed, probably wouldn’t do any harm either.

I’d personally leave other classes out of it though, especially Warriors – no need to saying anything negative about those guys here.

Jana.6831:

Thieves have always been elitists and passives are poison to any game that isn’t PvE. I was fine learning thief without most passives – but alas back then I had a good sustain line which I’m now missing.

Totally Agree! You know what we should do? Let’s remove stealth, boons, and damage modifiers from thief so that only the really skilled people can play them! Stupid jokes aside, the presence of some passives does not eliminate the need for skilled gameplay.

You thieves should be happy. The Guardians didn’t get one change they asked foe be it trait moves or weapon skill changes. We still have no role. Learn to know when your class is ok. If it is not bring it up. But if so, don’t shoot a dead horse. Ok. Thats how we get a balanced game and not, which class is op this season.

The only things I really want are bug fixes and some cooldowns reduced (like Haste and RfI).

Paulash.5814:

Totally Agree! You know what we should do? Let’s remove stealth, boons, and damage modifiers from thief so that only the really skilled people can play them! Stupid jokes aside, the presence of some passives does not eliminate the need for skilled gameplay.

Good luck killing a thief who built for evades

Yes, some passives are nice/ok – but there’s too many of them flying around.

Jana.6831:

Yes, some passives are nice/ok – but there’s too many of them flying around.

Not to mention that almost all of them are stacked in the Acro line. It’s seriously 50% of the traits.

I personally have no complaints about Acro (even though the changes didn’t affect me) or any other skills and traits changes. My personal problem is the fact that Thief is not about auto-attacks, we have initiatives for a very good reason.

yolo swaggins.2570:

Our damage has been increased and loaded onto AA so we can feel more comfortable using initiative for their utility and survivability instead of burning it down to nothing trying to kill before they are killed.

That’s my problem with this patch. I don’t want to reserve my initiative for utility or survivability. This is where the disconnect is. The main purpose of the initiative is to use it to initiate not to reserve it for other things. If this will be the case, then they ought to rename it to “Energy” instead. If that is their goal, calling it “Initiative” is a misnomer. Also that idea doesn’t apply to all weapon sets with crap skills (i.e. P/P).

This change didn’t really do anything for the get-in-burst-get-out type of play style either. There are also no changes that would give Thief more staying power so that they can effectively AA in melee. Evading means that AA stops so these two doesn’t really go hand in hand. What the Thief really need is either an increase in Initiative pool or reduced initiative cost on weapon skills and let the Thief make the decision on how to spend those initiatives rather than trying to dictate that initiatives should be reserved for utility and survivability. It’s not like the Thief’s weapon skills grants block, protection, or health regen, those would have been worth saving initiatives for, so that they can continue auto-attacking. The idea might have merit if this is the case, but since the Thief’s weapon skills are mostly damage oriented, saving initiative doesn’t make a whole lot of sense.

To be fair sometimes its weapon set balance people really mean and not class balance. Should be noted that the thief world should not revolve around D/P. But when people claim Thief needs buffs they should consider if its a weapon set issue or a class issue. (or a l2p issue)

that’s the thing, for D/p, staff and S/d, maybe even S/p the patch was relativly fine, even tho the higher aa dmg imho is not that big of a deal, since every class kittens out invulns, immunes etc 100dmg more per hit (average) does not make a big difference, for me e.g., I play dd, no improvement what so ever, the biggest thing is that they moved fleet shadow into hidden thief, a trait that would HINDER dd effectiveness, Acrobatic is still just a weaker form of DrD, TECHNICALLY our condi cleanse on SA is nice, clearing dmg dealing condi’s first, BUT you have no way of clearing weakness, which will f you up bad, or slow, or vuln, etc. (only using sa for condi cleanse!) meaning that it is a downgrade from what it was before, second having CiS as GM is pathetic, every other class has falling dmg as minor, we have it as GM, plus that and blind on stealth is NOT worth a GM slot imho! as DD you used to play with SA for the condi clear, the blind on stealth and the regen in stealth and I for my part used fleet shadows as well, a combo no longer possible to us, yet something almost necessary for our survival, we have absolutely no utility on your weaponset, CnD is hard to hit, takes up half of your ini, is a high risk reward skill AND is weaker than shadow shot on D/p, yet our only way to gain stealth from our set alone.
we have no way to interrupt making one ranger using rapid fire a problem since it easly does up to 15k dmg, something you don’t easly hit with backstab anymore fyi
etc etc etc, the whole balance is around dp, a set a lot of us don’t like but are forced to use because every other dagger set is pathetic compared to it
adding in the fact that every other class does NOT need to be stealthed or behind the target to do massive dmg, eg rev hammer 2, s3. DH lb2, ranger lb2 etc
next thing is all the passive we need to get through while having none of our own (well now in acro 2sec evade) Nowadays stealth seems more like a hinderance in combat than anything else, and since so many classes can just reveal you know it doesn’t make any sense to even play a build based on stealth, HELL why does SR have a cd of 60, is a big kill me sign and reveal when you leave or get knocked (i understand the knocked out for counterplay yes) BUT the engi drone is a mobile SR with NO reveale or counter option, in addition to that an on demand daze and only has 40sec cd, yes it’s an elite but it makes sr absolute imo
there are a lot of issues with thief, most not because of the class itself considering only dp, but mostly other weaponsets and the pathetic amount of ways thieves are countered atm because of all the QQ about thieves being op

anyway these are just my 2 cents, i lost track a few times writing this sorry, long day
pls keep the flaming down guys ok

@ Jana those are not passives. Passives are effects that happen even when you are not happening, like Don’t Stop’s cripple/chill effectiveness decrease and immobilize conversion. The DrD dodges are not since all they do is replace the original dodge which requires action on the player’s part.

And next time kinda read the rest of the post. Hard to Catch was one of those traits that all thieves kittened about. It was still a passive proc trait but it killed more than it saved. This version is a complete 180 from that and it really needed it.

In fact alot of the changes they made were asked for, as babashook stated, that were made during a time when thieves only had one role. It was a time before they got pushed out of the meta entirely. If you need someone to blame about these decisions, blame the ones who asked for them years ago. Because all anet did was listen to them.

That was one of my points. To think about what you want vs. what it means for the profession.

@ Vincent

Most thief weapon skills have high utility and are a means to active defense on demand. Only a few of them are meant for damage. The only reason why ranged hasn’t gotten the buffs it needs yet is because you have facetank heroes going around thinking that ranged is for kitten and/or boring to use (relative). And they do this without considering that most ranged weapons in this game sacrifice utility for damage and vice versa.

I do agree that a slight decrease in some skills initiative costs would do wonders, though.

Passives suck in all forms. Look at the warrior; half of their problematic balance state comes from having a heavy-handed passive design in their traits and abilities that lowers the skill cap and ups the skill floor, leaving them either weak/ineffective as they are now, or too strong from a numbers point of view, like the way hambow was.

Passives are a big cause for balance problems and at launch there used to be extremely few to the benefit of everyone, and PvP was more interesting,

It’s called the initiative mechanic after all – eagerness and action. I see no reason why it should be saved for defense/utility, especially when some sets have next to none to begin with/some are just innately superior at being defensive than others, and the offensive-oriented sets aren’t even much better at damage than those with defensive-oriented design.

That said, I won’t deny a lot of the proposed buffs are asinine and ridiculous (although this isn’t really anything new on these boards, tbh).

• Even with the few passive traits we have, none of them impact the meat of the profession (weapon skills and initiative) at all which is the main source of our active gameplay.*

What about vigor on dodge? You get to dodge more often if you have essentially perma-vigor. That involves taking acro however meaning you’ll need to sacrifice either DPS or (now) better movement in stealth to stay on your target to ensure you get the daze or knockdown (sword/dagger then switch to staff).

I think each class needs to have one traitline absolutely removed and have its most competitive traits replace traits no one takes/clearly inferior options in other traitlines and have something like the vigor on dodge be packaged with dash or in revenant have salvation removed and giving eluding nullification to Glint though the rest of that traitline needs to be rebuilt from the ground up along with Ventari itself.

yolo swaggins.2570:

@ Vincent

Most thief weapon skills have high utility and are a means to active defense on demand. Only a few of them are meant for damage. The only reason why ranged hasn’t gotten the buffs it needs yet is because you have facetank heroes going around thinking that ranged is for kitten and/or boring to use (relative). And they do this without considering that most ranged weapons in this game sacrifice utility for damage and vice versa.

The question is; Is this the direction we like to take our weapon skills to?

Accepting the idea that initiatives are for utility use is abandoning what the Thief game play is all about. I’m sure that we don’t need to be reminded what that is. The bottom line is, Thief should not be about AA, rather about dumping the initiative as much as possible. AA is for soldier class (Warrior, Guard, Rev), not for adventurer class. Just look at the other adventurer classes, I play both Eng and Ranger, I rarely AA. So, I’m really confused on why the Thief is being diverted to a path of auto-attacking.

Thieves only AA (or run) when they ran out of initiatives. Instead of improving the Thief’s staying power by giving them tools they can use, the Dev think that increasing AA dmg is the way to go. It’s mind boggling to think that they go through their iteration process and this is the best they can come up with? That’s simply hard to believe.

yolo swaggins.2570:

@ Jana those are not passives. Passives are effects that happen even when you are not happening, like Don’t Stop’s cripple/chill effectiveness decrease and immobilize conversion. The DrD dodges are not since all they do is replace the original dodge which requires action on the player’s part.

And next time kinda read the rest of the post. Hard to Catch was one of those traits that all thieves kittened about. It was still a passive proc trait but it killed more than it saved. This version is a complete 180 from that and it really needed it.

In fact alot of the changes they made were asked for, as babashook stated, that were made during a time when thieves only had one role. It was a time before they got pushed out of the meta entirely. If you need someone to blame about these decisions, blame the ones who asked for them years ago. Because all anet did was listen to them.

They are passives as you don’t chose “I want to evade” but the skill does this for you.
Hard to catch was a bad trait, yes, it’s a better trait now – still it’s a passive and that was my point. Thief survivability now lies in passively evading 50% of the attacks – not what I want in this game.
What anet should do: Stop listening to players and learn how their own game works – problem: Most are D/P so “everything” suits D/P – what should I do? Quit the game as I have no voice?

That was one of my points. To think about what you want vs. what it means for the profession.

I did, did you?

Ps: You do realize that we only have 2 sets left, out of formerly 4 when staff wasn’t even around?!

ETA: I mean weaponskills that evade, btw.

A very late ETA:
On the one hand you say that anet implemented “everything” players suggested – on the other hand you say “we” should shut up – does that even make sense to you?
(And that’s why I say the players shouldn’t be the important factor when it comes to balancing – a lot of stuff suggested on here is over the top, yes, but in reality the last patch barely scratched the surface of the problems thief as a class has got – and that is also because that what counts balance wise are the players and that shouldn’t be).

Jana.6831:

They are passives as you don’t chose “I want to evade” but the skill does this for you.
Hard to catch was a bad trait, yes, it’s a better trait now – still it’s a passive and that was my point. Thief survivability now lies in passively evading 50% of the attacks – not what I want in this game.
What anet should do: Stop listening to players and learn how their own game works – problem: Most are D/P so “everything” suits D/P – what should I do? Quit the game as I have no voice?

Now that you mentioned it, it seems that the aim for all these passives is to give D/P access to evasion. It makes sense. Instead of D/P going in SA for defense, they can pick up Acro instead where they can continue to AA while the passive evade makes sure that they can keep the pressure.

SE, SP, and SR from SA replaced by PR(or IR), GI, and UH from Acro.

This is just wrong.

Jana.6831:

yolo swaggins.2570:

@ Jana those are not passives. Passives are effects that happen even when you are not happening, like Don’t Stop’s cripple/chill effectiveness decrease and immobilize conversion. The DrD dodges are not since all they do is replace the original dodge which requires action on the player’s part.

And next time kinda read the rest of the post. Hard to Catch was one of those traits that all thieves kittened about. It was still a passive proc trait but it killed more than it saved. This version is a complete 180 from that and it really needed it.

In fact alot of the changes they made were asked for, as babashook stated, that were made during a time when thieves only had one role. It was a time before they got pushed out of the meta entirely. If you need someone to blame about these decisions, blame the ones who asked for them years ago. Because all anet did was listen to them.

They are passives as you don’t chose “I want to evade” but the skill does this for you.
Hard to catch was a bad trait, yes, it’s a better trait now – still it’s a passive and that was my point. Thief survivability now lies in passively evading 50% of the attacks – not what I want in this game.
What anet should do: Stop listening to players and learn how their own game works – problem: Most are D/P so “everything” suits D/P – what should I do? Quit the game as I have no voice?

That was one of my points. To think about what you want vs. what it means for the profession.

I did, did you?

Ps: You do realize that we only have 2 sets left, out of formerly 4 when staff wasn’t even around?!

ETA: I mean weaponskills that evade, btw.

If you are talking about the DD GM traits those are not Passives they are replacement/additional affects. You have to actively decide to dodge to use them. Which makes them not passive. Passive is where there is no user input what so ever.

BlaqueFyre.5678:

If you are talking about the DD GM traits those are not Passives they are replacement/additional affects. You have to actively decide to dodge to use them. Which makes them not passive. Passive is where there is no user input what so ever.

Jana.6831:

ETA: I mean weaponskills that evade, btw.
(edited about 26 minutes ago by Jana.6831)

I usually add stuff to what I’m writing – but your window seems to have been open a long time if you didn’t see that :P
Anyway, I already said in my initial post that I mean skills that also evade – so I don’t get why all of you think I mean dodges.

Jana.6831:

ETA: I mean weaponskills that evade, btw.

Weaponskills that evade are not passives. They require input to use. Passives would be something like the new instant reflexes that automatically trigger when a condition is met that you had no control over or just grant a permanent buff.

To more clearly define it, our signets are a passive buff until you activate them. Passive vs. Active effect.

Maugetarr.6823:

Jana.6831:

ETA: I mean weaponskills that evade, btw.

Weaponskills that evade are not passives. They require input to use. Passives would be something like the new instant reflexes that automatically trigger when a condition is met that you had no control over or just grant a permanent buff.

To more clearly define it, our signets are a passive buff until you activate them. Passive vs. Active effect.

They are – they are dual skill – you can either chose to attack or to evade – the second skill is in that case passive. It’s not that hard to get what I mean, is it?

ETA: “Uhh, I’m gonna hit this guy – oh, he tried to hit me at the same time but my skill let me evade that.. nifty!”
Or: “Uhh, I’m better evade this hit – wow I killed this guy while evading, didn’t intend to but I’ll take it”

ETA²: And better don’t try to discuss this further with me as I will go ballistic and call all of you brain dead.

Jana.6831:

Maugetarr.6823:

Jana.6831:

ETA: I mean weaponskills that evade, btw.

Weaponskills that evade are not passives. They require input to use. Passives would be something like the new instant reflexes that automatically trigger when a condition is met that you had no control over or just grant a permanent buff.

To more clearly define it, our signets are a passive buff until you activate them. Passive vs. Active effect.

They are – they are dual skill – you can either chose to attack or to evade – the second skill is in that case passive. It’s not that hard to get what I mean, is it?

ETA: “Uhh, I’m gonna hit this guy – oh, he tried to hit me at the same time but my skill let me evade that.. nifty!”
Or: “Uhh, I’m better evade this hit – wow I killed this guy while evading, didn’t intend to but I’ll take it”

…..but it requires direct input…. it’s not passive. A better example. I’ve been immobilized and someone is trying to land a burst on me. I use debilitating arc (staff #3) to evade the burst and counter attack. That is actively counterplaying an opponent. If a code in the game caused me to avoid the attack without input from me (instant reflexes), that would be passive.

Yes that is, but I doubt that people spamming vault really do so because they want to evade.
No matter how you turn it: skills like that are bad. They can be nice in moderation but not if they’re “spammable”. ETA: Spammable also by having multiple skills that do the same thing.

ETA²: And like I said; you use that skill to evade an attack, the damage you also deal isn’t that important I guess, so that’s the passive in that case.

Jana.6831:

Yes that is, but I doubt that people spamming vault really do so because they want to evade.
No matter how you turn it: skills like that are bad. They can be nice in moderation but not if they’re “spammable”. ETA: Spammable also by having multiple skills that do the same thing.

Actively spamming the same skill may be poor play, but it’s not passive. We can talk about how poorly a skill is designed, but it still requires input from the player, meaning it’s not passive. Let’s move beyond vault to a power spec D/D build. Using deathblossom to evade an incoming attack is going to do virtually no damage, however you may use it to evade an incoming attack when you can’t dodge because you’re out of endurance or immobilized. That doesn’t mean deathblossom is a passive skill. You’re actively using it to evade in response to an incoming attack.

Well, facerolling requires input from the player as well – I guess you got my point. If not: I wrote everything I had to say about it – if it’s still not clear what I mean, then well.. read it again, I guess.

Maugetarr.6823:

Jana.6831:

Yes that is, but I doubt that people spamming vault really do so because they want to evade.
No matter how you turn it: skills like that are bad. They can be nice in moderation but not if they’re “spammable”. ETA: Spammable also by having multiple skills that do the same thing.

Actively spamming the same skill may be poor play, but it’s not passive. We can talk about how poorly a skill is designed, but it still requires input from the player, meaning it’s not passive. Let’s move beyond vault to a power spec D/D build. Using deathblossom to evade an incoming attack is going to do virtually no damage, however you may use it to evade an incoming attack when you can’t dodge because you’re out of endurance or immobilized. That doesn’t mean deathblossom is a passive skill. You’re actively using it to evade in response to an incoming attack.

DB is an active attack while passively evading attacks. At the same time, DB is an active evade while passively doing damage. I get what she’s saying.

In case of dodges (by extansion DD GM), it’s an active position displacement with a passive evade effect, so if you didn’t roll (or Dash) far enough, the passive evade will negate the damage.

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Maugetarr.6823:

Jana.6831:

Yes that is, but I doubt that people spamming vault really do so because they want to evade.
No matter how you turn it: skills like that are bad. They can be nice in moderation but not if they’re “spammable”. ETA: Spammable also by having multiple skills that do the same thing.

Actively spamming the same skill may be poor play, but it’s not passive. We can talk about how poorly a skill is designed, but it still requires input from the player, meaning it’s not passive. Let’s move beyond vault to a power spec D/D build. Using deathblossom to evade an incoming attack is going to do virtually no damage, however you may use it to evade an incoming attack when you can’t dodge because you’re out of endurance or immobilized. That doesn’t mean deathblossom is a passive skill. You’re actively using it to evade in response to an incoming attack.

DB is an active attack while passively evading attacks. At the same time, DB is an active evade while passively doing damage. I get what she’s saying.

In case of dodges (by extansion DD GM), it’s an active position displacement with a passive evade effect, so if you didn’t roll (or Dash) far enough, the passive evade will negate the damage.

The problem I have is that this argument is conflating passive play and poor skill design.

Let’s use your example of the GM dodges. You’re fighting someone and both at low health. You have bound equipped. The opponent tries to land their burst and you counter by dodging into them, both evading the burst and attacking them. Which part of that is passive? You aimed your dodge in an attempt to damage them using it as an attack. You waited for their burst so you would have the endurance to dodge it.

Both the evade and damage of deathblossom are active, but the combination is poorly designed which leads to spam and a low skill floor.

Maugetarr.6823:

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Maugetarr.6823:

Jana.6831:

Yes that is, but I doubt that people spamming vault really do so because they want to evade.
No matter how you turn it: skills like that are bad. They can be nice in moderation but not if they’re “spammable”. ETA: Spammable also by having multiple skills that do the same thing.

Actively spamming the same skill may be poor play, but it’s not passive. We can talk about how poorly a skill is designed, but it still requires input from the player, meaning it’s not passive. Let’s move beyond vault to a power spec D/D build. Using deathblossom to evade an incoming attack is going to do virtually no damage, however you may use it to evade an incoming attack when you can’t dodge because you’re out of endurance or immobilized. That doesn’t mean deathblossom is a passive skill. You’re actively using it to evade in response to an incoming attack.

DB is an active attack while passively evading attacks. At the same time, DB is an active evade while passively doing damage. I get what she’s saying.

In case of dodges (by extansion DD GM), it’s an active position displacement with a passive evade effect, so if you didn’t roll (or Dash) far enough, the passive evade will negate the damage.

The problem I have is that this argument is conflating passive play and poor skill design.

Let’s use your example of the GM dodges. You’re fighting someone and both at low health. You have bound equipped. The opponent tries to land their burst and you counter by dodging into them, both evading the burst and attacking them. Which part of that is passive? You aimed your dodge in an attempt to damage them using it as an attack. You waited for their burst so you would have the endurance to dodge it.

In this scenario, you’re using Bound as an active attack while hoping that the passive evade will negate the damage. This is not different than if you choose to use DB.

Both the evade and damage of deathblossom are active, but the combination is poorly designed which leads to spam and a low skill floor.

Not always. If your intention is to deal damage, then you’re hoping for the passive evade to do its job. You can actively use DB to evade with no intention to do damage, thus when you actually dealt damage, then that’s just a passive effect.

According to this thread, Everything is a passive.

• Auto attack is a passive.
• Boons is a passive.
• Weapon skills is passive.
• Utility skills is passive
• Elite skills is passive.
• Healing skills is passive.
• Immunity is a passive.
• Burst skills is a passive.
• Offensive support is a passive.
• Actives is a passive.
• Passive is passive.

I think passive is just another word things that needs nerfing.

runeblade.7514:

According to this thread, Everything is a passive.

• Auto attack is a passive.
• Boons is a passive.
• Weapon skills is passive.
• Utility skills is passive
• Elite skills is passive.
• Healing skills is passive.
• Immunity is a passive.
• Burst skills is a passive.
• Offensive support is a passive.
• Actives is a passive.
• Passive is passive.

Don’t convolute the thread with idiotic comments.

Sir Vincent III.1286:

runeblade.7514:

According to this thread, Everything is a passive.

• Auto attack is a passive.
• Boons is a passive.
• Weapon skills is passive.
• Utility skills is passive
• Elite skills is passive.
• Healing skills is passive.
• Immunity is a passive.
• Burst skills is a passive.
• Offensive support is a passive.
• Actives is a passive.
• Passive is passive.

Don’t convolute the thread with idiotic comments.

I think this thread does a better job at convoluting itself with idiotic comments.

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Maugetarr.6823:

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Maugetarr.6823:

Jana.6831:

Yes that is, but I doubt that people spamming vault really do so because they want to evade.
No matter how you turn it: skills like that are bad. They can be nice in moderation but not if they’re “spammable”. ETA: Spammable also by having multiple skills that do the same thing.

Actively spamming the same skill may be poor play, but it’s not passive. We can talk about how poorly a skill is designed, but it still requires input from the player, meaning it’s not passive. Let’s move beyond vault to a power spec D/D build. Using deathblossom to evade an incoming attack is going to do virtually no damage, however you may use it to evade an incoming attack when you can’t dodge because you’re out of endurance or immobilized. That doesn’t mean deathblossom is a passive skill. You’re actively using it to evade in response to an incoming attack.

DB is an active attack while passively evading attacks. At the same time, DB is an active evade while passively doing damage. I get what she’s saying.

In case of dodges (by extansion DD GM), it’s an active position displacement with a passive evade effect, so if you didn’t roll (or Dash) far enough, the passive evade will negate the damage.

The problem I have is that this argument is conflating passive play and poor skill design.

Let’s use your example of the GM dodges. You’re fighting someone and both at low health. You have bound equipped. The opponent tries to land their burst and you counter by dodging into them, both evading the burst and attacking them. Which part of that is passive? You aimed your dodge in an attempt to damage them using it as an attack. You waited for their burst so you would have the endurance to dodge it.

In this scenario, you’re using Bound as an active attack while hoping that the passive evade will negate the damage. This is not different than if you choose to use DB.

Except that I actively used the dodge saving the endurance for the burst and repositioned. Had it not done damage there would be no question about using the dodge actively. In this scenario with damage both the dodge and the damage were active components of play. I didn’t mention hoping to dodge the burst, I kept enough endurance to wait for it and dodge it.

Both the evade and damage of deathblossom are active, but the combination is poorly designed which leads to spam and a low skill floor.

Not always. If your intention is to deal damage, then you’re hoping for the passive evade to do its job. You can actively use DB to evade with no intention to do damage, thus when you actually dealt damage, then that’s just a passive effect.

Here’s the thing. You mentioned intention here for the determination of a passive or active attack. Say I have untraited dodges with the endurance to use them and the availability of deathblossom. I have the choice of using either. I choose to use deathblossom because I want to counterattack. The intent is to both evade the damage and deal damage back to them. Neither effect is passive there.

Let’s blur the lines more. Is a skill that reflects a projectile passive or active. Let’s use the engi flamethrower airblast as the example here. My intent is to stop a kill shot from hitting me. I could dodge it. I choose to reflect it instead. Is the reflection passive? It deals the kill shot back to the warrior. It seems that by your stance on counterattacking would define the reflected shot as a passive effect.

Attacks can have both offensive and defensive aspects to them. That doesn’t make them passive. Deathblossom is not passive, just poorly designed because it’s spammable.

Maugetarr.6823:

Except that I actively used the dodge saving the endurance for the burst and repositioned. Had it not done damage there would be no question about using the dodge actively. In this scenario with damage both the dodge and the damage were active components of play. I didn’t mention hoping to dodge the burst, I kept enough endurance to wait for it and dodge it.

You said, “You aimed your dodge in an attempt to damage them using it as an attack”, thus the intention is clear that your goal is to do damage and relying on evade to passively negate the damage.

However, if you Bound backwards and happen to do damage to someone else, that damage is passive.

Here’s the thing. You mentioned intention here for the determination of a passive or active attack. Say I have untraited dodges with the endurance to use them and the availability of deathblossom. I have the choice of using either. I choose to use deathblossom because I want to counterattack. The intent is to both evade the damage and deal damage back to them. Neither effect is passive there.

The evade is passive.
- If you’re trying to evade target-1 and do damage to target-1, then the evade is passive in this scenario.
- If you’re trying to evade target-1 and damages target-2, then the damage is passive.
- If you’re trying to evade backward from target-1 but target-1 shadowstep to you then you happen to deal damage to target-1, the damage is still the passive.

Let’s blur the lines more. Is a skill that reflects a projectile passive or active.

Let’s use the engi flamethrower airblast as the example here. My intent is to stop a kill shot from hitting me. I could dodge it. I choose to reflect it instead. Is the reflection passive? It deals the kill shot back to the warrior. It seems that by your stance on counterattacking would define the reflected shot as a passive effect.

I think the confusion here is the difference between activated vs passive and skill vs effect.

Dodge is an activated skill, but the evade that comes with the dodge is the passive effect.

Activating a skill to apply a reflect effect is obviously not passive, since it is an activated skill. Once the skill is activated, the reflect effect does its thing without addition user input, thus it is passive.

Attacks can have both offensive and defensive aspects to them. That doesn’t make them passive. Deathblossom is not passive, just poorly designed because it’s spammable.

Nobody is saying that DB is passive, rather it has a passive effect depending on how you use it.

Let me put it this way. A boulder thrown by a snow wurm can hit multiple times (I know, used them for daily dodges). If you dodge the boulder, the evade effect will proc multiple times. If evade is not passive, then I will have to activate dodge for each possible hits making multiple activate evades. The fact that I don’t have to actively evade means that the evade effect is passive.

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Maugetarr.6823:

Except that I actively used the dodge saving the endurance for the burst and repositioned. Had it not done damage there would be no question about using the dodge actively. In this scenario with damage both the dodge and the damage were active components of play. I didn’t mention hoping to dodge the burst, I kept enough endurance to wait for it and dodge it.

You said, “You aimed your dodge in an attempt to damage them using it as an attack”, thus the intention is clear that your goal is to do damage and relying on evade to passively negate the damage.

However, if you Bound backwards and happen to do damage to someone else, that damage is passive.

Here’s the thing. You mentioned intention here for the determination of a passive or active attack. Say I have untraited dodges with the endurance to use them and the availability of deathblossom. I have the choice of using either. I choose to use deathblossom because I want to counterattack. The intent is to both evade the damage and deal damage back to them. Neither effect is passive there.

The evade is passive.
- If you’re trying to evade target-1 and do damage to target-1, then the evade is passive in this scenario.
- If you’re trying to evade target-1 and damages target-2, then the damage is passive.
- If you’re trying to evade backward from target-1 but target-1 shadowstep to you then you happen to deal damage to target-1, the damage is still the passive.

Let’s blur the lines more. Is a skill that reflects a projectile passive or active.

Let’s use the engi flamethrower airblast as the example here. My intent is to stop a kill shot from hitting me. I could dodge it. I choose to reflect it instead. Is the reflection passive? It deals the kill shot back to the warrior. It seems that by your stance on counterattacking would define the reflected shot as a passive effect.

I think the confusion here is the difference between activated vs passive and skill vs effect.

Dodge is an activated skill, but the evade that comes with the dodge is the passive effect.

Activating a skill to apply a reflect effect is obviously not passive, since it is an activated skill. Once the skill is activated, the reflect effect does its thing without addition user input, thus it is passive.

Attacks can have both offensive and defensive aspects to them. That doesn’t make them passive. Deathblossom is not passive, just poorly designed because it’s spammable.

Nobody is saying that DB is passive, rather it has a passive effect depending on how you use it.

Let me put it this way. A boulder thrown by a snow wurm can hit multiple times (I know, used them for daily dodges). If you dodge the boulder, the evade effect will proc multiple times. If evade is not passive, then I will have to activate dodge for each possible hits making multiple activate evades. The fact that I don’t have to actively evade means that the evade effect is passive.

You are trying to separate cause and effect by way of duration. Under this classification, any cleave damage or an attack with multiple impacts would be considered a passive attack.

Maugetarr.6823:

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Maugetarr.6823:

Except that I actively used the dodge saving the endurance for the burst and repositioned. Had it not done damage there would be no question about using the dodge actively. In this scenario with damage both the dodge and the damage were active components of play. I didn’t mention hoping to dodge the burst, I kept enough endurance to wait for it and dodge it.

You said, “You aimed your dodge in an attempt to damage them using it as an attack”, thus the intention is clear that your goal is to do damage and relying on evade to passively negate the damage.

However, if you Bound backwards and happen to do damage to someone else, that damage is passive.

Here’s the thing. You mentioned intention here for the determination of a passive or active attack. Say I have untraited dodges with the endurance to use them and the availability of deathblossom. I have the choice of using either. I choose to use deathblossom because I want to counterattack. The intent is to both evade the damage and deal damage back to them. Neither effect is passive there.

The evade is passive.
- If you’re trying to evade target-1 and do damage to target-1, then the evade is passive in this scenario.
- If you’re trying to evade target-1 and damages target-2, then the damage is passive.
- If you’re trying to evade backward from target-1 but target-1 shadowstep to you then you happen to deal damage to target-1, the damage is still the passive.

Let’s blur the lines more. Is a skill that reflects a projectile passive or active.

Let’s use the engi flamethrower airblast as the example here. My intent is to stop a kill shot from hitting me. I could dodge it. I choose to reflect it instead. Is the reflection passive? It deals the kill shot back to the warrior. It seems that by your stance on counterattacking would define the reflected shot as a passive effect.

I think the confusion here is the difference between activated vs passive and skill vs effect.

Dodge is an activated skill, but the evade that comes with the dodge is the passive effect.

Activating a skill to apply a reflect effect is obviously not passive, since it is an activated skill. Once the skill is activated, the reflect effect does its thing without addition user input, thus it is passive.

Attacks can have both offensive and defensive aspects to them. That doesn’t make them passive. Deathblossom is not passive, just poorly designed because it’s spammable.

Nobody is saying that DB is passive, rather it has a passive effect depending on how you use it.

Let me put it this way. A boulder thrown by a snow wurm can hit multiple times (I know, used them for daily dodges). If you dodge the boulder, the evade effect will proc multiple times. If evade is not passive, then I will have to activate dodge for each possible hits making multiple activate evades. The fact that I don’t have to actively evade means that the evade effect is passive.

You are trying to separate cause and effect by way of duration. Under this classification, any cleave damage or an attack with multiple impacts would be considered a passive attack.

The attack is an activated skill — the hits, on the other hand, are not. The hit is one of the effects of the attack since the effect of an attack is either a hit or a miss. The initial hit is a direct result of activating the attack, the additional hits are passive effects.

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Maugetarr.6823:

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Maugetarr.6823:

Except that I actively used the dodge saving the endurance for the burst and repositioned. Had it not done damage there would be no question about using the dodge actively. In this scenario with damage both the dodge and the damage were active components of play. I didn’t mention hoping to dodge the burst, I kept enough endurance to wait for it and dodge it.

You said, “You aimed your dodge in an attempt to damage them using it as an attack”, thus the intention is clear that your goal is to do damage and relying on evade to passively negate the damage.

However, if you Bound backwards and happen to do damage to someone else, that damage is passive.

Here’s the thing. You mentioned intention here for the determination of a passive or active attack. Say I have untraited dodges with the endurance to use them and the availability of deathblossom. I have the choice of using either. I choose to use deathblossom because I want to counterattack. The intent is to both evade the damage and deal damage back to them. Neither effect is passive there.

The evade is passive.
- If you’re trying to evade target-1 and do damage to target-1, then the evade is passive in this scenario.
- If you’re trying to evade target-1 and damages target-2, then the damage is passive.
- If you’re trying to evade backward from target-1 but target-1 shadowstep to you then you happen to deal damage to target-1, the damage is still the passive.

Let’s blur the lines more. Is a skill that reflects a projectile passive or active.

Let’s use the engi flamethrower airblast as the example here. My intent is to stop a kill shot from hitting me. I could dodge it. I choose to reflect it instead. Is the reflection passive? It deals the kill shot back to the warrior. It seems that by your stance on counterattacking would define the reflected shot as a passive effect.

I think the confusion here is the difference between activated vs passive and skill vs effect.

Dodge is an activated skill, but the evade that comes with the dodge is the passive effect.

Activating a skill to apply a reflect effect is obviously not passive, since it is an activated skill. Once the skill is activated, the reflect effect does its thing without addition user input, thus it is passive.

Attacks can have both offensive and defensive aspects to them. That doesn’t make them passive. Deathblossom is not passive, just poorly designed because it’s spammable.

Nobody is saying that DB is passive, rather it has a passive effect depending on how you use it.

Let me put it this way. A boulder thrown by a snow wurm can hit multiple times (I know, used them for daily dodges). If you dodge the boulder, the evade effect will proc multiple times. If evade is not passive, then I will have to activate dodge for each possible hits making multiple activate evades. The fact that I don’t have to actively evade means that the evade effect is passive.

You are trying to separate cause and effect by way of duration. Under this classification, any cleave damage or an attack with multiple impacts would be considered a passive attack.

The attack is an activated skill — the hits, on the other hand, are not. The hit is one of the effects of the attack since the effect of an attack is either a hit or a miss. The initial hit is a direct result of activating the attack, the additional hits are passive effects.

That is a specious argument. That’s like saying you stabbed someone but didn’t kill them because they died of exsanguination.

Maugetarr.6823:

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Maugetarr.6823:

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Maugetarr.6823:

Except that I actively used the dodge saving the endurance for the burst and repositioned. Had it not done damage there would be no question about using the dodge actively. In this scenario with damage both the dodge and the damage were active components of play. I didn’t mention hoping to dodge the burst, I kept enough endurance to wait for it and dodge it.

You said, “You aimed your dodge in an attempt to damage them using it as an attack”, thus the intention is clear that your goal is to do damage and relying on evade to passively negate the damage.

However, if you Bound backwards and happen to do damage to someone else, that damage is passive.

Here’s the thing. You mentioned intention here for the determination of a passive or active attack. Say I have untraited dodges with the endurance to use them and the availability of deathblossom. I have the choice of using either. I choose to use deathblossom because I want to counterattack. The intent is to both evade the damage and deal damage back to them. Neither effect is passive there.

The evade is passive.
- If you’re trying to evade target-1 and do damage to target-1, then the evade is passive in this scenario.
- If you’re trying to evade target-1 and damages target-2, then the damage is passive.
- If you’re trying to evade backward from target-1 but target-1 shadowstep to you then you happen to deal damage to target-1, the damage is still the passive.

Let’s blur the lines more. Is a skill that reflects a projectile passive or active.

Let’s use the engi flamethrower airblast as the example here. My intent is to stop a kill shot from hitting me. I could dodge it. I choose to reflect it instead. Is the reflection passive? It deals the kill shot back to the warrior. It seems that by your stance on counterattacking would define the reflected shot as a passive effect.

I think the confusion here is the difference between activated vs passive and skill vs effect.

Dodge is an activated skill, but the evade that comes with the dodge is the passive effect.

Activating a skill to apply a reflect effect is obviously not passive, since it is an activated skill. Once the skill is activated, the reflect effect does its thing without addition user input, thus it is passive.

Attacks can have both offensive and defensive aspects to them. That doesn’t make them passive. Deathblossom is not passive, just poorly designed because it’s spammable.

Nobody is saying that DB is passive, rather it has a passive effect depending on how you use it.

Let me put it this way. A boulder thrown by a snow wurm can hit multiple times (I know, used them for daily dodges). If you dodge the boulder, the evade effect will proc multiple times. If evade is not passive, then I will have to activate dodge for each possible hits making multiple activate evades. The fact that I don’t have to actively evade means that the evade effect is passive.

You are trying to separate cause and effect by way of duration. Under this classification, any cleave damage or an attack with multiple impacts would be considered a passive attack.

The attack is an activated skill — the hits, on the other hand, are not. The hit is one of the effects of the attack since the effect of an attack is either a hit or a miss. The initial hit is a direct result of activating the attack, the additional hits are passive effects.

That is a specious argument. That’s like saying you stabbed someone but didn’t kill them because they died of exsanguination.

Bleeding is another passive effect from DB. If they died from bleeding, then they died from bleeding. If you exhaust your initiative from using DB and your target died from multiple stacks of bleeding condition, then yes, they bled to death.

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Maugetarr.6823:

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Maugetarr.6823:

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Maugetarr.6823:

Except that I actively used the dodge saving the endurance for the burst and repositioned. Had it not done damage there would be no question about using the dodge actively. In this scenario with damage both the dodge and the damage were active components of play. I didn’t mention hoping to dodge the burst, I kept enough endurance to wait for it and dodge it.

You said, “You aimed your dodge in an attempt to damage them using it as an attack”, thus the intention is clear that your goal is to do damage and relying on evade to passively negate the damage.

However, if you Bound backwards and happen to do damage to someone else, that damage is passive.

Here’s the thing. You mentioned intention here for the determination of a passive or active attack. Say I have untraited dodges with the endurance to use them and the availability of deathblossom. I have the choice of using either. I choose to use deathblossom because I want to counterattack. The intent is to both evade the damage and deal damage back to them. Neither effect is passive there.

The evade is passive.
- If you’re trying to evade target-1 and do damage to target-1, then the evade is passive in this scenario.
- If you’re trying to evade target-1 and damages target-2, then the damage is passive.
- If you’re trying to evade backward from target-1 but target-1 shadowstep to you then you happen to deal damage to target-1, the damage is still the passive.

Let’s blur the lines more. Is a skill that reflects a projectile passive or active.

Let’s use the engi flamethrower airblast as the example here. My intent is to stop a kill shot from hitting me. I could dodge it. I choose to reflect it instead. Is the reflection passive? It deals the kill shot back to the warrior. It seems that by your stance on counterattacking would define the reflected shot as a passive effect.

I think the confusion here is the difference between activated vs passive and skill vs effect.

Dodge is an activated skill, but the evade that comes with the dodge is the passive effect.

Activating a skill to apply a reflect effect is obviously not passive, since it is an activated skill. Once the skill is activated, the reflect effect does its thing without addition user input, thus it is passive.

Attacks can have both offensive and defensive aspects to them. That doesn’t make them passive. Deathblossom is not passive, just poorly designed because it’s spammable.

Nobody is saying that DB is passive, rather it has a passive effect depending on how you use it.

Let me put it this way. A boulder thrown by a snow wurm can hit multiple times (I know, used them for daily dodges). If you dodge the boulder, the evade effect will proc multiple times. If evade is not passive, then I will have to activate dodge for each possible hits making multiple activate evades. The fact that I don’t have to actively evade means that the evade effect is passive.

You are trying to separate cause and effect by way of duration. Under this classification, any cleave damage or an attack with multiple impacts would be considered a passive attack.

The attack is an activated skill — the hits, on the other hand, are not. The hit is one of the effects of the attack since the effect of an attack is either a hit or a miss. The initial hit is a direct result of activating the attack, the additional hits are passive effects.

That is a specious argument. That’s like saying you stabbed someone but didn’t kill them because they died of exsanguination.

Bleeding is another passive effect from DB. If they died from bleeding, then they died from bleeding. If you exhaust your initiative from using DB and your target died from multiple stacks of bleeding condition, then yes, they bled to death.

So damage is a passive effect within this game?

Maugetarr.6823:

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Maugetarr.6823:

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Maugetarr.6823:

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Maugetarr.6823:

Except that I actively used the dodge saving the endurance for the burst and repositioned. Had it not done damage there would be no question about using the dodge actively. In this scenario with damage both the dodge and the damage were active components of play. I didn’t mention hoping to dodge the burst, I kept enough endurance to wait for it and dodge it.

You said, “You aimed your dodge in an attempt to damage them using it as an attack”, thus the intention is clear that your goal is to do damage and relying on evade to passively negate the damage.

However, if you Bound backwards and happen to do damage to someone else, that damage is passive.

Here’s the thing. You mentioned intention here for the determination of a passive or active attack. Say I have untraited dodges with the endurance to use them and the availability of deathblossom. I have the choice of using either. I choose to use deathblossom because I want to counterattack. The intent is to both evade the damage and deal damage back to them. Neither effect is passive there.

The evade is passive.
- If you’re trying to evade target-1 and do damage to target-1, then the evade is passive in this scenario.
- If you’re trying to evade target-1 and damages target-2, then the damage is passive.
- If you’re trying to evade backward from target-1 but target-1 shadowstep to you then you happen to deal damage to target-1, the damage is still the passive.

Let’s blur the lines more. Is a skill that reflects a projectile passive or active.

Let’s use the engi flamethrower airblast as the example here. My intent is to stop a kill shot from hitting me. I could dodge it. I choose to reflect it instead. Is the reflection passive? It deals the kill shot back to the warrior. It seems that by your stance on counterattacking would define the reflected shot as a passive effect.

I think the confusion here is the difference between activated vs passive and skill vs effect.

Dodge is an activated skill, but the evade that comes with the dodge is the passive effect.

Activating a skill to apply a reflect effect is obviously not passive, since it is an activated skill. Once the skill is activated, the reflect effect does its thing without addition user input, thus it is passive.

Attacks can have both offensive and defensive aspects to them. That doesn’t make them passive. Deathblossom is not passive, just poorly designed because it’s spammable.

Nobody is saying that DB is passive, rather it has a passive effect depending on how you use it.

Let me put it this way. A boulder thrown by a snow wurm can hit multiple times (I know, used them for daily dodges). If you dodge the boulder, the evade effect will proc multiple times. If evade is not passive, then I will have to activate dodge for each possible hits making multiple activate evades. The fact that I don’t have to actively evade means that the evade effect is passive.

You are trying to separate cause and effect by way of duration. Under this classification, any cleave damage or an attack with multiple impacts would be considered a passive attack.

The attack is an activated skill — the hits, on the other hand, are not. The hit is one of the effects of the attack since the effect of an attack is either a hit or a miss. The initial hit is a direct result of activating the attack, the additional hits are passive effects.

That is a specious argument. That’s like saying you stabbed someone but didn’t kill them because they died of exsanguination.

Bleeding is another passive effect from DB. If they died from bleeding, then they died from bleeding. If you exhaust your initiative from using DB and your target died from multiple stacks of bleeding condition, then yes, they bled to death.

So damage is a passive effect within this game?

It’s simple: You can use DB to either evade or to attack.
Evade: bleed is passive
Attack: evade is passive

As the latter isn’t intended in each case – it might be however that you evaded an attack although you didn’t intend to or that you killed someone although you didn’t intend to.
If you’re intending to do both at the same time there’s no need to tell you that this skill is badly designed.
The bleed and damage from DB used to be that weak and we didn’t have access to that many initative and additional evades (you have to be quick = on your target to get that bleed stacks up) that before HoT a build like that never worked – not even in “the condi meta”.

In the end, you can always look at a fight between two opponents of the same class and build – if they are unable to kill each other then something is wrong. best example has been cele-ele. So now imagine 2 thieves 1 vs 1 who evade every hit.

ETA²: I’m not saying that thief is neccessarily OP but if the other classes hadn’t had that many passives it would be = this game is screwed up since June.

Jana.6831:

Maugetarr.6823:

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Maugetarr.6823:

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Maugetarr.6823:

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Maugetarr.6823:

Except that I actively used the dodge saving the endurance for the burst and repositioned. Had it not done damage there would be no question about using the dodge actively. In this scenario with damage both the dodge and the damage were active components of play. I didn’t mention hoping to dodge the burst, I kept enough endurance to wait for it and dodge it.

You said, “You aimed your dodge in an attempt to damage them using it as an attack”, thus the intention is clear that your goal is to do damage and relying on evade to passively negate the damage.

However, if you Bound backwards and happen to do damage to someone else, that damage is passive.

Here’s the thing. You mentioned intention here for the determination of a passive or active attack. Say I have untraited dodges with the endurance to use them and the availability of deathblossom. I have the choice of using either. I choose to use deathblossom because I want to counterattack. The intent is to both evade the damage and deal damage back to them. Neither effect is passive there.

The evade is passive.
- If you’re trying to evade target-1 and do damage to target-1, then the evade is passive in this scenario.
- If you’re trying to evade target-1 and damages target-2, then the damage is passive.
- If you’re trying to evade backward from target-1 but target-1 shadowstep to you then you happen to deal damage to target-1, the damage is still the passive.

Let’s blur the lines more. Is a skill that reflects a projectile passive or active.

Let’s use the engi flamethrower airblast as the example here. My intent is to stop a kill shot from hitting me. I could dodge it. I choose to reflect it instead. Is the reflection passive? It deals the kill shot back to the warrior. It seems that by your stance on counterattacking would define the reflected shot as a passive effect.

I think the confusion here is the difference between activated vs passive and skill vs effect.

Dodge is an activated skill, but the evade that comes with the dodge is the passive effect.

Activating a skill to apply a reflect effect is obviously not passive, since it is an activated skill. Once the skill is activated, the reflect effect does its thing without addition user input, thus it is passive.

Attacks can have both offensive and defensive aspects to them. That doesn’t make them passive. Deathblossom is not passive, just poorly designed because it’s spammable.

Nobody is saying that DB is passive, rather it has a passive effect depending on how you use it.

Let me put it this way. A boulder thrown by a snow wurm can hit multiple times (I know, used them for daily dodges). If you dodge the boulder, the evade effect will proc multiple times. If evade is not passive, then I will have to activate dodge for each possible hits making multiple activate evades. The fact that I don’t have to actively evade means that the evade effect is passive.

You are trying to separate cause and effect by way of duration. Under this classification, any cleave damage or an attack with multiple impacts would be considered a passive attack.

The attack is an activated skill — the hits, on the other hand, are not. The hit is one of the effects of the attack since the effect of an attack is either a hit or a miss. The initial hit is a direct result of activating the attack, the additional hits are passive effects.

That is a specious argument. That’s like saying you stabbed someone but didn’t kill them because they died of exsanguination.

Bleeding is another passive effect from DB. If they died from bleeding, then they died from bleeding. If you exhaust your initiative from using DB and your target died from multiple stacks of bleeding condition, then yes, they bled to death.

So damage is a passive effect within this game?

It’s simple: You can use DB to either evade or to attack.
Evade: bleed is passive
Attack: evade is passive

As the latter isn’t intended in each case – it might be however that you evaded an attack although you didn’t intend to or that you killed someone although you didn’t intend to.
If you’re intending to do both at the same time there’s no need to tell you that this skill is badly designed.
The bleed and damage from DB used to be that weak and we didn’t have access to that many initative and additional evades (you have to be quick = on your target to get that bleed stacks up) that before HoT a build like that never worked – not even in “the condi meta”.

In the end, you can always look at a fight between two opponents of the same class and build – if they are unable to kill each other then something is wrong. best example has been cele-ele. So now imagine 2 thieves 1 vs 1 who evade every hit.

You are conflating multiple effects, or impacts with passivity. Which effect of an attack like impairing daggers is passive?

Maugetarr.6823:

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Maugetarr.6823:

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Maugetarr.6823:

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Maugetarr.6823:

Except that I actively used the dodge saving the endurance for the burst and repositioned. Had it not done damage there would be no question about using the dodge actively. In this scenario with damage both the dodge and the damage were active components of play. I didn’t mention hoping to dodge the burst, I kept enough endurance to wait for it and dodge it.

You said, “You aimed your dodge in an attempt to damage them using it as an attack”, thus the intention is clear that your goal is to do damage and relying on evade to passively negate the damage.

However, if you Bound backwards and happen to do damage to someone else, that damage is passive.

Here’s the thing. You mentioned intention here for the determination of a passive or active attack. Say I have untraited dodges with the endurance to use them and the availability of deathblossom. I have the choice of using either. I choose to use deathblossom because I want to counterattack. The intent is to both evade the damage and deal damage back to them. Neither effect is passive there.

The evade is passive.
- If you’re trying to evade target-1 and do damage to target-1, then the evade is passive in this scenario.
- If you’re trying to evade target-1 and damages target-2, then the damage is passive.
- If you’re trying to evade backward from target-1 but target-1 shadowstep to you then you happen to deal damage to target-1, the damage is still the passive.

Let’s blur the lines more. Is a skill that reflects a projectile passive or active.

Let’s use the engi flamethrower airblast as the example here. My intent is to stop a kill shot from hitting me. I could dodge it. I choose to reflect it instead. Is the reflection passive? It deals the kill shot back to the warrior. It seems that by your stance on counterattacking would define the reflected shot as a passive effect.

I think the confusion here is the difference between activated vs passive and skill vs effect.

Dodge is an activated skill, but the evade that comes with the dodge is the passive effect.

Activating a skill to apply a reflect effect is obviously not passive, since it is an activated skill. Once the skill is activated, the reflect effect does its thing without addition user input, thus it is passive.

Attacks can have both offensive and defensive aspects to them. That doesn’t make them passive. Deathblossom is not passive, just poorly designed because it’s spammable.

Nobody is saying that DB is passive, rather it has a passive effect depending on how you use it.

Let me put it this way. A boulder thrown by a snow wurm can hit multiple times (I know, used them for daily dodges). If you dodge the boulder, the evade effect will proc multiple times. If evade is not passive, then I will have to activate dodge for each possible hits making multiple activate evades. The fact that I don’t have to actively evade means that the evade effect is passive.

You are trying to separate cause and effect by way of duration. Under this classification, any cleave damage or an attack with multiple impacts would be considered a passive attack.

The attack is an activated skill — the hits, on the other hand, are not. The hit is one of the effects of the attack since the effect of an attack is either a hit or a miss. The initial hit is a direct result of activating the attack, the additional hits are passive effects.

That is a specious argument. That’s like saying you stabbed someone but didn’t kill them because they died of exsanguination.

Bleeding is another passive effect from DB. If they died from bleeding, then they died from bleeding. If you exhaust your initiative from using DB and your target died from multiple stacks of bleeding condition, then yes, they bled to death.

So damage is a passive effect within this game?

When you activate a weapon skill several things happen — activation → hit or miss → if hit, then damage, if miss, then no damage.

When you activate a condition skill several things happen — activation → deal small damage to apply condition → condition deals condition damage passively

The damage from a weapon skill is a direct result of the attack, thus it is not passive effect. However, if this attack has cleave, any additional damage after the first is passive.

In GW2, the game system requires that the skill will deal damage before a condition is applied. The condition itself deals condition damage which is passive since no additional input is needed from the user — the condition does what it’s suppose to do on its own.

So, asking that, “damage is a passive effect within this game?” is a little dishonest because I’m sure you know that that isn’t true nor what is being explained here.

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Maugetarr.6823:

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Maugetarr.6823:

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Maugetarr.6823:

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Maugetarr.6823:

Except that I actively used the dodge saving the endurance for the burst and repositioned. Had it not done damage there would be no question about using the dodge actively. In this scenario with damage both the dodge and the damage were active components of play. I didn’t mention hoping to dodge the burst, I kept enough endurance to wait for it and dodge it.

You said, “You aimed your dodge in an attempt to damage them using it as an attack”, thus the intention is clear that your goal is to do damage and relying on evade to passively negate the damage.

However, if you Bound backwards and happen to do damage to someone else, that damage is passive.

Here’s the thing. You mentioned intention here for the determination of a passive or active attack. Say I have untraited dodges with the endurance to use them and the availability of deathblossom. I have the choice of using either. I choose to use deathblossom because I want to counterattack. The intent is to both evade the damage and deal damage back to them. Neither effect is passive there.

The evade is passive.
- If you’re trying to evade target-1 and do damage to target-1, then the evade is passive in this scenario.
- If you’re trying to evade target-1 and damages target-2, then the damage is passive.
- If you’re trying to evade backward from target-1 but target-1 shadowstep to you then you happen to deal damage to target-1, the damage is still the passive.

Let’s blur the lines more. Is a skill that reflects a projectile passive or active.

Let’s use the engi flamethrower airblast as the example here. My intent is to stop a kill shot from hitting me. I could dodge it. I choose to reflect it instead. Is the reflection passive? It deals the kill shot back to the warrior. It seems that by your stance on counterattacking would define the reflected shot as a passive effect.

I think the confusion here is the difference between activated vs passive and skill vs effect.

Dodge is an activated skill, but the evade that comes with the dodge is the passive effect.

Activating a skill to apply a reflect effect is obviously not passive, since it is an activated skill. Once the skill is activated, the reflect effect does its thing without addition user input, thus it is passive.

Attacks can have both offensive and defensive aspects to them. That doesn’t make them passive. Deathblossom is not passive, just poorly designed because it’s spammable.

Nobody is saying that DB is passive, rather it has a passive effect depending on how you use it.

Let me put it this way. A boulder thrown by a snow wurm can hit multiple times (I know, used them for daily dodges). If you dodge the boulder, the evade effect will proc multiple times. If evade is not passive, then I will have to activate dodge for each possible hits making multiple activate evades. The fact that I don’t have to actively evade means that the evade effect is passive.

You are trying to separate cause and effect by way of duration. Under this classification, any cleave damage or an attack with multiple impacts would be considered a passive attack.

The attack is an activated skill — the hits, on the other hand, are not. The hit is one of the effects of the attack since the effect of an attack is either a hit or a miss. The initial hit is a direct result of activating the attack, the additional hits are passive effects.

That is a specious argument. That’s like saying you stabbed someone but didn’t kill them because they died of exsanguination.

Bleeding is another passive effect from DB. If they died from bleeding, then they died from bleeding. If you exhaust your initiative from using DB and your target died from multiple stacks of bleeding condition, then yes, they bled to death.

So damage is a passive effect within this game?

When you activate a weapon skill several things happen — activation -> hit or miss -> if hit, then damage, if miss, then no damage.

When you activate a condition skill several things happen — activation -> deal small damage to apply condition -> condition deals condition damage passively

The damage from a weapon skill is a direct result of the attack, thus it is not passive effect. However, if this attack has cleave, any additional damage after the first is passive.

In GW2, the game system requires that the skill will deal damage before a condition is applied. The condition itself deals condition damage which is passive since no additional input is needed from the user — the condition does what it’s suppose to do on its own.

So, asking that, “damage is a passive effect within this game?” is a little dishonest because I’m sure you know that that isn’t true nor what is being explained here.

Again, you are conflating duration with being passive. A condition is Damage over time. The damage is not passive. There might be passive application through traits over which you have no control. But imagine a skill does 1000 damage as soon as it hits. Now the skill does 200 damage for 5 seconds when it hits. The division of the damage over an interval of time does not affect the activation required to apply that damage.

Maugetarr.6823:

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Maugetarr.6823:

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Maugetarr.6823:

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Maugetarr.6823:

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Maugetarr.6823:

Except that I actively used the dodge saving the endurance for the burst and repositioned. Had it not done damage there would be no question about using the dodge actively. In this scenario with damage both the dodge and the damage were active components of play. I didn’t mention hoping to dodge the burst, I kept enough endurance to wait for it and dodge it.

You said, “You aimed your dodge in an attempt to damage them using it as an attack”, thus the intention is clear that your goal is to do damage and relying on evade to passively negate the damage.

However, if you Bound backwards and happen to do damage to someone else, that damage is passive.

Here’s the thing. You mentioned intention here for the determination of a passive or active attack. Say I have untraited dodges with the endurance to use them and the availability of deathblossom. I have the choice of using either. I choose to use deathblossom because I want to counterattack. The intent is to both evade the damage and deal damage back to them. Neither effect is passive there.

The evade is passive.
- If you’re trying to evade target-1 and do damage to target-1, then the evade is passive in this scenario.
- If you’re trying to evade target-1 and damages target-2, then the damage is passive.
- If you’re trying to evade backward from target-1 but target-1 shadowstep to you then you happen to deal damage to target-1, the damage is still the passive.

Let’s blur the lines more. Is a skill that reflects a projectile passive or active.

Let’s use the engi flamethrower airblast as the example here. My intent is to stop a kill shot from hitting me. I could dodge it. I choose to reflect it instead. Is the reflection passive? It deals the kill shot back to the warrior. It seems that by your stance on counterattacking would define the reflected shot as a passive effect.

I think the confusion here is the difference between activated vs passive and skill vs effect.

Dodge is an activated skill, but the evade that comes with the dodge is the passive effect.

Activating a skill to apply a reflect effect is obviously not passive, since it is an activated skill. Once the skill is activated, the reflect effect does its thing without addition user input, thus it is passive.

Attacks can have both offensive and defensive aspects to them. That doesn’t make them passive. Deathblossom is not passive, just poorly designed because it’s spammable.

Nobody is saying that DB is passive, rather it has a passive effect depending on how you use it.

Let me put it this way. A boulder thrown by a snow wurm can hit multiple times (I know, used them for daily dodges). If you dodge the boulder, the evade effect will proc multiple times. If evade is not passive, then I will have to activate dodge for each possible hits making multiple activate evades. The fact that I don’t have to actively evade means that the evade effect is passive.

You are trying to separate cause and effect by way of duration. Under this classification, any cleave damage or an attack with multiple impacts would be considered a passive attack.

The attack is an activated skill — the hits, on the other hand, are not. The hit is one of the effects of the attack since the effect of an attack is either a hit or a miss. The initial hit is a direct result of activating the attack, the additional hits are passive effects.

That is a specious argument. That’s like saying you stabbed someone but didn’t kill them because they died of exsanguination.

Bleeding is another passive effect from DB. If they died from bleeding, then they died from bleeding. If you exhaust your initiative from using DB and your target died from multiple stacks of bleeding condition, then yes, they bled to death.

So damage is a passive effect within this game?

When you activate a weapon skill several things happen — activation -> hit or miss -> if hit, then damage, if miss, then no damage.

When you activate a condition skill several things happen — activation -> deal small damage to apply condition -> condition deals condition damage passively

The damage from a weapon skill is a direct result of the attack, thus it is not passive effect. However, if this attack has cleave, any additional damage after the first is passive.

In GW2, the game system requires that the skill will deal damage before a condition is applied. The condition itself deals condition damage which is passive since no additional input is needed from the user — the condition does what it’s suppose to do on its own.

So, asking that, “damage is a passive effect within this game?” is a little dishonest because I’m sure you know that that isn’t true nor what is being explained here.

Again, you are conflating duration with being passive. A condition is Damage over time. The damage is not passive. There might be passive application through traits over which you have no control. But imagine a skill does 1000 damage as soon as it hits. Now the skill does 200 damage for 5 seconds when it hits. The division of the damage over an interval of time does not affect the activation required to apply that damage.

But you’re not actively applying damage, just as you’re not actively evading a multiple hit attack.

Let me ask you, what do you think a passive effect is?

Jana.6831:

yolo swaggins.2570:

@ Jana those are not passives. Passives are effects that happen even when you are not happening, like Don’t Stop’s cripple/chill effectiveness decrease and immobilize conversion. The DrD dodges are not since all they do is replace the original dodge which requires action on the player’s part.

And next time kinda read the rest of the post. Hard to Catch was one of those traits that all thieves kittened about. It was still a passive proc trait but it killed more than it saved. This version is a complete 180 from that and it really needed it.

In fact alot of the changes they made were asked for, as babashook stated, that were made during a time when thieves only had one role. It was a time before they got pushed out of the meta entirely. If you need someone to blame about these decisions, blame the ones who asked for them years ago. Because all anet did was listen to them.

They are passives as you don’t chose “I want to evade” but the skill does this for you.
Hard to catch was a bad trait, yes, it’s a better trait now – still it’s a passive and that was my point. Thief survivability now lies in passively evading 50% of the attacks – not what I want in this game.
What anet should do: Stop listening to players and learn how their own game works – problem: Most are D/P so “everything” suits D/P – what should I do? Quit the game as I have no voice?

That was one of my points. To think about what you want vs. what it means for the profession.

I did, did you?

Ps: You do realize that we only have 2 sets left, out of formerly 4 when staff wasn’t even around?!

ETA: I mean weaponskills that evade, btw.

A very late ETA:
On the one hand you say that anet implemented “everything” players suggested – on the other hand you say “we” should shut up – does that even make sense to you?
(And that’s why I say the players shouldn’t be the important factor when it comes to balancing – a lot of stuff suggested on here is over the top, yes, but in reality the last patch barely scratched the surface of the problems thief as a class has got – and that is also because that what counts balance wise are the players and that shouldn’t be).

I am not saying “shut up”, I am saying “watch it”. Whether or not the last patch did anything, it is too early to tell what the changes affected between the professions. And so I am here telling people to calm down and not make stupid requests lest anet actually does something about it and puts us back into an undesirable position… again.

It hard to have a debate when one can not even agree with what a word means.

This is my defintion of passive.

A passive skill is one that does not require active keyboard intervention my the players part to trigger. DB can not be a passive skill because I need to hit the 3 on my keyboard to trigger a deathblossom. Whether DB has multiple effects is immaterial. One gets an evade off deathblossom but it does not happen unless you hit number three. One applies bleeds and damage off deathblossom but it does not happen unless one hits number three.One can get a condition cleanse or heal off DB but it does not happen unless a person hits the number three on the keyboard. INI is spent each time One uses it and traiting so it has multiple effects hardly turns the effects into passives.

A passive is a skill like assassins signet running and it giving 180 power. No other input needed from the player (other then equipping the utility) is required. They will always get that 180 power. The active is when one manually triggers that skill for that 15 percent extra damage. The passive effect is shut off for its duration but that 15 percent damage for those next few attacks is defined as an active skill. If I trait Signets to get might from the CS line that Might is also an active as it requires me to activate my signet.

A trait like the new evasive skill in Acro is a passive. I can be standing away from my keyboard and when I drop in health and reach that threshold it will trigger. Pain response is a passive as I can be away from my keyboard and its effect will trigger on reaching the threshold. GI is not a passive. It can not be used unless I make an attack.

The warrior stance Endure pain is an active. It can not activate unless the warrior actively does so. Whether it has secondary effects added by other training does not make it a passive.

The warrior TRAIT defy pain is a passive. While it has the exact same effects as does endure pain no active intervention is needed by the warrior to trigger it. He can be away from his keyboard and under attack. When his health drops to 25 percent or lower it triggers with no intervention on his part required. All effects that happen because of this trigger can be defibned as passives now (such as the stun break) because he did not have to do anything to trigger that trait.

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Maugetarr.6823:

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Maugetarr.6823:

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Maugetarr.6823:

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Maugetarr.6823:

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Maugetarr.6823:

Except that I actively used the dodge saving the endurance for the burst and repositioned. Had it not done damage there would be no question about using the dodge actively. In this scenario with damage both the dodge and the damage were active components of play. I didn’t mention hoping to dodge the burst, I kept enough endurance to wait for it and dodge it.

You said, “You aimed your dodge in an attempt to damage them using it as an attack”, thus the intention is clear that your goal is to do damage and relying on evade to passively negate the damage.

However, if you Bound backwards and happen to do damage to someone else, that damage is passive.

Here’s the thing. You mentioned intention here for the determination of a passive or active attack. Say I have untraited dodges with the endurance to use them and the availability of deathblossom. I have the choice of using either. I choose to use deathblossom because I want to counterattack. The intent is to both evade the damage and deal damage back to them. Neither effect is passive there.

The evade is passive.
- If you’re trying to evade target-1 and do damage to target-1, then the evade is passive in this scenario.
- If you’re trying to evade target-1 and damages target-2, then the damage is passive.
- If you’re trying to evade backward from target-1 but target-1 shadowstep to you then you happen to deal damage to target-1, the damage is still the passive.

Let’s blur the lines more. Is a skill that reflects a projectile passive or active.

Let’s use the engi flamethrower airblast as the example here. My intent is to stop a kill shot from hitting me. I could dodge it. I choose to reflect it instead. Is the reflection passive? It deals the kill shot back to the warrior. It seems that by your stance on counterattacking would define the reflected shot as a passive effect.

I think the confusion here is the difference between activated vs passive and skill vs effect.

Dodge is an activated skill, but the evade that comes with the dodge is the passive effect.

Activating a skill to apply a reflect effect is obviously not passive, since it is an activated skill. Once the skill is activated, the reflect effect does its thing without addition user input, thus it is passive.

Attacks can have both offensive and defensive aspects to them. That doesn’t make them passive. Deathblossom is not passive, just poorly designed because it’s spammable.

Nobody is saying that DB is passive, rather it has a passive effect depending on how you use it.

Let me put it this way. A boulder thrown by a snow wurm can hit multiple times (I know, used them for daily dodges). If you dodge the boulder, the evade effect will proc multiple times. If evade is not passive, then I will have to activate dodge for each possible hits making multiple activate evades. The fact that I don’t have to actively evade means that the evade effect is passive.

You are trying to separate cause and effect by way of duration. Under this classification, any cleave damage or an attack with multiple impacts would be considered a passive attack.

The attack is an activated skill — the hits, on the other hand, are not. The hit is one of the effects of the attack since the effect of an attack is either a hit or a miss. The initial hit is a direct result of activating the attack, the additional hits are passive effects.

That is a specious argument. That’s like saying you stabbed someone but didn’t kill them because they died of exsanguination.

Bleeding is another passive effect from DB. If they died from bleeding, then they died from bleeding. If you exhaust your initiative from using DB and your target died from multiple stacks of bleeding condition, then yes, they bled to death.

So damage is a passive effect within this game?

When you activate a weapon skill several things happen — activation -> hit or miss -> if hit, then damage, if miss, then no damage.

When you activate a condition skill several things happen — activation -> deal small damage to apply condition -> condition deals condition damage passively

The damage from a weapon skill is a direct result of the attack, thus it is not passive effect. However, if this attack has cleave, any additional damage after the first is passive.

In GW2, the game system requires that the skill will deal damage before a condition is applied. The condition itself deals condition damage which is passive since no additional input is needed from the user — the condition does what it’s suppose to do on its own.

So, asking that, “damage is a passive effect within this game?” is a little dishonest because I’m sure you know that that isn’t true nor what is being explained here.

Again, you are conflating duration with being passive. A condition is Damage over time. The damage is not passive. There might be passive application through traits over which you have no control. But imagine a skill does 1000 damage as soon as it hits. Now the skill does 200 damage for 5 seconds when it hits. The division of the damage over an interval of time does not affect the activation required to apply that damage.

But you’re not actively applying damage, just as you’re not actively evading a multiple hit attack.

Let me ask you, what do you think a passive effect is?

You actually already actively applied the damage, it’s just taking longer that an instant in fully implement itself. If we were considering time to be a factor in whether or not something was considered active play, at what time would it be considered active. If you don’t think 1000 damage over 5 seconds is active, at what time interval does it become active? It’s not like we can take a limit with respect to time as it goes to zero and at some point the damage transitions from non active to active. Both forms of the attack required an action to implement, one just has a longer amount of time before the entirety of that action is realized.

We can see why considering something like time to have an effect on active or inactive definitions would make it tricky in the long run. Look at the traits Impacting Disruption versus Power Block. I wouldn’t consider either of these a passive skill because it requires an activation by the offensive player (the one interrupting) meeting a condition for their skill to operate. If time is taken into account, powerblock would be considered an active effect while the delay of the damage from pulmonary impact would render it into being a passive proc, but both require the same conditions and are usually a bonus modification to a skill with an additional effect. And no, I don’t consider the addition of effects when a condition is met which require an activation to make an ability passive. If that were the case, warrior burst attacks would be considered active while their berserker counterparts would be passive.

A passive effect is something that triggers on the controlling player that they don’t actually have control over.

Lets look at endure pain and defy pain. Regardless of the duration of negating damage, endure pain requires an activation for its effect. If you are burst down before you can activate it, you won’t get to activate it. Defy pain is a passive proc. Once you reach 25% health from an outside source, it will proc without your input.

babazhook.6805:

It hard to have a debate when one can not even agree with what a word means.

This is my defintion of passive.

A passive skill is one that does not require active keyboard intervention my the players part to trigger. DB can not be a passive skill because I need to hit the 3 on my keyboard to trigger a deathblossom. Whether DB has multiple effects is immaterial. One gets an evade off deathblossom but it does not happen unless you hit number three. One applies bleeds and damage off deathblossom but it does not happen unless one hits number three.One can get a condition cleanse or heal off DB but it does not happen unless a person hits the number three on the keyboard. INI is spent each time One uses it and traiting so it has multiple effects hardly turns the effects into passives.

A passive is a skill like assassins signet running and it giving 180 power. No other input needed from the player (other then equipping the utility) is required. They will always get that 180 power. The active is when one manually triggers that skill for that 15 percent extra damage. The passive effect is shut off for its duration but that 15 percent damage for those next few attacks is defined as an active skill. If I trait Signets to get might from the CS line that Might is also an active as it requires me to activate my signet.

A trait like the new evasive skill in Acro is a passive. I can be standing away from my keyboard and when I drop in health and reach that threshold it will trigger. Pain response is a passive as I can be away from my keyboard and its effect will trigger on reaching the threshold. GI is not a passive. It can not be used unless I make an attack.

The warrior stance Endure pain is an active. It can not activate unless the warrior actively does so. Whether it has secondary effects added by other training does not make it a passive.

The warrior TRAIT defy pain is a passive. While it has the exact same effects as does endure pain no active intervention is needed by the warrior to trigger it. He can be away from his keyboard and under attack. When his health drops to 25 percent or lower it triggers with no intervention on his part required. All effects that happen because of this trigger can be defibned as passives now (such as the stun break) because he did not have to do anything to trigger that trait.

I took too long to type and you basically said the same thing I did using one of the same examples.

forum bug
……………………

Maugetarr.6823:

You are conflating multiple effects, or impacts with passivity. Which effect of an attack like impairing daggers is passive?

You refuse to get the point – a dual skill that defends and attacks at the same time in a bulk is just as bad as having multiple invulnerabilities – maybe even worse (depends)
I don’t give a kitten what babaa and you think how the term should be used.