Sir Vincent III.1286

Shadow Mage/Arcane Thief.Shadow Magic trait line that eats (steals) everything. Pure offensive shadow abilities.Main weapon: GreatswordMain debilitating conditions: Blind, Weakness, Slow Enhances Blind making all hit to miss for the duration.Enhances Weakness to apply 75% instead of 50% less damage and endurance regen.Enhances Slow increase activation of skill to 75% instead of 50%.Main damaging conditions: Confusion, TormentNew offensive ability: Corrupted Wound - shadow magic corrupts wounds reducing target's maximum health by 20% for a duration (ref. GW1 Deep Wounds).Sample weapon skills:Stealth attack: Backslash - X damage, apply Corrupted Wound if from the back or side.1: Thrust - stab for X damage2: Blinding slash - X damage, target is blind if from the front.3: Cross slash - two spinning slashes, evade frame4: Positioned strike - leap backward, dash forward, X damage5: Shadow infusion - infused weapon with shadow, next attack applies stealth Sample skills:Healing: Shadow Form - (Manipulation) You are covered in shadow magic for 3s, you receive nor deal damage for the duration. Heal for X amount.Utility 1: Shrouded Thievery - (Manipulation) Steal upto 3 boons. Target cannot receive boons for Xs.Utility 2: Shadow Burden - (Manipulation) Next attack on target applies Corrupted Wound. Break stun.Utility 3: Shadow Stitches - (Manipulation) Target is immobilized unless moving towards your direction for Xs.Elite: Shrouded Charge - (Manipulation) Apply superspeed and cannot be targeted for Xs. Sample traits:Minor adept: Blind duration is reduced by 50%. All attacks miss for the duration of blind.Minor master: Weakness duration is reduced by 50%. Weakness is enhanced to 75%.Minor GM: Slow duration is reduced by 50%. Slow is enhanced to 75%. I wish...

It comes with a stunbreak which mean you have to be not stunned in order to hit your target from side or behind. It was a useless part of the trait. And quickness every 60s...really?

Just FYI: I got 7/10 - Snowden, Timberline, and Mt. Maelstrom are all open chests when they are supposed to be closed and locked.

Male Sylvari lost their appeal thanks to Trahearne. The voice acting for the Human male is superior to that of the Sylvari male. Lastly, armor design for the Human cultural set is way better than that of Sylvari. The female Sylvari armor doesn't look too bad.

@getalifeturd.8139 get-a-life-turd

I don't think I will be able to play a Guild Wars game without Dodge and Jump. It's hard to play other RPG without it too. I love the flow of combat in GW2 and any game without the Dodge and Jump combat feature/mechanic just feels incomplete.

They are letting players buy them outright if you buy the bundle. It's not cheap, but it's there. And you could win the lottery if you just buy a ticket for every possible combination of numbers. That's ridiculous and you know it. To compare 1:30 chance to 1:1,000,000+ chance is absurd. You're right, the lottery isn't nearly as bad because people can more intuitively understand how little of a chance of winning they actually have; it's essentially nothing. Here, if you spend 6000 gems on skins you still only have a coin toss chance of getting the skin you want, which to some people might actually seem like a "good deal".You must have an extremely bad luck if you can't get the one you want after 10 tries with a 1:3 chance -- and I highly doubt that you only want 1 skin.

If you had to pay real world cash for every random drop, i bet you'd see the difference really fast. Which is not the case here.

They are letting players buy them outright if you buy the bundle. It's not cheap, but it's there. And you could win the lottery if you just buy a ticket for every possible combination of numbers. this. everyone arguing "it's not gambling because you can buy them all" is wasting time on pointless semantics. except for a tiny portion of dedicated collectors and/or whales, most people only want a handful of these 30 skins, not every last one. every skin they pay for but don't want is a lost dice roll. just because there's a fixed total number of possible times to lose doesn't mean it isn't gambling. Call it gambling if you want, but this is nothing different than getting a random drop. In a way. Most good random drops come at the end of some sort of content though. A dungeon, a raid, a chain of quests or a world event. Low probability of getting what you want in those instances is to slow down or time gate rewards and content to encourage more play time and thus used to manipulate people in sub based profit models for the most part or to make buying the item with real money more desirable. The beauty of making items exclusive to the cash shop is you don't need to bother making the content to play through in the first place.Look at it this way. I played for a week running the same content hoping for the mount I want to drop from the boss, after several others drop, I got it. Now I played for a week in GW2, make enough gold to convert to gems and randomly got other skins until I get the one I want. Different path, same result.

They are letting players buy them outright if you buy the bundle. It's not cheap, but it's there. And you could win the lottery if you just buy a ticket for every possible combination of numbers.That's ridiculous and you know it. To compare 1:30 chance to 1:1,000,000+ chance is absurd.

They are letting players buy them outright if you buy the bundle. It's not cheap, but it's there. And you could win the lottery if you just buy a ticket for every possible combination of numbers. this. everyone arguing "it's not gambling because you can buy them all" is wasting time on pointless semantics. except for a tiny portion of dedicated collectors and/or whales, most people only want a handful of these 30 skins, not every last one. every skin they pay for but don't want is a lost dice roll. just because there's a fixed total number of possible times to lose doesn't mean it isn't gambling. Call it gambling if you want, but this is nothing different than getting a random drop.

They are letting players buy them outright if you buy the bundle. It's not cheap, but it's there.

They are in the game. You can convert gold to gem. I farmed this one randomly dropped mount from an old dungeon in WoW so many times. I made a lot of gold wishing that there's a way to use the gold to just buy the mount instead of wasting my time resetting and running the same dungeon over and over. Is that what you like to do, to run the same content hoping for a random drop? Then GW2 has it. To me, there's not difference. The more people do that the worse the exchange rate will become thus effectively increasing the grinding time which in turn makes paying with real money more enticing. They thought this through you know. Nah, I doubt it. It might spike the exchange rate sure, but you can't ignore those who exchange gems for gold.

They are in the game. You can convert gold to gem. I farmed this one randomly dropped mount from an old dungeon in WoW so many times. I made a lot of gold wishing that there's a way to use the gold to just buy the mount instead of wasting my time resetting and running the same dungeon over and over. Is that what you like to do, to run the same content hoping for a random drop? Then GW2 has it. To me, there's not difference.

I knew there was a reason I only buy socks I'm all going to use. (Sorry, yes, that was rather childish. True, though, I'll never get an assorted pack of socks that contains ones I know I won't use. I guess we're all different when it comes to these things.) It might be best to agree to disagree on the subject. Clearly, we think on it differently, and I'm not sure either of us is going to convince the other. Considering the risk of this devolving into a back-and-forth, this is my final reply. Thank you for the serious discussion, though, and have a nice evening. You too.

1) So does GW2. You have seen the new Jackal, right? Bright side? You know exactly what you're getting. You know exactly what you're getting. If you buy the bundle you get all 30 of them. For the bundle, yes. For anything less (like the 10-pack or the 1 contract), no. The odds of getting what you want is not even that high. If you can't afford it, then that's your problem, isn't it? I can't afford a Ferrari, but why would I waste my time complaining about it? I'm not complaining about not being able to afford a Ferrari. A Ferrari is like the Jackal, which indeed I can also not afford. That's not my problem. My problem is not being able to afford a shirt I want because it's between a bunch of other shirts and I can only get a random one out of 30, instead of the one shirt I want. Then this is not about affordability. You're actually complaining about the randomness. The option is there. If you don't like the randomness, then buy the bundle. If you can't afford the bundle then try your luck on singles. Or cut the odds to 1:3 by buying the 10 pack. That's your perception. Things in WoW isn't worst. And no, ArenaNet does not want your arm or your hand -- that's you underpricing your limbs. If I have to chop my finger, I better get $100 million for it, so if you want an arm, you better afford $250 Billion. These skins don't cost a hand or an arm, let alone a finger. Hence, me purposely using 'figuratively'. I'm not saying they cost me limbs. I'm saying the comparison is moot because it's still not a good thing. I can say it's like stealing 10 euros vs stealing 100 euros, which is both still not okay, if it makes you feel better about approaching a literal comparison. (Before you continue - yes, I am aware they're also not stealing any money, I'd be spending it voluntarily. That's why it's a comparison.) You need to work on your analogy then because those were bad examples. You very neatly explained the problem therein. There is no way to simply buy the actual product you want. It was designed deliberately to be like that. The inherent weakness that is being 'preyed' upon of the customer is being drawn into a game of chance where the odds are statistically against them. Hence people using the 'predatory' analogy. The problem here is that people want to buy something that ArenaNet is not selling.

Nope, not very high odds indeed. Mis-typed: "The odds of NOT getting..." Yes, I am. And I'm not the only one unable (or, in other cases, unwilling) to afford a way to eliminate the randomness from the equation. Well, it's an option and it's available. You don't even need to fork up the cash, you can convert gold to gems too. The option is there. If you don't like the randomness, then buy the bundle. If you can't afford the bundle then try your luck on singles. Or cut the odds to 1:3 by buying the 10 pack. That's not an option to buy the shirt separately. That's an option to buy all shirts and have 29 of them lying around in the closet, a wasted 116 bucks, and no option to even donate any of them to goodwill. That, or an option to buy a shirt and hope, pray, beg that it'll be the one I want, or keep on spending until I get it (with again, the ones I get before that one lying around in my closet, wasted money, etc.)No different than buying an assorted pack of socks even if you're not going to use the tube socks. I doubt they will remove the randomness. You need to work on your analogy then because those were bad examples. I don't complain about your Ferrari, either.I used that only because you said it's unaffordable when you clearly complaining about randomness.

Nothing "predatory" about this at all. That's just an exaggeration by inappropriately labeling something they don't like. If we break this down to $15/month, that's 3 skins per month and after 10 months, you get all the skins. Nothing unethical about that when other MMO charges a $15/mo fee to play their game on top of buying a copy of their expansion. $15/mo for 3 skins is very affordable. The problem here is that people want everything NOW even though they CAN'T AFFORD IT right now. I prefer it to be 250 gems a piece but I'm not too worked up if they keep the 400 gem price. The randomness is just a fun spin on the process. You are making the assumption that the same pack of mounts will remain available for ten months.At this point where no deadline was posted, it can remain forever.

1) So does GW2. You have seen the new Jackal, right? Bright side? You know exactly what you're getting. You know exactly what you're getting. If you buy the bundle you get all 30 of them. For the bundle, yes. For anything less (like the 10-pack or the 1 contract), no.The odds of getting what you want is not even that high. If you can't afford it, then that's your problem, isn't it? I can't afford a Ferrari, but why would I waste my time complaining about it? I'm not complaining about not being able to afford a Ferrari. A Ferrari is like the Jackal, which indeed I can also not afford. That's not my problem. My problem is not being able to afford a shirt I want because it's between a bunch of other shirts and I can only get a random one out of 30, instead of the one shirt I want.Then this is not about affordability. You're actually complaining about the randomness. The option is there. If you don't like the randomness, then buy the bundle. If you can't afford the bundle then try your luck on singles. Or cut the odds to 1:3 by buying the 10 pack. That's your perception. Things in WoW isn't worst. And no, ArenaNet does not want your arm or your hand -- that's you underpricing your limbs. If I have to chop my finger, I better get $100 million for it, so if you want an arm, you better afford $250 Billion. These skins don't cost a hand or an arm, let alone a finger. Hence, me purposely using 'figuratively'. I'm not saying they cost me limbs. I'm saying the comparison is moot because it's still not a good thing. I can say it's like stealing 10 euros vs stealing 100 euros, which is both still not okay, if it makes you feel better about approaching a literal comparison. (Before you continue - yes, I am aware they're also not stealing any money, I'd be spending it voluntarily. That's why it's a comparison.)You need to work on your analogy then because those were bad examples.

Nothing "predatory" about this at all. That's just an exaggeration by inappropriately labeling something they don't like. If we break this down to $15/month, that's 3 skins per month and after 10 months, you get all the skins. Nothing unethical about that when other MMO charges a $15/mo fee to play their game on top of buying a copy of their expansion. $15/mo for 3 skins is very affordable. The problem here is that people want everything NOW even though they CAN'T AFFORD IT right now. I prefer it to be 250 gems a piece but I'm not too worked up if they keep the 400 gem price. The randomness is just a fun spin on the process.

1) So does GW2. You have seen the new Jackal, right? Bright side? You know exactly what you're getting. You know exactly what you're getting. If you buy the bundle you get all 30 of them. If you can't afford it, then that's your problem, isn't it? I can't afford a Ferrari, but why would I waste my time complaining about it? That's your perception. Things in WoW isn't worst. And no, ArenaNet does not want your arm or your hand -- that's you underpricing your limbs. If I have to chop my finger, I better get $100 million for it, so if you want an arm, you better afford $250 Billion. These skins don't cost a hand or an arm, let alone a finger.

The hysteria over the GW2 mount skin is laughable. While WoW sells a single skin for $25, GW2 sells a skin for $5 (400 gems). $4 per skin if you buy the bundle.

I have to be doing something specific in a specific place at a specific time to find GW2 rewarding. I just filled my inventory with rewards again last night doing a Mordremoth run in Dragon's Stand at 2 in the morning. I will never get the same amount of reward anywhere else for the same time investment. I also did the Maws of Torment event last night and didn't even get as much reward as I got from Dragon's Stand. I spent almost the same amount of time. Is GW2 rewarding? Yes, sometimes. You just need to know where to find them.

My Main Thiefhttp://sirvincentiii.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/DE_SV3.jpg

Sounds like Daredevil with Shield instead of Staff.