Talk:Swamp troll (4): Difference between revisions

From Elanthipedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 39: Line 39:
*If you attempted to debilitate the enemy, you are certain that it would train very poorly.
*If you attempted to debilitate the enemy, you are certain that it would train very poorly.
*The troll appears immune to cold.
*The troll appears immune to cold.

I think the ranks need to be updated, definitely not a 190-260 creature
--[[User:ARCHIMEDIAN|ARCHIMEDIAN]] ([[User talk:ARCHIMEDIAN|talk]]) 07:50, 4 August 2016 (CDT)
--[[User:ARCHIMEDIAN|ARCHIMEDIAN]] ([[User talk:ARCHIMEDIAN|talk]]) 07:50, 4 August 2016 (CDT)

Revision as of 06:55, 4 August 2016

Careful Appraisal (brawling @ 359)

  • You are certain that the swamp troll is healthy.
  • You are certain that the swamp troll has an incredible spirit that is healthy.
  • You are certain that the swamp troll is slightly fatigued.
  • You are certain that it is significantly weaker than you are.
  • You are certain that it is significantly less agile than you are.
  • You are certain that it is a great deal less disciplined than you are.
  • You are certain that it is significantly less quick to react than you are.
  • You are certain that it is a great deal less conditioned than you are.
  • Taking stock of its offensive abilities, and defending with a damite targe and a heavily lacquered plumwood parry stick, you are certain that the swamp troll is a simple opponent.
  • Taking stock of its defensive abilities, and attacking with your fists, you are certain that the swamp troll is a creature completely beneath your notice.
  • If you brawled with the enemy, you are certain that it would train quite badly.
  • If you defended by parrying attacks, you are certain that the enemy would train quite badly.
  • If you defended by evading attacks, you are certain that the enemy would train quite badly.
  • If you defended by blocking attacks, you are certain that the enemy would train quite badly.
  • If you attempted to beguile the enemy with tactics, you are certain that it would train quite badly.
  • If you targeted and cast a spell at the enemy, you are certain that it would train quite badly.
  • If you attempted to debilitate the enemy, you are certain that it would train quite badly.
  • The troll appears immune to cold.

--Kythryn 07:27, 9 August 2015 (CDT)

Careful Appraisal (crossbow @ 168)

  • You are certain that the swamp troll is healthy.
  • You are certain that the swamp troll is slightly fatigued.
  • You are certain that it is rather weaker than you are.
  • You are certain that it is rather less agile than you are.
  • You are certain that it is definitely less disciplined than you are.
  • You are certain that it is rather less quick to react than you are.
  • You are certain that it is definitely less conditioned than you are.
  • Taking stock of its offensive abilities, and defending with a lumium round sipar and a light lelori forester's crossbow, you are certain that the swamp troll is a solid opponent.
  • Taking stock of its defensive abilities, and attacking with a light lelori forester's crossbow, you are certain that the swamp troll is a creature completely beneath your notice.
  • If you attacked with a light lelori forester's crossbow, you are certain that the enemy would train very poorly.
  • If you threw the crossbow at the enemy you are certain that it would train rather well.
  • If you defended by parrying attacks, you are certain that the enemy would train somewhat poorly.
  • If you defended by evading attacks, you are certain that the enemy would train quite badly.
  • If you defended by blocking attacks, you are certain that the enemy would train very poorly.
  • If you attempted to beguile the enemy with tactics, you are certain that it would train somewhat poorly.
  • If you targeted and cast a spell at the enemy, you are certain that it would train very poorly.
  • If you attempted to debilitate the enemy, you are certain that it would train very poorly.
  • The troll appears immune to cold.

I think the ranks need to be updated, definitely not a 190-260 creature --ARCHIMEDIAN (talk) 07:50, 4 August 2016 (CDT)