Difference between revisions of "Talk:Ablaze"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Why is the specificity of "torso" mentioned? --[[User:Krypton|Krypton]] 20:04, 17 March 2008 (GMT) | Why is the specificity of "torso" mentioned? --[[User:Krypton|Krypton]] 20:04, 17 March 2008 (GMT) | ||
:Because of the way applying salves works. If you specifically want to cure being on fire, you would apply to torso. If you apply generally you might just cure a broken leg instead! Oh no! But I don't really care if it's included or not. [[User:Gnaash|Gnaash]] 18:28, 28 March 2008 (GMT) | :Because of the way applying salves works. If you specifically want to cure being on fire, you would apply to torso. If you apply generally you might just cure a broken leg instead! Oh no! But I don't really care if it's included or not. [[User:Gnaash|Gnaash]] 18:28, 28 March 2008 (GMT) | ||
::That strikes me as something that is only there for ease of combat, whereas RP-wise, I wouldn't say direct application to the torso is the only remedy for being on fire (the page made it sound like that). --[[User:Krypton|Krypton]] 23:22, 28 March 2008 (GMT) | |||
Latest revision as of 23:22, 28 March 2008
Why is the specificity of "torso" mentioned? --Krypton 20:04, 17 March 2008 (GMT)
- Because of the way applying salves works. If you specifically want to cure being on fire, you would apply to torso. If you apply generally you might just cure a broken leg instead! Oh no! But I don't really care if it's included or not. Gnaash 18:28, 28 March 2008 (GMT)
- That strikes me as something that is only there for ease of combat, whereas RP-wise, I wouldn't say direct application to the torso is the only remedy for being on fire (the page made it sound like that). --Krypton 23:22, 28 March 2008 (GMT)