Talk:Electrical Melee: Difference between revisions
imported>Aggelakis (historical) (→Bug: Lightning Rod...new section) |
imported>Eabrace (historical) m (unsigned) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
== Bug == | == Bug == | ||
Lightning Rod has a bug that says procs affect the user; is this still true? I'm pretty sure my elec/fire brute with procs works properly, but am currently unable to check. ~ {{:User:Aggelakis/Sig1}} 02:55, 30 August 2010 (UTC) | Lightning Rod has a bug that says procs affect the user; is this still true? I'm pretty sure my elec/fire brute with procs works properly, but am currently unable to check. ~ {{:User:Aggelakis/Sig1}} 02:55, 30 August 2010 (UTC) | ||
== Lightning Rod Bug == | |||
I have been testing Lightning Rod with the Armageddon Set and the Fire Damage Proc. 100 activations of the power and none of them reported any damage to my character. I would say this bug is not valid any longer or happens so infrequently as to be non-existent. {{unsigned|Hube2|19:50, 2 June 2011 (UTC)}} | |||
Latest revision as of 02:15, 3 June 2011
The other powersets have a much more matter of fact tone to the introduction. This one looks like it was lifted from the press release. ;p Do we want to propagate this style to other powerset articles, or visa versa? Sapph
- I'm guessing that's because all we have atm is the press release. The other articles either have no extra info (Dark Armor, Katana for example) or in a few cases, have the text copied from the game (Archery, Trick Arrow). --StarGeek 01:27, 1 May 2006 (PDT)
Bug
Lightning Rod has a bug that says procs affect the user; is this still true? I'm pretty sure my elec/fire brute with procs works properly, but am currently unable to check. ~ User:Aggelakis/Sig1 02:55, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
Lightning Rod Bug
I have been testing Lightning Rod with the Armageddon Set and the Fire Damage Proc. 100 activations of the power and none of them reported any damage to my character. I would say this bug is not valid any longer or happens so infrequently as to be non-existent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hube2 (talk • contribs) 19:50, 2 June 2011 (UTC)