Earth Carrier

Ezri said:
Toddo said:
nope, they can't. Don't know if that's written down tho, East Coast JP clarified that for me a few years back when I was calling no effect to 10 life after taking the first hit on my armor and I had to call a hold to clarify why. Carriers can't be beneficial last I heard. I was just rolling with the thread. :p
-toddo
Click to expand...

It's not just that carriers can't be beneficial... life as a carrier is useless.

Undead are unaffected by gift
You cannot be affected by weapon blows when dead

So it can pop your magic armor, bust up your armor and use up your shield spell, but that's about it. I'm not even sure if it works on death elementals.
Click to expand...

If players can be affected by things that insta-kill them, why couldn't elementals be? Like Death elementals being insta-killed by something swinging Life?
 
They only rule that talks about carriers not healing is that elemental carriers(Flame, Ice, Lightning, Stone) do not heal things that are healed by an element.
Something healed by Flame wouldn't be healed by 10 Flame but in my opinion should be healed 10 Flame Bolt after taking 10 damage each swing and after armor.

A normal living person would be affected by 10 Cause Mortal Wounds and take the Cause Mortal Wounds after there armor is to 0, so why wouldn't a person be healed from 10 Cure Mortal Wounds after armor? They should get healed 20pts every hit there after.

These are all non-standard carriers and would potentially be different in different chapters.
 
Togashin said:
They only rule that talks about carriers not healing is that elemental carriers(Flame, Ice, Lightning, Stone) do not heal things that are healed by an element.
Something healed by Flame wouldn't be healed by 10 Flame but in my opinion should be healed 10 Flame Bolt after taking 10 damage each swing and after armor.
Click to expand...
The sentence cited makes no limitations on what it applies to: Carrier attacks can never “heal” creatures.
 
I stand corrected then.
 
I am fairly sure that the intent of that sentance was to be that a carrier attack can never be benificial. mainly because otherwise you would have ******** creatures running around carrier attacking their way into unlimited benefits.

I would put it up for ARC clairification, as the sentance does leave some room for interpretation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top