User talk:IM-T-MAN2: Difference between revisions
Nescientist (talk | contribs) (→{{a|Dazzling}} and {{a|Queenly Majesty}}: new section) |
|||
Line 53: | Line 53: | ||
Hey there. I guess you didn't read the edit summaries on why your initial addition of {{m|Protect}} there was reverted, so I'll explain it to you directly. That was because the articles clearly say that the Ability "prevents '''opponents''' on the field '''from affecting the user and its allies''' with [[priority]] moves", and Protect is not such a move anyway. (It also has nothing to do with damage, because {{a|Prankster}}-boosted status moves, for example, apparently ''are'' affected.) So I guess the explanation is fine as is. Cheers! [[User:Nescientist|Nescientist]] ([[User talk:Nescientist|talk]]) 18:55, 13 December 2016 (UTC) | Hey there. I guess you didn't read the edit summaries on why your initial addition of {{m|Protect}} there was reverted, so I'll explain it to you directly. That was because the articles clearly say that the Ability "prevents '''opponents''' on the field '''from affecting the user and its allies''' with [[priority]] moves", and Protect is not such a move anyway. (It also has nothing to do with damage, because {{a|Prankster}}-boosted status moves, for example, apparently ''are'' affected.) So I guess the explanation is fine as is. Cheers! [[User:Nescientist|Nescientist]] ([[User talk:Nescientist|talk]]) 18:55, 13 December 2016 (UTC) | ||
*I see... I apologize for the trouble, then.[[User:IM-T-MAN2|IM-T-MAN2]] ([[User talk:IM-T-MAN2|talk]]) 19:02, 13 December 2016 (UTC) |
Revision as of 19:02, 13 December 2016
Welcome
| |||||
|
I see you have added information on traps to these dungeons; did you extract the data yourself or found it somewhere? Eridanus (talk) 09:43, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
- I found it right here, in this little Dungeon FAQ by OgreGunner http://www.gamefaqs.com/ds/955859-pokemon-mystery-dungeon-explorers-of-sky/faqs/58190. --IM-T-MAN2 (talk) 11:05, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
Dazzling and Queenly Majesty
Hey there. I guess you didn't read the edit summaries on why your initial addition of Protect there was reverted, so I'll explain it to you directly. That was because the articles clearly say that the Ability "prevents opponents on the field from affecting the user and its allies with priority moves", and Protect is not such a move anyway. (It also has nothing to do with damage, because Prankster-boosted status moves, for example, apparently are affected.) So I guess the explanation is fine as is. Cheers! Nescientist (talk) 18:55, 13 December 2016 (UTC)