06-22-2003, 09:29 AM
Hmm, I kinda disagree.
While I see your point about it not mattering when the sorceress IS in melee, I would still say that a bow, for example, is still a ranged, i.e. "non-melee", weapon. Perhaps a better wording would've been 'melee-only' vs 'ranged spells'. But, for me at least, that WAS what I interpreted "melee" and "non-melee" to mean, in the context it was used.
If the sorceress doesn't HAVE any ranged spells, then the masteries can only be used for melee. Likewise, if she has Meteor, no matter how many monsters surround her, she could, if she wished, cast it at a distant target.
Still, "non-melee" probably IS a bad phrasing given that, in D2 at least, basically ANY ranged attack or spell can also be used at melee range.
- Dagni
While I see your point about it not mattering when the sorceress IS in melee, I would still say that a bow, for example, is still a ranged, i.e. "non-melee", weapon. Perhaps a better wording would've been 'melee-only' vs 'ranged spells'. But, for me at least, that WAS what I interpreted "melee" and "non-melee" to mean, in the context it was used.
If the sorceress doesn't HAVE any ranged spells, then the masteries can only be used for melee. Likewise, if she has Meteor, no matter how many monsters surround her, she could, if she wished, cast it at a distant target.
Quote:Pure melee would be no spells.Melee is simply the opposite of ranged. It just so happens that almost every spell is ranged. So pure melee is no ranged whatsoever.
Still, "non-melee" probably IS a bad phrasing given that, in D2 at least, basically ANY ranged attack or spell can also be used at melee range.
- Dagni