Nullify Magic

[Kringe]

Nullify Magic, is being resisted i'd say 2 outta 5 times on LOWER LVL players... On Live this was defintely not the case, the spell was rarely resisted if ever (if memory serves me correct only on Spite Golems) most certainly not players.


This is a key spell for pvp/dispelling pets..

And as Envious says you CANNOT dispell your own pets.

[Nirgon]

Players shouldnt be resisting this. Like he says only mobs like spite golem, stone spider etc. iirc even in planes of power with jacked up resists you couldn't resist a dispel as a player.

[Sprinkle]

i was unable to find nullfiy magic ( The spell ) For sale anywhere btw

[Bockscar]

Dispels shouldn't be resistable at all. There isn't meant to be a resist check. It basically functions like a beneficial spell.

[Palemoon]

Dispels shouldn't be resistable at all. There isn't meant to be a resist check. It basically functions like a beneficial spell.

What does the number mean in parenthesis?

Recant Magic:

1: Cancel Magic (9)
2: Cancel Magic (9)
3: Cancel Magic (9)
4: Cancel Magic (9)

Pillage Enchantment:

1: Cancel Magic (4)
2: Cancel Magic (4)
3: Cancel Magic (4)
4: Cancel Magic (4)

Taper Enchantment:

1: Cancel Magic (0)

[Bockscar]

Think it has something to do with how they changed dispels much later. It shouldn't be relevant to this server AFAIK because dispels always target the first buff(s) from the right. The only thing that matters is the number of dispels applied by the various spells. I believe the numbers in parantheses are just there because the spell data is copy-pasted from Lucy/Allakhazam. I think every buff and debuff received a number of "dispel counters", much like poison and disease counters vs. cures, to determine what could actually be removed by a given dispel spell - i.e you probably couldn't remove Virtue or Voice of Quellious with the level 4 Taper Enchantment. Something like that, anyway. This was long after the classic era.

[Palemoon]

Think it has something to do with how they changed dispels much later. It shouldn't be relevant to this server AFAIK because dispels always target the first buff(s) from the right. The only thing that matters is the number of dispels applied by the various spells. I believe the numbers in parantheses are just there because the spell data is copy-pasted from Lucy/Allakhazam. I think every buff and debuff received a number of "dispel counters", much like poison and disease counters vs. cures, to determine what could actually be removed by a given dispel spell - i.e you probably couldn't remove Virtue or Voice of Quellious with the level 4 Taper Enchantment. Something like that, anyway. This was long after the classic era.

hmm this sounds like my next testing project on Al'kabor.. to see if taper enchantment will remove Aego! Stay tuned

[pickled_heretic]

What does the number mean in parenthesis?

Recant Magic:

1: Cancel Magic (9)
2: Cancel Magic (9)
3: Cancel Magic (9)
4: Cancel Magic (9)

Pillage Enchantment:

1: Cancel Magic (4)
2: Cancel Magic (4)
3: Cancel Magic (4)
4: Cancel Magic (4)

Taper Enchantment:

1: Cancel Magic (0)

pretty sure these mean you cast the spell as if you were that many levels higher. e.g. pillage enchantment is the same as casting cancel magic 4 times as a caster that is 4 levels higher than the caster actually is.

[Palemoon]

I can't get Taper Enchantment to do anything. I've casted it a few dozen times, both on high level buffs and lvl 1 minor shieldings. On my alt and on myself. Never got it to dispell anything.

Recant Magic and Pilliage Enchantment (pre nerf Wristband of Secrets clicky) are working as you'd expect them to, except sometimes it skips a buff in the lineup and dispells a buff further down.

Ok I tried again useing Taper Enchantment against a lvl 30 necro with 16 MR (after tash) who was self buffed with Resist Cold.

The Resist Cold went away after 8 casts of Taper Enchantment. (the enchanter was lvl 62 btw).

Just tried it again. After 8 Taper Enchantments, the Resist Cold fell off.

Very interesting, almost feels like counters.

[lethdar]

Dispels should be coded as beneficial spells, no chance to resist against players.

[Lasher]

yeah, its a beneficial spell. As an ench i remember fighting in Velious and dispelling people who had kos mobs on them, which normally werent kos to me, and the mobs would become kos to me, ie like if i healed them.

Also could dispell people in safe zones since considered benefical

[Softcore PK]

I remember using both the single target and group dispell as a bard, and it always removed buffs/debuffs as it should. Both on players grouped with me and those not.

[mimixownzall]

Never got steel golem wand (instant right click pillage enchantment) resisted either. I used that thing countless times and never one resist.

[Bockscar]

hmm this sounds like my next testing project on Al'kabor.. to see if taper enchantment will remove Aego! Stay tuned

I thought the change came even later than PoP. They did some big PvP patch in like 2004. Al'kabor is that Mac server that's stuck in PoP, right? Or is it one of the progression servers?

Either way, it seems the counter theory was right, and that's definitely not what I remember from classic. Any dispel spell just dispelled a set number of magic-based effects, starting from the first buff to the right.

I believe the dispel mechanic itself works as it should on p99, the stuff in the spell files on the wiki is just there because it was copy-pasted from the modern spell data on Zam/Lucy. The resist thing should be fixed, of course.

[Palemoon]

Its the Mac server stuck in PoP, yeah.

And I dont go to zam/lucy to get my spell data, we have our own custom spell data site that was put together years ago by a member that shows all the pre buff/pre revamp spell data info.

It (the original spell info) has those counter things on it too.

I dunno, Taper Enchantment does also have a different sound file attached to it then all other dispells. Maybe Taper Enchantment is just some odd ball mostly broken spell.

[Bockscar]

I don't know then. I know pumice always dispelled 2 slots and that dispels should not be resistable. Can't think of anything that the numbers in parantheses would be for. A level modifier shouldn't matter, there was no variance to the dispel mechanic. Stuff like Nagafen's AoE dispel also has the Cancel Magic (9) thingy, for instance.

Back on SZ during Luclin and PoP, one of my friends played an enchanter. He used the low-level dispel a lot in PvP because it was useful for dispelling Winged Death (there were retarded amounts of mid-50s druids to fight when you were evil) because it only dispelled one slot. He didn't have any insta-clickies so he had to junk buff with actual spells, and the 1-slot dispel was useful for preserving those buffs while dispelling the first slot.

The only comment on Allakhazam for Taper Enchantment mentions that it reduces the duration of whatever buff it hits. It's from November 2003, during LDoN, which sounds like about the time they changed a number of PvP mechanics. It's possible that this particular spell did work like that (though well enough to counter WD effectively) but I'm sure the other dispels were actual dispels. I have no recollection of ever seeing pumice fail to dispel two buffs/debuffs.

[XiakenjaTZ]

taper shortened duration, thats why no one used it when cancel magic just erased them.

[Treats]

Cancel Magic - No Resist Check
Annul Magic - MR
Pillage Enchantment MR + 5
Alenia's Disenchanting Melody (Bard) - No MR check
Nullify Magic - MR + 5
Recant Magic - MR
Strip Enchantment - MR + 25
Taper Enchantment - No Resist Check

All of these are listed as Positive (Beneficial) spells except for Alenia's and Taper Enchantment. I don't know how this worked on live but I'm assuming if these spells are marked Beneficial here they will be broken. When trying to cast the spell on a mob/duel PC you would just receive the message "Your spell would not take hold".

[pickled_heretic]

taper shortened duration, thats why no one used it when cancel magic just erased them.

Every site i've seen says it is the same as cancel magic. Probably nobody used it because enchanters are the only class that can use it and they get far, far more powerful dispels shortly later in their career.

Cancel Magic - No Resist Check
Annul Magic - MR
Pillage Enchantment MR + 5
Alenia's Disenchanting Melody (Bard) - No MR check
Nullify Magic - MR + 5
Recant Magic - MR
Strip Enchantment - MR + 25
Taper Enchantment - No Resist Check

All of these are listed as Positive (Beneficial) spells except for Alenia's and Taper Enchantment. I don't know how this worked on live but I'm assuming if these spells are marked Beneficial here they will be broken. When trying to cast the spell on a mob/duel PC you would just receive the message "Your spell would not take hold".

this is just speculation but it's possible that dispels were considered beneficial when cast on players and harmful when cast on npc/hostiles since they have useful applications in both instances. when cast on a player, they default to the beneficial effect despite having applications to cause harm.

[Darwoth]

yeah i dont remember ever having a nullify/pumice/wand/dispel ever resisted by a player.

[Kringe]

Again this will be huge for pure melee as "Crystalize Pummice", Effect 5 Charges of "Nullify Magic" with a chance of being resisted can sway things huge.

[canardvc]

ACtually no one can tell how they'll handle that. I don't remember any dispell being ever resisted by a player.

I am sure Nilbog will tell us how they are going to handle this. No point in speculating more.

[lethdar]

In addition, due to dispell not being flagged as beneficial its impossible to dispell your own pet at the moment.

Pretty sure the benefical/detrimental thing is what's causing the resists, pet issues, etc.

[Palemoon]

Ok a bit of googleing uncovered some info that matches with my short testing session on Al'Kabor:



7. DISPELLING

Most people are fully aware that both buffs and debuffs stick on you in a top-down order; they find the first empty slot and stuff themselves in it.

What people often do not grasp is how dispels work.

Note: Absor, EQ Developer, has confirmed that there are multiple types of dispels available. The majority of them operate in the manner below; some mobs have special dispels that will remove random buffs. For our purposes, however, we'll examine the case of the majority, to help people understand the basic operation of dispelling.

There are numerous spells that we can use to dispel buffs/debuffs, but the best ones available to each class are as follows:

--Recant Magic (ENC)
--Annul Magic (CLR, RNG, DRU, SHM, NEC, WIZ, MAG, BST)
--Nullify Magic: (PAL/SHD)

--Crystallized Pumice: Available to all classes, sold by Mirao Frostpouch in the building NE of the PoK Soulbinder, as well as any place that sells invis potions. It has 5 charges of Nullify Magic with a 3 second casting time. It is clickable from inventory, but you must target yourself.

I will call this line of spells "dispels" throughout the rest of our discussion.

Let's take my second image from above.

Image

That Malo annoys me. RC didn't cure it. Grrr! I want to dispel it.

If you look at Annul Magic on Lucy, it states this:

Annul Magic
1: Cancel Magic(9)
2: Cancel Magic(9)

Remember how Detrimental worked above? This is similar.

In this case, it tells us that Annul Magic will dispel 2 buff slots, at a strength of 9. Remember, dispels don't care whether something is good or bad; it'll dispel it regardless, even if it's something you like. A quick examination of Lucy shows that Recant Magic can dispel 4 buff slots at a strength of 9, and Nullify Magic 2 buff slots at a strength of 4.

Dispels always land, even if they don't seem to work. Each buff gets a check versus the strength of the dispel. If the buff fails the check, it gets stripped. If that buff passes the check, the dispel moves on to the next buff, and so on. In the case of every buff passing the check, no buffs will be stripped.

This is, of course, the problem with dispels; they're unreliable, and are intended to be that way. Since some dispels strip multiple buffs, the first X buffs that fail their check get dispelled. Thus, to some people dispels seem random; they'll cast it, and say "Wait, I lost buff slots 2 and 5! What gives?" As you see, buff slots 1, 3, and 4 passed their check to remain on you.

We are not sure what the check consists of. Sometimes, spells cast by lower level individuals seem "weaker" against dispel, but that may simply be arbitrary perception. Developers have not confirmed anything that I have seen about the process.

Dispels act differently depending on what you are dispelling. For example, if you dispel a mob, you will not dispel something with counters. When they made the change to put disease counters on slow awhile back, part of the rationale was to prevent griefing by rival guilds dispelling it. I believe it works on the same principle in PvP.

In simple terms of dispelling yourself, however, you can dispel anything that's on you. Therefore, using the graphic above, if I cast Nullify Magic on myself to get rid of Malo, it'll probably chew through my Storm Guard and Form of Defense III first. Thus, presuming I had some dire need to get rid of Malo, I would click those off, and take my chances with it taking Voice of Clairvoyance and hopefully Malo. Clicking off Voice of Clairvoyance wouldn't really net me anything except that I'd lose Steeloak, too.

Thankfully, Malo is largely inconsequential. Application to other detrimental effects, however, can easily be drawn. Also of some interest is that dispels are classified as a Beneficial spell for purposes of spell haste.



So this is why Taper Enchantment seemed to do nothing when I used it on my high level toon with high level buffs, but when I broke out my lowbie with a lower level buff, it finally dispelled it after a few trys.

And remember in my previous post where I said at one point a dispell skipped one of my buffs and dispelled another buff down my list? Matches with the info above, I guess one of my first buffs "resisted" the dispell and the dispell moved into the other buffs to try to kill them.

Very interesting, and it confirms that the number in parenthesis represents the strength of the actual dispel. Very interesting stuff, and its what I suspected.

[Bockscar]

I'm not convinced that the dispel strength thing is really classic. I suspect it was added in that PvP patch they implemented in like 2003 or something. I'm as sure as I can be from memory that dispels would always remove the number of buffs inherent to each dispel spell, and always the first from the right. None of that skipping stuff if the buff resisted the dispel. The source you posted is from long, long after classic.

A few points:

- It was a widely known fact that two insta-clickies essentially made you immune to the common dispel from pumice because it would always dispel the first two slots. A third clicky would allow you to keep the first buff slot open as well so that you could dispel stuff from yourself without compromising your buffs.

- Various NPC dispel effects such as dragon AoE were certainly not avoidable and would always target the first buff. Anyone who doesn't remember this themselves can just look up any old Naggy/Vox guide. These abilities also have the "Cancel Magic (9)" tag on Zam/Lucy, however. Even the Guide Cancel Magic from GM items has two applications of Cancel Magic (9).

- I'm pretty sure any classic PvP veteran will tell you that dispel effects were guaranteed to work and always took the first buff(s) from the right. That's not concrete proof, but hundreds of people aren't magically remembering stuff wrong.

Since Al'Kabor is a PoP server, I'm not sure you can use it as evidence for classic mechanics when said evidence contrasts so much with what everyone knows to be true. I'm inclined to believe Taper Enchantment merely reduced the duration of the first buff/debuff (the name even indicates this) but that normal dispels were guaranteed.

If anything, maybe the (9) thing means a guaranteed dispel, like if a "buff strength" value can't be more than 9 and thus a dispel spell will always remove one buff/debuff per application of Cancel Magic (9), and will always hit the first from right since that's the order of checks. That would explain the nomenclature. After all, no dispel effect has a "strength" higher than 9.

[Palemoon]

Well , all I can say is dispels are behaving on Al'kabor (Plane of Power era server) basically the same as that info I posted above.

Taper Enchantment was weak as hell and took multiple castings to remove a lowbies buffs, and I had one of the higher level enchanter dispells "skip" one of my buffs in my lineup and take off something farther down the line instead (and I was useing my same set of clicky buffs each time in same order) during my short test.

My memory is wanting to say that occasionally a pumice or casted dispel would dispel something out of order back in 1999 too. But im not gonna say that with 100 certainty because memories can play tricks.

But if I was a betting man, i'd bet the system described above and the current system on Al'kabor is the 1999 classic dispel system. I.E. stronger dispels will almost always take down your buffs in order, while the weaker dispels will get "resisted" by your buffs more, leading to it taking down a buff much farther down the line, or taking no buffs off at all.

[Kelsar]

Bockscar has it right. I was a rogue and had to rely on this shit.

[Darwoth]

more useless al kabor testing, didnt apply in the other threads. does not apply now either.

dispelling buffs was never resisted in pvp during the classic era.

[nilbog]

more useless al kabor testing, didnt apply in the other threads. does not apply now either.

dispelling buffs was never resisted in pvp during the classic era.

It's not useless. Do not troll people contributing to a bug report.

[Darwoth]

seems pretty useless when the server in question came out 3 years after the fact and everything reported as fact thus far using said server as a test bed has been wrong.

[Darwoth]

as an aside whether it is true or not now i cant say, however there was a time when dispels were considered friendly, on rallos zek as a newbie there were more than a few times i sat around stripping buffs off of much higher players who were not within pvp range when they were being shitbags.

as others have said this may be a large part of the issue.

[Harrison]

I personally remember resisting dispels, MR based.

The information about it dispelling in order is also true. This is why raid buff orders were very important.

[Palemoon]

Another interesting tid bit from Al'kabor:

Went to Qeynos noob yard with an enchanter and charmed a firebeetle. Came up with 2nd account and used pillage enchantment (wristband of secrets clicky) on the firebeetle.. it took charm off. Did it multiple times to make sure.

This was in total blue mode, no duel or arena or anything.

edit: wow just summoned an animation with the enchanter, buffed it with shade and then tried to dispell it with my other toon... took Shade off first go. So useing dispel to grief in a non pvp enviornment is alive and well on Al'kabor, at least when it comes to summoned and charmed pets.

Tried to do it with a casted dispel (incase there was something strange going on with the wristband of secrets clicky), and it worked that way too.

[nilbog]

Another interesting tid bit from Al'kabor:

Went to Qeynos noob yard with an enchanter and charmed a firebeetle. Came up with 2nd account and used pillage enchantment (wristband of secrets clicky) on the firebeetle.. it took charm off. Did it multiple times to make sure.

This was in total blue mode, no duel or arena or anything.

While grouped?

[Palemoon]

While grouped?

no, not grouped

There is no box to buy and first 30 days free on new accounts on Al'kabor if you ever wanted to hop on for some focused testing or to verify anything ive posted.

[Kringe]

no, not grouped

There is no box to buy and first 30 days free on new accounts on Al'kabor if you ever wanted to hop on for some focused testing or to verify anything ive posted.

Glad we are testing.. Palemoon did you test how many times it was resisted on another player? (right now I just resisted Golem wand (effect pillage enchantment) 5 times in a row with 60magic)... Curious how Al'Kabor has its resist factors on the dispell line on players/and pets.

[Kringe]

Ok a bit of googleing uncovered some info that matches with my short testing session on Al'Kabor:



7. DISPELLING

Most people are fully aware that both buffs and debuffs stick on you in a top-down order; they find the first empty slot and stuff themselves in it.

What people often do not grasp is how dispels work.

Note: Absor, EQ Developer, has confirmed that there are multiple types of dispels available. The majority of them operate in the manner below; some mobs have special dispels that will remove random buffs. For our purposes, however, we'll examine the case of the majority, to help people understand the basic operation of dispelling.

There are numerous spells that we can use to dispel buffs/debuffs, but the best ones available to each class are as follows:

--Recant Magic (ENC)
--Annul Magic (CLR, RNG, DRU, SHM, NEC, WIZ, MAG, BST)
--Nullify Magic: (PAL/SHD)

--Crystallized Pumice: Available to all classes, sold by Mirao Frostpouch in the building NE of the PoK Soulbinder, as well as any place that sells invis potions. It has 5 charges of Nullify Magic with a 3 second casting time. It is clickable from inventory, but you must target yourself.

I will call this line of spells "dispels" throughout the rest of our discussion.

Let's take my second image from above.

Image

That Malo annoys me. RC didn't cure it. Grrr! I want to dispel it.

If you look at Annul Magic on Lucy, it states this:

Annul Magic
1: Cancel Magic(9)
2: Cancel Magic(9)

Remember how Detrimental worked above? This is similar.

In this case, it tells us that Annul Magic will dispel 2 buff slots, at a strength of 9. Remember, dispels don't care whether something is good or bad; it'll dispel it regardless, even if it's something you like. A quick examination of Lucy shows that Recant Magic can dispel 4 buff slots at a strength of 9, and Nullify Magic 2 buff slots at a strength of 4.

Dispels always land, even if they don't seem to work. Each buff gets a check versus the strength of the dispel. If the buff fails the check, it gets stripped. If that buff passes the check, the dispel moves on to the next buff, and so on. In the case of every buff passing the check, no buffs will be stripped.

This is, of course, the problem with dispels; they're unreliable, and are intended to be that way. Since some dispels strip multiple buffs, the first X buffs that fail their check get dispelled. Thus, to some people dispels seem random; they'll cast it, and say "Wait, I lost buff slots 2 and 5! What gives?" As you see, buff slots 1, 3, and 4 passed their check to remain on you.

We are not sure what the check consists of. Sometimes, spells cast by lower level individuals seem "weaker" against dispel, but that may simply be arbitrary perception. Developers have not confirmed anything that I have seen about the process.

Dispels act differently depending on what you are dispelling. For example, if you dispel a mob, you will not dispel something with counters. When they made the change to put disease counters on slow awhile back, part of the rationale was to prevent griefing by rival guilds dispelling it. I believe it works on the same principle in PvP.

In simple terms of dispelling yourself, however, you can dispel anything that's on you. Therefore, using the graphic above, if I cast Nullify Magic on myself to get rid of Malo, it'll probably chew through my Storm Guard and Form of Defense III first. Thus, presuming I had some dire need to get rid of Malo, I would click those off, and take my chances with it taking Voice of Clairvoyance and hopefully Malo. Clicking off Voice of Clairvoyance wouldn't really net me anything except that I'd lose Steeloak, too.

Thankfully, Malo is largely inconsequential. Application to other detrimental effects, however, can easily be drawn. Also of some interest is that dispels are classified as a Beneficial spell for purposes of spell haste.



So this is why Taper Enchantment seemed to do nothing when I used it on my high level toon with high level buffs, but when I broke out my lowbie with a lower level buff, it finally dispelled it after a few trys.

And remember in my previous post where I said at one point a dispell skipped one of my buffs and dispelled another buff down my list? Matches with the info above, I guess one of my first buffs "resisted" the dispell and the dispell moved into the other buffs to try to kill them.

Very interesting, and it confirms that the number in parenthesis represents the strength of the actual dispel. Very interesting stuff, and its what I suspected.

This information is false as it is clearly going off PoP and further on down the road expansions... Annul Magic wasnt "classic" either.

Boxscar is right as to where the "Strength" of spells were not implemented until much later.

Right now if Al'Kabor is the "testing ground" for Red99 it will have alot of flaws seeing as it resides around the PoP era as Pale stated.

Again,

Not trying to beat a dead horse here, but pvp at higher levels literally cant take place without dispells working properly.

[Smedy]

I didn't read shit of this thread, but if some idiot think that dispell should be resistable you're an idiot, period.

Dispell should be / has always been unresistable, end of story

And to end this argument once and for all IT'S CLASSIC

[Palemoon]

Glad we are testing.. Palemoon did you test how many times it was resisted on another player? (right now I just resisted Golem wand (effect pillage enchantment) 5 times in a row with 60magic)... Curious how Al'Kabor has its resist factors on the dispell line on players/and pets.


I never gotten any sort of "you resisted dispell" or whatever on Dispells on Al'kabor. The dispell is not hitting you "the player" its going straight to your buff list and its your buffs that are trying to "resist" the dispell individually, not you. (so you will never get any sort of resisted message).


Boxscar is right as to where the "Strength" of spells were not implemented until much later.

Where you guys guys getting dispell strenghs were only added much later?

I think the cancel magic lines always had strengths and always acted the way they are on Al'kabor (higher level dispells almost always taking buffs off in order, only skipping a buff once in a blue moon, low level dispells having a much harder time taking off higher level player casted buffs,etc.).

Otherwise, what is the point of Pillage Enchantment, Strip Enchantment, and Recant Magic ?? The devs just felt like increaseing the mana cost of the "same strength" enchanter dispells as they rose in levels?

Its time to think about the "strengths" of these different dispells and how good they should be at dispelling a level X buff casted by a level Y player. That is what needs to be made "classic" at this point, and what may be off.

[Harrison]

http://web.archive.org/web/20010506015721/http://eq.castersrealm.com/spells/enchanter/spelldescriptions.asp?SpellID=87&Page=2

This May Be An Offensive Spell After Patch of 01/20/2000 - Mohil
The patch text for that date says that spells like Nullify Magic will be regarded by mobs as an offensive action from now on. This bears testing in a controlled environment now methinks. (Currently level 21 so I can't test it yet.) Mohil of Innourruk
Does not Remove Tashani? - Aazzan
While waiting for friends, I decided to use my to debuffs on myself. At first I resisted too much so I cast Tashani on myself first. I managed to lower my Strenght to 2 and my Agility to 1. Then I thought I would use this spell to strip the debuffs. It quickly removed all of them except Tashani. I tried 3 times before getting tired of trying. Has anyone had a similar experience? Does Strip Enchantment fail to remove Tashani?

--------------------------

The tashan line is poison based. A cleric or a paladin with cure poision will be able to remove it for you. Note that this is the only spell in your spellbook (might've missed something...don't think so though) that isn't based around magic. Thankfully, it is virtually unresistable, so the fact that it's poison only matters when you're trying to remove it.

This is a bit of information on both tashani and the nature of dispels.

Dispel was made detrimental in January of 2000. This would suggest it would also be given a resist check.

[Palemoon]

Dispel was made detrimental in January of 2000. This would suggest it would also be given a resist check.

Not made detrimental, just changed mobs behavior to view it as a offensive action. Big difference. Was done I assume to stop pre debuffing mobs before agro.

[Silikten]

Smedy, dispells were resistable. Typically ENC's would be the only ones to resist.

[lindz]

http://web.archive.org/web/20010506015721/http://eq.castersrealm.com/spells/enchanter/spelldescriptions.asp?SpellID=87&Page=2



This is a bit of information on both tashani and the nature of dispels.

Dispel was made detrimental in January of 2000. This would suggest it would also be given a resist check.


Did you actually find this change in the patch notes? I have looked through 1999 and first half of 2000 (before Kunark) patch notes and seen no mention of any changes to dispel.
Take a look here -
http://everquest.allakhazam.com/history/patches-1999.html
http://everquest.allakhazam.com/history/patches-2000-1.html

The link you pasted doesn't seem to be any official info. Maybe the change was made later on? Doesn't seem to have been done in classic.

[Kringe]

Smedy, dispells were resistable. Typically ENC's would be the only ones to resist.

I am unsure of what server you played on, but dispells werent ever resistable in classic/kunark era... Again only 2-3 mobs I can remember would resist a dispell.

Spite Golem/Stone Spider from classic era..

VS from Kunark.

Never players.

[Nirgon]

Cancel magic shouldn't remove winged death no matter how many times you cast it. It took nullify or better.

Annul *always* removed 2, which is why it was the best outside of enchanter line for kunark+ when it came around.

Of course, there will be many posts about how I don't know anything, but have fun with your shit.

[mimixownzall]

http://web.archive.org/web/20010506015721/http://eq.castersrealm.com/spells/enchanter/spelldescriptions.asp?SpellID=87&Page=2



This is a bit of information on both tashani and the nature of dispels.

Dispel was made detrimental in January of 2000. This would suggest it would also be given a resist check.

They were made detrimental to mobs because people were standing at max range and dispelling mobs without them aggroing; you can see where this would be a great advantage to players.

[Amuk]

Never had resist dispell, played TZ classic till like Luclin. As a melee it's something I depended on heavily, and can't remember it ever having counters. I remember pumice taking two slots off always from the top.

[lethdar]

People talking about resisting dispell are on crack. You couldn't resist it on players, there wasn't even a check.

[Silikten]

I am unsure of what server you played on, but dispells werent ever resistable in classic/kunark era... Again only 2-3 mobs I can remember would resist a dispell.

Spite Golem/Stone Spider from classic era..

VS from Kunark.

Never players.

There was definitely resistable dispells. Can I remember 10-12 years exactly what they were? No. But I do remember resists. Mobs, as well as players.

[Kringe]

There was definitely resistable dispells. Can I remember 10-12 years exactly what they were? No. But I do remember resists. Mobs, as well as players.


You didnt start playing the game until Kunark, said so in another thread I believe... That to me says you really dont know what classic resist system should be... I said previously 2 Mobs in classic "that I can remember" could resist dispel, IE: follow the 100% immunity to magic based spells (minus unresistable tash line) were Spite Golem/Stone Spider from Sol B....

A player never resisted dispel magic line until after Luclin.


Lethdar is correct
Harrison/ and everyone else here have no clue how it was/should be needs to stop trolling like you have a clue..

Silikten you played a mage as well, try playing one with no CC No Shadowstep and unable to dispel your pet, or other players (other players only by using your cancel magic staff, which is moot because good players will have 1 clicky minimal).... And lets not get into the effects it has on pure melee.... (Btw you can also resist it casting it on yourself 70-80% of the time) gluck dispeling dots.

[lethdar]

http://web.archive.org/web/20010506015721/http://eq.castersrealm.com/spells/enchanter/spelldescriptions.asp?SpellID=87&Page=2



This is a bit of information on both tashani and the nature of dispels.

Dispel was made detrimental in January of 2000. This would suggest it would also be given a resist check.

Considered detrimental by mobs. Dispells remained unresistable by players and were coded as beneficial beyond 2000. See: dispelling people and gaining agro on mobs they were engaged with in classic - kunark - velious and on, see griefing people in plane of tranquility by dispelling them (can cast beneficial spells on people in pvp free zones) and so on.

[Mardur]

Dispels should never resist and always be effective at removing effects without PR/DR counters from right to left. There are no "dispel counters." If you disagree you didn't play classic EverQuest.

[Palemoon]

Why are people still talking about dispel being resisted on players? Dispel dosent even land on "you" it lands on your debuffs/buffs and its those debuffs/buffs that make a resistance check vs. the strength of the dispell. And yes, some dispells are so weak or some buffs are so strong, that the buff will resist being dispelled.

Has nothing to do with a players MR, or anything. Its interaction between the particular dispell and buff. We know what makes a dispell weak or strong (the number in parenthesis, see Tapar Enchantment doing next to nothing with its awsome strength of zero vs. recant magic's strength of 9) but I think what we are in the dark about still is what makes a buff "strong" and resisty.

Level of the buffer who cast it? Level of the buff spell itself? Something else?

All the evidence points to this, and all your memories of pumice stones working EXACTLY the same each and every cast, no matter what the buffs or what the levels, does not constitute fact. It just sounds like a bunch of monks wanting to make sure their pumice will ALWAYS take off the first two buff slots , no matter what is on them, and never resist one of those first two slots to then strike down a buff farther down on their precious buff list.

tl;dr: Yes players cannot resist "dispell", but your buffs sure can. Load up an enchanter with Taper Enchantment and tell me how that works out for you.

[Bockscar]

Taper Enchantment is the one spell that could credibly be the exception. Other dispels were guaranteed.

[Palemoon]

Taper Enchantment is the one spell that could credibly be the exception. Other dispels were guaranteed.

Ok evidence please?

Your memory you say? Like I said , I have memory of higher level dispels occasionally skipping a buff in the first two slots and knocking out a buff further down the line.

Someone else in this thread said they have memory of cancel magic being very unreliable in taking down high level spells like Winged Death.

My evidence beyond memory? (which is important in this forum section)

I witnessed a higher level dispel doing just that, skipping one of my first two buffs and knocking out a buff farther down the line on Al'kabor. And I have yet to see anywhere that dispel strenghts and how they interact with buffs changing between 1999 and 2002.

I also see that there are several enchanter spells that remove the same number of buff slots. Why do they exist unless the strength of the higher level dispels is important.

I know you guys really want pumice to be a 100 percent sure thing each and every time, but my memory, my research, and the collaborating data does not support 100 percent reliable behavior with dispels.

[Lasher]

They added dispells in game that would hop around in your buff order. I believe a ranger had a spell like that and i think there was a potion that did it.

I attributed the reason ench got a spell like pillage and recant was

1) recant has a faster cast time than pillage
2) the recast is on both spells are 5 sec but the global cool down for your spell bar is 3.5 sec. Having both dispells up allows you dispell buffs faster.

[Pudge]

i dont remember at what point on live it was.. but i do remember dispells not dispelling a buff, when i had only 1 buff on. this was a "strong" resistful buff. it was aego or some kind of large HP buff. remember distincly casting dispell on myself but it not going away until a couple casts.

i think what makes a buff harder to dispell is the length of time the buff has on it. so a buff that lands for 100 minutes would be harder to dispell than a buff that lasts only 5 mins

[Pudge]

little info from google, though from 2004. saying magic resist played a roll, and that dispels weren't always successful

http://forums.station.sony.com/eq/posts/list.m?topic_id=71183

[Nirgon]

Dispels should never resist and always be effective at removing effects without PR/DR counters from right to left. There are no "dispel counters." If you disagree you didn't play classic EverQuest.


Tell me why then Annul Magic was so special? It's perk was to *always* remove 2 magic (read: not poison or disease) buffs/debuffs.

Cancel couldn't remove ignite blood etc in one cast on live, you had to use nullify or better. On VZTZ? Yeah I think it was broken and that shit worked. Sorry, but I know this to be true.

It is one thing to get the message "you resist the cancel magic/nullify magic" vs it hitting you and something not being removed. Hopefully this is looked into correctly.

[valithteezee]

Tell me why then Annul Magic was so special? It's perk was to *always* remove 2 magic (read: not poison or disease) buffs/debuffs.

Cancel couldn't remove ignite blood etc in one cast on live, you had to use nullify or better. On VZTZ? Yeah I think it was broken and that shit worked. Sorry, but I know this to be true.

It is one thing to get the message "you resist the cancel magic/nullify magic" vs it hitting you and something not being removed. Hopefully this is looked into correctly.


Yup. I don't remember the red resist message at all, but I do recall certain buffs taking more than one cast of cancel magic etc to remove the affliction.

[pickled_heretic]

Dispels should never resist and always be effective at removing effects without PR/DR counters from right to left. There are no "dispel counters." If you disagree you didn't play classic EverQuest.

you would think that a self-proclaimed "prodigy of everquest" would be able to articulate more sophisticated arguments than "if you disagree you're wrong."

[Mardur]

My argument is exactly as sophisticated as everyone else's, I'm going on my personal experiences of playing casters pre-kunark and on (enchanter and shaman). The difference is I have absolutely no idea what era everyone else played, if drugs are clouding their memory, etc.

[Palemoon]

more evidence has been presented in this thread beyond "random cloudy memories of 1999".

[Cwall]

box life folks
http://i.imgur.com/FKBdX.png

lol
http://i.imgur.com/sTwvJ.png

[jilena]

I will say that mobs have cast nullify/cancel/pillage on my shaman on this server with 100% success rate. I have killed dozens of casters in CT and they do this every single time so I assume it's a pretty good test group.

I do not know if "resisting" this was added for player vs player use or not.

[Dfn]

Way too many idiots on this forum thinking their "prove it" posts are worthwhile. You didn't play 1999 PvP so stfu.

Nullify line, Splurt, Druid swarms, Necro taps, Necro tap dots, Necro heat blood line, Pillage/Strip, etc... All spells that were for all intents and purposes unresistable. Find me proof otherwise dipshits.

[Harrison]

Heat blood unresistable? Lolz

ubetrollin'

[jilena]

Dfn, the point is you have to prove these things were this way. You can't just be like I PLAYED PVP IN 1999 AND YOU DIDN'T SO I AM 100% RIGHT AND YOU ARE WRONG AND DON'T KNOW ANYTHING. I know this might sound crazy, but that's not really proof of anything. 99% of the people posting "bugs" on this forum are 100% wrong and full of shit or having serious issues recalling what EQ is like even today much less 12 years ago.

[Bockscar]

Nullify line, Splurt, Druid swarms, Necro taps, Necro tap dots, Necro heat blood line, Pillage/Strip, etc... All spells that were for all intents and purposes unresistable. Find me proof otherwise dipshits.

To be fair, there's a difference between a spell having a negative resist modifier and not checking for resist at all because it isn't a detrimental spell. Druid swarms and necro blood dots were plenty resistable, they just had a -100 modifier so you had to have 150+ MR/FR for a realistic chance. Dispels should not even roll against resists, I've never heard about that until these bug reports. It was a classic fact of life that dispels always worked. It's a beneficial effect, and it just happens that you can use it offensively as well in exactly the same way that you could invis someone to poof their pet or fungistaff someone to snare them (these were later made group only). Dispels were later made detrimental merely for the purpose of aggroing mobs. Doesn't mean they were made resistable.

I dug around on all kinds of old websites, using the wayback machine to scour EQLizer from 1999 and shit like that. There's no usable information, just pointless spell descriptions like "Nullify Magic is an upgrade to Cancel Magic" and "Pillage Enchantment can be used to remove buffs and debuffs from your target." It's obvious by now that the proof just doesn't exist anymore. That'll be the case with a number of these obscure things because the references would be so old that they're basically not findable anymore. If we can't find proof that dispels were unresistable and we can't find evidence that they were resistable, I think it's safe to go with what the overwhelming majority knows to be true.

If nobody has found a single credible source by now that says dispels were resistable, I'd say that's proof enough when we all know they weren't.

[Dfn]

I believe they were a -200 resist modifier. So as I said, for all intents and purposes - unresistable. I can't remember ever resisting or getting resisted on Necro taps, blood line, druid swarm, etc. They were not unresistable as they did resist on some mobs in PvE - but they had a significant negative resist modifier that made VIRTUALLY unresistable in PvP. I'm sure a fluke chance resist happened from time to time, but it was not commonplace at all.

Pillage/Nullify/Etc should not have a resist mechanic attached to it at all for PvP because, afaik, it acts as a beneficial spell.

And for all you fuckers that keep saying "get me proof" well how about you get me proof that people regularly resisted swarm, heat blood, nec taps, etc. Good luck dipshits.

[Palemoon]

I believe they were a -200 resist modifier. So as I said, for all intents and purposes - unresistable. I can't remember ever resisting or getting resisted on Necro taps, blood line, druid swarm, etc. They were not unresistable as they did resist on some mobs in PvE - but they had a significant negative resist modifier that made VIRTUALLY unresistable in PvP. I'm sure a fluke chance resist happened from time to time, but it was not commonplace at all.

Pillage/Nullify/Etc should not have a resist mechanic attached to it at all for PvP because, afaik, it acts as a beneficial spell.

And for all you fuckers that keep saying "get me proof" well how about you get me proof that people regularly resisted swarm, heat blood, nec taps, etc. Good luck dipshits.

Get proof please, beyond laughably wrong statements like "heat blood is unresistable"

[Bockscar]

From Filash's rogue PvP guide (link (http://www.thesafehouse.org/forums/showthread.php?t=2872)) anno Velious:

a Golem Wand fully expended will cancel 15 slots

Suggests that there was no variance in the number of dispelled slots, and no chance to resist.

[Cwall]

golem wand has 5 charges of pillage enchantment
pillage enchantment dispels 4 slots
you can only have 15 buffs/debuffs on at a time, which is why that's the max it can dispel on one person(technically you only need 4 charges to achieve this)

[Bockscar]

I believe golem wands used to have their own effect before they were given Pillage Enchantment and a cast time.

What it does do.

Quote
Reply
#Apr 17 2001 at 12:25 PMRating: Default

Logan
Scholar

58 posts
Check Golem Metal Bits for info on the spell.
____________________________

Edit: upon further research, that may be incorrect.

[Harrison]

Heat blood and swarm/crud line unresistable...still loling

Taps are -200

There is no difference in pvp or pve mods until a patch LONG after classic.

[Dfn]

Get proof please, beyond laughably wrong statements like "heat blood is unresistable"
Heat blood and swarm/crud line unresistable...still loling


I do believe I said "all intents and purposes unresistable" - meaning that barring extraordinary circumstances the spells are "virtually unresistable" - another statement I made.

Now - you get proof that heat blood and swarm line were regularly resisted. We realize you two idiots don't know jack shit about classic pvp, but try and at least read posts thoroughly before posting garbage that makes you look even dumber.

[Bockscar]

Either way, the point is that we apparently cannot find a classic source that says dispels were resistable. Meanwhile, pretty much everyone remembers that they weren't, and an old-school PvP guide specifically states that five charges of golem wand will dispel 15 buffs. Any references to individual buffs resisting and causing the dispel to skip are from the mid/late-2000s. Conversely, it was a classic fact of life that two clickies made you immune to the commonly used dispel (only enchanters could dispel more than two slots at once) which would not have been the case if dispels would regularly skip the first and proceed to the next buffs. In fact, that would make the "weaker" dispels better as they would be able to dispel buried buffs. The only thing that in any way suggests that this was the case is that Annul and Nullify both have the same number of applications of cancel magic, but against all the contrary evidence, the weight of this sole fact is questionable. It might have been part of a later change that made it possible for buffs to resist dispels and cause the skip. This would explain why it seems that any reference we can find to buffs resisting/skipping dispels is from like 2003 and later. There are no references at all to outright resisting the spell itself, and as far as I can tell, that phenomenon is unheard of outside of this server.

To shed some light on this, we should try to find two things:

1) the classic (1999/2000) raw spell data for one or all of the dispel spells to determine whether it even said anything about "Cancel Magic (4)" and such.

2) any reference from that time period that mentions buff-skipping or failure to dispel the listed number of applications of cancel magic.

It should be clear that dispels should not be literally resistable, as in the "Your target resisted the Nullify Magic spell." Dispels aren't even meant to be detrimental spells, so that resist check should never occur. The question is whether the skipping thing is classic. The odd thing is that none of the dispel spells appear to have any Allakhazam comments prior to 2003.

[Cwall]

from allakhazam page about steel golem
http://eqbeastiary.allakhazam.com/search.shtml?id=296
dated Nov 06 2000 at 3:05 PM

Pillage Enchantment removes a spell or spell like effect. It's the same as the other dispell magic effects with a greater chance to remove the effect. I've been hunting treants lately and we've used it to dispell the treants' CC DoT. It also removes our buffs, requiring (sometimes) multiple castings of it.

My own 2cp.

Elkantar Draganov
Enchanter of the 24th circle

for what it's worth
it's unclear as to whether or not he meant that the spell gets resisted or it requires several casts to remove all buffs including the DoT(maybe the DoT was buried under his buffs?)

edit: more info
allakhazam golem metal wand page
http://everquest.allakhazam.com/db/item.html?item=3644
dated Jan 21 2002 at 9:19 PM

This wand is a wonderful dueling item. It is easily obtained, instant-casting and useable by everyone. I believe the effect on this wand strips off the first 4 buffs you have on. I also believe it is unresistable.

edit 2: even more info
this thread from january 2001 has some more anecdotal information regarding dispels
http://www.eqclerics.org/forums/showthread.php?t=2133

[jilena]

Copied from my other thread:

I tried testing this out. I levelled an enchanter to 12 and played around casting taper enchantment, and cancel magic onto my 50 troll shaman, and casting nullify magic from my shaman onto my enchanter. Even buffed with resist magic to 65 MR I did not get a single resist with either spell on my shaman or the reverse. Can someone who is getting resists confirm any level difference and possibly what MR was in effect on the person you were casting on?

[Bockscar]

from allakhazam page about steel golem
http://eqbeastiary.allakhazam.com/search.shtml?id=296
dated Nov 06 2000 at 3:05 PM



for what it's worth
it's unclear as to whether or not he meant that the spell gets resisted or it requires several casts to remove all buffs including the DoT(maybe the DoT was buried under his buffs?)

edit: more info
allakhazam golem metal wand page
http://everquest.allakhazam.com/db/item.html?item=3644
dated Jan 21 2002 at 9:19 PM



edit 2: even more info
this thread from january 2001 has some more anecdotal information regarding dispels
http://www.eqclerics.org/forums/showthread.php?t=2133

Good info. It's still a little conflicting, but we're getting somewhere.

Question: if that's how dispels worked, why was two insta-clickies such a staple in PvP and basically required in order to compete at the top? And why the seemingly universal belief that dispels always targeted the first buffs?

My memory tells me that's how it was, but it's very possible that I just can't remember what the hell was going on ten years ago. Anyone feel like digging through patch notes? I don't have time right now, might do it tomorrow if nobody has by then.

[Cwall]

Copied from my other thread:

I tried testing this out. I levelled an enchanter to 12 and played around casting taper enchantment, and cancel magic onto my 50 troll shaman, and casting nullify magic from my shaman onto my enchanter. Even buffed with resist magic to 65 MR I did not get a single resist with either spell on my shaman or the reverse. Can someone who is getting resists confirm any level difference and possibly what MR was in effect on the person you were casting on?

Earlier today, I was level 46 with 106 MR and Darwoth was level 50. He tried golem wanding me 3 times and I resisted the pillage enchantment every time. I had a DoT on me so I tried to dispel it using nullify magic(still with 106 MR) and I resisted the cast on myself.

[Cwall]

Good info. It's still a little conflicting, but we're getting somewhere.

Question: if that's how dispels worked, why was two insta-clickies such a staple in PvP and basically required in order to compete at the top? And why the seemingly universal belief that dispels always targeted the first buffs?

My memory tells me that's how it was, but it's very possible that I just can't remember what the hell was going on ten years ago. Anyone feel like digging through patch notes? I don't have time right now, might do it tomorrow if nobody has by then.

As far as I can remember dispels never removed random slotted buffs, but I started playing shortly after kunark released. It was always top-down order. I never in my life saw a dispel spell/song being resisted either.

[Bockscar]

That's what I remember too, along with seemingly just about everyone in this thread. It's odd, then, that a few sources indicate otherwise. I suppose everything has to be taken with a grain of salt, because they could be wrong just as much as us.

[Cwall]

Well that thread I linked to was about EQ Myths and then it came into a debate about how it worked.

[Palemoon]

One thing we all agree on, the dispel line should not be getting "you resisted cancel magic" type resist messages. The line just did not work that way.

The thing there is disagreement on is how the dispel line interacted with buffs and debuffs.

A) On one side we have the "memory crew" who say without fail the dispel line removed any and all buffs/debuffs in a top down order.

B) On the other side is the belief that the various dispel line spells had certain strengths attached to them, and the stronger the dispel the greater chance it would work on the first buff/debuff it came in contact with (once again top down order). BUT the first buff/debuff the dispell came in contanct with could survive the power of the dispel, and if it did, the dispel would try to remove the next slotted buff/debuff, and so on until it either successfully dispelled the number of slots it possessed in its spell description, or reached the end of the buff/dispel list.

Opinion B is supported by "memory" as stated by a few in this thread, and other points:

-the behavior of dispels on Al'kabor (2002 EQ code) matches up with Opinion B
-no record in patch notes or otherwise of dispels being changed between 1999 and 2002
-the fact that multiple dispel lines exist, of varying strengths, which would serve zero purpose if those strengths did not mean anything.
-strengths (the number in parenthesis in spell description of dispels) assigned to the various dispels as far back as we have spell data for.
-3rd party internet posts describing the behavior of dispels matching up with opinion B (linked in this thread)

All evidence points to a certain randomness when removing buffs/debuffs and its success rate. I will agree with most others in saying that the HIGHER level (strong) dispels were VERY good at killing off the first buffs/debuffs they came in contact with (top down order). And one could expect the strong (9) dispels to almost always work that way.

I will NOT agree that enchanters could run around with taper enchantment (0) and chain strip buffs and debufs in order all day long. Nor could others with cancel magic (1), or strip enchantment (1) expect flawless dispels in buff order.

Nullify Magic (4) and Pillage Enchantment (4) get a lot more reliable, but still occasionally rare failures will be seen.

When you get into the domain of Recant Magic (9), the high level enchanter spell, you will see buffs and debuffs melt away like butter, with only once in a freakish blue moon some high level buff resisting it.

And that is how it should be, and that is how it was. The EQ spell developers were not dumb.

Those of you arguing Taper Enchantment (0) can machine gun a line of raid buffs off flawlessly are delusional. Use a strong dispel, Recant Magic (9) if you want that effect.

[jilena]

Palemoon, the only defense I would use against the "random" removal of buffs by skipping over "harder to remove" buffs are the 1000 PvP guides out there outlining the importance of laying out your buff stack a certain way.

Also, from my experience playing on live for PVE I remember people having to use multiple casts of xxxx magic to remove damage shield etc on mobs. As they were not getting resist messages I would think that perhaps it had an implementation similar to disease/poison counters. I.e. Resolution being a level 44 spell might take 3 casts of cancel magic or 1 cast of nullify to remove.

[Harrison]

Dispels always removed buffs in order, in varying amounts.

Strengths of spells were added later(with "counters" like poison and disease debuffs and dots)

Aegolism was very difficult to strip, took multiple casts of most dispels.

This is how I remember it as a pvper and as a raider too. AE dispels as a raider were very common and buff orders were very important.

[jilena]

Yeah I guess I didn't make what I was saying that clear. The dispell would keep trying to remove the same buff until it was removed, with the overflow of "strength" then being applied to the next buff in the chain. If that makes better sense.

[Harrison]

That makes sense and is how I remember it clearly.

[Palemoon]

Strengths of spells were added later(with "counters" like poison and disease debuffs and dots)

Aegolism was very difficult to strip, took multiple casts of most dispels.

This is how I remember it as a pvper and as a raider too. AE dispels as a raider were very common and buff orders were very important.


When do you think the Cancel Magic (1) <---- strength (or number of counter remover if you will?) was added to the dispel lines? And what was the point of different dispels spells before the above strength/counter remover system was added?

[Harrison]

I'm not sure.

Through my digging it's blurry at best...

[jilena]

When do you think the Cancel Magic (1) <---- strength (or number of counter remover if you will?) was added to the dispel lines? And what was the point of different dispels spells before the above strength/counter remover system was added?

I would think it was always there, just never noted. Or maybe it was more random than disease/poison. I.e. the level of the spell gave it some sort of bonus to being removed so your roll had to be higher than that of the spell in order to remove it and the strength of the dispell added some bonus to that? I'm not sure.

I know the higher level dispells COULD remove multiple spells though. So I think the idea of counters with "spill over" seems the most logical. I.e. Nullify has a strength of 4. Resolution has 3 counters, Shield of Words has 3 counters, and Spirit of Wolf has 1 counter. So 1 cast of Nullify would remove Reso. The second cast of Nullify would remove shield of words and spirit of wolf because the first nullify removed one of the counters off of reso. Does that make sense?

[Darksinga]

http://web.archive.org/web/20001009064115/http://eq.castersrealm.com/spells/enchanter/spelldescriptions.asp?SpellID=100&Page=2

"Nullify magic will either remove no enchantments or two enchantments... From my experiences it almost always removes two enchantments..."

He's referring to dispelling on players as you can note he's talking about dispelling himself. The archive is from October 9, 2000. I think the closest date we've seen.

[Palemoon]

http://web.archive.org/web/20001009064115/http://eq.castersrealm.com/spells/enchanter/spelldescriptions.asp?SpellID=100&Page=2

"Nullify magic will either remove no enchantments or two enchantments... From my experiences it almost always removes two enchantments..."

He's referring to dispelling on players as you can note he's talking about dispelling himself. The archive is from October 9, 2000. I think the closest date we've seen.

K, that matches up with what i've been saying about the dispel strengths and dispells not being a 100 percent thing.

[Darksinga]

Looking at http://web.archive.org/web/20010823034402/http://eq.castersrealm.com/spells/enchanter/spelldescriptions.asp?SpellID=134

however, it states: Similar to strip enchantment this spell will remove 4 effects without fail. It is unresistable and non provoking when used.

Seems kinda contradictory, unless only chanters could pell without fail?

The date on that link is August 21, 2001, however, so could've gone through a lot of changes. Not sure.

Another person talking about nullify magic from 2001,
http://web.archive.org/web/20011125030716/http://eq.castersrealm.com/spells/spelldescriptions.asp?Id=599
"It appears to be somewhat random which effects it removes so you may have to cast it a several times to remove charm or DOTs."
(people have seemed to agree on the castersrealm that nullify magic could be random and resisted however for spells such as pillage enchantment, it was unresistable?)

Just my 20 minutes of research on castersrealm, hopefully it helps.

[Nirgon]

I never, ever, ever, resisted a druid drones dot line spell.

Only ever with like bard resist song + full resist gear did I get a pyrocour resist. I mean like.. over 210 heat did I once get ONE resist.

Some god damned internet archaeologists in here.

[Darksinga]

I never, ever, ever, resisted a druid drones dot line spell.

Only ever with like bard resist song + full resist gear did I get a pyrocour resist. I mean like.. over 210 heat did I once get ONE resist.

Some god damned internet archaeologists in here.

I've resisted druid dots as well as necro fire dots. It's a real rarity though so the resist checks are definitely off. Never resisted a dispell and you shouldn't be able to, but it could theoritically fail the check on two buffs and do nothing? The only thing that's arguable about dispell is whether or not it can skip over a buff, giving the illusion of being "random/not dispelling two slots."

[Bockscar]

There's nothing mysterious about druid and necro dots. Their resist modifier just means you need 100 more in the relevant resist in order to achieve the same resist rate as any normal spell. With just 150 MR/FR, you'll resist fairly commonly - not half the time, but probably something like 20% or more. People in high-end Velious gear would routinely resist these spells. A pre-Kunark warrior in the best resist gear and a resist magic buff can exceed 200MR, so that'd mean easily resisting swarms as well.

[Lasher]

what was the point of different dispels spells before the above strength/counter remover system was added?

I played an ench and i always thought the reason we got spells that appear to do same as the previous spell like pillage and recant was for the reason of 1) mana cost might be lowered, 2) casting time might be lowered 3) loading 2 spells that do virtual the same time will allow you only have to wait for the global cool down for casting which i think is 3 or 3.5 sec and not have to wait for the actual spell to refresh which depending on the spell can be 5-6 sec

[Dfn]

There's nothing mysterious about druid and necro dots. Their resist modifier just means you need 100 more in the relevant resist in order to achieve the same resist rate as any normal spell. With just 150 MR/FR, you'll resist fairly commonly - not half the time, but probably something like 20% or more. People in high-end Velious gear would routinely resist these spells. A pre-Kunark warrior in the best resist gear and a resist magic buff can exceed 200MR, so that'd mean easily resisting swarms as well.

Are you kidding me? Stop making up shit in order to get your class buffed indirectly. In Luclin noone resisted pyrocuror or funeral pyre 20% of the time. It was a major fucking fluke if it got resisted. I'm talking <1% of the time. In classic, kunark, and velious it never got resisted by players. Necro blood line abd druid swarms worked just like taps - practically unresistable.


Find me proof of it being regularly resisted along witb druid swarms. Oh whats that, you can't find any?

[Bockscar]

Lol, are you incapable of logical thought? When a spell has a -100 resist modifier, all it takes in order to resist that spell at the same rate as you would resist other spells without a modifier is to have 100 more in that resist. This means 200 FR will let you resist the fire-based necro dots as much as you would resist, say, a druid's immolation with 100 FR (i.e quite a lot). Same with the swarm dots; 200 MR means you'll resist those as often as you'd resist ordinary magic-based spells with 100 MR. 200 in any resist is fairly difficult to get until Velious, but it's not impossible at all with buffs, and anyway you don't need an effective 100 in a resist in order to resist spells pretty regularly. 50 or 60 will make you resist a plain spell easily a fifth of the time. Considering a warrior can get 170 unbuffed MR pre-Kunark, you're the one who's full of shit when you claim that these spells were virtually unresistable at the time. A -100 modifier just meant the spell would usually land unless someone had stacked the relevant resist to high heavens, and it was plenty possible to do so in a variety of ways. The proof is in simply understanding the game mechanics. Everyone can plainly see that these spells have a -100 resist modifier, and knows that this was always the case. Getting 180ish in MR or FR is difficult but fully possible, and then it'll just be like trying to resist a 0-modifier spell with a resist value of 80. How can you not understand this?

[Palemoon]

Dfn is trolling, just ignore him.

[jilena]

I was thinking from a post I read from nilbog or somewhere else that the -XXX to resist for spells was added in later to allow for spells that bypassed resists? Or was it just the fact that these bonuses were never talked about before then? I dunno.

*shrug*

[mimixownzall]

After all of my digging I haven't been able to find anything that says the spells have no resist check.

I have read a LOT of posts about people using the different dispells; they say how to use it, when to use it on what mobs, etc. After all of my post reading, not once did I see anyone give the disclaimer "if it doesn't get resisted". To me this clearly indicates that the spells were not being resisted or it would have been mentioned.

[jilena]

I also have never read anyone saying that nor do I remember ever seeing someone saying in game that it was resisted. Only that it failed to do what they expected it to do. i.e. having to cast it multiple times to remove a buff or damage shield. Resist would imply receiving a RESISTED message.

So would you say the general consensus is that MAGIC based buff/debuff removal works similar to poison/disease counters? i.e. Buffs/Debuffs have some sort of point value and the strength of the dispell used is applied to those values stripping any number of buffs matching its strength? That or having some sort of innate chance built into each buff seems to be the most logical way to account for varying numbers of buffs being stripped.

[Palemoon]

Yes, im coinvinced it works that way, especially your last sentence. The evidence points to that, with zero evidence contradicting it. This has been my conclusion for some time now. Im dubious about buffs/dispells having a fixed amount of "counters/counter removers" though. And that can easily be tested and ruled out one way or the other on Al'kabor useing same buff/same dispell over a period of time.