Shadow Knights & Vampiric Embrace

[Hakurou]

So today I feel like shooting myself in the foot as I just got this spell, but in classic (and probably even today) shadow knights get a toned down proc version of Vampiric Embrace. Currently they're using the way too powerful necro version.

http://forums.station.sony.com/eq/posts/list.m?topic_id=67013
Originally, SOE just wanted to have hybrid spells be retreads of parent caster spells.



Thus, the only hp drain proc we received was "Vampiric Embrace."



The problem for SOE was that the Necro version was super powerful for SK's, since unlike Necro's, SK's actually you know melee. So, what they ended up doing was sneakily making two versions of the same spell that were called by the same name -- Vampiric Embrace.


Yeah I know Lucy data:
VampEmbraceNecro: http://lucy.allakhazam.com/spell.html?id=821&source=Live
vs
VampEmbraceShadow: http://lucy.allakhazam.com/spell.html?id=822&source=Live

Logic bonus: Why would SKs get a downgrade to their proc in Velious (50 dmg, vs the current 70ish dmg)?
http://lucy.allakhazam.com/spell.html?id=1459&source=Test

[Palemoon]

You are correct, as a SK back in the day this was how it was, along with lifetaps costing more for an SK to cast then a necro.

[uygi]

According to Lucy, Live is currently effectively the same as P99 is now. Both SKs and necros get the spell Vampiric Embrace (http://lucy.allakhazam.com/spell.html?id=359&source=Live), which adds a proc named Vampiric Embrace (http://lucy.allakhazam.com/spell.html?id=821). There is no different version, at least in any way that Lucy can decipher. The only visible difference, according to Lucy, between Live and current day P99 is that the name of the proc was changed on live:2006-10-30 20:24 Changed Name from VampEmbraceNecro to Vampiric Embrace

There is some evidence that you're correct, but I don't see anything reliable, especially anything that indicates the proc change was in classic era. The Allakhazam page for VampEmbraceShadow (http://everquest.allakhazam.com/db/spell.html?spell=822) has comments supporting this, but all dated 2003 or later. I see no other support for the difference, including the comments for Vampiric Embrace (http://everquest.allakhazam.com/db/spell.html?spell=359) itself and VampEmbraceNecro (http://everquest.allakhazam.com/db/spell.html?spell=821) (which as said has since been renamed on Live). Dunno.

[Hakurou]

Here's a spell list from 2001:
http://web.archive.org/web/20010630083307/http://eq.castersrealm.com/spells/spells.asp?Class=SK
Vampiric Embrace Self Only Lifetap Proc (Max: 31)

[Hakurou]

While I'm at it. There also was a long standing bug with Vampiric Embrace procs triggering the global spell recast timer, which wasn't resolved until 2003:
Vampiric Embrace - We have corrected a bug with this spell that would prevent the character from casting for a couple of seconds after the proc went off.

http://www.tski.co.jp/baldio/patch/20030514.html

[Brinkman]

Here's a spell list from 2001:
http://web.archive.org/web/20010630083307/http://eq.castersrealm.com/spells/spells.asp?Class=SK


If you click on the spell in this link provided above you can find a post that states:

NECRO VS SK, By Uzara (4/12/2001)

There seems to be some confusion out there about how much damage this spell does. For Necromancers it does Level+12 damage when it procs. For Shadowknights it does Level/2 damage when it procs. Hope that clears things up a bit. (I still use it occasionally with my necro at mid level, efficient if it procs a few times)


Obviously this is a velious era quote, but it makes sense, ive always known them to be different but do not have a SK on p99, only a necro.

Anyone able to find a post or link from kunark or classic era?

[Zeelot]

The spell is no different for necro/SK and never was. It's the exact same spell for both. It's also working as it should and doing the amount of damage it should be doing. That casters-realm is inaccurate and only lists the max dmg at level 22 (inaccurately). It lists the same max damage as 31 well past 2002 and luclin - and it was never maxed at 31 then either. Always 72 at level 60.

[Brinkman]

The spell is no different for necro/SK and never was. It's the exact same spell for both. It's also working as it should and doing the amount of damage it should be doing. That casters-realm is inaccurate and only lists the max dmg at level 22 (inaccurately). It lists the same max damage as 31 well past 2002 and luclin - and it was never maxed at 31 then either. Always 72 at level 60.

Suppose that could be so, I dont claim to know 100%... but after limited research there are posts making it at least worth more research.


Id take a post from 2001 any day

Over someone simply saying " this is the way it was, I promise "

If you are sure, I assume there will be no problem finding the obvious proof.

[Zeelot]

Yep I'm looking. I could very well be wrong, but I'm pretty sure. Of course there needs to be obvious proof to warrant changing it as well.

[Zeelot]

Found this browsing around if it helps:

http://i.imgur.com/sgvmx.png

[Brinkman]

Also strange, two different people in the same link saying they work differently. Again velious era but still.. Its enough to raise an eyebrow.

HP CAP INCORRECT, By Zelaide (5/24/2001)

As previous necro has stated, hp cap is incorrect. I played with it on my lvl 35 necro and got procs in thee 40's. I'm pretty sure it goes even higher, if i can recall from my old necro. Anwyays, I also know the spell works differently for sk's and necros, necros get higher procs at any given lvl. Don't have an sk, perhaps 31 is the max sk proc.

[Brinkman]

Yep I'm looking. I could very well be wrong, but I'm pretty sure. Of course there needs to be obvious proof to warrant changing it as well.

I would say there would need to be overwhelming proof its wrong to change it. I agree.

[Brinkman]

hmmm EQ shadowknight from waybackmachine June 21, 2000 ( kunark era )

http://web.archive.org/web/20000621122843/http://sk.eqhq.com/s3.html

Adds a drain proc for use in combat, drains (Level/2 + 1) hit points

This makes the 31 max at lvl 60 make sense.

What we need to find is posts from Shadowknight specific sites. I am sure most necro sites from back then would list what the spell did for Necros And im also sure they will say Sk get the same spell at lvl 22. Doesnt mean they actually did the same thing, or were even the same spell.



P.S. this is pretty close to overwhelming ( at least for p99 in kunark era ) Need to find something pre-kunark now.

[Brinkman]

The knight Watch ( eq classic Sk specific website )

http://web.archive.org/web/20000904164531/http://www.eqforge.com/shadowknight/spells/spell_three.htm

Delivers lifetap via touch, can be used with weapon. Adds a proc to your melee that drains (Level/2)+1 hit points (12-26 hp)

This is from September 4, 2000. Notice how it says max drain is 26 hp... that would mean this info was listed prior to the kunark expansion and not updated when kunark came out. 50/2 + 1 = 26 which should lead us to the logical conclusion that this is the way the spell worked in pre-kunark EQ.

[Brinkman]

Everlore post from Kunark era again explaining how the spell works for SK

http://web.archive.org/web/20010711215118/http://everlore.com/magic/Magic.asp?ID=281&mode=details&spname=Vampiric+Embrace&type=



Submited by: reevar On: 9/11/2000 11:57:07 PM Rank: worst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 best
this spell does 1 point of damage for every 2 levels of the caster, plus 1 hit point. at lvl 22 it does 12 hp damage (22/2=11, 11+1=12). so it goes up 1 hit point every 2 levels after level 22. for example, it does 16 points of damage at lvl 30 (30/2=15, 15+1=16), 21 points of damage at lvl 40, 26 points of damage at lvl 50, and 31 points of damage at lvl 60. this can mean the difference between living and "loading, please wait" throughout an SK's lifetime. A great little buff for all Sk's.

[kanras]

Fixed, pending update.

[Brinkman]

Fixed, pending update.

Just curious how this change will be made.

The necro spell was definatally different, will two distinct spells be created like the OP mentioned?

And just fyi, not a SK hater at all, i just browse the bug forums giving some of my time to research.

Looks like its classic Sorry =(

[Hakurou]

Just curious how this change will be made.

The necro spell was definatally different, will two distinct spells be created like the OP mentioned?

And just fyi, not a SK hater at all, i just browse the bug forums giving some of my time to research.

Looks like its classic Sorry =(

I have no knowledge of how the EQEmu codebase works, but in general it should just require a single if statement checking the characters class, for example:
if (player_class() == shadow_knight) add_effect(VampEmbraceShadow);
else add_effect(VampEmbraceNecro);

Or check for necro first, whatever suites your needs. What question remains is if the spell does this class check if cast from items like Blood Ember Vambraces.

[Brinkman]

Trying to figure out when vamp embrace was changed to be the same for both classes, as it is on live now, and I remember it to be for a while.

found this so far

casters realm post of vamp embrace spell from 2002 ( luclin era)

This is a very Useful spell from level 22 to 39 and above 50. At level 39 SK's get a spell called Scream of Pain which is a proc for 25. Scream of Pain is not stackable with Vampiric embrace and will proc for more until level 50. Once Level 50 is reached Scream of pain becomes obsolete and Vampiric embrace should be used again.

[Nlaar]

The change in vampiric embrace has been implemented and now as a 60 SK I am proccing for 31 instead of 72. That said...

I am finding that after vampiric embrace wears off (I use BE arms clicky) I am occasionally still proccing as if I were still buffed. Anyone else finding this to be the case?

[thrump]

The change in vampiric embrace has been implemented and now as a 60 SK I am proccing for 31 instead of 72. That said...

I am finding that after vampiric embrace wears off (I use BE arms clicky) I am occasionally still proccing as if I were still buffed. Anyone else finding this to be the case?

Yes. Just came here to say this. It is still proccing with the spell icon down.

[Daggoth]

I see this is an old issue but I've been away for a few months and am just now finding this. I don't have any links to posts to add, and honestly I think hunting down old posts is only as useful as people want it to be.

Brinkman's evidence is compelling but innacurate and I can explain how this bad information circulated the net back then just as it does now.

Castersrealm or some omni site decides to compile info, they use spell charts from some brady strategy guide. Some other ambitious person decides they're gonna make a site but this one will be different from CR because it's gonna be just for SKs, but the proprietor of that site is himself only a level 12 SK and doesn't know anything beyond what castersrealm says so he copies and pastes it to his new better SK site. Now we have 2 people who never used a spell explaining to the world what it does, even with algorithms from that fancy strategy guide based on a chart given to the author back in beta.

Now I can tell you what I remember, I played an SK on povar back in 1999 on through to planes of power. To begin I can recall that vampiric embrace always gained +1 hp and +6 seconds every time you leveled. I can recall being annoyed by the fact that SKs best lifetap was via proc not actual controlled cast (I must not have known about life leech at the time). This was obviously pre kunark as SK gets plenty of solid taps post 50.

I can also recall the shroud of undeath spell line being a sidegrade not an upgrade. The reason it taps for 50 is because it had a much longer 20 minute duration, SKs were forced to make a difficult decision to constantly recast a significantly better short buff vs a weaker low hassle version.

My evidence is anecdotal and based on human memory, it doesn't have links to posts of speculation amongst random visitors to a spells page, and it's 100% right. A sane man has to admit that it's at least possible to remember wrong, but I don't believe that's the case here. Fortunately I have better things to do than go on a crusade for proof of authenticity.

Zeelot's link was compelling enough to have left this alone, it included reference to a specific patch date and someone's observations on the spell algorithm. Brinkman's links appear to be random blurbs from people theorizing on the usefulness of the spell, not one person saying, "I'm a level x SK and it's doing this much damage" it's just some guy running his mouth about what he imagines he'd do with that spell he just read about and now wants to comment on.

For what it's worth I also know Brinkman in real life. He advocated this change without consulting me. He meant well but was mislead by poorly fact checked posts. This is a perfect example of a conviction on flimsy evidence.

Well that's all I have to say, hope this gets repaired... every time my SK procs for 30 I get a little more angry.

[Uthgaard]

Yes, there are incorrect facts on the internet. There are plenty of them. That's why you look until you find the the most commonly held conception, information that underlying the mechanics to recreate them, or most likely stories from opposing hypotheses.

In this case, the facts overwhelmingly support this, including the spell file itself. I for one remember that I was thoroughly impressed with spirit strike the first time I used it in west karana on a scarecrow (or it might have been a wisp that floated by), but to say that I recall the numbers would be lending credit to my memory that doesn't exist. I know it was 74 because of the amount of time I've spent on the spell file.

[Daggoth]

The truth is not democratic, but at least now you have another story from an opposing hypothesis as you put it. Furthermore I take exception to your use of the word facts, the "evidence" leaves alot to be desired. As I said before I have better things to do, I'm currently a retired SK and just came back for a day to hang out with my guild for old times.

BTW I appreciate what you're trying to say about remembering the damage on spirit strike, but I'm not reciting npc text verbatim, I'm not drawing zone maps from memory. I haven't said it should be a 72 tap I'm recalling landmark thoughts that are only consistent if things were a certain way and that is vampiric embrace was a stronger tap than lifedraw pre kunark (and into kunark and beyond for that matter). It would be like an enchanter saying, "hrm that can't be right I know clarity is x minutes because I used to have to cast it every time I would cast _____". That's not a person beating his chest and saying, "I remember it was x minutes trust me x minutes is right x minutes just sticks in my head." that's a guy walking you through his recollection of events that would only be consistent if x minutes were the duration.

You have every right to run your server however you please, and I realize you can't go off changing every little thing on the whims of every nut with the patience to make a reasonably convincing post. But that's what was done here. Vampiric Embrace and the SKs who count on it have been wrongly compromised by busy bodies on a misguided crusade for classic accuracy.

I don't plan on commenting on this any further, as I said I'm retired and this doesn't really affect me any more but it's wrong. Shadow Knight Vampiric Embrace is working as the people who never played an SK think it did. You now have 2 hardcore veteran SKs telling you that it's not right.

*Edit*
If they have time I also would urge the devs to take a look at those VampEmbraceNecro and other such entries and see where they're being applied. Perhaps they're related to the NPC versions of the spell and may explain some of the database confusion, I've resisted NPC harm touches as well as embrace procs and they have a slightly modified name, HarmtouchNPC and VampEmbraceNecro

[Brinkman]

I was simply attemping to help with the research on this spell. I did not bring this subject up, all the information I provided would have been linked eventually anyways, as the other people, including the original poster, were already linking quotes etc.

That being said I want it to be correct, but barring a screenshot from early 1999 showing a SK procing vampiric embrace, I dont know what else can be used as infalible evidence. The truth is definatally not democratic, problem is, what is the truth?

Just wanted to add a few things to this.... Zealots post of Everlores Vampiric Embrace Listing is misused. First of all, he posted the Necromancer spell. Notice how it says level 8. Everlore actually listed Vampiric embrace twice, once for necro, and once for SK. Take a loo at this link:

This is the SK spell listing from the same era, it says nothing about the patch upgrade.

http://web.archive.org/web/20010711215118/http://everlore.com/magic/Magic.asp?ID=281&mode=details&spname=Vampiric+Embrace&type=

If you go into that link you will find this post:

I am still anticipating this spell with my SK, but my necro can usually drain about 28hp whenever i "touch", is this Class-related, or are you all mistaken on the amount it drains? I will put a new post when my SK gets the spell to let you all know if i am experiencing any difference between my classes.


Chantraz 12 necro Druzzil Ro
Toast 12 SK Druzzil Ro

Now, this guy played both a SK and Necro and is visiting the everlore vampiric embrace page for SK. He seems very confused at why all the posts are saying this spell does so much less than his necro is currently doing with the " Same spell " he even goes on to ask if there is a class difference, or if the posters are mistaken.

Sk were the primary posters in the SK vampiric embrace spell listing on everlore, because when they went to look up there spells, they didnt click on necromancer spells.

Same thing for the Necromancer Spell listing on everlore for vampiric embrace.

Two different spell listings, both of which say the spells do different things.

Here is the necro listing:

http://web.archive.org/web/20010714080838/http://everlore.com/magic/Magic.asp?ID=328&mode=details&spname=Vampiric+Embrace&type=

After our conversation we had a few weeks ago Daggoth, I went back to try and find anything I could to post here that contradicted what I was finding, and I couldnt. I dont know what else to do or say about it.

[Brinkman]

including the spell file itself.

The way I understand it, at some point the spells were made the same, and because p99 used the everquest titanium client thats what the spells did here until this information was found.

What I am curious about is what spell file are you speaking of. Do you guys have access to an unadultered Classic spell file? If so do you still have access to it and can that information be copy and pasted for both Sk and Necro?

[Daggoth]

That being said I want it to be correct, but barring a screenshot from early 1999 showing a SK procing vampiric embrace, I dont know what else can be used as infalible evidence.


Because this was the standard used to nerf it in the first place? I haven't seen a screenshot from early 1999 showing a SK procing vampiric embrace for 31 at 60.

/shrug

[Uthgaard]

The spell file here is really just a csv (carat separated values) export of lucy data, the only thing it has in common with live is the information inside of it and its name. The way the server interprets it is entirely manufactured by people who reverse engineered things and made it into the current source. So how things work here or have worked here in the past isn't any sort of indication of how they should function.

And to answer your question, yes. The eqcaster parser doesn't show all of the data in the file and its development ended when lucy surpassed it, but it's all there in the file.

http://i41.tinypic.com/2s6lfkl.jpg

The actual spell itself did nothing. It used a variable in what's known today as the recourselink field. It's not a spell belonging to NPCs as no NPC has ever buffed with this spell.

[Daggoth]

The way I understand it, at some point the spells were made the same, and because p99 used the everquest titanium client thats what the spells did here until this information was found.

What I am curious about is what spell file are you speaking of. Do you guys have access to an unadultered Classic spell file? If so do you still have access to it and can that information be copy and pasted for both Sk and Necro?

They weren't different spells, one didn't say shadow knight only and the other didn't say necro only. It was one scroll shared by both classes same as deadeye and every other spell. I'm doubtful of the suggestion that they made 1 spell scroll scribe 2 different instances of a similar spell for different classes. When a class got something different they just got a different spell. For example they didn't take DMF and say give it to SKs but when they cast it turn off the see invis part, lower the poison resist, and have it be self only.. no they invented bobbing corpse.

[Uthgaard]

Daggoth, I think both your friend and I have been exceedingly polite to you. You have no evidence but your own anecdotes, and even after attempting to contradict himself and support you, your friend was unable to do so.

It's been explained sufficiently so I'm not investing any more time into it. It's time to let the thread die.

[Daggoth]

I agree nothing productive is to come of this. I thought I made clear that I wasn't attempting to convince anyone when I said my evidence was anecdotal. To try to convince you all would take more effort than I'm willing to invest or in fact might not even be possible to certain standards.

I'm just telling you it's wrong and I'm gonna get back to other things now.

By the way welcome back Uth, I didn't realize you were on the team again and I do appreciate you taking an active role in this discussion.

[Treats]

They weren't different spells, one didn't say shadow knight only and the other didn't say necro only. It was one scroll shared by both classes same as deadeye and every other spell. I'm doubtful of the suggestion that they made 1 spell scroll scribe 2 different instances of a similar spell for different classes. When a class got something different they just got a different spell. For example they didn't take DMF and say give it to SKs but when they cast it turn off the see invis part, lower the poison resist, and have it be self only.. no they invented bobbing corpse.

Same spell, different effects depending on class. From the spell file:

Necromancer

VampEmbraceNecro
Decrease Hit Points (HP) from 13 (L1) to 72 (L60) and adds it to yours


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Classes: Shd (L1), Nec (L1)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Range to Target: 15 feet

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Skill: Instantaneous
Allowable Targets: Drain

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resistance Check: Magic

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Spell Duration: Instant

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Spell cast on you: You feel your life force drain away.
Spell cast on someone: Soandso staggers.

Shadow Knight

VampEmbraceShadow
Decrease Hit Points (HP) from 1 (L1) to 31 (L60) and adds it to yours


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Classes: Shd (L1), Nec (L1)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Range to Target: 15 feet

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Skill: Instantaneous
Allowable Targets: Drain

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resistance Check: Magic

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Spell Duration: Instant

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Spell cast on you: You feel your life force drain away.
Spell cast on someone: Soandso staggers.

[koros]

Originally, and I do mean originally, they used the same effect. Back during classic the sk effect was added. I had a sk and a necro back then and they most certainly procced for different amounts.

I play a sk now, and sadly this change was classic.