[Castle]

Originally Posted by DarthPeon [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

(1)While you provide decent evidence of Blart suggesting shaman dot stacking in a post circa 2002 that (2)does not negate the fact that these same exact spells did not stack when a necro cast them. The spell IDs are the same in the code, yet coming out of the shaman they somehow magically stack as opposed to coming out of the Necro? This matter can be resolved by current devs with access to spell files showing if this feature can be custom flipped on and off on the same Spell ID - without creating two separate Plague spells (for example) on a Necro and Shaman. Separate versions of the spells in question did not exist.

(1) The earliest copy of the post is from 2002, but clearly shows it is no later than mid 2001 being all the info exclusively 1-60/Vanilla-Velious content. We don't have original autographs of many documents, but the content of manuscripts are the most accurate way to predict an accurate date of the original autograph. Clearly this was Pre-Luclin.

(2)This is untrue. Necros using Shaman DoTs stacked. It wasn't based on class, it was based on the DoT. Necros could stack Venom of the Snake and Ebolt just like Shamans could. There was no magic modifier that Shamans had, simply their DoTs were coded to stack. Beastlords could stack em and so could Necros. If you disagree, provide proof.

Further more, dot messages wearing off did not come until much later and that means people were unaware their higher level dots were over writing their lower level dots, they assumed as much because both spells landed. Yes there could very well be that many bad players that you quoted out of the ~500k that ended up playing.

False. See quote.

http://web.archive.org/web/200203050...ll.asp?Id=1184

DOTS, By Scratchen (1/28/2001)

When I started EQ I played an Enchanter and use to cast thier DOT (Damage over Time) spell over and over thinking that it worked like a DD (Direct Damage). Now EQ has a message that indicates when the spell wears off, but along with these messages came a nerf. DOTS require that the subject be still in order to have the full effect.

Moving on...

Originally Posted by DarthPeon

1) We have an official everquest dev post stating inferior dots do not stack with superior dots (the word "still" can be interpreted and coaxed out from the patch notes since by deduction it was not a feature taken away at that point).

2) We are in agreement that necro/druid dots of the same line do not stack.

3) And I hope we are in agreement that even notable players or experts throughout history can be at wrong, regardless of the subject.

1) This was in relation to "lines" of DoTs. Shaman DoTs are not mentioned. Shamans have been logically proven to not have lines. One vague quote cannot disprove mounds of unbiased evidence.

2)Yes, the lines specific to their class did not stack (ie: multiple from same "line")

3) See above where wearing off messages are in. People would clearly see. You fight 100 mobs to get 1 level, 1000ish to get 10 from 39-50. If what you're saying is true, 1,000 times their first DoT wore off and they got a message right when their other one landed, and they didn't notice?? It's not only how many people say this is true, but how little evidence can be found against this. This troll shammy was legit and one guy from Casters Realm posted detailed HP amounts and calculated their HP based on his DoTs. Obviously they knew their stuff. CHA is an entirely different subject because you cannot see the effects of things, so obviously without a parser or a packet sniffer you simple cannot really tell what CHA is doing. "Your Envenomed Bolt spell has worn off." Anyone can see that and put 2 and 2 together. To compare CHA with this is apples and oranges, my friend.

If the same spell ID is used for two separate classes, I predict any change to the spell would immediately show up on both classes due to the way the code works. If so, this negates the fact that Necros could not stack but yet shaman somehow could. Or else separate spell IDs of the same exact would have been required - essentially creating two new spells of the same name.

It is spell specific, not class specific. Not to sound like a broken record because I said it earlier, but whether a SHM, BST, or NEC cast a spell from the Shamans pool of spells, it would stack. There wasn't some special class modifier, that's not how it worked.

I am for classic on this issue. Nothing more, nothing less.

Agree. Are you starting to see that this was classic?