![]() |
|
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
Quote:
| |||
|
|
||||
|
#2
|
|||
|
1. Necro casts siphon strength.
2. Target gets -str 3. Check is applied that type=lifetap 4. Effect is applied to the caster of the spell, and the effects are multiplied by -1 5. Necro gains strength for the same duration 1. Necro casts shadowbond. 2. Target gets +hp 3. Check is applied that type=lifetap 4. Effect is applied to the caster of the spell, and the effects are multiplied by -1 5. Necro loses hp for the same duration Here's the raw data proving it used to be type=lifetap, changed at the very date the recourse was added. That's the flag that told the game to apply the effect in reverse to the caster. http://lucy.allakhazam.com/spellhist...17&source=Live 2002-09-04 11:33 Changed Target Type from Lifetap to Single EVERY other type=lifetap with a duration could be dispelled. Every other type lasted after a mob no longer had the effect. They were NOT linked and were dispellable. Case closed. I'm sick of reiterating this argument every few months. | ||
|
|
|||
|
#3
|
||||
|
Quote:
| |||
|
|
||||
|
#4
|
|||||
|
Quote:
Quote:
I don't get why you keep bringing this up. Like I'm baffled you want this nerfed so bad. | ||||
|
Last edited by Potus; 08-08-2014 at 05:14 PM..
|
|
||||
|
#5
|
|||
|
Necros didn't care about dispelling it Nirgon. They just used vexing/bod to heal instead of getting rid of all their damn buffs.
| ||
|
|
|||
|
#6
|
|||
|
From that same castersrealm snapshot. This is talking about impart strength. The same mechanics would apply. See how it mentions giving your whole party the effect and then cancelling it? It mentions 1. the recourse, 2. how the spell isn't gone from party members when it's removed from the caster, 3. how it can be clicked off the necro.
http://web.archive.org/web/200104180...ell.asp?Id=389 THIS SPELL IS GREAT, By Azrel darkelf necromancer e'ci (1/28/2001) you can give your whole party +str and then just left click the icon that is on your "effects" stack to turn it off and your party members still gain the bonus (it does override several str buffs cast on you, so just cast this on your party before they buff you) SLIGHT BUG..., By Gnish (1/28/2001) This spell will take 10 STR from you and give to another. Well, they fail to mention that it takes 10 from BASE STR without any buff spells on you. So, if your buffed STR (with magic buffs, not items) is 70, but normal STR is 60, then casting this spell will leave you with 50 STR. This is easily changed by casting Siphon Strength on your next target and then you'll be right back up to 70. A beneficial bug, is that you can cast this spell on multiple recipients | ||
|
|
|||
|
#7
|
|||
|
Let me know where you find a reference to anyone dispelling the effect successfully anywhere.
It would have been widely known/used, and it wasn't. Further if it had a visible effect to dispel and it was indeed dispellable, the first thing people would have tried to do was dispel it and there'd be mentions of it all over. Again, there isn't. It was briefly broken and quickly corrected outside of our time line. | ||
|
Last edited by Nirgon; 08-08-2014 at 12:56 PM..
|
|
||
|
#8
|
|||
|
Problem is things that like are technically an exploit, so if it was the case back then the necros that knew about it I'm sure kept it hush hush as long as they could so it wouldn't be changed.
Was it a classic exploit that flew under the radar or was it not doable is the question? The patch that made it no longer possible (that post from luclin or something) makes it sound like an exploit people used for a long time that was finally realized by Sony. | ||
|
|
|||
|
#9
|
|||
|
It's just that if there was a recourse the first thing someone would have tried to do was dispel it. I tried dispelling res effects from myself on live just the same. Every classic necro I can find and talk to about this says you just absolutely could not. It's a stupid thing to rustle good posting pals like pasi/koros about, I'll let it go... but its wrong :P.
PS: Banishment of Shadows confirmed not allowed at necro botb [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.] | ||
|
|
|||
|
#10
|
|||
|
did recourse effects even exist pre-luclin?
| ||
|
|
|||
![]() |
|
|