Spells: Shadow Knights & Vampiric Embrace

[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.

[Brinkman]

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

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]

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

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.

[Treats]

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

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.

[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/200107112...+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/200107140...+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.

[Daggoth]

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

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.

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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.

[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.