![]() |
|
|||||||
| View Poll Results: Does the staff care about Red99 still? | |||
| Yes |
|
37 | 37.00% |
| No |
|
63 | 63.00% |
| Voters: 100. You may not vote on this poll | |||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
|
|||
|
I remember people saying that spells with multiple effects of different types would suffer multiple resist checks making the entire spell more likely to resist outright.
__________________
Jack <Yael Graduates> - Server First Erudite
Bush <Toxic> Jeremy <TMO> - Patron Saint of Blue | ||
|
|
|||
|
#2
|
|||
|
Thats how its supposed to be. Spells that dmg/stun dot/push etc were easier to resist.
__________________
| ||
|
|
|||
|
#3
|
|||
|
A double resist check should make the spell harder to resist when it has two components to it.
| ||
|
|
|||
|
#4
|
|||
|
Two resist checks are more than one, not less. Exception was shock of lightning for whatever reason and a few other low level spells. Most spells that dmg+push or dmg+stun have double check = double resist chance.
__________________
| ||
|
|
|||
|
#5
|
||||
|
Quote:
You cast a Marklars Clash, Wizard spell with dmg+ nuke, magic based. The target rolls one resist check vs dmg than another vs stun. Target has to lose both resist checks for the spell to land. Sol landed like a lifetap everytime until POP era, partial ed on dmg all the time but always landed with knockback. There was a reason why mages, and wizards kept there lvl 8-12 nukes mem'd for pvp. | |||
|
|
||||
|
#6
|
||||
|
Quote:
I think we're in agreement.
__________________
| |||
|
|
||||
|
#7
|
|||
|
no
| ||
|
|
|||
|
#8
|
|||
|
Word
| ||
|
|
|||
|
#9
|
|||
|
All you 'no's should quit whining and enjoy your free game. Gd
Staff has put so much time into this project. I can tell you one thing that would make me want to stop investing, though: my users being a bunch of unappreciative, whining, complaining bitches. | ||
|
|
|||
|
#10
|
||||
|
Quote:
| |||
|
Last edited by Tradesonred; 08-05-2014 at 07:43 AM..
|
|
|||
![]() |
|
|