Game Mechanics: Nullify Magic

[Bockscar]

Lol, are you incapable of logical thought? When a spell has a -100 resist modifier, all it takes in order to resist that spell at the same rate as you would resist other spells without a modifier is to have 100 more in that resist. This means 200 FR will let you resist the fire-based necro dots as much as you would resist, say, a druid's immolation with 100 FR (i.e quite a lot). Same with the swarm dots; 200 MR means you'll resist those as often as you'd resist ordinary magic-based spells with 100 MR. 200 in any resist is fairly difficult to get until Velious, but it's not impossible at all with buffs, and anyway you don't need an effective 100 in a resist in order to resist spells pretty regularly. 50 or 60 will make you resist a plain spell easily a fifth of the time. Considering a warrior can get 170 unbuffed MR pre-Kunark, you're the one who's full of shit when you claim that these spells were virtually unresistable at the time. A -100 modifier just meant the spell would usually land unless someone had stacked the relevant resist to high heavens, and it was plenty possible to do so in a variety of ways. The proof is in simply understanding the game mechanics. Everyone can plainly see that these spells have a -100 resist modifier, and knows that this was always the case. Getting 180ish in MR or FR is difficult but fully possible, and then it'll just be like trying to resist a 0-modifier spell with a resist value of 80. How can you not understand this?

[Palemoon]

Dfn is trolling, just ignore him.

[jilena]

I was thinking from a post I read from nilbog or somewhere else that the -XXX to resist for spells was added in later to allow for spells that bypassed resists? Or was it just the fact that these bonuses were never talked about before then? I dunno.

*shrug*

[mimixownzall]

After all of my digging I haven't been able to find anything that says the spells have no resist check.

I have read a LOT of posts about people using the different dispells; they say how to use it, when to use it on what mobs, etc. After all of my post reading, not once did I see anyone give the disclaimer "if it doesn't get resisted". To me this clearly indicates that the spells were not being resisted or it would have been mentioned.

[jilena]

I also have never read anyone saying that nor do I remember ever seeing someone saying in game that it was resisted. Only that it failed to do what they expected it to do. i.e. having to cast it multiple times to remove a buff or damage shield. Resist would imply receiving a RESISTED message.

So would you say the general consensus is that MAGIC based buff/debuff removal works similar to poison/disease counters? i.e. Buffs/Debuffs have some sort of point value and the strength of the dispell used is applied to those values stripping any number of buffs matching its strength? That or having some sort of innate chance built into each buff seems to be the most logical way to account for varying numbers of buffs being stripped.

[Palemoon]

Yes, im coinvinced it works that way, especially your last sentence. The evidence points to that, with zero evidence contradicting it. This has been my conclusion for some time now. Im dubious about buffs/dispells having a fixed amount of "counters/counter removers" though. And that can easily be tested and ruled out one way or the other on Al'kabor useing same buff/same dispell over a period of time.