Project 1999

Go Back   Project 1999 > Server Issues > Resolved Issues

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 11-17-2011, 10:05 AM
Hakurou Hakurou is offline
Orc


Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 36
Default

Here's a spell list from 2001:
http://web.archive.org/web/200106300...s.asp?Class=SK
Quote:
Vampiric Embrace Self Only Lifetap Proc (Max: 31)
  #2  
Old 11-17-2011, 10:36 AM
Hakurou Hakurou is offline
Orc


Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 36
Default

While I'm at it. There also was a long standing bug with Vampiric Embrace procs triggering the global spell recast timer, which wasn't resolved until 2003:
Quote:
Vampiric Embrace - We have corrected a bug with this spell that would prevent the character from casting for a couple of seconds after the proc went off.
http://www.tski.co.jp/baldio/patch/20030514.html
  #3  
Old 11-17-2011, 08:39 PM
Brinkman Brinkman is offline
Sarnak


Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 395
Default

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

If you click on the spell in this link provided above you can find a post that states:

NECRO VS SK, By Uzara (4/12/2001)

There seems to be some confusion out there about how much damage this spell does. For Necromancers it does Level+12 damage when it procs. For Shadowknights it does Level/2 damage when it procs. Hope that clears things up a bit. (I still use it occasionally with my necro at mid level, efficient if it procs a few times)



Obviously this is a velious era quote, but it makes sense, ive always known them to be different but do not have a SK on p99, only a necro.

Anyone able to find a post or link from kunark or classic era?
Last edited by Brinkman; 11-17-2011 at 09:01 PM..
  #4  
Old 11-17-2011, 08:50 PM
Zeelot Zeelot is offline
Fire Giant


Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 625
Default

The spell is no different for necro/SK and never was. It's the exact same spell for both. It's also working as it should and doing the amount of damage it should be doing. That casters-realm is inaccurate and only lists the max dmg at level 22 (inaccurately). It lists the same max damage as 31 well past 2002 and luclin - and it was never maxed at 31 then either. Always 72 at level 60.
__________________
Zeelot <TMO>
Last edited by Zeelot; 11-17-2011 at 08:57 PM..
  #5  
Old 11-17-2011, 09:05 PM
Brinkman Brinkman is offline
Sarnak


Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 395
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zeelot [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
The spell is no different for necro/SK and never was. It's the exact same spell for both. It's also working as it should and doing the amount of damage it should be doing. That casters-realm is inaccurate and only lists the max dmg at level 22 (inaccurately). It lists the same max damage as 31 well past 2002 and luclin - and it was never maxed at 31 then either. Always 72 at level 60.
Suppose that could be so, I dont claim to know 100%... but after limited research there are posts making it at least worth more research.


Id take a post from 2001 any day

Over someone simply saying " this is the way it was, I promise "

If you are sure, I assume there will be no problem finding the obvious proof.
  #6  
Old 11-17-2011, 09:06 PM
Zeelot Zeelot is offline
Fire Giant


Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 625
Default

Yep I'm looking. I could very well be wrong, but I'm pretty sure. Of course there needs to be obvious proof to warrant changing it as well.
__________________
Zeelot <TMO>
Last edited by Zeelot; 11-17-2011 at 09:08 PM..
  #7  
Old 11-17-2011, 09:15 PM
Zeelot Zeelot is offline
Fire Giant


Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 625
Default

Found this browsing around if it helps:

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
__________________
Zeelot <TMO>
  #8  
Old 11-17-2011, 09:21 PM
Brinkman Brinkman is offline
Sarnak


Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 395
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zeelot [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Yep I'm looking. I could very well be wrong, but I'm pretty sure. Of course there needs to be obvious proof to warrant changing it as well.
I would say there would need to be overwhelming proof its wrong to change it. I agree.
Closed Thread


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:01 AM.


Everquest is a registered trademark of Daybreak Game Company LLC.
Project 1999 is not associated or affiliated in any way with Daybreak Game Company LLC.
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.