This isn't a bug report since I don't know the answer. The blade of carnage on dev only adds 10 hate per proc if any. I am wondering if this is correct? I get the bard proc limitations and stuff but this is a raw hate proc? So does anyone know if this is correct?
It is correct. Bard procs don't generate aggro. Only their songs do. In fact I think the deaggro proc blade from Chardok doesn't even reduce aggro.
As a bard, I was able to get a BoC during the PoP era. I can definitely vouch for the fact the pure hate procs still worked for bards as well as other classes during that time. Sadly, this is from live and I do not know if on Al'Kabor it worked the same way. I had specifically gotten the BoC because of the proc, as I loved to tank as a bard and all other types of procs didn't generate any aggro apart from the damage they dealt. Astuce
It seems to me that a proc would always generate the same effect, regardless of class, since it is from the blade and not from the person? Maybe bard procs are specially coded, but I had never heard of that being the case.
I gotta admit it makes no sense for this proc not to work for bards. It's not hate generated same as like stun hate or whatever.
Are you telling me all the deaggro procs, from Kunark as you mentioned, or Luclin (Toetwister) never did anything? Anecdotal evidence makes me think otherwise, but I never had any actual numbers to prove anything...
if you look at it that agro is a set value for bards regardless of the proc effect it makes sense. BoC would be the exception by nullifying that rule (assuming it is a rule), so by not doing it, it's working as intended. Just what I'm thinking anyway. However may it should work because the agro set point shouldn't nullify the effect itself?
You've made a mistake attempting to apply sense to bard code. Keep in mind, these are the same developers who saw fit to give Rangers Cinder Jolt. A clone of another spell they already own, but on the fire resist. Because the spell is merely an aggro reducer, the outcome is the same whether it lands or resists. So the clone spell has 0 purpose.
Yeah the deagro thing is weird too. So they know bard procs aren't affected by deagro procs then put in multiple bard only deagro procs?
Say what? You seem to be saying that the spells work as if they were working like +aggro from melee. In that case, yes, whether it hits or not doesn't matter. But I will go ahead and say I think you are wrong about -aggro spells, in all of my lengthy rangering I have observed the exact opposite, if it doesn't land it doesn't work. In fact, the whole reason for Cinder Jolt was to give us an option for high MR critters because we were getting turned into paste against them. More so than usual I mean. Now, on the 'Bard has a specially capped aggro mechanic that covers procs' thing, I have to say I'm not sure, but I have never ever heard of anything like that, and I will be very extremely surprised if that's the case.
I'm positive that's how Concussion, Jolt, Jolting Blades, etc. work. Their landing is irrelevant. The hate calculation of all spells is calculated before the Resist calculation. Even though the spell effect is "Reduce hate by 400" that doesn't matter. It has a raw hate value that is negative which is applied on Cast, not on Landing. This is why Wizards can spam Concussion or Concussion pants on a Magic immune mob and it still drops them. If you do not believe me it is easy to empirically prove. The easiest place to test this is Black Reavers since they are Magic immune and don't hit too hard. Aggro on one toon, steal aggro on ranger or wizard, cast 1 or 2 concussions/jolts and it will flip back to the original toon.
That requires the NPC resist the spell though and I'm not exactly clear what happens when you reach 0 Hate. I don't think you can go negative hate... can you? I may have to investigate this for science.
I still don't get it. Sure, the value is calculated before the spell lands, but if it gets resisted it doesn't get applied to the creature's hate list. Unless this is some kind of bizarre 'feature' of the emu code? I hate to be stubborn, but I totally don't think what you are saying is correct, at least for live during the era. Why would they have made CinderJolt if resists doesn't matter? You can say 'well, they were dumb' but that would be beyond dumb and well into incoherent. The reason that CJ exists is in the first place is because resists *do* matter. I am not going to try and prove you wrong, but I'd be interested if you could prove me wrong...I've learned to never say absolutely that I am right beyond a shadow of a doubt
Not if the original toon keeps attacking it won't. What you may be seeing here is the DPS loss from casting delay in addition to the continuing aggro generation from others will steal aggro back if all you do is stand there and cast resisted jolts. You can get the same effect by turning off attack and holding still for a couple rounds, but that doesn't mean that auto attack off has a hate reducing effect of it's own that gets applied. And what about ducking? Can I cast jolt and duck over and over and get a MOB off me? What about interruptions? To me it just doesn't make sense. Do you have any material supporting this, like links to comments or whatever? I feel like the burden of proof is on you since this seems (to me) to be kind of an unusual claim. I mean, I have been playing EQ since 99, and I cannot ever recall hearing anything like this. Plus, you can PULL a mob with jolt, since the very small casting aggro gets applied on a resist. In fact its a good way to pull, because although the mob becomes annoyed and comes after you, it stays at 1 if it lands or its like only 10 or something when it resists and either way it makes it very easy for the tank to peel. *but* yeah I could always be wrong. Would be super surprised on this one though. I should also stipulate I am talking about non-Bards, if there's some weird bardic coding I wouldn't know much about that.
Ok, so I looked around a bit, eve though I said I wouldn't. Here's what you are citing, Darch (I think) https://www.project1999.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-177247.html That seems pretty inconclusive, and it's more about how it works on P99, which is not really the standard. One guy does mention '100's of rangers reporting this' on the glade, and I would really like to see any old threads on the glade about it. I was a regular on the glade for years and I do not recall anything like that. Anyways, I'm out of cares to give so however it works now, I am sure it's good enough for me.
Wow, Raven, I just really have a hard time with it. Got a ton of respect for both of you, but this one's hard for me to swallow. I am still suspicious that it's more of a function of having stopped DPSing long enough to futz around with spells that makes it seem like there's a hate redux, but whatever. If I am right that's fine, and if I am wrong then I'll have learned something, so either way its a win.
http://www.eqoutrider.net/eqforums/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=4224 Ah..well...maybe. The point here is that since aggro from a resisted spell is partially added, then since jolt has a negative hate effect it would be partially subtracted (addition of a negative). If they said, hey well, a resisted spell adds a percentage of the spell aggro calculated from the raw hate value of the spell, let's say 10%, then I can see that the coders would probably have blundered into mistakenly doing the percentage and adding whether it was negative or not. If, however, they have a separate hate value that represents the +hate that comes from casting something, no matter what spell it is, then you wouldn't get that negative hate applied. I can see it either way, depending on the coders. But if what they are saying in the thread above is accurate for live, it would be a very small hate reduction. I wouldn't see how it could be much at all as far as shaking serious aggro, but I suppose I would have to say that TECHNICALLY, if it works that way, then yes, it does cause a hate redux even if resisted. I still think CJ was added not because they were dumb, but because resists WERE a problem and rangers were getting splattered...we complained about it a lot. The hypothetical drop of aggro from a resist was too small.
Hate on detrimental spells generally applies regardless how well its effect takes place. Examples: Your nuke for 2,000 damage causes 2,000 aggro even if it's a full resist for zero damage, a partial resist for 50 damage, or a crit for 15,000 damage. Your slow causes ~1,200 hate regardless of whether it lands or is resisted. Your snare causes ~1,200 hate even if the mob is runspeed immune. Clicking your mallet is ~400 hate regardless of a resist. Your paladin stun proc is ~1,200 hate even if the mob is too high a level or the spell is flat-out resisted. Jolt would be a rare exception to the rule if it acted any differently.
It's not hard to devise a simple test using a magic-immune mob (say, a newbie guard) to show that spells like concussion and jolt reduce aggro even if resisted. People did such tests on AK, and they did them on Live back in the PoP era. Here's a 2003 example from Graffe's: https://www.graffes.com/forums/showthread.php?8643-The-Truth-about-concussion-(and-other-aggro) People are arguing back and forth in that thread, of course, because this is Everquest and it's what people do! But this isn't a hard question to answer empirically, and it's been answered many, many times. Wizards on AK didn't drop Ancient: Greater Concussion from their lineups against MR-immune mobs like Emperor Ssraeshza or Lord Inquisitor Seru, and they knew what they were doing.
Incidentally, it was widely known (and empirically proven) on AK that the spell casting subtlety AA, which reduces hate, also reduced the efficacy of spells like concussion by the same percentage. Which is further evidence that in spite of the fact that "effect: decrease hate by 500" sounds like it should be resolved as a spell effect and thus handled separately from the normal spellcasting hate formula, hate from these spells was actually part of the same calculation that handled all other spell hate.
Yep, looks like I was wrong. You nailed my confusion exactly, I was assuming that they would have had a separate value, like a 'base +hate from spell casting' but it seems to be not so. Adding to my confusion is that it must be pretty small, I don't ever recall saying to myself 'hmm, it turned away even though 2 jolts resisted'. I always assumed that the pause in DPS and hate generation by others is what I was seeing. Thanks all, I learned.
I think it is quite likely the dev who made cinder jolt was not actually aware of how aggro worked re: resists. Anyone who has worked on a large project where they have to make content that draws on parts of the project they had nothing to do with can attest to that. Mr. Cinder Jolt may have been the guy in charge of ranger balance and mechanics in Velious while the guy who made the initial aggro system in Vanilla, he might not even still be with the company, or if he was it never occurred to Cinder Jolt guy to ask him if resists still counted for hate reduction. It certainly isn't even remotely unusual for the devs of a game to not really understand it at a deep level - look at that stupid hammer that Jorlleag dropped last night, even bare bones knowledge of EQ balance would tell someone that that weapon does not belong on a NToV dragon. It's outclassed by one group content drops from the previous expansion...
Well, yeah, but changes get discussed and reviewed, it's not like the devs just sat around and did whatever they thought up. I think it's more likely that they knew perfectly well that there was a small effect even on resists, but in fact it was not enough. Rangers needed a spell besides Jolt that could land on MR critters for full effect, I remember the issue and all the complaints. So, CJ actually had a good effect, when it lands for full it works much much better than whatever the amount from a resist is.
You post that from the standpoint of there being only a partial hate reduction from a resisted jolt, but that doesn't seem likely. In fact, knowing what we know about the mechanics of hate, it's almost impossible for it to work that way, and would require special rules for jolt alone.
