Distract/Frazzle = INT or MND ?

[Trumpy]

After some discussion in LS about it...

What helps distract/frazzle, MND or INT?

They are both black magic So i would lean toward INT and Oldwiki says INT while BGwiki doesn't have either. But Freshly Picked Vana #9 (http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxi/threads/43262-%E2%80%9CFreshly-Picked-Vana%E2%80%99diel-9%E2%80%9D-Digest?p=515764&viewfull=1#post515764) says MND. Now because its from SE i want to take their word for it but perhaps they made a mistake and nobody caught it so it hasn't been corrected (wouldn't be the first time they made a mistake, and its completely backward to the normal formula for enfeebles regarding white magic = mnd black magic = int). Just wanted to get what you guys think on this.

[Demonjustin]

So far as I know provided they have variable potency you should be able to easily test it in ballista using MND+ and INT+ gear individually and using /checkparam to check the affected player's EVA. I'm curious as well so if you could let me know that'd be great.

[Doombringer]

i just naturally assumed int because they are black magic. is there any precedent at all for a black magic spell using mnd or a white magic spell using int?


i hate to say it but i'm gonna chalk it up to typo/mistranslation until somebody tests it or camate double checks for us.

[Demonjustin]

These would be the first spells to break the normal paradigm. Still, it's the first time we have gotten new Enfeebling spells in a long time so it's worth checking to be sure since they might have done something vastly unexpected with it.

[dasva]

For all we know it being classified as a black magic is the typo/misprint... plus it's not like most rdm gear that has much of either stat doesn't have tons of both

[Karbuncle]

Well, until its clarified MND is probably what you should build around since thats what they said, but it wouldn't be the first time there was a translation slip up. Still, as a Black Magic enfeeble, it should be INT...

But as Dasva said, plenty of both on RDM enfeebling gear.

[dasva]

Ok tried distract 2 and It's mnd.... has a min cap of -40 eva even when target had way more mnd. Was -41 at 5dmnd, -42 at 10 dmnd, -43 at 15 dmnd, -49 acc at 46 dmnd, -50 acc at 50dmnd, and still -50 acc at 63 dmnd. So acc penalty is 40+floor (dmnd/5) with caps at 40 and 50 making not much difference between super geared player and completely naked one.

Interesting note saboteur distract with the capped dmnd only gave me -90. Saboteur is supposedly gimped against nms which would kinda make sense in pvp but then it should've been 75... perhaps it is only doubling the base amount?

With same mnd and saboteur and af3+2 hands and body was -103 mnd and to make that math work out the only thing I can think of is the enhanced saboteur was applied to just the base amount and the enhance enfeebling part was applied to the full amount

Edit: did some testing with blind and got it to -20-30 acc but enhanced sab was -63 so that blows that one theory out of the water... guessing saboteur is just really friggin weird with potency debuffs... my next thought is it might apply to base and to apply to the extra dstat potency you need that much more dstat. So like 50 dmnd to cap normally but need 100 dmnd to cap with saboteur...

[Malithar]

did some testing with blind and got it to -20-30 acc but enhanced sab was -63 so that blows that one theory out of the water...

Was the Blind testing with Mnd as well?

[dasva]

what no blind is int. Well previous testing says your int -target mnd.... but regardless I was ilvld up vs naked target

[Demonjustin]

So, quick question, any idea if it's MND or INT for Accuracy? I figure if they broke one rule, they may have broke the other as well...

[dasva]

That is a bit more testing that I feel up to right now but it's probably the same as whatever the potency is