Requiescat <3

[Motenten]

Might test on Campaign quadavs that use Diamond Shell (makes you hit for 0 damage when attacking from the rear). May be somewhat difficult to test solo, but I'm sure you can find at least one other person around somewhere. Also, wivres with Granite Hide (hit for 0 when attacking from the front).

The JoT thing seems like a bug, though.

[Greatguardian]

Ok we need more testing on this.

Today we decided to go screw around in sea and start building a pop set for JoL / AV. Did Jailer of Temperance . Now those that have done sea before know that JoT has different "modes" where he's only vulnerable to specific damage types.



So while it's got poles out, I decide to use Req to bypass it's damage resistance, and low and behold Req did exactly 0 damage. This immediately raised red flags because isn't Req supposed to bypass those resistances, that was kinda the entire point of the WS. SE even made a statement that they weren't going to change the -20% attack due to it bypassing those very same resistances I just ran into.

Next time I'm in Dyna Tav I'm going to pull a PLD mob and do Req during Invincible and see what happens. I was taking someone's word before that it bypassed that. Anyone else have actual experience with this WS vs damage resistances?

If they coded JoT's immunities as "if damage is physical and not piercing, do 0 damage" instead of "if damage is slashing or blunt, do 0 damage", it would logically follow that non-typed physical damage would still do 0 as it would not satisfy the conditions for dealing damage.

It's a lazy way to code it, but it fits the observable data.

Edit: To clarify, in this case it would actually be more correct to say that JoT has "Vulnerabilities" rather than "Immunities". He would only take damage from Piercing, rather than being immune to everything but piercing. It's a fine distinction, but it holds in this case.

[saevel]

They could do that, but it would be an incredibly inefficient way to code something like an MMO.

MMO's have to process tens of thousands of action scripts per second, having every monster have it's own action script for player attack would be horribly inefficient. What you usually do is code in "resistances" as a set of bit flags on a monsters database entry. When the action script for "player_attack" is ran, part of it checks the target's bit flags to determine damage resistances / vulnerabilities and then use's those as a multiplier for the final damage. A multiplier of 1 means regular damage, 0 means immunity, and so forth. This way you don't have to write a script for every single monster in the game and can instead just use one attack script that checks multiple things.

Assuming it ignores other NM's resistances, and we need to check that, then it's an unanticipated result (aka bug) of JoL's specific resistant flags.

[Crimson_Slasher]

I wouldnt rule out the coding aspect personally. Inefficient or not, its not the first time theyve done things like this. Heck we cant even get consistency on gear description terms half the time. I cant recall what it was but i remember seeing somewhat recently something like one piece of gear having "Double attack" while another was "Double-attack". Thats less a coding thing but it still shows a lack of consistency from this team.

[Ophannus]

I tried to go solo JoT as RDM/NIN thinking Req would pwn it, boy was that a mistake.