Copperbell Hard for int book 2 on stardust rod, killed the target no update

[Gwaeron]

It's not stupid. How can your book possibly think you killed that monster if you're face down on the floor when it dies? How can you collect its soul when you're out of commission? It makes perfect sense that you have to be alive to participate in the kill.

The same way you obtain crystalised souls of slain enemies from FATEs where you just collect stuff lying on the ground and never touch an enemy? How could a book possibly think anything? If we're mixing lore into this the books are already stupid. Because I am pretty sure the Zodiac Braves, who have written in their books what we need to kill to make our weapons stronger, and who lived in Radz-at-Han, did not kill Diabolos or the many other one-of-a-kind enemies that you can only find in Eorzea.

[Eekiki]

But I have noticed again that a good portion of the FF14 "community" is quite a special one. Egoistic and totally uncooperative. Doing Hauke Hard, another player told the party that he is doing an ATMA book and asked to be revived on last boss in case he dies. Healer took it as his special goal to NOT heal him during the entire last boss fight and took care not to revive him when he died although the player asked several times. Some people seem to get their fun by ruining it for other people. Disgusting. Since this, I know that I will never ask for support when I need a boss kill for ATMA. Because out there in the wilderness that is DF, you won't get much of it.

Pics or it didn't happen

[Donjo]

The same way you obtain crystalised souls of slain enemies from FATEs where you just collect stuff lying on the ground and never touch an enemy? How could a book possibly think anything? If we're mixing lore into this the books are already stupid. Because I am pretty sure the Zodiac Braves, who have written in their books what we need to kill to make our weapons stronger, and who lived in Radz-at-Han, did not kill Diabolos or the many other one-of-a-kind enemies that you can only find in Eorzea.

Then here's a question: If you're dead at the conclusion of a FATE, do you lose all chance at an Atma? If so, then things are still consistent. Otherwise, the fact that you don't have to actually kill anything to get an Atma from a FATE is just an anti-frustration feature meant to allow Atma acquisition from any FATE in an area. Seriously... imagine how bad the backlash would be if the chance to get an Atma wasn't based on just completing a FATE, but rather on your ability to tag mobs.

Another question regarding dungeon bosses: If you're alive, but not in the boss arena when the boss dies, do you get credit for the kill?

Additionally, since we're stabbing at lore here: If they're "one of a kind" enemies, why can we kill them repeatedly?

[Schaeffa]

Another question regarding dungeon bosses: If you're alive, but not in the boss arena when the boss dies, do you get credit for the kill?

I've heard from more than one source that it won't count unless you are alive in the boss arena. If you accept the "Revive at dungeon entrance," you won't get credit for the kill.

EDIT: Gwaeron says it's been tested and confirmed that reviving to the entrance of the dungeon will still give you credit for the kill.

[Gwaeron]

[...] the fact that you don't have to actually kill anything to get an Atma from a FATE is just an anti-frustration feature meant to allow Atma acquisition from any FATE in an area. Seriously... imagine how bad the backlash would be if the chance to get an Atma wasn't based on just completing a FATE, but rather on your ability to tag mobs.

Additionally, since we're stabbing at lore here: If they're "one of a kind" enemies, why can we kill them repeatedly?

You're just proving my point here. The book not "knowing" you killed an enemy just because you were alive makes no more or less sense than many other story-related things. I don't even know how many times I've defeated Gaius by now. So why then does "lore correctness" in this particular matter make sense, even at the expense of a major inconvenience?

I've heard from more than one source that it won't count unless you are alive in the boss arena. If you accept the "Revive at dungeon entrance," you won't get credit for the kill.

False, you do get credit for the kill as long as you are in the dungeon and alive. Tested and confirmed.

[Donjo]

You're just proving my point here. The book not "knowing" you killed an enemy just because you were alive makes no more or less sense than many other story-related things. I don't even know how many times I've defeated Gaius by now. So why then does "lore correctness" in this particular matter make sense, even at the expense of a major inconvenience?

There is this concept called "Gameplay and Story Segregation"(credit to tv tropes for the name). It basically means that sometimes, what makes sense in lore/story does not make sense in gameplay terms, or vice versa. This is usually done because it's a game and aligning story and gameplay in some cases just makes it less fun or in itself just doesn't make sense. An example of this we've identified is that it makes no sense that 100 different people can kill the same "one of a kind enemy". However, it makes sense in gameplay that everybody should be able to challenge it. It doesn't make sense in lore that you can get the "crystallized essence of a fallen enemy" for picking boxes up off the ground, but it makes sense in gameplay that any FATE can give it to you.

However, it's different in the case of you not getting credit for a boss kill if you're dead. In this case, story and gameplay are not segregated, but instead integrated. If you're dead when a boss dies, you didn't kill it. Everyone else in the party did. Why should you get credit for a fight you didn't survive? This is properly reflected in gameplay by not giving you the kill. This is not a "major" inconvenience. So you have to take another half hour or so to get to the boss again? That's not major. You go in, get some more loot, some gil, and some tomes on the way. Just be glad that you don't get locked out of loot for the same reason. It does, however, make no sense that you can be standing outside the arena and still get credit. That's silly.

I guess the point here is that just because X makes sense in both lore and gameplay doesn't mean that Y should too. It's up to SE whether or not to segregate them or integrate them.

[Doki]

2 runs in a row I died just before the boss of AV died. It's no fun running that place multiple times in a row >_<

[Schaeffa]

False, you do get credit for the kill as long as you are in the dungeon and alive. Tested and confirmed.

Then I stand corrected. I saw some people on Reddit talking about it, but I should learn to take Reddit posts with a grain of salt.
That being said, I wonder why people don't just revive themselves to the entrance of the dungeon right before the boss dies if it looks like the healer won't be reviving. Seems like this should be a non-issue.

[Elendil_Voronda]

Well, you are supposed to kill the boss, not the other way around xD

[gamersince1976]

This happened to me as well, I was matched in Haukke HM with a fresh tank and healer when I needed the boss kill for the Atma book. I ended up tanking the boss, dying, and clearing - but no credit.

But honestly - it's not that big of a deal. It would have been more upsetting to have to redo the slog that's Quarn again, but Haukke is fast