NEUS Projects
v2.73c Wind Slasher Inconsistency - Printable Version

+- NEUS Projects (https://neus-projects.net/forums)
+-- Forum: Sigrogana Legend 2 (OOC) (https://neus-projects.net/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=8)
+--- Forum: Bug Reports (https://neus-projects.net/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=5)
+--- Thread: v2.73c Wind Slasher Inconsistency (/showthread.php?tid=10235)



v2.73c Wind Slasher Inconsistency - Fern - 05-13-2023

Normally, if you're enchanted with Talvyd, the first enemy damaged by Wind Slasher will take Slash damage can be inflicted with Lingering Damage.
 
The inconsistency lies in how the Lingering Damage seems to be inflicted. It will be inflicted on the Slash damage tick of Wind Slasher, and not the Wind portion of the attack, regardless of if it was the first enemy hit or not. You can separately dodge the Wind and Slash portions of the attack, meaning that if you get hit by the Wind part but dodge the Slash part, no infliction check will be rolled.

[Image: image.png]
 
The reason I believe this to be a bug is because other multi-hit attacks that roll inflictions when they land don't behave this way (Wretched Oil will still inflict you with Poison if you get hit by one of its two hits, for example.) Wind Slasher seems to be the only one to be inconsistent in that regard.


RE: v2.73c Wind Slasher Inconsistency - renowner - 05-14-2023

Hmmm. Maybe the slash should just be bonus damage. . Seems kind've strange that if you're hit by the move, you can still dodge the actual slasher part.


RE: v2.73c Wind Slasher Inconsistency - Poruku - 05-14-2023

It just makes sense though doesn't it? Doesn't seem like a bug to me


RE: v2.73c Wind Slasher Inconsistency - MegaBlues - 05-15-2023

I feel like it would make most sense if the Slash portion was bonus damage that couldn't be avoided, then it being the only part to try and inflict Lingering Damage would be just fine.


RE: v2.73c Wind Slasher Inconsistency - Neus - 06-21-2023

That's just the way the skill works since the Slash damage is a separate damage instance. Not a bug.