Taunt bug?

WiccanDiva · **Posted:** Thu Oct 29, 2009 2:19 pm

Don't blame me, my coffee maker is on the fritz...blame the lack of caffeine for my lack of detect sarcasm today.

Felgus · **Joined:** Sun Jul 02, 2006 6:34 am **Posts:** 414

WiccanDiva wrote:

Your armor was full of pillows or full of marshmallows. Your armor did what it was supposed to do, it took the damage for you. See my post on the first page. I don't think this is a bug, he just knocked you on your butt, but you didn't get hurt from it. Haven't you ever slipped and fallen and not gotten hurt (aside from ego)? Same principle.

If I'm wrong about this, and it actually is a bug, then I retract any tone inferred in this. But, again, I don't think it is a bug as I believe bash checks first on knockdown and second on damage (similar to headbutt). Though this is open to correction.

Y'know, armor used to be worn in conjunction with padded shirts and pants, so that when a person got struck by a sword, the armor would stop the blade from puncturing, and the padded clothing would absorb the force of the blow.

That just came into my head with the "armor was full of pillows or marshmallows."

The more you know?

WiccanDiva · **Posted:** Thu Oct 29, 2009 3:00 pm

Felgus wrote:

WiccanDiva wrote:

Your armor was full of pillows or full of marshmallows. Your armor did what it was supposed to do, it took the damage for you. See my post on the first page. I don't think this is a bug, he just knocked you on your butt, but you didn't get hurt from it. Haven't you ever slipped and fallen and not gotten hurt (aside from ego)? Same principle.

If I'm wrong about this, and it actually is a bug, then I retract any tone inferred in this. But, again, I don't think it is a bug as I believe bash checks first on knockdown and second on damage (similar to headbutt). Though this is open to correction.

Y'know, armor used to be worn in conjunction with padded shirts and pants, so that when a person got struck by a sword, the armor would stop the blade from puncturing, and the padded clothing would absorb the force of the blow.

That just came into my head with the "armor was full of pillows or marshmallows."

The more you know?

The easier it is to fail tests...seriously though, could you imagine what would happen if SK had slots for padding under each piece of armor? Those that enchant would never do anything but enchant. So I guess the system just accounts for that which is why anything with a knockdown possibility has a chance for armor to absorb all the damage. Sometimes there is logic behind the scenes...just sometimes.

Though now that I think of it, I would like to see a set of armor that is armor stuffed with marshmallows.

Felgus · **Joined:** Sun Jul 02, 2006 6:34 am **Posts:** 414

WiccanDiva wrote:

Felgus wrote:

WiccanDiva wrote:

Your armor was full of pillows or full of marshmallows. Your armor did what it was supposed to do, it took the damage for you. See my post on the first page. I don't think this is a bug, he just knocked you on your butt, but you didn't get hurt from it. Haven't you ever slipped and fallen and not gotten hurt (aside from ego)? Same principle.

If I'm wrong about this, and it actually is a bug, then I retract any tone inferred in this. But, again, I don't think it is a bug as I believe bash checks first on knockdown and second on damage (similar to headbutt). Though this is open to correction.

Y'know, armor used to be worn in conjunction with padded shirts and pants, so that when a person got struck by a sword, the armor would stop the blade from puncturing, and the padded clothing would absorb the force of the blow.

That just came into my head with the "armor was full of pillows or marshmallows."

The more you know?

The easier it is to fail tests...seriously though, could you imagine what would happen if SK had slots for padding under each piece of armor? Those that enchant would never do anything but enchant. So I guess the system just accounts for that which is why anything with a knockdown possibility has a chance for armor to absorb all the damage. Sometimes there is logic behind the scenes...just sometimes.

Though now that I think of it, I would like to see a set of armor that is armor stuffed with marshmallows.

Try to be a high follower in a religion when/if they redo the sacred armor, and request armor made of marshmallows.

And you wouldn't really need multiple slots for under armor, just one, like the "about body slot," and have it be unenchantable. Not that I'm suggesting this, just musing on the idea of it.

WiccanDiva · **Posted:** Thu Oct 29, 2009 3:26 pm

No, then we'd end up with paladins running amok with frilly, lacy undergarments. Nope, not an image I want in my head. As far as the sacred armor, I think Marfik's could pull off marshmallow armor well...heck, give it two forms - toasted and untoasted.

Felgus · **Joined:** Sun Jul 02, 2006 6:34 am **Posts:** 414

WiccanDiva wrote:

No, then we'd end up with paladins running amok with frilly, lacy undergarments. Nope, not an image I want in my head. As far as the sacred armor, I think Marfik's could pull off marshmallow armor well...heck, give it two forms - toasted and untoasted.

And have it auto-create food, like, once a day. With an echo that says "a small marshmallow has fallen off of your armor."

Then all we need are mountable guinea pigs for sprites.

WiccanDiva · **Posted:** Thu Oct 29, 2009 4:49 pm

And the ability to craft s'mores...all will be right in SK yet again. We can gather around giant bonfires, hold hands, sing Kum-by-Yah, and finish with a huge group hug. No need to level, no need to PK, no need to hate. Hey, maybe this "idea" could replace the entire skill/spell selection for priests of Aludra instead.

Seriously though, what is up with taunt? I've noticed it on a few npcs too, I didn't try moving just went onto attacking another npc, but the affects were still there after killing the taunter.

grep · **Joined:** Fri Apr 17, 2009 9:50 pm **Posts:** 5522

WiccanDiva wrote:

Hey, maybe this "idea" could replace the entire skill/spell selection for priests of Aludra instead.

don't know if want...

Konge · **Posted:** Fri Oct 30, 2009 2:42 am

I think I might begin to cry, lets have it entirely without sarcasm this time...

No, the no-damage bash is completely normal, especially for very well-armored characters (as in this case) - the point, and the point which made it relevant to this thread - was that it occurred in a separate (empty) room and after the fight was "resolved". As I said, it might be related to someone using a bandalore and not being directly in a fight with you, as that seems to be the only common denominator in both logs.

stratford · **Posted:** Fri Oct 30, 2009 12:53 pm

Konge wrote:

I think I might begin to cry, lets have it entirely without sarcasm this time...

No, the no-damage bash is completely normal, especially for very well-armored characters (as in this case) - the point, and the point which made it relevant to this thread - was that it occurred in a separate (empty) room and after the fight was "resolved". As I said, it might be related to someone using a bandalore and not being directly in a fight with you, as that seems to be the only common denominator in both logs.

Empty room. Not relevant. This (the OP bug) happened because of a NPC being in the same room as the person taunted, after said taunted person fled away, while still being effected by taunt. Meaning: the fast effect system needs to update effects better and taunt shouldn't have an 'open check' for the !flee!recall!move taunt-effect that happened.

Shattered Kingdoms

Taunt bug?

Who is online