On request, the report Critical Strikes not proccing additional DoTs on Fully Absorbed Damage was opened. https://truewow.org/bugs/view.php?id=432
This was reported back in 04.2014, got fixed years later, but now it is bugged again.
The proof I found is a retail video where it is shown that talents like Righteous Vengeance, Vengeance and Art of War are proccing on fully absorbed attacks (minute 06:09 from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3hOvpaY5Cwc&t=85s).
The last answer given from the staff side is the one bellow:
"We actually have a commit from TrinityCore that specifically prevents this behavior:
https://github.com/TrinityCore/TrinityC ... 09b91c09dd
The reason for it is anyone's guess."
This commit globally targets full absorbs/full resists/full blocks/immune, while the retail PVP video I have linked it is showing how things should work specifically for the mentioned paladin talents.
The question is, should the retail videos not be taken into account when making a report? Also, please indicate what other viable sources I might use, and an official answer from the staff if retail videos will or not be taken into account in the future reports, just for info of the players that are actually playing the classes they make report about.
Requested an reopening of the bug report: Critical Strikes not proccing additional DoTs on Fully Absorbed Damage report
- Justicelight
- Donor
- Posts: 1130
- Joined: 05 Dec 2011 21:47
- Location: Romania
Requested an reopening of the bug report: Critical Strikes not proccing additional DoTs on Fully Absorbed Damage report
"I write about the power of trying, because I want to be okay with failing. I write about generosity because I battle selfishness. I write about joy because I know sorrow. I write about faith because I almost lost mine, and I know what it is to be broken and in need of redemption. I write about gratitude because I am thankful - for all of it."
Re: Requested an reopening of the bug report: Critical Strikes not proccing additional DoTs on Fully Absorbed Damage rep
The answer is here: https://github.com/TrinityCore/TrinityC ... d579R14370
The proc system was rewritten from then to there so that commit that was linked without a whole lot of information is just the aesthetic update to that.
There's a spell flag for spells that should specifically proc when absorbed. But it's known that some spells that should proc while absorbed don't have it inherently (e.g seal of vengeance).
Provided that video comes from a retail source, it does show it proc'ing there.
https://github.com/TrinityCore/TrinityCore/issues/11528
All things considered, you will never be entirely surely whether it should or should not do so. There's a whole lot of information that is just lost and it isn't rare that you will find guess work at Trinity, despite their long-standing tradition of keeping it at minimum use.
The proc system was rewritten from then to there so that commit that was linked without a whole lot of information is just the aesthetic update to that.
There's a spell flag for spells that should specifically proc when absorbed. But it's known that some spells that should proc while absorbed don't have it inherently (e.g seal of vengeance).
Provided that video comes from a retail source, it does show it proc'ing there.
https://github.com/TrinityCore/TrinityCore/issues/11528
All things considered, you will never be entirely surely whether it should or should not do so. There's a whole lot of information that is just lost and it isn't rare that you will find guess work at Trinity, despite their long-standing tradition of keeping it at minimum use.
“All your life, you will be faced with a choice. You can choose love or hate…I choose love.”
― Johnny R. Cash
― Johnny R. Cash
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest