Talk:Skill Cost modifiers - Revision history

Kinak at 03:52, 8 January 2012

2012-01-08T03:52:52Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:52, 8 January 2012
Line 9:		Line 9:
	:: So .. you are confirming that "reduces cost of combat spells" reduces cost of all combat skills, even those that are not spells? (The section above discusses difference between combat and noncombat skills, which is a different difference) --[[User:XKiv\|XKiv]] 12:18, 6 January 2012 (PST)		:: So .. you are confirming that "reduces cost of combat spells" reduces cost of all combat skills, even those that are not spells? (The section above discusses difference between combat and noncombat skills, which is a different difference) --[[User:XKiv\|XKiv]] 12:18, 6 January 2012 (PST)
	:::Basically, yes, but I haven't/can't check Animal Kung-Foolery, as I don't have it. --[[User:Hoyifung04\|hoyifung04]] 14:45, 7 January 2012 (PST)		:::Basically, yes, but I haven't/can't check Animal Kung-Foolery, as I don't have it. --[[User:Hoyifung04\|hoyifung04]] 14:45, 7 January 2012 (PST)

			These are now displaying as "Combat Skill" to prevent this confusion. It's intentional they work with all skills, not just spells. --[[User:Kinak\|Kinak]] 19:52, 7 January 2012 (PST)

Hoyifung04: /* Combat spells */

2012-01-07T22:45:29Z

Combat spells

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:45, 7 January 2012
Line 8:		Line 8:
	::Not so. [[Bonus spell damage]] only applies to Elem/Psion skills, not to Gadget/Nat skills. Using [[Shock Grenade]] at 10 skill points, my Gadget (level 70) should do {{col\|sonic\|70-80 damage}}. 78 and 71 were observed on [[Lady Macbeth]]. With a [[Mirror of Nitocris]] equipped (+50% spell damage), Lady Macbeth took 78 and 73 -- in the same range. Oh, and also, it only cost 8 PP. Nat skills should decrease in cost as well. As posted in the section [[#Reduction limit\|above]], I have tested it, although for a different purpose (testing the cap back then), and it was a year ago. (Not sure about [[Animal Kung-Foolery]], as it didn't exist back then.) --[[User:Hoyifung04\|hoyifung04]] 12:04, 5 January 2012 (PST)		::Not so. [[Bonus spell damage]] only applies to Elem/Psion skills, not to Gadget/Nat skills. Using [[Shock Grenade]] at 10 skill points, my Gadget (level 70) should do {{col\|sonic\|70-80 damage}}. 78 and 71 were observed on [[Lady Macbeth]]. With a [[Mirror of Nitocris]] equipped (+50% spell damage), Lady Macbeth took 78 and 73 -- in the same range. Oh, and also, it only cost 8 PP. Nat skills should decrease in cost as well. As posted in the section [[#Reduction limit\|above]], I have tested it, although for a different purpose (testing the cap back then), and it was a year ago. (Not sure about [[Animal Kung-Foolery]], as it didn't exist back then.) --[[User:Hoyifung04\|hoyifung04]] 12:04, 5 January 2012 (PST)
	:: So .. you are confirming that "reduces cost of combat spells" reduces cost of all combat skills, even those that are not spells? (The section above discusses difference between combat and noncombat skills, which is a different difference) --[[User:XKiv\|XKiv]] 12:18, 6 January 2012 (PST)		:: So .. you are confirming that "reduces cost of combat spells" reduces cost of all combat skills, even those that are not spells? (The section above discusses difference between combat and noncombat skills, which is a different difference) --[[User:XKiv\|XKiv]] 12:18, 6 January 2012 (PST)
			:::Basically, yes, but I haven't/can't check Animal Kung-Foolery, as I don't have it. --[[User:Hoyifung04\|hoyifung04]] 14:45, 7 January 2012 (PST)

XKiv at 20:18, 6 January 2012

2012-01-06T20:18:41Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:18, 6 January 2012
Line 7:		Line 7:
	:I believe the terms "[[skills\|skill]]" and "spell" are interchangeable in this game.  [[User:Richardhg\|Richard H-G]] 03:30, 4 January 2012 (PST)<br/>		:I believe the terms "[[skills\|skill]]" and "spell" are interchangeable in this game.  [[User:Richardhg\|Richard H-G]] 03:30, 4 January 2012 (PST)<br/>
	::Not so. [[Bonus spell damage]] only applies to Elem/Psion skills, not to Gadget/Nat skills. Using [[Shock Grenade]] at 10 skill points, my Gadget (level 70) should do {{col\|sonic\|70-80 damage}}. 78 and 71 were observed on [[Lady Macbeth]]. With a [[Mirror of Nitocris]] equipped (+50% spell damage), Lady Macbeth took 78 and 73 -- in the same range. Oh, and also, it only cost 8 PP. Nat skills should decrease in cost as well. As posted in the section [[#Reduction limit\|above]], I have tested it, although for a different purpose (testing the cap back then), and it was a year ago. (Not sure about [[Animal Kung-Foolery]], as it didn't exist back then.) --[[User:Hoyifung04\|hoyifung04]] 12:04, 5 January 2012 (PST)		::Not so. [[Bonus spell damage]] only applies to Elem/Psion skills, not to Gadget/Nat skills. Using [[Shock Grenade]] at 10 skill points, my Gadget (level 70) should do {{col\|sonic\|70-80 damage}}. 78 and 71 were observed on [[Lady Macbeth]]. With a [[Mirror of Nitocris]] equipped (+50% spell damage), Lady Macbeth took 78 and 73 -- in the same range. Oh, and also, it only cost 8 PP. Nat skills should decrease in cost as well. As posted in the section [[#Reduction limit\|above]], I have tested it, although for a different purpose (testing the cap back then), and it was a year ago. (Not sure about [[Animal Kung-Foolery]], as it didn't exist back then.) --[[User:Hoyifung04\|hoyifung04]] 12:04, 5 January 2012 (PST)
			:: So .. you are confirming that "reduces cost of combat spells" reduces cost of all combat skills, even those that are not spells? (The section above discusses difference between combat and noncombat skills, which is a different difference) --[[User:XKiv\|XKiv]] 12:18, 6 January 2012 (PST)

Hoyifung04: /* Combat spells */ skill != spell

2012-01-05T20:04:20Z

Combat spells: skill != spell

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:04, 5 January 2012
Line 6:		Line 6:
	This is kind of ambiguous. Even the game says "to the cost of combat spells", but spells usually refer to elemental/psion combat skills, and the reductions apply to all combat skills (even naturalist, gadgeteer and unclassed), right? I am currently not in a position to verify conclusively (out of turns), but pretty sure that jill's gloves reduce cost of shock grenade, and aura:mystery of animal kung-foolery. This might bear a mention. --[[User:XKiv\|XKiv]] 10:14, 1 January 2012 (PST)		This is kind of ambiguous. Even the game says "to the cost of combat spells", but spells usually refer to elemental/psion combat skills, and the reductions apply to all combat skills (even naturalist, gadgeteer and unclassed), right? I am currently not in a position to verify conclusively (out of turns), but pretty sure that jill's gloves reduce cost of shock grenade, and aura:mystery of animal kung-foolery. This might bear a mention. --[[User:XKiv\|XKiv]] 10:14, 1 January 2012 (PST)
	:I believe the terms "[[skills\|skill]]" and "spell" are interchangeable in this game.  [[User:Richardhg\|Richard H-G]] 03:30, 4 January 2012 (PST)<br/>		:I believe the terms "[[skills\|skill]]" and "spell" are interchangeable in this game.  [[User:Richardhg\|Richard H-G]] 03:30, 4 January 2012 (PST)<br/>
			::Not so. [[Bonus spell damage]] only applies to Elem/Psion skills, not to Gadget/Nat skills. Using [[Shock Grenade]] at 10 skill points, my Gadget (level 70) should do {{col\|sonic\|70-80 damage}}. 78 and 71 were observed on [[Lady Macbeth]]. With a [[Mirror of Nitocris]] equipped (+50% spell damage), Lady Macbeth took 78 and 73 -- in the same range. Oh, and also, it only cost 8 PP. Nat skills should decrease in cost as well. As posted in the section [[#Reduction limit\|above]], I have tested it, although for a different purpose (testing the cap back then), and it was a year ago. (Not sure about [[Animal Kung-Foolery]], as it didn't exist back then.) --[[User:Hoyifung04\|hoyifung04]] 12:04, 5 January 2012 (PST)

Richardhg: comment:spells=skills

2012-01-04T11:30:17Z

comment:spells=skills

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:30, 4 January 2012
Line 5:		Line 5:
	==Combat spells==		==Combat spells==
	This is kind of ambiguous. Even the game says "to the cost of combat spells", but spells usually refer to elemental/psion combat skills, and the reductions apply to all combat skills (even naturalist, gadgeteer and unclassed), right? I am currently not in a position to verify conclusively (out of turns), but pretty sure that jill's gloves reduce cost of shock grenade, and aura:mystery of animal kung-foolery. This might bear a mention. --[[User:XKiv\|XKiv]] 10:14, 1 January 2012 (PST)		This is kind of ambiguous. Even the game says "to the cost of combat spells", but spells usually refer to elemental/psion combat skills, and the reductions apply to all combat skills (even naturalist, gadgeteer and unclassed), right? I am currently not in a position to verify conclusively (out of turns), but pretty sure that jill's gloves reduce cost of shock grenade, and aura:mystery of animal kung-foolery. This might bear a mention. --[[User:XKiv\|XKiv]] 10:14, 1 January 2012 (PST)
			:I believe the terms "[[skills\|skill]]" and "spell" are interchangeable in this game.  [[User:Richardhg\|Richard H-G]] 03:30, 4 January 2012 (PST)<br/>

XKiv: what's a "combat spell"?

2012-01-01T18:14:33Z

what's a "combat spell"?

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:14, 1 January 2012
Line 2:		Line 2:
	Maximum reduction for combat skills is -5PP cost, checked on all classes by hoyifung.<br>		Maximum reduction for combat skills is -5PP cost, checked on all classes by hoyifung.<br>
	Currently it's impossible to achieve more than -4PP on non-combat skills, so it's undetermined whether same limit applies to them.--[[User:Shikao\|Shikao]] 07:35, 9 January 2011 (PST)		Currently it's impossible to achieve more than -4PP on non-combat skills, so it's undetermined whether same limit applies to them.--[[User:Shikao\|Shikao]] 07:35, 9 January 2011 (PST)

			==Combat spells==
			This is kind of ambiguous. Even the game says "to the cost of combat spells", but spells usually refer to elemental/psion combat skills, and the reductions apply to all combat skills (even naturalist, gadgeteer and unclassed), right? I am currently not in a position to verify conclusively (out of turns), but pretty sure that jill's gloves reduce cost of shock grenade, and aura:mystery of animal kung-foolery. This might bear a mention. --[[User:XKiv\|XKiv]] 10:14, 1 January 2012 (PST)

Shikao: more checks

2011-01-09T15:48:50Z

more checks

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:48, 9 January 2011
Line 1:		Line 1:
	==Reduction limit==		==Reduction limit==
	Maximum reduction for combat skills is -5PP cost, checked on ~~elemental and Mind Jab~~.<br>		Maximum reduction for combat skills is -5PP cost, checked on all classes by hoyifung.<br>
	Currently it's impossible to achieve more than -4PP on non-combat skills, so it's undetermined whether same limit applies to them.--[[User:Shikao\|Shikao]] 07:35, 9 January 2011 (PST)		Currently it's impossible to achieve more than -4PP on non-combat skills, so it's undetermined whether same limit applies to them.--[[User:Shikao\|Shikao]] 07:35, 9 January 2011 (PST)

Shikao: Created page with "==Reduction limit== Maximum reduction for combat skills is -5PP cost, checked on elemental and Mind Jab.
Currently it's impossible to achieve more than -4PP on non-combat ski..."

2011-01-09T15:35:19Z

Created page with "==Reduction limit== Maximum reduction for combat skills is -5PP cost, checked on elemental and Mind Jab.<br> Currently it's impossible to achieve more than -4PP on non-combat ski..."

New page

==Reduction limit==
Maximum reduction for combat skills is -5PP cost, checked on elemental and Mind Jab.<br>
Currently it's impossible to achieve more than -4PP on non-combat skills, so it's undetermined whether same limit applies to them.--[[User:Shikao|Shikao]] 07:35, 9 January 2011 (PST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:52, 8 January 2012
Line 9:		Line 9:
	:: So .. you are confirming that "reduces cost of combat spells" reduces cost of all combat skills, even those that are not spells? (The section above discusses difference between combat and noncombat skills, which is a different difference) --[[User:XKiv\|XKiv]] 12:18, 6 January 2012 (PST)		:: So .. you are confirming that "reduces cost of combat spells" reduces cost of all combat skills, even those that are not spells? (The section above discusses difference between combat and noncombat skills, which is a different difference) --[[User:XKiv\|XKiv]] 12:18, 6 January 2012 (PST)
	:::Basically, yes, but I haven't/can't check Animal Kung-Foolery, as I don't have it. --[[User:Hoyifung04\|hoyifung04]] 14:45, 7 January 2012 (PST)		:::Basically, yes, but I haven't/can't check Animal Kung-Foolery, as I don't have it. --[[User:Hoyifung04\|hoyifung04]] 14:45, 7 January 2012 (PST)

			These are now displaying as "Combat Skill" to prevent this confusion. It's intentional they work with all skills, not just spells. --[[User:Kinak\|Kinak]] 19:52, 7 January 2012 (PST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:45, 7 January 2012
Line 8:		Line 8:
	::Not so. [[Bonus spell damage]] only applies to Elem/Psion skills, not to Gadget/Nat skills. Using [[Shock Grenade]] at 10 skill points, my Gadget (level 70) should do {{col\|sonic\|70-80 damage}}. 78 and 71 were observed on [[Lady Macbeth]]. With a [[Mirror of Nitocris]] equipped (+50% spell damage), Lady Macbeth took 78 and 73 -- in the same range. Oh, and also, it only cost 8 PP. Nat skills should decrease in cost as well. As posted in the section [[#Reduction limit\|above]], I have tested it, although for a different purpose (testing the cap back then), and it was a year ago. (Not sure about [[Animal Kung-Foolery]], as it didn't exist back then.) --[[User:Hoyifung04\|hoyifung04]] 12:04, 5 January 2012 (PST)		::Not so. [[Bonus spell damage]] only applies to Elem/Psion skills, not to Gadget/Nat skills. Using [[Shock Grenade]] at 10 skill points, my Gadget (level 70) should do {{col\|sonic\|70-80 damage}}. 78 and 71 were observed on [[Lady Macbeth]]. With a [[Mirror of Nitocris]] equipped (+50% spell damage), Lady Macbeth took 78 and 73 -- in the same range. Oh, and also, it only cost 8 PP. Nat skills should decrease in cost as well. As posted in the section [[#Reduction limit\|above]], I have tested it, although for a different purpose (testing the cap back then), and it was a year ago. (Not sure about [[Animal Kung-Foolery]], as it didn't exist back then.) --[[User:Hoyifung04\|hoyifung04]] 12:04, 5 January 2012 (PST)
	:: So .. you are confirming that "reduces cost of combat spells" reduces cost of all combat skills, even those that are not spells? (The section above discusses difference between combat and noncombat skills, which is a different difference) --[[User:XKiv\|XKiv]] 12:18, 6 January 2012 (PST)		:: So .. you are confirming that "reduces cost of combat spells" reduces cost of all combat skills, even those that are not spells? (The section above discusses difference between combat and noncombat skills, which is a different difference) --[[User:XKiv\|XKiv]] 12:18, 6 January 2012 (PST)
			:::Basically, yes, but I haven't/can't check Animal Kung-Foolery, as I don't have it. --[[User:Hoyifung04\|hoyifung04]] 14:45, 7 January 2012 (PST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:18, 6 January 2012
Line 7:		Line 7:
	:I believe the terms "[[skills\|skill]]" and "spell" are interchangeable in this game.  [[User:Richardhg\|Richard H-G]] 03:30, 4 January 2012 (PST)<br/>		:I believe the terms "[[skills\|skill]]" and "spell" are interchangeable in this game.  [[User:Richardhg\|Richard H-G]] 03:30, 4 January 2012 (PST)<br/>
	::Not so. [[Bonus spell damage]] only applies to Elem/Psion skills, not to Gadget/Nat skills. Using [[Shock Grenade]] at 10 skill points, my Gadget (level 70) should do {{col\|sonic\|70-80 damage}}. 78 and 71 were observed on [[Lady Macbeth]]. With a [[Mirror of Nitocris]] equipped (+50% spell damage), Lady Macbeth took 78 and 73 -- in the same range. Oh, and also, it only cost 8 PP. Nat skills should decrease in cost as well. As posted in the section [[#Reduction limit\|above]], I have tested it, although for a different purpose (testing the cap back then), and it was a year ago. (Not sure about [[Animal Kung-Foolery]], as it didn't exist back then.) --[[User:Hoyifung04\|hoyifung04]] 12:04, 5 January 2012 (PST)		::Not so. [[Bonus spell damage]] only applies to Elem/Psion skills, not to Gadget/Nat skills. Using [[Shock Grenade]] at 10 skill points, my Gadget (level 70) should do {{col\|sonic\|70-80 damage}}. 78 and 71 were observed on [[Lady Macbeth]]. With a [[Mirror of Nitocris]] equipped (+50% spell damage), Lady Macbeth took 78 and 73 -- in the same range. Oh, and also, it only cost 8 PP. Nat skills should decrease in cost as well. As posted in the section [[#Reduction limit\|above]], I have tested it, although for a different purpose (testing the cap back then), and it was a year ago. (Not sure about [[Animal Kung-Foolery]], as it didn't exist back then.) --[[User:Hoyifung04\|hoyifung04]] 12:04, 5 January 2012 (PST)
			:: So .. you are confirming that "reduces cost of combat spells" reduces cost of all combat skills, even those that are not spells? (The section above discusses difference between combat and noncombat skills, which is a different difference) --[[User:XKiv\|XKiv]] 12:18, 6 January 2012 (PST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:04, 5 January 2012
Line 6:		Line 6:
	This is kind of ambiguous. Even the game says "to the cost of combat spells", but spells usually refer to elemental/psion combat skills, and the reductions apply to all combat skills (even naturalist, gadgeteer and unclassed), right? I am currently not in a position to verify conclusively (out of turns), but pretty sure that jill's gloves reduce cost of shock grenade, and aura:mystery of animal kung-foolery. This might bear a mention. --[[User:XKiv\|XKiv]] 10:14, 1 January 2012 (PST)		This is kind of ambiguous. Even the game says "to the cost of combat spells", but spells usually refer to elemental/psion combat skills, and the reductions apply to all combat skills (even naturalist, gadgeteer and unclassed), right? I am currently not in a position to verify conclusively (out of turns), but pretty sure that jill's gloves reduce cost of shock grenade, and aura:mystery of animal kung-foolery. This might bear a mention. --[[User:XKiv\|XKiv]] 10:14, 1 January 2012 (PST)
	:I believe the terms "[[skills\|skill]]" and "spell" are interchangeable in this game.  [[User:Richardhg\|Richard H-G]] 03:30, 4 January 2012 (PST)<br/>		:I believe the terms "[[skills\|skill]]" and "spell" are interchangeable in this game.  [[User:Richardhg\|Richard H-G]] 03:30, 4 January 2012 (PST)<br/>
			::Not so. [[Bonus spell damage]] only applies to Elem/Psion skills, not to Gadget/Nat skills. Using [[Shock Grenade]] at 10 skill points, my Gadget (level 70) should do {{col\|sonic\|70-80 damage}}. 78 and 71 were observed on [[Lady Macbeth]]. With a [[Mirror of Nitocris]] equipped (+50% spell damage), Lady Macbeth took 78 and 73 -- in the same range. Oh, and also, it only cost 8 PP. Nat skills should decrease in cost as well. As posted in the section [[#Reduction limit\|above]], I have tested it, although for a different purpose (testing the cap back then), and it was a year ago. (Not sure about [[Animal Kung-Foolery]], as it didn't exist back then.) --[[User:Hoyifung04\|hoyifung04]] 12:04, 5 January 2012 (PST)