The ranger spells, Marked shots and focused blizzard of arrows are not causing neither Rallos Zek Devotee's/Acolyte's assaulting Ice, Rallos Zek Devotee's/Acolyte's Assaulting Ice, the TOV sympathetic weapon effects, the TOV bow proc nor proc augs to proc. Are they either spells or skill attacks? At least some of these procs should be triggered by these spells, depending on how you view them.
Skill attacks are not a standard trigger for these types of focus spells. It's looking for direct damage.
So if it was a skill attack , that is cast and not a spell , even though it uses mana would it not cause bow procs and bow augs to proc or even the type 19 melee augs to proc ?
The three druid AA abilities Nature's Bolt, Fire and Frost are similar. They deal damage, use mana, and have a 0.5 sec cast time. But they do not cause anything to proc. It's just how they are. But now I know the reason they don't.
I was wrong for the Sympathetic. The issue there is they are looking for a SPELL. I expect the abilities you mentioned are Disciplines. Disciplines don't trigger Sympathetic. It also hasto be detrimental, cost a small amount mana (NOT endurance), and have a minimum level The specific spell Rallos Zek Devotee's/Acolyte's assaulting Ice is looking for ACTUAL skill use (swinging a sword shooting a bow) and the spell effects you mentioned arn;t using an actual skill.
Those are on the spell gem bar and they cost mana and they have minimum damage listed, I'm thinking if they are spells then they should proc sympathetic, if they are considered skill attacks they should proc the bow procs or the melee augs. one or the other depending on how you guys count them. If they do neither , then rangers are potentially loosing DPS.
Marked shots focused blizzard of arrows are not a weapon skill so will not activate the bow proc. I don't know why it isn't activating Sympathetic procs. Are you sure it isn't? As for the Rallos Zek Devotee's/Acolyte's assaulting Ice, Rallos Zek Devotee's/Acolyte's Assaulting Ice these are not ICE resist spells, which is a requirement for that focus.
I can make you some logs if you like, I tested on guild hall dummy. Ill be back with some.for comparison.
It's because Sympathetic procs require SPA 0 on a spell to focus them ("6: Limit Effect: Current HP"). These spells use SPA 193: [58939/11832] Marked Shots Rk. III Classes: RNG/111 Skill: Archery Mana: 1874 Target: Single Range: 200' Resist: Unresistable Reflectable: No Focusable: Yes Casting: 0.5s, Recast: 38s, Timer: 7, Rest: 1.5s 1: Archery Attack for 361 with 400% Accuracy Mod ---> SPA 193 2: Archery Attack for 361 with 450% Accuracy Mod ---> SPA 193 3: Archery Attack for 319 with 500% Accuracy Mod ---> SPA 193 4: Archery Attack for 319 with 600% Accuracy Mod ---> SPA 193 5: Cast: Called Shots Effect ---> SPA 374 Text: You are struck by a called shot. [46892] Sympathetic Blaze of Fire Target: Self Resist: Beneficial, Blockable: Yes Focusable: Yes Casting: 0s Duration: 3.3h+ (1950 ticks), Dispelable: Yes 1: Cast: Blaze of Fire on Spell Use (Base1=10) e.g. Cast Time 2s=2.5% 3s=3.3% 4s=5.0% 5s=6.7% 2: Limit Type: Detrimental 3: Limit Min Mana Cost: 10 4: Limit Min Level: 70 5: Limit Type: Exclude Combat Skills 6: Limit Effect: Current HP ---> Requires SPA 0 (Not saying this is a bug or anything, just this is why those spells are not valid for Sympathetic procs).
ah! I did miss that step! I expected it closer to slot 1. So yes. Those two spells will NOT trigger from the others.
It is an interesting topic though. Was there a reason why those spells show up on the spell bar instead of just being disciplines? Archery doesn't really fall under a typical spell skill like evocation, conjuration, etc.
Are you thinking Casting Ice? The resist check was changed from ice to detrimental early on after launch. 1: Trigger on Cast: Surge of Ice II (100% Chance) 2: Limit: Minimum Mana Cost (100) 3: Limit: Spell Type (Detrimental only) 4: Limit: Effect (Hitpoints allowed) 5: Limit: Effect (HP when cast allowed) Game Description Procs *$1%N when you cast spells.
4 and 5 are the standard "does hp damage" , so that is why these two spells don't trigger, because it's using the "does skill damage" which is not the same. (That's what I get for not looking up the spell and commenting) I should probably at least change the description to say Detrimental spells.
Aren't they technically Archery attacks which would fall under Limit Skill: Archery for the Assaulting aug
Ok I tested again. Confirmed. Silent shot, Summers Sleet, and all of the current fire and ice nukes make any of the Type 19 and weapon sympathetic procs fire off However Marked shots , Arrow portion of dissident fusillade, and Focused blizzard of arrows do not cause the sympathetic procs to happen. They are cast from spell gem bar. But. They cause bow damage but don't cause the bow procs to happen either , so bow aug proc, nor no heavy arrow, no poison arrow proc no Type 18 or 19 assaulter proc augs
It's a feature that no class's SPA 193 activated abilities trigger sympathetic procs. Rangers are not especially excluded in that regard. I would argue that if rangers get a boon here, then all classes should.
I kinda seem to remember that "as designed" Rangers do not trigger procs on Archery stuff and the damage output is tuned as such? While regrettably annoying, Ranger damage may be at the level it's supposed to without utilizing procs.
This is what I had questions about, if other classes abilities that did say 2hand slash attack triggered the effects and rangers were excluded. I was going off the fact that you can trigger headshot and potentially slays/decap/assassinates off of those skills attacks as well. The different SPA requirements make sense.
Part of the reasons we include the "damage" is because most of the sympathetic procs are also damage, and there are many cases where players DON'T want ALL detrimental spells causing damage because it changes aggro, breaks mez/lull/root, etc. So we have this middle ground were it doesn't go on some things that might be okay, but doesn't go when doing so would be truly detrimental. I.E. it's a compromise. We came up with a solution for root, but not the other reasons.