Test Update 02/13/2024 - Patch Notes and Discussions

Just went and checked my file, it was already set to AlwaysOnTop=0

They mess with the Shamans and they're going to force my cleric out of retirement. Trust me, no one wants to see that.

Was the nerf to The Emberclaw Sisters on Test and just not noticed or was this a special treat for the Live patch?

Can we get some clarity on exactly how the passive portion of this will function now? I guess I expected to see a description that was a little less vague in the alternate advancement window. We now have two passive AAs that share the same description and unless something changed behind the scenes the same SPA.






Is it possible to get an explanation of how these will actually work together?

You have both all the time, and they both stack with each other.

I was under the impression that SPA with a base 2 value of -1 could only stack with the same SPA that has a base 2 value >0. Battle leap has a base 2 value of -1. I can't verify that innate prowess has a base 2 value that makes it compatible with battle leap.

I honestly don't know of a source that offers information on alternate advancement abilities past what SPA it is.

What source do you have that you were able to verify this? I would like to be able to look through it for myself.

If you don't believe me, just test it. It's not very hard to calculate hit damage (or to /resetaa on test and confirm that both work)

I am aware I can test it. It was not what I asked though. You're a knowledgeable guy. Is there somewhere you can find more detailed information on AAs past their SPA?

https://github.com/kauffman12/eqaainfo

The data you’re looking for, though, has no relevance to SPA 185 passive AA stacking. A Base2 of -1 simply means the effect applies to all hits (rather than to a specific skill type). Two passive SPA 185 AAs with Base2’s of -1 stack just fine (just like Power of the Keepers and Combat Fury stack for SPA 169).

Thanks for the link. I have to admit I have seen this before but was only after the parser and did not explore it enough to see the other tools it offers.

I do realize that base 2 -1 applies to all hits other than specific skill type. I have also seen Beimeith's SPA stacking sequence chart which supports what you are saying here.

Don't misunderstand me I am not disputing what you have said. I am trying to clear up a possible misunderstanding I have. Here is where it stems from.

https://rexaraven.com/everquest/how-stuff-works-spas/

SPA with Base 2 = -1 can only stack with same SPA that has Base 2 > 0
If another spell with the same SPA indicates a Base 2 value greater than 0, then it’s limited to a specific combat skill instead.

If Base 2 = -1

This value limits effects to combat skills only. Another same SPA can potentially stack if it has a Base 2 value > 0 instead.

Example: Comparing SPA 184 involving Accuracy on the following spells:

RNG Outrider’s Accuracy XL (self buff – from AA)
Slot 4 | SPA 184 | Base 1 = 350 | Base 2 = -1 | Calc = 100 | Max = 0
RNG Eyes of the Senshali (self buff – from spell)
Slot 1 | SPA 184 | Base 1 = 45 | Base 2 = 7 | Calc = 100 | Max = 0
BRD Quick Time (group buff – from AA)
Slot 9 | SPA 184 | Base 1 = 90 | Base 2 = -1 | Calc = 100 | Max = 0


This section above is what is catching my attention. If the above is true. Why is it true for this example and not for what we are discussing?

Stackable on Players: SPAs w/ Percentages

SPAs from spells that use percentages will generally stack on different slots. These are multiplicative SPAs. A lot of changes to make a number of such spells stackable occured in a 2015 July Patch.

The section above to me says exactly what you are telling me. It is just the "generally stack"
comment used along with the information about base 2 values that cast doubt for me.

I also during my second read found the answer to my question "I think". It seems this data doesn't exsist or is not obtainable.

Passive AAs will not have any values displayed except for their SPA. This means you will not find base values or other information like you see on spells.

Rexa is a great player and writes a lot of very helpful guides. Unfortunately, most of what is in this guide is partially or completely inaccurate. It contains a lot of rules of thumb that will often get you to the correct answer but are incorrect as to why the answer is correct.

This is only true in specific cases. An accurate statement would be "Most melee SPAs that can modify both all hits and specific skills, when the SPA is in item or buff form, take the highest modifier from the 'all hits' (Base2 = -1) category and the highest modifier from the 'specific skill' (Base2 > -1) category, separately for both items and buffs." SPAs can and do (in some cases) have different stacking rules as passive AAs vs other categories.

Therefore, your SPA 185 modifier is calculated as the sum of all passive AA SPA 185 modifiers (all hits + specific skill type), the highest all hits worn SPA 185 modifier, the highest skill-specific worn SPA 185 modifier, the highest all hits buff SPA 185 modifier, and the highest skill-specific buff SPA 185 modifier. It works that way simply because that's how the particular SPA was coded.

This is overly simplistic. Whether SPAs that use %'s stack or not is just a function of how they were coded, with the exception that focus SPAs (except those that proc procs) cannot stack.

Slot is only relevant to buff stacking. If you can have two buffs on you, slot becomes irrelevant, and it has no relevance to items/passive AAs.

This is not true. If you use that AA parser, you'll get all of the AA information. Raidloot has it, and has to have it to parse AAs; it just doesn't display it for whatever reason.

To use Innate Prowess as an example:
1: Increase Hit Damage by 145% (v185)

Raidloot cannot parse what kinds of hits this affects (all hits or a specific skill) without the information that Base2 = -1. You can therefore derive from the parsed output that the Base2 value is -1, or use that AA parser to confirm yourself.