Topic: Darkness/Holy elemental attacks

[Deathlike2]

Other than Cecil's Shadow weaponry and Holy+Meteo, what monster attacks are Darkness/Holy based?

[Dragonsbrethren]

Cecil has the monopoly on dark-elemental attacks, he gets the dark knight equipment obviously and the crystal in the final battle. Other than those nothing uses dark.

Here's a list of everything holy:

• Holy
• Meteo
• W.Meteo

And I thought you might like this one: D(ark).Breath is fire-elemental.

[Deathlike2]

Cecil has the monopoly on dark-elemental attacks, he gets the dark knight equipment obviously and the crystal in the final battle. Other than those nothing uses dark.

Hmmm, I never really thought of the crystal being a Darkness attack (although, stupid Golbez/Cecil confuses the issue).

Here's a list of everything holy:

• Holy
• Meteo
• W.Meteo

I felt like that was the big duh.

Just checking, but this entire list includes FF4A right? It's relative to what I need to know.
I get the strange feeling that Darkness elemental resistance is useless on the Vishnu Vest.

And I thought you might like this one: D(ark).Breath is fire-elemental.

You know that's just evil. That's just as fucked up as Blaze is (I had a tough time at one point in my mind to register that as an Ice attack).

[Dragonsbrethren]

Hmmm, I never really thought of the crystal being a Darkness attack (although, stupid Golbez/Cecil confuses the issue).

Yeah, Zeromus's transformation is triggered by being hit with the dark element.

Just checking, but this entire list includes FF4A right? It's relative to what I need to know.
I get the strange feeling that Darkness elemental resistance is useless on the Vishnu Vest.

As far as I know nothing was changed in FF4A, so this should still be relevant. I wouldn't doubt it a bit if they gave you a useless resistance, that's just the way FF4A is.

You know that's just evil. That's just as fucked up as Blaze is (I had a tough time at one point in my mind to register that as an Ice attack).

Perhaps why they localized Blaze as "Frost" in FF5A.

[Deathlike2]

Hmmm, I never really thought of the crystal being a Darkness attack (although, stupid Golbez/Cecil confuses the issue).

Yeah, Zeromus's transformation is triggered by being hit with the dark element.

Just checking, but this entire list includes FF4A right? It's relative to what I need to know.
I get the strange feeling that Darkness elemental resistance is useless on the Vishnu Vest.

As far as I know nothing was changed in FF4A, so this should still be relevant. I wouldn't doubt it a bit if they gave you a useless resistance, that's just the way FF4A is.

I forgot to mention Caesar's Plate also resists Darkness...

You know that's just evil. That's just as fucked up as Blaze is (I had a tough time at one point in my mind to register that as an Ice attack).

Perhaps why they localized Blaze as "Frost" in FF5A.

Hmm.. I'm trying to recall if it was Dragon's Breath (Dark Elf was a Dragon) or Dark Breath... no matter. The image it used for the attack was ice...

[Dragonsbrethren]

Back when all I had to go on was FF2us I assumed the "D." stood for Dragon, but the attack name is Dark Breath.

[Entroper]

That's actually worse than Blaze.  At least Blaze was blue fire, so it vaguely made sense in some kind of bizzare way.

[Dragonsbrethren]

Speaking of blue fire, Blaze's unimaginative name in Easy Type is "Blue Flame."

[Deathlike2]

"Blue" really fucks things up.. since it seemed to be rewritten for one monster... the Blue Dragon.

[Deathlike2]

Refer to this thread for the basis of what I'm going to say: http://slickproductions.org/forum/index.php?topic=401.0

If the armor bit is set to have protection vs holy, you are weak against the Darkness elemental. If the armor bit is set to have protection vs Darkness, you are weak against Holy.

This new info explains why both bits are set in this instance.

This info will explain why the game engine isn't using this bit... enemies were meant to have elemental attacks. The problem with it was that if you were able to protection to both stats for magical reasons, it would hurt you for physical attacks, just like Ice+Fire equipment.

The entire Dark Knight's equipment was most likely meant to be resistant to Holy (this means he was weak vs Darkness), which also means extra pain vs Zombies (they were to attack with the Darkness elemental).. and that also probably meant that the Paladin's initial equipment was meant to be resistant to Darkness (which means weak vs Holy), making Cecil very resistant vs all of the undead at Mt. Ordeals, although all of the equipment has resistance vs Undead, so it's almost irrelevent. Then again, Holy attacks/spells would rape the Paladin...

It is the same logic that the Fire Shield has you weak vs Fire and resistant to Ice and the Ice Shield has you weak vs Ice and resistant to Fire.

This behavior is probably completely fixed in FF4A.

[Dragonsbrethren]

I never knew holy and dark worked like that, it makes sense though. Currently in my hack the dark knight gear resists dark because that just made sense to me, although I can't argue with your reasoning about making him weak to zombie attacks...hmm, his equipment might be getting an overhaul.

[Deathlike2]

I never knew holy and dark worked like that, it makes sense though. Currently in my hack the dark knight gear resists dark because that just made sense to me, although I can't argue with your reasoning about making him weak to zombie attacks...hmm, his equipment might be getting an overhaul.

Well, both bits are set in FF4A primarily to get in Holy resistance, but Scan would have confused people and give them shock because that message that they are weak vs Darkness would confuse/scare the people (the same people who can't figure out why the Dark Elf hurts them 9999 damage).

[Paladin]

 

While I don't disagree with the proposal of having Dark Cecil take more damage vs. Undead enemies (with the oddness of his armor being "Holy" resistant)...

To me...the logic of having a Dark Knight take Less damage vs. the Undead/Darkness-Weilding monsters makes sense, and at the same time being weak vs. Holy.

Likewise to have the Paladin weak vs. Darkness and strong vs. Holy...also seems to make sense.

This was the behavior I have written in the TODO for my next hack...

Having it the other way around would make for a more interesting twist...

[Deathlike2]

While I don't disagree with the proposal of having Dark Cecil take more damage vs. Undead enemies (with the oddness of his armor being "Holy" resistant)...

To me...the logic of having a Dark Knight take Less damage vs. the Undead/Darkness-Weilding monsters makes sense, and at the same time being weak vs. Holy.

Likewise to have the Paladin weak vs. Darkness and strong vs. Holy...also seems to make sense.

This was the behavior I have written in the TODO for my next hack...

Having it the other way around would make for a more interesting twist...

Yes, but you would have a tough time explaining that Fire Shields being weak vs Fire. The whole design was probably original intended behavior. I know it's totally ironic that "Holy" attacks are favorable my projected Dark Knight's equipment set, but that's how the elemental property on equipment is behaving.

The intention was to make Cecil totally useless vs Undead to a significant degree (even critical hits won't save him).

[Paladin]

I agree with the poor naming of the Fire and Ice defensive equipment.

The name "Fire Shield" implicitly connotes "defense against fire" to me, not "defense against ice".

The only logical way to explain the concept as it's used is somewhat obtuse...It is as though the the Fire Shield is somehow innately "hot" and when hit with an ice attack it's "heat" nulls out the ice effect, but hitting it with a fire attack compounds it's nature and causes pain to the wielder (it gets too hot).

I almost want to flip the bits on them so that the "Fire" shield and armor provide defense against fire and weakness to Ice. Same for the Ice equipment. Simply to make the names more implicitly easy to understand in the former context I explained.