Baraera v. Colibri?

[Tsrwedge]

Just got out of an exp. party where the WHM absolutely insisted Baraera reduced Pecking Flurry damage by 10%, but that's the first I've heard of it and I can't find anything to support it. Have any of ya'll heard this, or should this be filed under myth?

[Sevv]

Re: Baraera v. Colibri?

myth its physical damage.

imo atleast.

[Icemage]

Re: Baraera v. Colibri?

Pecking Flurry is physical damage. Baraera won't impact it.

If it were magic damage, Utsusemi would not absorb it.


Icemage

[Feba]

Re: Baraera v. Colibri?

imo

would someone please explain to me when the fuck opinions started to change facts.


This makes no sense, yet I keep seeing it.

[Armando]

Re: Baraera v. Colibri?

What they said. Although...

If it were magic damage, Utsusemi would not absorb it.

Why not? I thought Utsusemi only generally failed against AoE magic and breath attacks.

[Saren]

Re: Baraera v. Colibri?

What they said. Although...Why not? I thought Utsusemi only generally failed against AoE magic and breath attacks.

I was actually thinking the same thing when I read this but I assumed it was just something I didn't know, was going to try and find more about it today.

[Icemage]

Re: Baraera v. Colibri?

What they said. Although...Why not? I thought Utsusemi only generally failed against AoE magic and breath attacks.

Pretty sure Utsusemi and other Blink effects don't work against the rare non-spell single-target magic attacks (there's not many - the only ones I can think of offhand are the single target attacks used by CoP Wyrms).

The other clue to its real nature is that Pecking Flurry requires up to 3 shadows to absorb.


Icemage

[Alshandra]

Re: Baraera v. Colibri?

You know, I'm one of those Whms that does this.

And it never occured to me to check whether Pecking fury was elemental or physical.

I see the flying and the wind and the hurting and whether I'm connecting the right dots, who knows ._.

Maybe I'll test it out if I get bored this weekend. Would be interesting to see what happens.

[Sevv]

Re: Baraera v. Colibri?

would someone please explain to me when the fuck opinions started to change facts.


This makes no sense, yet I keep seeing it.

Kind of like you posting in ffxi topics when you don't play =P jking.

I used the imo because I have never seen it effect anything but in the same aspect I have not tested it. So it would be my opinion rather then solid fact.

So check your sense.

You know, I'm one of those Whms that does this.

And it never occured to me to check whether Pecking fury was elemental or physical.

I see the flying and the wind and the hurting and whether I'm connecting the right dots, who knows ._.

Maybe I'll test it out if I get bored this weekend. Would be interesting to see what happens.

Why do I have a feeling I am going to get beat on Colbiri all weekend.

[Feba]

Re: Baraera v. Colibri?

Kind of like you posting in ffxi topics when you don't play =P

Except that it's perfectly possible for me to post on FFXI without talking complete bullshit.

[Sevv]

Re: Baraera v. Colibri?

Except that it's perfectly possible for me to post on FFXI without talking complete bullshit.

I am not sure on that one feba =P


On the whole how we know its physical not magic. The correct answer is it is absorbed my Third eye. Third Eye doesn't absorb any type of magic.

[Armando]

Re: Baraera v. Colibri?

It's physical, I can shield it and no single-target magic attack takes off more than 1 shadow anyways.

[Callisto]

Re: Baraera v. Colibri?

I'm not sure if they're single target or not, I think they are, but Kirin's Great Whirlwind/Sandstorm ignore shadows and are magical damage afaik, learned by taking enough to the face last night.

[Ziero]

Re: Baraera v. Colibri?

Yea, Pecking is a melee attack, similar to Gob Rush or Sickle Slash. They can be blocked and Evaded like normal hits.

[Alshandra]

Re: Baraera v. Colibri?

Good to know ! XD