Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

melee attacks and just ATTACK LAST not interrupt spell casting #1012

Closed
wagneruo opened this issue Jan 15, 2023 · 11 comments
Closed

melee attacks and just ATTACK LAST not interrupt spell casting #1012

wagneruo opened this issue Jan 15, 2023 · 11 comments

Comments

@wagneruo
Copy link

melee attacks and just ATTACK LAST not interrupt spell casting like was in 56b
its a feature or bug?

@drk84
Copy link
Member

drk84 commented Jan 18, 2023

In the other Issue you says melee attacks interrupts spellcasting ?

@wagneruo
Copy link
Author

In the other Issue you says melee attacks interrupts spellcasting ?

no! melee attack and just attack by dclick in warmode must interrupt spellcasting (it was always in sphere)
and spellcasting atm just interrupt and looks like remove war target

@drk84
Copy link
Member

drk84 commented Jan 18, 2023

Impossible that you were able to fight back and casting the spell at the same time

@wagneruo
Copy link
Author

Impossible that you were able to fight back and casting the spell at the same time

no no, i mean char loosing war target after casting spell
and its for other issue not for it

@Tolokio
Copy link
Contributor

Tolokio commented Aug 18, 2023

Impossible that you were able to fight back and casting the spell at the same time

He means that in the past when u attack a target it interrupts ur spell casting. Just as if u tab (war/peace).
It is a diferent thing than the other post.

Example:
1-Start casting spell
2-Dclick on new target to attack it (in war mode)
3-Spell is canceled.

This was like this in the past he is right, but I dont know if it is desired now. For me pvp is better without it.

@cbnolok
Copy link
Contributor

cbnolok commented Sep 21, 2023

I can't get it, could you explain it more thoroughly? Is the involved mechanic the spellcasting interruption when trying to attack a char (the same or another)? What's happening exactly now and what was happening before?

@xwerswoodx
Copy link
Contributor

xwerswoodx commented Oct 8, 2023

If I understand correctly, he means if you casting a spell to player, then you dclick to target another player it stop casting the spell and remove attack target directly.

For example, there are players that named A and B

You start casting flame strike to A
And double click to B to change your melee attack target
Your spell failed because A doesn't seem your attack target anymore

I understand that from their posts but I am not sure if they meant that.

I tried that right now, I have no issue about it, I can change target while using spell, and spell successfully completed, but maybe some flag causes some issue but I don't see any flag that can cause.

@xwerswoodx
Copy link
Contributor

After seeing another issue, I guess he means same as #684

@wagneruo
Copy link
Author

I can't get it, could you explain it more thoroughly? Is the involved mechanic the spellcasting interruption when trying to attack a char (the same or another)? What's happening exactly now and what was happening before?

in the sphere, it always worked like this: if a player tried to attack during a spell cast, then the cast process was interrupted. This is not happening now

@wagneruo
Copy link
Author

After seeing another issue, I guess he means same as #684

no, it's a different problem :)

@Soulless-1
Copy link
Contributor

This is not really an issue, but re-implementing this as you suggested would actually be a restriction on admins who may want it to behave like this. its much simpler to add this for your particular requirement:

on=@attack
action=-1
return 0

also being allowed does not cause an issue, if you dclick during a spell cast your action does not change to combat, it stays in magery, and you go into combat afterwards.

i'm going to go ahead and close this out since its a year old

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

6 participants