Talk:Weakness

I was under the impression that weakness lowered attack damage by 66% as opposed to 90%.


 * Changed. The GW site itself says 66% and I've never seen a source say anything else.  --Fyren 11:44, 21 Aug 2005 (EST)

Melee attacks, Physical weapon attacks, any weapon attacks, or all Attacks?
This affects ranged attacks? Huh. I was under the (probably mistaken) impression it was only melee attacks. --207.172.212.167 11:24, 11 February 2006 (CST)
 * It makes perfect sense to me to affect bow attacks, which is not melee. As to whether it affects wand/staff attacks or Smite, that is an interesting question (since I don't have much faith in the technical accuracy of skill descriptions) -PanSola 11:37, 11 February 2006 (CST)

Ok just tested it. It does affect wand attacks. However Smite is not affected. -PanSola 11:48, 11 February 2006 (CST)

Attack skills
Anyway, I thought it important to note on weakness that attack skills aren't reduced by weakness. This has been my experience with weakness. I do about as much damage with a max sword with weakness as I do with a candycane. If someone believes elsewise, please discuss. StatMan 20:34, 4 January 2007 (CST)

19 Jan 07 update
After some simple testing, it looks like if the -1 attributes puts you below a weapon's requirement (ie, your allocated attribute matches the item's minimum requirement), you will fail the req check. Also, damage reduction is still in the neighborhood of 66%. --Bob III 22:26, 19 January 2007 (CST)


 * Is it possible to get attributes at -1 ? Nytemyre 12:36, 20 January 2007 (CST)


 * Based on a) the listed attribute level and b) the damage done by Lightning Orb, no. Gale can fail at 5 mastery when weakened, and if you increase your attribute from 0 to 1 while weakened, it will correctly fall back down to 0. So the -1 appears to work exactly as one could expect. Sigh. --Bob III 03:37, 21 January 2007 (CST)

Ah. Hm. Only temporary, eh? ^^;; --Bob III 05:03, 21 January 2007 (CST)


 * It is, till it is confirmed on the permanent release date. -- Xeon 05:07, 21 January 2007 (CST)