I was unclear. I hit a -25str wither, he lost his Armageddon, and wielded (I think) two frostbrands. n/t

I was unclear. I hit a -25str wither, he lost his Armageddon, and wielded (I think) two frostbrands. n/t:
[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Dioxide's CForum ]

Posted by Aradan on May 16, 2000 at 10:27:01:

In Reply to: A bug with Flurry? posted by Confused and Abused on May 16, 2000 at 10:12:56:

> Now something struck me as odd while reading the log board. In a fight I myself had I boneshattered a warrior which caused him to lose his dual sword. The very next round he flurries (I can post the log later). I figured it was something that could just be done since certain spirits can flurry using one sword. But then I saw this log:
>
> Ioanis vs Muskul
>
> 630hp 366m 741mv flurry
> 630hp 366m 741mv You must dual wield two swords to flurry.
> Muskul has some small but disgusting cuts
>
>
> And then this one:
>
> Minaclar vs Aradan
>
> "Oh. Also. He was withered and lost his Armageddon.
> Yeow."
>
> Someone starts a vicious series of attacks with its swords.
> You manage to partially parry its attack, but are still hit
>
>
> So which is suppose to be right? Can you flurry with only one sword? Is the part in Ioanis' log just a typo/bug or what? Thanks.

Follow Ups:

hrm Watcher 14:12:24 5/16/2000 (6)
- Hey...this kind of flame is UNCALLED for...you need to calm yourself down...or see a healer to doit for you (NT) Chengdu 17:54:23 5/16/2000 (0)
- Re: Did I miss something? Harlequin 15:37:16 5/16/2000 (0)
- Re: hrm Someone 14:29:04 5/16/2000 (3)
  - Re: hrm idiot 14:33:30 5/16/2000 (2)
    - El Wrongo' Rome 15:23:42 5/16/2000 (0)
    - Re: hrm Not Aradan 14:44:37 5/16/2000 (0)
Roger but... Confused and Abused 10:54:58 5/16/2000 (6)
- umm flurry only requires 1 sword? Graham 11:57:31 5/16/2000 (5)
  - My point being: "You must dual wield two swords to flurry." Confused and Abused 12:43:49 5/16/2000 (4)
    - no you dont. you can flurry with one sword (little text) Magtograme 13:30:12 5/16/2000 (3)
      - Sheesh..I am not saying you have to..it is there plain as daylight in a log n/t Confused and Abused 14:05:06 5/16/2000 (2)
        
        My guess is you have to perfect flurry to do it with one sword. It just seems... right. (n/t) Darlow (he who's never played a sword spec) 14:35:03 5/16/2000 (1)
        
        wrong guess - you dont have to have flurry perfected(nt) Magtograme 15:03:18 5/16/2000 (0)

Post a Followup

Name:
E-mail:
Subject:
Comments:	> > Now something struck me as odd while reading the log board. In a fight I myself had I boneshattered a warrior which caused him to lose his dual sword. The very next round he flurries (I can post the log later). I figured it was something that could just be done since certain spirits can flurry using one sword. But then I saw this log: > > > > Ioanis vs Muskul > > > > 630hp 366m 741mv flurry > > 630hp 366m 741mv You must dual wield two swords to flurry. > > Muskul has some small but disgusting cuts > > > > > > And then this one: > > > > Minaclar vs Aradan > > > > "Oh. Also. He was withered and lost his Armageddon. > > Yeow." > > > > Someone starts a vicious series of attacks with its swords. > > You manage to partially parry its attack, but are still hit > > > > > > So which is suppose to be right? Can you flurry with only one sword? Is the part in Ioanis' log just a typo/bug or what? Thanks.

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Dioxide's CForum ]