Repair Enhancements Affect Deconstruction?

[RedDragonScale]

I apologize if this has been asked and answered before but I cannot seem to find out whether the Artificer Repair enhancement lines (Repair Manipulation, Mighty Reconstruction, and Reconstructive Spellcasting) affect the "Inflict Damage" infusions or the "Deconstruction" infusion.

Can anyone help me with this question?

Thank you.

[RedDragonScale]

No one knows?

[Eladrin]

They do indeed.

[Yan_PL]

Sorry for the delay; I just checked it, and it seems like it's affected by force/untyped damage line rather than repair.

I have Repair manipulation 7 and force manipulation 5 on my lvl 20 pue arti, sporting Superior potency 6, my deconstructs were hitting for 285 damage, while reconstructs healed for 300

[RedDragonScale]

They do indeed.

Sorry for the delay; I just checked it, and it seems like it's affected by force/untyped damage line rather than repair.

I have Repair manipulation 7 and force manipulation 5 on my lvl 20 pue arti, sporting Superior potency 6, my deconstructs were hitting for 285 damage, while reconstructs healed for 300

Can someone please reconcile these two seemingly contradictory statements?

[Solmage]

Can someone please reconcile these two semingly contradictory statements?

My guess, it's supposed to be the recon line but for *some* reason, was never tested properly and is actually, in fact effected by the force line.

Between player tested and officially released by the designer, trust player tested .. trust me.

[Hikup]

My guess, it's supposed to be the recon line but for *some* reason, was never tested properly and is actually, in fact effected by the force line.

[Calebro]

My guess, it's supposed to be the recon line but for *some* reason, was never tested properly and is actually, in fact effected by the force line.

My guess, it's working as intended and Eladrin misspoke or misread the question.
Inflict wounds spells do not use the same energy as cure spells, so why should inflict damage spells use the same energy as repair spells?
Creative magic vs. destructive magic. They certainly should not use the same enhancement lines.

[Brennie]

My guess, it's working as intended and Eladrin misspoke or misread the question.
Inflict wounds spells do not use the same energy as cure spells, so why should inflict damage spells use the same energy as repair spells?
Creative magic vs. destructive magic. They certainly should not use the same enhancement lines.

Inflict spells use the same Enhancement line are Cure spells, on clerics and Favored Souls. Go figure.

However, clerics and FvS have the "old" spell enhancement lines of dual-combined elements, just like Wiz's and Sorc's did prior to U9. Artificers have single-type lines, just like Wiz/Sorcs do now, so maybe it wouldn't be appropriate to mash Repair/Deconstruct lines together.

ALTHOUGH, do Artificers really need *every* high end spell all under the same spell line (Prismatic Bolt, Bladebarrier, Tactical Detonation AND Deconstruct)? I honestly can't see a pure artificer who ever plans to sling a spell taking any enhancement line *other* than force (And maybe repair, but lets face it with 75% wand and scroll mastery, plus their bonuses to item usage, they might be better off using wands and scrolls for healing/repairing)

[Calebro]

Inflict spells use the same Enhancement line are Cure spells, on clerics and Favored Souls. Go figure.

However, clerics and FvS have the "old" spell enhancement lines of dual-combined elements, just like Wiz's and Sorc's did prior to U9. Artificers have single-type lines, just like Wiz/Sorcs do now, so maybe it wouldn't be appropriate to mash Repair/Deconstruct lines together.

And that was exactly my point.
Divines may use the same enhancement line for it, but that's only because they still have dual lines. It's a different type of energy.
As a matter of fact, it's the exact opposite type of energy.
As arcanes have individual lines, the repair line is not appropriate. The repair line is actually the least appropriate.

[Alanim]

By chance does deconstruct apply a de-buff that does -15% attack speed?(Reverse of reconstruct), if so that'd be pretty handy for the lord of blades. If not... well... get on it devs :P.

[Eladrin]

I've looked into it - Deconstruct is currently incorrectly set to deal untyped damage instead of "rust" type (anti-repair) damage. All of the other Inflict Damage spells are typed as "rust" correctly.

This is causing that spell to be affected by the force line of damage amplification effects instead of the repair line, and also causes the spell to do full damage to targets with Construct Essence instead of being tied to their Repair vulnerability.

[Darkrok]

I've looked into it - Deconstruct is currently incorrectly set to deal untyped damage instead of "rust" type (anti-repair) damage. All of the other Inflict Damage spells are typed as "rust" correctly.

This is causing that spell to be affected by the force line of damage amplification effects instead of the repair line, and also causes the spell to do full damage to targets with Construct Essence instead of being tied to their Repair vulnerability.

Just out of curiosity does this mean that Deconstruct is acting sort of like Disintegrate or does it still correctly apply only to the appropriate targets (ie constructs and those w/ construct essence feat)?

[Eladrin]

Just out of curiosity does this mean that Deconstruct is acting sort of like Disintegrate or does it still correctly apply only to the appropriate targets (ie constructs and those w/ construct essence feat)?

A little bit of both!

It's sort of like Disintegrate in that it's untyped damage, but it can only be cast on creatures whose Repair/Rust vulnerability > 0. It just then proceeds to ignore that vulnerability.

[Darkrok]

A little bit of both!

It's sort of like Disintegrate in that it's untyped damage, but it can only be cast on creatures whose Repair/Rust vulnerability > 0. It just then proceeds to ignore that vulnerability.

Ahh, ok. Was starting to wonder if Deconstruct was going to be crazy powerful for a minute there.

[Jay203]

A little bit of both!

It's sort of like Disintegrate in that it's untyped damage, but it can only be cast on creatures whose Repair/Rust vulnerability > 0. It just then proceeds to ignore that vulnerability.

Eladrin, in that sense, shouldn't wf be 50% resistant to Harm to begin with then?

[RedDragonScale]

Eladrin, in that sense, shouldn't wf be 50% resistant to Harm to begin with then?

Ooooh, good point!

[MrCow]

in that sense, shouldn't wf be 50% resistant to Harm to begin with then?

By the books, Warforged are 50% resistant to things from the healing sub-school (or for DDO, positive energy). The reverse, being 50% resistant to negative energy, is not true for Warforged.

The part DDO did mess up though is that technically Warforged are supposed to be 50% resistant to curing Ability Damage from Lesser Restoration, as it is part of the healing sub-school.

[Gorbadoc]

Eladrin, in that sense, shouldn't wf be 50% resistant to Harm to begin with then?

No, because that would make warforged even better than they are now.

Also, if Harm hurt warforged less, then it would stand to reason that it should hurt someone with Healing Amplification more. Actually, that would be kind of funny:

Party member 1: Alright, folks, this boss casts Mass Harm; take off your Levik's Bracers!
Party member 2: Shut up, noob; I get hurt more, but I also get healed more, so it balances out.
Party member 3: Whee! I'm a pale master!

[Brennie]

I've looked into it - Deconstruct is currently incorrectly set to deal untyped damage instead of "rust" type (anti-repair) damage. All of the other Inflict Damage spells are typed as "rust" correctly.

This is causing that spell to be affected by the force line of damage amplification effects instead of the repair line, and also causes the spell to do full damage to targets with Construct Essence instead of being tied to their Repair vulnerability.

I notice you don't mention whether this is being fixed...? I mean, I assume since it is "incorrectly typed" it will be, but sometimes these things take a couple updates.

Do you think this will be corrected before U11 goes live?