The Black Sacrament -- A Guide To Black Mage |
||
|
The Black Sacrament -- A Guide to Black Mage
Bahamut.Suph said: » you know what an "Entrust" is? lol Y’all ain’t actually using Real Mathematical Equations at all whatsoever so such is simply Par for the Course llAKs0nll said: » Asura.Geriond said: » (100+552)/(100-32) = 9.588 552/(100-32) = 8.11 Since via simply dividing by 100 gives ourselves the Percentage w/o having to move over the decimals which is what we wanted to begin w/ which is why you would instead just take 100 and then subtract 32 then divide into the MAB total the Difference. You also Bolstered INT + MAB + Malaise Yeah. I’m kinda done now. How many GEO you seriously bringing vs Ongo anyways a Full Alliance? I apologize for rocking the boat. This is just too much to be bothered w/ explaining How Math works to everyone. Which is not seriously what I came here to do. I thought I had the Real Equation yet I made a total fool of myself by accepting what I knew was Mathematically Incoherent simply cuz I believed y’all were Wiser than myself. I used your Broken Mathematical Equation in my own Equation like a total nimrod. I admit it. I see it very clearly now. I just wanted the Real Mathematics behind Magic Damage in Game. I thought I had discovered such via How I suggested doing the Math. I defeated my own Topic & also yourselves simultaneously. I proved my own Equation as Broken Math too as well. here's some blm testing:
Naked, so +40 MAB from Trait and +50 MAB from Gift = +90 MABs  Your Logic 90/100 = 0.9, less than 1 so 0.9 + 1 =1.9x, no MAB damage = 404/1.9 = 212.6 My Logic (100 + 90)/100 = 1.9, no MAB damage = 404/1.9 = 212.6 we agrees here with Earrings = +90 + 10 + 7 = +107 MABs  Your Logic 107/100 = 1.07, more than 1 so, 1.07 +0 = 1.07x, No MAB damage = 440/1.07 = 411.2 My Logic (100 + 107) /100 = 2.07, no MAB damage = 440/2.07 = 212.6 With Earrings, Laev, Waist and Neck, = +107 MABS + 10 + 7 + 70 = + 194 MABs and also +279 Magic Damage  Your Logic 194/100 = 1.94, more than 1 so, 1.94 + 0 = 1.94x, no MAB damage = (1446/1.94) - 279 = 466.4 My Logic (100 + 194)/100 = 2.94, no MAB damage = (1446/2.94) - 279 = 212.8 for your "logic" to work, aero I base damage must be all over the place when my INT (and honestly all other parameters aside from Magic Damage + which i've accounted for) is always the same. By my logic, base damage always stay the same at basically 170 (at max DInt for Aero I) + 20 (from job point) + 23 (from job gift) = 213, as per BGWIKI. No. You need the dINT 1st then you simply do
190/100 = 1.9 Indeed such is correct. Since we we are actually looking for the percentage to multiply our Magic Damage by via. Then you simply multiply such towards your Base Magic Damage values. If you have 100 MAB vs 0 MDB (100+100)/100 = 2 You multiply your M.Dmg by 2 You always Divide by 100 when MDB value is Zero automatically giving ourselves the Percentage w/o having to move over the Decimals via the other Equations I alrdy have shown. That’s why we divide in the 1st place. To find the percentage. In all honesty I am seriously not even sure what you are actually trying to achieve via simply giving Values to yourself that are nonexistent in the Game. I apologize but I seriously do not understand the reasoning behind such. Once you alter the Values in the Game via on paper you automatically have created a False Equivalence towards the Game itself. Therefore making your Equations automatically Null & Void via doctoring the Data yourself. llAKs0nll said: » No. You need the dINT 1st then you simply do 190/100 = 1.9 Indeed such is correct. Since we we are actually looking for the percentage to multiply our Magic Damage by via. Then you simply multiply such towards your Base Magic Damage values. If you have 100 MAB vs 0 MDB (100+100)/100 = 2 You multiply your M.Dmg by 2 You always Divide by 100 when MDB value is Zero automatically giving ourselves the Percentage w/o having to move over the Decimals via the other Equations I alrdy have shown. That’s why we divide in the 1st place. To find the percentage. In all honesty I am seriously not even sure what you are actually trying to achieve via simply giving Values to yourself that are nonexistent in the Game. I apologize but I seriously do not understand the reasoning behind such. Once you alter the Values in the Game via on paper you automatically have created a False Equivalence towards the Game itself. Therefore making your Equations automatically Null & Void via doctoring the Data yourself. the 100 isn't a "giving values to myself" its inherent in any ratio, the ratio of 1/1 is the same as the ratio of 100/100. We know that +1 MAB, when you are naked = +1 percent damage. per cent, cent mean 100, +1% means +1 per 100. So you can say you always start with 1 Magic Attack and 1 Magic Defense, then its always (1 Magic Attack + (Magic Attack Bonus/100)) / 1 Magic Defense, or you can say ((100 Magic Attack + Magic Attack Bonus)/100) / 100 Magic Defense. These 2 formula are exactly the same formula, its that you must always start with 100% and add or subtract from it, not from 0. MAB = 0 does not mean that your magic attack is 0, MDB = 0 does not mean that magic defense is 0. Any mob with 0 magic defense will always take infinite/undefined magic damage. You do realize 1 is the same as 100%, 0.5 is the same as 50%? We don't divide anything by 100 to find a percentage, its the fact that its divided by a 100 that make it a percentage, a per hundred figure. If 2 man out of 5 have a car, you would do 2/5 = 0.4, you don't further divide this number by 100 to get a percentage, you multiply it by 100% to get 40%. the % is basically representing /100, 40/100 = 40% = 0.4. Bahamut.Suph said: » llAKs0nll said: » No. You need the dINT 1st then you simply do 190/100 = 1.9 Indeed such is correct. Since we we are actually looking for the percentage to multiply our Magic Damage by via. Then you simply multiply such towards your Base Magic Damage values. If you have 100 MAB vs 0 MDB (100+100)/100 = 2 You multiply your M.Dmg by 2 You always Divide by 100 when MDB value is Zero automatically giving ourselves the Percentage w/o having to move over the Decimals via the other Equations I alrdy have shown. That’s why we divide in the 1st place. To find the percentage. In all honesty I am seriously not even sure what you are actually trying to achieve via simply giving Values to yourself that are nonexistent in the Game. I apologize but I seriously do not understand the reasoning behind such. Once you alter the Values in the Game via on paper you automatically have created a False Equivalence towards the Game itself. Therefore making your Equations automatically Null & Void via doctoring the Data yourself. the 100 isn't a "giving values to myself" its inherent in any ratio MAB 500 vs MDB 0 —> (100+500)/(100+0) = 6 Proves you have Doctored the Data via giving yourself a 6x Multiplier when you only have 500% more MAB than MDB The Real Mathematical Equation is simply MAB 500 vs MDB 0 —> 500/100 = 5 Your Math is Falsified via giving yourself 100 more of something you do not even have in the Game itself. i just proved in my test that +194 MAB = 2.94x
That +107 MAB = 2.07x you have tested nothing, where if your proof that that +500 MAB = 5x? its weird that you think MDB start at 100 (MDB at 0 = 100 + 0) but MAB start at 0. when you 0^0, you get 1, math start at 1, at 100/100, not at 0 or 0/100. Math is NOT the Game itself. You cannot just say.
” We’ll I just gave Target 100 MDB when they had 0 so now I can just give myself 100 more MAB too “ That’s a Mathematical Equation that ceases to Relate to the Game itself once you Adjust the Values to your own Choosing on paper. — BGwiki Magic Damage Equation is Null & Void The reason we give 100 to 0 is simply cuz we are Dividing to find the Percentage thus giving 100 to 0 allows ourselves to not have to move over the Decimal. That plus you cannot divide anything by 0 obviously so yeah. You just gave them arbitrary MDB as well then, what do you think of mob with +20 MDB? does it suddenly only have (0 + 20 MDB)? there for suddenly taking 5x damage?
you also have no addressed your logic of +99 MAB dealing 1.99x damage to +101 MAB dealing 1.01x damage. You have provided no proof, you've provided nothing but numbers you've assumed, that is also just adjust values to your own choosing on paper. I've provided proof positive that the BG wiki number and formula is correct at Dint cap with master blm, aero should do (170 + 20 + 23) = 213 Add the 279 from Laev = 492, multiply by 2.94 (from INNATE MAB of 100 + MAB from gear of 194)/(INNATE MDB of 100) 492 * 2.94 = 1446.48 Floored (1446.48) = 1446 Formula and screenshot matched perfectly Where is your screenshot that match your formula / logic perfectly? Bahamut.Suph said: » i just proved in my test that +194 MAB = 2.94x That +107 MAB = 2.07x you have tested nothing, where if your proof that that +500 MAB = 5x? its weird that you think MDB start at 100 (MDB at 0 = 100 + 0) but MAB start at 0. when you 0^0, you get 1, math start at 1, at 100/100, not at 0 or 0/100. When your giving the divisive component a 100 value that you want to remain as 0 you cannot have 100 yourself so must give yourself 100 as well. MAB 200 vs MDB 0 —> such should equate to 200% While MAB 100 vs MDB 0 —> I guess be…… I mean if you are suggesting that simply cuz MAB 100 vs 0 exists & such equals 200% or 200 MAB via simply doing (100+100/100) That’s doesn’t automatically mean you should be calculating your MAB as 600% when you only have 500 vs 0 when obviously you do not have 600 MAB vs 0 I will try to grasp what you are trying to prove. Bahamut.Suph said: » Where is your screenshot that match your formula / logic perfectly? Your damage at 0 MAB is can be consider X, X + 20% is 1.2X, 1.2X is the same as 120X/100, its the same as (100 + 20)X/100. X is everything else in the formula, your 100% damage before MAB, 100%, 1/1, 100/100. You add 500% to it from your MAB you're adding 500/100 to it. 1 + 500% = 1 + 500/100 = 100/100 + 500/100 = (100 + 500)/100 = 6 That's where the 100 come from, the 1, the X, your original 100% damage, not some arbitrary number.
[+]
Bahamut.Suph said: » Bahamut.Suph said: » Where is your screenshot that match your formula / logic perfectly? Your damage at 0 MAB is can be consider X, X + 20% is 1.2X, 1.2X is the same as 120X/100, its the same as (100 + 20)X/100. X is everything else in the formula, your 100% damage before MAB, 100%, 1/1, 100/100. You add 500% to it from your MAB you're adding 500/100 to it. 1 + 500% = 1 + 500/100 = 100/100 + 500/100 = (100 + 500)/100 = 6 That's where the 100 come from, the 1, the X, your original 100% damage, not some arbitrary number. When all I saw was numbers not matching our known Values in game. So the game is forced to continue upward where vs MDB values of 0 a MAB of 100 = 200% bonus unto 200 = 300% increase and so forth upward. I see now. 600 MAB would indeed = 700% Bonus to Multiplier. There’s no “innate MAB” nor any “innate MDB” but rather a Mathematical continuation upward. The Math looked wrong & the terminology sounded even worst but I am WRONG.
[+]
llAKs0nll said: » I see now. 600 MAB would indeed = 700% Bonus to Multiplier. Yup because you are adding 600% to your original damage of 100%. Its Magic Attack Bonus, after all.
[+]
Bahamut.Suph said: » llAKs0nll said: » I see now. 600 MAB would indeed = 700% Bonus to Multiplier. Yup because you are adding 600% to your original damage of 100%. Its Magic Attack Bonus, after all. So basically absolutely everything has a MDB value of 0 then? llAKs0nll said: » Thank you for proving such. Sorry for wasting your time. I still do think MAB is Multiplied individually rather than Added then Multiplied as a Whole Value but I am quite possibly Wrong about that too. Should be X * (100 + sum of vanilla "Magic Attack Bonus" from all sources)/100 * (100+ sum of elemental specific "Magic Attack Bonus" (i.e. like on archon ring))/100 is my understanding Almost every mob that isn't whm, rdm or run should have MDB of 0 So... to make sure I followed this train wreck correctly. At the end of the day are we saying that:
JSE+2/Agwu Boots is BIS Quanpur/Wicce Boots is a comparable alternative? The maths show the two extremely close, but in all of the mess of a specific individual not understanding how basic algebra works, I feel I might have missed a subtler point. Is the above conclusion always correct, or when factoring in things like SV Etudes, Burn, Impact, etc, and just the Ongo fight in general, does that somehow make Quanpur on top? Or is the difference so negligible that we're splitting hairs and both sets are about equal? It means when you factor in everything with party buff and debuff which is the realistic scenario quanpur comes out ahead. no blm mbs by themselves.
Lilllith said: » It means when you factor in everything with party buff and debuff which is the realistic scenario quanpur comes out ahead. no blm mbs by themselves. That makes sense. I can definitely make an Ongo-specific MB set. But how much of a difference are we talking here? If it's a difference of like 3,000 damage, I literally don't even care at that point to make a new set. The math being presented isn't that hard to grasp. I'm pretty sure he's arguing now just for the sake of arguing. This is why we can't have nice things.
[+]
Asura.Melliny said: » The math being presented isn't that hard to grasp. I'm pretty sure he's arguing now just for the sake of arguing. This is why we can't have nice things. Quite possibly. I'm just trying to figure out what the end takeaway is. It sounds like Quan/Wicce is best for Ongo, which I can make a set for. But I'm trying to figure out if it's always the case. Should all stone MB's have that configuration, or only in cases where you have enough dINT and magic accuracy that +2 JSE doesn't matter? I'm good min/maxing for a specific fight. But if the difference is negligible, I'd rather just keep JSE+2/Agwu as a general MB set, even for Stone MB, instead of figuring out what the enemy's INT etc are and running the numbers. If the difference is significant, I'd want to make a full change for all Stone MB to use Quan/Wicce. If that makes sense? Ragnarok.Siyual said: » Lilllith said: » It means when you factor in everything with party buff and debuff which is the realistic scenario quanpur comes out ahead. no blm mbs by themselves. That makes sense. I can definitely make an Ongo-specific MB set. But how much of a difference are we talking here? If it's a difference of like 3,000 damage, I literally don't even care at that point to make a new set. My advice is try clearing V20 Ongo over and over with your static instead of just doing 10% after the first clear to get RP. Get the answer from a your own personal experience. When your team becomes an efficient Ongo killing machine and everyone is on spot with buffs and debuffs, you can tell the difference in damage. But of course there's no incentive for this. I only had to repeatedly kill V20 Ongo cause I had to do it for my alts and helping people in my LS. These clears were done when we were ML20-ML30 with no Empy +3. I can only imagine the disparity of damage between quanpur vs +2 neck only increased as evident from the formula. Lilllith said: » Ragnarok.Siyual said: » Lilllith said: » It means when you factor in everything with party buff and debuff which is the realistic scenario quanpur comes out ahead. no blm mbs by themselves. That makes sense. I can definitely make an Ongo-specific MB set. But how much of a difference are we talking here? If it's a difference of like 3,000 damage, I literally don't even care at that point to make a new set. My advice is try clearing V20 Ongo over and over with your static instead of just doing 10% after the first clear to get RP. Get the answer from a your own personal experience. When your team becomes an efficient Ongo killing machine and everyone is on spot with buffs and debuffs, you can tell the difference in damage. But of course there's no incentive for this. I only had to repeatedly kill V20 Ongo cause I had to do it for my alts and helping people in my LS. These clears were done when we were ML20-ML30 with no Empy +3. I can only imagine the disparity of damage between quanpur vs +2 neck only increased as evident from the formula. Already have R25 Agwu and cleared Ongo v20 many times, but thanks for the assumption. This was all before Empy+3 as well, hence my question on Quanpur/Wicce. I had never used it in favor of JSE+2, but reading some of the posts here has me questioning if Quan/Wicce is better. And it sounds like it is, but by how much? I have Ongo v25 in mind whenever that drops, and if Wicce had made Quanpur that much more of a significant boost, it may well be worth switching to use that for the fight, and possibly for all other Stone magic bursts. We literally have people crunching math here. I trust the math, and just asking what the end numbers are to compare between. Telling me to just "try it out yourself" isn't really helpful. Ragnarok.Siyual said: » Lilllith said: » Ragnarok.Siyual said: » Lilllith said: » It means when you factor in everything with party buff and debuff which is the realistic scenario quanpur comes out ahead. no blm mbs by themselves. That makes sense. I can definitely make an Ongo-specific MB set. But how much of a difference are we talking here? If it's a difference of like 3,000 damage, I literally don't even care at that point to make a new set. My advice is try clearing V20 Ongo over and over with your static instead of just doing 10% after the first clear to get RP. Get the answer from a your own personal experience. When your team becomes an efficient Ongo killing machine and everyone is on spot with buffs and debuffs, you can tell the difference in damage. But of course there's no incentive for this. I only had to repeatedly kill V20 Ongo cause I had to do it for my alts and helping people in my LS. These clears were done when we were ML20-ML30 with no Empy +3. I can only imagine the disparity of damage between quanpur vs +2 neck only increased as evident from the formula. Already have R25 Agwu and cleared Ongo v20 many times, but thanks for the assumption. This was all before Empy+3 as well, hence my question on Quanpur/Wicce. I had never used it in favor of JSE+2, but reading some of the posts here has me questioning if Quan/Wicce is better. And it sounds like it is, but by how much? I have Ongo v25 in mind whenever that drops, and if Wicce had made Quanpur that much more of a significant boost, it may well be worth switching to use that for the fight, and possibly for all other Stone magic bursts. We literally have people crunching math here. I trust the math, and just asking what the end numbers are to compare between. Telling me to just "try it out yourself" isn't really helpful. I trust math/formula too but how do you know the numbers or inputs are correct? the formula spits out whatever you put in. garbage in garbage out. I don't think we should focus on a certain number but the concept of the formula. As dINT increases what happens to the output? How much weight do each variable carry? I think that provides a better understanding. People experiencing better outcome with +2 neck most likely needed that extra MACC and INT from the +2 neck whereas those in an efficient party with all buffs/debuffs applied can support a BLM using the quanpur neck for better outcome. I think some folks are getting caught up on the "B" part of Magic Attack Bonus (MAB). It's a bonus added to Magic Attack and every player has 100 Magic Attack and 100 Magic Defense by default.
(Magic Attack + Magic Attack Bonus)/(Magic Defense + Magic Defense Bonus). It would make everything so much simpler if SE just had those two numbers displayed on the inventory sheet, rather then being hidden like Acc / Evasion are. Ragnarok.Siyual said: » Lilllith said: » Ragnarok.Siyual said: » Lilllith said: » It means when you factor in everything with party buff and debuff which is the realistic scenario quanpur comes out ahead. no blm mbs by themselves. That makes sense. I can definitely make an Ongo-specific MB set. But how much of a difference are we talking here? If it's a difference of like 3,000 damage, I literally don't even care at that point to make a new set. My advice is try clearing V20 Ongo over and over with your static instead of just doing 10% after the first clear to get RP. Get the answer from a your own personal experience. When your team becomes an efficient Ongo killing machine and everyone is on spot with buffs and debuffs, you can tell the difference in damage. But of course there's no incentive for this. I only had to repeatedly kill V20 Ongo cause I had to do it for my alts and helping people in my LS. These clears were done when we were ML20-ML30 with no Empy +3. I can only imagine the disparity of damage between quanpur vs +2 neck only increased as evident from the formula. Already have R25 Agwu and cleared Ongo v20 many times, but thanks for the assumption. This was all before Empy+3 as well, hence my question on Quanpur/Wicce. I had never used it in favor of JSE+2, but reading some of the posts here has me questioning if Quan/Wicce is better. And it sounds like it is, but by how much? I have Ongo v25 in mind whenever that drops, and if Wicce had made Quanpur that much more of a significant boost, it may well be worth switching to use that for the fight, and possibly for all other Stone magic bursts. We literally have people crunching math here. I trust the math, and just asking what the end numbers are to compare between. Telling me to just "try it out yourself" isn't really helpful. It's a question of what you define as "best" because it all depends on exactly how much dINT is going on and how much you hate resists. The extreme examples show both impact and burn on, that's not happening without being lucky and even then only for less then 90s. Austar has a very good grasp of game math and has laid out the comparison. Both JSE +2 neck and Quanpar come very close to each other and the "winner" is based on dINT and even then only by 1% or less. At that point I'd be paying more attention to magic accuracy cause Ongo is a *** with it's resists. That's what I was looking for - thanks!
Ragnarok.Siyual said: » Quite possibly. I'm just trying to figure out what the end takeaway is. This is sole +2 with agwu boots since people whine about boots when optimizing each pieces' option, no rayke or quick draw buff, or cumulative bonus This set has 441 mDMG, 667 INT with buffs and food, and assumes 425*0.8-63 INT on Ongo. Uses the MAB and MDB buffs Geriond posted, so it has 580 MAB and target has -32 MDB. It still caps damage. When you get the points where you aren't capping damage, Sole +2 will become comparatively better. Really don't even day/weather. As 171880 / 1.35 = 127318.5185 Code 441 + 2500 + 90 * 3 = 3211 3211 * 1.1 = 3532 3532 * 1.75 = 6181 6181 * 2.06 = 12732 12732 * 1.35 = 17188 17188 * 6.8 / .68 = 171880 Ramuh.Austar said: » Ragnarok.Siyual said: » Quite possibly. I'm just trying to figure out what the end takeaway is. This is sole +2 with agwu boots since people whine about boots when optimizing each pieces' option, no rayke or quick draw buff, or cumulative bonus This set has 441 mDMG, 667 INT with buffs and food, and assumes 425*0.8-63 INT on Ongo. Uses the MAB and MDB buffs Geriond posted, so it has 580 MAB and target has -32 MDB. It still caps damage. When you get the points where you aren't capping damage, Sole +2 will become comparatively better. Really don't even day/weather. As 171880 / 1.35 = 127318.5185 Code 441 + 2500 + 90 * 3 = 3211 3211 * 1.1 = 3532 3532 * 1.75 = 6181 6181 * 2.06 = 12732 12732 * 1.35 = 17188 17188 * 6.8 / .68 = 171880 Thank you for this! That makes a lot of sense. If I remove burn and impact from Ongo, both pieces can still cap without weather. Quanpur set changing to this for 110491 damage:
Code Top Valid Set:
{'Name': 'Marin Staff +1', 'INT': 47, 'Magic Accuracy': 180, 'MAB': 68, 'Magic Damage': 217}
{'Name': 'Ghastly Tathlum +1', 'MP': 35, 'Magic Damage': 21, 'INT': 11}
{'Name': 'Ea Hat +1', 'MP': 65, 'INT': 43, 'Magic Accuracy': 50, 'MAB': 38, 'MB Damage': 7, 'MB Damage II': 7}
{'Name': 'Wicce Coat +3', 'MP': 132, 'INT': 50, 'Magic Accuracy': 64, 'MAB': 59, 'Magic Damage': 34, 'MB Damage II': 5}
{'Name': "Agwu's Gages", 'MP': 73, 'INT': 33, 'Magic Accuracy': 50, 'MAB': 58, 'Magic Damage': 20, 'MB Damage': 8, 'MB Damage II': 5}
{'Name': 'Wicce Chausses +3', 'MP': 119, 'INT': 53, 'Magic Accuracy': 63, 'MAB': 58, 'Magic Damage': 33, 'MB Damage': 15}
{'Name': "Agwu's Pigaches", 'MP': 44, 'INT': 30, 'Magic Accuracy': 50, 'MAB': 58, 'Magic Damage': 20, 'MB Damage': 6, 'Drain Potency': 33}
{'Name': 'Quanpur Necklace', 'MP': 10, 'MAB': 7, 'Affinity': 5}
{'Name': 'Regal Earring', 'MP': 20, 'INT': 10, 'MAB': 7}
{'Name': 'Malignance Earring', 'INT': 8, 'Magic Accuracy': 10, 'MAB': 8}
{'Name': 'Metamor. Ring +1', 'INT': 16, 'MP': 60, 'Magic Accuracy': 15}
{'Name': 'Freke Ring', 'INT': 10, 'MAB': 8}
{'Name': "Taranus's Cape", 'MB Damage': 5, 'INT': 30, 'Magic Accuracy': 20, 'Magic Damage': 20, 'MAB': 10}And stole +2 set changing to this for 108097 damage: Code {'Name': 'Marin Staff +1', 'INT': 47, 'Magic Accuracy': 180, 'MAB': 68, 'Magic Damage': 217}
{'Name': 'Ghastly Tathlum +1', 'MP': 35, 'Magic Damage': 21, 'INT': 11}
{'Name': 'Ea Hat +1', 'MP': 65, 'INT': 43, 'Magic Accuracy': 50, 'MAB': 38, 'MB Damage': 7, 'MB Damage II': 7}
{'Name': 'Wicce Coat +3', 'MP': 132, 'INT': 50, 'Magic Accuracy': 64, 'MAB': 59, 'Magic Damage': 34, 'MB Damage II': 5}
{'Name': "Agwu's Gages", 'MP': 73, 'INT': 33, 'Magic Accuracy': 50, 'MAB': 58, 'Magic Damage': 20, 'MB Damage': 8, 'MB Damage II': 5}
{'Name': 'Wicce Chausses +3', 'MP': 119, 'INT': 53, 'Magic Accuracy': 63, 'MAB': 58, 'Magic Damage': 33, 'MB Damage': 15}
{'Name': 'Wicce Sabots +3', 'MP': 50, 'INT': 36, 'Magic Accuracy': 60, 'MAB': 50, 'Magic Damage': 30, 'Dark Skill': 35}
{'Name': 'Src. Stole +2', 'Magic Accuracy': 30, 'MAB': 7, 'INT': 15, 'MB Damage': 10}
{'Name': 'Regal Earring', 'MP': 20, 'INT': 10, 'MAB': 7}
{'Name': 'Malignance Earring', 'INT': 8, 'Magic Accuracy': 10, 'MAB': 8}
{'Name': 'Metamor. Ring +1', 'INT': 16, 'MP': 60, 'Magic Accuracy': 15}
{'Name': 'Freke Ring', 'INT': 10, 'MAB': 8}
{'Name': "Taranus's Cape", 'MB Damage': 5, 'INT': 30, 'Magic Accuracy': 20, 'Magic Damage': 20, 'MAB': 10} |
||
|
All FFXI content and images © 2002-2024 SQUARE ENIX CO., LTD. FINAL
FANTASY is a registered trademark of Square Enix Co., Ltd.
|
||
