Lightguard

in [9361], thank you =)

in [9360], thank you =)

There are 2 other spells with the same name if you look around a bit. You have to select which spell to cast by gender.

In 9322, thank you =)

In 9313, thank you:)

Nice patch, but i don't think that we have to handle the 2 cases separately if there's only 1 character difference. Actually the spellid.

In 9308, thank you =)

In 9295, thank you =)

Thank you all =)

Use this: src/game/SpellEffects.cpp | 8 ++++++++ 1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/game/SpellEffects.cpp b/src/game/SpellEffects.cpp index 2e29bec..f9b7926 100644 --- a/src/game/SpellEffects.cpp +++ b/src/game/SpellEffects.cpp @@ -5257,6 +5257,14 @@ void Spell::EffectScriptEffect(uint32 effIndex) ((Player*)m_caster)->learnSpell(discoveredSpell, false); return; } + case 69377: //Fortitude + { + if(!unitTarget) + return; + + m_caster->CastSpell(unitTarget, 72590, true); + return; + } } break; }

The problem was fixed in 9280.

Both items have their related spells with proc trigger aura. You could try to override them in spell_proc_event and give them some cooldown or ppm.

Did anyone experience this running it on unix? A gdb log would be appreciated... =)

Well i didn't see any question or other way of requesting assistance. And write in english on this forum.

If you're not interested in it just don't comment it. You might know that if i have written it there i also have something related written in my sources. Being rude to ppl who want to help isn't the best idea at all... ui: If you need help with the ships you just have to ask... _normally_.

Some additions: Destructible buildings' health is shown by its animprogress on the client, uint8 max (255) is 100%. For correct damage logs we should send SMSG_DESTRUCTIBLE_BUILDING_DAMAGE structure looks like: (size 29) packguid (GameObject) packguid(vehicle used/attacker if no vehicle) packguid(attacker) uint32 damage uint32 spellId Thanks to TOM_RUS for the structure.

Try to edit Map::GetMaxPlayers() . There you can add an exception for it.

This should do it: src/game/Pet.cpp | 8 ++++---- 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/game/Pet.cpp b/src/game/Pet.cpp index 15c1750..b13d3a2 100644 --- a/src/game/Pet.cpp +++ b/src/game/Pet.cpp @@ -710,7 +710,7 @@ void Pet::GivePetXP(uint32 xp) newXP -= nextLvlXP; GivePetLevel(level+1); - SetUInt32Value(UNIT_FIELD_PETNEXTLEVELEXP, sObjectMgr.GetXPForLevel(level+1)/4); + SetUInt32Value(UNIT_FIELD_PETNEXTLEVELEXP, uint32(sObjectMgr.GetXPForLevel(level+1)/20)); level = getLevel(); nextLvlXP = GetUInt32Value(UNIT_FIELD_PETNEXTLEVELEXP); @@ -772,7 +772,7 @@ bool Pet::CreateBaseAtCreature(Creature* creature) setPowerType(POWER_FOCUS); SetUInt32Value(UNIT_FIELD_PET_NAME_TIMESTAMP, 0); SetUInt32Value(UNIT_FIELD_PETEXPERIENCE, 0); - SetUInt32Value(UNIT_FIELD_PETNEXTLEVELEXP, sObjectMgr.GetXPForLevel(creature->getLevel())/4); + SetUInt32Value(UNIT_FIELD_PETNEXTLEVELEXP, uint32(sObjectMgr.GetXPForLevel(creature->getLevel())/20)); SetUInt32Value(UNIT_NPC_FLAGS, UNIT_NPC_FLAG_NONE); if(CreatureFamilyEntry const* cFamily = sCreatureFamilyStore.LookupEntry(cinfo->family)) @@ -917,7 +917,7 @@ bool Pet::InitStatsForLevel(uint32 petlevel, Unit* owner) } case HUNTER_PET: { - SetUInt32Value(UNIT_FIELD_PETNEXTLEVELEXP, sObjectMgr.GetXPForLevel(petlevel)/4); + SetUInt32Value(UNIT_FIELD_PETNEXTLEVELEXP, uint32(sObjectMgr.GetXPForLevel(petlevel)/20)); //these formula may not be correct; however, it is designed to be close to what it should be //this makes dps 0.5 of pets level SetBaseWeaponDamage(BASE_ATTACK, MINDAMAGE, float(petlevel - (petlevel / 4)) ); @@ -1940,7 +1940,7 @@ void Pet::SynchronizeLevelWithOwner() if(getLevel() > owner->getLevel()) { GivePetLevel(owner->getLevel()); - SetUInt32Value(UNIT_FIELD_PETNEXTLEVELEXP, sObjectMgr.GetXPForLevel(owner->getLevel())/4); + SetUInt32Value(UNIT_FIELD_PETNEXTLEVELEXP, uint32(sObjectMgr.GetXPForLevel(owner->getLevel())/20)); SetUInt32Value(UNIT_FIELD_PETEXPERIENCE, GetUInt32Value(UNIT_FIELD_PETNEXTLEVELEXP)-1); } break; (Untested but should give the expected result)

Try this if you know that it uses only one mount creature id: src/game/SpellEffects.cpp | 1 + 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/game/SpellEffects.cpp b/src/game/SpellEffects.cpp index 0e437fd..ddd15a6 100644 --- a/src/game/SpellEffects.cpp +++ b/src/game/SpellEffects.cpp @@ -5282,6 +5282,7 @@ void Spell::EffectScriptEffect(uint32 effIndex) ((Player*)m_caster)->learnSpell(discoveredSpell, false); return; } + case 65917: m_caster->CastSpell(m_caster, 66122, true); return; } break; } If it uses random then this one would work: src/game/SpellEffects.cpp | 7 +++++++ 1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/game/SpellEffects.cpp b/src/game/SpellEffects.cpp index 0e437fd..6d9a65c 100644 --- a/src/game/SpellEffects.cpp +++ b/src/game/SpellEffects.cpp @@ -5282,6 +5282,13 @@ void Spell::EffectScriptEffect(uint32 effIndex) ((Player*)m_caster)->learnSpell(discoveredSpell, false); return; } + case 65917: // Magic Rooster + { + uint32 spells[3] = { 66122, 66123, 66124 }; + uint8 random = urand(0,2); + m_caster->CastSpell(m_caster, spells[random], true); + return; + } } break; } Dunno which is correct there are 3 spells for it...

This can easilly solve your problem: From 6dd311c72d328a66187b17511e2c64a32a0a9e7e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Lightguard <[email="[email protected]"][email protected][/email]> Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2009 09:56:29 +0100 Subject: [PATCH 1/1] Fix Glyph of Seal of Command energize amount --- src/game/SpellEffects.cpp | 1 + 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/game/SpellEffects.cpp b/src/game/SpellEffects.cpp index ac22721..5ed8bae 100644 --- a/src/game/SpellEffects.cpp +++ b/src/game/SpellEffects.cpp @@ -2951,6 +2951,7 @@ void Spell::EffectEnergize(uint32 i) break; case 31930: // Judgements of the Wise case 63375: // Improved Stormstrike + case 68082: // Glyph of Seal of Command damage = damage * unitTarget->GetCreateMana() / 100; break; default: -- 1.6.5.1.1367.gcd48 INSERT INTO spell_proc_event () VALUES (54925, 0, 10, 8388608, 520, 0, 16, 0, 0, 0, 0); Try this for the proc problem (untested) Patchfile

They already gave directions to go to improve the patch.

Nice (: /bow

Well, for me it looks to be the general way...

The problem is that totem spells are passive. Passive spells are checked like 3 times before reaching sspt, so no real chance to get this correctly working.

As nos4r2zod pointed IsPassiveSpell will stop that too. I tested it and fixed that but it wouldn't be a good solution too because if the totem doesn't get removed it will spam castspell.