Talk:Paralyze (Status Effect)/Archive 1edit

From FFXIclopedia, the free Final Fantasy XI encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Talk on Weapon Skill & Paralysis

I am going to put the conversations in from talk pages to here because I am tired of Talk Page hopping::

any particular reason for this revert?[1]Mifaco 19:52, 14 February 2007 (EST)

You wrote: "Paralysis does not affect Weapon Skills." The reason I reverted this was its untrue. I have had a WS in the past canceled by paralyzed... just like when a mob can be paralyzed by using one of their TP attacks. Paralyze a crawler and you will be able to see its moves be canceled by paralysis, but watch it attempt that move again like a second later... You dont lose that TP but you will have to hit the button again. I tested this last night on Puks in Aydeewa Subterrane by getting Palsy Pollen and then having my NIN use his WS - it didn't happen often but at least once he got paralyzed. He still had his TP so he was able to try again but the weapon skill can be stopped by paralysis making that statement incorrect. --Nynaeve 21:20, 14 February 2007 (EST)

You are mistaken, Paralysis does NOT affect your weaponskills. I don;t care if you think it delayed a crawlers WS either, you are mistaken. Mifaco's edit is correct. http://www.bluegartrls.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=16294 --Aurikasura 16:31, 15 February 2007 (EST)

Actually its not seeing as I proved it the other night... It is rare... And that entire forum conversation did have some people saying they swore it did happen. Just because the vast majority says nooo I have never had it happen to me - doesn't mean it doesn't happen - esp when there are people out there who say it does and has happened. IT IS RARE BUT IT DOES HAPPEN.

I saw the crawler get paralyzed trying to do a tp move on the NIN and then have it attempt and succeed in doing it a second time and then later I saw the NINs weapon skill get paralyzed and then HE was able to do it again... No TP is lost but you can get it paralyzed.

So, just because it hasn't happened to you and maybe 50 other people doesn't make it so that it doesn't happen period... How often are you all paralyzed anyways? what are your resists? most players have some kind of resist in the forum of status buffs and whatnot that can prevent the paralysis from going off frequently...

The NIN i had was terrible and therefor prolly with the crappy gear and i had him play for a long while with no buffs other than utsusemi - so when he got paralyzed and i didnt take it off - he kept getting paralyzed... Just like his Paralyze scroll made the mob paralyzed... and the mobs TP attack was interupted...

I witnessed it - its the second time i have ever seen it happen to a PC in the four years I have been playing but I did see it. Just because you haven't - doesn't make you right... In fact that means all of you have no proof whatsoever since you have seen nothing - the lack of it doesnt mean it doesnt exist - it just means you havent experienced it. Thank you. --Nynaeve 17:15, 15 February 2007 (EST)

No, sorry, you're incorrect. Take a paralysis potion, step out of town and test it. Paralysis will never ever prevent a weaponskill from a player, nor will it prevent a monster from using a weaponskill. Since obviously it isn't possible to provide evidence that something doesn't exist, I will ask you to provide evidence that it does exist. In the meantime, the bulk of the very experienced players at BG agree that it just does not happen. When a critical mass of experienced players agree on something, the burden of proof is on you to show the contrary.

As a side note, please try to format your messages on my talk page a little nicer. Run-on paragraphs and sentences make it difficult to comprehend what you have written. --Aurikasura 17:28, 15 February 2007 (EST)

Sorry, I am currently at work and tech not supposed to be on here... So I was typing quickly. And that isn't always true. I went purposely out to test this theory once I saw it posted. I disproved it. Just because a bunch of people on some forum think one thing since they have never seen it - that doesn't make it true and experience is in the eye of the beholder.

I have been playing along time - alot of lil 75s running around in todays FFXI society havent even been around for more than a year and alot of them aren't ever even in the position to get themselves paralyzed. A mobs paralysis can be stronger than a paralysis potion. I wouldn't be so adamant about this if I didn't see it done....

The crawler example - was the crawler was readying Sticky Thread... crawler than got paralyzed... two seconds later you see it again.. Crawler readies sticky thread... Now what does that tell you? One that the crawler's TP attack can be paralyzed - second that once it is paralyzed it can do it again moments later meaning the TP doesnt go away.

This prompted me to make the stupid NIN take off Pro/Shell so all he had on was Haste... He had no elemental resists on and so we fought some puks to get the paralyze effect onto him... He got paralyzed alot - and i mean alot and only once - once did his weapon skill get interupted but he was able to do it again like two seconds later - showing that both the PC and the mob's TP attacks can in fact get paralyzed.

I will repeat - I saw it happen... I should have SS'd it but I did see it happen. I have seen mobs get paralyzed in the past and do TP attacks like that but as I said above this is only the second time in like 4 years that I have seen a PC have this happen to them and I used to be a FFXI addict who played like every single day. --Nynaeve 17:57, 15 February 2007 (EST)

First off, I seriously don't think that casting doubt on the depth of experience of the 15+ people posting on BG is a wise tack. The consensus is that it doesn't happen. Having been a 75 monk a long long long time I can personally guarantee you I've been paralyzed frequently from ice spikes and howling down in KRT and over the course of probably 1000+ weaponskills while paralyzed (most of them while wearing Scp.Harness or Scp.Harness+1, -20 to ice), I have never failed to execute the WS.

Secondly, as for a mobs paralysis being stronger than a paralysis potion, I haven't ever used a paralysis potion. Have you? What's the relative strength, compared to Hex Eye? I guess I can find out tonight. From what I've heard, however, potion-induced paralyze is brutally strong.

Thirdly, can you guarantee that the mob was not stunned during charge-up of its skill? I'm assuming that you mean flytraps instead of puks, which indicates that you are fighting in Aydeewa. Since your main character is listed as 63, I'm assuming you were there in an XP party (especially since you rag on the Ninja as well) NOT a controlled test. Therefore I am doubtful that what you saw was actually a weaponskill being halted from paralysis.

There are several reasons why a monster (or player) could stop its weaponskill, the main culprits being sleep and stun. When a mob is stunned or slept during charge-up it does not lose TP and can use the skill immediately after it becomes unstunned. Certain monsters in ToAU have rather unique AI to this regard. For example, Attercops naturally become stunned if you use a weaponskill or offensive job-ability such as chi blast or jump. This can halt weaponskill charge-up. They also gain 30 TP from chi blast (not sure about jump), which is quite unique. I can't guarantee whether or not this unique AI also affects monsters elsewhere in ToAU zones.

"I will repeat - I saw it happen... I should have SS'd it but I did see it happen" You managed to produce contrary evidence within 24 hours yet failed to screenshot it, which implies that it should be easy enough to reproduce, no? Even a clear screenshot of the unfiltered XP log would be sufficient (ie, showing the ninja readying a weaponskill twice, but never receiving a damage report from the first, and with no particular reason why the first one failed) or by repeating the experiment in a more controlled situation.

As for not posting from work / posting quickly, this is a message board not instant chat so take your time when it is available to you :) --Aurikasura 18:30, 15 February 2007 (EST)

Currently, my newest characters highest level is a 63 WHM.... I have leveled WHM to 75 before myself as a hume and I have leveled other jobs up as well... I have deleted and kept many character of high level - I am usually never satisfied with one race and dont mind starting over due to my lack of desire for the Maat cap... I have extensive WHM experience and I do not dislike NIN - I was commenting on the competency/gear choices of the one I was with that night...

And yes I was fighting in Aydeewa Subterrane just as I said on the other page and yes I was fighting Puktraps which use the AoE Paralysis Palsy Pollen... I had no one in the party to stun seeing as I was the only one with MP... It was WHM.WAR.WAR.WAR.NIN and we were just fooling around killing the Crawlers and the Puktraps for fun...

I reread your Blue Garter forum discussion now that I am at home and have more time and two pages of commenting - with some of it being irrelevant and out of topic - with some people agreeing on this end saying they have seen a mob paralyzed and lose a TP attack - and other adamantly saying it isn't so only to be contradicted by someone else - who then retort by talking down to them - I really don't see where the consensus is.... All I know is what I saw - and yes some of these players I even know from back when I played with them and discussed on that forum - but it doesn't mean they are right - it just means that they haven't seen it or weren't paying attention enough to see it. As I said - it must be really really rare for it to happen considering this is only the second time I have seen it happen to a PC - but as far as the mobs go - I have seen that happen more often... NIN Paralysis every time that I recall it though - so I do not know what that means.. I am not sure if that means that RDMs can't or haven't caused it but every time I recall seeing it is when there was a NIN doing the Paralyzing...

I am a hawk when it comes to status effects - I shoot to get them off like that - and that is why I have seen the paralysis thing... I see So and So is paralyzed and I am on it like white on rice with getting it off and that is how I saw my first mob paralyzed from doing its TP attack... I was stunned at first because I was of the impression originally that it couldn't be interrupted as well - that is something that we grew up on - everyone always said it - but I saw it and I know others who have as well... Just because you and a bunch of other players haven't doesn't mean its not true - there are hundreds upon thousands of FFXI players - 15 out of that large # doesnt equal the consensus... and doesn't mean you are right.

I am not making fun of or trying to offend anyone on your forum but I do not think that they know everything... I know that I do not know alot of things... But the things that I do know or that I have seen, I am more likely to speak up about... Just because something doesn't happen often - doesn't mean it doesn't happen... If you want to put your statement down with a verification tag - that is fine but I wasn't having that on the page accentuated when I had it proven false but apparently my word isn't good enough for you so leave it up to someone else to prove. But it shouldn't be up there w/o that verification tag seeing as there is a debate on the issue and there are people on both sides. --Nynaeve 21:51, 15 February 2007 (EST)

EDIT: When I stated the above should have a verification tag - I didn't realize Jopa already put one in with the information - Thank you Jopasopa. ^^ --Nynaeve 21:57, 15 February 2007 (EST)

I've levelled 4 jobs to 75, one of them being BST, one of them being RDM.

As a BST, i've fought enemies that give some of the most potent paralyzes, Goobues and Scorpions, and not once, when I use sic, does my pet get paralyzed from his TP move. I'm not talking about within a 24 hour period, i'm talking about over 75 levels.

As a RDM, I debuffed the whole way from 10-75, and as before, not once did my paralysis stop a pet from using a WS.

ToaU mobs, like the one you described in your example, do get stunned from WS and other JA, their behaviors are different to normal mobs. Example being Spiders outside whitegate, Chi blast stuns them (which doesnt show in log) - some crawlers appear to WS twice, because they charge WS > get stunned > Charge up again.

Paralyze does not affect WS at all. --Lordwafik 00:51, 16 February 2007 (EST)

See paralyzewn4.png Methodology: build 100 tp. Use a paralyze potion. Notice that there is a 100% paralysis rate (30 consecutive paralyzes). Use TP move, it goes off without a hitch.

Until you provide some evidence of your claim, I would say this is pretty conclusive. --Aurikasura 01:00, 16 February 2007 (EST)

If you don't support your claim that weaponskills are susceptible to paralyze, I'm going to remove the claim from the main page. I'll give you a few days to collect supporting evidence in the form of screenshots. --Aurikasura 17:47, 16 February 2007 (EST)

The protection of this page was uncalled for. Personally, I view it as an abuse of your Jr. Admin. priviledges. I am requesting that you do the following: 1) unprotect the page 2) make clear your intentions for satisfying the burden of proof of your claim about paralysed weaponskills

I require prompt response on this issue. --Aurikasura 19:25, 16 February 2007 (EST)

In your example on your forums - in the screenshot that you posted of you being paralyzed and getting a weapons skill off - it doesn't show any paralysis after said weapon skill - how do we know that the potion didn't run out before? It doesn't always show when a potion runs out in a log. If you have more screenshots feel free to post them to show you being paralyzed afterwards.

Also - seeing as I saw this paralysis of a weapon skill last by using NIN's Jubaku and of how said party at the time was fighting Puktraps and the local crawlers... Maybe Puktraps have a differnt kind of paralysis... Or crawlers are less resistant to Paralyze - paralyze is an ice effect - and crawlers are weak to ice - soooo - it is possible that circumstances could make it so it happens. How is using a paralyze pot and showing you getting paralyzed continually then getting WS off then showing nothing after while fighting a mob that had nothing to do with the original mobs in question that do this, proof?

Time and money you say - one paralyze pot and 5 minutes time? I spent 5 hours partying with some random screwballs to prove it... I protected the page because you threatened to change the verification tag which is how procedures around here run... and now are acting rather immature, arrogant and childish about this making more demands and threats where you have no more right than anyone else on here. I really don't need you personally attacking me for doing what I think is right in the given situation.

I still think that weapon skills can be paralyzed - maybe only certain mobs/circumstances surround this... But I still think it is possible seeing as I know I saw it happen... Maybe the ToAU mobs are different than regular? They show differences in other ways as well... So why not here?

Things don't have to be resolved immediately and honestly - I am really busy this week - I work and go out - FFXI is not my life so I do not have time to duplicate my work right now... So please. calm down and this will eventually be resolved. In the meantime there is no harm in having the Verification tag on there. If you want me to word it differently I can - I can have it say that weapon skills aren't effected but there needs to be a tag next to it for verification purposes seeing as there is more than one person out there who disagrees with you. --Nynaeve 19:42, 16 February 2007 (EST)

I am insulted by the fact that you refuse to discuss this civilly like I would with any other user of the wiki, but would rather wield your administrative abilities to resolve things in a manner which suit you. Refrain from doing it in the future. In addition, please keep personal attacks off of the wiki discussion pages, it is unbecoming.

My stated intention was neither a threat nor a demand, it was merely that: stated intention. The only thing I am demanding from ffxiwiki is accuracy; you are free to support or not support your claim as you see fit. If nobody can prove something to exist in a timely manner especially in the face of strong evidence that it does not exist, then it might as well not exist for the purposes of a fact database. Therefore the verification tag can be removed, and I wish to remove it. If you do not wish to support your claim with evidence, then I will correct the error to reflect the state of the game mechanics to our best knowledge by removing the claim and the verification tag.

In my example, the paralysis pot did not wear off. The log reports "<self> is no longer paralyzed" when the effect of paralysis is removed from one's self, much like virtually every status effect in the game, beneficial or harmful, naturally expiring or removed using medicine or removed from an outside status cure spell. If you believe for some reason that I am lying, you can easily with "5 minutes" of your time and "one paralyze pot" reproduce the experiment for yourself.

If you are too busy outside of FFXI to have the time and drive to verify game mechanics then let the people who do have the time and the drive to verify game mechanics do just that and correct the database where they find errors. Electing yourself as the official conduit for any and all changes to the database on the issue when you have neither the time nor the interest to perform the experiments suggested is precisely the wrong action to take.

--Aurikasura 20:03, 16 February 2007 (EST)

I and many other people among my end-game ls agree with the statements aurik and wafik have said. Never have we seen any monster's ws or player's ws halted due to the paralysis effect. KRT would indeed be a very very sad place to merit if they were. Paralysis potions do not change the paralyze effect at all, they simply add the effect. The recent edit is excruciatingly misleading, and in light of the current discussion downright insulting of the time Aurik took to go prove his point, even if it didn't take long. If anything, it was better off with the previous verification tag rather than adding that.

Don't see why there was need to make that page non-editable with this discussion. There wasn't going to be any vandalism taking place. Removing the edit function just limits what this wiki is for in the first place.

--Zhais

Frankly, to put this issue to rest, I would like to see someone provide counter-evidence to aurik's in form of hopefully a screenshot showing a log of someone's ws ( monster and/or player ) getting paralyzed. Not trying to be picky, but would like to see it taken in an area not as likely to be corrupted by lag. If there isn't any, then it should probably have verification tag taken off.

Basically, we can work with this like how most theories/evidence is worked with. If someone were to say 1 + 1 = 3, mathematically proved it and showed a concrete example, and no one in the world could disprove this... it would become fact. Until someone /does/ disprove it. Can't really say something is a contested truth when one side is evidence heavy and the other side isn't. Before aurik's screenshot, it was all just he said she said, so there was equal proof magnitude-wise. Now, the standard is to find a counter-screenshot providing contradictory evidence.

So my suggestion is to leave it as-is ( without the paralysis potion comment in my opinion ), and leave the verification tag on it for a week. If noone can come up with evidence otherwise, it should be reopened and the verification tag removed. This, I think, gives a fair compromise to either side of the argument.

--Zhais And how do you do timestamps >:( And bah, you made an edit while I was typing! Would be nice if wiki had a built-in edit conflict control system ;o

I have never seen it in KRT either. Not once have I seen Ice Spikes paralyze anyones ws there. How would you like me to word it then - all I am asking is that the verification tag stays since myself and some others say they have seen this effect occur and I am at a loss for the wording that will satisfy you. --Nynaeve 20:59, 16 February 2007 (EST)

EDIT: Also, I am not trying to undermine his time - I was trying to add the statement about Paralyze Potions because he proved that is what happens therefor that should at least be said... If says it kept going than I believe him. I know that chat filters can be turned off but it seems unlikely he would have done that in this case when he was trying to prove this. I will unprotect this page if no one takes down the verification tag and then you can word it however you like but that tag should be able to stay seeing as more than one person thinks different. The only reason it is protected is to keep the state of things so that no one takes things out because they think they should not be there. Verification Tags are used all the time when things are said to not exist or happen and they remain there even when others say no its not so and one or two go yes it is... for example see: Absorb-DEX and the drop that a majority of people say doesn't happen but few say does from Orcish Zerkers. That too has a verification tag - it is left up even tho no screenshot proving it does drop from it is posted or exists - we just take the word of others and leave it posted as a verification needed. --Nynaeve 21:07, 16 February 2007 (EST)

I think paralyze doesn't affect WSs/special abilities/BPs, but whatever... I'm pretty sure BPs aren't affected. After all these times my avatars have been paralyzed, I think para only proc's on ME when I use the pet command. It should be easy to test, get Garuda paralyzed by some skeleton BLM's annoying Ice Spikes, then try Claw/Aero II. Also, I hate fighting on FFXIclopedia, just try to say what you have to say, guys. D: --Joped 22:04, 16 February 2007 (EST)

Also, you can sign your name (includes timestamp) by typing ~~~~ or by using the signature option, Zhais. --Joped 22:04, 16 February 2007 (EST)

Wow, you removed the edit tags from the page because people disagree with you, smart move. Thank god I wasn't tempted to donate to this wiki, if it means we are donating to an unreliable information source. I'll make sure nobody else I know donates to this place either.

There is more than enough proof against your point, and not once have you proved it, you "forgot" to SS, you "think" that paralyze can stop WS but you refuse to show any source of information whatsoever making us beleive you. You are unreliable.

If X - 7 = Z - 7, then X = Z, not X = -7 which you are trying to make us beleive. We are arguing X = Z, and providing proof with evidence, you are arguing X = -7, and showing us nothing to support it. Goodbye wiki! It's on allakhazam status for me unless you decide to grow up. --Lordwafik 00:51, 17 February 2007 (EST)

I demand that this should be unprotected. It should just mention paralyzing WSs/SAs/BPs is a rumor, since the FFXI community is mostly saying it doesn't, and there hasn't been any proof to show otherwise. And don't leave, Wafik, this immaturity just tends to happen whenever someone edits something out and then a disagreement happens. --Joped 09:22, 17 February 2007 (EST)

First off - all the "demands" are uncalled for. The page was protected for less than 24 hours. No harm was done - it simply allows the discussion to proceed here rather than having the article changed back and forth. This is what should continue to happen. There is a disagreement and that is precisely why there is a verification tag. So far I see a screenshot showing circumstantial evidence that paralyze does not effect WS. Counter to that is a personal experience being recounted about how the user saw paralyze effect a WS. Neither is particulary stong evidnece since if anything we are talking about something that happens, if ever, very rarely. That being said it can only be proven with a screenshot of the paralysis effecting a WS. ToAU mobs are in fact different in how the react to various effects - so that should be taken into account. They regen TP in certain weather, are effected by spells, WS, abilities, etc. It seems that the current wording is a pretty fair representation of the above. There is no timeline to remove a verification tag. It should remain until the disputed fact is verified or those that dispute the claim withdraw their dispute. The facts related to the dispute should be here on the talk page and the reader can weigh the two sides and draw their own conclusion. --Gahoo 12:53, 17 February 2007 (EST)

Facts related to the dispute were being placed here, and no edit-war was ongoing on the page; it was protected by Nynaeve simply to further her personal agenda rather than to correct any existing problem. If that isn't a chilling effect on an otherwise open wiki, I don't know what is.

--Aurikasura 14:08, 17 February 2007 (EST)

You had threatened to change the article before the discussion was complete. Her actions were not party of any agenda. Do not continue any personal attacks. If you cannot let your arguments speak for you, do not continue the conversation any further. We all do this in our spare times, no one does this for money. Demanding evidence and quick responses is not how we go about things here. There is a legitimate dispute about whether paralyze can effect weapon skills, so until it is resolved, the verification tag will remain. Continue the normal discussion please. --Chrisjander 14:44, 17 February 2007 (EST)


Personal attacks? You mean like calling people arrogant and childish? Because that's the only personal attack I see. --Aurikasura 14:50, 17 February 2007 (EST)

Justifying bad behavior with bad behavior is not acceptable. I was refering to everyone's comments, admins and regular users alike. This is not the place for arguments as I've seen on this page. Either discuss it with another admin if you have problems with another user (including admins), or drop it. This talk page is for discussing the Paralyze status effect, and it's getting very unproductive, very quickly. User:Gahoo has unprotected the page and expressed his wishes that the verification tag stay until the discussion is resolved. So please, keep the discussion on track. --Chrisjander 14:59, 17 February 2007 (EST)


Can we at least change the text to something like "Some people claim that Weaponskills have been paralyzed, although an overwhelming majority of the FFXI community seems to agree that it is not possible. No screenshots have been provided to support the claim that Weaponskills can be paralyzed." --Divisortheory 18:00, 17 February 2007 (EST)

My opinion would be "No". "An overwhelming majority" implies that some people don't agree. Also, if this gets to be an edit war over wording, one of us admins needs to deal with it. It can be changed when evidence supporting the other side of the argument is presented. Until then, leave it as disputed. And for the record, I believe I've experienced WSs being paralyzed, but I'm willing to wait for someone to catch a screenshot of it before changing anything. --Chrisjander 18:27, 17 February 2007 (EST)

On the other hand, it's definitely a fact that an overwhelming majority of the endgame community believes that weaponskills cannot be paralyzed. Anyone reading the page should come away with an accurate view of the issue at hand. Accurate = 1) There are a few people who think it can happen, 2) There are orders of magnitude more people who think it can't. Stating "Paralyze can also affect a player's weaponskill" and then putting a verification tag implies that it's exactly the opposite - that most people think it can happen. And that's definitely not accurate, any way you slice it. --Divisortheory 1:00, 18 February 2007 (EST)

If you open the door for this sort of nonsense, then anyone can say anything, like "Sneak Attack doesn't always give a Critical hit when you meet the conditions for it's activation" and it can be "in dispute" forever, since it's impossible to disprove. This argument has been going on for a week or more, and not one single person has provided one single screenshot to ever show a player or mob WS being stopped by paralysis. How long does the "disputing" side have to continue to fail to produce evidence before the dispute can be removed? Archibaldcrane

IT'S NOT A DISPUTE IF ITS ONE vs. EVERYONE ELSE. THAT'S CALLED STUPID.

This is why it was protected. The page should not be changed this much to reflect personal opinion. Words like "overwhelming" and "orders of magnitude" are opinion. I have revetred it back to my edit, which accurately reflects that this is (a) in dispute and (b) if it ever happens it happens rarely enough that players should probably not worry about it. It is not phrased at all that it can happen with a verification mark. This should be the end of this unless there are new facts or someone makes a compelling reason to change the text.

"It is currently disputed whether paralysis can stop a player's weapon skill. If it can, it happens very rarely. It is also disputed whether the enemies' special abilities and/or avatars' blood pact abilities are affected by paralysis. See the talk page for more discussion. Verification Needed"

I am reverting Altoc's revisions. There is no way to verify statments such as "vast majority of the FFXI community". There are 500,000+ players in FFXI. It may be 10-1 here, or even 20-1, but this is not vast majority of 500,000. In order to yet again try to put an end to this I will revise it as per the below. As to some comments on the BG message board, the screenshot of the paralyze pot is circumstantial because it cannot prove the negative. The absense of something happening (i.e. paralysis of a WS) cannot be proved with that test. It is not that strong of circumstantial evidence because it is only one trial. If the test was done a lot more than it becomes more significant. Nor was the counterveiling evidence direct or strong. That said, based on the above, the wording should reflect that it likely doesn't effect WS with the verification tag - rather than language that it does effect WS with a verification tag. --Gahoo 22:57, 18 February 2007 (EST)

"It is generally believed that paralyze cannot prevent a player's weapon skill, although some players believe that it can happen very rarely. It is also believed that paralyze cannot prevent an enemies' special abilities and/or avatars' blood pact abilities. See the talk page for more discussion. {{verification}}"

You say 'There is no way to verify statments such as "vast majority of the FFXI community".' yet you have no problem with leaving unverifiable statements like "weaponskills can be paralyzed"? Why don't we leave Altoc's claim with a verification tag? --Aurikasura 23:39, 18 February 2007 (EST)


It might have been one screenshot, but saying the evidence is circumstantial is nothing short of ridiculous. Why ignore the YEARS (literally) of numerous players, like me, who have partied in KRT and dealt with ice spikes and paralyze? You're also ignoring the fact that there is absolutely NO evidence from the one person who claims paralyze can interupt a WS. It's not a debate, or a dispute. It's an argument with people who have an immense amount of experience against one person who is too childish to just say, "You're right, mistakes happen." Obviously FFXIclopedia is far more concerned with maintaining the irrelevant credibility of a junior admin then adhering to the experience of FFXI veterans who you're insulting by suggesting that even though they've been playing for 3 years, don't know the freakin workings of BASIC FFXI functions. Please, this is a pathetic joke. --Altoc 23:59, 18 February 2007 (EST)

There is clearly some confusion about what Circumstantial Evidence is. Furthermore, the assertion that the provided screenshot is proof that Paralyze cannot affect weaponskills is an instance of the logical fallacy Proof by Example:

  • Let Set A represent the set of weaponskill usages.
  • The Screenshot shows a member of Set A that had the property not paralyzed.
  • Concluding, from this, that all members of Set A have the property not paralyzed is an instance of the Proof by Example fallacy.

This is not direct evidence. At best, this evidence is circumstantial.

For the record, I am not yet convinced of either side of this argument, as neither side has provided any conclusive evidence.

I would hope that everyone could continue the discussion with valid logic and without ad hominem attacks and unsubstantiated claims. (By the way, I do not mean to dismiss eye-witness accounts; I mean to dismiss statements like "There is more than enough proof against your point" and "Paralysis potions do not change the paralyze effect at all, they simply add the effect." Such assertions are useless, when they have nothing of substance to back them up.)

One last note: I believe Nynaeve has been vindicated in her decision to protect the page: soon after the page was unprotected, User:Altoc User Talk:Altoc began to wage his edit-war, which is just what she said she was intending to prevent. Personally, I think the page should be re-protected.

--Alephnot 06:43, 19 February 2007 (EST)

Paralyze potion is 100% through it's duration. Everything that can be paralyzed will be paralyzed with it. The weaponskill was not paralyzed. People who have been playing this game for 3 years, and have exp'ed in KRT for 2 years with skeleton's ice spikes have never had paralyze block a weaponskill. Some junior admin comes along and see his ninja start a WS, get slept by soporific and then woken up and use his WS and suddenly thinks he's paralyzed and therefore the WS can magically be blocked by paralyze once out of a billion times. Please, that's just stupid. Hinting that both "sides" are even is insulting to the plethora of players against the one single admin. We understand that Nynaeve is powerful on FFXIclopedia, now about we begin putting out correct information?

If you open the door for this sort of nonsense, then anyone can say anything, like "Sneak Attack doesn't always give a Critical hit when you meet the conditions for it's activation" and it can be "in dispute" forever, since it's impossible to disprove. This argument has been going on for a week or more, and not one single person has provided one single screenshot to ever show a player or mob WS being stopped by paralysis. How long does the "disputing" side have to continue to fail to produce evidence before the dispute can be removed? This is the question here. How long? A few days, a week, a month? There has to be some time limit to this completely unsubstatiated dispute before it is deemed to fail and therefore be eliminated. Maybe a mod can answer this question - give a time period so we don't have to keep guessing how long this idiocy will continue. Set a date.Archibaldcrane

Which was exactly what I suggested in the first place. However, looking at http://wiki.ffxiclopedia.org/Category_talk:Food#Subcategories it seems clear that there is no rush to resolve "disputes" where Nynaeve is on the "losing" side --Aurikasura 14:26, 19 February 2007 (EST)

I'd also like to quote Nynaeve: "I will unprotect this page if no one takes down the verification tag and then you can word it however you like but that tag should be able to stay seeing as more than one person thinks different." That's exactly what I did. I reworded it to more accurately reflect the majority of the ffxi community, and LEFT THE VERIFICATION TAG, just like Nynaeve recommended. I worded it how I liked, to more accurately frame the argument, and left the verification tag. However, that was clearly not good enough for some users, and they felt like rewording was also unacceptable, and began an edit war - even though the verification tag was left intact as the mod suggested. There is no evidence beyond anecdotal evidence to the contrary, and that is a fact. Noone has presented any evidence that is not anecdotal, however that fact was removed from the disputed information and then locked, convieniently making this look more in dispute than it is. Shoddy moderating. Archibaldcrane 15:34, 19 February 2007 (EST)

Edit wording

Since this topic is locked, can admin to make a correction to the page on the wording? Currently a portion of the chart says this:

== How to remove the effect ==


Can it be changed to this to remove the repeats:

== How to remove the effect ==


--Wayka 03:35, 17 February 2007 (EST)

Retrieved from "http://wiki.ffxiclopedia.org/wiki/Talk:Paralyze_(Status_Effect)/Archive_1"