Category talk:Barspell

Bar Status duration

• Level 99 WHM, 394 skill = ~784 seconds
• Level 99 WHM, 442 skill = ~879 seconds
• Level 7 WHM, 21 skill = 480 seconds (8 minutes) : Showed up as 475 seconds.
• Level 90 WHM, 331 skill = ~658 seconds
• Level 90 WHM, 369 skill = ~733 seconds
• Level 77 WHM, 256 skill = ~507 seconds
• Level 75 WHM, 246 skill = ~487 seconds
• Level 73 WHM, 240 skill = ~476 seconds (so floored)

It looks like the formula over 240 skill (Level 73 skill cap) Duration = Skill*2. All the above delays are 5 seconds short because I'm going off the log. I also confirmed RDM Barspells follow the same pattern. --Byrthnoth 11:00, 29 January 2012 (EST)

Barstatus from SCH

https://luteff11.livedoor.blog/archives/42400562.html The test referenced here was done on a NIN/BLM and he received Barpoison from a SCH, with the test concluding that the barstatus spells provide the equivalent of +20 elemental resistance. One problem is that SCH doesn't have Barpoison. And the other problem is that Lute doesn't give the SCH's subjob, so I don't know for sure if Barpoison or Barpoisonra was used in the test. --Shynoe (talk) 01:32, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

We do know the spell they used, it's written multiple times: "バポイズン" "Barpoison" and not "バポイゾラ" "Barpoisonra." If you read the entire entry it's clear when they are referring to a self-target Barspell such as "バポイズン" "Barpoison" and when they refer to an AoE Barspell as they do with "バパライラ" "Barparalyzra." It's not a stretch to assume they cast Barpoison as SCH/RDM with Accession to give it to the ninja. And even if it was Barpoisonra, it doesn't matter. That link was provided as a historical test method and labeled "Old Bar-status spell testing" since those Bar-status test results are no longer accurate in light of recent testing anyways.--Argisto (talk) 04:49, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

Barpoison is also the name of the status effect given by Barparalyzra, causing the ambiguity. The reason it's curious is because the new testing was intended to revisit the same scenario, finds a different barspell potency when there's no potency change expected per the version updates, but there was a discrepancy in the old/new tests using SCH that could point to a difference with accession for the other party members. --Shynoe (talk) 06:25, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

Barpoison and Barparalyzra are separate spells that grant different resistances and have no relation other than being Barspells, there is no ambiguity. I feel like you are missing much of the context of the testing. The change in Barspell potency was expected as a possibility due to the reports in the comments section of Lute's post of Bar-status spell potency being changed multiple times over several months while the devs tried to fix Sroda Necklace. I referenced these comments in that same thread over a year ago and mentioned them again here along with the potency testing. The only version updates I linked were:

• This one regarding the change in Poison duration for players in 2015
• This version update from 2013 in a later post in the same thread regarding the change in duration of Bar-element spells only, which occurred over a year before Lute's testing.

Neither version update had anything to do with Bar-status spell potency changing. As far as Accessioned self-target Bar-status spells possibly granting a different amount of resistance to other party members: it may be possible. However, reading the comments of Lute's post and having others corroborate his findings and then a few months later finding those values had changed multiple times over the course of months, I don't think it's very likely. It is an avenue that would need testing to say for sure though.--Argisto (talk) 08:49, 23 January 2025 (UTC)