Question on VB damage (in General)

Question on the VB damage - I just fought Street Fighter and saw this in melee (in one round)

Ryu sliced into Roadster [22837]
Ryu draws strength from his weapon! [8838]
Roadster's Guardian Angel smote Ryu (5215)
Ryu's vorpal blade went snicker-snack! [26612]
Ryu draws strength from his weapon! [5810]
Roadster's Guardian Angel smote Ryu (4977)

What is the snicker-snack doing there? That's some pretty effective VA! Anyone else seen this?

I was wondering about the "snicker-snack" too - notice how it doesn't say which opponent was hit. What does that mean?

Also, there isn't any indication that the opponent's AC is actually reduced. Should there be a message like those of the exbow and axbow?

snicker-snack is from the poem "Jabberwocky - Lewis Carrol " I think that is the cue they just got halved AC wise. I could be wrong of course, but I know the snicker-snack thing is from the poem which has a Vorpal Blade.

Maelstrom, the AC drop is not permanent, unlike the DX/ST drop by EX/AXbow.

Ex/axbows permanently reduce dx/st? Isn't it restored at the end of the fight?

For how long does the VB reduce AC? A single round?

Yes, Vorpal drops AC only for that round.

But the snicker-snack has square brackets beside it, just like VA. And the 26k figure looks like a VA draw increasing the HP, not a change to AC. That's why I thought it might be interacting with VA. Anyone hit with the VB see an increase in HP?

Now it went twice

Ryu clove Roadster [25071]
Ryu draws strength from his weapon! [9024]
Roadster's Guardian Angel smote Ryu (5303)
Ryu's vorpal blade went snicker-snack! [26527]
Ryu draws strength from his weapon! [5731]
Roadster's Guardian Angel smote Ryu (5060)
Ryu's vorpal blade went snicker-snack! [22426]

It doesn't look like VA for Ryu since I was able to kill him in 1 round after this. And I don't see anything on my stats. What is this doing?

OK - never mind. It's just an extra strike at me that does extra damage by negating my ToE. Maybe the VB gets stronger in passing by endurance in multiple strikes.

So if VB drops AC only for the current round, it is only useful if you are able to hit the same minion that was hit by the VB a second time within the same round, correct?

GM, I hadn't noticed the different types of brackets. I'll take a look to see what is happening...

The snicker-snack is just a new adjective added to 'disemboweled', 'decapitated', 'rived', and all the other words used to describe a hit. I imagine it's used for a good hit, not a weak one.

The VB doesn't reduce the opponent's AC/End/Prot for any other weapon. It only reduces it for itself. If you have 4 tanks hitting the same minion in a round, only the one(s) with a VB will get the special effect. The other guys will just get the effects of their weapons, like extra VA from a Morg or BoTh.

Everybody got it?

thanks, Almuric :)

Actually, I haven't quite got it.

If "snicker-snack" is just another adjective, then why not have a target? Shouldn't it be
X's vorpal blade went snicker-snack! at Y [26612]

I guess the damage in brackets instead of the usual parentheses indicates that AC is also "damaged"?

Read the poem. ;)

I've posted it in the changelog thread.

I've read the poem before. So we're just sacrificing target information to stay consistent with the poem?

and that is bad why? its a melee weapon, it shouldn't be too hard to figure out. (unless the VB seeks the highest AC, and no one noticed)

the snicker snack is as far as i can see just the multiple hit of the same minion...

maulaxe, I wasn't saying it was bad, simply confirming that it was the case.

Shade, I'm pretty sure I've had single hits that went snicker-snack.