Relfect Damage + Resist Normal Weapons

[Johnny Casey]

The two magic effect does similar thing; it reduces the incoming physical damage. (although RD only work against melee) If you achieved 100% of either one, you will be immune against such damage.

What I want to know is whether if they stack each other. For example, if I have 20% Resist Normal Weapons effect on myself and cast Reflect Damage 80% on myself, will it work as 100% immune to physical melee attacks?

[hoskope]

Was interesting so i googled around.

Reflect vs. Absorb vs. Resist

All of these spell effects help prevent enemy magic from harming you.

Reflect attempts to bounce harmful effects back: its magnitude is the percentage chance that it will succeed, and if it does, all of the effect is applied to the caster of the incoming spell.

Absorb attempts to convert incoming magic into magicka for the target: its magnitude is the percentage chance that it will succeed. If it does, all of the incoming effect is negated, and the target with Absorb on it receives magicka proportional to the magnitude of the incoming spell.

Resist Magic always works, and reduces the effectiveness of the incoming spell by a certain percentage.

If two or more effects are active, there can be interesting consequences. Reflect Spell will always be counted above the other two, so those with the Atronach birthsign will have to be especially cautious using this.

Spell Absorption is counted after Reflect Spell, and if you have less than 100% Reflect and it fails, Spell Absorption kicks in. It still trumps Resist Magic, however, so if you have no Resistances or 100% Resistances, it won't matter.

Resist Magic is taken into account last.

Source[en.uesp.net]

[Johnny Casey]

That's Reflect Spell w/ Resist Magic, which works completely different than Reflect Damage w/ Resist Normal Weapons.

No wonder why you're keep necroing old post.

[[P]etya]

The two work differently:
- Resist is always active and negates % of the damage you'd take
- Reflect means a % chance that the attack will be reflected on the attacker

So no, you won't become immune to it. You'll have 80% chance to reflect damage, and all that 20% you'd take are reduced by 20%. It'd work like this.

[arottweiler]

It's an easy mistake to make and if you're going to insult people who respond to your questions that you can easily answer yourself by sparing a few minutes at UESP you won't get many responses. I just glanced over the two effects descriptions and they work in different ways so probably do stack but not towards the same benefits. Resist normal weapons doesn't include attacks from creatures and achieving 100% is a lot more difficult compared to getting 100% reflect damage. Reflect damage has a lot more benefits and I've never bothered with anything enchanted with resist normal weapons so sell them as soon as possible. It doesn't even shield against a ghost. Having said that I don't know if reflect damage will reflect the damage from a ghost but I'm sure that can be confirmed at UESP.

[[P]etya]

Also reminder: even if you achieve 100% Resistance to Normal Weapons, that doesn't mean 100% invulnerability against them, the following weapons ignore this stat:
- Silver, Daedric, Dremora Weapons
- Enchanted weapons (even if they are uncharged)
- Fists (if the character is journeyman at least)
- Bound Weapons

[Johnny Casey]

Originally posted by Petya:

The two work differently:
- Resist is always active and negates % of the damage you'd take
- Reflect means a % chance that the attack will be reflected on the attacker

So no, you won't become immune to it. You'll have 80% chance to reflect damage, and all that 20% you'd take are reduced by 20%. It'd work like this.

Reflect Damage is not chance based, unlike Reflect Spell. 80% to Reflect Damage means every 80% of incoming physical melee attacks will always be reflected towards the attacker.

So no, you're wrong.

Originally posted by arottweiler:

It's an easy mistake to make and if you're going to insult people who respond to your questions that you can easily answer yourself by sparing a few minutes at UESP you won't get many responses.

This hoskope guy presented the case of Reflect Spell with Resist Magic, instead of Reflect Damage with Resist Normal Weapons. The two works entirely different to each other. His answer was simply irrelevant, and I have the right to complain his ignorance for not even attempt to figure out what this thread is about, which is rather easy to do so.

[[P]etya]

Then what was this question for, if you know the answer to it?

[[P]etya]

In any case, I read into your question, and you don't really become immune to damage if you have Reflect damage at 80% and Resist Normal Weapons at 20%. While it is still uncertain how the two interact with each other to this day, Reflect Damage is calculated first. Therefore I assume that 80% of that damage is reflected, and the rest gets reduced by 20%. The only thing I found on the forums is that 100% Resist Normal Weapon overrides Reflect Damage and in that scenario Reflect Damage doesn't work.

Also being rude just discourages others from answering, which you can find out yourself btw. The internet and the console in the game exist you know. Some of us played the game so long ago, that we don't really remember how exactly the two work (I also remembered that the two reflect were based on chance, even if it was wrong). And the scenario you described is just so ultimately rare, that unless you were tackling with the system, you might not even know how it would work.

[arottweiler]

Originally posted by Johnny Casey:

Originally posted by Petya:

The two work differently:
- Resist is always active and negates % of the damage you'd take
- Reflect means a % chance that the attack will be reflected on the attacker

So no, you won't become immune to it. You'll have 80% chance to reflect damage, and all that 20% you'd take are reduced by 20%. It'd work like this.

Reflect Damage is not chance based, unlike Reflect Spell. 80% to Reflect Damage means every 80% of incoming physical melee attacks will always be reflected towards the attacker.

So no, you're wrong.

Originally posted by arottweiler:

It's an easy mistake to make and if you're going to insult people who respond to your questions that you can easily answer yourself by sparing a few minutes at UESP you won't get many responses.

This hoskope guy presented the case of Reflect Spell with Resist Magic, instead of Reflect Damage with Resist Normal Weapons. The two works entirely different to each other. His answer was simply irrelevant, and I have the right to complain his ignorance for not even attempt to figure out what this thread is about, which is rather easy to do so.

With that attitude you are probably blocked by many people.

[Johnny Casey]

Originally posted by Petya:

Then what was this question for, if you know the answer to it?

I don't *know* the answer. How did you come to such conclusion?

All I have stated so far in the comments are basically we have one guy who mistook the topic of the thread as 'Reflect Spell with Resist Magic', and another guy, which refers to you, who mistook that Reflect Damage will work as chance based, and I have proven that both of you were wrong.

I already stated the question of the thread, so I'm not gonna repeat myself. Basically, one guy was on a completely different topic, and you, the other, has made a conclusion based on false information(=Reflect Damage works as chance based). That's what I have stated so far on the comment. I don't know the answer yet.

Originally posted by Petya:

Some of us played the game so long ago, that we don't really remember how exactly the two work (I also remembered that the two reflect were based on chance, even if it was wrong). And the scenario you described is just so ultimately rare, that unless you were tackling with the system, you might not even know how it would work.

Then perhaps, you shouldn't have made an attempt to answer this question after all, since this question I'm asking is somewhat beyond to you. If you played the game so long ago, and you don't really remember how exactly the certain magical effects work, that means you simply does not qualify enough to answer my question. You don't know the answer, so why are you answering?

I appreciate your attempt to help a guy, but a poor answer based on false information is worse than not answering the question at all.

[[P]etya]

All I can say is: that if you ask a question, even if the answer might be incorrect, it's part of the discussion. If you don't want anyone to answer it, then you can simply tackle with the game's system, because you can answer these questions for yourself too. :)

[Johnny Casey]

Originally posted by Petya:

All I can say is: that if you ask a question, even if the answer might be incorrect, it's part of the discussion.

It's part of the discussion where it should be sublated at any matter. Stating an incorrect answer for the question is one of the least thing you could do in discussion. Yes, it can happen, but that doesn't mean you can just do it whenever you feel like it, and the one who originally questioned such would always be appreciated by it.

If the case of one's offering a false answer would have been easily sublated by carefully comprehending the topic of the thread, and the informations you have searched(=the case for hoskope guy), or even you knew the answer you're about to offer might be incorrect due to your lack of information(=the case for you), then there's no excuse for making an incorrect answer and try to get away with it by stating; "We're just trying to help!" - No. That's not true. You were providing me a false information where you could have absolutely tried not to prvide it, and therefore, I do have a right to state that your answer was wrong, even if it feels rude to you.

Originally posted by Petya:

If you don't want anyone to answer it, then you can simply tackle with the game's system, because you can answer these questions for yourself too. :)

I want someone who actually knows the answer, answering the question I asked, not the one who pretends to know, or only half know such.

Which part do you not understand about "I shouldn't make an answer for this question, for I do not truly know the answer." ?

[arottweiler]

You sound like someone who knows about Oblivion so you can clearly answer your question yourself with a bit of research. I'm not saying you shouldn't have created this thread because I will start new threads even though I could probably find the answer myself with 20-30 minutes of sleuthing as it keeps forums busy but to scold someone who has clearly responded in earnest is harsh. You've given me advice in another thread which I'm grateful for but confusing those spell effects is not uncommon and the etiquette in forum discussion is to either not say anything or politely tell them of their mistake. That's the natural progression of thread discussions and that way everyone is happy. You also mention something about necroing old posts so you made it personal based on something outside this discussion. In summary, someone replied trying to help and got a rude response for their troubles.

[[P]etya]

In any case after I realized the mistake, I answered the question for you (guess you didn't read it). It might not be 100% correct, but in theory it should work like that. The only thing is, that irritates me is the sheer empty arrogance and egotism from your part. You clearly pretend to know a lot about this game, you might know, I don't know, but if you are such a smart guy, then you could have simply tested your theoretical example in game. ;) It isn't hard to set up such stats with console commands, but I guess your knowledge regarding this reached only that far to taunt others, who made mistake. I can sense that you probably made the same mistake as us, but you probably read into it. So fair I dare say. :)

Nevertheless you actually have the *right* to behave like this, as you claimed that you have the right to be rude, however reminder that even though you have the right to do something, that doesn't inherently mean you should. There is this thing, called basic human decency, which also include to appreciate others trying to help you, even if they couldn't, but it just seems that you clearly lack this. Pitiful. Anyway I just thought I'd share one final thought regarding this.

[arottweiler]

Originally posted by Petya:

In any case after I realized the mistake, I answered the question for you (guess you didn't read it). It might not be 100% correct, but in theory it should work like that. The only thing is, that irritates me is the sheer empty arrogance and egotism from your part. You clearly pretend to know a lot about this game, you might know, I don't know, but if you are such a smart guy, then you could have simply tested your theoretical example in game. ;) It isn't hard to set up such stats with console commands, but I guess your knowledge regarding this reached only that far to taunt others, who made mistake. I can sense that you probably made the same mistake as us, but you probably read into it. So fair I dare say. :)

Nevertheless you actually have the *right* to behave like this, as you claimed that you have the right to be rude, however reminder that even though you have the right to do something, that doesn't inherently mean you should. There is this thing, called basic human decency, which also include to appreciate others trying to help you, even if they couldn't, but it just seems that you clearly lack this. Pitiful. Anyway I just thought I'd share one final thought regarding this.

I agree with every word you say and don't let it bother you. When someone seems more interested in arguing than discussing the subject at hand it's a lost cause. A trainer skilled in empathy would be be a good start.