• Giant Growth behavior

    • Skill Name: Giant Growth
      Job Name: rune knight
      Skill Correct Behavior:

      should add more atk


    Videos from kRO Sakray before rune update:



    and after:



    these vdeos show that this RK damage was 19-28k without tursis/with old tursis behavior and 56-85k after


    adding screens here for better visibility:




    Edited by Theodosia

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    If this is not deemed conclusive I will do tests with Odin's Power added tomorrow. On average that brings my pre-rune crits to 31-35k but modified never exceed 85k without doubling, while they should be considerably greater than from RK in the videos

    Share this comment

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    the old behavior?

    15% chance  3x?

    why does it have anthing to do with this?

    the new behavior is 100% chance 2.5x (or 3.5x in your report ) and 15% chance 5x(and 7x in your report)

    and on pvp maps

    it's :

    the new behavior is 100% chance 1.25x (or 2.25x in your report ) and 15% chance 2.5x(and 4.5x in your report)

    Share this comment

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Old behavior is used as a reference point

    With it we can see what is the unmodified damage of crits of RK in the videos is (since old tursis was +30 str and a chance of 3x we can say its pretty much unmodified )

    which is between 19 and 28k depending on buffs

    With tursis after patch same rk same eq deals 56 to 85k


    My unmodified damage was 26 to 31k yet modified was between 58 and 65k

    How else we can explain such differences (roughly 18-25k if we approximate ) in damage if not that tursis adding 250 and not 150?

    And again GG is additive, so it will never be flat 3.5x/7x, since other bonuses too affect atk

    In previous topic I also provided source from rAethena showing that they support my claim

    Share this comment

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Additional testing with Odin's power:

    Average damage was 33-35k before tursis, meaning by all accounts if the formulas are the same my damage should be considerably greater than the one of the RK in the videos (since his normal crits were 19-28k)

    However, the damage with tursis was on par with his higher end and a bit lower:

    Damage with RK buffs + expatio + odin + impotio + magnum break bonus active:



    And with added Tursis:






    I looked up through the skill bug reports:

     here other players have pointed out that 100+150% behavior is incorrect.

    I hope these tests comparing LimitRO damages to official damages, testimonies of other players and how the rAthena team have implemented the rune improvement are enough of an evidence to change it to 100+250%

    Share this comment

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    the lux anima fix also lowered the giant growth damage. (my damage went from 50k -> 30k (after the rune update) -> 22k(after the lux anima fix) it was really bad made me quit RK but i had no way to test because im not good at these things. it needs to be fixed.

    Edited by Shinchou

    Share this comment

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    look at the video you provided, you lack of use another rune(example: Asir), don't forgot still have other rune is updated not only this rune. please test again 

    Share this comment

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Test with Asir active.

    Using Dark frames since comparable to Ferre (shadow/demon to stack with gloom and bring my damage to at least 18-19k).

    No expatio or AB bonuses. With asir but without GG damage is 19.7k:


    Which is greater than lower bound of damage of RK on the video. If the formula works correctly, with Tursis added I should deal at least 57k (lowest damage of his output):


    Share this comment

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    DMG before Asir Rune?

    I mean you should test without Asir Runestone first (older is add ATK-7 only, new is add Atk-70) , next step you should activate 2~4 rune to test it...

    Share this comment

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Asir not active, tursis not active:


    Before I get asked again: 

    Tursis and no Asir:


    At this point honestly it is hard to argue that RK on limit are not weaker than their kRO counterparts.

    RK on the video deals 18k at least with unmodified crits (since old tursis was mostly not affecting damage aside from 3x proc)

    I deal almost 20k here

    His lowest is 56 with new tursis and asir

    Mine with 19.7k is 47k at most, which is substantially lower than his lowest damage before being affected.

    My highest is 34k before tursis and yet its barely 80k total, which is lower than his highest (about 84-85k) at 28-29k unmodified.


    Share this comment

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    In addition. Suppose we have a character dealing 28k damage

    Suppose all of this damage can be affected by tursis (which will never ever happen)

    New Asir adds roughly 1.2 to 2k damage to me before being affected by tursis and that is with 4x destruction, but lets go with 2k either way

    Suppose with new asir character deals now 30k before tursis and we will get ALL the atk affected by the rune

    With our formula the damage will be 75k. With same eq as before, same other buffs as before and just those two runes changed, that RK would never be able to deal more than that, period, if tursis was +150%


    Since this article was referenced before, here it is again:



    " But add an additional increase atk-based physical damage by 250% instead. (Rhydo runestone won't benefit from this bonus)"

    The WarpPortal article also supports that we add 250%

    I do not see anywhere any information that would suggest that 250% atk bonus is a total. 

    Share this comment

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    1. rathena is not a reliable source. do not use it again.

    2. comparing new behavior on limit with old behavior on kro is meaningless. so all the test you provided above is meaningless. don't do that again.

    3. the reference you include from warpportal is just a translation. i won't take it. if it's from some players expeirence, i'll take it.

    4. however i'll change the modifier back to 250% just because the reply in the former report. i didn't read it because i don't promise to read the thread unless the its status is pending.



    Share this comment

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    This is now closed for further comments