Magic Accuracy effect charm?

[Gunslinger]

I have a simple answer- use Omega ring if you have it. Looks awesome, maybe 2 less CHR, but who cares when you charm in style!

For the record- my personal opinion is that it does make a difference. I don't have extensive testing to prove it though, but I rarely play bst anymore and I don't care to go charm 1000 things like I used to for this stuff.

edit: one last thing, +15% charm rate? I call bullshit until someone actually tests it, sounds like a made up number.

Probably tested into the ground ages ago on Alla, I'll see if I can find a link later. It's pretty much just common beastmaster knowledge though. From experience I'd say it's accurate.

[Avarice]

No matter how much CHR you stack you still have that 5% chance you'll miss regardless at capped success rate.

Oh the joys of failing to charm a Wild Rabbit as 75BST.

[SephYuyX]

There was extensive testing somewhere when Omega Ring was released, and showed that atleast that ring was bett than CHR5, but it's just a recollection and cant find it anymore, sooo. Meh.

[Julian]

Probably tested into the ground ages ago on Alla, I'll see if I can find a link later. It's pretty much just common beastmaster knowledge though. From experience I'd say it's accurate.

Well I figured 10/15% would probably be accurate, but from the wiki discussion page it didn't look like it was tested or anything, I think, I just skimmed it <.<

[Rocl]

I am just echoing the idea of caution about FFXIclopedia here, as the page does not even list the Magic Accuracy Bonus of the Elemental Staves. (It isn't +15%)

[shaddix]

stave doesn't necessarily have hidden "macc+" on it

[Argettio]

It isn't +15%

No it's ~20-30 M.ACC

Kanican - Scholar Guide (Part IV)

[Yugl]

I bet the Magic ACC from Light Staff (And gear in general) is just a glitch and you all are setting yourselves up for one hell of a nerf.

[Greatguardian]

inb4 All BST who've ever charmed with Apollo's/Light staff are B&?

[The Stig]

So is Light Staff + Charm placebo then?

I swear I charmed just as well pre 51!!

oh, don't forget to test LIGHT GRIP too ... !

[Suiram]

So is Light Staff + Charm placebo then?

I was never trying to suggest that, personally. I didn't mean to come off that way to anyone if I did. Although if it turns out to be that it doesn't help that would be something lol

But all I was trying to say before, regarding the wiki page, is that assuming that Light/Apollos does help charm, maybe it's because Macc affects charm, so it benefits from the usual Macc hidden bonus on staves, or maybe it doesn't benefit from Macc and the staff has a seperate hidden "charm accuracy" bonus. Whichever it turns out to be, though, I don't expect Gahoo knew in May 2005 the answer to this subtle question when he put it on that page, so quoting the wiki as the first few responses here doesn't answer anything.

[mdkuser]

a few years ago , a BST told me appollo's staff enhance charm because charm ability appears white on the ability list. He also said that Light staff enhances provoke, lolz.

[Julian]

Whichever it turns out to be, though, I don't expect Gahoo knew in May 2005 the answer to this subtle question when he put it on that page, so quoting the wiki as the first few responses here doesn't answer anything.

The one thing that annoys me about those posts, is not that the info is old and outdated because it's.. old, but it's that people quote it thinking that it's 100% right with no exceptions, and really believe so.

[Valyana]

No it's ~20-30 M.ACC

Kanican - Scholar Guide (Part IV)

Well, saying that HQ staff gives +15% accuracy isn't exactly wrong; it's an increase in hit rate, not an increase in some MAcc stat like sushi gives. It also seems that it's +15% below 50% base hit rate, and +30% above. The unbearable triteness of preening: magic resist analysis

But yes, it's probably clearer to just say that NQ is MAcc+20, HQ staff +30.

As for MAcc and Charm, I don't think textual analysis of what ffxiclopedia says in one place and doesn't say in another is very reliable...if there was actual testing that found Omega Ring better than Light Ring, that would suggest that it does have effect. But I would expect the difference between those two rings to be small enough to require a very large sample set, so I'm somewhat skeptical that the testing was conclusive one way or the other.

[mdkuser]

from memory slime mobs are very resistant to charm. Someone find a IT++ slime and elemental seal charm it.

[Gunslinger]

The one thing that annoys me about those posts, is not that the info is old and outdated because it's.. old, but it's that people quote it thinking that it's 100% right with no exceptions, and really believe so.

I'm all up for testing, I just don't want to be the one to do it!

All the testing I needed was going 1-75 bst solo before the xp cap was adjusted/COP was released. It was a long road haha.

I can't say that the elemental staves have a specific % of charm increase, but I can say without a doubt: Apollo's >> Light Staff >> Monster Signa in terms of charm success rate. That's probably the brick wall you're running up against- I don't think it's really people quoting the wiki and believing it with blind-faith (it happens, sure), but rather I think for the majority of beastmasters the "proof is in the pudding." Let's face it- it takes a 'special' kind of person to do bst 1-75, especially solo (even though it's much easier now, it's still a grind... I don't think I could do it again, even with lower required xp). The people who do it solo have a LOT of time to observe, simply because most of the time you're sitting back and doing next to nothing while you xp.

All I can say is that those numbers 'feel right.' Whether that's because of m. acc or because of some special programming on light/apollos, I'm not sure.

But observationally- if Omega is parsing on par with a +5 chr ring, light/apollos have an obvious affect (independent of the % charm increase argument), it seems like signs point toward "m. acc does something."

Sadly, I agree that the burden of proof lies on those who make the claims, but I'm not willing to do it with my available time . I'm from the school of "it works well enough!" after all this time. Hell, I'm convinced charm is pretty much based on whether I really need it to succeed or not.

Ps. Fuck charming raptors. I can deal with slimes, raptors can diaf.

[Suiram]

from memory slime mobs are very resistant to charm. Someone find a IT++ slime and elemental seal charm it.

I figured I could try it on 75BLM/01BST, but rather than a slime a just tried a lesser colibri. However, Charm didn't even consume ES.

[Gunslinger]

I figured I could try it on 75BLM/01BST, but rather than a slime a just tried a lesser colibri. However, Charm didn't even consume ES.

Do corsairs card-shots consume elemental seal?

That's always been my thought on the subject. I feel like corsairs card-shots are closer to charm than anything else that exists in the game at this time. At least it's an elemental ability.

[The Stig]

Ah but does ES's description state the next spell, not ability?

My THF is 15 but my Steal command is macroed so I haven't seen it for a while, isn't Steal green too? Test the Wind Staff against that too.

[SephYuyX]

When Gold BST Coins were 400k a stack back in the day, I used to go BLM/THF to Mon.Cavern and steal with Wind Staff and lots of INT and CHR gear ^^;