Return of Reckoning

If i stack 2 aggravation procs (es full dominator + gutpierce) i gain a 20% of probability to taunt or what?

No, procs with the same name don't stack.

Mm i think every time you have calculated 2 times the chance to taunt enemy, if nothing changed it' still every source of eff calculate his own proc chance; not reallu sure.

Test it out on mobs

I have to test it? Nobody knows? xD

They will probably stack on proc chance, but it's a matter of if it's multiplicative or additive. My guess is additive, but I doubt many people have tested and know for sure.

dansari wrote:They will probably stack on proc chance, but it's a matter of if it's multiplicative or additive. My guess is additive, but I doubt many people have tested and know for sure.

So if it's additive the if I do the math right then stacking 2 10% taunt procs will give you an 11% chance only or would that be if it's multipicative?

TenTonHammer wrote:

dansari wrote:They will probably stack on proc chance, but it's a matter of if it's multiplicative or additive. My guess is additive, but I doubt many people have tested and know for sure.

So if it's additive the if I do the math right then stacking 2 10% taunt procs will give you an 11% chance only or would that be if it's multipicative?

I'm not a math surgeon but I think if it's multiplicative it's 11% and if it's additive it's 20%.

My guess is that, when you attack something, you simply roll twice for the proc (both at 10% in this example).

Your scenarios are the following:

1) Proc and Proc (0.1 and 0.1)
2) Proc and No Proc (0.1 and 0.9)
3) No Proc and Proc (0.9 and 0.1)
4) No Proc and No Proc (0.9 and 0.9)

From the scenarios up there, there are 3 where you WILL get the proc (1, 2 and 3). So the overall probability of getting a proc would be:

(0.1 x 0.1) + (0.1 x 0.9) + (0.9 x 0.1) = 0.19 = 19%

In other words, I believe having 2 pieces with a 10% chance to proc the same effect simply translates to an overall 19% chance. Of course, I could be talking out of my ass here.

edit: cause I failed at adding those multiplications.

Penril wrote:Of course, I could be talking out of my ass here.

You? Noooooo never