Passive Talent doesn't work for "spell known" load option when not using spellID
CrystalBearer opened this issue ยท 11 comments
Is there an existing issue for this?
- I have searched the existing open and closed issues.
Description
In the "Load" tab, in order to enter a spell known, one must use the SpellID, as it does not seem to validate spell names of passive spells.
WeakAuras Version
5.17.1
World of Warcraft Flavor
Retail (Default)
World of Warcraft Region
US/NA
Tested with only WeakAuras
I got this issue with only WeakAuras enabled
Lua Error
No response
Reproduction Steps
Go to any aura.
Select "Load"
Attempt to add a passive spell by name as conditional.
Last Good Version
n/a
Screenshots
No response
Export String
No response
Bisector Report
No response
yes you can
Ok. I'm trying it actively as we're talking. I must be missing how since I use this all the time on other auras and have never gotten it to validate on passives. In this case, the passive is "Thriving Growth". It's not validating for me.
Hero Talents can and are different per spec. so that does not work.
Then, if you have multiple 'specs' chosen, could you have the hero talent options from each of them appear separately for OR selection?
Usually the Spell Known load option is the better choice anyway.
"Spell Known" doesn't work if there is no spell. For example, using a WA to track the stacks of Bloodseeker Vines on a target can't do this because it's a proc from a passive talent. And you can't use "Spell Known" with the passive.
So, unlike active spells, you can add them, but only by SpellID? I mean, that's fine, so long as I know that's what I have to do.
Plus... I will have to figure out how to get that on my tooltip or I'll be on WoWhead constantly....
EDIT: Or, I can link the ability into it.
Thanks. Will do. Sorry I needed a video for that; I appreciate the time.
I suppose I would flex this, then, to attempt validation for passive spells as well by name, if possible.
I couldn't use the name for passive spell as spell known, i reopen ticket for this
Sounds good; thanks. I updated the main post to match this request for easier reference.