Gilgamesh-ffv-ios-portrait.png
Gilgamesh: Enough expository banter!
This talk page is used for discussing improvements to the page "Reflect (ability)". It is not the place for general discussion or sharing stories about the topic of this article.

I never did like much the idea of splitting spell pages into Spell and Status pages, but since this is what we did, perhaps it's time we did the same with Reflect? Drake Clawfang 06:31, October 15, 2009 (UTC)

We'd pretty much have to do that with Confuse, Toad, Mini, and all of those too. To be frank, I think it's a bit silly to split them up imo. It'd be best to just have Toad, Mini, Haste, Confusion, etc. rather than Haste (ability) and Haste (status) when the status can be explained in very simple words... Xenomic 06:45, October 15, 2009 (UTC)
The problem is that it's Haste, Slow, Doom, Berserk, and I think there's others. Either way, merge them back or split the un-split ones up, the job is half done. Which way should it be taken? I too, prefer Status and Spell on the same page, but let us not forget the huge debate over this. Drake Clawfang 06:48, October 15, 2009 (UTC)
True, but it's a debate that can go either way. That's where the problem lies. One way, we'd have 2 pages that gives info on the exact same thing, when having them both on the same page solves that problem. It's not like there's much to say about the statuses that can't be said on the spells. I'd say merge them together to one page, but I know that this is going to spark up that debate again. ^^; Xenomic 06:50, October 15, 2009 (UTC)


Hm...[edit source]

ACRudeBox.PNG

It is, but it's still called "Reflect". So it should stay. "Haste" worked different in FF1 and 2 without the ATB system. Drake Clawfang 05:31, November 6, 2009 (UTC)

? Wall was never called Reflect in FFII, at least to my knowledge. 8bit 06:00, November 6, 2009 (UTC)
Oh, my bad. Then yeah, no mention here. Drake Clawfang 06:02, November 6, 2009 (UTC)


Wait, will this work?[edit source]

If you cast Reflect on the enemy and then on yourself, and then cast, oh, say, Firaga, will it simply bounce back and forth?--Lord Captain Cecil Harvey 04:11, January 18, 2010 (UTC)

No, once it bounces off of the first Reflect, it will bypass the other character's Reflect. So if you cast Firaga on yourself with reflect, it will hit the enemy regardless of its status. 8bit 04:15, January 18, 2010 (UTC)
No. the programmers thought of this and made it so that a spell that is reflected once, can't be reflected again. I'm pretty sure this is how all instances of Reflect work. Brago-77 04:19, January 18, 2010 (UTC)
The only time that ever happens was in FFVII, when the party has Reflect Rings and are fighting a Mirage enemy. Xenomic 04:19, January 18, 2010 (UTC)

Aw, I thought that would work. Ah well.--Lord Captain Cecil Harvey 02:46, January 19, 2010 (UTC)

Bounced Spells weaker?[edit source]

I'm positive that in some games, most notably FFV, if you have your entire party with reflect, and bounce a spell by targeting all of them, the effect is in fact stronger, is it just my idea?

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.