Document skip-vanilla-damage-tick-when-shield-blocked#417
Merged
lynxplay merged 4 commits intoJun 15, 2024
Merged
Conversation
powercasgamer
suggested changes
Jun 15, 2024
powercasgamer
approved these changes
Jun 15, 2024
zlataovce
reviewed
Jun 15, 2024
| description: >- | ||
| Whether the server should skip damage ticks when entities are blocking damage | ||
| via a shield. While Vanilla does process a damage tick, this behavior was a long | ||
| standing bug in paper. Enabling this option means that the damage tick will be |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| standing bug in paper. Enabling this option means that the damage tick will be | |
| standing bug in Paper. Enabling this option means that the damage tick will be |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Document upcoming unsupported option in paper.
See PaperMC/Paper#10877