Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[1.8->1.7] generic.maxHealth attribute changes applied via item results in being stuck on respawn screen #538

Open
5 tasks done
calcastor opened this issue Aug 10, 2024 · 4 comments

Comments

@calcastor
Copy link

/viaversion dump Output

https://dump.viaversion.com/e6f35bd590d62b51aa3476b3a04363e7d9e18534fa8b435ff41819beed40a05a

Console Error

None

Bug Description

Applying a generic.maxHealth attribute via an item results in becoming stuck on the respawn screen. This is mitigated by the absorption effect.

The usage of the attribute in this situation is to reduce the player's health cap.

Steps to Reproduce

  1. Be on 1.7.10 and switch to an item with a generic.maxHealth attribute on a 1.8 server (specifically one that reduces health)
  2. Observer stuck respawn screen (respawn button does nothing)

Expected Behavior

Respawn screen should not appear

Additional Server Info

1.7.10 player on 1.8.8 Paper-based server

Checklist

@Barvalg
Copy link
Member

Barvalg commented Aug 10, 2024

Platform: git--SportPaper--1465194--P.1e3f759--SP.72ca320--CB.e1ebe52%20%28MC%3A%201.8.8%29
ViaVersion (5.0.4-SNAPSHOT): Even with master
ViaRewind(4.0.3-SNAPSHOT): Even with master
ViaBackwards(5.0.3): Even with master

@calcastor
Copy link
Author

This seems like it could be related to a regression somewhere that reintroduces #511 as the behaviour described in that issue is also reintroduced. However this might be outside of ViaRewind; I can reproduce this issue and #511 on a 1.13.2 client as well.

@FlorianMichael
Copy link
Member

I believe this happens in the 1.16->1.15.2 protocol, meaning 1.16+ clients shouldn't have the issue while 1.15.2 and older do, maybe you can confirm/check this?

@calcastor
Copy link
Author

calcastor commented Aug 11, 2024

I believe this happens in the 1.16->1.15.2 protocol, meaning 1.16+ clients shouldn't have the issue while 1.15.2 and older do, maybe you can confirm/check this?

Tested 1.15.2 through to 1.17 and the first version that I don't see the issue with is 1.17.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants