From Wowpedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Hmm. Always thought it had to do with "procure". You know, produce? Generate? Cause to exist? Cause an effect? See where I'm going with this? --Falos 05:09, 9 January 2007 (EST)

^ Agreed. That's what I always heard. --Iamdeadfish 14:05, 4 April 2007 (EDT)

I'm confused. The first paragraph states that the meaning of proc is unknown, while the next definately states that it's Programmed Random OCcurence. Xavius, the Satyr Lord (talk) 15:29, 24 May 2008 (UTC)


No mention of Paladin procs? I'm shocked. 14:24, 29 September 2006 (EDT)

"Generally accepted"?

References all through the article that it is "generally accepted to be short for Programmed Random OCcurrence" really bug me. Who generally accepted that? No, it is not a common term used in programming. Programming for more than ten years, including experience in some gaming and MUD programming I was pretty amused to be told on this page about "common knowledge" I've never heard about. Quick search on Google turns this explanation ONLY in WoW-related forum disscussions, not even on other MMOs, not to mention any programming forums or documents! There's a discussion at that mentions a letter from <a href="">Raphael Koster</a> who confirms that it came from SPEC_PROC. Considering that he done his share of work in MMO developing world, I take his words as truth.

Since there's no proof behind other variations except for forum threads where players just retell the same explanations they've heard from other players, I will rewrite text to make SPEC_PROC a main explanation for "proc" and move everything else to some kind of "assumptions" section. --Rowaasr13 (talk) 21:02, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Update: I've asked around and looked, and I can find no reference to this ludicrous "Programmed Random OCcurrence" claim, especially given that the term is consistently used for events which happen 100% of the time. Thorns procs. Every time you are hit. It is not random. That was the dumbest attempt at an etymology I've read in years, and I actually fixed up my account here just to make the stupidity stop burning my eyes. (seebs)

Yeah, I've got no idea what the etymology is either. Process? Procedure? It sounds more like it's short for something than an acronym. -- DarkTZeratul (talk) 00:56, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

The spec_proc etymology is plausible and substantiated. It fits idiomatic programmer usage, and isn't obviously made up after the fact. I favored it in my edits. The stuff about randomness was ridiculous. "spec_proc" (short for procedure) makes sense and fits other usage. (seebs)

Yeah, let's go with that, for all the reasons you stated. Now if only someone could offer an etymological explanation for "toon" that makes as much sense... -- DarkTZeratul (talk) 07:32, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

The articles still claims that it's short for Programmed Random OCcurence, which is in direct contradiction to the PPM article, and without any kind of source given. - Alltat (talk) 13:21, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

No idea why nobody ever actually edited the article to reflect these comments, this is a wiki after all, but oh well. I did it. - Sancus (talk) 02:30, January 23, 2010 (UTC)

Soon removing "Guaranteed on critical melee hit"

I'm going to remove the proc example "Guaranteed on critical melee hit" soon unless someone can cite and item that has this effect. I could not find one. --Gengar orange 22x22.png Fandyllic (talk · contr) 2:44 PM PST 17 Mar 2009

I don't know any items with this kind of ability, but there are several talents, including [Demonic Pact], that are guaranteed on crits. This specific example is on pet crits, but 5/5 [Hunting Party] in the Hunter's Survival tree is also 100% -- Crackrat (talk) 12:54 AM CST 12 APR 2009

More In-depth Article

It seems to me that this article is 1) too melee-oriented and 2) is much too general, lacking information regarding many mechanics related to the proc. I would like to construct an article (or perhaps build on this one) which is slightly more in-depth, focusing on the various mechanics involved in procs, such as internal cooldowns which are not even mentioned within this article. Additionally, seeing as how many items these days are proc-based, or at least possess a proc component, I believe it would be helpful for players to be able to calculate proc-effectiveness for itemization purposes. Depending on class, procs can be major factors when determining optimal rotation; with the inclusion of formulaic equations, theorycraft-based players would be able to accurately determine how the implementation of a proc could influence their rotation negatively or positively. Abductkill (talk) 15:48, May 30, 2010 (UTC)