Updated the reminder text for Ailments to include the 3 new Ailments.
Markov patch notes actually spoiled it and everybody thought it was just the algorithm trolling us.
Need the real news of the day Bex. Please stop this teasing. Im about to lose it.
Just a little snack to tide you over until the main meal.
Be honest here Bex, whether it not it happened the idea of slipping one or two actual lines of the patch notes in the Markov post has crossed your mind. :P
That's wicked confusing because poison is the damage and the ailment
Poison is the ailment. Chaos damage is the damage type it deals.
"Burning" is just a shorthand for "fire damage over time".
Yeah this is quite possibly the stupidest thing in the game.
That stat was never meant to be used except in combinating with the move speed one (on Unstoppable). Having both together substantially reduces the confusion.
Then, of course, we decided to put it on an item by itself.
The description of "slows" has been changed in 3.5.0 in a way that hopefully alleviates this confusion.
Then, of course, someone decided to put it on an item by itself.
thats not very professional of you
I'm not intending to call anyone out, more jokingly pointing out that I should have anticipated that an effect that useful would be re-used, despite there being no plans to do so at the time, and pushed for different descriptions from the start to account for that.
I can see how it could be read that way, though, so have edited my post to make my intent clearer.
To be even more fair, the problem with this is all of it is super unintuitive and has exceptions upon exceptions.
- "Ignite" is an "ailment" which makes you "burn" and its burn damage can be increased by investment into damage with ailments.
- But "burning" itself is a "status effect" that is connected to fire damage over time which can be removed with a dousing flask if it's caused by an ignite or Herald of Ash but not if it's a source that applies burn continuously.
- Just about nothing about this tells a new player than several different sources of burn can stack which each other even though you can normally apply only one ignite.
- Does that mean only ignite cannot stack? No, Herald of Ash cannot either, despite it being an igniteless burn, and this isn't mentioned anywhere in the game to my knowledge.
- While on topic of HoA, can anyone explain why the "increased Fire Damage" is global while "more Burning Damage" is not?
- Also, burning ground is ground-based fire damage over time which you can be "unaffected by", but e.g. Malachai's fire circle is a ground-based fire damage over time that is not burning ground.
It's a clusterf**k, plain and simple. I don't even want to imagine how Scorch has any place in it.
You definitely have some good points, and I'm always trying to improve this stuff, so thank you. I've provided some clarificaitons, in the hopes they help.
"Ignite" is an "ailment" which makes you "burn" and its burn damage can be increased by investment into damage with ailments.
All correct.
But "burning" itself is a "status effect" that is connected to fire damage over time which can be removed with a dousing flask if it's caused by an ignite or Herald of Ash but not if it's a source that applies burn continuously.
Burning is not a "status effect". "Status effect" doesn't mean anything in PoE. Burning is also not "connected to" fire damage over time, it is fire damage over time. "Burning" is nothing more, or less, than a shorthand way to say "fire damge over time". All fire damage over time is burning, and nothing else is. Because Ignites deal fire damage over time, they deal burning damage - that's are the same thing, just described in a shorter and more thematic way.
The reason the flask doesn't remove things which are continuously dealing burning damage, such as things dealing burning damage while you're in a specific area, is that they'd be immediately re-applied anyway, so there's no noticable difference in behaviour either way - it's therefore simpler to not go through the process of actually removing them and having them come back. That said, there are a few cases now where it might technically matter (e.g. things that do things when you stop taking damage over time), so it might be worth re-examining that behaviour in future.
Just about nothing about this tells a new player than several different sources of burn can stack which each other even though you can normally apply only one ignite.
Does that mean only ignite cannot stack? No, Herald of Ash cannot either, despite it being an igniteless burn, and this isn't mentioned anywhere in the game to my knowledge.
There's nothing specific to burning or ignites or the Herald here. The standard behaviour for all buffs or debuffs in PoE is that you can only be affected by the strongest of each specific type of buff/debuff (i.e. only the strongest ignite is in effect at any time), but buffs/debuffs of different types don't interact or conflict, even if they do similar things. Exceptions to these rules explciitly state the way they break them (such as being able to apply multiple poisons, which is explained in the poison reminder text). It's true that this rule isn't easy to communicate in-game; part of the point of having a standard set of rules is so not everything has to keep explaining the way it works when it's the same as everything else, and we only need to call out the things which act differently to the standard way. Possibly the help panel needs to go into more details on this?
While on topic of HoA, can anyone explain why the "increased Fire Damage" is global while "more Burning Damage" is not?
I'm not happy with this at all. The skill has to display both the stats granted to you by it's buff, and the stats of the skill (which affect it's damage). There are limitations on this system which make it complicated to be clear with that. There's a refactor planned for the medium-long term to skills granting buffs/debuffs and how their stats display which should improve this, but I've also made some notes to find a workaround for this specific case for as a shorter-term solution.
Also, burning ground is ground-based fire damage over time which you can be "unaffected by", but e.g. Malachai's fire circle is a ground-based fire damage over time that is not burning ground.
Burning Ground, similar to Ignite, is a specific effect, and things that specify it by name only apply to it, not to anything else.
lmao that is a lot better. I almost just went with "????"
For a long time the new cold ailment had the placeholder name "Frostburn" because we were struggling to come up with a good name that fit it. Obviously we needed to change it before release because a cold-based ailment with "burn" in the name would be ridiculous.
[deleted]
Already the name of a different debuff (the curse).
There's a refactor planned for the medium-long term to skills granting buffs/debuffs and how their stats display which should improve this
When you make that refactor/fix, can you resolve arcane surge/innervate ineractions?
Currently arcane surge/innervate enable supported spells to be supported by duration supports (less duration) but not attacks.
Relatedly, Summon Phantasm on Kill Support + Chance to Bleed Support do not work together, but Storm Barrier Support + Summon Phantasm on Kill Support do*, possibly due to the same interaction as with innervate/arcane surge
*Happened to test this with spell totem - flameblast - summon phantasm on kill - storm barrier, and shield charge - chance to bleed - summon phantasm on kill, both with spiritual aid
Currently arcane surge/innervate enable supported spells to be supported by duration supports (less duration) but not attacks.
This is not true. Supports cannot change which skill types they add to skills. They either support a skill or do not, and if they do, they add the types they are set to add. It's not possible for a given gem to add a duration type to spells but not to attacks if it supports both.
Both Innervate and Arcane Surge add the duration type to all skills they support, which allows supports that are restricted only to duration skills to apply. Increased duration doesn't support Frenzy, but starts to when Innervate is also added. This is working correctly.
Relatedly, Summon Phantasm on Kill Support + Chance to Bleed Support do not work together, but Storm Barrier Support + Summon Phantasm on Kill Support do*, possibly due to the same interaction as with innervate/arcane surge
Summon Phantasm on Kill causes the skill to create minions, which makes it incompatible with Chance to Bleed. This is correct behaviour.
Summoned Phantasms do not use any channelled skills, which is the restriction on Storm Barrier (minions that channel), so those don't conflict. Those are very different restrictions, so they work differently.
Thank you for the response; there are a few things I'd like to address.
Burning is not a "status effect".
The reason I treat it that way is because that feels like the most reasonable way to implement it in the game's logic: instead of scanning through a large list of possible sources of fire damage over time that affect the player at the moment the flask only needs to flip one bit, e.g. "is_burning", from 1 to 0, that constitutes the removal of burning, and that, in its turn, propagates to the sources of fire damage over time. Isn't it how it's implemented? Otherwise you'd have to hardcode any new source of fire damage over time into the flask's (or any other possible source of the same effect) mechanism of action so that it didn't forget to remove it.
Out of curiosity, were debuff-less (hence, invisible) DoT effects planned from the beginning? Because nowadays it feels weird that you'd single-out burning ground with its own debuff but not any other source of ground-based fire damage. The fact that you sometimes cannot ascertain the source or the type of damage you are taking is no less concerning because it feels unfair to the player to leave them without a means to make an informed decision to counteract it. I mean, not everyone reads the wiki or poedb.tw, right?
The reason the flask doesn't remove things which are continuously dealing burning damage, such as things dealing burning damage while you're in a specific area, is that they'd be immediately re-applied anyway
Have you considered making it so that burns deal significantly less damage during a Dousing flask's effect? Because as of right now it is pretty useless against e.g. Scorching Ray (very noticeable in PvP!) whereas a flask of Heat gives full protection from continuous sources of chill. Granted, making a powerful effect against a non-lethal mechanic is easier to balance, but the fact that you can't reasonably counteract a continuous burn the way you can counteract some other sources of damage over time (e.g. poison, bleeding/corrupted blood) is somewhat saddening. Or maybe there should be a flask base that specifically protects against damage-over-time effects—something to consider!
The standard behaviour for all buffs or debuffs in PoE is that you can only be affected by the strongest of each specific type of buff/debuff (i.e. only the strongest ignite is in effect at any time), but buffs/debuffs of different types don't interact or conflict, even if they do similar things.
That's exactly the problem. Like you said, a burn is not a debuff. It's just damage over time, so there is no intuitive argument that leads one to reasonably assume the mechanics of their interaction and end up right. So it's not like a burn is overwritten by the strongest burn—it's more like a burn from a particular source is only overwritten by the strongest burn from that particular source of damage. Which then requires understanding of what a source of damage is—and I'm sure you of all people know how many times you've had to explain this even to those who've had plenty of experience with the game.
On a related note, is there any explanation as to why my character is not being ignited on crit in this case? As you can see I wear both an item that converts a portion of incoming damage to fire (the Redblade helmet) and a ring that specifically gives enemies a chance to ignite (Mokou's Embrace). You can see I'm being crit by the Commandment of Light proccing and the occasional shock from the Lightning Coil but not a single burn despite ignites being damage-agnostic (so with both of those items on I should be ignited almost indefinitely). I have no sources of "cannot be ignited" anywhere on my gear; here's the link to the character (the only thing I swapped out since the recording was Mokou's Embrace).
The reason I treat it that way is because that feels like the most reasonable way to implement it in the game's logic: instead of scanning through a large list of possible sources of fire damage over time that affect the player at the moment the flask only needs to flip one bit, e.g. "is_burning", from 1 to 0, that constitutes the removal of burning, and that, in its turn, propagates to the sources of fire damage over time. Isn't it how it's implemented?
I'm not sure I have a great grasp on the way you think this stuff is structured, but I have enough of one to say it's definitely not like this.
Have you considered making it so that burns deal significantly less damage during a Dousing flask's effect? Because as of right now it is pretty useless against e.g. Scorching Ray (very noticeable in PvP!) whereas a flask of Heat gives full protection from continuous sources of chill.
The flask's main purpose is immunity to ignite - all the flasks are meant for ailment protection rather than general protection from debuffs associated with a type. The removal of other burning effects is an extra bonus that was primarily left in because it was decided that it was cool to be able to use it as a means to turn of Righteous Fire. The flask isn't really meant to work against all forms of burning.
That's exactly the problem. Like you said, a burn is not a debuff. It's just damage over time, so there is no intuitive argument that leads one to reasonably assume the mechanics of their interaction and end up right. So it's not like a burn is overwritten by the strongest burn—it's more like a burn from a particular source is only overwritten by the strongest burn from that particular source of damage.
Ignite is a debuff. If multiple ignites are applied, only the strongest one is having it's effect.
Herald of Ash's burning is a debuff. If multiple of that debuff are applied, only the strongest one is having it's effect.
Ignite and Herald of Ash's burning are entirely unrelated debuffs, so having one doesn't affect the other - if both are present, both have their effect.
These are the standard rules of buffs/debuffs, and they work the same way for these, or any other sources of burning damage, as they do for e.g. Grace and Fortify. If you have multiple of the same type, only the strongest of that type does it's thing. If you have both, both do their thing, because they're different buffs.
"burning" is not a type of debuff, it's a type of damage which is dealt (almost) exclusively by individual buffs/debuffs/other timed effects which all follow this same set of rules, just like all the buffs/debuffs/etc that don't apply burning damage.
On a related note, is there any explanation as to why my character is not being ignited on crit in this case
Ignite does not care about the damage you take from the hit, the enemy calculates it's ignite damge and it's hit damage from the same base damage (by applying different modifiers. This results in a Physical damage hit and 0 ignite damage (and thus no ignite), because the enemy has no damage that can ignite. Then your stat takes the physical damage hit and says "I take some of this as fire damage". This is entirely independant of the ignite damage which was already calculated separately.
Shock is different, because non-damaging ailments are calculated based on the damage you take. Damaging ailments are the enemy's damage, and so are calculated from their base damage.
Damaging ailments used to calculate from damage taken, like non-damaging ailments, but this was changed in 3.0.0 to remove double-dipping, which was unintuitive and made them hard to balance. These images I posted at the time explain the way the damage is calculated in more detail, and the series of manifesto threads which it was posted in the comments of explain the reasoning and effect of the change in much greater depth.
These are the standard rules of buffs/debuffs, and they work the same way for these, or any other sources of burning damage, as they do for e.g. Grace and Fortify. If you have multiple of the same type, only the strongest of that type does it's thing. If you have both, both do their thing, because they're different buffs.
"burning" is not a type of debuff, it's a type of damage which is dealt (almost) exclusively by individual buffs/debuffs/other timed effects which all follow this same set of rules, just like all the buffs/debuffs/etc that don't apply burning damage.
So is Scorching Ray an exception then? Is it intentional that its burns stack with each other when e.g. you're running a multi-totem build or a summoner? Because it's known that Searing Bond doesn't stack. What's the difference between the two?
Ignite does not care about the damage you take from the hit, the enemy calculates it's ignite damge and it's hit damage from the same base damage (by applying different modifiers. This results in a Physical damage hit and 0 ignite damage (and thus no ignite), because the enemy has no damage that can ignite. Then your stat takes the physical damage hit and says "I take some of this as fire damage". This is entirely independant of the ignite damage which was already calculated separately.
I see now. I was used to the old system and didn't realize that a source now has to have a base ignite damage. What this basically entails is an indirect buff to damage-taken-as-fire items (because you can't be ignited by a damage-converted hit anymore) and an indirect nerf to Mokou's Embrace because in order to ignite yourself you need to find an enemy that can naturally do so.
So is Scorching Ray an exception then? Is it intentional that its burns stack with each other when e.g. you're running a multi-totem build or a summoner? Because it's known that Searing Bond doesn't stack. What's the difference between the two?
Yes, it's intentional that Scorching Ray deviates from the standard behaviour by having one debuff from each entity channelling the skill take effect, rather than just one overall. This should be explained better on the skill, and I've made a note about that to try to improve it in the future.
With the current description, the fact that it specifies a limit on the total fire res penalty is meant to imply to the user that mutliple beams can therefore apply simultanitously to one enemy, but I agree this should probably be made more explicit.
devtrackers.gg
