The fact that someone has to spend time thinking about that CI interaction…have you guys considered axing pvp so even Slightly more work could be put into pve, or in this case, less thought about pvp means more time for pve?
That was just an example. I was pointing out that the system for assigning damage-over-time kills takes into account immunities. That is not in any way tied to PVP.
The community doesn't agree with this. Ive already quit the league but seeing discharge get a midleague nerf pisses me off, as you havent allowed this skill to shine since strands meta. This is clever use of mechanics. Discharge takes your current charges, and removes charges down to your minimum charges, and deals damage based on the difference between current and minimum. Having negative minimum charges should work this way. Discharges sets you to -x charges to deal damage, but that value cant currently exist, so it sets you to 0 instead. Instead of totally patching this out, why don't you allow players to have negative/inverted charges, that debuff the player, but allow interactions like this to exist, instead of just killing things like this, embrace them.
I have no idea why me saying "I don't know when this will go live" is being intrpreted to mean "this will definitely go live before the next league", but that's not what I said. I was directly asked if this bug was intented, which is isn't, and responded to that. My job is to fix the bug, not chose when the fix is deployed.
I'd be 100% down with introducing negative charges as an actual mechanic, but that would mean actually following through with the concept, so e.g. the player's per-charge bonuses should also go negative if their current number of charges is negative. That wouldn't change the fact that Discharge specifically says it counts charges removed, so until it can actually remove charges below zero, getting bonuses as though it did so is clearly wrong.
That being said I know for a fact that there are some exceptions. Vall Lightning Strike will snap shot any damage buffs from the moment it is cast.
No, it won't
if that debuff is the one that kills them.
How is it determined which debuff kills them if they have multiple debuffs active at once?
The oldest one?
Generally yes, excepting any that can be eliminated as not being able to contribute (such as poison against a CI character)
What if i swap between repeats of the same cast, will it inflict brittle and chill over the single ice nova cast?
Is that intended, hence the “Altenating” part of the item’s name?
What if i swap between repeats of the same cast, will it inflict brittle and chill over the single ice nova cast?
Yes.
Is that intended, hence the “Altenating” part of the item’s name?
It's not specifically intended, just a natural consequence of how things work.
If i cast Ice Nova on Frostbolt with Alternating Sceptre equipped, then weapon swap quickly
Does the Ice Nova inflict Chill or Brittle?
Chill, if you swapped before the nova reached a specific target. Non-damaging ailments aren't determined until a hit is applied.
Skills generally do still snapshot their damage throughout all of their hits that aren't considered separate casts, which is why exerts even function. The fuzzy rule is that if the crit roll would apply to all hits then any applicable stats would too
That is not true.
/u/Mark_GGG is this intended?
No, this is a bug, and one I fixed last week. I don't know when the fix will be put live, but discharge is fundamentally supposed to scale from the charges you remove, not ones you never had.
Read moreOk so this is complicated.
I'm absolutely not sure how this interaction works with general DoT kills, but in particular socketing the IIR gem into Arakaali's Fang will transfer the IIR bonus to the debuff that the Spiders apply and the IIR will apply if this debuff is what kills. This was a comment made by /u/Mark_GGG a few days ago. Intuitively, one would assume that the IIR bonus would only apply if the Spiders kill, but most of the time Spiders don't directly kill but instead kill with poison, and DoT kills are player kills in terms of attribution.
Now, I cannot tell you if including IIR into the link of a hit-skill that then applies a DoT will apply the IIR to the DoT if the DoT kills for a player situation, but this is a pretty recent comment confirming that, at least for one specific DoT interact...
I cannot tell you if including IIR into the link of a hit-skill that then applies a DoT will apply the IIR to the DoT if the DoT kills
I can and it will. All DoT applied by skills have this behaviour, and have for a very long time.
Do other damage over time effects do the same (ignite/poison/death aura/etc)?
Yes, damage-over-time effects from skills all do this
Resetting your life to a higher previous value with Temporal Rift is technically recovery internally, but is allowed to bypass things that prevent recovery
This doesn't seem to be the case.. Executioner debuff also does not allow Temporal rift recovery above 50%
Interesting, it does appear that bypass isn't in place for one of the life-modifying functions (but is for the others, and for things other than life from what I can see). I'll bring this up, I suspect this is an oversight due to life using an override of the general modification function which does have that bypass.
Blasphemy is not a Hex Curse, no; it's a gem that interacts with Hex Curses.
Same with Bane.
The tags on both are accurate.
This is correct. The "curse" gem tag is intentionally only for skills that inflict curses, not for gems related to curses in some way. The "Hex" and "Mark" tags are used on gems that have primary interactions with those mechanics without actually being curses.
This was caused by some specific debuffs having been set up with stats that only prevented some forms of recovery rather than the ones that prevent all recovery, which was always the intent for those debuffs.
Too curious not to ask: why did these debuffs correctly prevent LGOH granted by the passive tree, but not LGOH from claw implicits? That seemed especially strange behaviour.
The old incorrect stat that was previously used basically sets a bunch of calculated stats on the player to zero - one of those was total life gain on hit. But the claw implicits are local, so don't feed into a single stat for the character, but add to that separately based on which hand you hit with. So while the character's global total was zeroed out, the local ones still got added to that if you hit with the correct hand. Similarly, some life-gain-on-hit modifiers which are conditional on something about the enemy likewise are processed outside the character's global total stat and also weren't prevented.
The actual correct stat doesn't do anything with those calculations, but instead is checked when changing the character's life, if that change is gaining as opposed to losing.
I think people are so used to PoE's extremely specific wording that we just kinda assume the text string itself is important, especially since that's how PoB recognizes modifiers.
We do put a lot of effort into trying to keep the wording consistent so people can make predictions - which is why when one of the designers noticed this one using "replenish" when nothing else did, we changed it (I'm pretty sure that string was old and was written the way it was to avoid the "equal to" phrasing, which is admittedly little awkward).
But the text describes the mechanics, it doesn't cause them - changing the text can't change the function of what the stat does*.
And if we ever do introduce "replenish" as a specific mechanic in PoE, then if it makes life/mana/es value go upwards, then it fundamentally will be a type of recovery, not something separate from it.
*except that one time with the cats, that was weird
Updated the description on Aegis Aurora's Energy Shield recovery to "Recover Energy Shield", previously "Replenishes Energy Shield". This is not a functional change.
You sure about that? Aegis was working when you stand on Sirus' degen ground. And that degen ground disables "recovery", thus "replenish" still works
You sure about that?
Yes.
This is literally changing the text string displayed for a specific stat to bring it into line with all the others. It fundamentally can't cause a functional change.
And beyond that, "Recovery" in PoE refers to anything that makes the current value of life/mana/es/etc go upwards, the term fundamentally isn't limited to specific mechanics. "Recovery" is the catchall term for all* positive changes to the values of those resources.
The bug you're referring to was fixed in the initial 3.19 patch, and was listed in the ...
Read more" Horvath wrote: what about flame wall? It doesn't follow either of those rules when triggered by CWDT or by trigger socketed spells when focused craft, whether or not enemies are nearby. Flame wall seems to picks a random direction, and also a fixed distance from you.
" TwentyFiveEX wrote: Does this mean Cast on Crit skills trigger where the hit that caused a crit landedCast on Crit will attempt to target the object you crit - a location-only targeting skill like Storm Call would target that thing's location. If that's an invalid target then it will look for valid targets around that thing.
" taggedjc wrote: Is there a reason that Storm Call always targets yourself when triggered by CWDT, while Firestorm targets a nearby enemy?
devtrackers.gg