Does this mean Quicksilvers become an "aura" or "buff" for allies/yourself? Is it affected by aura effect or things that affect buffs?
No.
This is basically the same mechanic as Umbilicus Immortalis - when you use a quicksilver flask, that flask's effect is applied to nearby allies (as well as to you, since this item doesn't prevent flasks applying to you). The effect on each of them will continue to apply until it expires, they don't have to stay close to you.
Along this line of thought: based on this order of operation, "% Physical Damage Taken as [type]" wouldn't have synergy with Transcendance though, right? Because we don't start taking damage (and thus having conversion) until after Armour mitigation is calculated?
Modifiers which allow you to take damage of one type as a different type instead apply pre-mitigation. They wouldn't really do much otherwise.
Those aren't a modifier to damage taken, they're changing the process of how you take damage, which includes mitigating it in all forms.
Ah, I forgot to remove that part about reduced damage taken applying additively in my flurry of edits.
Quick question then. The reworked Unbreakable + Transcendence. Would you get only 8%, 100%, or more 108% of armour applied to elemental damage?
100%. Trancendence just has the boolean property that armour applies to that damage, saying that 8% of armour applies is effectively redundant - that 8% was already applying, as was the rest of it.
That just not true. According to the Q&A, Damage reduction from Armour is calculated
after other forms of damage reduction,after elemental resistances, based off the remaining hit.Edit: More info.
Slight correction. Armour is not calculated before other forms of damage reduction. Reduced and Less damage taken modifiers are applied "after" armour's damage reduction is calculated. Sources of "additional Physical Damage Reduction" are added to the effect of armour's phyiscal damage reduction.
Additional sources of "reduced -x- damage taken" are applied additively to the effect of Armour.
Hopefully by now, I have all of the wording correct.
Additional sources of "reduced -x- damage taken" are applied additively to the effect of Armour.
Not quite - you are confusing "[type] Damage Reduction" with "reduced [type] Damage taken" (which you had already correctly stated applies after armour, as a modifier to damage taken).
Armour applies "Damage Reduction" to the damage types it mitigates - usually this is physical, so "Physical Damage Reduction" Other sources of additional "Physical Damage Reduction" are additive with the Physical Damage Reduction calculated from armour. I don't believe there are currently any modifiers granting "additional [type] Damage Reduction" for types other than physical, but they would add to any damage reduction to that type provided by armour (if any - or add to 0 if armour doesn't apply to that type). Armour doesn't mitigate damage over time, but "Damage Reduction" does, so sources of additional Physical Damage Reduction mitigate physical damage over t...
Read moreCan you block (Glancing Blows) then Suppress the remaining damage or they are exclusive?
You cannot, but not because they're exclusive, because suppression happens fist.
Damage is suppressed, then stun is calculated, then the remaining damage can be blocked (fully, or partially with something like Glancing Blows)
on the size of the initial hit
Which spell suppression does not affect.
initial_hit = 100 mitigated_hit = initial_hit * defense_a * defense_b * defense_c... defense_a = 0.5, spell supression defense_b = that_silly_armor_function(initial_hit)Note that armor uses the initial_hit, not the mitigated_hit.
Note that armor uses the initial_hit, not the mitigated_hit.
This is not true and never has been. Any other form of mitigation, such as resistances, that's applied before armour will change how armour interacts with that damage. It does not use the "initial" or unmitigated damage for calculating physical damage reduction.
Often nothing else will mitigate physical damage before armour, so this makes no difference, but it absolutely does not look at some "initial" value that can be different from the value with previous mitigation factored in.
Suppressing damage, however, happens after armour because it's a modifier to damage taken.
Never. For every toucan posted, I'll delay it 10 minutes.
░░░░░░░░▄▄▄▀▀▀▄▄███▄░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░
░░░░░▄▀▀░░░░░░░▐░▀██▌░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░
░░░▄▀░░░░▄▄███░▌▀▀░▀█░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░
░░▄█░░▄▀▀▒▒▒▒▒▄▐░░░░█▌░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░
░▐█▀▄▀▄▄▄▄▀▀▀▀▌░░░░░▐█▄░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░
░▌▄▄▀▀░░░░░░░░▌░░░░▄███████▄░░░░░░░░░░
░░░░░░░░░░░░░▐░░░░▐███████████▄░░░░░░░
░░░░░le░░░░░░░▐░░░░▐█████████████▄░░░░
░░░░toucan░░░░░░▀▄░░░▐██████████████▄░
░░░░░░has░░░░░░░░▀▄▄████████████████▄░
░░░░░arrived░░░░░░░░░░░░█▀██████░░░░░░
Does Life Leech actually work with CI? Your maximum recovery per life leech instance is 20% of 1 = 0.2, wouldn't that just be rounded down to zero?
Paging u/sergeantminor, do you know if Strength of Blood will actually give him 24% dmg reduction with CI + Vaal Pact, or no?
You are correct - with CI, your maximum life is 1, so unless you raise your maximum recovery per life leech a lot, it will be lower than one and round to zero.
Did those stats actually apply to the user all the time- or perhaps only when the flask was active- or not at all?
The stats started applying when you equipped that flask, and were removed when you removed any flask (because items being equiped and granting stats is fundamentally is built around single-item slots).
Any change to an item technically removes and replaces it (this has since changed, so that changing only the number of charges a flask has doesn't require an internal remove/replace), so this was inconsistent, and you'd gain and lose the stats based on which flasks you used.
Repeated skills I don't think ever contribute towards things like Ruthless.
Think of it this way: you are not attacking 3 times. You are attacking once, with 2 copies.
With Multistrike, your 3 attacks would hit 9 times. Ruthless would be applied to the 7th, 8th, and 9th hit.
See: https://www.poewiki.net/wiki/Ruthless_Support
Relevant:
When supported by Multistrike Support, Ruthless blows work differently, instead of occurring every third hit, it occurs every third multistrike.
Think of it this way: you are not attacking 3 times. You are attacking once, with 2 copies.
With Multistrike, your 3 attacks would hit 9 times. Ruthless would be applied to the 7th, 8th, and 9th hit.
This is pretty much correct.
When supported by Multistrike Support, Ruthless blows work differently, instead of occurring every third hit, it occurs every third multistrike.
This quoted part is technically incorrect, in that nothing about how Ruthless Blows work is actually different with Multistrike to without. They are simply completely different effects which care about fundamentally different things - and neither of them care about a number of hits.
Ruthless explicitly tracks how many times you use the skill. When you push the button (or leave it held when finishing the previous skill use) and pay the cost of the skill to start doing it,...
Read moreand stating it explicitly would make Herald of Ash awkward to read in a way that could add to confusion
As suggested in this very post, "your overkill damage" instead of "the overkill damage" would make it clear on a careful reading and add zero confusion.
Y'all have a bad habit of declaring "impossible to word" when there are available wordings there with a little thought.
(It's actually part of a larger trend where y'all claim that it's impossible to make interface changes that make things clearer despite many, many player-provided examples on this sub showing the opposite. Hire a UX person for the love of god, please.)
As suggested in this very post, "your overkill damage" instead of "the overkill damage" would make it clear on a careful reading and add zero confusion.
That would absolutely add confusion for some players.
"While you have this buff, if you kill an enemy, other enemies near them will be burned based on your overkill damage."
"your" is really awkward there, and makes the "your overkill damage" part sound like some keyword phrase which is a property of the player character rather than part of the killing event. It feels weird to specify the overkill damage is "yours" there, and not entirely intuitive that overkill damage conceptualy is "yours" when it's fundamentally defined more by the enemy it's happening to than you being what dealt it.
That doesn't mean the current wording is perfect or no improvements are possible, but they have to be carefully considered, and the text is serving it's...
Read moreHerald of Ash requires you deal a killing blow, not just kill. This isn't stated explicitly because it's implicit in the fact that it requires overkill damage, which is only possible from a killing blow, and stating it explicitly would make Herald of Ash awkward to read in a way that could add to confusion. This might get re-examined at some point, but care would have to be taken not to sacrifice clarity for new players reading Herald of Ash and trying to understand just that skill, to aid clarity around a specific very niche interaction with a unique item most players will never see.
Hey Mark can boneshatter self damage crit if you are wearing a legacy reckless defense which has the line +x % additional Chance to receive a Critical Strike
No, it would need to force a crit, not rely on the chance - the crit roll for that damage is zero.
This actually means it will always crit in this case, which is not intended, and it will be changed to make a crit roll such that it can interact with stuff adding a crit chance in an intuitive and sensible way in future.
Whatever method you use to collect the data is flawed then -- I think perhaps some people are giving you fabricated data and just copy/pasting from previous notes that they used or something. Are you incentivizing this data collection somehow? Because it's not accurate and the jewels do in fact change from league to league... as stated by GGG themselves (yes, this information comes directly from the devs so it's NOT up for debate).
You have definitely misunderstood something, as what you are claiming is incorrect.
The system by which the modifications to the tree are determined by the seed has intentionally not been changed since it was introduced, so that the items can continue to function the same way. The Historic jewels actually even have an internal "version" value which was included so that if we ever needed to make such changes, we could have them only apply to new gems and distinguish them in some way by describing the version stat, but we haven't had to actually use that so far.
As noted above, changes to the tree do change the results (and some potential changes to the tree might not be obvious or visible to players, but those would be rare), because the passive skills themselves are inherently one of the inputs. But outside of that, the results of a historic jewel don't change unless it's seed does.
In fact there's a minor bug in the code for making those modifications which...
Read morewhich might actually be true. But it does not say, whether the debuff is assigned a hit.
Maybe /u/Mark_GGG can answer this: Is the explosion caused by the fuse debuff of exploding arrow counted as a hit by the player (i.e., do on hit effects like raiders generic "frenzy charge on hit" trigger?) or a hit by the debuff? If the answer is "player", is this because a debuff is not an entity that can be assigned a hit?
Maybe /u/Mark_GGG can answer this: Is the explosion caused by the fuse debuff of exploding arrow counted as a hit by the player
Yes
If the answer is "player", is this because a debuff is not an entity that can be assigned a hit?
Not really - a debuff is fundamentally not a game object and can't hit things, but even if it could that wouldn't be what's happening here. The damage is directly caused by your skill which you used.
Correct, with the exception of conversion from active skill gems, which applies first.
If you had a gem that does 50% lightning built in, alongside having 100% cold and 100% fire, your total damage would be 50 lightning, 25 fire, 25 cold. If the gem has 100% lightning innately, you'd do 100 lightning, 0 fire, 0 cold.
Conversion from skills has priority - this includes both skill and support gems. Otherwise this is correct.
The only distinction is between conversion from the skill vs conversion that's from the player/monster who's skill it is.
Read moreI find your take on shroudwalker really informative, and I appreciate the design and similarly think it’s cool. For how echoist interacts with movement skills, however, I personally think that’s just bad programming.
From an “in-universe” perspective, the echoist mod lets spells and skills be cast twice in quick succession, and for a movement skill that would make the most sense if you would just dash twice, covering twice as much distance. This would keep the spirit of the mod and still force the player to be careful given the change in movement distance, but wouldn’t completely brick certain movement skills. It’d both feel awesome to dash twice the distance and also still make the player keep the mod in mind. In contrast, trying to dash and simply dashing back to your original position both doesn’t make sense from a mechanical point of view (the player didn’t aim their mouse back at their original position) nor from an in-universe point of view. Therefore, I still feel l...
In contrast, trying to dash and simply dashing back to your original position both doesn’t make sense from a mechanical point of view
What's actually happening in these is the target location didn't change, and it was close enough that you've moved past it, so targeting the same location with the repeat causes you to go backwards. However, while it's not how skills actually work, I think there is merit to trying to treat this as though targeting a direction rather than a location, and maintaining that - I've raised this with a designer for further consideration in future.
devtrackers.gg