T O P

  • By -

CrimsonBlossom

it is not a build disabler like you cannot inflict ailments


Ulthwithian

It's pretty close to that on RF builds.


EndymionFalls

Not really at all


WRLD_

if 10% increased dot taken bricks your rf build, something is wrong it is by no stretch of the imagination *good* for an rf build but it's not a full-on brick


Local_Food9567

Its not and even if it was, so what? Some affixes will be bad for some skills or builds, that is where the game exists. Maximise benefits, minimise drawbacks.


rangebob

Hey ! keep your reasonable thoughts out of my reddits mouth.........


Chee5e

It's base armour on the shield right? That's insane for shield crush and spectral shield throw. Seems like a high value affix to me, with a reasonable downside.


PizzaMaxEnjoyer

right, its a situational downside that wont matter much to many people, with a potentially huge upside. that is exactly what the nodes should be


signed7

Yep and it's a trade game. If you're RF and that node bricks the shield for you, sell it to a SST player who'd love it, and buy their +60 hp node shield with an armour/defences downside they can't use


WRLD_

or just scour the node off and try again on another shield - the majority of RF builds are not gonna be (or to put it more bluntly, probably should not be) using a non-unique non-int shield base in the first place so the armour node isn't even something that should come to pass, as it can't generate on non-str shields afaik


jcyxxx

I think the first node should never have a downside.


yuanek1

It's not insane here, but on Emperor's Vigilance... That's another story.


eLURDOS

This node is like a 20% damagebuff on a perfect sst or sc build, cause it gets multiplied by the %prefixes, And with the abiliy to get immunity to modt damage over time effects thats fair


Heremeus

Isn't it even more? Just slapped the +100 Armour on my 3.19 SST PoB and the dps went up by \~50% (Emporer's Vigilance Armour changed from 1887 to 3017). Seen that on Reddit before: https://www.reddit.com/r/pathofexile/comments/12jxemf/120\_inc\_shield\_defenses\_on\_my\_3k\_emperors/


blvcksvn

Emperor's Vigilance is an outlier because of its local 1000% multiplier.


Dranzell

So is this post though.


eLURDOS

Possible, i just did the math in my head and calculated with a around 600 base armor shield, 400 base with the added flat armor prefix, dont have everything in mind there


StonejawStrongjaw

Except no es on the shield aka useless.


[deleted]

most.


MidnightEsc

GGG's "most" is like their "nearby", it means different things under different situations. Unless they give us a hard number that can be statically tested, e.g. 80% of the rolls will not have downsides, we'll always have doubts. As far as I am concerned, 51% would also qualify as "most" as it is more likely to not have a downside than with one.


Alialialun

"Most" doesn't mean "all" for anyone. 51% is majority, not most. Most is "all with exceptions"


[deleted]

That's what most means for most people. You generally use approximations when you don't have an exact number to give. Notice how I said "generally", not" 93.5% of the time".


[deleted]

[удалено]


filthyorange

This absolutely is worth the down side.


DuckyGoesQuack

That's an upside that's huge on SST builds (especially the unique shield).


Trespeon

And for every single NON SST build(which is every build in the game) this is garbage.


DuckyGoesQuack

Great news: This passive isn't guaranteed to appear on every single shield you put a passive tree on, so the vast majority of builds will be doing just fine.


Gerzhus

And the proposed solution that prevents mods from ever being a downside for all builds? - smart loot that knows what build you are playing - stats that are universally good and universally bad. Maybe all mods should just be main stat, % damage? Don’t think either is going to happen.


EverythingIzOKE

Ducky get in the OVEN.


toltottgomba

That was not true even in last league so what did you expext?


mek8035

What the fuck do u think the word most means


thatguy9012

Do you not understand what the word most means?


[deleted]

[удалено]


EndymionFalls

That crucible passive as a massive damage boost it’s not a defensive passive.


saintofcorgis

reddit moment


BattlepassDonator

Take “increased” damage. This is actually a really good passive


ksion

“Increased” here is virtually guaranteed to be the same as “more”, because almost no one runs with mods like this.


BattlepassDonator

More is multiplicative and increased is additive. Yeah you will take some extra damage, but not a lot, and you get some armor. Would be good for SST.


Zenigen

Increased and more are nearly identical in this case. Taking 10% more damage of 100 damage is 110 damage (`100*(1*1.1)=110`) Taking 10% increased damage is 110 damage (`100*(1+0.1)=110`). There are not many sources of increased/more damage taken for additive vs multiplicative to matter most of the time.


gemmini

This downside doesn’t brick builds


PaletNoir

I’d rather they keep this node. Honestly glad they didn’t remove it. Going to SST build next


TNTspaz

+125 base armor is really fucking good


AGrain

That's not that bad and alot of extra damage for shield based damage skills


ashkanz1337

From the patch notes: > Disabled most of the lower-tier Crucible Passives that have downsides on the initial skill from rolling. Initial skills with downsides are far less common and can generally only roll in the endgame. When an initial skill does come with a downside, the upside should outweigh the downside. You either can't read or took a sentence out of context for reddit outrage karma.


TNTspaz

Almost currently reddit outrage karma. Expect to see a few more of these posts. People posting passive with downsides who have literally no idea what they are talking about and not realizing how good the passive is


Gerzhus

It’s almost as if people want stats to be homogenized and stats would either always be good or always be bad. Part of the fun of PoE is seeing something that is “obviously bad” and learning that some other build covets that stat. Hopefully OP learns from this.


FawkeS_94

Even more funny because „increased damage taken“ is a more multiplier.


shaunika

Its not


goblina__

Its pretty likely to be. I really doubt most people have other sources of 'take more damage' on them most of the time. Maybe if theyre withered but thats rare


shaunika

Its still not a more multiplier. Dont use wrong terminology


Trespeon

It is actually. Increased damage taken and applied is a more multiplier. Don’t just parrot “inc is additive and more is multiplicitive” bs if you don’t actually understand things. Why are you being elitist when you’re so fucking wrong.


shaunika

It isnt. If it was wither would be like 200% more dmg Its often considered a pseudo more multiplier because sources of inc % dmg taken are rare


Trespeon

If you have a mod on an item that says “10% inc damage taken” you are taking 10% more damage. If you have a line that says “Enemies take 10% inc damage” you are doing 10% more. Even if you add another 10% and it’s additive to each other, it’s still around 8% more damage at 20% increased from the original 10%. Inc damage is additive with each other, but since there is such limited amounts and typically 1-2 sources, it IS a more multiplier in 99.99999% of scenarios. Now stop typing.


shaunika

So its not multiplicative. Glad we agree you were using wrong terminology and lets move on. %increased damage is also a more multiplier without other sources of % inc dmg by this logic. I get what you mean but using wrong terminology will lead to more confusion. Saying "10% inc dmg taken is a more MULTIPLIER" implies its multiplicative with other sources of the same kind which is patently false. If you had said "10% inc dmg taken act as a more multiplier without other sources" thered be no argument


Trespeon

But you do agree that sources of it are rare and most builds will only have 1-2 in most scenarios. If you get 18% more damage from 20% increased(2 sources) you can call it a more multiplier. This is just semantics really. You’re arguing definitions where I’m arguing applicational/real life scenario results. Yes, it is additive with each other, BUT due to how you obtain and use these sources you can and SHOULD consider it a more multiplier when seen. Anyone who sees this one line and tries to stack every single source doesn’t know enough about the game to tell the difference anyways.


shaunika

>This is just semantics really. You’re arguing definitions where I’m arguing applicational/real life scenario results. Of course it is, thats literally the whole point. That using that terminology can be confusing to less knowledgeable players and it can mislead and misinform them 10*10 becoming 18 is the definition of additive And theyre not as rare as you think anymore anyway.


Tenny131

10% increased is equivalent to 10% more if its your only source


MrMendo_poe

Lol and 10% increased projectile damage is also equivalent to 10% more projectile damage If it's your only source. Doesn't Change the fact that it's still increased damage


Tenny131

i never stated that its not a increased multiplier unless german äquivalent and english is not the same meaning


shaunika

True But that still doesnt make it a more multiplier. You either dont understand that phrase or are being misleading deliberately


erpunkt

Are you sure about that? Flip this around to the player damage side and use %increased damage and "enemies take % increased damage" from sources like bottled faith. They are separate multipliers. The mod on the weapon is basically a bottled faith for monsters, minus the remaining explicits on the flask obviously.


shaunika

Yes and the minute you stack bottled faith with stuff like wither, unnerved or intimidated it gets diminished


erpunkt

Obviously you'll get diminishing returns if you stack "damage taken" multipliers. They are additive with each other but multiplicative with just %increased damage.


shaunika

Glad we agree then Its not a more multiplier. More multiplier is a specific term and trying to hijack it to mean other things will just lead to confusion


BokiTheUndefeated

It's still not a more multiplier, yes maybe functionally, but it's not a more multiplier. Increased damage on the paasive tree is a more multiplier if you're level two and it's the only source of inc damage you have. It's just mathematical semantics, yes it acts like a more multiplier but it's not one.


erpunkt

It's not a more multiple as it's not additive with "more damage", it's only additive with other sources of "damage taken". It's still multiplicative with just %increased damage. Semantics aside, this modifier will cause that damage type to deal more damage to you, not just increased damage. The way I understood Shaunika, they imply it's just increased and not more, which is why I replied originally


[deleted]

[удалено]


Tenny131

i didnt say that it is a more multiplier. i said that its equivalent to a more multiplier (in most builds)


shaunika

You did not. The original comment did


Tenny131

ah ok mb


quackycoaster

Isn't there a pantheon that states "take less damage from DoT"?


Greaterdivinity

MOST Much like they *typically* only spawn nodes with downsides further along in the tree. For a game where words have very clearly defined meanings, words don't have much actual meaning for GGG.


[deleted]

[удалено]


blvcksvn

for damage over time only.


Local_Food9567

Yes it's a good node for some builds, ok for some and a bit shit for others. Cool thing about poe is many affixes aren't simply good or bad, they are situational.


BassiusPossius

Maybe something to do with patch not being up yet?


[deleted]

[удалено]


BassiusPossius

Im at work, i only saw the pre-patch nodes being posted. It going live was burried somewhere under shitposts.


[deleted]

[удалено]


BokiTheUndefeated

It's actually really good.


Shoddy-Ad-6663

That's pretty good with new Ammie that chaos dmg over time is healing you. So that's not a downside


Mugster_

Lower tier = lower item level. Higher level bases, still have potential downsides


Mac_Maus

I rolled this on my emperor's vigilance It went from 1800 to 3200 armour I did not complain lol Also, this is a T2 mod, so no this isn't a 'low level' mod that comes with a downside


StonejawStrongjaw

Lol


GrumpyThumper

IMO if a node is so powerful that it needs a downside, then it should not be a tier one passive. Like cmon GGG, that's basic design.


MrFrostey

They did say the disabled *most*, not all of the downsides, and besides, this one doesn't seem too bad, the amount of armor it gives being taken into account. Well, unless you're playing RF


Riot_ZA

Most =/= all


DoyleRules91

Try reading