Enduring Flasks do not queue.
Maybe if we're lucky u/Mark_GGG will be willing to help us out. My impression was that Spellslinger just added the final damage of your wand to the spell as a flat number (in this case the 74-181 on Obliteration), not the mods themselves.
If you look at a wand (or any weapon) item, in the base properties section above the mods and requirements, it will show that weapon's damage values. If you equip that weapon, those values are your base attack damage (for that hand). Those numbers are what Spellslinger cares about. Local modifiers can affect those numbers (making the physical damage display in blue if modified, and adding values for other damage types).
For clarification, is it always true that any hit whose base damage is not a damage number listed on the gem, or a damage number listed on your weapon, secondary damage? Or is that just a rule of thumb?
(Shield Charge and Spectral Shield Throw immediately come to mind as semi-exceptions, but they override "off-hand damage" which then presumably counts as attack damage.)
Are Attack and Spell damage always mutually exclusive, when looking at different components of a single skill? Is there any skill that deals both?
For clarification, is it always true that any hit whose base damage is not a damage number listed on the gem, or a damage number listed on your weapon, secondary damage? Or is that just a rule of thumb?
(Shield Charge and Spectral Shield Throw immediately come to mind as semi-exceptions, but they override "off-hand damage" which then presumably counts as attack damage.)
I should probably have worded that in terms of Main/Off hand damage - you are correct that the shield skills deal attack damage.
Outside that case, I believe this is currently true, but not necessarily a rule. A skill could have an amount of base secondary damage on it's gem to use for secondary damage hits, in theory. Explosive Arrow's explosion before it was reworked used to be secondary damage that had an amount per arrow on the gem.
It seems unlikely we'd do that for a spell (it would seem to serve no purpose), but the base value being on the gem is something that is (at least mostly) true of spell damage, b...
Read moreAll attack skills deal attack damage, but some of them will also deal non-attack damage.
There are four kinds of damage in PoE:
- Spell Damage (dealt by spells, base damage comes from gem)
- Attack Damage (dealt by attacks, base damage comes from weapon/unarmed)
- Secondary Damage (hit damage which isn't either of the other two, stuff like corpse explosions are generally secondary damage)
- Damage Over Time
They have no overlap, no damage is more than one of those things.
So Prodigious Defence applies to attack damage specifically, which is damage from hits that is based on your weapon.
Advance Guard applies to any damage dealt with an attack skill, even if that damage isn't attack damage - it could be secondary damage (the corpse explosion on infernal blow, which is based on the enemy's life, not your weapon), or damage over time (such as if the attack ignites an enemy). Both of those would be examples of damage that isn't attack damage but is dealt by an attack skill.
Similarly, not...
Read moreAttack damage is any source of attacking including default attack, attack skills are skills like dual strike, heavy strike, etc
Default Attack is an attack skill.
The default attack actually is a skill.
In this case, Advance Guard will buff damage over time caused by attack skills, whereas Prodigious Defence will not.
I can't think of any cases where Prodigious Defence is better than Advance Guard, since I can't think of any ways to deal attack damage besides through the use of an attack skill. Or is there something that allows attack damage to apply to something that isn't an attack? Hmm.
Or is there something that allows attack damage to apply to something that isn't an attack? Hmm.
There is not (and for technical reasons quite probably never will be). Stuff like making spell damage modifiers apply to attacks is straightforward, going the other way is not, in general.
The mine throwing time is not a nerf, it's just how throwing additional mines has worked since 3.8.0. All sources of additional mines in the game should already have that reminder text (which did get missed and added late, but has been in for at least a little while).
animate weapon with archmage support? the announcement specified "can be used with any spell that deals damage with hits and has a mana cost". AW is a spell, costs mana and hits so to me it works, likely the support will have "cannot support minions" though... just really hopeful. got excited by that idea
AW is a spell, costs mana and hits
Animate Weapon is a spell and costs mana. It does not hit. It creates a minion, which has an attack skill. The minion will hit things with its attack skill, but that skill is not Animate Weapon.
So... please correct me if I'm wrong, but does that mean that "Quick and Deadly" specifically would give 60% increased attack damage if you were using Varunastra in your main hand and a shield in your off hand with most attacks? And it would give 30% increased attack speed with Shield Charge and Spectral Shield Throw in the same setup (Varunastra+Shield)?
Yes
So what? Varunastra by itself counts as multiple weapon types the item in your off hand is irrelevant all the mod looks like it is checking for is that you are wielding two different types of weapons and with a Varunastra and a shield you wielding a sword, axe, claw, dagger and mace
You are correct. A single Varunastra satisfies the requirement, regardless of what you do with your other hand in the meantime.
Would it be technically possible to have an unset ring with "socketed support gem supports an active skill gem socketed in your other ring"? Or is there some technical issue preventing this? (Not even talking about balance right now, just curious.)
It might be possible, but would certainly not be easy. Removing one item can't change which skill/support groups are in any other item, and the system depends on that to some extent - it means skills only need checked in relation to the specific item you do things with.
Does a curse applied this way count towards the player's curse limit?
Yes, it is your curse skill.
Hi Mark, how does this interact with [ Asenath's Gentle Touch]?
It doesn't? I'm not sure what stats on that item you expect to have an interaction. Asenath's Gentle Touch only does it's thing with non-aura curses.
which means that skill is based on your stats
Which means that the radius is based on the Curse gem, yes? That part hasn't really been clarified yet. And thanks.
I believe it uses the base radius of the skitterbot aura (30), rather than base curse radious (22), but all modifiers on the curse gem will apply, just to that different base value.
Do supports that you give to your skitterbot effect the curse, like increased aoe?
No, you'd need to support the curse skill to affect it's AoE with a support gem, which is not currently possible with the ring.
As far as I understand the Curse gets all the Curse stats you have like AoE and Curse Effect.
I highly doubt that. It's no longer you casting the Curse, it comes from the minion, applied as an aura. And minions only scale with minion and ally modifiers.
The socketed curse is inherently your skill, as you have the ring equipped. The aura is put on the Skitterbot, but it's appling your curse skill - which means that skill is based on your stats.
[removed]
This is not correct
So does this mean that the damage from shaper's mod like 1-6 lightning damage per 10 INT with this weapon will not apply to spellslinger??? Was really hoping that we finally get to make stat stacking spell builds.
That modifier does not change the wand's damage, it has no interaction with Spellslinger.
And for future reference, I'm probably the person to poke over Rory for wording quibbles :P
Me: Mom, I want [ Enemies Killed Explode ]
Mom: We already got that at home.
At Home: [ Killed Enemies Explode ]
: ' )
There is already an issue on my list to improve those descriptions for 3.10.0, but I can't yet say what form any improvement there will take.
Right, that I understand, it's why spectral throw is so comically short on modifiers.
What I mean though is, normally for any effect other than the actual hit effect of a projectile coliding with an enemy, be that an explosion, a secondary zone of damage, whatever it might be, will be listed if it's not simply a more or less damage multiplier.
For instance, infernal blow. it states that it deals:
Explosion deals base Fire Damage equal to 6% of the corpse's Maximum Life Debuff deals 66% of Damage per Charge
Both damage types are included in that statement as it's just generic damage.
But cremation, if it's the same as detonate dead (sorry for all the corpse explosion mechanics but there aren't that many sources of secondary damage in PoE, apologies), deals a percentage of the corpse's life as damage, and does not include any other damage, be that base or added.
I guess that's where I'm getting hung up here. It's a secondary effect, by default it deals no damage unless otherwise stated, at which point only the damage listed should apply. So explosive arrow to me, being a secondary effect, should only deal the 50% of base damage and not include any added damage, or the gem should be ammended to read:
Explosion deals 50% less damage.
100% more added damage dealt by explosions.
I'm not sure in what you're using "secondary effect" to mean - you discuss secondary damage in relation to corpse skills, but that's not relevant to explosive arrow, as the explosion is attack damage. The difference here is more like the distinction between the melee and projectile hits of Lightning Strike - both attack damage, but with some different modifiers applying.
With Cremation, the explosion deals secondary damage while the projectiles deal spell damage - the base damage of one type can't be used to calculate damage of the other type. Added spell damage will likewise not apply, although global added damage will apply to both.
I'm getting the impression that the "deals x% of base" wording may be a contributing factor to the confusion here. This was used because we wanted it to match the other modifiers on attacks that modify base damage, since those are exactly what it looks like. Would it be less confusing if it said "Explosion deals 50% less Base Damage"?
Read more