Blasphemy is the most obvious, though. And it currently already acts like one.
Blasphmey does not currently act like a meta gem, it acts like (and is) a regular support gem. It does nothing at all by itself, and just applies changes to each supported skill individually.
It will likely be reworked to a meta gem in PoE2, but that will involve a significant change to it's functionality, including probably making it a skill-support, like Spellslinger will be and Bane already is.
Yes. It looks to be the first "meta gem" (discussed at exilecon PoE2 demo) to be added into the game.
There will be no actual Meta Gems until PoE2, but Bane was the first skill-support added to the game.
Is "Adds # to # physical damage to attacks with this weapon per 3 player levels" mod from Poet's pen considered as an added local damage'? I doubt it because the weapon quality does not affect this mod. But I'm also uncertain due to the fact that your offhand will not benefit from the mod though it's not local. Can you enlighten me?
No. It can't be local because it can't be worked out on just the item - the value depends on the player holding it. Local modifiers apply entirely on the item, and thus are in effect even before you pick the item up.
As someone suggested already: "while all 3 of the following slots are empty: gloves, main hand, offhand".
We prefer to use the wording referring to not having items equipped, because this is more intuitive that it works when you have items that are disabled (disabled items are not equipped), in which case the slot is not empty. This is particularly relevant to use with Dancing Dervish.
"... while you have no gloves, no weapon and no shield equipped"
should confuse less people while even being shorter.
Since all non-weapon off hand items are classified as shields, and all main hand items as weapons, you can save a lot of letters.
Quivers are not shields.
It's worth mentioning that Wings of Entropy sets a precedence for using traditionally main-hand only 2Hers and giving them both main-hand and off-hand modifiers separately. It will be interesting to see if this functionality is implemented in a similar way for fists.
It works the same as WoE - "Counts as Dual Wielding" means that you will alternate between main and off hand hits, with the base off-hand damage being copied from the base main hand damage (since you don't have an actual off-hand weapon to draw from). Hollow Palm Technique does the same, so it is the only way to have base off-hand unarmed damage values.
As a programmer you shouldn't assume either way because the wording is ambiguous. I prefer the current wording though. "You do not have x, y or z" as in not(x or y or z).
People that want to change it to "and" don't realize it's just as ambiguous: "Unencumbered when you do not have x, y AND z" can be read as not(x and y and z), so if you have one or two out of three the condition is satisfied, the opposite of what was meant.
There's a much more elegant solution as another comment here mentions: "You are unencumbered when you have neither x, y, nor z"
Unfortunately "neither" is explicitly for two options - it would be explicitly incorrect here.
I've made an issue to review this and see if we can come up with a wording that is still correct but people find less confusing, hopefully while still fitting the constraint of not being too long (which was the original reason I didn't just push the whole thing through De Morgan's law).
If you have any of gloves, main hand item or off hand item, then you do not have "no Equipped Gloves, Main Hand Item, or Off Hand Item" and thus do not meet the requirement.
For a real-world example, if you see this sign, you don't get to carry a sword onto the property and say "it's fine because I have no firearms". "No x or y" means not having "x or y".
Does having a glove equipped but disabled (such as due to not meeting socketed gem requirements) count as having gloves equipped for the purposes of being unencumbered?
Disabled items are not equipped.
I think I'm derping. If it means none of the three equipped, shouldn't it say "AND" then?
ie. "You are unemcumbered while you have no Gloves, mainhand, and offhand equipped". This wording makes waaaay more sense to me.
"or" is the grammatically correct word here. "no x or y" means you do not have "x or y" - having either an x or a y means you don't meet the condition of "no x or y".
Conversely, if you have x but not y, then you do not have "x and y", so a "no x and y" condition would be met despite having one of the two (because you don't have both).
"And" would mean it's only referring to all of them, which is incorrect because the "no" mean's it's talking about what you can't have - you can't have any of them ("or"), rather than can't have all of them ("and").
See this for some more details: https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/159166/why-do-we-use-or-instead-of-and-when-we-mean-both-things
Read more/u/Mark_GGG -- base totem placement speed is 0.6s, do the ballista totems have a different base placement speed compared to traditional totems?
According to https://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/2679908 they are supposed to, but I can't find any evidence that they actually do.
Base Totem Placement speed for placing Ballista Totems is 350ms.
So was this just unprogrammable or were there balance concerns? Thread of hope/legion jewels are super cool so it's a bit disappointing that they won't interact with the new cluster jewel nodes whatsoever.
Literally none of the stuff that handles distances on the tree can understand things being added to it - it all relies on the base tree and precalculated info.
2 questions - will radius jewels inside added cluster affect original nodes and will it affect cluster nodes?
No and No. Added passives are never within radius of anything (and thus nothing is ever within radius of an added passive).
Is letting you allocate it really something that affects the socket though? I guess it could be considered doing so, but it doesn't actually modify the socket itself the way, say, conquering or other jewels do to other nodes. Unless "You can allocate this node as if it were connected to your tree (but not connect to other nodes from it)" is a secret modifier to the node that lets you allocate it?
Yes, that fundamentally works by changing the affected passive to have an extra stat that makes it be allowed to allocate without being connected.
Jewel sockets are and always have been passive skills. At the time we first added them to the tree, they were specifically Notable passive skills, although I believe that's no longer the case.
They are allocated on the passive tree and have passive skill popups when you hover them, showing you what stats they grant (which will be no stats unless a jewel is socketed into them). They're passive skills. They've never not been passive skills.
Intuitive Leap does not affect them because a fundamental property of jewel sockets is that they cannot be modified by any jewel except the one in that specific socket.
Read moreUnfortunately, those jewels specifically won't let you allocate jewel sockets for a reason, to avoid issues with passive tree disconnection.
So if anything they'll just get reworded to "can allocate non-Jewel passives..." instead.
The reason is more fundamental than that. No jewel can affect any socket other than the one it's in. That's just fundamental to how jewels and sockets work. That doesn't and never has meant that the sockets aren't passive skills.
Does that mean we can't allocate them using leap of faith?
Added passive skills are never considered to be within radius of any jewel. There is reminder text on all the cluster jewel stats that add passives clarifying this, which will be visible in-game.
so do i understand this correctly:
if i have one EA setup with swift affliction and one setup with unbound ailments i could fire one with unbound ailments first and then more with swift affliction (until the first arrow explodes) and i would get the damage multiplier from swift affliction (but not the duration reduction) and the duration increase from unbound ailments for the whole ignite (excluding that first arrow, which would of course not benefit from the swift affliction bonus)?
Yes. The Damage-per-second of each ignite is calculated separately, then they are summed, then the exploding arrow applies one ignite with the total ignite damage per second, using it's own stats to work out the duration of the applied ignite.
oh that's interesting, so let's say i grab the node that says that burning from critical strikes deals more damage, this means that if the explosion is a crit the burning calculation will be affected by this mod in total, and not only the burning part that cames from crititalc hits?
No. Each arrow calcualtes it's explosion hit & ailment damage separately. Only those which are crits individually will calculate their damage with that modifier, because that modifier only applies to damage calculation for crits.
When the individually calculated damages are combined, if any are a crit then the explosion as a whole will be considered a crit for on-crit effects, but this cannot affect the damage calculation in any way, because that has fundamentally already happened before that point.
are the stat requirements the only thing that affects socket colors?
Yes, outside of modifiers that explicitly refer to sockets which some uniques have.
