"Supressed" Story...

[theBalthazar]

Hello guys,

 

So I am not ok with actual stacking rules, you know that since the time. And I am perfectly ok with that. I can do with that and keep my opinion for me...

 

Except for one thing...

 

So zealous focus is supressed by Priest and/or fighter. OK. No problem, I do with that.

 

Balthazar switch on the other aura for adaptation !

 

Squalala !

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8r2HRgYrmgQ

 

Obsidian WANTS my switch, this is the reason of this package of 3 elements ? So I test an other aura...

 

 

 

But... What...?

 

Also here ?

 

So...

 

No...

 

Focus : No. Endurance : No. So... I must pick the most useless of the 3 auras ? : p

 

: p

 

So, yes I don't understand this choice. The first excuse is : No Balthazar, there is a RED LINE in character creation panel :

 

Multiclass are not recommanded for beginners.

 

But... Excuse-me but... here ? Stoic steel is also Paladin, like zealous endurance ? 2 abilities in the ssame class we are OK ? So why, there is also a problem here ?

 

EDIT : Visibly Hardy supress the aura.

 

More seriously, you understand my approach : since the beginning : Stacking rules are a non-sense.

 

It is not logical, and it is not interresting.

 

PS : It is not my character here, but an ugly hired for few tests  : p

Edited June 7, 2018 by theBalthazar

[shadowbunker]

Seriously?

Auras and Stances should be counted as Modals, not actives, and should stack with everything else.

 

 

Can anyone check weapon modals too?

[theBalthazar]

Weapon modals don't stack.

 

Memories since beta 1 :

 

Half-sword

+2 penetration

 

Tenacious

+2 penetration

 

= Don't stack.

 

__________________________

 

BUT...

 

Devoted

+2 penetration

 

Tenacious

+2 penetration

 

= STACK

 

______________________

 

Incomprehensible. For casuals players, and also for me (for others reasons. For the pleasure of "assembly".)

Edited June 7, 2018 by theBalthazar

[Boeroer]

Modals are on the active side of the tree. Weapon Proficiencies are modals, too. 

 

Actives don't stack, passives do. It's rel. simple.

 

The only exceptions (and why that is I don't know) are some chanter phrases that are on the passive side but don't stack (with themselves).

[shadowbunker]

Modals are on the active side of the tree. Weapon Proficiencies are modals, too. 

 

Actives don't stack, passives do. It's rel. simple.

 

The only exceptions (and why that is I don't know) are some chanter phrases that are on the passive side but don't stack (with themselves).

It's really simple, but it's really BS too.

 

If Modals' effects are sub-par & can be suppressed by Active skill effects

Then any proper team composition with buffs won't pick it.

 

If Modals' effects are on-par with Active skills & can be suppressed by Active skill effects

Then Modals will suppress most on-par Active buffs instead.

 

The fact that Modals are zero-cost in battle has limited its options.

 

 

@theBalthazar Devoted +2 Pen is passive.

Edited June 7, 2018 by shadowbunker

[theBalthazar]

Race and classes core bonus are passive ? OK.

 

Inspiration / Afflictions = Active. OK.

 

It is simple Yes. The problem is, why invest on an aura, seriously, there is a lot of classes that give Hardy or equivalent... (Druid, Barbarian, berserker etc.)

 

There is simply no use.

 

I think personnally modal of fighter and paladin need to be considered as passive, and replaced at the right of the screen. Far more logical for a simple reason :

 

You are always on a situation of "supressed". My OP is the demonstration of the absurdity of all of this. I want accuracy ? Supressed. I want armor ? Supressed ? So what I must desactivate the aura ? : p

Edited June 7, 2018 by theBalthazar

[Boeroer]

No, class bonuses are not necessarily passive. It depends on which side of the tree they are. For example Gilded Enmity is an active (as an upgrade of Sworn Enemy) and thus doesn't stack with other active AR bonuses.

 

I didn't say the stacking rules are cool - I just said that they are rel. simple. So I don't quite understand the displayed surprise.

 

Anyway I prefer simple stacking rules over too complicated ones. Maybe that destroys some cool combos, but better than the PoE1 mess where you had to test *everything* to determine if and how it stacked.

 

If you plan a character now you know what will stack and what not beforehand. So... just don't try to stack Zealous Focus and Warrior Stance or Gilded Enmity with Zealous Endurance. Either take no Stance or no aura or choose the ones that don't suppress each other. It's not that bad.

Edited June 7, 2018 by Boeroer

[theBalthazar]

I didn't say the stacking rules are cool - I just said that they are rel. simple. So I don't quite understand the displayed surprise. 

 

 

In fact, my position is not on fun of combos or not. It sad for my optimizator soul but not "essential".

 

My position here is more to say :

 

OK I have a pack of three aura. 2 of them can be fully countered by an other effect, very very often.

 

At the end, I will never take this ability. Additionnal effect for 2 ability point are a misery (+5 % hit to crit etc...) Only the endurance is OK.

 

Generally it is not trully the case, because there are active (with "activation" like FoD) BUT there is also an "active" (BUT without activation)

 

When you used FoD for example, why accuracy is not supressed by devotion for the faihful in this case ? Where for one ability point (spend on tree), I have far more than only this (than accuracy. There is damage, accuracy etc.).

 

So Auras are an active-passive but not really passive, but even when you change of aura, sometimes you have no bonus.

 

Often, it is totally ok with active abilities BECAUSE you can't use them at the same time (barbaric blow VS flame of devotion)

 

Here, there is an illusion of persistent passive, but no : sometimes nothing add a simple minor bonus.

 

So I am... circumspect. Obisidian sell it like a little swiss knife. But in fact, for optimizer-players, will be never useful. I am a berserker ? Totally useless. (Armor+2) If I do the best spell for the team with a priest : devotion for the faithful : +10 accuracy ! Zealous aura also out.

 

And I think you know the value of the last aura : p

 

So yeah, I don't like this system.

Edited June 7, 2018 by theBalthazar

[Kaylon]

All modals were considered active buffs since PoE1, nothing new...

[theBalthazar]

In POE1 there was few exceptions. Like -5 accuracy +20 % damage. Stack. 

 

And it is not because that was like this globally in POE1, that we have to find this normal.

 

When you are casual, you take aura naïvely in POE1. Until you have +20 accuracy with priest. Here :

 

1) You don't know. You believe you are at 25.

2) You know and you respec at the good time.

3) You start and you will never take zealous aura knowing that you can have +20 with a priest.

 

So yes, indeed same problem since PO1...

 

------------------------------------------

 

EDIT : And question, +30 % hit to crit for berserker. Stack with Barbaric blow or not ? Because this is with an active ability (frenzy) ?

 

So yes or no ?

Edited June 7, 2018 by theBalthazar

[Boeroer]

Stack with what? Savage Attack didn't stack with Reckless Assault - you couldn't even have both active at the same time. 

 

Meanwhile Zealous FOcus stacked with Devotions and Inspiring Radiance...

 

Now there is that one simple rule: actives don't stack, passives do. In PoE1 ist was not easy to determine what was considered active and what passive (Inspiring Radiance?) - in Deadfire it is easy because it tells you what's active/passive via the ability tree.

 

Not the same problem as in PoE1. A big improvement I'd say.

[theBalthazar]

I am pretty sure at a moment two modal was stackable. Perhaps not at 3.0++

 

But for barbaric blow + Berseker.

 

Stack or not. Two actives abilities of the same character single class for example.

 

Not the same problem as in PoE1. A big improvement I'd say.

 

 

A clear rule is always a good improvement.

 

But this is absolutely not the panacea actually. A lot of impossibilities are induced for a such system. You create abilities unusable under certain conditions/That create a null result when you have spend one invested point for example, far from optimal.

Edited June 7, 2018 by theBalthazar

[Braven]

I don’t think it is quite so simple as actives don’t stack and passives do.

 

For exanple +X attributes stacks with inspirations that do the exact same thing, just hidden behind a name. For example +20 reflex from a wizard spell will stack with the +5 from a perception inspiration while at the same time +2 armor from an inspiration doesn’t stack with +armor from abilities (like gilded). So sometimes inspirations stack and sometimes not.

 

+20 to all defenses also stacks with individually named defensive bonuses. Not exactly intuitive unless you know it works that way. It would be sensible to think they just wrote “all defenses” to avoid having to list each one out individually on the tooltip.

Edited June 8, 2018 by Braven

[ibanix]

Modals should be considered passive effects. Fin.

[Boeroer]

+10 ACC is not addressing the same value as +5 PER. If this wouldn't stack then +10 to deflection and +5 to RES shouldn't stack as well - and +20% action speed shouldn't stack with +5 DEX, too. +50% damage and +10 to MIG? Nope? You don't want that...

 

+2 AR and +1 AR addresses the same and thus doesn't stack (if coming from actives both).

 

For example an inspiration with +5 PER wouldn't stack with a direct PER buff of 10.

 

That +X to all defenses stacks with +Y to a single defense is indeed unintuitive and not very logical, but it has been like this in PoE1 as well for whatever reason.

 

Still a lot better than in PoE1.

 

Now even item enchantments like +X to INT all stack - not like PoE where they didn't except it was on a weapon/shield.

 

Most stacking in Deadfire follows the simple rule and that's better than the stacking mess in PoE1.

Edited June 8, 2018 by Boeroer

[Boeroer]

Modals should be considered passive effects. Fin.

Then stuff like Zealous Focus stacked with Warrior Stance and a nerf would be the result. Not good for single classes. The non-stacking of modals / putting modals into the active category is the better solution in my opinion.

[dunehunter]

 

Modals should be considered passive effects. Fin.

Then stuff like Zealous Focus stacked with Warrior Stance and a nerf would be the result. Not good for single classes. The non-stacking of modals / putting modals into the active category is the better solution in my opinion.

 

 

I agree, the activate ability not stack rule can make Single class more attracting. As a Crusader you're already able to stack passive to get all 6 Stats Resistance, making activate ability stack will make them too OP.

[shadowbunker]

 

 

Modals should be considered passive effects. Fin.

Then stuff like Zealous Focus stacked with Warrior Stance and a nerf would be the result. Not good for single classes. The non-stacking of modals / putting modals into the active category is the better solution in my opinion.

I agree, the activate ability not stack rule can make Single class more attracting. As a Crusader you're already able to stack passive to get all 6 Stats Resistance, making activate ability stack will make them too OP.

That's not the point, no one here wants or suggested that.

We're talking about the incorrect classification of Modals, which are passive in nature (but got thrown into the active list).

Edited June 8, 2018 by shadowbunker

[Nemesis7884]

Isnt the whole point of an aura that its passive

[shadowbunker]

 

Modals should be considered passive effects. Fin.

Then stuff like Zealous Focus stacked with Warrior Stance and a nerf would be the result. Not good for single classes. The non-stacking of modals / putting modals into the active category is the better solution in my opinion.

Stances are self-targeted effects, Devs can easily tune it to prevent OP fighters.

 

Auras are fine as-is EXCEPT Zealous Focus.

Everyone on the team needs Accuracy, i.e. benefits from it.

+3 would be good enough as a passive.

Blame Warrior Stance if fighter's Acc goes too high.

 

Weapon modals are bad enough and is completely trash when suppressed.

[Braven]

+10 ACC is not addressing the same value as +5 PER. If this wouldn't stack then +10 to deflection and +5 to RES shouldn't stack as well - and +20% action speed shouldn't stack with +5 DEX, too. +50% damage and +10 to MIG? Nope? You don't want that...

 

+2 AR and +1 AR addresses the same and thus doesn't stack (if coming from actives both).

 

For example an inspiration with +5 PER wouldn't stack with a direct PER buff of 10.

Monk’s turning wheel INT bonus stacks with smart inspiration. Both are active and both provide a direct INT bonus. I would be highly surprised if there are not several other examples of things like this where two active abilities with the exact same bonus stack. I’ll try and console around some later and pull some more concrete examples. Edited June 8, 2018 by Braven

[Boeroer]

Monk’s turning wheel INT bonus stacks with smart inspiration.

Last time I checked it did not (beta3). Did they change that?

 

Helwalker's MIG bonus does stack because it's a passive.

 

I know of no example (after quite some testing) where two actives that directly address the same stat will stack.

[theBalthazar]

I agree, the activate ability not stack rule can make Single class more attracting. As a Crusader you're already able to stack passive to get all 6 Stats Resistance, making activate ability stack will make them too OP.

 

 

Not really if you are in team. The purpose is to create a subtle association. Quickly, you see a +10 accuracy here, a +1 armor here and here.

 

Single are quickly in the absolutely same situation.

 

Highter, somebody tell : it is exactly the same for true active abilities. No.

 

"True active" abilities are not persistent. So you can make a choice to use them or not, contrary to a passive(active!) bonus. BUT ! Plus :

 

If you are in this situation :

 

 

Question for you boeroer :

 

Flame of devotion = Active ability. (left of the Paladin tree)

 

Zealous focus = Active ability. (left of the Paladin tree)

 

What ? Stack....?

 

How do you explain that ? There is exception ? So, yes it is not intuitive...

Edited June 8, 2018 by theBalthazar

[Boeroer]

 

Monk’s turning wheel INT bonus stacks with smart inspiration.

Last time I checked it did not (beta3). Did they change that?

 

Helwalker's MIG bonus does stack because it's a passive.

 

I know of no example (after quite some testing) where two actives that directly address the same stat will stack.

 

Just checked in game: does not stack Duality of Mortal Presence (INT) does NOT stack with Elightened Agony (Smart, +5 INT). The lower one automatically gets suppressed as it should be.

 

[Boeroer]

Question for you boeroer :

 

Flame of devotion = Active ability. (left of the Paladin tree)

 

Zealous focus = Active ability. (left of the Paladin tree)

 

[...]

 

How do you explain that ? There is exception ? So, yes it is not intuitive...

I assume you mean "Why is the accuracy bonus of Flames of Devotion stacking with the accuracy bonus of Zealous Focus"?

First of al that's a question for the designers, not for me. I can only guess why.

 

My guesses are:

- Since it's not a buff but an inherent value of the ability itself it stacks with everything. Would Flames of Devotion give you an ACC buff of x seconds it would certainly not stack. It's like asking "Why did the accuracy bonuses of spells in PoE1 stack with everything". You wouldn't have asked this because this seems to be right - intuitively.

 

- It would be completely pointless for a single attack to have bonus ACC, bonus PEN or bonus anything if it got supressed by buffs. The inherent values of an attack ability can not be considered as buffs and thus don't fall under the normal stacking rules.

 

I find that rather intuitive - although it collides a bit with my statement "actives don't stack, passives don't". But if we expand the rule to "active buffs don't stack, passive buffs do" (I don't recall the exact wording in Daedfire) it fits again.

 

You desperately want to decry the stacking rules and present a problem - but there is none. And even if there are problems they are pretty minor ones. My biggest gripe is that phrases don't fit 100% into the stacking rules. But you just seem to be diappointed that you can't stack ACC buffs into the sky.

 

I will repeat myself again: While the stacking rules in Deadfire may not be perfect, they are a lot more simple and easy to understand and to anticipate than in PoE1. You don't have to test every ability and item in order to know how it exactly works when it comes to stacking. I can't remember that you complained that much about PoE's stacking rules. Maybe simply because they allowed more absurd stacking of ACC?

Edited June 8, 2018 by Boeroer