Make fortify wear off upon casting or using ranged?

This would allow Fortify to be customized to deal with the current threat level of monsters in-game without making it accessible to people who fight from range. While some spells like Flame Blast (Less so since the recent league) are close-range, those can be filed as niche and have it be understood you'll need alternative defenses.
Last bumped on Apr 24, 2019, 2:14:26 PM
This thread has been automatically archived. Replies are disabled.
So, since there was no qualifier attached to cast, using Flame Dash, or Immortal Call - or CWDT in general would blow off Fortify? (or any Totem with "spell" in its description line?)

And a player could have long lasting Minions and Fortify would not be affected by their presence?

I suspect the proposal needs to be fleshed out a little more than "tough luck to Flame Blast users".
Formerly posted under AnExile_onthePath
Last edited by walkjohn55#8649 on Apr 23, 2019, 12:44:59 PM
How about we nerf monsters and bosses to be less 1shotty first before we screw over players who use fortify to avoid that?

Too bad that won't happen until GGG nerfs meta builds and their powercreep mentality that allows players to delete screens, justifying the need to have 1shotty mobs in the first place.
PoE players: Our game has a wide diversity of builds.

Also PoE players: The [league mechanic] doesn't need to be nerfed, you just need to play a [current meta] build!

And the winds will cry / and many men will die / and all the waves will bow down / to the Loreley
"
blinddagger95 wrote:
This would allow Fortify to be customized to deal with the current threat level of monsters in-game without making it accessible to people who fight from range. While some spells like Flame Blast (Less so since the recent league) are close-range, those can be filed as niche and have it be understood you'll need alternative defenses.


Why stop there, when we could also take the opportunity to remove the Champion from the game?
Or, just reduce fortify duration to 1-2 sec, give it a more multiplier (same as with melee phys dmg) and remove the old melee phys dmg gem as redundant. Frees up one socket and makes it cumbersome to get fortify if you are not actively attacking with a melee attack.
"
walkjohn55 wrote:
So, since there was no qualifier attached to cast, using Flame Dash, or Immortal Call - or CWDT in general would blow off Fortify? (or any Totem with "spell" in its description line?)

And a player could have long lasting Minions and Fortify would not be affected by their presence?

I suspect the proposal needs to be fleshed out a little more than "tough luck to Flame Blast users".


I actually fleshed this out a lot more in my other post that has no replies. I tried to delete this post to no avail. The more fleshed-out suggestion: https://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/2493418
I would rather not invalidate "ranged" melee builds that are tagged as Projectile but use a melee weapon.
This is a buff™
So I read you other post:

https://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/2493418

and it struck me as a very broad proposal - one that begs an extensive reply (guess why no replies?).

On the more narrow topic of Fortify, perhaps Fortify should only protect against melee attacks. In my mind, all characters should be allowed protection against melee attacks. But that leaves the question of how to handle physical damage from other attacks where I would agree that close quarter combatants should be allowed additional protection vis a vis what is available to ranged combatants.
But then ranged combatants should have a viable opportunity to "duck" (move their character in order to avoid) damage. Without that ability, I think the case for additional protection for close quarters breaks down.
Formerly posted under AnExile_onthePath
Last edited by walkjohn55#8649 on Apr 24, 2019, 1:37:34 PM
"
Pizzarugi wrote:
How about we nerf monsters and bosses to be less 1shotty first before we screw over players who use fortify to avoid that?

Too bad that won't happen until GGG nerfs meta builds and their powercreep mentality that allows players to delete screens, justifying the need to have 1shotty mobs in the first place.


This. Nerf meta builds DPS (seriously, 1mil should be the threshold for endgame dps; multiple millions should only be obtainable with insane gear), then revisit monster burst damage. Things will be on more even ground for many more builds, skills, etc. and this will allow for further balance changes that I believe are needed to heal a sick* game.

Then melee will be easier to fix, old skills and uniques will be easier to fix, league mechanics will be easier to balance, and rewards across the board can be tweaked as well so that wealthy, powerful players are still justly rewarded without being allowed to straight-up break the game by crafting items that allow for 8+ links worth of DPS.

The game can also get more challenging overall without screwing over everyone who wants to try non-meta builds or mechanics, or who doesn't enjoy mindlessly farming the most profitable content at insanity-inducing speeds.

It's demoralizing being punished with 1/2 DPS and significantly less survivability for daring to do something out-of-fashion. Perfect balance is impossible but we can do WAY better than what's going on right now.

And the thing is, GGG can still shuffle the meta every league! There's just no reason for such whiplash-inducing zero-sum shifts - when build X or item Y goes from garbage to practically cheating to garbage again, nobody knows wtf is even going on anymore.

*Yes, PoE is doing well growth-wise, but that's an entirely different standard then whether a game is as good as it can be. Many BAD games (which PoE is not), movies, products, etc. make a ton of money for a host of complicated economic and social reasons. Quality and financial success are different things, and I choose to address quality in my judgement and commentary.
We're all in this leaky boat together, people.
Last edited by demon9675#2961 on Apr 24, 2019, 2:16:23 PM

Report Forum Post

Report Account:

Report Type

Additional Info