Trying to understand Ring of Fire Backfire

[Dmdtt2]

at this time I have 2 mods that add a 5% chance of x damage dealt to me on using ring of fire, one that deals 116 damage and another that deals 128. the damage I am dealt on being hit is 218.

my mitigations include
4 fire mitigation
84 direct fire mitigation
28 indirect fire mitigation

damage boosts for fire are as follows
+2% direct fire damage
+100% base fire damage
+96% indirect fire damage

now no matter which way I have tried to crunch the numbers I cannot seem to figure out how I am being dealt 218 damage.

on top of that I am always dealt max damage by this skill I am never dealt from only 1 of the two mods, is it suppose to always deal both mods damage whenever 1 of them triggers or are they a package deal always stacking meaning I have a 10% chance?

also how is that % chance applied? is it per target hit by my ring of fire? or is it based on when its cast each time at a flat 10% chance?

would love some clarification

[Citan]

The effects are rolled separately, so you have two separate 5% chances to take damage when you use the ability. (It's rolled per ability use, not per target). I suspect what you're seeing is just one of the mods going off (the 128 one), but your indirect boost is applied, like this:

128 * 1.96 (your indirect fire mod) = 250

250 - 32 (your indirect + generic fire mitigation) = 218

[Dmdtt2]

The effects are rolled separately, so you have two separate 5% chances to take damage when you use the ability. (It's rolled per ability use, not per target). I suspect what you're seeing is just one of the mods going off (the 128 one), but your indirect boost is applied, like this:

128 * 1.96 (your indirect fire mod) = 250

250 - 32 (your indirect + generic fire mitigation) = 218

tbh that seems odd to me that indirect fire should increase backfire damage. indirect damage in this game generally is reserved for DoTs why would you all design it to increase this mods damage.

also I guess that explains why I am suddenly being killed now and then from backfire because I upgraded my indirect fire damage from 0% to +96%.

regardless thanks for the reply.

[Crissa]

Yeah, a backfire isn't direct damage, directly intentionally ^-^

It is kinda both 'makes sense' and is harsh that buffing yourself means your backfire hurts more.

[Triscone]

tbh that seems odd to me that indirect fire should increase backfire damage. indirect damage in this game generally is reserved for DoTs why would you all design it to increase this mods damage.

also I guess that explains why I am suddenly being killed now and then from backfire because I upgraded my indirect fire damage from 0% to +96%.

regardless thanks for the reply.

I am in agreement with this being somewhat counter-intuitive. Though to be fair, I had assumed "indirect damage" meant aoe abilities when I first started and not DoT's, so in that context this mechanic sorta makes sense?! Consistency would be helpful here, or a better description of what "indirect damage" actually means.

[Extractum11]

IME indirect damage is anything that does direct health damage. Even bear rage attacks!

[Badnesso]

Did this give you unique death exp?

[Crissa]

Probably.

x-x

[Citan]

The way it works is this: "direct" damage is the number at the top of the ability description. If it says it does 500 damage, that's direct damage. "Indirect" damage is damage added on from other sources. If it says at the bottom of the ability "deals 40 damage over 10 seconds", that's always indirect damage. Direct = the attack's actual damage, indirect = anything else.

It's still pretty fuzzy, but I haven't figured out a better terminology yet. I considered calling all the indirect types by other names, so direct fire damage would be Fire and indirect would be Heat damage (for instance). The problem there is that we have buffs that boost all direct or indirect damage types. So giving them other names just seems to make things more confusing, not less.

It's still a problem I'm mulling over, I'm sure there's a better presentation than we're using now, I just don't know what it is yet.

[Hoxard]

One option would be to make direct and indirect damage show up differently when dealt. Direct could be the red number that shows up now, and indirect could be a different color? I can't think of any clearly distinct colors that aren't already in use though.

Also, a combat log would do wonders to help with the confusion. Just hit something with the attack in question, check the combat log and see whether it says "21 fire(direct)" or "21 fire(indirect)"

[Niph]

The way it works is this: "direct" damage is the number at the top of the ability description. If it says it does 500 damage, that's direct damage. "Indirect" damage is damage added on from other sources. If it says at the bottom of the ability "deals 40 damage over 10 seconds", that's always indirect damage. Direct = the attack's actual damage, indirect = anything else.

It's still pretty fuzzy, but I haven't figured out a better terminology yet. I considered calling all the indirect types by other names, so direct fire damage would be Fire and indirect would be Heat damage (for instance). The problem there is that we have buffs that boost all direct or indirect damage types. So giving them other names just seems to make things more confusing, not less.

It's still a problem I'm mulling over, I'm sure there's a better presentation than we're using now, I just don't know what it is yet.

You could use 'Direct' explicitly when dealing direct damage, and everything else would be indirect. Instead of saying "Deals 500 fire damage", it could be "Deals 500 direct fire damage". "Deals 40 damage over 10 seconds" would remain unchanged, and since it doesn't have 'direct' in it, would be understood as indirect.

[Yaksnot]

Also, a combat log would do wonders to help with the confusion. Just hit something with the attack in question, check the combat log and see whether it says "21 fire(direct)" or "21 fire(indirect)"

I know a rudimentary GUI is being hammered out due to other issues but I would personally love to see this implimented with it. And the ability to define on my screen exactly what i am seeing and what i am not with differend colors. EG if direct damage is red, indirect damage yellow. Direct heals Green, indirect heals purple, or whatever.