100% Damage reduction?

Monk
Between Crippling Wave, Mantra of conviction and Resolve I would have 100% Dmg Reduction on enemies. Viable??? I'm willing to change other skills outside of sweeping wind. That will be the main damage dealer for me.


http://us.battle.net/d3/en/calculator/monk#ehWkSR!aYV!ccccZa
There are 2 types of damage reduction. There is reducing the damage that mobs deal, and then there is reducing the damage that you receive. They are calculated separately. There will be caps on both.
02/03/2012 01:02 PMPosted by D3BETA
There are 2 types of damage reduction. There is reducing the damage that mobs deal, and then there is reducing the damage that you receive. They are calculated separately. There will be caps on both.


It probably stacks multiplactively, if it has a limit after that I wouldn't know. The proper calculation to his build is .7*.7*.6=.196 about a 5th of the damage
02/03/2012 01:02 PMPosted by D3BETA
There are 2 types of damage reduction. There is reducing the damage that mobs deal, and then there is reducing the damage that you receive. They are calculated separately. There will be caps on both.
This information sounds incredibly wrong, unless you plan to back it up with a source. It makes no sense to calculate them separately, and makes no sense to cap any of it either. They'll simply all stack multiplicatively, which is the only logical system anyway.
02/03/2012 01:48 PMPosted by Mouthwash
There are 2 types of damage reduction. There is reducing the damage that mobs deal, and then there is reducing the damage that you receive. They are calculated separately. There will be caps on both.
This information sounds incredibly wrong, unless you plan to back it up with a source. It makes no sense to calculate them separately, and makes no sense to cap any of it either. They'll simply all stack multiplicatively, which is the only logical system anyway.


Of course it makes sense, since one is a debuff affecting the enemy, and one is a buff affecting you; And caps are a balance issue.
02/04/2012 12:38 PMPosted by Pezz
Of course it makes sense, since one is a debuff affecting the enemy, and one is a buff affecting you; And caps are a balance issue.
Agreed, it seems to be more fair to have caps on separate categories, however, monks ONLY ability that allows them to TAKE % damage is obsidian tempest rush.
02/04/2012 12:38 PMPosted by Pezz
This information sounds incredibly wrong, unless you plan to back it up with a source. It makes no sense to calculate them separately, and makes no sense to cap any of it either. They'll simply all stack multiplicatively, which is the only logical system anyway.


Of course it makes sense, since one is a debuff affecting the enemy, and one is a buff affecting you; And caps are a balance issue.
No, that still does not make sense. There's no reason to treat a 30% reduction in damage taken different from a 30% reduction in enemy damage. If you had 2 such effects (2 damage taken reductions, 2 enemy damage dealt reductions, or one of each) you would expect the outcome to be exactly the same amount of damage.

Moreover, Blizzard moved away from additive bonuses years ago for exactly this reason. Additive bonuses are incredibly un-intuitive, require special balancing rules for every single case which makes them unnecessarily complicated, and have absolutely no benefit to gameplay or design.

So, a 30% reduction means you're taking 70% damage, and two such reductions mean you're taking 0.7 * 0.7 = 49% damage. It doesn't matter if its a reduction to damage enemies deal or a reduction to the damage you take, this is universally true--these effects will always stack multiplicatively and there is no reason to ever put a cap on them. If stacking multiple such effects were overpowered, you would simply rebalance their values.
Also, AscendedOne's math is wrong: these 3 effects stacked together would reduce damage taken by about 71%. You'll be taking roughly 1/3rd damage while all three effects are present.
The difference is that a debuff on a mob will reduce the damage it deals to ALL targets, not just the ones that happen to have a buff.

So if a mob's hit with a -30% damage debuff, and I have a -30% damage buff, it'll whack me for 49%.

But if John Dhoe over there gets hit, and he has NO buff, he'll take 70%.

That's why debuffs, as a general rule in these kinds of games, are seen as MUCH more powerful - and that's also why they tend to have MUCH shorter durations than buffs.

For example, it's fine if a Barbarian takes like 50% less damage all the time, since he's supposed to be a "tank." But if a mob deals 50% less damage all the time, that just makes it a puny mob; the thrill of killing it is diminished. So debuffs are very short, and buffs tend to be quite long and role-specific.

You are correct however in that as far as damage calcs are concerned, the only "realistic" way to do that is by grabbing ALL the damage modifiers - be they buff or debuff - and just multiplying them out. In this way, the damage works on an exponential curve such that it approaches, but never quite reaches, 0.

And of course, should balance issues arise, it merely becomes an issue of tweaking the numbers and extrapolating the data curves. Caps COULD conceivably be required in PVP, but generally speaking they shouldn't be necessary.
No, that still does not make sense. There's no reason to treat a 30% reduction in damage taken different from a 30% reduction in enemy damage. If you had 2 such effects (2 damage taken reductions, 2 enemy damage dealt reductions, or one of each) you would expect the outcome to be exactly the same amount of damage.


Yes, it would work out the same, but it would STILL be different, as one affects damage done to everything hit, and one changes how much damage YOU take. 2 different effects, 2 different categories. Still works out to the same damage taken, but they are different parts of the formula. What wouldn't make sense would be putting the enemy's damage debuff as part of your armor or damage reduction.


Moreover, Blizzard moved away from additive bonuses years ago for exactly this reason. Additive bonuses are incredibly un-intuitive, require special balancing rules for every single case which makes them unnecessarily complicated, and have absolutely no benefit to gameplay or design.


I made no mention of how they stack. Multiplicative bonuses are better for scaling and balance, i agree, but they are NOT more intuitive or complicated. They require no more additional rules than a blanket base (eg. AR from D2 always having at LEAST a 5% chance to hit/ at most a 95% chance to be missed). In addition Additive bonuses are much clearer to read, and easier to calculate for the player.

eg. I have 20% damage reduction on my legs, 3% on my gloves and 12% on my shoulders.

Which is easier to do in your head? 100-20-3-12 = 65% damage taken or 0.8*0.97*0.88= 68% damage taken?

or, looking at it a different way, 20+3+12 = 35% damage reduction, 100-(0.8*0.97*0.88) = 32% damage reduction.

Of course, thats kind of a moot point since the results are calculated for you in the details tab, but it still stands.

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum