Discussion on Blasphemy (New Support Gem)

"

VixTrader a écrit :

It's also not that big of a radius so I'm not sure it's as game changing as people think. It's mainly just for melee chars, and even then I think many won't bother with it.

When you're in melee range, Herald of Thunder cursing for you is pretty effective already.

It might be a small default radius, however with improved AoE from various sources, skills, jewels, curse radius and possibly aura radius, I think it will end up covering a much larger area than you first might imagine, and seeing how detrimental curses are to most builds I think this gem will perform solidly in various setups.

I imagine many people will avoid those curse-casting deaths with Blasphemy.

Time will tell when Talisman leagues go live, it might be insanely strong, it might be "just okay", or it might be a gigantic flop, either way I'm looking forward to finding out!

So here is how i see it
if blasphemy requires ANY mana reservation 2 possibilities will happen.

the curses will gain all the bonuses of aura nodes and offensive curse aura builds will be a thing.

or

the curses will not gain all the bonuses and people will stick with curse on hit setups because curses have 60 - 80% reduced effectiveness vs bosses and regular auras dont and there is no way in hell ill bother investing in this gem if it means losing hatred or one of the other main stay auras. the curses simply wont do enough to the monsters that matter to really be worth it.

"

einholt2 a écrit :

"

mark1030 a écrit :

"

kamil1210 a écrit :

Blasphemy +

Is going to be used by every build.

Every build that wants to limit their offense maybe. I'd rather have heralds/auras and self cast or trigger gem the curses.

. If that 1 hit is from a big phys hitter and it crits, you may have very well just died OR you just lost 80% of your HP.

So casting Enfeeble on hard hitters manually isn't an option? If those hard hitters are a surprise, cast Enfeeble ahead of you without knowing what's ahead. A curse linked to Increased AoE and Increased Duration covers about the whole screen for a fairly long time.

"

Saltychipmunk a écrit :

So here is how i see it
if blasphemy requires ANY mana reservation 2 possibilities will happen.

the curses will gain all the bonuses of aura nodes and offensive curse aura builds will be a thing.

or

the curses will not gain all the bonuses and people will stick with curse on hit setups because curses have 60 - 80% reduced effectiveness vs bosses and regular auras dont and there is no way in hell ill bother investing in this gem if it means losing hatred or one of the other main stay auras. the curses simply wont do enough to the monsters that matter to really be worth it.

They've already said aura effect will do nothing for curses using Blasphemy.

"

Saltychipmunk a écrit :

people will stick with curse on hit setups because curses have 60 - 80% reduced effectiveness vs bosses and regular auras dont

However, there are no auras which give me life + mana leech (Warlord's Mark) or charges on kill (Assassin's / Warlord's / Poacher's Mark) or resistance reduction. And these are things which you'll really want applied BEFORE you hit/kill a mob. Using Curse on Hit for these things means slower clearspeed outside of bosses because you'll have to cast the spell linked to CoH before your attack (Herald of Thunder, which not every build can use, notwithstanding). Against bosses, it means staying stationary more (and thus being in more danger) against bosses.

"

scrooge999 a écrit :

"

Saltychipmunk a écrit :

people will stick with curse on hit setups because curses have 60 - 80% reduced effectiveness vs bosses and regular auras dont

However, there are no auras which give me life + mana leech (Warlord's Mark) or charges on kill (Assassin's / Warlord's / Poacher's Mark) or resistance reduction. And these are things which you'll really want applied BEFORE you hit/kill a mob. Using Curse on Hit for these things means slower clearspeed outside of bosses because you'll have to cast the spell linked to CoH before your attack (Herald of Thunder, which not every build can use, notwithstanding). Against bosses, it means staying stationary more (and thus being in more danger) against bosses.

against bosses it wont matter much since you are only getting 20% of the effect anyway ( builds that dont heavily invest in curses really shouldn’t worry too much about keeping curses up vs bosses anyway if it means risking death to do it. ). but the clear speed angle is a good point.

"

mark1030 a écrit :

"

einholt2 a écrit :

"

mark1030 a écrit :

Every build that wants to limit their offense maybe. I'd rather have heralds/auras and self cast or trigger gem the curses.

. If that 1 hit is from a big phys hitter and it crits, you may have very well just died OR you just lost 80% of your HP.

So casting Enfeeble on hard hitters manually isn't an option? If those hard hitters are a surprise, cast Enfeeble ahead of you without knowing what's ahead. A curse linked to Increased AoE and Increased Duration covers about the whole screen for a fairly long time.

Sure, it's an option...if you want to keep casting curses. It all comes down to play style preferences. If you don't mind re-casting curses during boss fights, if you don't mind stopping to cast curses every now and then, then Blasphemy is not for you. For those who do mind, Blasphemy is a significant quality of life improvement.

"

Sure, it's an option...if you want to keep casting curses. It all comes down to play style preferences. If you don't mind re-casting curses during boss fights, if you don't mind stopping to cast curses every now and then, then Blasphemy is not for you. For those who do mind, Blasphemy is a significant quality of life improvement.

Let me give an example in my case, where Blasphemy would be very useful.
I play a 2h Ice Crash Leap Slammer,a very active, very anti-casting build. Casting curses is NOT something I do, I think it goes against the ethos of a melee face smashing maul wielding marauder who just wants to leap in to a pack, smash them to pieces with Ice Crash, and then move on to the next pack.
However, mana & life leech from Warlord's Mark were a MUST for me to sustain using Ice Crash on such little mana reserves, due to most of my mana going to Hatred and HoA.

I used to have Warlord's Mark linked to a Leap Slam + Curse on Hit + Fortify which provided me with a fair amount of survive-ability and meant I could achieve the 'run & gun' play style I look for in a marauder build.
But some issues I had with that old build which Blasphemy may resolve are:

- Leap Slam has a fairly small area of effect, when leaping in to a pack, 4-5 of the mobs only would be cursed, leaving a bunch of mobs on the outside being hit by Ice Crash (which has a much larger AoE) but not giving me any extra flask charges, endurance charges, leech.

- Other mobs outside of the pack that would aggro outside of the initial Leap would just die to Ice Crash when they run into it, also providing no sustain bonuses as mentioned above.

Edit: I do NOT want to put the curse on hit on my Ice Crash, I leave that for pure offensive support gems, melee phys, added fire, FA, inc AoE/Conc Eff, WED

Hopefully with the Blasphemy gem and a little increased curse radius, the curse would extend to the same, if not larger, range than Ice Crash, meaning any mob in range of Ice Crash is cursed!

Good comments guys, I like the ideas and discussions so far, I wonder if with some reduced mana reserved nodes and maybe jewels and Enlighten it would be possible to run a curse aura + hatred + HoA - and leave enough mana to sustain casting a primary skill, or two curses + one main aura.

"

Vipermagi a écrit :

Curse resistance is 60%, not 80%, and it's additive with Curse Effect. Skittering Runes alone gets you a 50% effective increase, going from 40% effectiveness to 60%, and Curses working at 60% strength are really friggen good.

(I really wish GGG reduced values on Curses and reduced Curse 'resist', it's an entirely invisible modifier that is never explained; lower resist at least makes it less impactful to be unaware of)

Are you sure?

pre 2.0 it was 70% for act bosses , 60% for map bosses then in the 2.0 beta (or shortly after in the release) there was a note in the patch notes that this resistance was increased .

there was no number given , but a logical setup up to me would be 10% , hence the 80% number

I think it was to combat that chill/ temp chains cheese you could do to slow bosses to around 20% of their regular speed....

and I heard nothing about it being reduced back to 60% so I am curious on the source of this info.