Reduced effect of ailments on you. Does this reduce duration?

For example, does having 50% reduced effect of non-damaging ailments reduce the time you are shocked, chilled, frozen, etc. by 50%? If not, does reducing effect of ailments do anything vs freeze? Or would u need exactly 100% in order to counteract freeze?

Also, what if I also have death's door, increasing ailment duration by 50%? How does this interact with reduced effect of ailments?

Thank you!

Reduced Effect of Non-Damaging Ailments will apply to Chill, Shock, Scorch, Brittle and Sap. It will not apply to Ignition, Poison and Bleeding (While they are Ailments, they are damaging), and will not apply to Freeze (While it is a non-damaging ailment, its effect reduces your action speed to 0 and locks you in place, bypassing even Kaom, Stampede and other sources of "your action speed cannot be lowered).

Effect Reduction does literally that: it lowers the efficacy of those ailments on you. So, if you have 50% Reduced Effect of Shock of you, if you sip a Vessel of Vinktar, which shocks you for 50% Increased Damage Taken, you will be instead Shocked for 50*0.5% = 25% Increased Damage Taken.

This also means that having 100% Reduced Effect of [non_damaging ailment] on You is the same like having Immunity to that ailment (in other words, wearing an Inpulsa has the same effect as having 100% Reduced Effect of Shock on you), much like having 100% Chance to Avoid something is equal to have a "Cannot be [ailment/debuff]" bonus.

Personally, I have never seen something that gives you a "Immune to Freeze", but there are examples of "Cannot be Frozen", like in Wanderlust. While logically I would say having 100% Reduced Effect of Freeze on you would mean you are frozen and still able to walk and act, I believe the unique "binary" effect of Freeze makes the Reduced Effect approach uneffective. Were it not like this, Izaro's Dilemma would have been way more used than now.

Reduced Effect only applies to the magnitude of an ailment's malus. It does nothing regarding its duration.

As an example, suppose you are wearing an Inpulsa (100% Reduced effect of Shock on you) and Death's Door (+50% increased shock duration). You are hit by a Vaal Oversoul's Ray and you are still alive. You are, however, shocked. Let's say the shock would have been for 40% Increase Damage Taken and would last 5 second.

In your case, you will be shocked for 0% Increased Damage Taken (because Inpulsa), and it will last for 7.5 seconds (because Death's Door)

"

Maxtrux wrote:

Reduced Effect of Non-Damaging Ailments will apply to Chill, Shock, Scorch, Brittle and Sap. It will not apply to Ignition, Poison and Bleeding (While they are Ailments, they are damaging), and will not apply to Freeze (While it is a non-damaging ailment, its effect reduces your action speed to 0 and locks you in place, bypassing even Kaom, Stampede and other sources of "your action speed cannot be lowered).

Unless I am misremembering, freeze should not bypass Kaom's Roots. If your action speed cannot be lowered below the base value, then freeze does not do so either. The wiki also lists freeze among the effects that are circumvented by Kaom's Roots.

The Stampede locks your movement speed to 150% of the base value, which is why it does not prevent freeze from affecting you, since that modifies action speed.

"

Maxtrux wrote:

This also means that having 100% Reduced Effect of [non_damaging ailment] on You is the same like having Immunity to that ailment (in other words, wearing an Inpulsa has the same effect as having 100% Reduced Effect of Shock on you), much like having 100% Chance to Avoid something is equal to have a "Cannot be [ailment/debuff]" bonus.

Personally, I have never seen something that gives you a "Immune to Freeze", but there are examples of "Cannot be Frozen", like in Wanderlust. While logically I would say having 100% Reduced Effect of Freeze on you would mean you are frozen and still able to walk and act, I believe the unique "binary" effect of Freeze makes the Reduced Effect approach uneffective. Were it not like this, Izaro's Dilemma would have been way more used than now.

100% reduced effect does not make you immune, it makes you unaffected. The distinction is important for modifiers like "while shocked". With 100% reduced effect you can be shocked, but with 100% chance to avoid ailments, you cannot.

Your understanding of why reduced effect does not apply to freeze is correct.

"

DER_PSYCHOPATH wrote:

Unless I am misremembering, freeze should not bypass Kaom's Roots.

I've found a 3-year old post about the interaction with Kaom's Roots and a Freezing strongbox. Seems at the end OP actually got frozen but could still walk. I guess if they did not change anything for 3 years, then Izaro's Dilemma is solved.

"

DER_PSYCHOPATH wrote:

100% reduced effect does not make you immune, it makes you unaffected.

Slip of tongue, I remembered "Cannot be - Immune to" rather than "Cannot be - Unaffected by". Thanks for clearing that up

Thanks, guys, for the great answers and discussion! So if I want to avoid freeze, should I go for the "chance to avoid non-damaging ailments" approach, and try to get to 100%? I'm guessing also if I get 100% reduced freeze duration, that would work too, right? But what if I'm wearing death's door (which raises duration by 50%) while I have 100% reduced duration? Would I now only have 50% duration?

Am I right in thinking that "100% reduced effect of non-damaging ailments" will completely mitigate all the other ones besides freeze (chill, shock, sap, brittle, and scorch)? Also wondering, do enemies ever use sap, brittle and scorch, or are those only ever seen from players when they have Secrets of Suffering? In which case I'm really only mitigating chill and shock.

Thanks a lot for the help!

"

Stebobibo wrote:

Thanks, guys, for the great answers and discussion! So if I want to avoid freeze, should I go for the "chance to avoid non-damaging ailments" approach, and try to get to 100%? I'm guessing also if I get 100% reduced freeze duration, that would work too, right? But what if I'm wearing death's door (which raises duration by 50%) while I have 100% reduced duration? Would I now only have 50% duration?

Am I right in thinking that "100% reduced effect of non-damaging ailments" will completely mitigate all the other ones besides freeze (chill, shock, sap, brittle, and scorch)? Also wondering, do enemies ever use sap, brittle and scorch, or are those only ever seen from players when they have Secrets of Suffering? In which case I'm really only mitigating chill and shock.

Thanks a lot for the help!

Yes, you would end up with 50% of the duration if you have 100% reduced duration otherwise.

If you get 100% chance to avoid elemental ailments, you will be completely immune to freeze and even chilling and shocking ground.

I do not know of any enemies afflicting the newer generation of ailments, but technically they are also included in elemental ailments and non-damaging ailments.

100% reduced effect will indeed make you unaffected by all except for freeze.

"

DER_PSYCHOPATH wrote:

I do not know of any enemies afflicting the newer generation of ailments, but technically they are also included in elemental ailments and non-damaging ailments.

As per advanced tooltip Scorch, Brittle and Sap are Elemental Ailments, expected to be non-damaging because of their effect. I believe some mobs in Harvest and Delirium were able to, at least, Sap you, but they are indeed a rare occurence. ...For now.