# Wording of "+n% To All Damage" is Misleading

How I read this bonus (incorrectly):
Take your total damage before resistances. Multiply it by n%. Add this to your damage for the total damage. For example, 500 damage “+100% damage” with this interpretation would mean 1000 damage (500 + 500 * (100%)). I was also unsure if it applied to pets, because pets in a way feel like MY damage, however it does not apply to them.

Actual:
Add n% to every % damage bonus on your character. If you already do +300% damage in one type, this makes it +400%, which is far from double damage.

Alternate Suggested Wordings:
“Add n% to all character percent damage bonuses”
“Add n% to all damage bonuses”

Your suggestions are way too wordy…

All Damage works fine.

+50% to All Damage = All damage increased by 50% (flat increase, not multiplicative.)

The only stat that is multiplicative is “Total Damage modified by…” which is mainly only seen on transmuters like the one Blade Arc has.

Maybe it’s better to replace the “Total Damage modified by X%” by “Total damage multiplied by Y” where Y=X/100.

I know my suggestions aren’t ideal, but that’s because of how hard it is to word in a concise way which most people are going to read correctly.

Maybe “+n% to all damage bonuses” without the pets part.

The reason I found it confusing is because of what I thought “total damage” meant. I thought it meant the total you get after you apply all of your %bonuses. Like the sum (ie total) of all damage you do with whatever spell or attack. So that’s why I thought +n% to total damage would increase that, at the very end of adding everything up

It’s the same with all damage types then.

We have for example ‘+100% fire damage’, but that doesn’t double fire damage.

What we have now is consistent and easy to understand.

That is wrong. Total damage modified by say +100% means multiplying by 2, not 1…

Y=1+X/100

It does mean that. Increase in “total damage” happens after all the other damage bonus. Bonus to “all damage” happens at the same time as the other bonus.

I agree with this one.
I was reading wrong as well but I never took the time to actualy research what it meant. Adding one word to the sentence is not a big deal and would make a lot of difference in interpretation.

I generally agree with the wording being imprecise, but if we would be already at it I would wanna get rid of another phrasing paradigm that seems to have caused misunderstandings for years and years.

Because the phrase “+n% to” literally expresses that the respective bonus is to be modified by the stated percentage while in fact it isn’t.
In fact that “% [to X] damage” that this refers to is a discrete variable that holds the value for the modifier that is applied multiplicatively to all (flat) damage of the respective damage type X.
So what “+n% to all damage” wants to express is rather that the value of this variable is to be modified by a flat amount. Correct me if I should be wrong.

Thus it would be even more precise if we changed the text to “+n to all percentual damage bonuses” or, less syntactically correct but more concise, “+n to all % damage bonuses”. Or something along the lines.

One could also argue that “bonuses” isn’t really precise either.
As far as I know it is generally possible to get a negative value on such a “bonus”, making it a penalty, or “malus”.
Thus the word “modifier” would probably be more fitting, making this “+n to all percentual damage modifiers” and “+n to all % damage modifiers” respectively.

Sorry, your suggestion doesn’t make any sense to me. It’s already as straightforward as it can get if you understand how numbers/percentages work.

This is exactly why it is so confusing to someone who doesn’t already know how it works.

+n% to Total Damage -> happens afterwards, multiplicative
+100% to total damage is doubling your damage

+n% to All Damage -> happens in the same stage as other %bonus, making it additive to those bonuses
+100% to all damage, on top of an existing +300% bonus = +400% damage. Obviously much less then double damage if you already have a large bonus.

The wording of the two is nearly identical, “All damage” and “Total damage.” The words “all” and “total” are practically synonymous. The difference between them in terms of how they effect my damage (additive, multiplicative) is MASSIVE.

Basically my problem is that with the wording of the two, there is no way to identify which does what without research outside of the game itself. Perhaps instead of changing the wording, they could add a tooltip when you pick up your first item with “+n% to all damage” which explains in more words what exactly is happening, in comparison to “+n% to total damage”

There is absolutely no way to know from the terms

all damage
total damage

which one is going to do what. They are practically the same. Once you know how it works, and just memorize that difference between the games use of the terms, I agree it is very simple to understand.

However to someone without outside knowledge of how it works and just entering and reading it within the game for the first time, it is in my opinion too hard to definitely prove which phrase is doing what

Except that isn’t what the game reads. The game defines Total Damage as ‘Total Damage Modified by X%’.

On the other hand, All Damage implies a sense of additivity with its ‘+’ sign: ‘+X% All Damage’, just like other damage types: ‘+X% Fire Damage’.

I played this game to lv40 without checking a single site and I wrapped my head around it just fine. The problem isn’t with the game.

Other people in the thread have said they made the same mistake as me. Not everyone will, but if there is a simple change like rewording something or adding a tooltip helps more people know whats up, then why not?

Also, explain how logically you decided that “+50 to total damage” is multiplicative, and “+50% to all damage” is additive to other bonuses. Seeing as the words total and all are basically the same. You simply guessed correctly.

Nowhere in the game does it say +x to total damage. The wording is, ‘Total damage modified by’ which would suggest it is different somehow than all other damage stats.

Well, if someone is confused your damage bonuses are listed on the 2nd tab of your character sheet. I quick check there to see how the bonuses change when you equip/unequip an item (or devotion or passive skill) should clear up confusion fast…

The wording is consistent with other bonuses. Doesn’t sound like the wording is confusing for the other bonuses. Seems like if the wording wasn’t consistent it would cause more confusion… If the wording would change, it would mean all the other wording needs to be changed too… Maybe if it was changed, however, would “+100% to all base damage” be clear enough and not too wordy? Still, if people just take to time to look at the information in the character sheets, there should be little confusion…