You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I'm running the latest version of Path of Building and I've verified this by checking the changelog
Check for duplicates
I've checked for duplicate open and closed issues by using the search function of the issue tracker
Check for support
I've checked that the calculation is supposed to be supported. If it isn't please open a feature request instead (Red text is a feature request).
What platform are you running Path of Building on?
Windows
What is the value from the calculation in-game?
In-Game, the Aristocrat ascendancy Gem-Lined Cap reads "+3 to Level of all non-Exceptional Support Gems". This works (mostly) as expected.
What is the value from the calculation in Path of Building?
In Path of Building, Gem-Lined Cap is rendered as blue which implies that it is implemented and is working. No support gems receive the +3 bonus from this ascendancy node however.
How to reproduce the issue
Apply a support gem(s) to your active skill in PoB
Toggle the Gem-Lined Cap ascendancy on and off
Confirm no numbers change
Check version
Check for duplicates
Check for support
What platform are you running Path of Building on?
Windows
What is the value from the calculation in-game?
In-Game, the Aristocrat ascendancy Gem-Lined Cap reads "+3 to Level of all non-Exceptional Support Gems". This works (mostly) as expected.
What is the value from the calculation in Path of Building?
In Path of Building, Gem-Lined Cap is rendered as blue which implies that it is implemented and is working. No support gems receive the +3 bonus from this ascendancy node however.
How to reproduce the issue
Apply a support gem(s) to your active skill in PoB
Toggle the Gem-Lined Cap ascendancy on and off
Confirm no numbers change
PoB for PoE1 build code
Screenshots
No response
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: