Talk:Crafting
From ProphWiki
A summary:
Copied from Musing III -
Some thoughts on an idea for a new eq sink providing something for end-game players to do with eq that's less painful than enchanting [----:----+----:----+----:----+----:----+----:----+----:----+----:----+----] Essentially, the concept of being able to "reroll" an item, a command with a good chance of trashing the item, and a small chance of adding a 1pt bonus (so, -5 ac/1hit/1dam/-2 saves/whatever) to the item. It provides a good eq sink, which with 140k+ items in existence (lockers/hostels), taking up around 20+ MB since we don't yet have a cacheing system, would be good. It's less time consuming than enchanting (for the people with vast quantities of gathered items just sitting around until they get bored enough to enchant a few). It potentially gets you, well, just a little something extra, and quite nice. There are lots of spare items around, being hoarded for want of something better to do with them, for example: 407 archpriest robes, 144 elder cloaks, 863 chains of madness, 647 shaman staffs, 809 fleece boots, 213 warm sashes, 744 intricate bracelets, 1065 sky crystals, 872 nedra mantles, 122 demonskins, 480 chains of fangs, and plenty of other items in 3-4 digit quantities. Obviously, these are spread out among players, but it shows that there are plenty "around". It just gives a little something to do.
Brought up on ooc on 20070507.1928, some "minutes":
- Rasfene: This won't necessarily solve the problem of hoarding, since people will now have more incentive to get items, and will still hoard the crafted items.
- Anheg: However, a: it's planned to be "cheaper" (mana/time) than enchanting (100 mana/20s), so less "I have 200 sally crowns I'll enchant one day", and b: while the exact chance to enchant an item to -5 ac isn't explicitly known, it's a sufficiently low percentage. Saying arbitrarily, 1%, then to have 200 *crafted* sally crowns, of the order of 20000 would have had to have been collected. Yes, arguably, people now actually have significant incentive to collect more, but numerically, it should be fine
Some further comments:
- Random stats (where stats can be ac, hitroll, and not just str/int/etc) via crafting, rather than just, say, lowering "costs" for enchant, to avoid balance hit on warriors
- Possibly justifying as some sort of "divine blessing" (to allow all classes to do)
- Possibly some level addition to the item (capped at 91) to stop "uber newbie eq"
Do please comment below on the idea - Anheg 18:39, 7 May 2007 (BST)
- I like the idea, but it seems to be very repeated-action based = will lead to people just doing tedious work and spamming this. Also doesn't much to encourage group play. Since I think those two things are the most important part of a fun game, I'd say it would be much better if it helped out those two things somehow. Noran 21:16, 2 June 2007 (BST)
- However, it is a: relatively trivial to implement (so it's not as though there's significant opportunity cost for its introduction), b: makes good headway to resolving the issues described above (especially if it were done via "crafting" mobs, for a gold fee, two sinks with one stone). Finally, it gives people more of a reason to kill things, which in many cases, is much more fun if done in a group (and, once some more things are "fixed", like AC and charm, we should see some more items essentially "requiring" a group to get). Anheg 12:41, 3 June 2007 (BST)
- I do like the idea of a crafting mob requiring gold... actually, those two points make me like this idea a lot. Noran 23:00, 3 June 2007 (BST)
- However, it is a: relatively trivial to implement (so it's not as though there's significant opportunity cost for its introduction), b: makes good headway to resolving the issues described above (especially if it were done via "crafting" mobs, for a gold fee, two sinks with one stone). Finally, it gives people more of a reason to kill things, which in many cases, is much more fun if done in a group (and, once some more things are "fixed", like AC and charm, we should see some more items essentially "requiring" a group to get). Anheg 12:41, 3 June 2007 (BST)
