We are not saying remove it... we are saying that you should have a way to remove it in the imbuing process if you like, or that it should not count toward what you can add to a weapon. And if it came down to it, I would much rather remove it from the unraveling weight toward frags if it allowed us to put an extra property, and an extra 90-100% intensity on weapons.If you remove DI from exceptionally crafted items, you wreck what few options we have to get relics. No thanks, I'm happy with imbuing as it is.
Exceptional items can have DI and 4 other properties and can have 500 total weight.Mind if I ask why?
I thought the purpose of having cap values was to reward exceptionally crafted items period. After all, they are exceptional so should be able to hold a better magical charge. That's how I interpreted it anyway.Isn't that the purpose of having different cap values from exceptional and npc bought items?
If you could remove the damage increase then the cap should be lowered to 450 for exceptional items.
I would only accept this change if the above cost applied, Otherwise I think it would be slightly overpowering.If it takes 5 relic frags to put it on, should take 5 relic frags to remove it. Otherwise people are going to be able to make this uber jewelry even easier. Not that that is a TOTALLY bad thing, but the game should still be at least some what difficult.
Agreed, but I dont' think it should need an ingredient.they should add in a new ingredient that can be used to remove a property from an item via imbuing. Tired of having DI on my exceptional weapons when I really don't want or need it.
I'm thinking the resources used to remove the property, should be really RARE off of SA peerless, and require one relic frag. Still possible, but expensive so it's not overly used. Yeah I know, crafters themselves wont be able to get it, but other templates could or other people.I would only accept this change if the above cost applied, Otherwise I think it would be slightly overpowering.
Why make complexity just for the sake of creating an overly complex system?I'm thinking the resources used to remove the property, should be really RARE off of SA peerless, and require one relic frag. Still possible, but expensive so it's not overly used. Yeah I know, crafters themselves wont be able to get it, but other templates could or other people.
Just a thought.
Now you're just being silly, it's not complex to add 1 rare resource in order to do something you couldn't before.Why make complexity just for the sake of creating an overly complex system?
Maybe the crafter should only be able to do it at the right time requiring the use of a holiday timepiece and it has to be 5:34 in the morning.
-Lorax
having DI not take up item weight will never happen. Removing a property shouldn't be taken lightly, otherwise you can just use a high end runic, remove all properties you don't want and replace them, making it much easier to amazing items.No. This should NOT require expensive ingredients, or any ingredients for that matter. The 40% Damage Inc is a BONUS for having high smithing AND Arms Lore skill. So it should not be a draw back. When you craft exceptional armor it does not leave you with only 420% Weight left, and only 4 mods available. Weapons should be the same way. The bonus you get from exceptional should not count at all towards the imbuing properties or weights.
If you want to bring the damage up to 50% then ya, that should count. But the inherent 40% is a BONUS and should NOT take up any weight!
Removing properties should have been part of imbuing at it's inception. High end runics would actually be worth something again if it was possible. As it is now, trying to sell an aggy or verite runic hammer is almost more costly than it's worth to have them sitting on vendors for weeks, even at basement pricing.having DI not take up item weight will never happen. Removing a property shouldn't be taken lightly, otherwise you can just use a high end runic, remove all properties you don't want and replace them, making it much easier to amazing items.