Can you powder of fort jewels like it says on UO guide?
-
Hail Guest! We're looking for Community Content Contribuitors to Stratics. If you would like to write articles, fan fiction, do guild or shard event recaps, it's simple. Find out how in this thread: Community Contributions
-
Greetings Guest, Having Login Issues? Check this thread!
-
Hail Guest!, Please take a moment to read this post reminding you all of the importance of Account Security.
-
Hail Guest! Please read the new announcement concerning the upcoming addition to Stratics. You can find the announcement Here!
Antique
- Thread starter PaithanTheElf
- Start date
- Watchers 0
Nope... devs like to keep things as inconsistent as possible it seems.
Clean jewelry can't even be Pof'd... It's unbelievable!
No, but the original intent was to be able to fort powder it three times but substantially dropping the max durability after the 2nd time.
Because of this, antique items are far worse than brittle items.
Frankly, they should just drop the antique tag and either make them brittle or not, aside from the prized tag.
Don't see this happening though.
could you link where it specifically says this about jewels so it can be corrected?
this is the main antique page on UOguide:
Antique - UOGuide, the Ultima Online Encyclopedia
it doesnt apply to jewels, because by default no jewels in the game can be pofed. its fully accurate for everything that can by default be pofed (armor shields weapons)
It was a stratics page not UO guide.
Magic Item Properties - Old Stratics
I am not at all familiar with crafting or anything of the sort. So just to spell it out for me.. if a jewel has the antique tag and lowers max durability- it can NEVER raise the max durability under any circumstance by any means?
If so- I hate the devs for more than just their pvp BS.
Not just antique. ANY jewels. Even clean ones. Since now they all spawn with durability you cannot use powder on them.
It is very inconsistent with so many items now. I even mentioned it before at a meet and greet and the devs were going to look into it / discuss it.
For example you can use powder on clean armor (no brittle, antique, imbed) but not on clean jewels. Some artifacts you can also powder (mace and shields for example) but you can't powder many of the new ones like a cameo.
Aside from the blatant inconsistency... my other issue with antique is what it counts as "combat". How is my antique jewelry being damaged if my pet is the one fighting? How is my antique jewelry being damaged running a bard song in Luna?
Antique should follow the same rules for actions that result in losing durability as all other items, with only an increased chance to take damage.
Antique should follow the same rules for actions that result in losing durability as all other items, with only an increased chance to take damage.
Pretty sure the devs reasoning for Jewelry to not be Powder-able is because the jewels Start with 255/255 durability...
I say, if that's the problem make jewels spawn with random amounts of durability like everything else... unless it's antique (antiques always spawn with 255/255 starting durability)....
Antique jewelry should be powder-able 3x like everything else that's antique...
Clean items should be powder-able up to 255/255 unlimited times regardless if the item(s) are jewerly or not (makes reason for PoF in the first place).
If not, why are "clean" jewelry items so rare?
I mean, shouldn't they be the same rarity as "Brittle" legendary armor/weapons, since technically a clean jewel is brittle? -starts at 255/255 & cannot be pof'd
Let's get this game fixed!
I say, if that's the problem make jewels spawn with random amounts of durability like everything else... unless it's antique (antiques always spawn with 255/255 starting durability)....
Antique jewelry should be powder-able 3x like everything else that's antique...
Clean items should be powder-able up to 255/255 unlimited times regardless if the item(s) are jewerly or not (makes reason for PoF in the first place).
If not, why are "clean" jewelry items so rare?
I mean, shouldn't they be the same rarity as "Brittle" legendary armor/weapons, since technically a clean jewel is brittle? -starts at 255/255 & cannot be pof'd
Let's get this game fixed!
Merlin
The Enchanter
Moderator
Professional
Governor
Supporter
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
UNLEASHED
Campaign Patron
If there is anything that should be considered for a potential change, it would be to raise the imbue intensity cap for self-made jewels so a full sixth mod can be added. Otherwise, leave everything as is. There really just isn't any need for massive game-changing alterations to jewelry here.
There are enough high end jewels in game already. We need some of these to cycle out from time to time. Even antique jewels will last you a bit. If you build a suit or template around one, you're just going have to deal with the possibility of having to update it later once the jewel runs out. Every item in-game shouldn't be made to last in perpetuity.
There are enough high end jewels in game already. We need some of these to cycle out from time to time. Even antique jewels will last you a bit. If you build a suit or template around one, you're just going have to deal with the possibility of having to update it later once the jewel runs out. Every item in-game shouldn't be made to last in perpetuity.
What's the point in having Powder of Fortification if it's not usable on anything?
Adding an extra imbuing slot to items wouldn't make a difference... brittle items can have like 7-20 properties.... who the hell would drop down to 6 properties for imbuing when they could just use cheap legendary items?
Merlin
The Enchanter
Moderator
Professional
Governor
Supporter
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
UNLEASHED
Campaign Patron
Six is better than five. Imbue-able jewels shouldn't have the same weight as a 10+ property high-end legendary drop.
And you're right - legendary jewels are becoming cheaper and more plentiful, which is what I noted in my first post. All the reason more why they shouldn't be made to last forever and ever. If you do want one to last a long time, you can imbue one and take the penalty of having less properties. That seems to be a fair balance.
I must've missed the memo that it's no longer able to be used on anything.
I think the point was for virtually every piece of looted gear that gets used it is either brittle (armor) or antique (jewelry)... neither of which can have powder used on them.
Why do you NEED them to cycle out from time to time? Sounds like a PvMers perspective.
As a PvPer I used to be able to have characters on every east and west coast shard. Do you know how costly that would be now? Especially if I had to ship a jewel due to deterioration?
Building one suit takes long enough. Once it is complete it is a pain in the ass. Plus, suits are now build AROUND jewels. So, one jewel goes away it is not a simple replace of the jewel. It is building a whole new suit.
Yeah - keeps the economy going when **** breaks, but I agree that antique is a little too intense. For the amount of gold jewelry goes for, we should get a little more wear out of them. I've cut down drastically on "horsing around" with guildmates because of jewelry damage. Kind of lame.
Merlin
The Enchanter
Moderator
Professional
Governor
Supporter
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
UNLEASHED
Campaign Patron
It is a PVMers perspective, which there are more of than PVPers, but I am not a complete Trammie ether. PVPers need to end their "holier-than-thou" approach whenever they have a comment on something because their precious template or suit isn't going to be permanently uber-elite.
You shouldn't have some 10+ mod uber-elite Legendary jewel last in perpetuity for PVP. I don't feel sympathy that you can't build multi-platinum uber suits on every single shard in game so that the same two dozen or so die-hard PVPers can wreck everyone in game on every shard.
Because then you might not make as much money? Do you think I want to have to have pvpers on every shard? No. The fact is this game is dying and to increase pvp chances you have to go to other shards. I am glad you don't care about pvp, but to those of us that do- that is highly expensive to keep up with for pvp especially when it ends up being only 10 or so new pvpers on a shard.
Let me transfer my chars for free and immediately to any shard and then bing bam boom I wouldn't have an issue with it. Back when faction arties and imbued armor was the high end items- guess what- everyone was on the same level to build suits and it was not expensive. But, boo hoo the pvmers had to cry because it was easier for everyone to be equal. And now those same pvmers are blabbing on about "uber suits" and then claim thats the reason there is dominance.
There is a MASSIVE need to alter the entire Imbuing/enhement/reforge/refinement systems to keep up with all the UBER LOOT that has been placed in the game by the DEVs.
This to me says no not take away our UBER LOOT sells.
Crafters are becoming a dying breed when it comes to making PvP and PvM items on a regular basis.
Yea... and 7-20 is better than 6... that's the point. The only people that would really benefit from imbuing adding up to 6 properties would be max luck suit users & sampires... very few other people will use imbued items if not for luck pieces & weapons (Pvm)...
and pvp... Archers would get +1 more property on bows? no thanks. We're trying to fix the game not mess it up more.
Merlin
The Enchanter
Moderator
Professional
Governor
Supporter
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
UNLEASHED
Campaign Patron
Simply because someone doesn't agree with your call to do away with 'antique' doesn't mean it has to do with greed or that they don't care about PVP.
No one in this conversation said we should add an extra property to bows.
I never said to do away with antique.... I said fix it. Big difference.
Also, adding 6th imbuing slot to jewels only wouldn't do enough for imbuing either...
Nothing people use can be Powdered...
PoF is only usable for making luck suits & new weapons.
If you want items to be cycled out, have them be cycled out by finding items that are better...
Last edited: