Changes to Imbuing

[Maplestone]

ps: Does anyone know whether the existing crafting talismans for mansory have the "exceptional" bonus?

Yes they do (tower sculptures need at least a +10% masonry exceptional bonus to have a chance at crafting an exceptional one)

 

[Ailish]

Harlequin - Others have asked for just that thing (removing a single property). Wilki stated he isnt sure if it is possible, but that he would look into it. Best we can ask for the moment

 

[Lord Drakelord]

Currently imbuing has the following limitations:

1. Can imbue up to 5 properties on an item.
2. Each property is limited to a max of 100% intensity.
3. Can imbue up to 500% total intensity on an exceptionally crafted item, or 450% on any other item.
4. Some properties are weighted to count more towards the total intensity cap.

Many of our beta players have expressed concern that the items created by imbuing are too powerful, and that imbuing has the potential to make other sources of items much less attractive.

The idea was then brought forth that perhaps imbuing should be less of an "item creation" skill, and more of an "item customization" skill. We thought about that, and would like to get your feedback on the following:

1. Any item can have up to 300% weighted intensity added to it via imbuing (while still obeying the max caps from #2)
2. The total intensity caps remain the same (500 for exceptionally crafted, and 450 for regular items)
3. Individual property intensity can range up to 150% unweighted (but the weighted intensity still counts against the caps from #1 and #2)

What this would mean is that a regular item, with no properties on it, could be imbued up to 300% weighted intensity. An item that started out with, say, 130% weighted intensity, could then have an additional 300% weighted intensity added on top of that, for a total of 430%.

So, you could customize any valid* item with any combination of properties up to 300% weighted intensity, regardless of what it started with, as long as it doesn't exceed either of the caps from #1 and #2 above.

We feel that this would give you a lot of flexibility in creating the items you want, while not replacing so much of the existing methods of acquiring items. Loot drops that you find, or runics that you make are all good potential starting pieces for imbuing, but you'd still want to find something that fit what you're looking for.

This means that you couldn't create the perfect item from scratch, but you could customize a lot of the items that you have now, find as loot, buy on vendors, or craft yourself. However, newer players who pick up imbuing will still find it very useful in improving the items they would find while progressing through the game, or by creating less powerful items from scratch.

Please let us know what you think of these changes, we'll be reading this thread frequently. If you'd like to make other suggestions unrelated to these changes, please use the Stygian Abyss forum as we'll look for them there.

Thanks!


*A valid item is one that is currently imbuable by the imbuing system. It excludes artifacts, and any item made with or enhanced by special materials.

in layman terms Dr!!!!

Sorry you lost me here with this weighted intensity??

 

[jamie(gri)]

I'll try to explain it better.

Some properties "cost" more to imbue than others, in terms of reaching the total cap (either the 300% of imbued weight per item, or the 450/500 total weight for the item in general, which includes all properties, imbued or not).

For example, Damage Increase has the default weight of 1.0, which means that 100% counts as 100% against the cap. SSI, however, has a weight of 1.3, which means that 100% SSI would use up 130% towards the cap.

As far as individual properties go, as long as you don't exceed one of the total intensity caps for the item, then you can imbue any property up to 150%, regardless of weight.

So, that means you can have 75% Damage Increase (150% intensity for DI), and that would count at 150% intensity towards the cap.

For SSI, 150% intensity is 45 SSI, but since it has a weight multiplier of 1.3, it'd count as 1.3 * 150 = 195% against the cap.

ya i was confused too he answered here

and mr. Wilki sir ima need a list of those weight modifiers lol

 

[Ailish]

Drakelord - I posted a thread here in UHall that attemts to explain the weighted thing.

Basically what he said is you will no longer be able to buy something from an NPC and make it godly. You will now need to start with a base item that is looted or crafted with a few properties already on it and work from there

 

[MorganaLeFey]

ABC and calibek: How is this a "nerf" or causing what is possible now with imbuing to be impossible.

Your end result will still be the same as it is now. You will still be able to create those "godly" pieces now. The only difference is that you will need to craft or find a decent base first.

How can that be bad? How can keeping crafters and looters alive in the face of the power of this skill be bad? I really don't understand that.

PvM for high end loot has been the way THIS GAME has been since the beginning. Invulnerable Plate, anyone?

I don't even have a crafter, but even I could see how damaging imbuing could be to those who do.

@ Shelley - I am curious, why would they need to be enhanced when gargish armor already has a considerably higher base resist than human/elf armor. Mainly all this will do is change it so that you can have MR on your earrings, but not have + skills (which was a HUGE concern).

What she said.

 

[Bombastic Fail]

We are aware this is the 3rd "nerf" imbuing has had in like 2 weeks? Lol. I went from "OMG IMBUING IS GONNA BE SO WORTH THE PRICE TO TRAIN!" to "Oh well it'll be pretty good" to now, "Uhm it looks like a waste of money.."

It seems to me the lower level ecomony is complaining because all the high level rich people will get the "perfect" items first and you feel left out bc you can't afford it (or get it right away and will have to wait a month or so for the trickle down effect). Then it was nerfed to this..

So now, instead of waiting a month for everyone to have "perfect" items, the rich people will buy the 2 perfect mods weapons (Or make them with Runics, etc..), and get the perfect items ANYWAYS, but now they are even harder to come by for the lower level people, so instead of having to wait a month for you, you have to wait 6 months to get it && a lot more money (if you buy it from the richer people, making them richer.)

Doesn't that sort of defeat the purpose? I thought Imbuing was basically the way to give everyone perfect things, so the playing field is COMPLETELY BALANCED (as far as items, since everyone will have there maxxed modded items). I think you just opened a bigger gap between rich/poor by limiting, because the rich can afford ANYTHING, while as the poor cannot.

Just my 2 cents about it.

 

[Specialshoes]

I thought imbuing was to be the great equalizer to bring back player skill to the game. This change definitely is not it.

 

[It Lives]

Tied to runics once again, prices on kits will push back up. Again script kiddies win.


The whole Idea was to give us the power to customize our gear, this semi quazi customize puts alot of luck back into the picture.

Luck what the **** is up with luck its been broken since inception (AOS). Not to mention the excessive excuses on not fixing it or adjusting loot drops.

Well Instead of making enhancing work you give us imbuing and ask us to take a middle ground, well I say the middle ground need be a bit higher on our side or the new skill will be a failure.

 

[Ailish]

The purpose was never to allow "everyone" to create "perfect" items. The STATED purpose was to allow some flexibility and choice.

Are you seriously going to try to say that even the poorest people do not have at least one chest full of "so close!" items? AND keep a straight face while you say it?

People who are THAT poor will be SOL in the first place, because they will have nothing to unravel to get the ingredients in the first place! Maybe that person should get their ass out there and kill a mongbat or something - everyone has to start somewhere!

EVERYONE has the capacity to fight the necessary creatures, or to raise the necessary skills to get the base items. Asking for hand-outs because you are lazy doesnt go over very well.

----

Also, all detractors, why not wait and TEST it when it goes live?! Then give CONSTRUCTIVE feedback ("wat?! I cant make mad lootz from noobz gear anymorez?! FOUL!" does not constitute constructive :< )

 

[Ole Cheapy]

So what if a weapon that is unenhanced and a non artifact already has 6 properties? Does this mean I can choose 5 properties on the item who's intensity I wash to raise on the "already" 6 mod weapon? Also what if I want to totally remove a property to bring it to the 5 max property? I havent seen this covered so i thought I would ask.

 

[jamie(gri)]

After much consideration i dont care much for these changes, unless it includes the ability to remove unwanted mods. The reason behind my decision is the odds of getting a useable piece from crafting or monster loot seems to be almost as low as getting an uber piece from said methods. I thought this was supposed to make high end pieces more aquireable. However with the ability to remove mods it would greatly increase the ability to loot/make useable pieces for imbuing.

just my 2gp tho

 

[Hanokh1967]

Imbuing should encompass all 3 modes--item creation, item modification, and item modification thru property removal. Vary the difficulty as necessary to limit uber items but give us the flexibility to create the items we want to create. This is the first good idea to come to UO in years. Please don't mess it up now by adding restrictions.

 

[Natalie Black]

I agree, good if we can remove properties that are unwanted.

 

[Bombastic Fail]

If you don't understand the "WEIGHTS" of items that people are talking about; skip this post.


ANYWAYS;

My other thing is this.. (Mainly Weapons & Jewerly)

The weight of NON-EXCEPTIONAL (Monster loot & Non-Exp crafted items)
has a 450% weight table.

Meaning..
4 100% properties & 1 50% property.


***And lets remember***
Unless you are making gemmed Items such as Ecru Citrine rings and the like,
You CAN NOT get expectional jewelry
*******


Now; Exceptional weapons
(500% weight item, for being exceptional)
Come with between 35-40% damage inc
(70-80% on the weight table)

So, you are cut down to 420% - 430% to start with.

Now, this sounds OK if you want damage on your weapon, but what if you dont?

Jewels can give you 50% damage inc
Tallys give 20% Damage
Gloves can give between 15%-25% depending on the ones you are using
&& Headpieces can give anywhere between 10%-30%

So, the best weapon without damage inc on it you can get is 450% with a NON-Exceptional?

BC Exceptional = Auto 70-80% weight down the drain.


That is lame in my opinion and makes Imbuing weapons & jewels less desirable. Mainly because of the auto damage on exceptional weapons
(Maybe give a gump saying "Do you wish to add 40% damage inc to your weapon")

And the NON-Ability to start out with an Exceptional piece of jewelry
(Again; except for the gemmed jewels)



Or as others stated; make removing of properties feasible.

 

[TheGrayGhost]

If you don't understand the "WEIGHTS" of items that people are talking about; skip this post.


ANYWAYS;

My other thing is this.. (Mainly Weapons & Jewerly)

The weight of NON-EXCEPTIONAL (Monster loot & Non-Exp crafted items)
has a 450% weight table.

Meaning..
4 100% properties & 1 50% property.


***And lets remember***
Unless you are making gemmed Items such as Ecru Citrine rings and the like,
You CAN NOT get expectional jewelry
*******


Now; Exceptional weapons
(500% weight item, for being exceptional)
Come with between 35-40% damage inc
(70-80% on the weight table)

So, you are cut down to 420% - 430% to start with.

Now, this sounds OK if you want damage on your weapon, but what if you dont?

Jewels can give you 50% damage inc
Tallys give 20% Damage
Gloves can give between 15%-25% depending on the ones you are using
&& Headpieces can give anywhere between 10%-30%

So, the best weapon without damage inc on it you can get is 450% with a NON-Exceptional?

BC Exceptional = Auto 70-80% weight down the drain.


That is lame in my opinion and makes Imbuing weapons & jewels less desirable. Mainly because of the auto damage on exceptional weapons
(Maybe give a gump saying "Do you wish to add 40% damage inc to your weapon")

And the NON-Ability to start out with an Exceptional piece of jewelry
(Again; except for the gemmed jewels)

Even gemmed jewels have a very low exceptional rate, not to mention you won't have any exceptional earrings and necklaces at all to work with.

 

[Maplestone]

I'd like to understand here is what exactly bothers people here...

Do you not believe that it's the same end power? (were you planning to only create perfectly maxed suits with imbuing? or settle for something a little less that allowed you to avoid needing to find a supply of relic fragments?)

Is it the added complexity/work of needing to find a base item close to 200%?

Or were you hoping for clearly identifiable "commodity" suits (identical stats each time you go to buy a replacement piece)?

 

[Ailish]

Ole Cheapy - I played around with this some early on. It is a shakey area - if the item already exceeds the 500% intensity cap, then no, you cannot. If it doesnt, then you can adjust existing properties to that point. Now that property weights have been added, I would guess the chance of being able to will be few and far between.

@ Jamie - have you ever seen a 1/3 ring with nothing else on it? This change would let you put 2-3 more things on that ring. If it is 1/3 with + 10 Magery? Even better!

Crafting a weapon with a dull copper runic is going to give you 40 DI and one other property. You can imbue the rest! It is not so hard to imagine that you will not get at least 3 items with a property you can use off of a DC runic.

 

[Ailish]

Bombastic - You can lower the intensity of the DI. You cannot completely remove it, and that is a shame (and Wilki did tell us he would look into it, but no promises); but you *can* lower its impact on your weapon. You can even lower it to 1%.

I would also like to be able to remove a property. But if it isnt possible, Imbuing will still add more customization power to armor and weapons than has ever existed in this game that I can recall.

 

[Bombastic Fail]

Crafting a weapon with a dull copper runic is going to give you 40 DI and one other property. You can imbue the rest! It is not so hard to imagine that you will not get at least 3 items with a property you can use off of a DC runic.

That part right there. Why do you NEED damage inc on your weapon? It's like HCI. You can get these properties in so many different places now, so why do you have to waste the property on damage? IDK about you, but I would rather sacrifice 1-2 properties on my jewels (for damage) so I can have ALL of my weapons to not need damage inc and have an extra mod on them.

 

[jamie(gri)]

yes i have seen ring with 1/3 only however they are about as common as before mentioned uber items.

and a dc runic gives 1-2 properties @ 40-100% intensity so not only would you have to roll the mods you were looking for but then you would have to hope the rng smiles on you for 90=100% intensity. all considered its alot to expect for an item just so i can begin to use the new skill on. however with the ability to remove mods from an item (which was planned before the closed beta even) you could use higher end hammers or loot from the high end loot tables. pick the mods you want remove the rest. so you can begin to use the new skill.

 

[Remy Blacktoe]

Maybe incorporating the Item Identification skill into removing properties would give it some use and allow people to remove things.

 

[Maplestone]

So what if a weapon that is unenhanced and a non artifact already has 6 properties?

The check against the 5 property limit appears to be made when you select which mod to imbue. The result is:

If an item has 5 properties, you can raise or lower an existing property.

If the item has 6 properties, as soon as you select which mod you want to alter, you are informed the item has too many properties.

 

[Harlequin]

Yes they do (tower sculptures need at least a +10% masonry exceptional bonus to have a chance at crafting an exceptional one)

Thankies!

Harlequin - Others have asked for just that thing (removing a single property). Wilki stated he isnt sure if it is possible, but that he would look into it. Best we can ask for the moment

Yeah, that ability will really be nice.

Independant and well defined properties like MR and such I think is a bit easier to remove, I'm guessing it's things like the resists that's gonna give him a harder time, exceptional/armslore bonus and all.

 

[Ole Cheapy]

Ole Cheapy - I played around with this some early on. It is a shakey area - if the item already exceeds the 500% intensity cap, then no, you cannot. If it doesnt, then you can adjust existing properties to that point. Now that property weights have been added, I would guess the chance of being able to will be few and far between.

So basically instead of being joyful when you finally get an extra mod on a weapon after using a much earned runic hammer, you should just go ahead and cry cause you're actually being punished for being lucky and getting an extra mod by not being able to imbue it? Doesn't sound right to me. Well luck suits should definitely lose value cause being lucky in UO seem to have consequences and repercussions.

 

[Ailish]

however with the ability to remove mods from an item (which was planned before the closed beta even)

Plans on paper can sometimes not translate into coding. At one time it was planned for SA to be accessable with only the KR client ... now that client won't even exist and SA will be accessable by all available clients.

I am 100% in favor of being able to remove a property. But I am realistic. I have watched my husband code a single UI element for 2 weeks or more now. Coding is not always friendly. And sometimes something that looked good on paper comes out to leaving the product wide open for exploit. Ask Microsoft

I was thinking about how to allow for the removal of a property, but I'm not sure if we can do that. I'll look into it.

That is a direct quote from Wilki, taken from the internal forums, that he posted today at 5:29pm Pacific time.

 

[Ailish]

Old Cheapy - Imbuing is not meant to replace high end runics. Each will have their place. High end runics are random, but they can have a much higher intensity AND be "forever". Imbuing is customized, but has a capped intensity of 500% and will decay over time.

Its just a different option, not a replacement.

@ Bombastic - I just want to make sure you saw that earrings and necklaces will no longer have jewelry properties - that includes DI. So your places to put DI has not increased. You are still limited to ring, bracelet, etc.

 

[jamie(gri)]

if the whole problem is the 75 skill points on jewels why not just exclude +skill mods from being added to necklace and earring slots. that seems much easier, and will avoid a rework of the garg armor system.

 

[Ole Cheapy]

Maybe incorporating the Item Identification skill into removing properties would give it some use and allow people to remove things.

The 5 property max should ONLY be the limit of mods that you can imbue to a weapon, it shouldn't be a form of punishment for already having a 6 mod weapon.

A 1st grade teacher tells her students if you get an A on your test today boys and girls you will be rewarded a maximum of 5 treats from the candy bowl, lil Johnny comes to school with 6 pieces on candy already in his locker and kills the test! making a perfect 100 test score, the teacher now tells lil Johnny you already brought 6 pieces of candy from home so you don't get any candy from the candy bowl for scoring higher than everyone else in the class room. What does Lil Johnny do next????

 

[guum]

Someone reminded me that I left out some information from a prior change.

Earrings and necklaces are now only able to be imbued with armor properties. Allowing gargoyles 4 jewelry slots would have caused balance issues, obviously.

Also, we will make earrings and necklaces drop as loot as well.

What about the balance issues involved with gargoyles being unable to wear crimsons, lieutenant guard sashes, etc? I mean, I can see the point here, but gear-wise, the extra jewelry mods were their one advantage. Otherwise, they seem pretty gimped.

Not sure how I feel about this change. I kinda liked imbuing the way it was, but I could sympathize with those who thought it was overpowered. On the other hand, it looks to be a right pain to level up, so if it's taking a nerf, I hope that it will be a less horrific skill-up experience than I'm expecting.

 

[TheGrayGhost]

if the whole problem is the 75 skill points on jewels why not just exclude +skill mods from being added to necklace and earring slots. that seems much easier, and will avoid a rework of the garg armor system.

That has already been decided lol. Earrings and Necklaces will be treated as armor pieces instead of jewlry where imbuing is concerned.

 

[Ailish]

Not sure where you got the idea that was why this change was being made. That is why the necklace and earrings will have armor mods instead of jewelry (also, because gargoyles were coming up short on Regen properties).

But the rest of the change is so that regular crafters do not become overshadowed by the imbuer. There was serious concern by crafters that the power to imbue a 100% customized item from an NPC or newbie item would completely eclipse crafting and looting that is subject to randomness.

@ Old Cheapy - you are still not keeping in mind the fact that your 6 property item will be forever. It can be made of special materials to give it even more properties, in fact. Your analogy just isnt accurate to the situation.

 

[Uvtha]

Currently imbuing has the following limitations:

1. Can imbue up to 5 properties on an item.
2. Each property is limited to a max of 100% intensity.
3. Can imbue up to 500% total intensity on an exceptionally crafted item, or 450% on any other item.
4. Some properties are weighted to count more towards the total intensity cap.

Many of our beta players have expressed concern that the items created by imbuing are too powerful, and that imbuing has the potential to make other sources of items much less attractive.

The idea was then brought forth that perhaps imbuing should be less of an "item creation" skill, and more of an "item customization" skill. We thought about that, and would like to get your feedback on the following:

1. Any item can have up to 300% weighted intensity added to it via imbuing (while still obeying the max caps from #2)
2. The total intensity caps remain the same (500 for exceptionally crafted, and 450 for regular items)
3. Individual property intensity can range up to 150% unweighted (but the weighted intensity still counts against the caps from #1 and #2)

What this would mean is that a regular item, with no properties on it, could be imbued up to 300% weighted intensity. An item that started out with, say, 130% weighted intensity, could then have an additional 300% weighted intensity added on top of that, for a total of 430%.

So, you could customize any valid* item with any combination of properties up to 300% weighted intensity, regardless of what it started with, as long as it doesn't exceed either of the caps from #1 and #2 above.

We feel that this would give you a lot of flexibility in creating the items you want, while not replacing so much of the existing methods of acquiring items. Loot drops that you find, or runics that you make are all good potential starting pieces for imbuing, but you'd still want to find something that fit what you're looking for.

This means that you couldn't create the perfect item from scratch, but you could customize a lot of the items that you have now, find as loot, buy on vendors, or craft yourself. However, newer players who pick up imbuing will still find it very useful in improving the items they would find while progressing through the game, or by creating less powerful items from scratch.

Please let us know what you think of these changes, we'll be reading this thread frequently. If you'd like to make other suggestions unrelated to these changes, please use the Stygian Abyss forum as we'll look for them there.

Thanks!


*A valid item is one that is currently imbuable by the imbuing system. It excludes artifacts, and any item made with or enhanced by special materials.

Id like to suggest an allowance to imbue enhanced/special material items. As it is now, its suuuuuper hard to make an imbued set of armor thats worthwhile, because you have to enhance AFTER you imbue, and the success rate with leather and metal is really pretty low, so you could have to waste 5 or 6 fully imbued items before actually getting it enhanced, and if you don't enhance it the resists will be super low.

I don't see why this would be a bad thing so long as the proposed caps are put into play. And as it sits now you can make some really uber wooden items really easy because wood almost never fails to enhance.

This change would make the system MUCH more useful if you ask me.

 

[guum]

I personally view imbuing as an avenue to return to the days when items were fungible and the game retained a greater reliance on skill yet still keep the AOS damage and properties systems.

Continuing to nerf imbuing hoses that and keeps the cost of appropriate gear inflated.

Who benefits from that?

Also, I just wanted to add a to this insightful observation. I don't know if I had really figured out *why* I liked imbuing the way it is, but now that you put it this way, I totally agree.

 

[Ender]

It seems to me right now that gargoyles are going to be at a disadvantage to elves and humans tbh.

 

[Zodia]

Also, all detractors, why not wait and TEST it when it goes live?! Then give CONSTRUCTIVE feedback ("wat?! I cant make mad lootz from noobz gear anymorez?! FOUL!" does not constitute constructive :< )

Why don't you let people post their opinions instead of trying to run the thread? We've read your tiring posts. Now go away.

 

[Ender]

I personally view imbuing as an avenue to return to the days when items were fungible and the game retained a greater reliance on skill yet still keep the AOS damage and properties systems.

Continuing to nerf imbuing hoses that and keeps the cost of appropriate gear inflated.

Who benefits from that?

This was my thought from the first time I logged into open beta, where you could do 5 mods at 100%. I still feel the same way. Allow people to choose any mod at any intensity, and then PvP is less of a battle of items and more a battle of skill.

 

[Ole Cheapy]

@ Old Cheapy - you are still not keeping in mind the fact that your 6 property item will be forever. It can be made of special materials to give it even more properties, in fact. Your analogy just isnt accurate to the situation.

The analogy is fine i just think you're not getting what I'm saying...lemme try again...I want the option to modify 5 properties "of my choice" on my weapon regardless of how many extra mods I already have. Allow me to max out 5 of my mods on my weapon just as a owner of a 5 mod weapon can do. I won't modify my 6th mod, i will just leave it as is but I want the ability to modify 5 of my properties just as a 5 mod weapon owner has.

 

[Maplestone]

Also, I just wanted to add a to this insightful observation. I don't know if I had really figured out *why* I liked imbuing the way it is, but now that you put it this way, I totally agree.

I'd like to understand this a little better ...

What exactly about this change feels like a nerf to you?
What were you planning to do before that you can't do now?

 

[Fink]

Wilki, these sound like pretty reasonable concessions. I've always felt Imbuing should be a "tweak"craft and it sounds like it'll go that way.

In light of that, is there any plan to allow us to remove/delete individual unwanted properties from an item (eg: loot or runics)? Perhaps have removal cost as much as it would to add in terms of resources, but subtract from the resulting complexity/difficulty of the item.

Also can we add pitchforks, black staves, tribal/orc/animal masks/helms, and other orphaned items to the craftables list?

 

[TheGrayGhost]

Wilki, these sound like pretty reasonable concessions. I've always felt Imbuing should be a "tweak"craft and it sounds like it'll go that way.

In light of that, is there any plan to allow us to remove/delete individual unwanted properties from an item (eg: loot or runics)? Perhaps have removal cost as much as it would to add in terms of resources, but subtract from the resulting complexity/difficulty of the item.

Also can we add pitchforks, black staves, tribal/orc/animal masks/helms, and other orphaned items to the craftables list?

I claim Pitchforks for Tinkerers!!!!!!!!! It's a tool, so we get Dibs! But then it would suck cause we have no runics or a way to make it "special".........

 

[guum]

I'd like to understand this a little better ...

What exactly about this change feels like a nerf to you?
What were you planning to do before that you can't do now?

I'm not sure how to explain why it's a nerf -- it seems pretty self-evident. Before you could, eventually and at the cost of potentially a large amount of expensive ingredients, create literally anything within the normal rules of what is possible to have, mod-wise, on loot using the imbuing system. Now you cannot. I'm not saying that it's an "oh noes the world is going to end" nerf, and I can see the logic behind it, but it's definitely a nerf.

And as far as my agreeing with what Thangorodrim said, allow me to paraphrase what a friend once said about early UO...something to the effect of "I always really liked early UO because it wasn't like Final Fantasy or WoW where you just keep getting nonsensically better and better on an exponential curve just because your sword is made out of a different mythical magical metal. A guy with a sword is just a guy with a sword. A bigger sword will hurt a little more, but that's because it's a bigger sword." The point is that when UO became item-based, it suddenly became more analogous to the "woohoo! now I have a mythrite sword that does 50,000 damage instead of an adamantizine sword that only does 20,000!" school of RPGing. But allowing everyone to completely customize their gear in effect removes the effect of gear from the game. Eventually (and probably not that far out), everyone would have the gear that's ideal for whatever character they're playing -- hence, there'd no longer be a gear gap, and effectively, the guy with the sword would become just a guy with a sword again, not a guy who's got an adamantazine sword fighting a dude who's using a mythrite sword. If they've both got mythrite swords, then, effectively, they both just have swords.

Does that make any sense? It's late, so no guarantees it's actually englysh.

 

[Fink]

I claim Pitchforks for Tinkerers!!!!!!!!! It's a tool, so we get Dibs! But then it would suck cause we have no runics or a way to make it "special".........

I say make them all tinkered, including masks & helms!

I'd just be happy to have my mark on them, but with exceptional quality comes extra Imbuing potential so I'd be happy with that too. My tinker used to carry magic pitchfork pretty much everywhere, so from a personal standpoint a gm tinkered one would be a nice accessory. I also have characters that use masks and weapons that can't currently be crafted, this would liberate them from the tyranny of the RNG in terms of loot.

 

[Wilki]

Wilki, these sound like pretty reasonable concessions. I've always felt Imbuing should be a "tweak"craft and it sounds like it'll go that way.

In light of that, is there any plan to allow us to remove/delete individual unwanted properties from an item (eg: loot or runics)? Perhaps have removal cost as much as it would to add in terms of resources, but subtract from the resulting complexity/difficulty of the item.

Also can we add pitchforks, black staves, tribal/orc/animal masks/helms, and other orphaned items to the craftables list?

Removing one or more properties is something I've been thinking about. It's possible, but I'm not sure how difficult it will be. I will talk to the team and see how they feel about it.

As for the other items, you know, I've always wondered why they weren't craftable, but I never actually looked it up. I'll see if there was a reason they were left out.

 

[Theo_GL]

Also, I just wanted to add a to this insightful observation. I don't know if I had really figured out *why* I liked imbuing the way it is, but now that you put it this way, I totally agree.

First, let me say that Wilki and whomever else is working on this had better really really consider all the impacts of this system before it goes in because it has the chance to alter the use of every single non-artifact item in the game.

As for the thumbs up on the comment - if you create a system so people can generally 'dial' the mods on any item to max intensity - you might as well throw out all crafting systems and just sell GM weapons.

Alot of PvPers might like this - but you KILL other aspects of the game. If everyone can 'choose' their mods and there is very little effort/randomness in the system then there is no need for a system.

Lets just let people buy items from an NPC and dial in their properties.


As for Wilki's original question:

I am not a fan of imbuing in the least. I think its complex and poorly implemented. IE any item can be unraveled for 3 base ingredients that all go into making any property you want. If actually implemented - I would have thought you would have to find a 50% Lightning item to strip out the 'essance' to use to try to enhance another item. As it is - just go out and farm as many paragon arties b/c they mostly give a runic crafting fragment and that is required by many of the important 'imbuing recipes'.

As a crafter I was hoping that imbuing or whatever system was added gave you the ability to 'dial in' one or two properties with a runic. Intensity levels would be random and other props random but at least it gave you a good *chance* to create what you were after while still following the runic intensity scale.

As it stands now go out and craft stuff with a low level runic and get a few 100% intensity props then imbue on the others you want and voila! Everyone has their SC no Penalty Dagger with HLD 50% and Lightning 50%. Maybe they get lucky and roll on a 30% SSI.

If this does go in as it is - here are the tweaks:

1 - Make the mining gems spawn more often. For high intensities you need 10 of them. They become the bottleneck, you can't buy them from NPC's and scripters again win. Make them 5x more common to dig up.

2 - Don't let people imbue slayers. Otherwise everyone will run around with superslayers. That destroys the value of the slayer property if anyone can craft the one they want at any time. Its bad enough with so many easy ways to get Undead and other slayers. In fact - why even have an option on the gump for Water Elemental etc? Who would craft 'water elemental' slayer on their blade if they could as easliy choose Elemental?

3 - Ingredients are destroyed - but why not the weapon like enhancing? That would make it more dangerous to imbue. Right now, it is keep trying till you add 50% fireball to your godly blade with only the loss of ingredients. No risk.

4 - Allow removal of properties - or just get rid of Reflect Damage once and for all. NO ONE uses it b/c it fires first and causes you to flag first in PvP so people avoid that armor like the plauge. Get rid of the property. It is the only one people REALLY want to remove from items. The other need to remove comes from intensity caps and someone have Luck 80 on some otherwise great PvP blade that they cannot now add another prop b/c of luck.

THats my .02 from playing with this sytem for an hour.

I urge you again - really consider what you are doing and the impacts. This will affect nearly all armor/weapons/jewels in the game!

 

[TheGrayGhost]

Removing one or more properties is something I've been thinking about. It's possible, but I'm not sure how difficult it will be. I will talk to the team and see how they feel about it.

As for the other items, you know, I've always wondered why they weren't craftable, but I never actually looked it up. I'll see if there was a reason they were left out.

Heya Wilki, any chance you could let us know if Tinkerers are going to be looked at. With the changes you had in mind for imbuing it brought a lot of things up that concern me and there in this thread.

http://vboards.stratics.com/showthread.php?t=153098

I'll quote it as well

So, the changes to imbuing have brought a few things to light for me that are just oO.

First off we have no runics, so as far as earrings and necklaces go we when they add mob drop earrings and necklaces these will be far more desired than any we make .

Secondly we have 100 skill and very low success rate and exceptional rate on most of what we can craft that can be imbued (Well worth imbuing).

3rdly it's said that the Devs don't want imbuing to nudge out any craft, and well simply put we could barely compete with mob loot let alone imbuing so ......... where's the tinkerers love?

We should be able to make Garg only necklaces and earrings these should have some basic armor resists and stats etc considering they are now considered armor, considering we have no runics we should be able to do magical ones as well since that is out version of runics.

I wouldn't mind being on par with the other crafts with skill wise considering we are going to be needed to repair jewlry now as well. An imbued Smith made head piece will last longer than a tinkerers earrings since our repair is going off of a max 100 and the smiths going off a max of 120, same for tailors.

Theres a lot that has come up that tinkerers are going to need for SA considering rings and bracelets as well as earrings and necklaces that are going to be imbued will need repair. We should be considered a full fledge crafter at this point with what SA has brought to the table, but we are still the red headed step child.

Anyways these are my concerns.

 

[Wilki]

I urge you again - really consider what you are doing and the impacts. This will affect nearly all armor/weapons/jewels in the game!

I agree with that sentiment, as imbuing is very powerful; more so than I think many people believe, who haven't played with it extensively.

Thank you for the rest of your feedback as well.

 

[Wilki]

Heya Wilki, any chance you could let us know if Tinkerers are going to be looked at. With the changes you had in mind for imbuing it brought a lot of things up that concern me and there in this thread.

Yes, we're aware of the difference there, but I don't know that we can do a full tinkering revamp right now. But tinkering/imbuing is something we're looking in to, to see what we can do.

I know that sounds like a brush off, but it's not. We have been thinking and talking it over.

 

[TheGrayGhost]

Yes, we're aware of the difference there, but I don't know that we can do a full tinkering revamp right now. But tinkering/imbuing is something we're looking in to, to see what we can do.

I know that sounds like a brush off, but it's not. We have been thinking and talking it over.

No not at all, was just wanting to hear at least "We are looking into it". You've done that so I am a happy camper.

 

[AxiamInc]

I do like the idea of the 300% cap addition. Would keep crafters alive and viable.

I say bring the skill points back onto the earrings and necklace but force them to use the same cap. It's not very often that you will find an item with 2 close to maxed out skills that you actually need to attempt to make it better.

I do understand the possible inbalance that allowing someone to add 240+ skill points to a template would bring, but I don't think it should be completely impossible if someone wants to take that 3 years to find the right piece to start with. This would only work however if they did NOT allow us to remove a selected property from an item.

My vote: Go with the new proposal and bring skills back on gargoyle jewels!