Goblin Squad Member
|
Well now that we know that when dying your gear is not going to be destroyed or stolen, but we do have strong hints that no matter what, gear is going to need to be destroyed/removed from the economy on a regular basis. I think this topic deserves it's own thread at this point.
I've strongly mentioned a great dislike for the idea of using the bind on equip, rapid obsolescence method that theme parks use, primarally because that involves an ever expanding continuous list of upgrades (as once people hit the top they have nothing to work for, so newer better items have to continue to be made on a regular basis as a as a result, the power level between characters continues to grow at a rapid level, and mid level players, and even characters who have just reached the top, become sideline characters in a war). This method also creates a large lack of value in mid-level items, as it is often just worth it to save up for the best and skip over the crap in the middle.
With items with wear and tear, that is not easy to fix, you wind up up with 1. mid level items remaining useful, as even the high level players are measuring out cost/benefit of using different items at different times. Sure I could use my 500,000 GP +5 flaming vopal sword of doom, but since it can only be used for about a week, I'm burning 75k gold to use it for a day, I'm not doing anything that valuble today so the +2 flaming should do the job, and only wear me out 2k worth of resources. This also creates extra chalenges, strategies, and gives the underdogs in a war, a chance to suprise a stronger guild that simply underestimated them and wore their cheap stuff to the fight.
One idea my fiance brought up, I don't think any game has ever had maintinence as a factor on weapons. What if on average, weapons went like say. Leather should need to be oiled, steel cleaned up dried off sharpened polished etc...
1 days usage for unmaintained gear, 10% damage
1 days usage maintained, 5% damage.
Death while wearing item, 5% damage
Enemy successfully sunders etc... 2-10% damage depending on weapon and level of sunder.
Repairing damaged weapons: I do agree, having a weapon get damaged should not be an unrepairable unfix-able issue, and should not cost as much as a new one, but it also shouldn't be barely noticeable pocket change either. The best system I can think of is, repairing the weapon takes 1/2 the resources it takes to craft the weapon to begin with, and must be done by a crafter who is able to craft the weapon. If it took 4 adamantine bars and 4 Dragon tongues, it should take 2 adamantine bars and 2 dragon tongues. In some cases you may have to provide them yourself to the crafters, in some cases crafters may be stocking up on them by themselves to increase their markups and profit margins for repairs.
As far as the main reason I believe destruction of gear is a necesity, it can be summerized with a quote from Ryan
We want to have the kind of robust market economy that EVE has and that means that loss of items will be commonplace.
I want to see lots of people harvesting, transporting, crafting, and selling.
While the destruction of carried loot will do some towards the removal of resources, that is only a slow down of gaining items not technically a loss, once they are manufactured and turned into equipment, if they are invincible, then we are right back at square 1, once made the items stay forever, and thus the economy reaches a peak and the crafting industry comes to a halt, as the supply keeps going up, but the demand keeps going down.
One other possible variant here. If instead of going by percentages, it instead could go by HP, certain types and classes of armor could have more HP then others, and even getting hit or hitting things could have a possibility of damaging equipment
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I would very much like to see the in-game system modeled so as to encourage the kind of behavior you would see in real life.
To that end, repairing equipment while it's barely damaged should always be more efficient than waiting until it's on its last legs.
Also, I remember searching through an old barn and seeing a dagger/knife that had been sharpened so much over the years that the blade was only about half as wide in the body as it was near the hilt, and it was obvious that a very significant amount of it had simply been whetstoned away. This makes me very enamored of systems that don't always repair back to pristine condition.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
mmm maybe someone can increase the durability of two identical weapons (but damaged) "merging" them in one with a... -10% complessive damage?
an example, I have two +2short sword. one with 75% damege and one with 90% damage. I want to go on a journey, but i do not want to break one of them in a... bad moment.
I merge the magic in them (in a forge, maybe?).
Now I have a 55% damaged +2short sword, and a broken short sword.
in this way, the objects WILL renew themselves, but we'll not have to carry five 98% damaged weapons
(yay firt post, also, good work! and sorry for my english)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
mmm maybe someone can increase the durability of two identical weapons (but damaged) "merging" them in one with a... -10% complessive damage?
an example, I have two +2short sword. one with 75% damege and one with 90% damage. I want to go on a journey, but i do not want to break one of them in a... bad moment.
I merge the magic in them (in a forge, maybe?).
Now I have a 55% damaged +2short sword, and a broken short sword.
in this way, the objects WILL renew themselves, but we'll not have to carry five 98% damaged weapons
(yay firt post, also, good work! and sorry for my english)
Not bad at all, and your english isn't bad at all :P. That idea does hold merit, I was advising for repairing to use some of the resources to make an item, it would make perfect sense for one to be able to break down an existing item, and use it's materials to add durability to the first. Actually having weapons effectiveness be partially based on it's condition would make perfect sense.
To that end, repairing equipment while it's barely damaged should always be more efficient than waiting until it's on its last legs.
That actually makes a good amount of sense, maybe the further down a weapon is, the more damage it takes. hitting with a perfectly sharp sword the blade would dull slower, once it has a few nicks in it, the blade will dull even faster each time it hits something.
and, can someone turn a broken sword in a bar of metal and maybe after forge a new sword with it?
I can see, after a big fight, jackals everywere looting shield, swords and crafts. but... ehi, steel is steel!
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
... give the "better" [weapons] some kind of minor drawback.I'd really, really like to see powerful magic weapons have a will of their own. Maybe an alignment, along with some creepy non-standard upkeep, like requiring fresh blood, or the blood of innocents.
That itself would be awesome, an evil sword that loses it's bonus if you don't kill a certain amount of players a day etc... Or a good one that requires kobalds or something to be killed, or even a merciful one that just hates killing humans.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Ooh. Intelligent magic items. Hadn't thought of that. Well, maybe not "Fully AI Scripted" intelligent, but yeah, ones with odd requirements to wield or maintain them. How about a battleaxe that needs to hear music once a week to work?
As for the original topic...
Nihimon, you're mentioning "no repairs back to pristine", and I would agree with that, unless you use materials as part of the repair. Maybe allow both kinds of repairs!
Say, if you have a basic in-field repair kit, you can do some basic maintenance: (I swear spellcheck is wrong on that word...) Sharpening, polishing, etc. Maybe instead of actually repairing the weapon, this just helps it resist further damage.
If you're at a blacksmith's forge and have the tools, you can do a decent repair, but not up to pristine.
However, if you're willing to use some percentage of the materials used to make the item, THEN you can repair back up to full; yes, the blade gets thinner as you keep sharpening it, but you use some more iron to basically reforge part of the blade.
why "intelligent magic items with requests" make me think about nobles in dwarf fortress?
"I want a bone elf breastplate"
"we cannot do it! it's impossible!"
"Impossible is not the answer. well, seems that now i have to f**k your fortress up"
Very Fun. Also, True story.
However, The possibility to utilize a lesser magic item to recharge a +5 vorpal longsword is not advisable (i remember something like this in Neverwinter nights) But maybe someone can utilize a "magic repair kit" that permits some kind of temporary hit points, or a magic powder which augments the "broken limit condition" of a nearly broken spear at a 120% damage for a little time... like a diehard feat for weapons
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Nihimon, you're mentioning "no repairs back to pristine", and I would agree with that, unless you use materials as part of the repair. Maybe allow both kinds of repairs!
... but you use some more iron to basically reforge part of the blade.
Well, reforging is significantly different than repairing. Is it possible to reforge the blade of a sword and still use the existing hilt, pommel, etc.?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well, reforging is significantly different than repairing. Is it possible to reforge the blade of a sword and still use the existing hilt, pommel, etc.?Nihimon, you're mentioning "no repairs back to pristine", and I would agree with that, unless you use materials as part of the repair. Maybe allow both kinds of repairs!
... but you use some more iron to basically reforge part of the blade.
I still think that without materials you should not be able to repair, but maintain. Perhaps 2 separate durabilities would be needed.
Say a sword
Sword of whatever
Condition: 95%
Durability: 9000 HP
The condition would refer to how well maintained it is, IE oiled/cleaned etc... and should go down rapidly with usage, but be easy and inexpensive to bring back up to full for most weapons. durability on the other hand is actual damage the weapon has taken, it can only be fixed via materials, and the lower the condition of your weapon, the faster the durability would drop as well as the less effective the weapon in general will be. IE the weapon you just pulled from the sheath in mint condition will hit for far more damage on it's first few kills and each hit does 1 damage to the weapons Durability every 3 hits, after about 10 kills, drop down to 75% and only be doing about 90% of what it used to and taking 1 HP every 2 hits, 50% it's only doing 75% of normal damage and taking 1 damage a hit, 25% 50% damage and at risk of instantly breaking and taking 2 damage a hit.
Cleaning a weapon to restore it's condition should be doable in the field but not easy enough to do mid fight (when I use the term fight I am referring to while the enemy is in your face, in a battle you can drop out of the front lines and deal with it). So I'd say maybe 15-30 seconds to fix the condition. (slow enough that you aren't going to get away with it without missing a beat in a fight, fast enough that you aren't falling asleep waiting on it or taken completely out of a battle.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Weapons becoming less effective as they get used is good, but it's going to be a difficult curve to get right.
In my opinion, there should be a slight bonus to pristine weapons, that goes away fairly quickly, maybe at 95% durability. At that point, the weapon should be roughly the same, with only very minor effectiveness penalties, until very low, maybe 25%. At that point, it should probably begin losing effectiveness more rapidly.
Personally, my tastes run to slightly lower magic than you see in most MMO games. I really hate seeing every piece of gear I wear having +INT on it. I would also like to see a lot of characters using non-magical gear, with no real bonuses on it other than the rational bonuses that would be associated with its core function, such as an archer's brace improving archery accuracy.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
So I'd say maybe 15-30 seconds to fix the condition. (slow enough that you aren't going to get away with it without missing a beat in a fight, fast enough that you aren't falling asleep waiting on it or taken completely out of a battle.
30 seconds is an eternity when you're waiting on a timer bar. 10 second inductions feel like forever, even. If it's something that your character would do after every fight, I would strongly encourage not making you stand there for 10+ seconds after every combat.
Maybe there could be a skill for "Weapon Maintenance" that allows you to toggle the ability on or off. While it's on, you will automatically maintain your sword, at the cost of using up resources in your inventory over time, or even after each fight. If you run out of resources, or simply choose to, you can turn it off.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Mmm. a metalsmith should be a central person in the life of a village made of adventurers.
Complete restoring my 95% damaged sword should be a expensive act (95% the price of a new sword, but in this way i can mantain a loved object, or a particular important symbol) and only with a smith with the ability to effectively REMAKING the same weapon.
Any other expedient should be temporary
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Weapons becoming less effective as they get used is good, but it's going to be a difficult curve to get right.
In my opinion, there should be a slight bonus to pristine weapons, that goes away fairly quickly, maybe at 95% durability. At that point, the weapon should be roughly the same, with only very minor effectiveness penalties, until very low, maybe 25%. At that point, it should probably begin losing effectiveness more rapidly.
Personally, my tastes run to slightly lower magic than you see in most MMO games. I really hate seeing every piece of gear I wear having +INT on it. I would also like to see a lot of characters using non-magical gear, with no real bonuses on it other than the rational bonuses that would be associated with its core function, such as an archer's brace improving archery accuracy.
I agree, which is also part of what a system that bases the repair costs permits to happen. When gear repair takes a sizable amount of the materials to craft to make it functional, The guy with the uber rare 100,000 gold weapon, is going to think twice about using it for a mundane task.
and yeah perhaps less significant differences from 75-25%, I still like the idea of 25% and below having a possibility of just snapping like a twig.
DAOC had weapon levels, they were usable at any level but if you used them before you should they got damaged much easier/quicker this could help you limit the use of +2 vs +5 on lower level characters.
Allowing Sunder to work on Equipment would eventually lead to another form of griefing... I can see several people in a team with the specific job of breaking the armor of the other team(yes somewhat realistic in immersion) but I can just see all kinds of trouble with that. I would much prefer for Sunder to put a debuff on someone allowing them to take more dmg if on equipment or do less damage if done on a weapon for a set period of time.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
DAOC had weapon levels, they were usable at any level but if you used them before you should they got damaged much easier/quicker this could help you limit the use of +2 vs +5 on lower level characters.
I actually could see weapon skill level effecting the speed of a weapons destruction, IMO no matter what, at the absolute longest, most careful with a weapon possible, 20 days should be the absolute maximum a weapon or armor should be preservable to, as they still have to be taken out of the economy on a regular basis to keep the crafting/harvesting industry moving and the economy flowing freely.
Allowing Sunder to work on Equipment would eventually lead to another form of griefing... I can see several people in a team with the specific job of breaking the armor of the other team(yes somewhat realistic in immersion) but I can just see all kinds of trouble with that. I would much prefer for Sunder to put a debuff on someone allowing them to take more dmg if on equipment or do less damage if done on a weapon for a set period of time.
I still think that should be a valid concept. IMO the most awsome way to win a war, would be if you can cut off their supply line (IE take their mines, stop merchants from delivering supplies), and smash the heck out of their weapons until the war is won.
Cutting off the supply lines has been a key to war for as long as recorded history goes, but for that tactic to work, things are going to have to break often, and since things breaking extremely often when doing mundane tasks seems a bit much to me, sunder etc... sound like the best way to permit and encourage rapid destruction of gear during war, without excesively frequently damaging it outside of war. Though I could see it as plausible that sunder deals condition damage rather than durability damage if they go that route.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Allowing Sunder to work on Equipment would eventually lead to another form of griefing... I can see several people in a team with the specific job of breaking the armor of the other team(yes somewhat realistic in immersion) but I can just see all kinds of trouble with that. I would much prefer for Sunder to put a debuff on someone allowing them to take more dmg if on equipment or do less damage if done on a weapon for a set period of time.
I actually really like the idea of letting Sunder damage or even destroy another player's equipment. This seems like a very valid way to cycle gear through the economy.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Allowing Sunder to work on Equipment would eventually lead to another form of griefing... I can see several people in a team with the specific job of breaking the armor of the other team(yes somewhat realistic in immersion) but I can just see all kinds of trouble with that. I would much prefer for Sunder to put a debuff on someone allowing them to take more dmg if on equipment or do less damage if done on a weapon for a set period of time.I actually really like the idea of letting Sunder damage or even destroy another player's equipment. This seems like a very valid way to cycle gear through the economy.
Indeed, cycle gear, boost economy, increase tactics of war, I can see many many good things this can accomplish that can result in a far more tactical battlefield while stimulating the economies at the same time.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Sunder? Damn, I hadn't even considered that. I'm all for Glod's idea:
I would much prefer for Sunder to put a debuff on someone allowing them to take more dmg if on equipment or do less damage if done on a weapon for a set period of time.
Debuffing damage/armor is nice. Having an ability to directly damage or outright destroy player gear? Yikes. I know it makes for great roleplaying, it would add complexity to battles, and it would help stimulate the economy, but all that's running through my head is how much griefers could abuse this. Already, the only thing that's guaranteed to be kept on death is your equipment; what if even that wasn't safe? In my opinion, it would be way too tempting for most griefers to: Get decent skills with Sunder, then just make sure to use as many Sunders as you can while you're suicide ganking.
(And yes, I've played EvE Online, so I know what to do in the worst case: Keep spare sets of gear in every town you visit, and never wander into the wilds without a group unless you REALLY know what you're doing.)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Already, the only thing that's guaranteed to be kept on death is your equipment...
How do you mean this?
My understanding is that you have a very good chance of losing all of the equipment on your character if you can't either get resurrected or be the first one back to your corpse.
I don't think anyone's wanting to see someone able to spam out 30 sunders at the beginning of combat and totally trash your gear. I think it's more along the lines of wanting that ability to marginally increase the amount of damage that your gear would take in combat, and for it to be on a suitably long cooldown if it does that.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Already, the only thing that's guaranteed to be kept on death is your equipment...How do you mean this?
My understanding is that you have a very good chance of losing all of the equipment on your character if you can't either get resurrected or be the first one back to your corpse.
I don't think anyone's wanting to see someone able to spam out 30 sunders at the beginning of combat and totally trash your gear. I think it's more along the lines of wanting that ability to marginally increase the amount of damage that your gear would take in combat, and for it to be on a suitably long cooldown if it does that.
Actually the blog was pretty explicit that on death you would re-spawn with all of your gear, everything equipped is safe, everything unequipped is on your corpse.
Your character will re-enter play at the soulbinding point holding and wearing whatever gear they had equipped when they died, so you won't have to start without your armor, or the weapons, wands, or staves you were using. However, until you return to your husk, you are in danger of losing the rest of your inventory
I agree also that we don't want to see 1 person single handedly trashing all of the equipment, but I would like to see wars that utilize sunder and try to end the wars on attrition by slowly wearing the opponent out of supplies, by damaging their gear and hindering their production to replace it. I don't think 1-2 attacks should do it, perhaps if it were limited so that the cooldown is say 30 seconds, or the task itself takes time so that you are likely to take several hits and get killed in exchange for doing the damage.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Actually the blog was pretty explicit that on death you would re-spawn with all of your gear, everything equipped is safe, everything unequipped is on your corpse.
Your character will re-enter play at the soulbinding point holding and wearing whatever gear they had equipped when they died, so you won't have to start without your armor, or the weapons, wands, or staves you were using. However, until you return to your husk, you are in danger of losing the rest of your inventory
Thanks for the reminder.
Actually, this makes me realize that the game is even more encouraging of raider activity than I was thinking. If I'm a raider, and I don't carry around extraneous stuff in my inventory, I don't really face much risk if I die. Can that be right?
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
One important thing to note: If repairing an item takes materials, it needs to take ALL the types of materials needed to make the weapon. If a flaming burst longsword needs rubies in the hilt, then a damaged flaming burst longsword needs at least some of those rubies replaced. That's a JEWELER skill, followed by an ENCHANTER skill. In the meantime, your damaged sword is only slightly less effective at hitting people, it just doesn't do the thing with the fire.
Rare alchemical and magical ingredients are handwaved as being available at GP cost for Patfinder item creation; herbalists and alchemists and foragers should be part of the PC economy- if duskweed is common enough near protected cities, but somewhat time-consuming to harvest, it makes an ideal job for people who don't want to venture far from protection; people who expect higher average returns will simply pay the market rate for the near-foraged goods, rather than gather them personally. If the market rate goes above what you would otherwise be getting in the time it would take to get it yourself, you go and get your own (or go into business getting it for others).
|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
Actually the blog was pretty explicit that on death you would re-spawn with all of your gear, everything equipped is safe, everything unequipped is on your corpse.
Your character will re-enter play at the soulbinding point holding and wearing whatever gear they had equipped when they died, so you won't have to start without your armor, or the weapons, wands, or staves you were using. However, until you return to your husk, you are in danger of losing the rest of your inventoryThanks for the reminder.
Actually, this makes me realize that the game is even more encouraging of raider activity than I was thinking. If I'm a raider, and I don't carry around extraneous stuff in my inventory, I don't really face much risk if I die. Can that be right?
That depends: Where do you keep your spoils? At the bank in town? Remember that having a criminal's bounty on you means that attacking you in high-sec areas is permitted...
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Well, reforging is significantly different than repairing. Is it possible to reforge the blade of a sword and still use the existing hilt, pommel, etc.?Nihimon, you're mentioning "no repairs back to pristine", and I would agree with that, unless you use materials as part of the repair. Maybe allow both kinds of repairs!
... but you use some more iron to basically reforge part of the blade.
I still think that without materials you should not be able to repair, but maintain. Perhaps 2 separate durabilities would be needed.
Say a sword
Sword of whatever
Condition: 95%
Durability: 9000 HPThe condition would refer to how well maintained it is, IE oiled/cleaned etc... and should go down rapidly with usage, but be easy and inexpensive to bring back up to full for most weapons. durability on the other hand is actual damage the weapon has taken, it can only be fixed via materials, and the lower the condition of your weapon, the faster the durability would drop as well as the less effective the weapon in general will be. IE the weapon you just pulled from the sheath in mint condition will hit for far more damage on it's first few kills and each hit does 1 damage to the weapons Durability every 3 hits, after about 10 kills, drop down to 75% and only be doing about 90% of what it used to and taking 1 HP every 2 hits, 50% it's only doing 75% of normal damage and taking 1 damage a hit, 25% 50% damage and at risk of instantly breaking and taking 2 damage a hit.
Cleaning a weapon to restore it's condition should be doable in the field but not easy enough to do mid fight (when I use the term fight I am referring to while the enemy is in your face, in a battle you can drop out of the front lines and deal with it). So I'd say maybe 15-30 seconds to fix the condition. (slow enough that you aren't going to get away with it without missing a beat in a fight, fast enough that you aren't falling asleep waiting on it or taken completely out of a...
I really like this idea; effectiveness would fall with condition, not durability. This allows even the a person with the most basic skills to maintain their own equipment. But, blacksmiths are still needed to reforge once durability falls low enough.
(I still hope crafters can destroy items to recover some percentage of the remaining durability in mats...for instance 1 simple sword which uses 20 pieces of iron and is at 20% durability can be "melted down" to recover 3 pieces of iron (considering 75% recovery)).
Optionally...I would consider a balance of sorts...between durability loss and damage. Since damage is going to fall as condition falls, allow players to raise the condition above 100%...this would represent sharpening your sword to a razors edge...but also result in an increased rate of loss with durability.
This would make mid-grade gear very usable because it could be "overclocked" to equal more expensive gear, but is destroyed more quickly.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
That depends: Where do you keep your spoils? At the bank in town? Remember that having a criminal's bounty on you means that attacking you in high-sec areas is permitted...
Well, if I'm a wretched villain scum, I probably do my banking in the wretched hive of scum and villainy, and I've been led to believe I shouldn't really expect my fellow wretched villain scum to enforce bounties put up by prissy little followers of Iomedae.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not complaining that the designers really want to encourage player-vs-player combat. In fact, the more I think about it, the more rational it seems. I'm just curious if I'm correct about the level of encouragement :)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
This would make mid-grade gear very usable because it could be "overclocked" to equal more expensive gear, but is destroyed more quickly.This is very interesting, not to mention a very funny visual :)
Agreed and it would actually make sense, if you set destruction rate based on how far the object is from 100%, (so 125% is the same durability destruction rate as 75% etc...).
As far as items being destroyed snapping while in use, that would make a really amusing item property is if a magic sword breaks while in use, it explodes damaging both he wielder and the target as it goes out.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Optionally...I would consider a balance of sorts...between durability loss and damage. Since damage is going to fall as condition falls, allow players to raise the condition above 100%...this would represent sharpening your sword to a razors edge...but also result in an increased rate of loss with durability.
This would make mid-grade gear very usable because it could be "overclocked" to equal more expensive gear, but is destroyed more quickly.
This is sounding better and better! Have a difference between the weapon's performance and durability, with different mechanics to repair both... I like it.
And as for being able to "overclock" gear, allowing it to perform better but at a durability cost... that would make for some nice strategizing. Almost all duelists would keep their swords razor-sharp for an extra edge in fights... pun very much intended. I could see it going the other way, too; either being able to "underclock" a sword, or just having a variant crafting recipe, for weapons that don't do as much damage but are much more durable, where the sword is thicker and made of more durable materials, but harder to keep sharp.
EDIT: I'm calling it "oversharp" and "undersharp". Anyone else got a more Pathfinder-friendly phrase?
|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
Another thing to consider is what you are attacking. I would take issue with a swords condition dropping at the same rate regardless of what you attack. A goblin's head won't deteriorate a weapon's striking surface nearly as much as armor made of similarly tough materials. I would prefer to see hardness on equipment with each piece taking damage based on the other pieces hardness. Hardness should also vary with condition, as a sword or armor in poor repair will be more brittle and have more "give" than well maintained gear.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I have no problem with paying a durability cost for items, whether involved in pvp or pve. Sure, sometimes you gotta run over to the blacksmith, weapon maker, crafter, whatever. A dash of realism. But, two different durabilty loss systems? Percentage-based deterioration over time? Acquiring mats to restore your magic sword? I have generally dismissed arguments against pvp,item loss and penalties for character death that involved posts saying 'I want to escape my normal life' because a game should be challenging one way or the other. But gentlemen, this is HOMEWORK. And step back and look at some of these proposals from the devs point of view in terms of implementing and playtesting-how much longer will we wait for the game while they figure out rates of sharpness? Degrees of hardness? Heck, fireballs melt gear, right? Cold spells make it more brittle? Sonic damage cracks it. NOW add in the durability damage from my 77% effective but whetstone sharpened sword? Oh, I used cold water on the whetstone-my sword is at 83%! In a game with so much opportunity for character specialization, faction/politics, creating a lair or realm, crafting, gathering, trading and filling different roles I say we have enough to work on. A simple durability loss/repair mechanic and debuffs whether by sunder or magic would be just fine. All you guys are smarter than I am-I've read many of your posts-but this one comes down to the realism vs. playability argument and I don't see a really complex item durability system appealing to most players.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I have no problem with paying a durability cost for items, whether involved in pvp or pve. Sure, sometimes you gotta run over to the blacksmith, weapon maker, crafter, whatever. A dash of realism. But, two different durabilty loss systems? Percentage-based deterioration over time? Acquiring mats to restore your magic sword?
I would say the split durability is a flavor thing I would like, it is debatable as far as the necessity of it etc... No matter what I still believe that equipment either permanantly being destroyed, or requiring the base materials and a crafter to fix is an absolute necessity to the very core nature of the game.
A robust economy absolutely 100% depends on loss of items on a regular basis. Otherwise things pool up, the value goes out the window unless you throw in some very un-sandbox mechanics like binding in addition to PVP unbalancing extreme amounts of upgrades. Just pocket change to repair will result in a completely stagnated economy, the reason that eve's economy is so deep and so advanced, is because your entire ship + weapons etc... will all be completely destroyed on a regular basis. PFO isn't going that route and I applaud that, to me the best middle ground would be for gear to wear out in a semi-predictable fashion, but it either needs to be unrepairable, or it needs to be repairable with costs in the same category as crafting it to begin with.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I would say that a 3 value system would be best.
1. A Quality number that indicates how well made the gear is and has an effect on how fast it wears out. This can be a percentage like is used in DAoC and has a dirrect effect on the damage of weapons and the protection provided by armor. 75% quality weapons wear out much quicker than 99% quality weapons.
2. A Condition value that tells the current condition of the gear and this number can be brough back to full with the help of a PC (no NPCs) crafter. As this number drops it too will affect the effectiveness of weapons and armor. This also is very simular to DAoC.
3. A Durability value that slowy drops over time based on use and is affected by the quality and how low you allow the Condidition to go. This value will just determine the over all life of the item. The better the enchantment and material the gear is made from, the longer it should last, so that a Paladin does not have replace his +5 Holy Avenger every time he turns around.
I referenced DAoC twice because I think they have a good system when it come to gear. Now they have put gear in the game that will never wear out and I am unsure if that is a good idea. If NPC crafter can be used to repair gear I think it should be made expensive enough that a PC woudl be a better alternative if one is available.
This looks good to me, except I don't think enchants should change the quality of the item (which determined deterioration rate) unless the enchant is specifically designed to do so. A keen enchant keeps the weapon sharp but does nothing for the temper, nor does it magically reinforce. There could be enchants however that do.
Instead, don't waste enchants on shoddy gear. Insure it is the best manufacture and materials before enchanting.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I have no problem with paying a durability cost for items, whether involved in pvp or pve. Sure, sometimes you gotta run over to the blacksmith, weapon maker, crafter, whatever. A dash of realism. But, two different durabilty loss systems? Percentage-based deterioration over time? Acquiring mats to restore your magic sword?I would say the split durability is a flavor thing I would like, it is debatable as far as the necessity of it etc... No matter what I still believe that equipment either permanantly being destroyed, or requiring the base materials and a crafter to fix is an absolute necessity to the very core nature of the game.
A robust economy absolutely 100% depends on loss of items on a regular basis. Otherwise things pool up, the value goes out the window unless you throw in some very un-sandbox mechanics like binding in addition to PVP unbalancing extreme amounts of upgrades. Just pocket change to repair will result in a completely stagnated economy, the reason that eve's economy is so deep and so advanced, is because your entire ship + weapons etc... will all be completely destroyed on a regular basis. PFO isn't going that route and I applaud that, to me the best middle ground would be for gear to wear out in a semi-predictable fashion, but it either needs to be unrepairable, or it needs to be repairable with costs in the same category as crafting it to begin with.
Just because an item durability system is simple doesn't mean items have to be cheap to repair. And the more damaged, the higher level, the more expensive it is. Certainly you'd have to visit the requisite craftsmen. But even in a simple system, I can see an equipped item reaching 0% and being destroyed so the local weaponsmith (npc or PC) doesn't have a surplus of +1 swords for 10 gold. If every equipped item can be effected in this manner, there'd be no need for bound items which I've never been crazy about.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Just because an item durability system is simple doesn't mean items have to be cheap to repair. And the more damaged, the higher level, the more expensive it is. Certainly you'd have to visit the requisite craftsmen. But even in a simple system, I can see an equipped item reaching 0% and being destroyed so the local weaponsmith (npc or PC) doesn't have a surplus of +1 swords for 10 gold. If every equipped item can be effected in this manner, there'd be no need for bound items which I've never been crazy about.
Well as I said the complexity sides are something I like but i don't consider critical. Money in the pure form, is something that tends to come into high supply, and really is only made relevant through resources that are harder or easier to obtain, the best way to maintain that IMO is the resources themselves in crafting. That is why repairing itself should be either imposible, or take resources. If you have people gathering X iron a day used to make a +1 sword, and then everyone has the +1 sword, and just use pure gold to pay for repairs, iron keeps pouring in, and now there is a huge surplus of iron. Resources themselves need to constantly need to be used up, regardless of whether people are upgrading to he latest and greatest toy.
We both agree that binding should not be in place, but I believe either not repairing, or repairing for resources needs to be in place, and yes repairing for resources will still allow people to pop in to a PC Crafter and get their equipment repaired instantly, because smart crafters will keep extra supplies for all but the rarest of equipment.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
There are other options...make resources more rare and make gear not break, but simply slowly decrease in efficiency. Then, allow crafters to break down items. You will then have a cycle of people buying weapons from crafters, crafters buying them back once they have "worn out" to use as scrap for crafting and selling new items. The loss then is not in crafted gear but in resources loss in deconstruction. Balancing this cycle correctly would provide a core economy while decreasing the need for items to magically "disappear".
I do not like this as much as what we have been discussing, but it is simple(r) and sounds as if it would work.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Just because an item durability system is simple doesn't mean items have to be cheap to repair. And the more damaged, the higher level, the more expensive it is. Certainly you'd have to visit the requisite craftsmen. But even in a simple system, I can see an equipped item reaching 0% and being destroyed so the local weaponsmith (npc or PC) doesn't have a surplus of +1 swords for 10 gold. If every equipped item can be effected in this manner, there'd be no need for bound items which I've never been crazy about.Well as I said the complexity sides are something I like but i don't consider critical. Money in the pure form, is something that tends to come into high supply, and really is only made relevant through resources that are harder or easier to obtain, the best way to maintain that IMO is the resources themselves in crafting. That is why repairing itself should be either imposible, or take resources. If you have people gathering X iron a day used to make a +1 sword, and then everyone has the +1 sword, and just use pure gold to pay for repairs, iron keeps pouring in, and now there is a huge surplus of iron. Resources themselves need to constantly need to be used up, regardless of whether people are upgrading to he latest and greatest toy.
We both agree that binding should not be in place, but I believe either not repairing, or repairing for resources needs to be in place, and yes repairing for resources will still allow people to pop in to a PC Crafter and get their equipment repaired instantly, because smart crafters will keep extra supplies for all but the rarest of equipment.
I think money will have much more intrinsic value in POL. In WOW there was the auction house, negligible durability loss, some factional items, and most especially saving for a mount. Then, a better mount. Etc. POL could have these, plus worthwhile PC crafted items, but most especially the amount of cash it will take to construct a lair. A road. A city. A castle. Paying for armies. These are the point of the 'dominate' part of the game-a very important part-and will not cost a fortune, they will cost FORTUNES. Money will not be in high supply, in my view.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I think money will have much more intrinsic value in POL. In WOW there was the auction house, negligible durability loss, some factional items, and most especially saving for a mount. Then, a better mount. Etc. POL could have these, plus worthwhile PC crafted items, but most especially the amount of cash it will take to construct a lair. A road. A city. A castle. Paying for armies. These are the point of the 'dominate' part of the game-a very important part-and will not cost a fortune, they will cost FORTUNES. Money will not be in high supply, in my view.
I still think that a system of gains and losses has far more sustainability and allows for late comers to have a better chance then a system of pure straight gains. Offering more directions to gain still does not compensate for every event ending in positive gains. Domination should be a momentary thing, the group that was dominating last year may sink to the middle next year, and a year long head start is almost impossible to close the gap, unless there are losses.
My vote is still for a world of heavy gains and losses. Where the scale of power may change at a sneeze, or bad luck, or simply political messes. IE A & B but heads destroying each-other, all of a sudden C is a huge contender now that a & B have crushed what each-other have.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
But, two different durabilty loss systems? Percentage-based deterioration over time? Acquiring mats to restore your magic sword? ... gentlemen, this is HOMEWORK. And step back and look at some of these proposals from the devs point of view...
You have a point. I think we're all so excited that it's really easy to want to throw in everything but the proverbial kitchen sink. I can live with a simplified single-valued durability system that just has some kind of chance of going down with use.
But, gentlemen, the real question is staring us in the face, and I would greatly appreciate a little clarification from Ryan, if he's willing.
Is it going to be PFO, or POL, or something else entirely?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Here's one thought I just had: Spellcasters! How should equipment damage/quality effect sorcerers, clerics, and the like? In tabletop Pathfinder, they are much less reliant on gear than other classes, as you don't need an expensive weapon to cast decent spells. How should equipment for mages work in PFO? Should magic wands and staves give bonuses to magic attack and damage, enough that no serious spellcaster would go without one? And what about monks? Maybe better handwraps and gauntlets would help them... martial-arts more effectively? Clearly, you don't want to just leave almost half the archetypes out of the equipment loop... how should gear be made to affect them?
I'll also add one of my favorite quotes about gear, taken from a webpage about the game Iron Heroes:
"You are not your magic weapon and armour. You are not your spell buffs. You are not how much gold you have, or how many times you've been raised from the dead. When a Big Bad Demon snaps your sword in two, you do not cry because that was your holy avenger. You leap onto its back, climb up to its head, and punch it in the eye, then get a new damn sword off of the next humanoid you headbutt to death."
(For the curious, Iron Heroes is a tabletop game using the 3rd ed D&D license. I must confess that I don't know much else; I got this off of the TV Tropes page about it, but the quote made me giggle too much to not share it.)