MacGuffinites ... how rare should they be?


Pathfinder Online

1 to 50 of 66 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Goblin Squad Member

Now, we're all salivating over this game, but let's stop and think for a second.

Bringing up the Unholy One (World of Warcraft), something that pisses a lot of folk off is that every expansion it's yet ANOTHER series of minerals to grind, more types of precious stone, more types of herbs, idiotic variations of hides and leather to harvest, yadda yadda yadda.

Yet ... should the leather we get from harvesting and refining fifty rabbits be equal to the leather we get from harvesting a Cave Bear?

Copper, Bronze, Brass, Iron, Silver, Gold ... fairly standard metals in fantasy, and I think that they should make up 90-95% of what we harvest in terms of mineral ores from the Wild Hexes/Mines/Dungeons.

Mithril should be rare. Adamantite should be ludicrously difficult to find, as it is a 'Star Metal', or found ridiculously deep underground. Somebody walking around with a Mithril Longsword is a Pimp-in-training. Somebody walking around in Mithril Fullplate is a walking national treasure (for that settlement).

Somebody wandering around in Adamantite Fullplate ... you're holding a 'Gang and Spank me' sign the instant you step outside your house without a full posse backing you up.

I suppose what I'm asking is, should the 'rare' materials in game be EXTREMELY rare, like a 10-5% spawn rate compared to the other materials of the same 'type', or should it be a slightly easier ratio? And how hard is too hard? Would such a low % (And remember, we're talking about truly massive Hexes that have random spawning nodes/creatures that will be popping up randomly within the Hex to prevent bot-farming and the like!) cripple people trying to reach a certain 'Tier' of gear, or is the whole point to ensure that every man and his dwarf isn't doing the harlem shake in their +5 MacGuffinite artefacts of same-ness?

Do we go for the old 'Epics are for the Epic People', or do we offer a slow but reliable method for everyone to eventually get their hands on the Rare/Epic level items/Materials?

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I have never liked gear centric games, which is what you get when gear is actually more important in combat than anything else.

It appears that GW is already sticking to the idea that the best gear in game will be crafted. That is a huge positive for moving away from the whole gear grind end game travesty that WoW has bestowed upon the genre...... Truly the laziest developers in the gaming industry.

What if PFO took the rarest if metals or other materials and had them create just rare cosmetic itemization, instead of rare function?

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Can't be "Epic" if everyone has it, then it's just common. I played WoW for seven years, and the one thing I miss the most, Epics being Epic. Not this, oh, your max level, here's half a set of free epic gear to help you raid faster. I remember in Vanilla (the first WoW, no expansions for those who don't know) that when I saw the level 60 in full epic gear walking around, I would think to myself, "wow, hes epic'd out. He's pretty hardcore". Or even better yet, in Everquest, my friend was actually paid by his older brother to skip school and wait for a certain mob spawn, so he could kill it and get the one piece of gear that had a CHANCE to drop.

Goblin Squad Member

I can see 'white', 'green' and 'blue' name gear available to most folks (most of us able to get 'green'-named items, perhaps a 'blue' or two ...) but the 'Purple'-named or 'Epic' gear truly belonging to the Elite of the game.

And since gear will only help us slightly, it's a big power boost, but not a cripplingly high boost. And with item decay, it might be possible to slowly 'wear out' epic items, meaning that it becomes a question of if and when to use the Epic Item(s) to preserve their lifespan for as long as possible.

Also, if we make the 'Epics' truly rare, through the following methods:

A) Requires several rare/expensive components to craft the base item.

B) Requires a specific place and ritual to perform the high-level enchantment.

C) Takes up a mother-load of threads, so if you die, you're saving only the Epic and one or two other items at best.

D) The path to learning to craft the Epic could take months of experimentation, unique to that Crafter, ensuring that one person learns how to make the Fist of Ragnaros, and then can't tell everyone else how to make it.

This ensures that Epics are something that, when you get them, it's not a 'whoooo, now I can raid', it's a 'Oh my !@#$ing God!' moment.

Also, if specific types of material will only spawn within a specific terrain-type of Hex, and might require an Escalation or a long-term Harvesting process (top-end Lumber Mill near an Ironwood Grove, Deep Pit-Mine above a rich vein of Mithril), this ensures that MacGuffinites are not only kept rare, but are also profitable to produce from the very lowest levels.

Also it gives a bucket-load of incentives for people to either build Trade Alliances or go to War to gain access to the materials they will need to produce their Epics!

Goblinworks Executive Founder

I think that gradual power creep is both inevitable and desirable, and should be planned for from the beginning.

By 'gradual', I mean that by the tenth year, there should be something possible which requires 40,000 player-hours to create, and is slightly overpowered compared to its cost.

Goblin Squad Member

DeciusBrutus wrote:

I think that gradual power creep is both inevitable and desirable, and should be planned for from the beginning.

By 'gradual', I mean that by the tenth year, there should be something possible which requires 40,000 player-hours to create, and is slightly overpowered compared to its cost.

I would agree to this, as long as it's not an item one person can wield. Make it a super defensive structure, like a magic tower, or a super siege vehicle. I don't want to see a person walking around with "Weapon of Heavenly/Hell Fire+50" and being a walking demigod. If I remember right GW does not plan on each "class skill tree" going as far as level 20, because they say that is the "Demigod" status. A maxed character tree will be around equivalent to a level 15-17 character. THIS IS ALL OFF MEMORY, NOT 100% FACT!

CEO, Goblinworks

5 people marked this as a favorite.

Its likely that extremely high-end gear will be a function of massive component requirements and highly advanced specialized production facilities rather than getting a few bits of stastically rare resources.

Goblinworks Executive Founder

Well, by necessity one player will be in control of it. My prototype model for that class of thing is 'war golem'.

Just start with a solid block of adamantine, and chip away everything that isn't a golem.

Goblin Squad Member

Ryan Dancey wrote:
Its likely that extremely high-end gear will be a function of massive component requirements and highly advanced specialized production facilities rather than getting a few bits of stastically rare resources.

You forgot "...or bought with real money from the store."

Don't freak out, that was a joke...mostly.

Goblin Squad Member

I like that approach.

What i think will help with something like this is specialization of crafting.

So to make that holy avenger you need to specialize in weapons not armor. Same would be for other items.

Eventually a crafter could make everything but it would take a while.

Goblin Squad Member

I would like crafting specializations to go as far as to the type of weapon. So a master sword-smith, or axe-smith.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I don't like the idea of tiers of resources. Like in your example. Which is better, bear or rabbit fur?

Well if I'm making a pair of gloves and I want my hands to still be nimble/comfortable, then I want rabbit fur gloves.

If I'm making a coat that I want to be warm and to offer protection, bear would be much better.

Don't separate items as inferior/superior. Just make them different.

Goblin Squad Member

@Eldurian

Would you have that apply to metals?

Goblin Squad Member

How about if I am making a ring that I want to apply a magic effect too I would use gold. If I am making a sword which I want to hold a good edge and be light I use a light weight metal. For armor I may use a heavy weight metal since I want the bulk to be able to protect me. The again different type of metal against different foes.

Goblin Squad Member

My personal prayer to the powers that be: make iron the base metal for weaponry.

There may be some reasons for certain characters to avoid iron and steel, but once a civilization is in the iron age or better, there's rarely a need to make weapons and armor using bronze or copper.

Goblin Squad Member

Ryan Dancey wrote:
Its likely that extremely high-end gear will be a function of massive component requirements and highly advanced specialized production facilities rather than getting a few bits of statistically rare resources.

I like this idea. It means that our 'Epics' are going to be something that is a long, hard slog to. We will EARN our Epics, rather than it being 'just another tier', it will be a quest in and of itself.

Urman wrote:

My personal prayer to the powers that be: make iron the base metal for weaponry.

There may be some reasons for certain characters to avoid iron and steel, but once a civilization is in the iron age or better, there's rarely a need to make weapons and armor using bronze or copper.

Again, hell yes. Iron and Steel will hopefully be our primary weapon/armor materials, with Copper, Bronze and Brass serving as the metals for non-combat items and trade-goods.

That was a big irritation for a lot of people in WoW that I spoke to. Iron and Steel should have been the main resource, with the occasional node of Mithril, Dark Iron, Thorium and the like being an incredible find.

Mind you, I also was b!@*#ing on the forums that items should be levelable like the characters, so every 10 levels or so you need to take your favourite weapon back to the forge, supply the necessary materials and 'level' the weapon up to your new level.

That's something else. Since gear is decaying, and we are making more all the time, that means it's unlikely we're going to find +3 Longswords of +2 Flaming Crossbows lying around in the wilds/dungeons/NPC lairs. So for those of us who have played most modern MMOs where 'Greens' drops like rain, it's going to be a hell of a culture shock.

Goblin Squad Member

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Warning. Pedantic Military History mode enabled.

Bronze is actually superior to standard iron for weapons and armour, since standard iron is brittle. The skill to make superior (stronger and more malleable) iron came quite late, and steel obviously came later still. One reason that iron was used is that it is cheaper and easier to refine than bronze, especially when tin was scarce and highly valuable.

In game terms, bronze should be the equal of iron except slightly heavier, and inferior to steel. For weapons relying on weight (such as maces and hammers), bronze is actually superior even to steel. In-game advantages would be a resistance to any magnetic spells/effects and being easier to maintain as it doesn't rust. If a non-trademarked monster that likes to turn ferrous metals into rust appears, then the bronze sword and breastplate will become very useful!

Spoiler:
1.1 THE THING CALLED MICROSTRUCTURE
I may, perhaps, catch your attention by beginning with a quotation. I have chosen the following passage, which is Winston Churchill's succinct description of the birth of the Iron Age in Britain:

At this point [» 400 BC] the march of invention brought a new factor upon the [British] scene. Iron was dug and forged. Men armed with iron entered Britain from the continent and killed the men of bronze. At this point we can plainly recognize across the vanished millenniums a fellow-being. A biped capable of slaying another with iron is evidently to modern eyes a man and a brother. It cannot be doubted that for smashing skulls, whether long-headed or round, iron is best.
- Winston S. Churchill, A History of the English-Speaking Peoples, Vol. 1, p. 10

Winston Churchill was individually responsible for a measurable fraction of the history of his own age and was, perhaps as a consequence, an unusually perceptive commentator on the histories of others. But in this passage he is wrong. I do not refer to his social psychology, which I am not competent to judge. He is wrong in his metallurgy.

Modern research has shown that the iron that appeared in Britain at the end of the Late Bronze Age was, in fact, inferior in its salient mechanical properties to the bronze that preceded it. Since iron is also less dense than bronze, this metal was in every respect less suitable for smashing skulls, whether long-headed (Nordic) or round (Mediterranean).

So why change from good bronze to bad iron? I shall return to that point at the end of the chapter. I first want to excuse Sir Winston. His error is neither uncommon nor unreasonable. It would be made by almost anyone who is unschooled in materials science, and by a good many who claim intimate knowledge of the subject. To the average person the properties of a material are uniquely associated with its name, which is usually derived from its dominant chemical constituent or the whim of the company that manufactures it. Almost everyone knows that the Iron Age succeeded the Bronze Age. The idea that "iron" might be inferior to "bronze" is a possibility that a person who does not know metallurgy is unlikely to consider. Even physical scientists of impeccable credentials often assume that the properties of a material are uniquely associated with the atoms that make it up, and that those properties would be thoroughly understood if we only mastered behavior at the atomic level.

This notion is wrong. The material we call iron can be made weak (easily bent) or strong (virtually impossible for a human to bend), ductile (capable of being bent or deformed into complex shapes without fracture) or brittle (easily broken). Examples of all of these manifestations of iron are common today and useful in engineering. It follows that when we describe a material as iron we have left out something important. In fact, we have left out something essential.
That thing that is missing from the designation, iron, is called microstructure.

While the term "iron" describes the nature of the atoms that are present, or at least the dominant atom type, the term "microstructure" describes how those atoms are arranged. Both are necessary to understand the properties of iron. The same is true of any other engineering material. The composition and the microstructure together define the material; they specify what it is and what engineering properties it will have. Either, alone, is insufficient.

....

1.4 WHY CHANGE FROM GOOD BRONZE TO BAD IRON?
To return to the question with which I began this chapter, there are a number of competing theories, and I have described some of them in previous editions of these notes. However, in keeping with Occam's razor, the most probable reason is also the simplest. They changed to iron because it was cheap.

In this the British were not unique. They were, in fact, repeating history from the cradle of civilization in the Middle East more than a millennium earlier. Every society, from the Hittites forward, changed to iron weaponry as soon as they learned how to make it, despite the fact that the iron they could make was everywhere inferior to good bronze. (When Goliath met David, in the biblical account, he was carried iron weapons but wearing bronze armor. His choices give a pretty good indication of which metal he thought would do the better job of protecting him.) Early iron was inferior to good bronze, but it wasn't that bad. And it was plentiful and cheap. Given a choice between a thousand soldiers armed with iron and half that number armed with bronze, the wise king invested in iron. In many societies of the period soldiers were expected to provide their own weaponry. Given that he could afford fifty arrows tipped with iron or twenty tipped with bronze, the smart soldier made up his mind very quickly.

Iron is, arguably, the most versatile metal in the periodic table, and metallurgists gradually learned to make tools and weapons of iron that were far superior to any that preceded them. But that came much later. In the early days iron dominated the market because it was available and it was cheap.

If this is the case, can we, in Churchill's words, "plainly recognize across the vanished millenniums a fellow-being?" Most of us will have little trouble doing that. In fact, steel's place in the world market today is largely due to the fact that it is relatively cheap. One can make a better automobile out of more exotic materials, and the owners of grand prix race cars do that. But most of us will continue to buy cars made primarily of steel and bank the difference in price. A surprisingly large fraction of the materials used in industry are chosen on the simple basis of cost and availability.

J. W. Morris, Jr.
A Survey of Materials Science
Department of Materials Science and Engineering
University of California, Berkeley
Fall 2008

Goblin Squad Member

@Sadurian, excellent post, thanks for sharing.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

@Sadurian

Please refrain from messing with my misguided hierarchies and assumptions. Thank You Very Much!

Goblinworks Executive Founder

Early iron-forging techniques were so bad that they occasionally made steel accidentally.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
DeciusBrutus wrote:
Early iron-forging techniques were so bad that they occasionally made steel accidentally.

I do wonder if that's where stories of magic swords originated - fluke weapons that were better than most other weapons.

Goblin Squad Member

Urman wrote:
DeciusBrutus wrote:
Early iron-forging techniques were so bad that they occasionally made steel accidentally.
I do wonder if that's where stories of magic swords originated - fluke weapons that were better than most other weapons.

This is really interesting to me.

I'm a big believer in the wisdom of the common man. As such, it's easy for me to believe that there were isolated cases where people had figured out how to forge really powerful iron/steel well before that knowledge spread to other people. In fact, it's really easy to see that being a closely guarded secret.

Goblin Squad Member

Glad you enjoyed the article. Military history is what I do, so it's the sort of thing I like to bring to discussions.

The theory of the 'magic' sword is not far wrong. The theories are that, in an age where basic iron was standard the improved iron or even steel blade was held in awe. Witness the standing that swords enjoyed in Celtic and Scandanavian pre-medieval cultures, where a good sword was the symbol of leadership. The really good smiths made the famous pattern welded blades, which look beautiful but would also have been superior to the common blades held by most warriors.

Later on, the sword became the symbol of knighthood, even though it was not usually the weapon of choice in combat.

It is not surprising, therefore, that myths and legends grew up out of particularly great blades, and they were accorded magical status.

CEO, Goblinworks

1 person marked this as a favorite.

You can make an iron weapon with one harvested resource. To make bronze you need tin and copper. Tin and copper are usually not found in the same geology. The Bronze Age was an age of trade necessitated by the need to get ore from the other guy. The Iron Age was an age of conquest by those who had iron against those who didn't.

Goblin Squad Member

As I remember, a goldsmith presented Emperor Tiberius with a plate made of a shiny new metal. He claimed he had discovered a secret way of extracting this stuff from clay. Tiberius had the poor bozo excecuted-he had amassed so much gold and silver in his military campaigns he didn't want this mysterious substance undermining the value of his loot. So we waited another thousand years for aluminum. Two things-don't be the first clown to walk by the tin mine with an iron sword; and I wonder if we can keep some recipes secret for a time.

Goblin Squad Member

Ryan Dancey wrote:
The Bronze Age was an age of trade necessitated by the need to get ore from the other guy. The Iron Age was an age of conquest by those who had iron against those who didn't.

Current thinking* is that the great Celtic migration was not one of warriors conquering people along the way, but the spread of the culture and technology through trade and diplomatic missions.

The old theory of an iron-age Hallstatt Celtic tribe sweeping West conquering all in their path has been questioned, not least by the DNA evidence that put serious doubts on Europe being unified by a 'Celtic' DNA trace. Bearing in mind that the history of this time is mainly archaeological, with some Roman story-telling thrown in, it is easy to see how the discovery of similar Celtic artifacts in (for example) Britain and Spain could have led to the conclusion that the Celts must have conquered lands in both Britain and Spain.

*Which is prevalent but not universal - historians love a good argument.

CEO, Goblinworks

1 person marked this as a favorite.

If I can make war based on the stuff I have in my territory, and you have to make war based on trading for stuff with someone else, I have an inherent advantage against you as long as the stuff I have is reasonably as common as the stuff you trade for. There's no record of bronze-equipped people displacing iron equipped people, but plenty of evidence for the other way 'round. It's just simple economics.

Goblin Squad Member

The only evidence is archaeological, and that can easily be explained by trading and adoption of cultural manufactured items, such as the famous Celtic swirling artwork. There is absolutely no DNA evidence, and no written legacy (apart from the Roman interpretation, which is dodgy at best).

That and the fact that iron came later. You can't displace someone who isn't already there.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Bingo~!

This is also my thought on the matter, a few impurities and that Iron Sword became Steel of a type that was much better.

The poor maker never could remake it, not knowing his helper was heart broken over rejection and through his "badly made" love token into the mix.

I think this is where sulfur and daemons got related, some one was mixing and made a Boom, folks came to see. Smelled the sulfur and the building was blown apart, had to be a Daemon.

Lee

Nihimon wrote:
Urman wrote:
DeciusBrutus wrote:
Early iron-forging techniques were so bad that they occasionally made steel accidentally.
I do wonder if that's where stories of magic swords originated - fluke weapons that were better than most other weapons.

Goblin Squad Member

Sadurian wrote:

The only evidence is archaeological, and that can easily be explained by trading and adoption of cultural manufactured items, such as the famous Celtic swirling artwork. There is absolutely no DNA evidence, and no written legacy (apart from the Roman interpretation, which is dodgy at best).

That and the fact that iron came later. You can't displace someone who isn't already there.

I think Mr. Danceys' argument was economic and fundamentally sound. Once the technique was known, rocks with iron concentrations of over 60% were ubiquitous compared to tin and copper; you could actually gather them up instead of mining. So it was far faster and cheaper to equip an army with iron. Arguments over which metal made a better maul, sword, armor, etc. pale in comparison to the fact that all other things being equal, an army completely equipped with metal is superior to one that has less.

Goblin Squad Member

One thing Eve did well IMHO, was that the first ore you harvested was needed to make most things, it may have been common but it was still needed, so there was always a market.

How I see it working?

The Rare stuff will need High Skill in Harvest and Well Made Tools, to get.

Then that Rare Stuff will need to be taken to a Craftsman of Skill to Refine.

Then the Refined Rare will need to be added to other items Common - Rare, by a Craftsman, to Create a Great Item.

Perhaps at this time or after the Refine Step, that Rare may need to be taken to a Enchanter to "Enhance" it, add keyword.

SO lets make the Sword of Slaying
We need Iron, Tin, Copper, and some Volcanic Rock (uncommon drop found on Blackened Golems).

The Rare stuff we need is Samarium.

Take the Samarium to the best Metal Refining person we can find, pay the fee.
Get back a Bar or 3 of Refined Samarium.

We take it to the best Enchanter we can find to bring out all the rareness we can.

This we take with bars of all the other Metals and extras, do not forget the rocks. To the Sword Maker.

The Sword Maker charges us a fee fitting the great skill we are buying.
Remember he needs Skill and the Best Tools as well.

Then the Sword is made,
If we got it all correct and added enough rocks :)

We get a Sword of Slaying,
A beautiful weapon with a dark menacing blade, (those rocks at work),
Strong yet Flexible.
Keywords: Flexible x2 (harder to damage) Added By Enchanter and Skill of Maker, Sharp (Armor is less effective) Added by Mats, Inspiring (takes Less Threads) Added by Samarium, Color of Blade Black Added By Samarium and Volcanic Rocks (uncommon drop found on Blackened Golems )

But we will see what really happens in game.
Lee

Goblin Squad Member

Bringslite wrote:

@Eldurian

Would you have that apply to metals?

Yes I would actually. Steel is much better than most metals for weapons and armor but that doesn't mean it's a "better" metal. What are we going to make bells, lamps, jewelry, anchors, etc. from?

There is plenty of uses for copper, bronze, brass, lead, gold, silver, etc. where they are preferable to steel.

This is evident in the fact that all of those metals continue to be used in the modern world.

Goblin Squad Member

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ryan Dancey wrote:
... conquest by those who had iron against those who didn't.
Sadurian wrote:

...spread of the culture and technology through trade and diplomatic missions.

I sure hope that both appoaches are going to be legit strategies in the game.

Goblin Squad Member

The joy I feel that 'Smithing' might include more than just weapons and armor, and those items might be more than just once-off gag items fills me with joy.

I also like the concept that hides/leather from different creatures could have different properties.

Rabbit Hides might be excellent for light, thin, flexible materials, while Goat/Cow Hides might be suitable for armors strips and more durable purposes, while Bear/Monster Hides might be a fundamental component for full suits of armor or weapon components.

Herbs and harvested plant materials might provide a variety of uses depending upon how they are harvested, how they are treated and how they are combined.

You throw all those possible combinations together, and not only do you have many different combinations that can provide similar yet subtly different results, but there's also the possibility of 'signature' combinations, such as one person figuring out that applying the boiled residue of Flower X to Sheep-Hide makes it turn a deep sapphire blue, which he then sells to Smith B who makes Steel swords with a hint of powdered Gold Dragon scales to make the blade have a subtle hue, to make a mechanically similar weapon to the stock standard weapon, but looks significantly cooler.

Goblin Squad Member

I'm not a military historian, more a keeper of these military history goodies, but here are my 2 credits :)
Before cast iron processing was invented, bronze was only decent material to cast your cannons and other big things. Cast iron was cheaper, but somewhat more brittle than bronze.
Last cannon with steel-bronze compound barrel was austrian-hungarian field gun from the year 1905 (iirc).
Beryllium bronze (beryllium copper)... well I use this beauty in my campaigns regularly as a wondrous "king's bronze". Modern steel alloys surpassed its qualities... somewhere in the 1960s. Dangerous to make, hard-to-obtain components - perfect for GM, just perfect! :)
Damascus steel, good for the weapons, is still inferior for this purpose to the ancient crucible steel, which was made in small quantities, with great difficulty and little understanding and was produced in India and worked into the weapon in the Persia and several other Central Asia countries.

Copper alloys are not that bad,(imo) and can be (with a little help of devs) more cost-effective than many iron-based compounds.

So I see no problem in threading my t3 crossbow with beryllium bronze bow and wielding my t3 scimitar with crucible steel blade. Just if I have enough threads... :)

Scarab Sages Goblin Squad Member

I can't believe no-one has come by to inform us all that katanas were made of vastly superior materials than any other weapon in the entire history of the world.

Goblin Squad Member

Snorter, that because they were not made with better materials (far worse, mind you), but the forging technique more than made up for it! That's why you get the self-sharpening qualities.

CEO, Goblinworks

I suspect he knows this and was being ironic.

Goblin Squad Member

Drakhan Valane wrote:
Snorter, that because they were not made with better materials (far worse, mind you), but the forging technique more than made up for it! That's why you get the self-sharpening qualities.

Well, i wouldn`t say that Tamahagane-steel isn`t of good quality, the again, maybe that is part of what you mean with technique.

But the technique point is an important one.
Even today the production of a highquality sword, or even a knife is a process that takes a highly skilled dedicated smith. and it takes time. the production of a katana or a Nesmuk knife for example takes at least many days, up to several weeks.

-Highquality items should allways be singlerun productions.
-Highquality item production should take longer.

Goblin Squad Member

"-Highquality items should allways be singlerun productions.
-Highquality item production should take longer."

I am onboard with that.

Scarab Sages Goblin Squad Member

J. W. Morris, Jr.
A Survey of Materials Science

Based on the sample Sadurian provided, this seems to be an exceptionally readable textbook (or a good popular science book). Kudos to Mr./Ms./Dr.(?) Morris.

Goblin Squad Member

I'll make a suggestion here because I don't like the standard item colorization of mmos. How about give different stats on an item different color? +5 would be colored green and +10 would be colored blue or certain keyword would be colored green and another blue to indicate how powerful they are. So that the item in itself wouldn't have color but the stats in it. Like 2 green stats and 1 blue stat item etc. I think this would give people more variety in choosing magic items and threading them. If GW is going to use multiple stats in gear it would be nice to see those colored and not the actual item.

There's some pretty cool ideas on this thread :)

Scarab Sages Goblin Squad Member

Ryan Dancey wrote:
I suspect he knows this and was being ironic.

I suspect you are a canny judge of character, sir.

Talk about a self-fulfilling post.
Sorry for the derail, is there a corollary to 'Godwin's Law'?

Zatoichi's Law?
"As the number of posts in a thread increase, the chances of anyone mentioning katanas approaches 100%."

Scarab Sages Goblin Squad Member

Aeioun Plainsweed wrote:
I'll make a suggestion here because I don't like the standard item colorization of mmos. How about give different stats on an item different color? +5 would be colored green and +10 would be colored blue or certain keyword would be colored green and another blue to indicate how powerful they are. So that the item in itself wouldn't have color but the stats in it. Like 2 green stats and 1 blue stat item etc. I think this would give people more variety in choosing magic items and threading them. If GW is going to use multiple stats in gear it would be nice to see those colored and not the actual item.

I'd rather find out what an item's properties are, through using it.

Or finding oneself on the pointy end of it.

It would make banditry and assassination more interesting, if the attacker has no idea how well-equipped his target is until the gloves are off.

From an aesthetic point of view, I'd rather have items look exactly like what they are, with no artificial colours or glow.
Most masterwork items would be made with clean, simple lines, for effective use (eg the items given the the Fellowship in Lothlorien). I'm not a fan of 'spikes covered in spikes, covered in spikes' armour or weapons, of the type that are only fit for hanging on the walls for show.

Obviously, if they're viewed via detect magic or arcane sight, they could radiate colours, and intensity, based on the schools of magic* and spell levels* employed in their creation.
And I'd have no problem if a frost blade had ice forming on the scabbard, or a fire blade gave off flames and smoke when in use, but I don't think anyone should be able to distinguish a '+1' weapon from a '+3', with the unaided eye.

I'd also like the option to travel incognito, and carry colour-coordinated gear that didn't clash, if I upgraded one of the items.
Accessorising is so very important, especially if you want to hide.
A glowing ghillie-suit is rather redundant, after all. And if that's blue, but my armour's green, and my boots are red...well.
I'd like the carpet to match the drapes, if you get my drift.

*yes, I'm aware the MMO won't be mapping directly to the TTRPG, but I'm using these terms for clarity, until we get the finished product.

Goblin Squad Member

Aeioun Plainsweed wrote:
How about give different stats on an item different color?

Well, the items won't really have stats like that. They'll have keywords, and the good ones will have lots of keywords.

I think it would be a great idea in an MMO where a lot of items were still being acquired as loot drops. In that environment, having this color-coding would be very helpful in making quick decisions. But I'm not sure it makes sense in PFO where most players will be getting their weapons and armor from the market, and I would imagine most of them will be custom orders where they're requesting very specific keywords.

I think in PFO it actually makes more sense to color-code them based on Tier, because those tiers will be extremely important.

Goblin Squad Member

Snorter wrote:
Obviously, if they're viewed via detect magic or arcane sight, they could radiate colours...

I'm fairly certain Aeioun Plainsweed's suggestion was in reference to the way the item names are usually color-coded in most games. I don't believe she was suggesting the items themselves should have a color that was visible in-world.

Goblin Squad Member

Snorter wrote:
Obviously, if they're viewed via detect magic or arcane sight, they could radiate colours...

...and 30% of all magic weapons should generate light equival to a light spell anyway ;)

Goblin Squad Member

Gedichtewicht wrote:
Snorter wrote:
Obviously, if they're viewed via detect magic or arcane sight, they could radiate colours...

...and 30% of all magic weapons should generate light equival to a light spell anyway ;)

Not to mention all the cool Paladins...

Goblin Squad Member

Nihimon wrote:


Not to mention all the cool Paladins...

uuhhh... shiny ;)

Scarab Sages Goblin Squad Member

Nihimon wrote:
I'm fairly certain Aeioun Plainsweed's suggestion was in reference to the way the item names are usually color-coded in most games. I don't believe she was suggesting the items themselves should have a color that was visible in-world.

Apologies to Aeioun, if that's the case.

I've just been scarred by some really horrible eye-blistering adverts for other MMOs, with BESM avatars frolicking in dayglo panties, and I'd prefer to keep things looking real.

1 to 50 of 66 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Paizo / Licensed Products / Digital Games / Pathfinder Online / MacGuffinites ... how rare should they be? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.