State of Crafting

[Aelonwy]

/wall of text
This suggestion is only concerned with collectible ingredients not the amount or type of essences, and for THE MOST PART will stick with what can be acquired F2P. Although I have nothing against some collectibles from particular packs being used, this is just a beginning. These suggestions ignore Purified Dragonshard fragments as an unneccesary complication.
Furthermore, it is NOT the indivual enchantments that make an item overpowered or create the possiblity of inbalance in the game. Its the combination of enchantments, and sometimes the combination on the appropriate metal weapon. So you shouldn't have penalized the indivudual shard recipes (with enormous or over-the-top ingredients that make leveling at those levels tortorous) but rather should have made the Shard of Potential recipes (over +8 or 10 maybe) contain these rare and costly ingredients and/or added a cost to imbueing any shards on special metal blanks. Shards of Potential were a brilliant idea to begin with and should be the lynch pin of the best Cannith Crafting has to offer.

Example: +1 Steel weapon of Greater Evil Outsider Bane (random loot is ML6)
This could be useful in an at level Chronoscope, or a little over level Phiarlan Carnival.
There is no reason why this should require shroud ingredients or an astral diamond to make.

Example: +5 Holyburst Silver weapon of Greater Evil Outsider Bane (random loot would be what? ML 18? 20?)
This would be incredibly useful in any high end quest/raid with devils, evil outsiders (most of them.)
To push the item's potential this high aught to cost several rare/expensive ingredients and either to craft on a special metal weapon or to disjunct the special metal weapon and make it craftable in the first place aught to cost extra.

Shards of Potential +10 = Small Eberron Dragonshard
Shards of Potential +11 = Small Eberron Dragonshard
Shards of Potential +12 = Medium Eberron Dragonshard
Shards of Potential +13 = Medium Eberron Dragonshard
Shards of Potential +14 = Large Eberron Dragonshard
Shards of Potential +15 = Large Eberron Dragonshard

Anytime someone crafts a shard onto a special metal blank these ingredients could be required:
Imbue On Silver = Silver Bowl
Imbue On Cold Iron = Polished Ore
Imbue On Flametouched Iron = Polished Ore
Imbue On Adamantine = Adamantine Ore
Imbue On Mithral = Moonstone

Using this method has the added benefit of not making the process of leveling your crafting skills insanely costly at the high levels where after 10.1 most of the recipes required the purified dragonshard fragment. But still making it harder and more costly to make the weapons that rival raid/epic gear.

Collectibles as an alternative to or in tandem with Soul gems. NOT ssuggesting AMOUNT, just TYPE.
Greater Aberration Bane = Planar Spoor
G Animal Bane = Cryptmoss Worm
G Chaotic Outsider Bane = Outsider Tokens
G Construct Bane = Adamantine Ore
G Dragon Bane = Dragon Relic
G Dwarf Bane = Lumps of Coal
G Elemental Bane = Elemental Ingots
G Elf Bane = Elf Relic or Ivory Scorpion Icons
G Evil Outsider Bane = Planar Talismans
G Giant Bane = Giant Relic or Amulets of the Archbishop
G Gnoll Bane = Antique Bronze Tokens
G Goblinoid Bane = Shamanic Totems
G Halfling Bane = Pale Creeper
G Human Bane = Intact Fingerbone
G Lawful Outsider Bane = Planar Talismans
G Magical Beast Bane = Cryptmoss Queen
G Monstrous Humanoid Bane = Swaying Mushroom Spore Pods
G Ooze Bane = Oceanic Sphere
G Orc Bane = Shamanic Totems
G Plant Bane = Lush Cryptmoss
G Reptilian Bane = Icons Of Khyber
G Vermin Bane = Headsman Beetle
G Undead Bane = Necromantic Gems

Holyburst = x# of Mark's of Favor + 1 Ritual Athame

These are just ideas... please reply to each section if possible with your own opinions on the subject.
Furthermore, this uses more of the collectibles we already have in the game in a useful way. The collectibles already have tiers, why not use the third tier ...the one that drops least to effectively curtail the most favored recipes by requiring large amounts of rare collectibles rather than creating new things to take up our inventory space? Maybe the ship has already sailed and what we see here is larglely what we are going to get. I for one hope not... I hope that you will use more of what is already a large part of the game and less of what mainly existed in the store.
/wall of text done.

P.S. requiring a flawless siberys shard for Greater Dragon Bane mainly punishes monks that cannot have greensteel weapons, most others will ignore that, that particular recipe even exists.

[Letrii]

I dont think hes missing the point. I think that -IS- the point. Macro leveling was a little to no cost leveling solution, all the way up and took people a few days to do.

Reasonable pace is a matter of opinion. With shards being BTA meaning we only need one crafter per account. Leveling at a slower pace is reasonable. Even 3-6 months is reasonable for something you will never have to do again.

3-6 months is not reasonable if you need to skill up to make upgrades to current gear.

[gloopygloop]

Item deconstruction still grants XP if the item has never been deconstructed before.

I do think that the zillion-clicks leveling was a problem. I did like the idea of getting something extra for deconstructing the junk shards that we created for leveling, though.

Would you consider granting 0/2/4/6/8 XP for deconstructing items instead of 1/2/3/4/5 the way we have now?

That would grant a little more for the big deconstructions while still avoiding the problem of the insane low-cost method of leveling.

[Alanim]

I think the concerns are that exp rates are not increasing at the same speed as exp amount required, and resources consumed. It also doesn't all recipes suffer the same exp degradation furthering this problem.

In other games where resources go up, so does experience, but it also doesn't degrade. perhaps base degradation on the levels that they're at? like 3 at 1-25, 2 at 25-50, 1 at 50-150? Either way something is flawed here making the upper levels too much a grind and for all the wrong reasons.

[Cauthey]

3-6 months is not reasonable if you need to skill up to make upgrades to current gear.

I said it in another thread, and I'll also say it here:

Anything worth having is worth paying for, or working for.

[Rinnaldo]

It seems like a major issue now is how to keep a fully leveled-up crafter from making a ton of highly prized items, selling them, and flooding the game with them, destroying any semblance of balance.

It occurs to me that Fernando's original idea (at least the way he stated it in that one video) of simply swapping a paralyzing effect from one weapon to another, would be self-limiting. The effects would have to come from weapons and items that were already randomly generated, you see. So, if you wanted to make 200 holy burst silver weapons of lawful outsider bane, you'd literally have to have at least 200 (probably twice as many) weapons that already had holy burst, silver, or lawful outsider bane, before you could swap the effects around onto one item. This may have been quick and easy in the short term, but after a period of people buying up all the items of certain types off the AH, the sought-after effects would become rare (due to hoarding) and then super-expensive. Throw in the need to add a stack of x to the items when swapping effects, and this would have been quite effective in creating limits in and of itself.

So, I simply wanted to suggest that it's ironic that if Fernando's statement (which got a lot of us excited about crafting in the first place), which turned out to be largely untrue, had been implemented, it might have been a better limiting factor in the long-term. ("Better," read: "Easier and more logical than implementing weird ingredients to limit high-level effects.")

[dkyle]

It occurs to me that Fernando's original idea (at least the way he stated it in that one video) of simply swapping a paralyzing effect from one weapon to another, would be self-limiting.

That's not even remotely self-limiting.

Paralyzing, Holy Burst, and Banes are not rare. Even silver weapons are barely limiting currently, and they're already far more rare then those enchantments.

Useful combinations of those abilities are rare, not those abilities themselves.

People might hoard the useful items at first, but the supply of those items simply far outstrips the demand. Crafting as it is is already far more limiting than that.


Fernando's statement was obviously a simplified version of the crafting process, intended to be easy to understand to press. I never for a moment thought it would actually be as simple as that. The devs would have to be mad.

[MadFloyd]

MF,

Where do we stand on relaxing slot restrictions? Any change to the crafting system going forward would seem like this would need to be decided sooner rather than later.

As a follow on, where do we stand with the ML issue for weapons. I'm finding it very hard to believe that this can't be addressed. I know your previous post on the subject mentioned something about how the random loot generator assigns MLs of items but that really got me thinking about why in the world that should make an difference. Is Cannith crafting using the random loot generator in some way, shape or form? If so....why? The shards are pretty self-descriptive about they increase in ML that will occur. If you are able to tell us in advance how the ML will change based on what shard you are applying, then that data has got to be in a database. I'm not going to say a fix is as easy as reducing all your number in the database by 1 but it truly can't be that much harder than than at least in concept if not actual code. Along those lines, as an example, why does a +3 Enchantment shard indicate that applying it will increase the ML of an item by 4 if there are no enhancements already on the item but by 5 if there are already other enhancements. Forget about any other loot generator or how it's done in DnD or anything else, that just doesn't make sense and is at least part of the reason the MLs are higher rather than lower as you've indicated was the intent.

PS - One other thing MF. Should a Cannith crafted item remain BtC if you disjunct it again? It seems like disjuncting the item would remove everything off of it including BtC since the item just becomes a craftable blank with nothing on it. Is this WAI?

After review, we’re not that unhappy with the current state of crafted item minimum levels, but are considering adding a way for players to actively choose to reduce the minimum levels of certain items.

As for the BTC question, it is WAI. For exploit reasons, we need to take the stance that once bound, always bound.

[Thvari]

In the middle of the verbal brawl over the last few pages, this excellent suggestion appears to have been overlooked.

This, right here, is full of win.

^
This right here both of the quotes. Pure truth. I'd also like to add that uising Gems and the lesser shards would make it tolerable to make higher level banes.

[Cyr]

After review, we’re not that unhappy with the current state of crafted item minimum levels, but are considering adding a way for players to actively choose to reduce the minimum levels of certain items.

That is beyond depressing. The ML's currently make little sense in many cases when viewed as an entire system within the game.

[stainer]

After review, we’re not that unhappy with the current state of crafted item minimum levels, but are considering adding a way for players to actively choose to reduce the minimum levels of certain items.

As for the BTC question, it is WAI. For exploit reasons, we need to take the stance that once bound, always bound.

Would it be possible to craft an additional RR onto an item at some point? That seems like an easy easy way to drop ML a little.

[Khurse]

As for the BTC question, it is WAI. For exploit reasons, we need to take the stance that once bound, always bound.

Ooooh this I'll take exception to.
(Mainly after screwing myself over with silver threaded handwraps that belong to my caster now)

How is it that allowing someone to craft on something, (ie let's say Silver Threaded Handwraps) and then disjunct them (so losing all those LDS or whatever I've dropped so I have the really good effects) then transferring them to another toon before crafting on them again allows me any sort of nefarious exploit?

Especially since any items marked BTA (including ones I've purchased from the DDO store that were *sold* as being BTA) keep their BTA status.
Yes, from your own DDO store I managed to purchase a craftable trinket, it was sold as and is indeed BTA.
I can freely deconstruct on it,pass it around, whatever.

The ST Handwraps I (stupidly) constructed on though are BTC forever because...it would be bad if I could send them to my Monk?

[dkyle]

That is beyond depressing. The ML's currently make little sense in many cases when viewed as an entire system within the game.

There's some wiggle room there. For now, I'm interpreting it as:

1 ML over par for most weapons? Staying.

Additional 2 ML over par for Pure Good and Greater Banes? Perhaps not staying.

lots ML over par for Caster weapons? Perhaps not staying.

2 ML under par for accessories? Staying.


If those "perhaps" become "definitely not", I'd be entirely satisfied.

Also, in regards to disjunction removing Bound status: I don't see why disjuncted BtC items becoming BtA would be exploitable, as long as the borderline exploit with BtA base items is fixed. Surprised that one's lasted as long as it has...

[Yaga_Nub]

After review, we’re not that unhappy with the current state of crafted item minimum levels, but are considering adding a way for players to actively choose to reduce the minimum levels of certain items.

As for the BTC question, it is WAI. For exploit reasons, we need to take the stance that once bound, always bound.

Thanks for the update MF. I'm with Khurse on this one that I can't really think of any way to exploit the system but I'm sure others might be able to. It's definitely not a high priority by any means but it would be nice if that could be fixed so that it couldn't be exploited.

On a different topic, I'd like to request FoM be added as a crafting effect. There was originally a FoM DT rune, if I remember correctly, and it was removed with the explanation that the devs didn't want effects that conflicted with raid items. Since you have added in Cannith craftable +4 Attack shards, which previously only came on raid loot and epic items, you've now entered the realm of crafting items stepping on the toes of raid/epic items. In for a dime, in for a dollar.

[Rinnaldo]

That's not even remotely self-limiting.

Paralyzing, Holy Burst, and Banes are not rare. Even silver weapons are barely limiting currently, and they're already far more rare then those enchantments.

Useful combinations of those abilities are rare, not those abilities themselves.

Upon further consideration, I think you may be right.

Now, if you needed a stack of ingredients to transfer the effect, and a had a high probably of failure resulting in loss of the original effect... Oh wait, that's basically what we have now.

[Rinnaldo]

I'd also like to add that uising Gems and the lesser shards would make it tolerable to make higher level banes.

I totally agree. Even using other shard combinations to make higher level effects would be tolerable. For example, a Greater Construct Bane + Some Other Shard + essences = Smiting Shard. I would very much expect them to throw a Mystical Ingredient in that recipe, though.

[dkyle]

I'd also like to add that uising Gems and the lesser shards would make it tolerable to make higher level banes.

Ugh... please no on gems in crafting. If I have to start sorting out the crafting gems from the junk gems, and can't just click "Sell Gems"...

[Miztof]

From another thread:

Confirmed that they removed the toggle under options, aaaand...
Confirmed that they left the overwrite block on by default.

What's the reasoning behind blocking shard overwriting? Any change to mid/high level item will incur massive costs in terms of reapplying shards of potential each and every time, not counting in the possibility of having to redo shards with special ingredients.

[Primalhowl]

I think in the modern "I-want-it-now", mass production culture we live in that there is an incredible lack of understanding of how much effort it takes to perfect a hand craft in the real world. Artisans work for decades to reach the pinnacle of their craft, often making and remaking the same objects to perfect some small technique.

I don't see any rational reason why a fictional crafting system should be any different. The early levels should be quick and easy, but if you want to make the best of the best crafted items, you should have to work your tail off to get the skill.

And as in life, skill gain should be gained in smaller and smaller increments as you get closer to perfection (the skill "cap" or mastery).

Now, as for the "grind" aspect. Musicians rehearse endlessly before performing. Artists sketch/paint/sculpt over and over before getting the piece perfect. Jewelers will cast/recast/melt down as slag and start from scratch repeatedly before a custom piece of jewelry is released. There is necessarily grind associated with any skill. In this, video game crafting *should* mimic life, in a condensed time scale (obviously).

Finally, the "rare items" complaint: If you want to make a ring that is diamond set in a platinum setting, can you walk to the grocery store and get the components? Of course not. Platinum metal is rare and expensive. So are diamonds. So why shouldn't we expect that the best items in crafting require expensive or hard to get items as ingredients?

I agree that 3-6 months of work to reach the cap is just about perfect.

[dunklezhan]

Ugh... please no on gems in crafting. If I have to start sorting out the crafting gems from the junk gems, and can't just click "Sell Gems"...

I liked the idea of 'gems totalling x...'

In fact, the crafting supplies NPC could have a 'trade gems' option rather than 'sell gems'. If you have gems worth enough plat, he gives you a specific crafting gem or three. If you haven't, he says 'you don't have enough for a crafting gem - would you like some cash?' and you can take the plat instead.