Previous Thread
Previous
Expand All
Collapse All
Ignore Author
Reply
Hey gang. I've been a bit AWOL for awhile, but I wanted to check in and let everyone know where things stand with Enchanting so far.
The bad news is that there hasn't been a ton of technical progress so far, so we're still at least a few months of work away from a tangible release.
The good news is that we've made a lot of conceptual and organizational progress. I've had the chance to spend some substantial time with a couple PCs and get a feel for Kodius' fantastic Forging system and our new Mining gathering system from a player perspective. This experience has informed a couple adjustments to the way we plan to present Enchanting to the players.
A couple observations:
1. Forging benefits greatly from the logical separation between disciplines. I know exactly what I'm getting when I choose a discipline for a career or a hobby. I can be relatively certain that any advances in my area of interest will continue to fall under my chosen discipline(s).
2. Blacksmithing as a support discipline adds a lot of depth to my decisions on technique expenditures.
3. Rare metal drops are an exciting find and add some surprise rewards to mining process.
4. Variability in material choice adds a lot of flexibility and exploration possibility in the forging experience.
In order to try and capitalize on some of these positive aspects from the existing crafting disciplines, we're looking at some conceptual updates to the Enchanting discipline structure. The following is subject to change, but I thought people would appreciate hearing where we're at.
1. Discipline focus adjustment
The biggest shift is that we are no longer segregating enchantments into discipline by their underlying mechanism. This proved too vague to provide any conceptual boundaries between disciplines and meant that players would have no real idea what the enchantments they made would be able to do.
Instead, we will be dividing the enchantments into three logical categories, similar to existing crafting systems. Using some really non-technical terms here:
1. Runecrafting - tools, Founts, runes
2. Binding - Armor / Weapons
3. Invoking - Everything else
Players can expect each of these disciplines to have roughly 3 technique trees, with Binding and Invoking including appropriate enhancing trees, and Runecrafting likely containing the sigil-gathering techniques.
2. Enchantment powering and Founts
Founts are our answer to the enchantment powering variations. Rather than separating an enchantment activation mechanism by discipline, this will now be driven by what we are calling a Fount. A Fount is like an engine for the enchantment that determines how it receives its energy and is activated. Creation of a Fount will be handled by the Runecrafting decision.
3. Rare sigils, enchantment variation
In order to try and gain some of the exciting rare drops and variation found in Forging, we will be modifying the sigil usage slightly. Essentially each recipe will have some required sigils, but then optional sigils can be added to modify the underlying properties of the enchantment. This final sigil performs a similar role to the type of material used in forging and allows the enchanter to choose whether his enchantment wants to focus on duration, power, ease of use, or some other properties. Harder sigils will offer more novel property options, with rare sigils providing slightly more advantageous property configurations.
4. NMUs and enchanting
Rather than omitting NMUs from an entire discipline, we decided that it would be better to control this interaction by providing two crafting mechanisms for enchanters. There will be a tooled creation mechanism and a non-tooled mechanism. Magic users are able to invest in the Imbue spell, which will provide access to certain enchanting mechanics without the restriction of certain stationary structures. The exact details of these two options are still being determined.
Additionally, NMUs will have restricted options with regards to Fount creation. Again, details pending.
I believe these changes should help provide a much stronger cohesiveness to the disciplines and ensure that players are not penalized for picking the "wrong" discipline a few months down the road when the enchantment they want comes out in a different discipline. It should be much more clear what you will be able to do with each choice. We also have disciplines better able to support one another, with the clear segregation of tools and gathering techniques into Runecrafting, but by putting Founts into Runecrafting it also has capabilities as a potent career path on its own as well.
Feedback is, of course, welcome.
I appreciate everyone's patience with this system. I know enchanting has been on people's radar for awhile, and I have been nowhere near as productive as I would have liked. On the plus side, I finished my Master's, got a sweet new job, and moved into a new apartment over the past year, so I have benefited from the lapse and am now in a much better position to get things done.
I am once again monitoring the lore forums (at all) and hope to have more news for you all soon.
GM Lohkrian
"In art and dream may you proceed with abandon. In life may you proceed with balance and stealth."
As someone hip deep in the crafting system, I have to say I like all of the proposed changes. I think it adds a lot of clarity and flexibility that will benefit the system. I think it also adds a lot more options for future expansion.
I'm still not happy about the NMU restrictions, but that's an entirely different discussion.
Weapons for Sale:
http://www.elanthipedia.org/wiki/User:Caraamon#Wares
Hunta Talna Kortok, built by Gor'Togs, for Gor'Togs
http://www.angelfire.com/rpg2/caraamon/home.html
Combat Balance List:
http://tinyurl.com/DRBalance
I'm still not happy about the NMU restrictions, but that's an entirely different discussion.
Weapons for Sale:
http://www.elanthipedia.org/wiki/User:Caraamon#Wares
Hunta Talna Kortok, built by Gor'Togs, for Gor'Togs
http://www.angelfire.com/rpg2/caraamon/home.html
Combat Balance List:
http://tinyurl.com/DRBalance
<<I'm still not happy about the NMU restrictions, but that's an entirely different discussion.>>
Me too when I first read it, but after a few moments to process I realized that "restricted options" didn't not equate to restricted participation. As long as NMUs get "equal but different" ways to interact with the enchanting system I'll be a happy camper.
Yamcer
"You know, while I understand the importance of seeing the (personal) validity in other's arguments, it's impossible for me to believe fully that others are correct. If their argument was correct, I'd change mine." - My GF
Me too when I first read it, but after a few moments to process I realized that "restricted options" didn't not equate to restricted participation. As long as NMUs get "equal but different" ways to interact with the enchanting system I'll be a happy camper.
Yamcer
"You know, while I understand the importance of seeing the (personal) validity in other's arguments, it's impossible for me to believe fully that others are correct. If their argument was correct, I'd change mine." - My GF
Since we've got some action going on here I had a couple questions that I wasnt sure had been answered yet.
1) Are enchantments going to be able to be recharged.. say a flaming sword or rune running out of charges can we just fill it back up or do we have to make another?
2) In the same realm as the previous question when something runs out of charges is it going to break akin to how runes do now? For example say I want to use my favorite staff to bind magics into, am I going to lose my staff when I put an enchant on/in it and use it up? Or will I be able to either recharge it or put something new onto it?
3) Are we going to be able to remove enchantments? Sort of a magical re-smelting of the enchantment itself... If I use afformentioned staff and put an enchant on it can I remove it later if I find one I like better or just get better at making the type I already have on it?
4) Are there going to be guild only enchants? As in will War Mages only be able to imbue things with their spells and Moon Mages being the only ones able to make invisibility rings? Or are things going to be more open then that?
5) Can you explain founts a bit better? Is this going to be a seperate item you need all the time to power the enchantment? Or something that holds energy to pour into the enchantment on its creation? Little confused on this one...
I think I have more questions but thats a good start.
~Tezirite Renzar Lorrani
"Power is merely a stepping stone to more power."
1) Are enchantments going to be able to be recharged.. say a flaming sword or rune running out of charges can we just fill it back up or do we have to make another?
2) In the same realm as the previous question when something runs out of charges is it going to break akin to how runes do now? For example say I want to use my favorite staff to bind magics into, am I going to lose my staff when I put an enchant on/in it and use it up? Or will I be able to either recharge it or put something new onto it?
3) Are we going to be able to remove enchantments? Sort of a magical re-smelting of the enchantment itself... If I use afformentioned staff and put an enchant on it can I remove it later if I find one I like better or just get better at making the type I already have on it?
4) Are there going to be guild only enchants? As in will War Mages only be able to imbue things with their spells and Moon Mages being the only ones able to make invisibility rings? Or are things going to be more open then that?
5) Can you explain founts a bit better? Is this going to be a seperate item you need all the time to power the enchantment? Or something that holds energy to pour into the enchantment on its creation? Little confused on this one...
I think I have more questions but thats a good start.
~Tezirite Renzar Lorrani
"Power is merely a stepping stone to more power."
>>4) Are there going to be guild only enchants? As in will War Mages only be able to imbue things with their spells and Moon Mages being the only ones able to make invisibility rings? Or are things going to be more open then that?
Per Kodius, each guild will have a guild-only sigil. That is, that guild alone can collect the sigil. However, it may (or may not) be possible for anyone to make use of a guild-only sigil.
-- Player of Eyuve
Per Kodius, each guild will have a guild-only sigil. That is, that guild alone can collect the sigil. However, it may (or may not) be possible for anyone to make use of a guild-only sigil.
-- Player of Eyuve
I'm going to take these out of order, to make it easier to discuss:
>5) Can you explain founts a bit better? Is this going to be a seperate item you need all the time to power the enchantment? Or something that holds energy to pour into the enchantment on its creation? Little confused on this one...
Disclaimer: Since Founts were initially a suggested by Armifer, he may feel free to contradict or amend this definition.
You can think of a Fount as type of engine for the enchantment. Different engines take different types of fuel and produce energy in different forms. Exchanging one Fount for another will alter the means of powering an enchantment.
Let's use our favorite example: Fire Swords. A sword with a fire enchantment can take in power in a number of ways:
* a magic user can charge it like cambrinth and the flame lasts as long as the mana powering it is available
* a user trained in arcana could shake the sword to activate the enchantment, which would draw on stored energy to power the enchantment for a fixed duration
* any user could attack with the sword, which would automatically set it on fire for each attack
* more exotic options are possible: maybe the sword draws energy from other sources - when you cast a spell, or hold harnessed mana, or are attacked by magic. (Note that these are hypothetical - no existing mechanics support these, but they are potential options.)
Now look at some ways the fire enchantment can put out power:
* the sword can be set ablaze, dealing fire damage to the target in addition to the normal weapon damage
* the sword could do pure fire damage with each attack
* the sword could shoot a fire projectile with a verb
* the sword could set its targets on fire, inflicting damage over time
So the Fount gives you control over the way power comes into an enchantment and the way power goes out of an enchantment.
It will likely be a required component at the time of creation, but I think we'll probably also make a technique that governs swapping out a Fount after creation.
>1) Are enchantments going to be able to be recharged.. say a flaming sword or rune running out of charges can we just fill it back up or do we have to make another?
To answer this question - it depends on the type of Fount. Certain enchantments can just be recharged and others will need to have the Fount replaced entirely. I think in general we'd like to see a model similar to other equipment, in which using the enchantment inflicts gradual damage on its components. Founts may wear down, but I think that enchantments themselves will suffer wear and tear themselves.
So there are two different answers:
1. Short term re-powering will depend on the fount
2. Long term re-powering will (probably) be something analogous to repairing weapons
>2) In the same realm as the previous question when something runs out of charges is it going to break akin to how runes do now? For example say I want to use my favorite staff to bind magics into, am I going to lose my staff when I put an enchant on/in it and use it up? Or will I be able to either recharge it or put something new onto it?
As a general rule we won't be breaking your nice stuff. Worst case, the enchantment goes kaput and the weapon is no longer enchanted. That's not to say that certain enchantments won't result in expendable items that break or otherwise go away, but we don't want to discourage people from enchanting their favorite gear (assuming it's made out of enchantment-friendly material!)
>3) Are we going to be able to remove enchantments? Sort of a magical re-smelting of the enchantment itself... If I use afformentioned staff and put an enchant on it can I remove it later if I find one I like better or just get better at making the type I already have on it?
I would like to allow an enchantment equivalent of reclaiming, which will remove the enchantment from the enchanted item, but it will be unlikely to return any materials to you.
>4) Are there going to be guild only enchants? As in will War Mages only be able to imbue things with their spells and Moon Mages being the only ones able to make invisibility rings? Or are things going to be more open then that?
Eyuve is correct - guild-only sigils will be a limiting factor. We haven't made a determination as to whether sigil scrolls can be studied cross-guild, but even if they can, you wouldn't be able to study the scroll for another guild-only sigil. If a guild-only sigil is required for an enchantment, you'll reach a point where you won't be able to proceed until someone scribes it.
Questions like these are very useful for us as well, so feel free to keep them coming.
GM Lohkrian
"In art and dream may you proceed with abandon. In life may you proceed with balance and stealth."
>5) Can you explain founts a bit better? Is this going to be a seperate item you need all the time to power the enchantment? Or something that holds energy to pour into the enchantment on its creation? Little confused on this one...
Disclaimer: Since Founts were initially a suggested by Armifer, he may feel free to contradict or amend this definition.
You can think of a Fount as type of engine for the enchantment. Different engines take different types of fuel and produce energy in different forms. Exchanging one Fount for another will alter the means of powering an enchantment.
Let's use our favorite example: Fire Swords. A sword with a fire enchantment can take in power in a number of ways:
* a magic user can charge it like cambrinth and the flame lasts as long as the mana powering it is available
* a user trained in arcana could shake the sword to activate the enchantment, which would draw on stored energy to power the enchantment for a fixed duration
* any user could attack with the sword, which would automatically set it on fire for each attack
* more exotic options are possible: maybe the sword draws energy from other sources - when you cast a spell, or hold harnessed mana, or are attacked by magic. (Note that these are hypothetical - no existing mechanics support these, but they are potential options.)
Now look at some ways the fire enchantment can put out power:
* the sword can be set ablaze, dealing fire damage to the target in addition to the normal weapon damage
* the sword could do pure fire damage with each attack
* the sword could shoot a fire projectile with a verb
* the sword could set its targets on fire, inflicting damage over time
So the Fount gives you control over the way power comes into an enchantment and the way power goes out of an enchantment.
It will likely be a required component at the time of creation, but I think we'll probably also make a technique that governs swapping out a Fount after creation.
>1) Are enchantments going to be able to be recharged.. say a flaming sword or rune running out of charges can we just fill it back up or do we have to make another?
To answer this question - it depends on the type of Fount. Certain enchantments can just be recharged and others will need to have the Fount replaced entirely. I think in general we'd like to see a model similar to other equipment, in which using the enchantment inflicts gradual damage on its components. Founts may wear down, but I think that enchantments themselves will suffer wear and tear themselves.
So there are two different answers:
1. Short term re-powering will depend on the fount
2. Long term re-powering will (probably) be something analogous to repairing weapons
>2) In the same realm as the previous question when something runs out of charges is it going to break akin to how runes do now? For example say I want to use my favorite staff to bind magics into, am I going to lose my staff when I put an enchant on/in it and use it up? Or will I be able to either recharge it or put something new onto it?
As a general rule we won't be breaking your nice stuff. Worst case, the enchantment goes kaput and the weapon is no longer enchanted. That's not to say that certain enchantments won't result in expendable items that break or otherwise go away, but we don't want to discourage people from enchanting their favorite gear (assuming it's made out of enchantment-friendly material!)
>3) Are we going to be able to remove enchantments? Sort of a magical re-smelting of the enchantment itself... If I use afformentioned staff and put an enchant on it can I remove it later if I find one I like better or just get better at making the type I already have on it?
I would like to allow an enchantment equivalent of reclaiming, which will remove the enchantment from the enchanted item, but it will be unlikely to return any materials to you.
>4) Are there going to be guild only enchants? As in will War Mages only be able to imbue things with their spells and Moon Mages being the only ones able to make invisibility rings? Or are things going to be more open then that?
Eyuve is correct - guild-only sigils will be a limiting factor. We haven't made a determination as to whether sigil scrolls can be studied cross-guild, but even if they can, you wouldn't be able to study the scroll for another guild-only sigil. If a guild-only sigil is required for an enchantment, you'll reach a point where you won't be able to proceed until someone scribes it.
Questions like these are very useful for us as well, so feel free to keep them coming.
GM Lohkrian
"In art and dream may you proceed with abandon. In life may you proceed with balance and stealth."
>>Will Founts be interchangeable?
Sounds like it. I'm guessing there'd be a tech for that though.
Fount replacing before full on enchantment removal?
_________________________________
An agonizing pain fills you as you feel your tongue turn to powder in your mouth! Through a haze of uncertainty and loss, you realize that something you just said was very wrong.
Sounds like it. I'm guessing there'd be a tech for that though.
Fount replacing before full on enchantment removal?
_________________________________
An agonizing pain fills you as you feel your tongue turn to powder in your mouth! Through a haze of uncertainty and loss, you realize that something you just said was very wrong.
The original idea was no, the Fount would be built into the enchantment at the time of creation and couldn't be removed or replaced short of making a new enchantment with a new Fount.
Whether that will hold or not remains to be seen.
-Armifer
"In our days truth is taken to result from the effacing of the living man behind the mathematical structures that think themselves out in him, rather than he be thinking them." - Emmanuel Levinas
Whether that will hold or not remains to be seen.
-Armifer
"In our days truth is taken to result from the effacing of the living man behind the mathematical structures that think themselves out in him, rather than he be thinking them." - Emmanuel Levinas
>>Eyuve is correct - guild-only sigils will be a limiting factor. We haven't made a determination as to whether sigil scrolls can be studied cross-guild, but even if they can, you wouldn't be able to study the scroll for another guild-only sigil. If a guild-only sigil is required for an enchantment, you'll reach a point where you won't be able to proceed until someone scribes it.
I have always been against this guild-sigil idea. I hope that an alternative is created. Not because of the function it does, but because I believe it severly limits the options and viability of sigils which would be the essence of the materials or components. An enchantment that can be made that won't be finalized till its invoked by a user of a certain guild is a much better idea and serves the same function while maintaining greater viability. An enchanter in this case can make "duds" which can then be activated at a later time.
The issue I have with the Sigil-based structure is that I fear development will encourage items that actively force me to go find a cleric, paladin, and a warrior mage to create an item I want. Barring that I'd have to go buy a ton of sigils from a trader just to make the enchantment I wish. While buying materials, lets say work order quality bronze from a trader is good business and a time saver its not mandetory, I can if I wish go out and find the bronze and the silver and mix it myself.
_______________________
It is impossible to strive for the heroic life. The title of hero is bestowed by the survivors upon the fallen, who themselves know nothing of heroism.
-Johan Huizinga
The Light is Crimson through the Darkness.
I have always been against this guild-sigil idea. I hope that an alternative is created. Not because of the function it does, but because I believe it severly limits the options and viability of sigils which would be the essence of the materials or components. An enchantment that can be made that won't be finalized till its invoked by a user of a certain guild is a much better idea and serves the same function while maintaining greater viability. An enchanter in this case can make "duds" which can then be activated at a later time.
The issue I have with the Sigil-based structure is that I fear development will encourage items that actively force me to go find a cleric, paladin, and a warrior mage to create an item I want. Barring that I'd have to go buy a ton of sigils from a trader just to make the enchantment I wish. While buying materials, lets say work order quality bronze from a trader is good business and a time saver its not mandetory, I can if I wish go out and find the bronze and the silver and mix it myself.
_______________________
It is impossible to strive for the heroic life. The title of hero is bestowed by the survivors upon the fallen, who themselves know nothing of heroism.
-Johan Huizinga
The Light is Crimson through the Darkness.
I like the idea of the enchantment needing to be "activated" by someone of the proper guild upon completion, with the addition that the person activating needs to have the proper amount of skill to create the enchantment themselves at that difficulty/quality/etc. So you can't have a cleric with 10 mech lore activating the extremely difficult orichalcum flaming holy sword of doom +10 you made at masterful quality.
"You always have to be a know-it-all. And you don't. Know. It. All." - GERSTEINJ2
"You always have to be a know-it-all. And you don't. Know. It. All." - GERSTEINJ2
>>The issue I have with the Sigil-based structure is that I fear development will encourage items that actively force me to go find a cleric, paladin, and a warrior mage to create an item I want. Barring that I'd have to go buy a ton of sigils from a trader just to make the enchantment I wish.
From the bit you posted that wont be possible anyway. If you want to make something that requires a guild-only sigil you'll need to find someone to scribe it for you. No buying a stack of scrolls from a Trader.
I'm sort of on the fence about it myself. What would be nice is if a GM could tell us what the idea behind them is. Are they for making skill boosts that effect guild only skills? Are they for making guild only enchants like astral guides? Are they going to be used in a far greater scope then that? What general purpose would these sigils serve.
From the bit you posted that wont be possible anyway. If you want to make something that requires a guild-only sigil you'll need to find someone to scribe it for you. No buying a stack of scrolls from a Trader.
I'm sort of on the fence about it myself. What would be nice is if a GM could tell us what the idea behind them is. Are they for making skill boosts that effect guild only skills? Are they for making guild only enchants like astral guides? Are they going to be used in a far greater scope then that? What general purpose would these sigils serve.
The more I think about guild-only sigils. The more I'm against them.
The only real positive I see to them is it forces inter-guild relations. I completely understand the logic behind them. Why should a Lunar mana user be able to create an Elemental-based sigil?
However, on the flip, no one is forced to partake in the crafting system(s). This means not only will I need to find a person that opted to craft but they'll have to specifically work on Enchanting as to not affect the quality of the item I'm crafting. So, unless the guild-specific sigils are completely elementary the picking is going to slim down.
I have very high hopes for the Enchanting System and plan on only "getting my feet wet" to ensure I like it before choosing my favorite of the 3 branches as my career and the other 2 as my hobbies and dumping my Mech ranks into it.
I'd really like to see Enchanting along the lines of Weaponsmithing/Armorsmithing/Blacksmithing in the respect that not only Barbarians can mine rare metals or not only Paladins can make armor out of steel.
If Moon Mages can only make Lunar Founts or Lunar Sigils, great, but make it the most basic of skills (akin to ingots) and make them have a sellable form. (This is meant to sound like a suggestion and not a demand)
The only real positive I see to them is it forces inter-guild relations. I completely understand the logic behind them. Why should a Lunar mana user be able to create an Elemental-based sigil?
However, on the flip, no one is forced to partake in the crafting system(s). This means not only will I need to find a person that opted to craft but they'll have to specifically work on Enchanting as to not affect the quality of the item I'm crafting. So, unless the guild-specific sigils are completely elementary the picking is going to slim down.
I have very high hopes for the Enchanting System and plan on only "getting my feet wet" to ensure I like it before choosing my favorite of the 3 branches as my career and the other 2 as my hobbies and dumping my Mech ranks into it.
I'd really like to see Enchanting along the lines of Weaponsmithing/Armorsmithing/Blacksmithing in the respect that not only Barbarians can mine rare metals or not only Paladins can make armor out of steel.
If Moon Mages can only make Lunar Founts or Lunar Sigils, great, but make it the most basic of skills (akin to ingots) and make them have a sellable form. (This is meant to sound like a suggestion and not a demand)
>>I like the idea of the enchantment needing to be "activated" by someone of the proper guild upon completion, with the addition that the person activating needs to have the proper amount of skill to create the enchantment themselves at that difficulty/quality/etc. So you can't have a cleric with 10 mech lore activating the extremely difficult orichalcum flaming holy sword of doom +10 you made at masterful quality
It really should be the arcana skill that determines if you can activate it or not. I mean, this is like saying you should not be able to swing a tyrium longsword if you don't have the mech.
Abison/Rystien
It really should be the arcana skill that determines if you can activate it or not. I mean, this is like saying you should not be able to swing a tyrium longsword if you don't have the mech.
Abison/Rystien
This is old information, and coming from my memory, so take it with a grain of salt.
If I recall, last time they mentioned guild only sigils it was to protect significant guild abilities, like Teleport, so that only MM can create them. However, in some places a guild only sigil might be substituted for a different sigil for some benefit or another.
>The only real positive I see to them is it forces inter-guild relations
This is not a positive for everybody, and I would resent being forced to interact with people to practice a craft, when no other craft has this requirement.
Elemental Lord Opieus, Master Warrior Mage of Elanthia
"For a bunch of radical empiricists, the Philosophers' system relies on a whole lot of faith." ~Armifer
If I recall, last time they mentioned guild only sigils it was to protect significant guild abilities, like Teleport, so that only MM can create them. However, in some places a guild only sigil might be substituted for a different sigil for some benefit or another.
>The only real positive I see to them is it forces inter-guild relations
This is not a positive for everybody, and I would resent being forced to interact with people to practice a craft, when no other craft has this requirement.
Elemental Lord Opieus, Master Warrior Mage of Elanthia
"For a bunch of radical empiricists, the Philosophers' system relies on a whole lot of faith." ~Armifer
>>It really should be the arcana skill that determines if you can activate it or not. I mean, this is like saying you should not be able to swing a tyrium longsword if you don't have the mech.
Think of it as needing a special set of skills to turn on your car, or install the car battery, as opposed to driving it.
I dislike the idea of someone not needing to know anything about enchanting to be able to "finalize"/"activate"/etc the enchantment.
"You always have to be a know-it-all. And you don't. Know. It. All." - GERSTEINJ2
Think of it as needing a special set of skills to turn on your car, or install the car battery, as opposed to driving it.
I dislike the idea of someone not needing to know anything about enchanting to be able to "finalize"/"activate"/etc the enchantment.
"You always have to be a know-it-all. And you don't. Know. It. All." - GERSTEINJ2
>>This is not a positive for everybody, and I would resent being forced to interact with people to practice a craft, when no other craft has this requirement.
I don't see it being that bad. Yes you will be stopped from making certain stuff, but you can always make stuff that deals with you magic. Assuming there also will be good amounts of things that don't require a guild sigil. You still will be able to practice enchanting, just that you will just have more options if you interact with others.
Abison/Rystien
I don't see it being that bad. Yes you will be stopped from making certain stuff, but you can always make stuff that deals with you magic. Assuming there also will be good amounts of things that don't require a guild sigil. You still will be able to practice enchanting, just that you will just have more options if you interact with others.
Abison/Rystien
>Yes you will be stopped from making certain stuff
I'm really expecting the vast majority of things won't require a guild only sigil. Signature guild abilities should be protected, but other than that everything should be craftable by anybody.
Elemental Lord Opieus, Master Warrior Mage of Elanthia
"For a bunch of radical empiricists, the Philosophers' system relies on a whole lot of faith." ~Armifer
I'm really expecting the vast majority of things won't require a guild only sigil. Signature guild abilities should be protected, but other than that everything should be craftable by anybody.
Elemental Lord Opieus, Master Warrior Mage of Elanthia
"For a bunch of radical empiricists, the Philosophers' system relies on a whole lot of faith." ~Armifer
Yeah: keep in mind that guild-only enchantments aren't going to be the cornerstone of enchanting. It's more that only Necros would be able to make something like a glass construct enchantment, for example (anyone gets the ability to do that at all).
And there are going to [theoretically] be guild-only crafts in other craft sets, as well. They plan to revisit that kind of stuff (for example, everyone can carve lockpicks but Thieves could theoretically get some kind of Thief-only-craft uber-pick) after the systems are more robust/completed in general.
"You always have to be a know-it-all. And you don't. Know. It. All." - GERSTEINJ2
And there are going to [theoretically] be guild-only crafts in other craft sets, as well. They plan to revisit that kind of stuff (for example, everyone can carve lockpicks but Thieves could theoretically get some kind of Thief-only-craft uber-pick) after the systems are more robust/completed in general.
"You always have to be a know-it-all. And you don't. Know. It. All." - GERSTEINJ2
I have to agree. I like interacting with others but I dont want it to be a requirement for me to be any sort of decent enchanter. Im fine with there being some signature abilities that need sigils but Id prefer this to be in the realm of say maybe 1-3 very very specific enchantments related to the guild. To be brutally honest I can really only think of a couple Cleric (memory saving, rezz helping) based possible enchants and a few from the Moon Mage side (teleport, luck stones, astral guides) that should even need such sigils. If I want to make a weapon with elemental damage and have to have a War Mage every time or a Moon Mage to make an invis ring... thats going to ruin it for me and you might as well just make enchanting for each guild like Moon Mages have now and scrap the whole general enchantment route.
Obviously Ill wait till I hear more since its still in planning phase but currently as I see it every other crafting area can be done solo so I dont see why enchanting wouldnt be able to as well. This of course is aside the fact of say getting master tools from someone who makes them better to aid in your own crafting. That is something isnt required but can be done to make better quality items should you so wish. I dont mind this being the same in enchanting in the least bit.
~Tezirite Renzar Lorrani
"Power is merely a stepping stone to more power."
Obviously Ill wait till I hear more since its still in planning phase but currently as I see it every other crafting area can be done solo so I dont see why enchanting wouldnt be able to as well. This of course is aside the fact of say getting master tools from someone who makes them better to aid in your own crafting. That is something isnt required but can be done to make better quality items should you so wish. I dont mind this being the same in enchanting in the least bit.
~Tezirite Renzar Lorrani
"Power is merely a stepping stone to more power."
<<The only real positive I see to them is it forces inter-guild relations>>
I think any other magical guild using a necromancers scribed anything should have their arms blown off. :-)
/---
Oh and last one, DR at any given time has a population of weenies that will criticize at the drop of a hat, don't take things personally it happens to everyone.
Leucius
I think any other magical guild using a necromancers scribed anything should have their arms blown off. :-)
/---
Oh and last one, DR at any given time has a population of weenies that will criticize at the drop of a hat, don't take things personally it happens to everyone.
Leucius
Pretty sure the plan is that the majority of enchantment options are going to be things you can do solo. Only "signature" stuff for each guild will require that guild either being the ones making them outright (or "activating" it, based on the suggestion that was just brought up that I am kinda liking).
"You always have to be a know-it-all. And you don't. Know. It. All." - GERSTEINJ2
"You always have to be a know-it-all. And you don't. Know. It. All." - GERSTEINJ2
>>Only "signature" stuff for each guild will require that guild either being the ones making them outright
And Im totally fine with that. In fact I prefer that. What Im worried of is how much and what will fall under these headings. Just about any spell effect that could be applied to any object could theoretically be divvied up into a certain guilds "realm". And the paranoid person in me is worried that too much will be divvied rather than maybe 1 or 2 very specific things being special for each guild.
~Tezirite Renzar Lorrani
"Power is merely a stepping stone to more power."
And Im totally fine with that. In fact I prefer that. What Im worried of is how much and what will fall under these headings. Just about any spell effect that could be applied to any object could theoretically be divvied up into a certain guilds "realm". And the paranoid person in me is worried that too much will be divvied rather than maybe 1 or 2 very specific things being special for each guild.
~Tezirite Renzar Lorrani
"Power is merely a stepping stone to more power."
>>I think any other magical guild using a necromancers scribed anything should have their arms blown off. :-)
I have total faith in Armifer to make sure using a necro sigil or a necro rune will be a VERY BAD THING for anyone not a Necromancer. And an even worse thing for Paladins, Clerics, and Empaths. Actually now that I think about it I'd get a kick out of Empaths being far, far better then Necro's at using their spells. Not because it would be a nice thing for Empaths, but because it would make PC Necromancers really confused.
Anyway...
>>If I recall, last time they mentioned guild only sigils it was to protect significant guild abilities, like Teleport, so that only MM can create them.
I get that idea, but I don't understand why it wouldn't just be easier all around to make an enchant do a spell check. Oh you don't know the Teleport spell, I'm afraid you'll need to find someone who does to finish this enchant. Though at the same time I feel that those special protected signature enchants should be rare in general.
That said. If top end rare to build enchants are the only enchants that require guild-only sigils them I'm totally ok with having to track down someone of another guild with enough skill to get their sigil. In that case we wont be making those enchants very often or it will be powerful enough of an enchant for us to ignore the inconvenience.
If guild-only sigils are semi-uncommon then I still think I'm totally fine with them existing, but not so fine with the idea of not being able to go buy a stack of them at one time. 'Cause then it just starts getting annoying.
I have total faith in Armifer to make sure using a necro sigil or a necro rune will be a VERY BAD THING for anyone not a Necromancer. And an even worse thing for Paladins, Clerics, and Empaths. Actually now that I think about it I'd get a kick out of Empaths being far, far better then Necro's at using their spells. Not because it would be a nice thing for Empaths, but because it would make PC Necromancers really confused.
Anyway...
>>If I recall, last time they mentioned guild only sigils it was to protect significant guild abilities, like Teleport, so that only MM can create them.
I get that idea, but I don't understand why it wouldn't just be easier all around to make an enchant do a spell check. Oh you don't know the Teleport spell, I'm afraid you'll need to find someone who does to finish this enchant. Though at the same time I feel that those special protected signature enchants should be rare in general.
That said. If top end rare to build enchants are the only enchants that require guild-only sigils them I'm totally ok with having to track down someone of another guild with enough skill to get their sigil. In that case we wont be making those enchants very often or it will be powerful enough of an enchant for us to ignore the inconvenience.
If guild-only sigils are semi-uncommon then I still think I'm totally fine with them existing, but not so fine with the idea of not being able to go buy a stack of them at one time. 'Cause then it just starts getting annoying.
>>Questions like these are very useful for us as well, so feel free to keep them coming.
1) Under the discipline focusing, I suspect Foci will be relegated to Invoking?
2) Would enchantments be scribed or traced into/onto an object? or would it be a magical inlay process?
Reason for asking: Would it be possible to trace an enchantment from one object, and inscribe/bind it to another? Much like copying...
3) Will Spell Scroll creation be a possibility?
4) Need more info on Founts. Basically, they act as an enchantment battery with restrictions as to how the power is applied?
5) When a Fount runs out of juice, will that destroy the enchantment, or just require a 'battery' replacement?
6) In reverse to Founts, would something like a Well you could fill or charge be possible?
7) Any items/enchantments planned to intercept oncoming offensive spellcasts for future use? (would be extremely cool imo)
8) Any other new/interesting magical items planned, not necessarily enchantments? IE spell reflectors, mobile wards, ATMOS squelchers, chargeable item hiders, communication devices, foci, ritual spell items, pet items, light sources, etc?
9) Will there be variance in sigil quality? or will all enchantments be roughly of the same power, same amplification?
10) Will magic stances affect enchantment power?
1) Under the discipline focusing, I suspect Foci will be relegated to Invoking?
2) Would enchantments be scribed or traced into/onto an object? or would it be a magical inlay process?
Reason for asking: Would it be possible to trace an enchantment from one object, and inscribe/bind it to another? Much like copying...
3) Will Spell Scroll creation be a possibility?
4) Need more info on Founts. Basically, they act as an enchantment battery with restrictions as to how the power is applied?
5) When a Fount runs out of juice, will that destroy the enchantment, or just require a 'battery' replacement?
6) In reverse to Founts, would something like a Well you could fill or charge be possible?
7) Any items/enchantments planned to intercept oncoming offensive spellcasts for future use? (would be extremely cool imo)
8) Any other new/interesting magical items planned, not necessarily enchantments? IE spell reflectors, mobile wards, ATMOS squelchers, chargeable item hiders, communication devices, foci, ritual spell items, pet items, light sources, etc?
9) Will there be variance in sigil quality? or will all enchantments be roughly of the same power, same amplification?
10) Will magic stances affect enchantment power?
>I'm really expecting the vast majority of things won't require a guild only sigil. Signature guild abilities should be protected, but other than that everything should be craftable by anybody.
This is correct. Guild-only sigils are primarily intended as a mechanic to provide an explanation for the protection of signature abilities. A Correspondence sigil could be a required component for a Moon Mage-specific enchantment. Since no one besides a Moon Mage can even study a Correspondence sigil, you will need a Moon Mage capable of creating that enchantment in order to complete that step of the enchantment. While may be feasible to partially enchant the rest of the enchantment, it is not our intent that Guild sigils are a traded commodity.
We also expect that the number of protected enchantments to be relatively small. The vast majority of enchantments will not have guild limitations.
I'm still on the fence about the commodity status of other sigils.
Sigils will have properties, similar to how different metals have different properties. Right now we're working with the properties Complexity and Amplitude. Complexity is a measure of difficulty and also suggests how much information can be stored within a given sigil, while Amplitude describes the scope and range of the sigil pattern. Both of these vary by sigil type. These two properties will allow you to fine-tune the enchantments you make, though we aren't shooting for something on the same order of complexity as smelting.
Individual sigil instances will have a property analogous to quality as well, which we're currently calling Clarity, and an additional property called Precision, which provides kind of a sliding scale between thin and precise sigils (high potency, low duration) and thick, but muddled sigils (the reverse).
Since we won't have anything equivalent to mixing for sigils, we don't expect there to be quite the same demand for pre-harvested sigils, but each guild has their own view of the world, resulting in different sigil distribution. This may mean that certain types of sigils are more commonly available to one guild or another, and could encourage trading. I'm not sure if we intend to allow cross-guild sigil sharing at all, however.
I have been encouraged to see people posting pre-mixed metals for sale, though, and have been speculating on whether such a trade could exist in Sigils, and if we would want it.
GM Lohkrian
"In art and dream may you proceed with abandon. In life may you proceed with balance and stealth."
This is correct. Guild-only sigils are primarily intended as a mechanic to provide an explanation for the protection of signature abilities. A Correspondence sigil could be a required component for a Moon Mage-specific enchantment. Since no one besides a Moon Mage can even study a Correspondence sigil, you will need a Moon Mage capable of creating that enchantment in order to complete that step of the enchantment. While may be feasible to partially enchant the rest of the enchantment, it is not our intent that Guild sigils are a traded commodity.
We also expect that the number of protected enchantments to be relatively small. The vast majority of enchantments will not have guild limitations.
I'm still on the fence about the commodity status of other sigils.
Sigils will have properties, similar to how different metals have different properties. Right now we're working with the properties Complexity and Amplitude. Complexity is a measure of difficulty and also suggests how much information can be stored within a given sigil, while Amplitude describes the scope and range of the sigil pattern. Both of these vary by sigil type. These two properties will allow you to fine-tune the enchantments you make, though we aren't shooting for something on the same order of complexity as smelting.
Individual sigil instances will have a property analogous to quality as well, which we're currently calling Clarity, and an additional property called Precision, which provides kind of a sliding scale between thin and precise sigils (high potency, low duration) and thick, but muddled sigils (the reverse).
Since we won't have anything equivalent to mixing for sigils, we don't expect there to be quite the same demand for pre-harvested sigils, but each guild has their own view of the world, resulting in different sigil distribution. This may mean that certain types of sigils are more commonly available to one guild or another, and could encourage trading. I'm not sure if we intend to allow cross-guild sigil sharing at all, however.
I have been encouraged to see people posting pre-mixed metals for sale, though, and have been speculating on whether such a trade could exist in Sigils, and if we would want it.
GM Lohkrian
"In art and dream may you proceed with abandon. In life may you proceed with balance and stealth."
>1) Under the discipline focusing, I suspect Foci will be relegated to Invoking?
Going to leave this one for Armifer.
>2) Would enchantments be scribed or traced into/onto an object? or would it be a magical inlay process?
Reason for asking: Would it be possible to trace an enchantment from one object, and inscribe/bind it to another? Much like copying...
There's no immediate plan for something along these lines, though it is our intent to allow some of the decisions made in the enchanting process to be visible post-creation. For example, you might have a particularly effective enchantment and focus on it to see what the final sigil used in creation was.
>3) Will Spell Scroll creation be a possibility?
Definitely on our radar. We'll have to evaluate the balance ramifications of spell scroll creation, but I don't see any reason why it would be ruled out entirely.
>4) Need more info on Founts. Basically, they act as an enchantment battery with restrictions as to how the power is applied?
As I described earlier, they govern both the inputs and the outputs. A fire sword with one fount could shoot fireballs, while another might light a room, or deal fire damage on attack. The fount also determines whether the sword is charged with mana, is activated for a time duration, or has a fixed number of swings.
>5) When a Fount runs out of juice, will that destroy the enchantment, or just require a 'battery' replacement?
Not sure we're ready to make a call on this yet. I'm leaning towards something equivalent to the forging equivalent of Repair. A runecrafter technique will likely govern such a thing.
>6) In reverse to Founts, would something like a Well you could fill or charge be possible?
Do you mean something that would allow you a non-magic user to power a device?
>7) Any items/enchantments planned to intercept oncoming offensive spellcasts for future use? (would be extremely cool imo)
>>8) Any other new/interesting magical items planned, not necessarily enchantments? IE spell reflectors, mobile wards, ATMOS squelchers, chargeable item hiders, communication devices, foci, ritual spell items, pet items, light sources, etc?
>10) Will magic stances affect enchantment power?
Specific types of enchantments and their mechanics are still too far off to give specifics. Enchanting is a big project, partially because a lot of existing enchantments don't exist at all yet. Our first goal is to make it possible to add enchantments to items, but after that, the scope of what types of enchantments may be created is wide open. Hopefully something that it is easy for any number of GMs to create and add as templates to the system.
>9) Will there be variance in sigil quality? or will all enchantments be roughly of the same power, same amplification?
See my post just before this one.
GM Lohkrian
"In art and dream may you proceed with abandon. In life may you proceed with balance and stealth."
Going to leave this one for Armifer.
>2) Would enchantments be scribed or traced into/onto an object? or would it be a magical inlay process?
Reason for asking: Would it be possible to trace an enchantment from one object, and inscribe/bind it to another? Much like copying...
There's no immediate plan for something along these lines, though it is our intent to allow some of the decisions made in the enchanting process to be visible post-creation. For example, you might have a particularly effective enchantment and focus on it to see what the final sigil used in creation was.
>3) Will Spell Scroll creation be a possibility?
Definitely on our radar. We'll have to evaluate the balance ramifications of spell scroll creation, but I don't see any reason why it would be ruled out entirely.
>4) Need more info on Founts. Basically, they act as an enchantment battery with restrictions as to how the power is applied?
As I described earlier, they govern both the inputs and the outputs. A fire sword with one fount could shoot fireballs, while another might light a room, or deal fire damage on attack. The fount also determines whether the sword is charged with mana, is activated for a time duration, or has a fixed number of swings.
>5) When a Fount runs out of juice, will that destroy the enchantment, or just require a 'battery' replacement?
Not sure we're ready to make a call on this yet. I'm leaning towards something equivalent to the forging equivalent of Repair. A runecrafter technique will likely govern such a thing.
>6) In reverse to Founts, would something like a Well you could fill or charge be possible?
Do you mean something that would allow you a non-magic user to power a device?
>7) Any items/enchantments planned to intercept oncoming offensive spellcasts for future use? (would be extremely cool imo)
>>8) Any other new/interesting magical items planned, not necessarily enchantments? IE spell reflectors, mobile wards, ATMOS squelchers, chargeable item hiders, communication devices, foci, ritual spell items, pet items, light sources, etc?
>10) Will magic stances affect enchantment power?
Specific types of enchantments and their mechanics are still too far off to give specifics. Enchanting is a big project, partially because a lot of existing enchantments don't exist at all yet. Our first goal is to make it possible to add enchantments to items, but after that, the scope of what types of enchantments may be created is wide open. Hopefully something that it is easy for any number of GMs to create and add as templates to the system.
>9) Will there be variance in sigil quality? or will all enchantments be roughly of the same power, same amplification?
See my post just before this one.
GM Lohkrian
"In art and dream may you proceed with abandon. In life may you proceed with balance and stealth."
Ill start by saying the part about the small number of enchantments needing guild only sigils makes me very happy. That was one of the things I had worried about. That we would be having to run around to find someone of another guild every time we enchanted something.
On that similar note I do have to agree that if you are using the guild only sigils as the means of restricting certain enchantments then I think that you should make said guild sigils non-tradable. Sure this sort of sucks if theres an enchant you really want to make thats of another guild, but that should be in the realm of a guild perk. As long as the final product is tradable to other guilds then I think that sounds perfect to me.
When you talk about sigil trading how would this be done? Are we talking about someone making a "window decal" sigil that you "paste" on the item you're enchanting? Or a piece of metal (or other material) that melts into the enchanted item when touched? Or is it going to be like Moon Mage sigil scrolls now where you just study it after its scribed on paper?
And when you say nothing as far as mixing for sigils... I think maybe Im thinking they are something else. I think sigil in the same vein as how I (as a Moon Mage) use them now. I scribe them and bind them and the more complex the enchantment the more sigils I need. The combination of sigils seems to me as the equivalent of mixing. Perhaps a better skilled enchanter can combine certain sigils I am unable to and can provide me that combination in some tradable form. Granted Im just tossing things out since Im not sure how you guys have it envisioned.
~Tezirite Renzar Lorrani
"Power is merely a stepping stone to more power."
On that similar note I do have to agree that if you are using the guild only sigils as the means of restricting certain enchantments then I think that you should make said guild sigils non-tradable. Sure this sort of sucks if theres an enchant you really want to make thats of another guild, but that should be in the realm of a guild perk. As long as the final product is tradable to other guilds then I think that sounds perfect to me.
When you talk about sigil trading how would this be done? Are we talking about someone making a "window decal" sigil that you "paste" on the item you're enchanting? Or a piece of metal (or other material) that melts into the enchanted item when touched? Or is it going to be like Moon Mage sigil scrolls now where you just study it after its scribed on paper?
And when you say nothing as far as mixing for sigils... I think maybe Im thinking they are something else. I think sigil in the same vein as how I (as a Moon Mage) use them now. I scribe them and bind them and the more complex the enchantment the more sigils I need. The combination of sigils seems to me as the equivalent of mixing. Perhaps a better skilled enchanter can combine certain sigils I am unable to and can provide me that combination in some tradable form. Granted Im just tossing things out since Im not sure how you guys have it envisioned.
~Tezirite Renzar Lorrani
"Power is merely a stepping stone to more power."
>And when you say nothing as far as mixing for sigils... I think maybe Im thinking they are something else. I think sigil in the same vein as how I (as a Moon Mage) use them now. I scribe them and bind them and the more complex the enchantment the more sigils I need. The combination of sigils seems to me as the equivalent of mixing.
In current crafting, items have a list of required ingredients. For example, to make a shovel, first I need a refined metal ingot, then I need a finished long wooden pole. The metal ingot could be iron, tin, or kertig, and it would still work, but it would have different properties. Furthermore, I could come up with a mixture of different metals to get the properties I want, but I still need a metal ingot.
For enchanting, your "recipe" may specify an exact sigil, or it may require a general type of sigil, where the enchanter has a choice. At the stage where an optional sigil is scribed, the properties of that sigil affect the resultant enchantment in a similar way to how the properties of a metal ingot affect the crafted item. The earlier sigils would work like the long wooden pole, which needs a good quality, but is not used to modify item stats in the same way the iron ingot properties do.
When I say we do not plan to implement sigil mixing, what I mean is that we do not envision a process similar to smelting metal in a crucible, combining the properties of multiple metals to make a new metal. Enchantments will still (mostly) be crafted by scribing (or otherwise applying) sigils on the desired item in a particular arrangement.
>Will multiple founts be possible? It would be nice if advanced enchantments had multiple functions. Or if you had multiples of the same fount this would give the item more uses before it burns out.
This may be a challenge, but some of this falls under implementation details for the creators of individual enchantments. If your enchantment only does one specific thing, variation on energy output mechanisms can only take you so far. On the other hand, if an enchantment coder wants to have multiple vectors of complexity, or an enchantment with multiple parts, the system will likely support such a template being built.
GM Lohkrian
"In art and dream may you proceed with abandon. In life may you proceed with balance and stealth."
In current crafting, items have a list of required ingredients. For example, to make a shovel, first I need a refined metal ingot, then I need a finished long wooden pole. The metal ingot could be iron, tin, or kertig, and it would still work, but it would have different properties. Furthermore, I could come up with a mixture of different metals to get the properties I want, but I still need a metal ingot.
For enchanting, your "recipe" may specify an exact sigil, or it may require a general type of sigil, where the enchanter has a choice. At the stage where an optional sigil is scribed, the properties of that sigil affect the resultant enchantment in a similar way to how the properties of a metal ingot affect the crafted item. The earlier sigils would work like the long wooden pole, which needs a good quality, but is not used to modify item stats in the same way the iron ingot properties do.
When I say we do not plan to implement sigil mixing, what I mean is that we do not envision a process similar to smelting metal in a crucible, combining the properties of multiple metals to make a new metal. Enchantments will still (mostly) be crafted by scribing (or otherwise applying) sigils on the desired item in a particular arrangement.
>Will multiple founts be possible? It would be nice if advanced enchantments had multiple functions. Or if you had multiples of the same fount this would give the item more uses before it burns out.
This may be a challenge, but some of this falls under implementation details for the creators of individual enchantments. If your enchantment only does one specific thing, variation on energy output mechanisms can only take you so far. On the other hand, if an enchantment coder wants to have multiple vectors of complexity, or an enchantment with multiple parts, the system will likely support such a template being built.
GM Lohkrian
"In art and dream may you proceed with abandon. In life may you proceed with balance and stealth."
>>This may be a challenge, but some of this falls under implementation details for the creators of individual enchantments. If your enchantment only does one specific thing, variation on energy output mechanisms can only take you so far. On the other hand, if an enchantment coder wants to have multiple vectors of complexity, or an enchantment with multiple parts, the system will likely support such a template being built.
If its possible I'd like the functions of a Fount be split into two things, a Fount and a Locus.
One would control how the enchant is activated(charged, invoked, on use) the other would control how the energy of the enchant is released. Set the sword on fire, shoot fireballs, unleash a wave of fire around you.
Locus
2. A center or focus of great activity or intense concentration: "the cunning exploitation of loci of power; the insulation from normal American society" (Clifton Fadiman).
3. Mathematics The set or configuration of all points whose coordinates satisfy a single equation or one or more algebraic conditions.
Either of these definitions kinda merit what I mean by a Locus. In the case of 3 its the configuration of the sigils.
_______________________
It is impossible to strive for the heroic life. The title of hero is bestowed by the survivors upon the fallen, who themselves know nothing of heroism.
-Johan Huizinga
The Light is Crimson through the Darkness.
>>This is correct. Guild-only sigils are primarily intended as a mechanic to provide an explanation for the protection of signature abilities. A Correspondence sigil could be a required component for a Moon Mage-specific enchantment. Since no one besides a Moon Mage can even study a Correspondence sigil, you will need a Moon Mage capable of creating that enchantment in order to complete that step of the enchantment. While may be feasible to partially enchant the rest of the enchantment, it is not our intent that Guild sigils are a traded commodity.
The thing that still worries me about this plan is the possibility that certain guilds get signature enchantments that are much more desirable than other guilds' sets, and the inevitability that desirability of guild enchantment sets will not be equal. I don't want to be locked out or significantly hindered in the enchantment market because I chose the wrong guild fourteen years ago.
Any chance you could post a list of what enchantments you're currently planning to be specific for each guild?
The thing that still worries me about this plan is the possibility that certain guilds get signature enchantments that are much more desirable than other guilds' sets, and the inevitability that desirability of guild enchantment sets will not be equal. I don't want to be locked out or significantly hindered in the enchantment market because I chose the wrong guild fourteen years ago.
Any chance you could post a list of what enchantments you're currently planning to be specific for each guild?
>>The thing that still worries me about this plan is the possibility that certain guilds get signature enchantments that are much more desirable than other guilds' sets, and the inevitability that desirability of guild enchantment sets will not be equal. I don't want to be locked out or significantly hindered in the enchantment market because I chose the wrong guild fourteen years ago.
You're assuming that guild parity within each crafting discipline is a desirable situation. It's not, nor should it be a goal of the system.
TG, TG, GL, et al.
"Disagreement with the fundamental plan at this point is akin to supporting Richard III vs the Tudors."
-Raesh
You're assuming that guild parity within each crafting discipline is a desirable situation. It's not, nor should it be a goal of the system.
TG, TG, GL, et al.
"Disagreement with the fundamental plan at this point is akin to supporting Richard III vs the Tudors."
-Raesh
>>You're assuming that guild parity within each crafting discipline is a desirable situation. It's not, nor should it be a goal of the system.
While I agree in principle, there are several orders of magnitude of difference between the current system and the proposal for enchanting. Execution is everything.
If the quest weapon instructions are any indication of what we can expect for the guild-restricted weapon and armor templates that are planned at some point (and likewise for enchanting), this should be a non-issue, as the general trend is variations on a theme. Hawkbill's just a little lighter and with a better damage spread than something like a stiletto, for example, which favors puncture. If fire swords are available to everyone but the rare Warmie-only sigil is needed for a fire sword that simply has a few more charges or does a bit more damage, I do not anticipate this will be a problem.
However, if entire functions are restricted by guild template, I could easily see this being a problem. If fire swords require Warmie sigils and gweths require Moonie sigils, and the Bard sigil allows EXCITING NEW PERFORMANCE VERBS, then Bards are up the creek without a paddle regarding their sigil being useful. The equivalent would be like if all two-handed edged weapons were Barbarian-only, and people would understandably be upset with this when the whole design aesthetic was much more parity than guild-specific systems.
tl ; dr I agree to a point. Measure of degree and the precise mechanics of execution could change my opinion a lot though.
While I agree in principle, there are several orders of magnitude of difference between the current system and the proposal for enchanting. Execution is everything.
If the quest weapon instructions are any indication of what we can expect for the guild-restricted weapon and armor templates that are planned at some point (and likewise for enchanting), this should be a non-issue, as the general trend is variations on a theme. Hawkbill's just a little lighter and with a better damage spread than something like a stiletto, for example, which favors puncture. If fire swords are available to everyone but the rare Warmie-only sigil is needed for a fire sword that simply has a few more charges or does a bit more damage, I do not anticipate this will be a problem.
However, if entire functions are restricted by guild template, I could easily see this being a problem. If fire swords require Warmie sigils and gweths require Moonie sigils, and the Bard sigil allows EXCITING NEW PERFORMANCE VERBS, then Bards are up the creek without a paddle regarding their sigil being useful. The equivalent would be like if all two-handed edged weapons were Barbarian-only, and people would understandably be upset with this when the whole design aesthetic was much more parity than guild-specific systems.
tl ; dr I agree to a point. Measure of degree and the precise mechanics of execution could change my opinion a lot though.
