1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Greetings Guest!!

    In order to combat SPAM on the forums, all users are required to have a minimum of 2 posts before they can submit links in any post or thread.

    Dismiss Notice

Removing properties...

Discussion in 'UHall' started by Uvtha, Feb 17, 2010.

  1. Uvtha

    Uvtha Grand Poobah
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    May 24, 2008
    Messages:
    6,529
    Likes Received:
    2,915
    they should add in a new ingredient that can be used to remove a property from an item via imbuing. Tired of having DI on my exceptional weapons when I really don't want or need it.
     
  2. Aran

    Aran INFRACTION INFRACTION INFRACTION!
    Stratics Veteran Stratics Legend -A-

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2000
    Messages:
    14,717
    Likes Received:
    1,021
    Mind if I ask why?
     
  3. Sonoma

    Sonoma Guest

    I think that since damage increase is a bonus for having high crafting skill, and arms lore, that it should not count toward the 500%. If you want to imbue it onto a non exceptional item, then fine, have it count. But we should not be penelized for having high skill. If we get the damge inc from making an exceptional item, then it should not count toward the 500% property weight.
     
  4. Gowron

    Gowron Guest

    If you remove DI from exceptionally crafted items, you wreck what few options we have to get relics. No thanks, I'm happy with imbuing as it is.
     
  5. Sonoma

    Sonoma Guest

    We are not saying remove it... we are saying that you should have a way to remove it in the imbuing process if you like, or that it should not count toward what you can add to a weapon. And if it came down to it, I would much rather remove it from the unraveling weight toward frags if it allowed us to put an extra property, and an extra 90-100% intensity on weapons.
     
  6. Obsidian

    Obsidian UO Forum Moderator
    Moderator Professional Premium Wiki Moderator Stratics Veteran Campaign Supporter

    Joined:
    May 21, 2008
    Messages:
    3,143
    Likes Received:
    780
    I'm sure Sonoma's reason above is exactly why Uvtha asked for this. In fact, I admit I've wished the same thing. If you can stack 100 DI from items (i.e. 25 stormgrip, 30 essence of battle ring, 25 bracelet, 20 Primer on Arms) then you could make a sampire weapon like this with 500 imbuing intensity (in parenthesis):

    Super Slayer (130)
    30 SSI (110)
    44 HML (97)
    44 HSL (88)
    34 HLA (75)

    This is just an example. If you can go lower SSI or with a standard slayer you could do these weapons for Navrey (for example):

    Radiant Scimitar or Leafblade
    20 SSI (74)
    Spider Slayer (110)
    50 HML (110)
    50 HSL (100)
    48 HLA (106)

    You can still make nice weapons without DI using a non-exceptional weapon (450 max intensity), but dreaming about a true five-mod 500-intensity clean slate would be awesome.

    -OBSIDIAN-
     
  7. Stupid Miner

    Stupid Miner Guest

    Exceptional items can have DI and 4 other properties and can have 500 total weight.
    Unexceptional items can have 5 properties but can only have 450 total weight.

    Some people need DI less than others, and don't want to use a weapon property for it.
     
  8. Multani

    Multani Journeyman
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2008
    Messages:
    231
    Likes Received:
    6
    Isn't that the purpose of having different cap values from exceptional and npc bought items?

    If you could remove the damage increase then the cap should be lowered to 450 for exceptional items.
     
  9. sablestorm

    sablestorm Certifiable
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2008
    Messages:
    1,951
    Likes Received:
    317
    I thought the purpose of having cap values was to reward exceptionally crafted items period. After all, they are exceptional so should be able to hold a better magical charge. That's how I interpreted it anyway.

    If you could remove properties, it would make many items found through hunting much more desirable. You could remove the properties you don't want and imbue additional properties you do want. This however begs the question of would this be unbalancing? Would fragments and trying to obtain fragments become obsolete?
     
  10. Yes, it's long overdue that the imbuing menu should allow you to remove mods (at a reasonable, minimum cost of resources... or at no cost at all).

    In addition to Uvtha's point, of having the option of removing DI which takes up 1 whole mod slot (which we could use for another more desirable mod), as sablestorm pointed out, "it would make many items found through hunting much more desirable. You could remove the properties you don't want and imbue additional properties you do want."

    Long overdue, seriously.
     
  11. Speedy Orkit

    Speedy Orkit Grand Inquisitor
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    May 16, 2008
    Messages:
    4,132
    Likes Received:
    9
    I honestly don't see why crafted items are given a 500% cap and monster drops only 450% anyway. Low end runics still have the ability to give very nice starter properties(IE Shadow giving SC np) thus saving lots of resources. I hate the fact all of my items have 1% DI when I could just lower the other stuff and add something useful like ML or HLA. Plus, let's be honest, it's a lot easier to get high end gear from runics than off a drop from a peerless :/
     
  12. Speedy Orkit

    Speedy Orkit Grand Inquisitor
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    May 16, 2008
    Messages:
    4,132
    Likes Received:
    9
    Sorry to derail above, I am in favor of being able to remove properties in such a fashion as reverse imbuing. IE the higher the property, the more it costs to remove it.

    If it takes 5 relic frags to put it on, should take 5 relic frags to remove it. Otherwise people are going to be able to make this uber jewelry even easier. Not that that is a TOTALLY bad thing, but the game should still be at least some what difficult.
     
  13. Aran

    Aran INFRACTION INFRACTION INFRACTION!
    Stratics Veteran Stratics Legend -A-

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2000
    Messages:
    14,717
    Likes Received:
    1,021
    Why do you hate people having the freedom to turn down the difficultly level in the game?
     
  14. Mapper

    Mapper Crazed Zealot
    Stratics Veteran Alumni Stratics Legend

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2005
    Messages:
    3,528
    Likes Received:
    110
    I would only accept this change if the above cost applied, Otherwise I think it would be slightly overpowering.
     
  15. Speedy Orkit

    Speedy Orkit Grand Inquisitor
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    May 16, 2008
    Messages:
    4,132
    Likes Received:
    9
    I don't hate a leveled playing field, I hate a sloped one. A lot of changes that are supposed to help the average player only helped them about 5%, but helped scripters about 100%.
     
  16. Lorax_Pacific

    Lorax_Pacific Lore Master
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Messages:
    1,012
    Likes Received:
    63
    Agreed, but I dont' think it should need an ingredient.

    In regard to crafting it is like making a bow string have less tension or a weapon less mass.

    Imbuing should be much more flexible. I would even go further by saying unraveling 5 artifacts to get one of five properties on an item was the stupidest idea and the utmost lack of flexibility to the crafters. Some artifacts don't even give relics.

    This expansion could have been designed much better.

    -Lorax
     
  17. Konge

    Konge Lore Master
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2006
    Messages:
    1,045
    Likes Received:
    2
    I'm thinking the resources used to remove the property, should be really RARE off of SA peerless, and require one relic frag. Still possible, but expensive so it's not overly used. Yeah I know, crafters themselves wont be able to get it, but other templates could or other people.

    Just a thought.
     
  18. Lorax_Pacific

    Lorax_Pacific Lore Master
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Messages:
    1,012
    Likes Received:
    63
    Why make complexity just for the sake of creating an overly complex system?

    Maybe the crafter should only be able to do it at the right time requiring the use of a holiday timepiece and it has to be 5:34 in the morning.

    -Lorax
     
  19. Konge

    Konge Lore Master
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2006
    Messages:
    1,045
    Likes Received:
    2
    Now you're just being silly, it's not complex to add 1 rare resource in order to do something you couldn't before.
     
  20. Sonoma

    Sonoma Guest

    No. This should NOT require expensive ingredients, or any ingredients for that matter. The 40% Damage Inc is a BONUS for having high smithing AND Arms Lore skill. So it should not be a draw back. When you craft exceptional armor it does not leave you with only 420% Weight left, and only 4 mods available. Weapons should be the same way. The bonus you get from exceptional should not count at all towards the imbuing properties or weights.

    If you want to bring the damage up to 50% then ya, that should count. But the inherent 40% is a BONUS and should NOT take up any weight!
     
  21. Konge

    Konge Lore Master
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2006
    Messages:
    1,045
    Likes Received:
    2
    having DI not take up item weight will never happen. Removing a property shouldn't be taken lightly, otherwise you can just use a high end runic, remove all properties you don't want and replace them, making it much easier to amazing items.
     
  22. If I was a Dev, when imbuing was introduced, I would have changed the Exceptional bonus so that, INSTEAD of the DI, the crafter could choose any one property at 85% intensity without arms lore, or up to 100% with lore. That would mean that a crafter with arms lore could choose, for instance, 25% SSI; without it, he would have to settle for 20%. (30 SSI is 110%). Having arms lore would allow the crafter to put a property like spell channeling (100%) on a weapon, while crafters without arms lore couldn't.

    Alternatively, the idea of being able to remove the DI property at a cost of 5 relic fragments wouldn't be that bad. I wouldn't want to have to spend a week trying to get some ridiculously low-spawn-rate item from the cavern of the discarded to be able to remove a property, though.
     
  23. Removing properties should have been part of imbuing at it's inception. High end runics would actually be worth something again if it was possible. As it is now, trying to sell an aggy or verite runic hammer is almost more costly than it's worth to have them sitting on vendors for weeks, even at basement pricing.
     
  24. MalagAste

    MalagAste Belaern d'Zhaunil
    Reporter Professional Stratics Veteran Stratics Legend Campaign Supporter Royal Knight

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2000
    Messages:
    18,976
    Likes Received:
    5,462
    I always thought we should be able to remove completely a property...

    Certainly if we know how to "unravel" it and how to "imbue" it one would think that you could "Pick out" a property to remove.

    I think though that this should cost in some way. Perhaps it should be like enhancing... if you fail it unravels the entire item.

    So best to do it before you start imbuing it.

    Just my thought...
     
  25. Warpig Inc

    Warpig Inc Babbling Loonie
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    2,416
    Likes Received:
    397
    There should be a risk with the advantage this gives. And enhancing has always been balanced as far as risk vs reward.

    lowland boura fur mod wipe on shields
    Highland boura fur mod wipe on jewelry
    Ruddy fur mod wipe on armor
    east kretch fur mod wipe on ranged weapons
    west kretch fur mod wipe on close weapons

    Takes 100 of fur type to create enouch static magic to erase a mod from an item.

    5 fur is added to the stygian dragon as loot from his chin hair. And is not on as stacked loot but 5 items that maybe don't stack so mixed groups get a spread on the fur. And this fur works on only artifacts and other such unique titled items.

    And this unenhancing would be done by the crafter skill required to make like item. No Imbuer would get caught destroying specialized weapons and armor of battle. Crafters have a long history of recycling to make new shinies. They are experienced at the heartbreak of destroying something.

    Maybe in the future the one kretch fur does all weapons and the other fur can do spell/mystic/necro books. I say books because we know bards never get any love.

    So if your removing 40DI from a plain GM crafted weapon no big risk. But if you want to remove the DI from the Taskmaster to make room for lightningbolt you better like hunting in doom to get another.
     
  26. LordDrago

    LordDrago Certifiable
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2004
    Messages:
    1,500
    Likes Received:
    393
    I like Warpigs idea, and was thinking about the fur as I was reading down the posts. Currently, fur has no use, so there would not be a need to add annthing to the game (other than the Stygian fur, etc.). I also like the scaled difficulty for obtaining the resources necessary to effect artifact level items.