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

Transmutation (solution for item creep)

Discussion in 'UHall' started by Sarphus, Jul 31, 2008.

  1. Sarphus

    Sarphus Guest

    I decided this idea needs its own thread

    My goals with this proposal are as follows:
    1. Make monster loot more relevant
    2. Make artisan skills more interactive
    3. Make treasure hunter loot useful again
    4. Make fisherman loot useful again
    5. Build a renewable design; or a system that doesn't plateau with eternally created items.
    6. Create a design for alchemy up to the legendary level
    7. Add content to all crafting skills
    8. Make reasonably decent gear attainable for new players

    Overview
    Alchemists would be able to train alchemy up as high as 120. Once an alchemist reaches GM or higher skill, he gains the ability to perform transmutation on items. Transmutation is a system to turn one randomly-chosen mod on an item into a crafting resource. New modable items become craftable by artisans. Each modable item has a certain number of sockets available based on the type of item it is (ex. spellbook could have up to 3 sockets, weapons, jewlery and armor could have 5). Once applied to a moddable item, item mods would lose their potency over time; thus completing the loop and making the system renewable. Also, crafters can remove stale mods from an item (destroying the mod) to free up the slot for a different or "fresher" mod resource.

    Transmutation
    Transmutation would work exactly how item recycling works, except that failed transmutation would not create a resource. A quest npc would offer a chain of 4 quests that raise a character's alchemy cap first to 105, then 110, 115 and finally to 120.

    When an alchemist chooses to transmute an item, the system randomly chooses one of the mods on the item and attempts to create a mod resource out of it. If transmutation is successful, a mod resource is created. Whether transmutation was successful or not, the transmuted item is destroyed.

    A collection quest would be added where alchemists can turn in undesired mod-resources for collection points. This collection system could possibly serve as the collection quest to attain powerscrolls for alchemy.


    Renewability
    The most important aspect of the system is addressing the issue of renewability. If the system isn't renewable, it just creates a bunch of max mod items and makes all loot irrelevant. I think the best way to address renewability is to have mods lose potency in timed increments from the time the mod was applied. Basically, the mods on your socketed items will become stale over time and need to be replaced eventually. How long these timed increments need to be could be determined in testing.

    The last issue I can think of with this system is how to tie crafters in with removing and applying mods to other people's items. Obviously, we can't force the crafter to have the item in their inventory, or the crafter could just keep the item. I think the best solution is to either allow the crafter to change the item from the crafting window along with prompts when the crafter is removing mods from an item or to just have crafters make a new kind of repair contract that can be used to remove a mod from an item or add a mod to an item.
     
  2. Llewen

    Llewen Grand Inquisitor
    Professional Stratics Veteran Stratics Legend Campaign Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2006
    Messages:
    4,699
    Likes Received:
    200
    Interesting idea, I like it.
     
  3. Gildar

    Gildar Babbling Loonie
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2004
    Messages:
    2,354
    Likes Received:
    4
    I think it would be fine to allow anybody add or remove a mod from an item, and keep any skill requirements at obtaining the mod in the first place.

    One thing that would need to be prevented is gaming mod decay (swapping mods in and out between swings, for example, to make them last longer)... but also prevent mods from decaying too quickly for it to be worth it for casual players.

    Maybe have it decay when equipped (and the character is logged in) and for 2 minutes after being unequipped?


    Also... I think transmutation should be possible as low as 75 alchemy skill... just very risky (<5% chance to succeed at all below GM?). And maybe increase the odds for a higher-quality mod being extracted as skill increases?
     
  4. Sarphus

    Sarphus Guest

    Good point with restrictions on gaming the system. I didn't think of that, but I can easily see how people would script something like that to change mods mid-fight.

    I'm fine with lower lvl alchemists being able to transmute. One of my original intentions was to create a reason for legendary alchemists to exist, but I don't think unlocking transmutation at a lower lvl undermines that goal.

    If it's reasonably doable, I think your idea of having realtime mod decay based on usage would certainly be preferred. It makes sense for stuff to wear out faster when you use it more.

    About allowing anyone to add/remove mods. It's definitely simpler to allow anyone to add or remove mods. The only reason I had it so crafters did that part of the system was to include them. Maybe crafters only need to be involved in the part of creating the initial mod item. People would still want mod items made from various materials.

    Edit:
    It just occurred to me that the number of mod slots available on a mod item could be randomly determined based on the skill of the crafter that made the mod item. Naturally, a 5 mod item would be desired over a 2 mod item. So basically, it would work about like how spellbook crafting works.
     
  5. Lady_Mina

    Lady_Mina Guest

    Artisan skill...sockets...this all sounds very WoW-ish.
     
  6. drinkbeerallday

    drinkbeerallday Visitor

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2008
    Messages:
    1,175
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think part of the problem is that the shards are under populated. There should be less shards to encourage player interaction.
     
  7. Gildar

    Gildar Babbling Loonie
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2004
    Messages:
    2,354
    Likes Received:
    4
    Socketted items have been around for much, much longer than WoW.

    And taking a quick look at WoW's system... this doesn't sound like it matches too closely except for the "you can enhance this item by using other items, but can only use a limited number of items at a time" aspect (which UO had before WoW, but with a maximum of one 'socket'... and it got named material bonuses).
     
  8. Lady_Mina

    Lady_Mina Guest

    I totaly agree with this.

    Although i don't expect EA to put some effort in UO... as they're busy with warhammer.
     
  9. Sarphus

    Sarphus Guest

    Forgive me if I don't know how. I quit wow 1 yr after it was released. Do they have socket-based items now?

    If they do, that doesn't make it a bad idea or a bad thing for UO. One of the biggest problems with UO loot is that there are caps on most mods and the closer your suit gets to those caps, the more loot becomes trivial to you. The reason this idea would help UO's itemization is that it makes a lot of the currently trivial loot useful again without allowing people to get stuck in a max mod suit with no further advancement possible.

    When I played WoW, you could disenchant items and then use the enchantment resources as ingredients for recipes to add a single mod to an item. The mod added to your item was determined by the recipe you were applying to the item.

    This idea is different in that the resources created by this system are specific to the mod that was pulled from an item. If you pull 50 DI off an item, you have a resource for 50 DI . If you pull FC 1 off an item, you have a resource for FC1. As I understand it, the wow equivalent would be that you transmute an item and end up with some magic dust that you can use to add a bonus to one of your existing weapons in order to make that weapon more powerful.

    This system doesn't buff existing weapons. It builds custom weapons and armor using resources that were harvested from existing weapons. Also, enchantments in WoW didn't have a life span. Instead, WoW continually obsoletizes gear by releasing even better gear in continual expansions.

    Edit:
    re-read your post... realized you were saying Artisan skill sounds wowish.

    Artisan skills have existed in UO for 11 yrs. The artisan skills are
    Mining
    Blacksmithing
    Lumberjacking
    Carpentry
    Tailoring
    Tinkering
    Bowcrafting
    Alchemy
    I probably missed one or 2, but any skill that represents a trade is an artisan skill. The consept is nothing new in UO

    The inspiration for this idea was the anime "Full Metal Alchemist". Granted, the inspiration is pretty far removed from the anime, but that was my true inspiration here lol
     
  10. Eslake

    Eslake Guest

    Not really, WoW stole the concept from a game that took it from a game that got the basic idea from Final Fantasy. ;)

    But the reason it is utilized in one fashion or another in so many games is that it is a good system. Albeing in most the Materia/Gem/Augment/etc doesn't decay over time, where in UO it would have to.

    I wish they would impliment a system similar to this.
    When they first told us we would be able to Craft magical items, this was the general concept most of us expected. Destroying existing magical items to obtain proponents of the creation process.


    I don't think it should be Creation only tho. We should be able to create "empty" items with no properties, but a specific number of sockets for the resources.

    Otherwise it would be less effective. Who would waste the resources to craft a ML weapon using an augmentation resource if it was going to decay to uselessness after a couple of hours?

    But if you could make that ML weapon with No Properties beyond the default base properties for its kind, and a socket in which to Add a short-lived resource property... People would definitely use it.
     
  11. drinkbeerallday

    drinkbeerallday Visitor

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2008
    Messages:
    1,175
    Likes Received:
    0
    I like it because I don't think it should be a such a big pain to put suit together. I think once you put in effort to get really good suit you should be able to have a really good suit without having to have a big excel spreadsheet, sift through 100's or 1000's of armor pieces, and search vendors endlessly.
     
  12. Sarphus

    Sarphus Guest

    Yes, I agree.

    I think this system allows you to build a stand-in item to complete your suit temporarily as you work toward getting an item that won't lose potency.

    I also think this design revitalizes crafting and makes it easier for new players to get a decent suit quickly.
     

  13. A great idea.

    Ive seen similiar ideas for moving properties. I had an idea for a reward that was a jeweled sword that had lots of smoke and mirrors. Youd drop a weapon on it and it would take on the properties of the weapon. The weapon would be lost but the jeweled sword would function like the weapon.

    There is no gain. Just a different look.