Make every weapon have a material. Make condition modifiers represent quality.

[zanzibar]

This idea has been discussed a little in the past, but I think it deserves its own thread.

Right now, weapons have up to three modifiers.  The first modifier is usually something that describes condition, such as worn or perfect.  The second is the material used.  The third is something esoteric like “of the clacker” or “of Talad’s arm”.  There are a few known problems with the current settings, and people are mostly aware of them.  Silverweave weapons are bugged.  Iron weapons are more powerful than steel weapons.  And so on.  These are all things that will be worked out in time.

What I want to suggest is more far reaching than that, and it will be a real pain to code.  It will take a lot of work and a lot of things will have to be redone in order to make it happen.  Despite that, I think that if these suggestions came to realization, the item system would be far superior to the one we have now.

Here’s the list.

i.   Make every weapon have a material.

This means that there will no longer be anything called a “dagger” or “short sword”.  There will only be “iron daggers” and “steel daggers”, “silver short swords” and “bronze short swords”, and of course the equivalents for all other weapons and materials.  This will make the weapons make more sense when compared to one another.

ii.   Make every weapon have a condition.  Make modifiers based on condition represent quality.

I can imagine that this is going to be very difficult to do, but it would be a dramatic improvement to the game.  Basically, as weapons are used and their quality decreases, the condition modifier changes based on the quality value.  Perfect weapons become masterwork weapons.  Masterwork becomes fine, fine becomes polished, polished becomes worn, worn becomes scruffy, becomes ruined.  I’m leaving qualifiers out and they might not be in that order, but that’s the general idea.

There are more than a few advantages to this system.  It would mean we could hide the quality rating in the item description, just like the way it was when CB first came out.  It will make it easier for new players to judge the quality of a weapon.  It will make things make more sense – a perfect weapon with a quality of zero is ruined, but a ruined weapon of high quality might be a useable weapon.  It would also make the auction chat more IC.  Instead of people say “300 quality axes for sale”, they could say “Perfect axes for sale.”   Trades would become safer, since you wouldn’t have to wait until after receiving the item to check its quality.

There are other benefits and changes that this would bring.  I’m sure that you can think of some yourself.

[bilbous]

How would a shady merchant sell you shoddy merchandise masquerading as quality items? It isn't exactly possible now but it should be as misrepresentation is part of most commerce in reality.

[zanzibar]

How would a shady merchant sell you shoddy merchandise masquerading as quality items? It isn't exactly possible now but it should be as misrepresentation is part of most commerce in reality.

If I sold you an iron dagger with quality 0/50, I doubt you'd be very pleased.

Do you have any other thoughts on this, or was that it?

[bilbous]

You on the other hand would likely be ecstatic, especially if the price was enormous. Are you suggesting that a con man is not a suitable RP device? How sanitized do we want to be?

Actually, it would be a better deal than an iron dagger with quality 20/20 though I do get your meaning. I could probably repair that to at least 45/45 if not 47/47 depending on how the repair system might be functioning atm

[lordraleigh]

Knowing the way the NPCs are "smart", selling fools gold to Harnquist might be a more profitable option for con men 

[bilbous]

but you could melt it (the fools gold) down for iron and sell it to a player...

EDIT clarification added in brackets.

[zanzibar]

You on the other hand would likely be ecstatic, especially if the price was enormous. Are you suggesting that a con man is not a suitable RP device? How sanitized do we want to be?

Actually, it would be a better deal than an iron dagger with quality 20/20 though I do get your meaning. I could probably repair that to at least 45/45 if not 47/47 depending on how the repair system might be functioning atm

I'm suggesting that people should be reasonably protected from griefing.

Let's try not to fixate on this one element of it.  There are more significant aspects of the changes I'm proposing - including whether or not it's even possible.

[bilbous]

One can, if she tries, couch her descriptions in contextual terms, most people do not bother to try. It is possible your system would prevent that but it might also just cause people to convert to the old system when describing their items as the effectiveness would be testable and comparisons drawn.

I find this a little confusing:

a perfect weapon with a quality of zero is ruined, but a ruined weapon of high quality might be a useable weapon.

are not perfect and ruined either end of the same scale so that one item could not be both? and how can a ruined weapon be of high quality if ruined is the bottom of the quality scale? Would you mind restating it in more differentiated terms?

[zanzibar]

Strength and condition would be accurately described by the modifiers.  We could always hide the numbers and go back to the way things were when CB was new.


There are modifiers such as perfect, ruined, polished, etc.  Ones that describe condition.  They are set in stone and unchanging in the current system.  Quality, however, can change.  So you can have a perfect dagger with quality 0/50 and you can have a ruined dagger with quality 50/50.

In the new system, weapons with high quality ratings would be described as perfect, fine, etc.  Weapons with low quality ratings would be described as ruined, scrappy, worn, etc.


Edit:  I can't believe I bothered to type that all out.  I didn't expect that anyone would get confused by this.  Maybe you're just unfamiliar with the modifier system?

[bilbous]

So, if I understand you correctly, in the bit I quoted, you were mixing old system and new system descriptors?

[zanzibar]

So, if I understand you correctly, in the bit I quoted, you were mixing old system and new system descriptors?

The proposed system would use the modifiers from the old system, but in a different way.

[Nikodemus]

I.) I absolutely love it. This would tell us what exactly is silverwave or spellwave material. Right now it is almost meaningles name. I'm a lot interested by the technology of producing different matrials.

II.) Bilbous, how can't you get it? ;P
you would see
/auction selling steel dagger of worn condition and fine quality
instead of
/auction selling 10/45 steel dagger

Also, every merchant and smarter warrior will ask for two values. Even if condition is 0, but quality 200, then he will pay more than for a weapon which is 100/100. That person will calculate how many repair kits are needed or rather the overal cost of repairing and then deduct it from price of the weapon if it was 199/199.

[zanzibar]

I was actually thinking of condition and quality to be the same thing, but that's an interesting idea.  It would probably get confusing though.

So you're saying there would be a static modifier decribing the quality of craftsmanship.  There would be a changing modifier describing the state of repair the item is in.  There would be a third modifier which would be again static which would describe the material used.

If it would be done, then that would be great.  I think the line between "quality" and "condition" is a bit grey though.  I was just thinking of having "condition material item".

[Nikodemus]

We have condition ----->50/50 <------ quality currently. I don't see a reason to change degrade it. What I say about is putting current numbers into words. Something what you have just said.
Condition is for instance how sharp the weapon and few other factors, which may change due to repairing.
Quality is how well the sword was made, what is quality of the material. It decrease due to repairing, as the material structure may got slightly damaged, as well as its amount will decrease due to sharpening and similiar, but we know how slightly it is happening in game currently. On a small note, I was proposing reforging option for those who own some special unique weapons of more than material value to the owner. In short, reforging would bring the Quality up.
Material - Steel for example. We know that there are different kinds of steel and it is directly connected with the Quality factor. Not only skill matters when doing a weapon, but also the quality of material.

As for the question if we should keep the numbers or not. I think we shouldn't to enforce the use of words in /auction channel. What we should put instead, is short bar. Something you can't interpret easly by words, but which would make a visible enough change, similiar to the change of numbers of the condition/quality. Colors, would make it better to spot.
Anyway, in effect we will see less numbers in chat, what is good i think. 

[emeraldfool]

I don't see why this is really necessary. It would be nice to have it all fit together in a neat package, but there's far more important things to be worrying about... And by the time they're ready to implement this, the item system would probably already be very different what with the other crafting-skills, and it might not be applicable. (e.g. what do you call a gem-encrusted, Tefuskin-wrapped, high-quality, gold-riveted halberd?)