About That Enchanting Suggestion

[Woper_The_Black]

Woper_The_Black wrote: ↑
29 Jun 2018 19:51
Most of these suggestions come from players that have been here a long time. This decision to give enchantment said perks happened ages ago and was decided on by the devs and everybody had their opportunity to discuss/argue the viability of the changes back then (just like the current ammunition update recently), you either argued/discussed it back then and the devs let the decision stand, in which case you should respect it, or if you said nothing about it back then funny how it only just starts to become a fundamental "this isn't right issue for you now"

That's.. silly. The devs are a totally different team now. Many of the current devs were players back then. We're seeing a lot of stuff from the old days undone (kensai, weave master and favored soul removals are big examples of this) and more big mechanical changes may have happened in the last year and a half than in the six or seven years before.

Not to mention this is probably the tenth time this discussion has come up... I remember people saying the school didn't seem right way back then. But this isn't a democracy and these forum discussions are almost always just hot air, except every now and then when they're not.

This was posted as an update by Irongron himself march last year. I'm not talking about 6-7 years ago. This was an update he felt was right for the server then and he is the owner. Commenting that I'm silly and that the dev team is totally different now is false as irongron is still the owner now as he was when he posted then, and your comment that more mechanical changes that have happened in the last year and a half are correct and this was one of them. Have your opinion by all means but don't demean other players in the process, maybe you should apologise for your hasty comment and research the facts first next time ?

[thingsicantdo]

I like how that sounds! It would mean a crafting focused character (with the feats) is still able to enchant! Yay! It's much closer to the lore as well and that makes me happy.

HOWEVER~ What do you mean about grandfathered? Why/how is that useful? What is the point of having ESF and all three crafting feats (which I do, and I assume most craftywizards do)? I'm ignorant.

grandfathered means that those with the enchantment focuses (specifically ESF i guess) would keep their cheaper enchantments (like they had the appropriate feats). this would simply lessen the blow to the existing characters who want to keep being good at enchanting.

that said, it's not a requirement, it would just be preferred, imo. i know we could say "tough luck," but generally speaking, that's not... ideal. at least for those who have this "tough luck"

[Baron Saturday]

very positively. and seconded the enchanter grandfathering

EDIT: do want to note, we may need another gate to get through, or we'll have "epic enchanter" level characters at level 10

We already have level gates in place on enchanting regarding when the skill bonuses become available, so I don't imagine it would be too difficult to translate these over.

[Versatile]

I too think Baron's idea is better and a good compromise but I would ask as the others have that we be grandfathered in, or again, let us redo those three feats (sf,gsf,esf enchant changing them to the three crafting feats) It wouldn't be perfect but the sting wouldn't be nearly as bad. Keep in mind that is from looking at my own build and seeing I would have to drop to lvl 2 and start over to do what I can do now.

[thingsicantdo]

i'm going to point out that this would open up the current ESF bonuses to every caster class (specifically those who couldn't attain the feat previously: rangers, paladins, bards), which is good. however it's going to be a big hit on some of these classes (wizards: *laughs in bonus feats*).

i would suggest a slight buff in the bonuses to make it more attractive, but i'm unsure if that would be the right way to go. what do you guys think?

also, we should brainstorm a new epic cookie for enchantment. hopefully something with RP potential, and not just some form of dominate monster buff.

[Aelryn Bloodmoon]

This last quote kept pinging my notifications over and over, for w/e reason.

Anyways, I would agree with you if you could create the items in NwN that you can in PnP. But you can't. You're actually pretty limited by what you can do in a basin. So I suppose we can agree to disagree on that?

Quotes do that for me, as well, until I click on them individually.

We can agree to disagree on that! I agree that the basin is more limited than PnP (by a LOT of properties the game sadly doesn't include), but I feel that's overshadowed by the fact that in NWN +1 str on 11 different items stacks to +11, whereas in PnP that equals +1 strength. In this world, what you can do is better because of that, IMO.

How do people (on both sides) feel about moving the basin bonuses to scribe scroll/brew potion/craft wand? Having one of those feats gives the SF bonus, two gives the GSF bonus, and all three gives the ESF bonus. This opens up full basin bonuses to all caster classes without requiring otherwise useless feats, but at the same time restricts the bonuses to those willing to invest feats in them, and frees up Enchantment foci to have their own thing. It also makes sense that people practiced in creating magical items... would be better at creating magical items.

very positively. and seconded the enchanter grandfathering

EDIT: do want to note, we may need another gate to get through, or we'll have "epic enchanter" level characters at level 10

I am 100% behind an idea like this as well. I think the level gate should just be level 21 for epic, as you can currently make a character with GSF enchantment at level 1 without taking any gifts or anything special at all.

[Dr_Hazard89]

Let's say that having SF ench = lvl 1 enchanter, GSF = lvl 2 and ESF = lvl 3.

Am I right to understand that under the proposed idea, the feats craft wand, craft potion and scribe scroll would count as 1 each? For example having any one of those three = lvl 1 enchanter, having any two of those = lvl 2 and three = lvl 3?

If that's the idea I really really like how it sounds.

I still don't quite understand the benefit of grandfathering though, in my case. Why would I want all six feats? Unless enchanting is buffed somehow or given a very cool cookie, I don't see the point in having all six and would feel like I have wasted feats that no longer do what they did when I chose them (create magical items). Tough luck for me, I guess?

Re-levels pls.

[Fionn]

How do people (on both sides) feel about moving the basin bonuses to scribe scroll/brew potion/craft wand?

I'm really not seeing the issue with the current system. If you went this way, there are 3 Ench and 4 Craft Feats (Craft Wonderous Items). If anyone's considering altering things, I'd recommend we grant basin bonus to all 7, topping out at/around the current 35%. Baron's proposal would lower Epic Enchanter to level 5, which would rather dramatically increase the number of 35% Enchanters.

My crafter Wiz has 5 of 7 Feats at level 13, and will take Wonderous next. I could really use those SF feats back if we're tinkering with my build

[sad_zav]

pretty sure craft wondrous item is an FL only thing

[Baron Saturday]

pretty sure craft wondrous item is an FL only thing

'Tis. That said, the idea of both Enchantment foci and the craft/scribe/brew feats contributing towards the max 3 feat bonus is an interesting one and might ease the transition.

The main issue with migrating basin bonuses to the crafting feats is how to transition. Offering rebuilds to anyone with any Enchantment foci is a huge undertaking, even with the script, since DM oversight is still needed to make sure that the rebuild isn't being taken advantage of to completely change a character's build. Grandfathering is awkward, since the idea with grandfathered stuff is that you eventually want to phase the old thing out, and I don't know if that would work when the thing being grandfathered is the functionality of a feat, rather than a path that's simply no longer offered.

Two ways I could see to do this:
1) Grandfather enchanting feats giving basin bonuses for X amount of time. A year, say. This gives people who want to make new enchanters lots of warning,and people.who have established enhanters have time to -losexp and relevel if they so desire. Not an ideal solution.
2) Expand the list of feats that contribute basin bonuses, so having any three of SF/GSF/ESF/craft/scribe/brew would give the full bonus. This is a bit messy, as I would honestly prefer to give Enchantment foci a clean slate to have new perks added to, but it would certainly make for a less painful transition.

Thoughts?

[yellowcateyes]

Generally speaking, I prefer solutions that do not necessitate grandfathering or rebuilds. The original suggestion was appealing in that there was no loss or transfer in functionality - an epic caster who invested in Enchantment would still be capable of doing exactly what they were doing before. The only issue to be addressed would be ensuring that the Enchantment school was an appealing, worthwhile and enjoyable choice, independent of basin bonuses.

That said, the idea of shifting basin bonuses to a different set of feats raises a more fundamental design question.

Aside from race and class-specific craftables, Arelith's crafting system is notable for its openness and universality. No matter the character archetype, every PC is guaranteed at least 2 points per level to invest into crafting skills. And while there are some synergies that are more practical/appealing than others, any character has the freedom to choose whatever crafting skill they feel like pursuing. This means, generally speaking, that a PC does not have to choose between being an effective adventuring character and an effective crafter.

Tying basin bonuses to a full suite of invested feats means that there is a clearer delineation between a crafting character and an adventuring character. So here's a few questions for anyone interested in answering:

1) Do you prefer a system where there is a clearer line between adventuring (combat) characters and crafting characters? Why?

2) Do you believe that being good in crafting should come at the cost of significant feat investment? What are the benefits of raising the bar of entry for participating in high-end item creation?

[Scurvy Cur]

1) Do you prefer a system where there is a clearer line between adventuring (combat) characters and crafting characters? Why?

Absolutely not. I've played on a couple of servers that did something like this (most notably, Depths of Norhaven). What usually ended up happening was that people built crafting alts, and used those alts to craft for friends and faction members. The actual number of dedicated craft characters played as mains could usually be counted on one hand, because there are only a few people who feel that this is enjoyable enough an activity to fill their desire for both roleplay and game play. We even see that here to some extent with enchantment characters; they're rare enough that most enchanters that I know are willing to accommodate ooc requests for gear from friends, because of how important it is to be properly geared on a combat character.

While this style system is workable, the Arelith setup goes a long way towards shortcutting the purely OOC elements, and I think achieves a cleaner end result. Most crafting is done by characters that matter, and very very few people have dedicated "craft alts".

2) Do you believe that being good in crafting should come at the cost of significant feat investment? What are the benefits of raising the bar of entry for participating in high-end item creation?

No and none, respectively. I expect we'll get some boilerplate remarks about enhancing RP by forcing adventurers to go to more craft-centric characters to get their gear, but this, I feel is a dubious benefit at best. Arelith is a fantasy roleplay server, and I don't see that any meaningful roleplay will be added by forcing a character to go buy their upgraded sword from a dedicated crafter instead of asking an adventuring friend to do it. What RP will be added will be flavorless, perfunctory filler.

[JediMindTrix]

Honestly, I'm partial towards using the original suggestion (for primary casters) and giving the enchantment school direct bonuses:

GSF - Duration bonuses and/or dominated creature attribute bonuses.
ESF - % chance to penetrate immunity.

EDIT:
Even after 8 pages, the concerns against it seem to be boiled down to:

1) "It's always been this way!"
2) "It's silly!"
3) "It doesn't work like that in PnP!" or paradoxically "Arelith/NWN is not PnP!"

A lot of concern seems to come from people who didn't read the suggestion fully/or the thread (don't blame them at this point).

It's the Human trait of resistance to change. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Tying it to feats is not necessary when tying it to level already makes it a monumental investment of time. At the risk of provoking a tangent: "But some people can grind to 30 in 3 weeks or less Jedi! You yourself said so in the Writ thread." To which I say: worry less about what other players are doing and more about yourself. That is not the average Arelith player, and I can tell you right now that kinda playing comes at a personal sacrifice. It's not a pleasant time. That's 3 weeks at 18 - 20 hour days to the exclusion of social life, nutrition, exercise and sometimes, hygiene. So let's skip the obligatory "It's easy to get to 30!!11!" comments and back to the fact it's already a giant investment of time.

[thingsicantdo]

1) Do you prefer a system where there is a clearer line between adventuring (combat) characters and crafting characters? Why?

i feel like we're creating a false dichotomy in this case. a 3 feat investment won't cripple many builds (but certainly will certain ones, but those were unlikely to be epic enchanters in the current system, anyway). no matter the build, a caster with 9th level spell slots is potent, even if only as support. realistically, the character is going to be giving up one spell school focus, if they weren't going to take craft wand/potion/scroll feats anyway, and these feats allow the character a lot of freedom in their spellbook if they choose to utilize these feats for their buffs. overall, this isn't so much as reducing their combat effectiveness, as it is shifting the focus.

2) Do you believe that being good in crafting should come at the cost of significant feat investment? What are the benefits of raising the bar of entry for participating in high-end item creation?

yes, because i feel that having a character be able to do too much is overall detrimental. this is my opinion, though. it sure is inconvenient to have to search for a crafter/enchanter, but i don't think it's inherently bad to have to do so.

[TimeAdept]

That's 3 weeks at 18 - 20 hour days to the exclusion of social life, nutrition, exercise and sometimes, hygiene.

It's not, but OK.

[JediMindTrix]

sure thing boss
i don't know a single person who levels faster than that that isn't doing something unhealthy to achieve it. you can four word 'replytorefute' it if you want but it doesn't make it less true

[TimeAdept]

I work 45 hours a week, play less than 4 hours a day on average, more on weekends and I went from 1-30 in the underdark in about 3-4 weeks. I don't know what to tell you. It definitely wasn't 3 weeks of 18-20 hour days, which by your count puts going from 1-30 a grueling 378 hour grind with no sleep and very little food or anything else. I'm pretty sure if I had vacation, or wasn't working 45-50 hours a week, I could do it much faster if I was intent on doing so, but it would not be 18-20 hour days, probably 8-10, which is, to be totallt fair, PRETTY EXTREME, but also the equivalent of me sinking my workday into my primary hobby, which doesn't seem altogether out of the ordinary for a hobbyist on their time off? see: boardgames, archery, firearms, writing, art, etc etc etc.

[BegoneThoth]

sure thing boss
i don't know a single person who levels faster than that that isn't doing something unhealthy to achieve it. you can four word 'replytorefute' it if you want but it doesn't make it less true

A month of casual play at low RPR.

[JediMindTrix]

Thoth, if you're hitting 30 in a month I don't think you understand what casual means. Casual is like, 2 - 4 hrs/day and probably not everyday. More than that and you're hitting 'hobbyist' as TimeAdept described it.

I work 45 hours a week, play less than 4 hours a day on average, more on weekends and I went from 1-30 in the underdark in about 3-4 weeks. I don't know what to tell you. It definitely wasn't 3 weeks of 18-20 hour days, which by your count puts going from 1-30 a grueling 378 hour grind with no sleep and very little food or anything else.

Yea, it was awful. It's literally my experience with a 4 ECL Drow (Nihlanna Mae'viir) pre-writ and without an optimale discord grind squad to mobilize. I recognize that you can totes do it faster with a squad, which is why I took care to qualify this sentence: "But some people can grind to 30 in 3 weeks or less Jedi!".

I've also done -1 ECL Humies in the Underdark post-xp boosting updates, with an optimal grind squad and it came to about 2 weeks, 10 hour days. Either way, that's not an insignificant amount of time as grinding is pretty much unfun in any amount.

I would be down with the argument writs have made it more streamlined and even faster but it's pretty obvious from the three threads (and my own personal experience trying to find writ parties) that a lot of people are having issues with it too. I'm glad you had a smooth ride. YMMV

[Tourmaline]

The main issue with migrating basin bonuses to the crafting feats is how to transition. Offering rebuilds to anyone with any Enchantment foci is a huge undertaking, even with the script, since DM oversight is still needed to make sure that the rebuild isn't being taken advantage of to completely change a character's build. Grandfathering is awkward, since the idea with grandfathered stuff is that you eventually want to phase the old thing out, and I don't know if that would work when the thing being grandfathered is the functionality of a feat, rather than a path that's simply no longer offered.

I think it's extremely optimistic to think that would happen. Most likely they would just change it and say existing characters have to delevel if they want feats changed.

What if crafters could enchant items they made (and only items they made) as if they had ESF enchantment? So tailors could make clothes with +2 skill bonuses, etc.

[Baron Saturday]

Generally speaking, I prefer solutions that do not necessitate grandfathering or rebuilds. The original suggestion was appealing in that there was no loss or transfer in functionality - an epic caster who invested in Enchantment would still be capable of doing exactly what they were doing before. The only issue to be addressed would be ensuring that the Enchantment school was an appealing, worthwhile and enjoyable choice, independent of basin bonuses.

Aside from race and class-specific craftables, Arelith's crafting system is notable for its openness and universality. No matter the character archetype, every PC is guaranteed at least 2 points per level to invest into crafting skills. And while there are some synergies that are more practical/appealing than others, any character has the freedom to choose whatever crafting skill they feel like pursuing. This means, generally speaking, that a PC does not have to choose between being an effective adventuring character and an effective crafter.

Tying basin bonuses to a full suite of invested feats means that there is a clearer delineation between a crafting character and an adventuring character. So here's a few questions for anyone interested in answering:

1) Do you prefer a system where there is a clearer line between adventuring (combat) characters and crafting characters? Why?

2) Do you believe that being good in crafting should come at the cost of significant feat investment? What are the benefits of raising the bar of entry for participating in high-end item creation?

Truthfully, I prefer the original suggestion as well, as it is significantly simpler in terms of implementation. However, the amount of pushback it received was significant enough - or at least vocal enough - that it was distracting from any discussion of alternate Enchantment foci bonuses, so I figured offering an alternative was worthwhile.

You make a very good point about characters not needing to make mechanical sacrifices to become effective mundane crafters. Enchantment, as it currently stands, is the glaring exception to this, and I would not object to seeing it brought into line with mundane crafting.

Your second question is, I think, a somewhat tricky one.

On the one hand, no longer tying basin bonuses to feats makes the basin more accessible and makes enchanting more consistent with Arelith's mundane crafting. Upon consideration, the argument that characters shouldn't be able to make magic items if they don't have the feats to do so doesn't really stand up, since fully mundane characters can already create very powerful items through the mundane crafting system.

On the other hand... I can understand people who have RPed as specialized enchanters for months and years not wanting to suddenly be made obsolete. I don't necessarily think this would happen, as there really aren't that many common builds that qualify for full enchanting prowess under the proposed new system, however... it is worth noting that, while true that mundane crafting requires no special investment to make the best items, it is still possible to specialize in it through the Gift of Craftsmanship and craft weapon/armor skill investment, which allows characters who make this investment to craft much more quickly than their uninvested counterparts. To me, this divide seems similar to the one the exists between the different basin bonuses.

Increased runic success rate and ability to enchant up to +2 items are the currently feat-gated bonuses that allow for the creation of top-tier gear. The 35% cost reduction, however, has much less impact one what can be created, instead simply allowing for it to be created much more cheaply. Would it be reasonable to split these bonuses, making +2 items and runic success rate level gated, while leaving cost reduction behind a feat gate?

Basically, to allow people to become more effective enchanters through feat investment if they so desire, without requiring the investment for more casual enchanters?

[BrutalForce48]

Just had a couple of thoughts for various abilities that could be added that would be cool .

1. -enchant command. This would work like -ward but basically for crafting toons -enchant plain activates a 1 minute period where an additional 5% success rate would be added to enchanting. So a mast damask 5% for Ken would be bumped to 10%. So cost and gold cost untouched.
Using -enchant via tell would disable -pray for 2minutes on any PC. Limit for both to 1 use per ig day?

2. As others have said myself included the +2 stat/+3 skill ability tied to esf

YCE

1. No, I don't. The reason being I think in the case of enchantment it is applicable to both. Creating magical items would need testing right:P!
2.yes. from a. Rp perspective it is showing a clear choice in specializing. Otherwise you end up with all the benefit and there being no cost to such. As is, enchanting is open to all so anyone can go and do such but to be good at it, you should have feat investment to reflect that.

[Dr_Hazard89]

An enchanter wouldn't be able to do exactly what they did before the change, though. They would no longer be an enchanter in the sense of 'the person people go to for items', people can just do it themselves or go to someone else who is now just as effective at it. If they were still better in some way and would keep their business/status as 'item enchanter' then I'd agree, but in this case they can't.

I don't mean to be argumentative, but just stating that the reason I would hope for a rebuild is to reinvest in feats I would have chosen rather than ones I did choose and then were changed under me. Changing the rules while playing a game is necessary sometimes and I understand that, but it's also unfair towards the player.

I assume most people take the feats to be able to create those items for whatever reason (because enchantment is terrible). If those feats are no longer required, they're left with three feats that they didn't choose. They chose the ones that help with item creation, and when they log in they won't have them, they'll have three feats that do not help with item creation.

To illustrate from my perspective it would be similar to .. if .. I was selling food and you came to me saying you were hungry. I gave you the option of chicken soup, roast lamb, or a vegetarian salad. You ponder your choices, all three will sate your hunger but you decide on the salad for your own reasons. I bring you something else and when you complain I say "Hey. You were hungry. You're still getting /exactly/ what you wanted.. aren't you?" Some people won't care. But some will and I doubt that will make them feel any better or that they'd ever come back.

When things are changed in Arelith it's a little bit like that. The rules presented you with a list of options and ways to build your character. You spent a long time planning and building before finally creating your character, and then over weeks/months/years you develop that character. One day those rules change and you're left feeling bitter that you chose a thing you wouldn't have and rather than having a system in place to fix that problem for you, you're told there is no problem and you're free to do it all over again if it really bothers you.

Sorry that was a bit longer than I wanted it to be and I don't mean to sound so negative. It's not a big deal and I do understand what you meant as well, but I just wanted to put the other perspective there too. I understand rebuilds will likely not happen with such a change, but it won't stop people from wanting one and I think it's very fair and understandable that they want one, and the fact that they can't have one isn't because they shouldn't but because there is no system in place for it to be easy and so they must accept an unfair situation.

This really applies more to just .. most changes, and not just this one. I hope I didn't come across as negative or anything. Rebuild policy is just something that always gets me throwing my opinion in as I'm very opinionated about it. I care about it even when it doesn't affect me in any way. I would gladly devote my free time to helping people rebuild their characters after changes and checking up on them to make sure they rebuilt in an appropriate way if that was possible, but I don't see it happening.

Anyway. That's my 5 cents.

[BegoneThoth]

Thoth, if you're hitting 30 in a month I don't think you understand what casual means. Casual is like, 2 - 4 hrs/day and probably not everyday. More than that and you're hitting 'hobbyist' as TimeAdept described it.

2-4 hours a day of grinding is about all I can stand. Seriously, it's very rare for me to 'hit the grind' and reach yet alone exceed 4 hours.

And I always try to get RP in, so the 2-4 hours isn't even all grinding.

[afreshstart]

Maybe non-focused characters can get a cool-down on their enchantment attempts, while each focus reduces the cool-down, ESF completely removing it.