[crossfire] Jeweler skill

[Robin Redeker]

On Fri, Mar 24, 2006 at 11:06:27PM -0800, Mark Wedel wrote:
> 
>   My personal thoughts would be something like this:
> 
>   Some combination of ingredients allows you to attempt to improve a ring.  Some 
> of the ingredients should be rare, as otherwise you'll just have pile of 
> powerful rings.

Yes, that should really not be the case... But that should also be
prevented with the code that checks the success chance (with
      item_power).  Also: Low level chars shouldn't have enough money to
make _really_ powerful rings.  Eg. rings like Elrond should only be able
to make with a success chance of 100% around level 80 of jewelery and
really really a lot of money.

I don't like the idea with _rare_ ingredients, as this makes the current
jeweler skill completly unused. How hard it is to make a ring should
IMHO only limited by the jeweler level.

That the jeweler doesn't only gain exp by his skill should be limited by
the fact that he needs lots of money to work. And thus he has to go out
and search money. And money isn't that easy to gather (or at least is
      shoud not be very easy).

One other thing i want to take care of, is that stuff a jeweler produces
propably shouldn't be more worth than the ingredients (i guess this is
      obvious). So that the jeweler can't make money only with jewelery.

I want to make the jeweler skill also usable by low level chars, who
aren't able to get for example a gaelotroll's liver to for example raise
the acid resistancy. He should be able to go with the potion he found
and some big gems.

> 
>   You can only increase on step at a time (+1 stat, +3% resistance, etc).  You 
> can't go from a ring fire res +10 to ring fire rest +30 in one step - it would 
> take many.  this also increases cost a bit. 

Yes, thats a good idea, it would slow down creation of really strong
stuff.

> IMO, just require 1 potion with 
> many rubies (or other gems) with the gems being how much it is improved is way 
> too weak.  Even moderate level (~15) players have hundreds, perhaps thousands, 
> of gems, or can get them easily.  IF gems are going to be the increase factor, 
> they probably need to be the extraordinary value/flawless beauty type.

Yes! I also thought about that. Propably only the _big_ gems of a
certain quality can increase the power of the ring. Eg. 1 ruby of great
value can raise a resistance by 1%, exceptional bauty by 2% and
flawless beauty by 5%. (all with combination of a potion).

> 
>   Each time you increase the object, the item_power goes up (maybe give 5% 
> resistance improvement, with a cap at 50% or 75%?)
>
>   Success chance should probably be based on current item power, or what you are 
> enchanting it to.

Yes, i wanted to use the calc_item_power function in common/item.c to
recalc the item_power of the resulting ring. And then something like
item_power * x == jeweler level gives 50% chance of success.

(Either i use calc_item_power or some self craftet function to calc the
 improvement 'level' of the ring)

Also setting a cap is maybe really better... but i want to be able
to make a ring of halvor with +100 resistancy.
Makeing a ring with one resistancy +100 with sucess chance of 100%
should at least take level 12 jeweler skill and really a lot of
big gems, something around 1000 flawless beauty gems, and at least 100
potion (or similar).

Making a ring with 2 or 3 resistancies +100 would require at least
something like level 30-50 jewelery. And this should be quite hard to
become... and even if a char has such a jewelery level: thats completly
find IMHO he put lots of efford in it and should be rewarded for that.

Also: I haven't found so many flawless beauty gems while playing yet.
Propably 1000 is even too much to be reachable anyhow.

>
>   I know as a player, I often find those resistance potions and don't have much 
> use for them.  Being able to use one to increase an items protection by 5% would 
> be cool in terms of having some use.

Yes!

>
>   It may make sense to unify all the improvement code, so the same rules apply 
> to weapons as it does for rings, armor, etc.  That said, only certainly things 
> could be done to weapons, only certain things to armor, etc

I thought about combining skills. Eg. smithery and jewelery to raise
armours resistancies... but well... first i want to get jewelery right.

>
>   another random thought - could be interesting to have something (100 gems of 
> flawless beauty or other really high price) that would let a player decrease 
> item power by 1 for an object?  Expensive enough that it would actually be cause 
> for players to spend gobs of money.  Thus, long term, really rich players, could 
> really have the best objects in the game (I have my +75 
> fire/cold/electricity/etc ring).

Hm, lowering the item power of an object would some kind of disable the
item power checking code. IMHO the item power shouldn't be something
that can be lowered. Then we have people running around with ruggillys
whisker whielded and giving them to low level chars propably...

The game will quickly reach a level where everyone wears 2 rings of
elrond. And after that, they propably give low level chars these
rings...

But ok, 100 flawless beauty diamonds are really hard to get, it will
really take lots of time...


Robin

--
elmex at ta-sa.org / robin at nethype.de / r.redeker at gmail.com
Robin Redeker