How about an adornment than can be applied to the 40% Horse Whistle to upgrade it to 45% so people that don't want to ride dogs can have a 45% horse.
+ Ranged Adornments for the love of God! Add + ranged to the adornments that give + crush,+slash + pierce. Seriously, do the devs even realize there is a ranged class in this game. I dont think so with the amouint of + melee crit items only floating around and the amount of items that have all + to offensive except ranged. Or the spells that buff everything but ranged. Come on
[p]Please forgive me if this has already been suggested/mentioned, but I'd LOVE to see a way to remove adornments from an item so they can be re-used in another item.[/p][p]Highly desirable adornments for the higher levels (50-60) are really expensive - and with good reason since they're not cheap for the crafter who made them. But for the average non-raiding player who has to really work to get the plat to buy them...it's heartbreaking when you put an adornment on your best item that you think you won't find a replacement for any time soon...and then you get an upgrade to that item. This forces you to choose - use the upgrade and lose the adornment you just spent 10 plat on, or keep using the inferior item so you feel like you get your money's worth.[/p][p]The mechanic to remove the adornment could even be crafted...crafters who already have recipes for adornments for certain slots could have recipes to make a solvent that would remove those same adornments. For example, provisioners can make adornments for cloaks; therefore, provisioners could also make a solvent to remove an adornment for a cloak. The solvent could still use rare or semi-rare ingredients so it could still sell for a high price (though probably not as high as the adornment itself) so that it would be worthwhile for crafters to make them.[/p][p]This way:[/p][p]1) The crafter still gets a consumable item to make and sell; and,[/p][p]2) Adventurers won't feel "stuck" because they put an expensive adornment into a piece of armor/equipment.[/p][p] [/p]
[p]I havn't read the whole thread, but i'll through my thoughts in anyway, which are primarily from a mage PoV.[/p][p]Every class should have a useful and desirable adornment for each slot. As it is now, mages do not have anything useful for feet, legs, forearms or shoulders (+sta, str and wis are the most useful here, not worth it for the most part). Adding in +power, int, +crit, +spell damage or a proc for these slots would give mages a reason to put an adornment in here (note that most classes have slots with no owrthwhile adornment, I am a caster, so I posted what I think casters need).[/p][p]Resist adornments are totally useless as they stand now (see the dev comments from Fan Faire about resists if you do not believe me). They either need to be increased to around 800ish, changed to a small regenerating ward of the damage type (similar to potions), or replaced with something else all together.[/p][p]Ring adornments need better balancing between the treasured and fabled adornments avalible, 'nuf said. Edit; the idea of making legandary adornments to buff multiple resists is a good one (disease/poison, heat/cold, arcane/divine/mental). A legandary adornment that buffs these resists by ~800 'may' actually be of some use.[/p][p]The chest slot needs better adornments than +6 to each stat. There should be a range of fabled adornments that give spell procs, melee procs or heal procs (or even better, spell haste, +haste and +DPS, and 'something' for tanks).[/p][p]Consider making "adornment sets". This may be hard to implement, but would most certianly be popular.[/p][p] [/p][p] [/p]
Timaarit wrote: I leveled up my transmuting by what is possably the hardest means. I made an alt and leveled him up while farming for treasured items as he progressed. I estimated the total value of the items I transmuted to get to 350 transmuting, had I sold them on the broker at the time, to be in the range of 220p. Yesterday I sold 24p of transmuted goods. I made my money back from transmuting in less than a month. While the argument that it does cost you to level up transmuting via the market price of the trash you transmute is true (though you are arguing over semantics here), the argument that you can not make that money back is false.
I would have to say that I'm in the camp that doesn't feel transmuting should involve crafting adornments. The current setup puts them too much at odds with weaponsmiths. However, in the process of taking away, there must out of necessity be something added. So a few suggestions in list format. - Remove all adornments from transmuters - Take the sum total of all adornments lacking the "tinkering feel" (I like that term) and distribute among the 9 primary tradeskill classes. I can't speak much on tinkered adornments, but I would have to say examples that involve utility seem much more like that should be the forte of things related to tinkering - Allow transmuters to skill up on breaking down items past 100, but as someone suggested, at a diminishing amount as they reach higher levels. The reason for this is is threefold.... - Give transmuters the ability to transmute items of lower than Treasured quality for powders - Allow transmuters to combine lesser components to make higher components. - Allow transmuters to use their transmuted materials along with small amounts of normal harvested materials (to even them out with tinkerers a bit) to make adornment solvents that can safely remove adornments for reuse These three things would allow the transmuter to still have a viable product to provide to the market, and it also gives them something unique for what is being taken away that will be of high value to many players, the concept of solvents. Giving them the ability to combine materials into higher levels of material, which would also be a good way to provide a chance of skilling up, means that the availability of the materials they provide will increase and adornment prices will not have to be so out of whack with other products that the other tradeskill classes can provide. Transmuters may have been meant to make adornments, but an idea like that would really only be viable if they were the *only* ones who could make adornments and that isn't the case. It's far better to redefine the intention into a supply class that has its own uniqueness and is bringing something completely new and valuable to the table.
1) Fix forearm adornments for mages so that we can actually put something usefull there. 2) I dont know what you people were smoking when you decided on the distribution of items between crafting classes but it is pretty obviously terrible. You seem to have picked the TS classes with the most problems (woodworkers / provisioners) to also have the most useless adornments.
I tell you the way to solve adornment problem, stop asking crafters about them!! You want to know what really are useful adornments, but go ask the players who really understand the game, go ask the raiders why they do and do not choose adornments for certain slots, ask them why they will not ever go near near 80% of adornments. I have seen posts on t his forum that certain adornments have a place, but i know that in truth no one who can afford the plat to pay for a lot of the fabled adorns would ever go near them. I know that a lot of fabled adorns are pointless, worthless and crazy as their is an obvious Treaseured/Legendary adorn much much better than anyone who understands the game mechanics would use. I have seen people on crafting forums argue that people would take a 2% legendary haste neck item over a 10% DPS neck item. Adornments affect adventurers, ask adventurers what useful adornments actually would be not crafters, then split the adorns up between the crafters fairly. I am a raider, and a crafter, and i can tell you easily what adorns are suitable for which class and this renders a large percentage of adornments useless. These adorns are not useful for any class but they are put in game even though no one would ever use them. Some serious eliminating of adorns needs to happen, why give classes fabled adorns that no one would buy. Get rid of the useless adorns and then add in ones which people can actually use. Make viable alternatives for slots. Make sure the Fabled adorns are the best for each class and the ones that would be used over treasured and legendary, which currently in game are the best for many slots for every class.
Oakbark@Splitpaw wrote: According to Domino, this thread is for listing specifics. Compile and share your lists?
[p]I just read 8 pages worth of posts. I'll ask forgiveness now because this is probably going to ramble a bit.[/p][p]I think a general "fix" for both transmuter and weapon smith adornments would be quite simple. Move all of the current transmuter adornments to weapon smiths. Prune as deemed necessary to give a reasonable number of desirable adornments.[/p][p]Give transmuters some relatively weak adornments that can be used in any slot. Say at tier 7 a +7 to any one stat adornment (treasured) that can go in any slot. Or perhaps +50 hp or power instead of a single stat. I wouldn't see these being universally popular but every class would use a few to shore up a few holes here and there. Same could be done for weapon skills, defense bonuses, even haste/spell haste/healing and damage bonuses. Just give an appropriate tier. [/p][p]Also give transmuters recipes to break down existing adornments into components to help with skilling up. With the current trade skill system that would be the primary component plus one shard for every quality level upto 3 with pristine. Or with your new system return the adornment on a failure and 3 shards and a primary on a success. This would not only recoup some of the extreme resource consumption from making adornments, it would effectively offer another painless chance at getting a skill up. Also the broker would benifit greatly by not being flooded with undervalued adornments created just to skill up. [/p][p]Just to point out to the many critics of how transmuting has effected the economy (and the costs with skilling up): I believe it was a huge success from the producer's stand point. Its a tremendous coin sink. Before transmuting came along, adept 1s were hardly worth anything. They just piled up on the broker. The same is true for treasured items. They just piled up as people overlooked them for the master crafted items. Now, for every peice of transmuted dross you find on the broker there are 5+ treasured items removed from the game. This also removes any coin that would of been generated from selling these items to vendors. In fact, since you use fuel to make the combines, your removing coin to remove potential sources of coin. Its win win win as far as the people who worry about in game economies are concerned. [/p][p]Not a win win win for the individual players mind you. Its a painless loss of coin though. I never realy notice when I transmute every tresaured item I found at the end of a long day of adventuring that I just turned 7-10g worth of vendor loot into a no-value item. You just get use to doing it, and never question why your doing it. You either hord the end result or sell an adornment and the pain goes away.[/p][p]As far as the adornments themselves. Yes, they need to be looked at and reballanced for usefulness. The current resistance adornments are not even worth considering. Currently every crafting class has a wrist adornment that gives +14 to a stat. I'd suggest widning the number of slots that can be done and make each class responsable for a single stat bonus OR give each class certain slots and the ability to make a variety of stat bonuses for that slot. Not the cookie cutter system currently in place. I believe I favor the second choice as it would give every trade skill class a requested treasured adornment. Other non-stat based adornments should follow the tendencies of each trade skill class. I would like to see more slots available towards damage bonuses, healing bonuses, the creation of agression bonus adornments, some agression mittigation adornments, more flowing thought, possibly some truely aggressive regeneration adornments (say at least x5 what is currently seen), some minor duration extention, some minor range extention, some minor double attack/crit increases, DPS augmentation, bonuses to all indivudual combat skills, and movement speed. Killing with kindness would allow people to individualize their choices instead of having a default best. Best examples of this are chest adornments (only 1 good choice with many bad) versus weapon adornments (many, many choices in which none can be called best in all situations). [/p][p]Also I'd love to see the effect from Gnomish Spring Boots made into an adorment. There are probably several other tinkering effects (and totem effects) that could be made into adornments without ruining the game. Like a (treasured) water breathing adornment, an (legendary) out of combat regen adornment or (fabled) invisability adornment. Have the effect break if the item is removed.[/p][p]One last request: adornments that create permanent pet buffs/group buffs. Neither of these are high on my own personal list of desired adorments but they would generate alot of excitement. A see invis group adornment would be very popular. A 3 point group regen is less of a joke than an individual 3 point regen. Maybe limit group buff adornments to the cloak slot? Perhaps toss them over to the 1 or 2 leist loved adornment classes. Something to think about.[/p]
This suggestion would effect adornments. Let us transmute common and handcrafted items. They should be 100% transmuted into fragments. This would help in the high stages when lots of fragments are needed.
Ignoring the problems with the general system for the moment, here are some specific ideas. A cloak adornment that gives a damage bonus to attacks made when stealthed. Wand/staff adornments that add damage/debuff/dot to spells doing a certain type of damage and/or to the activated attack of the wand. A (fabled?) shield adornment that has a (small) chance to prevent all damage from a physical attack. A helm adornment that has a chance to prevent all damage from a mental attack, or a chance to block a charm or mez. Neck adornments that boost taunts and/or detaunts Glove adornments that boost a particular tradeskill
[p]I am in favor of being able to combine or breakdown fragments, powders, infusions, and manas. In the higher tiers, it is very hard to make adornments because of all the materials that are needed. The other day I was trying to make a legendary t4 adornment which takes 10 items. I needed 1 infusion, 5 powders, and 4 fragments. I tranmuted 15 items. after breaking down five adept 1s, 9 adept 3s, and 1 master and I received 3 fragments, 1 mana, and 11 powders!!! After breaking down 15 items I could not make one adornment treasured or otherwise. That is ridiculous!!! If 300+ tranmuters had a quest similar to alchies, that would help a lot. It would also help to bring down the prices of adornments on the broker because they would not be such a pain to make.[/p][p]Also the Fabled adornments that have regen that activates 20% of the time and have only 3 triggers are a waste of time. 3 Triggers is a joke. Lower the activate % and have unlimited triggers like imbues then they may be worth while.[/p]
and frankly, it's not really 'that late a stage', considering tradeskills have been completely overhauled a few times. Doing this is minor, particularly if you are looking at redistributing who makes what ones. You can have adornments back from my Transmuter and my Tinkerer and I won't say anything but thank you.
Transmuting and creating adornments are very different activities which ought to use separate skills. If transmuters are to continue to be able to make adronments even when they are not crafters, then perhaps this system would work: The Transmuting skill is used only for breaking down items, and skill ups are gained by doing that without the current limit. A separate skill - Geomancy - is used for all adornment recipes, both crafter and transmuter. Skill ups are gained similar to the way transmuting currently gets them from crafting an adornment (with the chance of a skill up increased when below 100). All adornment recipes have a chance to increase the skill and also give crafting xp (if not grey for your crafter level). Transmuting recipe books used geomancy to determine the skill level When the change is made Geomancy is set to max(5xcrafter level, transmuting skill). These seem to be the advantages of this scheme: Leveling up is consistant for each scheme. People who just want to be able to break down their excess items to give to crafters to make adornments will be able to level up their skill at doing that faster. A wider range of recipes would be available for grinding up geomancy, making it less boring and making a wider range of low level adornment available for adventurers. I know geomancy is used for a couple of HQs, and this would make it harder in future for people to gain the level of skill needed. The level could be reduced or the skill change to a more relevant one, now that the commision system has removed the need for everyone doing the quest to have the skill. It would make sense if making the wyrmslayer needed a weaponsmith.
Oakbark@Splitpaw wrote: Do you really believe the current adornment system is based on what crafters asked for? It isn't.
Terron, so I'm sure I'm reading it right, you're saying strip adornments from everyone and put them under geomancy?
Deson wrote: No, leave the adornment recipes belonging to the same classes, just change the skill the recipes use, so that all adornments are made using the same skill. Then any adornment you happen to have the recipe for you could make when trying to raise that skill. Actaully moving some recipes might be a good idea, but that is separate from what I was proposing.
Terron@Splitpaw wrote: Thanks for clarifying. I things I don't like about it then are xp and the skill up for adornment making. The xp factor I don't like because if non-primary trades are keeping adorns then it again serves as backdoor xp like when they first opened things up. The geomancy skill-up I don't like because unless it's so easy it's trivial to level, you end up with the same grind fodder problem transmuters currently have. Amending my placement statements from the first page: As others in thread have suggested, it'd be nice to have some tinkering items actually made into adorns like the spring boots. Non-charm slot equipped items actually put you at an adventuring risk to use them. Switching those items to adornments is well in keeping with the tinkering theme and opens up more marketing options for the skill.
Deson wrote: Backdoor xp? I don't see it like that. Crafting an item giving crafting xp seems reasonable. Currently some adornment recipes give crafting xp, some do not. I think it would be better if they were consistant. It would push up the crafting levels of transmuters who were primarily adventurers, and might tempt them into doing a bit more crafting, but I don't see that as bad. Regarding the grind fodder problem of transmuters, it would improve the situation in several ways. Since they would very rapidly reach level 5 artisan if they are not one already they would have access to all the T1 adornment recipes to grind on, giving them a greater variety of things to make, makign a wider variety of cheap, but fairly weak adornments available. Secondly, I suspect many people want to get their transmuting skill up primarily to be able to break stuff down, perhaps for no-trade drops. They will be able to do that more easily, without creating grind fodder. Only the people who want to actually create adornments will need to grind up. In future that will include crafters as well as transmuters, though current crafters will start with the skill high so they can still craft the adornments they currently make. My feeling is that in the long run the number of people who will want to be able make high level adornments will be less than the number who will want to be able to break stuff down, so that they will be fewer people creating grind fodder, and more people selling components from stuff they broke down. It would not eliminate the problem, but I think it would alleviate it.
