Hypothetical question(s)!

BAH! Stupid site, double post.

Definitely agree. When the treasured gear in Mistmoore Castle dwarfs most legendary, some things are out of line.

[p]I definitely agree on merging the smiths... just seems sensible all the way around. I would also love to see carpenter and woodworker merged for purely selfish reasons (my carpenter is jealous of making imbued stuff *lol*). Unfortunately I don't see a one-fits-all solution to compensating those who wouldn't want the merger. [/p][p] [/p][p]I would pose one idea though. (not sure if this has been discussed as I am relatively new to EQ)... Since there is an adventure class betrayal ability, why not implement the ability to change/betray or combine trade profession? Perhaps stop gaining recipes in the abandoned profession (keeping those you know) and begin earning recipes in your new profession. [/p][p] Say my Carpenter decides he just can't resist the lure of making snazzy bows for all his friends. So he remembers how to make all his old carpentry stuff but starts learning woodworking. This way you wouldn't loose all the time he spent in carpentry and still has a means of making wares while he skills up as a wood worker. I know diddly about game mechanics and whether this would even be remotely feasible, but I thought I'd throw it out there. I'm a bit of a multitasker so I'm always up for branching out... not that I ever finish everything I start of course. :wink:[/p]

I have all nine tradeskills although not at a particularly high level. I agree in principle with the idea of merging weaponsmith with armourer, and woodworker with carpenter. But where does this leave the other tradeskills? I see the tradeskills panning out as follows: Outfitters: Blacksmith Tailor Scholar: Alchemist Sage Craftsman: Jeweler Woodworker (inc Carpenter) Secondary Tradeskills: Provisioner Transmuter Tinkerer Reclamator (new idea, sacrifice crafted items and a suitable pile of raws in order to 'reclaim' the rare used to make the original item, even if the item was attuned, reclaimed item may have a slightly different name e.g. reclaimed blackened iron but still be usable in same receipes as blackened iron) Needs: Offer Armorer, Weaponsmith, Woodworker & Carpenter a respec to either the appropriate new class or on of the secondarys Offers Scholars the option to respec to Craftsman to cover those who were planning on making a Jeweler.

[p]Instead of proposing combining tradeskills, why not extend the levels at which you specialize?[/p][p]When the game first launched, specializing at lvl 9 and 19 was a good fit for a level 50 cap game. Now that the cap is 70, I have first hand knowledge of the pain that many of the non-scholar tradeskillers feel. Getting from lvl 20 to 70 on many tradeskills is as exciting as watching grass grow :x[/p][p]Instead of the lvl 9 and 19 transition lines, why not extend them to perhaps lvl 19 and 39. There are a few reasons for this proposal:[/p][p]1. At low levels it is so easy to skill-up that many new players don't get a 'feel' for the upcoming specializations. By time they do the tradeskill tasks from the trainer they are already pushing lvl 10. Extending the first specialization to lvl 19 would give new players the opportunity to practice and learn what tradeskill they enjoy (and to use the durability buffs on each tradeskill :thumbup: ). 2. Having the final specialization at 39 will allow many more recipes for tradeskillers (lvl 20-39) and allow them to skill-up easier. This will encourage more tradeskilling IMHO. 3. For those tradeskills lacking in variety (outfitters & craftsman particularly), SOE can work on adding new recipes for T5-T7 instead of worrying about T3-T7 (which is the current problem). This will reduce SOE's current *lack of variety* tradeskill issue.[/p][p]Just my hypothetical...[/p]

My general sentiments on these hypothetical questions: 1) Weaponsmith + Armorsmith = Blacksmith -- This sounds like a good idea and would not be game breaking to me. 2) Carpenter + Woodworker = ?? -- At first I was kind of against this idea, perhaps because my carpenter was my first trade that I took to level 70. I am a carpenter just because I enjoy making the house items. After thinking about it awhile, it would not be game breaking for me to combine with woodworker class. Also would like to add that I appreciate the hypothetical questions. Even if it does not come to pass, it helps knowing the crafters are being thought of and attempts to improve the overall situation are being thought about. Nothing will ever please everyone, but I for one appreciate the attention. -Z ps. for frame of reference I have most crafting tradeskills covered to mid 60s+ except my weaponsmith, who is semi-retired at lvl 30 something.

Sir Mr. Professor Doctor Josgar the Great, the best elf in the universe has a very wonderful idea! Primary Tradeskills (utility): Blacksmith (Armorer Weaponsmith Woodworker) Tailor Sage Alcehmist(combined with jewler) Secondary Tradeskills (non utility): Carpenter Provisioner Teritary Tradeskills(magical mechanical stuffs): Transmuter Tinkerer The primary tradeskills would all gain the ability to repair the items they make. Everyone will get the ability to break down what they craft into raw components so that they have the chance to use those to make something new. The recipe window would get tabs saying First, second, third tradeskills. (or maybe the names of them) The secondary skills as listed above would have the same exact level bar as your primary tradeskills, so if you dinged level 20 tailor, you could go get a new tailor book and a a carpenter book. (Teritary tradeskills would work the same as they do now.) Special recipes could be given to certain combos. A tailor carpenter for instance, might get some special furniture that has cooler cloth on it... Or a Blacksmith Carpenter could make metal furniture too. (carpenters would keep basic furniture stuff though) When this is implemented, everyone would get a manditory respec of tradeskills class change... they would keep their level, but be allowed to pick any of the tradeskills. Then they would receive recipies. If you had scribed levels 1-40 tradeskill recipies, you would receive the same recipe levels in your knew tradeskill.

Mighty Melvor wrote:

This is the best idea I have seen yet. Better still, no changes to receipe books would be required, an Outfitter would be allowed to scribe Tailor, Armorer and Weaponsmith books until they reach level 40. Having to scribe separate books will teach the user the difference between the crafts (whereas this is less obvious currently). Same goes for an Artisan, having to find/purchase Outfitter, Scholar and Craftsman books would teach the difference between them. Implementation would be just a case of switching some tradeskillers back to Artisan, Outfitter, Scholar or Craftsman based on their Tradeskill level. This also gives people who started a tradeskill, then abandoned it early, the possibility to select a different path at tradeskill 20 and/or 40. THUMBS UP!!!!

[p]I've been scanning this thread for a while, thinking about it and absorbing other people's thoughts. While I can't say I've read every post, I think I've figured out how I feel about the subject.[/p][p]My answer is "no". To me, merging tradeskill classes is the same as merging adventure classes. It seemed to say that the 4 classes involved are somehow defective, something is wrong with them, they're unplayable and they interfere with the balance and mechanics of the game world. I don't believe that. To me, deleting any kind of class would be a totally last-ditch measure in order to save an otherwise failing system.[/p][p]This is not the case with tradeskills. The system is far from perfect, and certain classes need some work, but these are fixable. Yes, it will take time and effort, and will require some creative thinking, but heck, you guys came up with an entire game, so tweaking a couple of tradeskill classes should be well within your capabilities. [/p][p]Merging classes is a lazy fix. It simply eliminates a problem class without addressing any of the issues that caused the problems in the first place. And, as pointed out by several people, it makes for more competition, with no corresponding increase in demand.[/p][p]I have a 70 carpenter. I knew when I made her that her products would be of limited appeal, and that the only real sellable item I would make was strong boxes. No consumables for a steady market, nothing other than the boxes that were really needed for gameplay. I just wanted to make items that people could actually place in the game world. Items that added character and beauty (or ugliness; and what's the deal with tier 6 commons? I mean, really...) and were just frivolous fun.[/p][p]It was a hard grind to 70, but that didn't bother me much. Only one or two recipes per level, disappointing not so much for the lack of pristine bonuses for leveling speed, but because so many of the items were dull or of dubious use (tents?? who puts tents inside their house?), so many of the items were the same as quest rewards, or could be bought from a vendor.[/p][p]For carpenters, all these issues are fixable with new recipes and more attention to itemization. Concocting a recipe is easy, designing and coding new items is not. I realize this. It's why I've been so patient. By proposing to merge my class with woodworker, I feel like all my hard work and dedication is invalidated - you're saying carpenter is a broken class that interferes with game balance and my recipes can be given to a woodworker because heck, anyone who uses wood can bang together a chair or a chandelier.[/p][p]Please don't do this. SOE spent a lot of time and effort working on adventure class balance, and overall, I think they're doing a good job. Stop marginalizing the tradeskills! When this game was in development, artisan was supposed to be a playable class all on its own. There were a lot of people looking forward to that; playing a tradeskill-only character with worth and impact.[/p][p]I have no problem with tradeskills being hard. The people who really want to do it won't let that stop them; they tradeskill because they want to make things. My feeling is that SOE needs to look a little harder at tradeskill issues and balance, dedicate more manpower to it, and make sure the tradeskill developers have some clout with the itemization and art teams. Stop merging adventure and tradeskill quests; it makes for resentment in the adventure classes and frustration for the tradeskillers. Come up with tradeskill-only quest lines, with rewards that are of no real interest to adventurers (like recipes!). The one in Fallen Dynasty was a step in the right direction, why did you stop there? In EQL, new recipes often had to be discovered, and you'd see people all over the message boards coordinating their efforts to find them. It was fun, and engaging, and probably not all that hard to implement.[/p][p]Tradeskillers should be a valuable and valued part of the game world. Sloppy itemization and bias toward mob drops as upgrades has marginalized them to the point where you're now proposing to totally do away with two classes! How has this happened? Why has this happened?[/p][p]You have a great game here, with the potential to become even better. Don't mess it up by taking the lazy way out when a problem is encountered.[/p]

Mighty Melvor wrote:

I also want to say that this is one of the best ideas I've read in this entire thread. I also want to reiterate that my Weaponsmith is not a metal-pounder. He is a weapons crafter. Do *not* make a Smith class!

I have a horrible suspicion the 'red names' have already moved on from this thread. Pity it always takes so long for the best ideas to materialise :-(

Why shouldn't they have? It was a hypothetical question asked almost two months ago.

Maybe because this topic got more attention than any topic in the tradeskilling forum in a long long time. It's obviously a very important "concept" if you will. And, there is no reason why a hypothetical can and will not become a change in game. I know what he stated in his opening post but he had to say that to allow for more relaxed discussion rather than people flipping out. There were a LOT of issues that were brought forth in this post that I'm sure he never even considered and I'm glad he posted. It shed light on some serious flaws with a few of the things that have taken shape in crafting. As a result of this thread and a few others where the community has given feedback, I'm really starting to see some positive changes in this game where for quite some time, it seemed things were starting to go downhill.