Hypothetical question(s)!

That's not the point.. the point is, there is only 1 character slot for a bow adding a variety of options to one slot doesn't solve the problem. You can add three million two-handers and weaponsmiths will still only have to make 1 item per tier max (assuming people don't use legendary/fabled weapons).

I disagree, though many would only take one bow, if there were other beneficial procs to choose from many players would buy more than one. A bow that can proc stuns could be very useful for soloing, but not so much for grouping/raiding. As for weapons, every scout/tank I know caries around a wide array for weapons. And, as said in the original post, the concern he has is that there aren't enough recipes for woodworkers.

[p]I posted an almost identical suggestion (going a bit further too) a few weeks back. Alas the post is gone, I'm sure.[/p][p]It was something of the extent:[/p][ul][li]Blacksmiths (just as you said)[/li][li]Craftsmen (just as you said) - but taking away totems and giving them to Jewelers[/li][li]Sages/Provisioners - untouched[/li][li]Tailors - get scarves/belts from Jewelers - after all, its cloth/leather[/li][li]Jewelers - nothing other than getting a few things removed and given totems, otherwise they have enough recipes.[/li][/ul][p]I had also tossed around the idea of giving blacksmiths the few ore furniture combines, and tailors some rugs, but obviously it wouldnt fit into the classes very well. But hey, provisioners now have transmuting recipes, which obviously dont really fit into that class either.[/p][p]What would need to happen with this is the possibility for a respec. What if I have a 70 armorer and 70 weaponsmith? It would be pointless to have two 70 blacksmiths. Allow me to drop one of them to level 9 and choose a different class. I shouldnt lose any faction titles though etc - I'm sure quite a few would fit into that. [/p][p]But many people here are right - taking two wrongs and combining them in some ways just makes it "1 large wrong". Both Weaponsmiths and Armorers need some serious TLC - Some unique recipes, quests for recipes etc - there are a few, but most of them are worthless. Make it for a unique, tradable mastercrafted recipe that is on-par with legendary or better. Maybe 1-2 per tier, in a slot that doesn't typically have dropped legendary competing with it. [/p][p]agressiv[/p][p] [/p]

Also, while you're looking at it, can you PLEASE make imbued wands a "on hostile spell" proc, instead of the stupid clicky they are now, that no one uses.

There are some interesting points/discussions made in this thread. But, as a Tailor, I won't like this idea too terribly much if it means any of my recipes are given to other classes (bandoliers and such). It would also definitely unbalance the number of recipes available to certain classes (by my estimates, the Blacksmith class would have significantly more recipes than a Tailor), and would make me feel like i wasn't being looked at, as a Tailor. I also have a hard time figuring out how this would actually help the current state of artisans; most high end Mastercrafted is bypassed as it is, and condensing from 9 classes to 7 classes still means that Mastercrafted gear is bypassed.

This sounds like a great idea to me.. it gets two thumbs way up :thumbup:
As some people touched on, there will need to be some kind of "compensation" for those who currently have both classes.... Maybe a /respec for them to choose another Tradeskill?
Having worked on levelling an armorer, the lack of recipes in a real pain in the keester. I think combining it with weaponsmith would be a great thing.
As for woodworkers and carpenters, it just seems to me that this makes sense as well. I always get confused about who does what.
Cheers!

Instead of combining classes, it would be much more globally beneficial to all crafters if they were allowed to start a 2nd tradeskill class. It could even be a quest (crafting related, not adventuring) which "unlocks" the ability to take up a second class. I still think, though, that 2 years after release, talking about combining classes, even just hypothetically is a bad precedent.

valkyrja wrote:

I DO use the clicky use of wands and find them valuable for that very reason. It may be highly situational (my warden uses his fairly frequently when soloing for mana free uninteruptable damage, but my conjuror only uses them for novelty), but it makes sense for what a wand should be. It should require attention to use and be trigerable when you want to use it, not random. If anything, lowering the cast time (and damage accordinly with recast) would make them more useful to more players.
(edit for extreme bad spelling hehe, cant find the spellcheck option for the new forums if there is one)

I just want to comment on two things before I head out for the evening.

• 'Re-doing' entire professions is not something that was asked. The amount of time that would take is beyond the realm of even remote possibility.
• If, in the off-chance, something like this did happen, there is no way that we wouldn't consider people with multiple skilled characters (example: folks who have an armorer and a weaponsmith). Don't even let that enter into the discussion.

Thanks! Been a good discussion so far.

-Ilu

I think this is a great idea. I once had a woodworker and ended up deleting the whole character because I got sick of the grind. I think the combining of them with Carpenter, just makes sense. After all, they both focus with working on wood. Same thing with the idea of combining the Weaponsmith and Armorer.

Wikfizbik wrote:

The point you're missing is that for the classes who "should" be using wands, having one imbued does not help your DPS, as it does for every other class who buys an imbued weapon.

Any caster would take a wand with a "on hostile" proc over a clicky one any day.

Furies don't count, because you really shouldn't be using wands.

Regarding a craftign revamp that goes far beyond the scope of the original hypothetical question.
When the craftign trees were originaly concieved, class interdependence was a key issue, and this is no longer the case. I for one have become incresingly dissatisfied with crafting in EQ2 gradualy since the removal of said interdependence and escelating in frustration with LU24, yet I still craft because I am an adict I think that craftign as a whole should be looked at and a major revamp should be considered.
I would realy like to see a merger of the EQ1 and EQ2 craftign systems (take the EQ1 class structures and recipie ideas (ie mix of store bough recipies, and items made with mob drop loot) and keep using the EQ2 crafting mechanics engine). I'm sure there are plenty of other ways a good major revamp could be done to make craftign interestign again as well, thats just what I can think of off the top of my head.

valkyrja wrote:

Takign that approach to wands, I would offer a more siginificant change of makign wands a focus item rather than either a clicky or random (ie make them act like occult stitching type adornments).

Ilucide wrote:

That said, I say don't bother. Without a full class review, at best all that is being done is shifting problems. Merging those classes does nothing substantial but change their leveling dynamic. The problems that exist run much deeper than just what they have to sell. While increasing the market for the weaker classes by default, it will also increase competition and still leave everyone competing for the few recipes that sell. This is why I ended up not liking the idea. Even the new classes will still be limited in their ability to grow. If you can actually find a way to make weapons viable for instance with this scenario, what keeps it from being done in the old class structure?Same for the other classes really.

The biggest issue with the crafting classes is that everyone trying to protect their market ends up bumping right into someone else. It's hard to expand weapon smiths for instance because they bump right into tailors and woodworkers, same goes for armorers. Even giving other classes fluff forces them into competition though, that fluff would not address the actual usefulness on the class.

Glad you like the discussion, thanks for officially putting it on the table.

Wikfizbik wrote:

This is delving a bit off topic, true - tradeskills need a looking over as a whole. It appears, and I do recall something being stated that the LU24 revamp was done to simplify it developement wise. This was partially touted as 'making crafting more fun'. What the effects were - market flooding and more of a grind. WORTs and subs done away with - less recipes, more of a grind. provisioner was totally screwed over. 2 per pristine is too darn much.

If you want to fix those classes...
1) provide them with recipes that can't be gotten anywhere else. For example an armorer making class gear that matches, looks good and would be available at the higher end of a tier (say x7 of a tier). This would give armorers the ability to make things that could sell at the upper end of a tier where our current mastercrafted begins to give way. And please for the love of Tunare, find someone who understands what a paladin looks like! This could also include spells that can only be crafted, Jewelery that is more targeted to specific classes, etc.
and
2) provide every class with some form of consumables. If you look at the classes that honestly do well on the broker, it is those that have a renewable selling point. Totems, potions, poisons, repair kits, ammo, etc. Once a character gets to level cap, how many crafted armor sets are they going to buy? How many new crafted weapons?
combining them and then not looking at what made them have issues in the first place is a recipe for disaster.

I think its a good idea, as i have allways thought that there where to many tradeskill classes. But there is still some problems.

Currently some tradeskill classes are way more in demands. (Provisioner's are one). On my provisioner i can make 60 of the level 70 5 hour drinks for about 68 silver, put it on the market for 2.50 to 3.50 gold (3.5 to 5 time the cost to make), and be sold out in 1 or 2 days. While on an arrmorer i can make tons of arrmor, and put it at slightly higher than breaking even, and spend weeks waiting for a buyer). Main reason is that we have no Reusable items. Provisoners can keep selling food and drink at good price cause people run out of food and drink and need to rebuy it. Armorers and Weaponsmiths don't have that. The average level 70 player dosn't really need what we make.

Carpenters and Woodworkers are slightly better off than Armorers and Weaponsmiths. While house items are not reusable you can fit 500 in a house, and they lower the cost of stat in houses. So theres a slightly larger market. Woodworkers can make totems, which are resuable, most of them though arent that useful so there not much of a market other than invise totems.

Combining Carpenters and woodworkers would probably help woodworkers the most.
Combining Armorers and Weaponsmiths really won't do much until there some type of reusable item they can make

Combining any profession might mean some feeling of a loss of identity

I think this needs emphasising. Lots.

Consumables are overrated. Even on Lucan the consumable market has been dropped to a rough race to the bottom for those who make the products forcing a razor thin profit margin per craft.The best thing that can be done in absence of a total class rework is to add core products of value the likes of the Nest recipes and to add specialty crafts the crafters themselves can earn through factions. Combine both of those with adventure acquired components of varying quality and you greatly broaden whats craftable. The class set armor crafts are a great idea since it would not only add variety but, at the suggested level, give us some leeway with the equipment graying mechanic. A mechanic I 'm still not sure why it exists but that's another rant.

As a provisioner, this hypothetical change would not effect me. I do think it would be a welcome change to the game though. I know a few people have responded saying that instead more interesting recipes should be added instead. If this change where to happen, I think you would see this anyway, as Devs would not have to scratch their heads trying to workout if for example a certain shield type goes to one profession and not the other. They could just add it, without having to split hairs over whether it's a woodworker or carpenter who can make it.