Jump to content

  •  
- - - - -

Advanced alchemy to build multi-ess

alchemy essence changes

  • Please log in to reply
6 replies to this topic

#1 Lunatique

Lunatique

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 7 posts
  • LocationPanama

Posted 19 March 2020 - 05:56 PM

[18:43:26] Lunatique: If I cannot have more slots, then I'd like an advanced alchemy option to build multi-ess.
[18:43:43] Lunatique: for example... ttr...
[18:44:15] Lunatique: I would be willing to take a small hit in the profitability to premake a ttr-ess.
[18:44:34] Lunatique: This would be good for invasions when you want to take ttr, but don't want to eat three slots.
[18:45:09] Warlock: tha ts actually a nice idea luna
[18:45:32] Warlock: maybe like a bind option, somehow, bind the three together
[18:45:39] Lunatique: yes
[18:45:52] Warlock: very good thought
[18:46:11] Lunatique: I can see it requiring an earth ess in the formula to BIND them.
[18:46:17] Lunatique: as it would act like the 'glue'
[18:46:29] Warlock: post to forums :D
[18:46:35] Warlock: im sure majority would agree to it

#2 idefix

idefix

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 34 posts
  • LocationStockholm

Posted 19 March 2020 - 10:55 PM

I might be a bit slow but I don't quite understand what that means. What's a ttr-ess?

#3 Lunatique

Lunatique

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 7 posts
  • LocationPanama

Posted 19 March 2020 - 11:19 PM

Teleport To Range.
This spell requires level 15 magic, the appropriate sigils plus 1 each of  Energy, Matter and Spirit essences.
My idea would probably involve reading advanced alchemy, reading a book that would allow making multi-ess, reading a book that would allow you to make a specific spell (in my example TTR), and adding other components (my idea was perhaps an earth essence to glue them together).
The standard chance to fail to create or critically fail to create the desired multi-ess would apply, but I think that if enough investment is added during the creation process, failure to USE the item should be eliminated.
(Example, when I make potions, I may fail to make it, or I might even lose all the ingredients, but later on when someone drinks the potion, it never fails)
Both the creator of this multi-ess AND the user of it, must have the sigils required to cast the spell.
I see this as a way to enable some players to reduce the number of slots used in their pack while they're out hunting or defending the lands from invaders.  Three slots to cast one spell seems like raindrops in the ocean, until you look at your pack and realize that one spell ate over 8% of your pack's slots.
I don't see this being overly useful for full on mages, as they will probably want and need the diversity of the present system, but for the casual person that simply needs to hop a puddle here and there (for TTR) or other spells that seem well suited to the 'advanced alchemy' multi-ess proposal, it could offer us the option of saving some precious number of pack slots.





#4 EatsAllLife

EatsAllLife

    Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPip
  • 465 posts

Posted 20 March 2020 - 03:59 AM

Basically what you are doing is bringing in a conglomerate in for each spell rather than for an item. So each spell conglomerate can be a new item, but requiring higher alchemy to mix together. (Seeing as to how there is already a "matter conglomerate" maybe we can FINALLY make that into something besides an item, and it would make sense to bring use with magic as magic items are created from serid)
Currently, the matter conglomerate requires, or recommends an alch level of 23, and 25 Matter ess, 80 Earth Ess, I wouldn't expect the spell congolmerates to match this. But since they are a convenience item- make them take maybe 1.25x the ings of a spell, and if it is a single ing- 2x. I would also rather see these spell congo's be a higher alch level - perhaps starting at 50, and capping at 80, making there some 'end game' alchemy items and bring more use to this skill being higher level and gives players a reason to do these. But perhaps these should require a certain nexus, I'd say magic 1 or 2. That way fighters have to sacrifice if they wish to make their own (myself included :P)

~Eats

#5 Learner

Learner

    God

  • Administrators
  • 2809 posts

Posted 20 March 2020 - 11:55 AM

This also means you'd have to carry Ess for each type of spell you want to cast, not a mix of Ess that may be usable for multiple spells. In my mind, having to decide how much EMU/slots you are willing to give up for your choice of spells is part of deciding who you are and how you play.

Inventory management has always been part of what you need to think about when you're playing. Hence having a limit on the number of slots as well as having to think about how much to put into increasing your EMU. Thats also why you have to give up the cape slot in order to wear a pack, so you trade off all cape effects in order to get more EMU with a risk of loss.

#6 Lunatique

Lunatique

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 7 posts
  • LocationPanama

Posted 20 March 2020 - 12:20 PM

I agree Learner, but for the casual squirt that merely needs to cast one or two spells periodically, it might make sense to have the choice to carry a few multi-ess instead of plain ess.  It would enable folks to decide how they wanna pack their bags for their trip.

#7 EatsAllLife

EatsAllLife

    Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPip
  • 465 posts

Posted 20 March 2020 - 01:24 PM

View PostLearner, on 20 March 2020 - 11:55 AM, said:

This also means you'd have to carry Ess for each type of spell you want to cast, not a mix of Ess that may be usable for multiple spells. In my mind, having to decide how much EMU/slots you are willing to give up for your choice of spells is part of deciding who you are and how you play.

Inventory management has always been part of what you need to think about when you're playing. Hence having a limit on the number of slots as well as having to think about how much to put into increasing your EMU. Thats also why you have to give up the cape slot in order to wear a pack, so you trade off all cape effects in order to get more EMU with a risk of loss.

View PostLunatique, on 20 March 2020 - 12:20 PM, said:

I agree Learner, but for the casual squirt that merely needs to cast one or two spells periodically, it might make sense to have the choice to carry a few multi-ess instead of plain ess.  It would enable folks to decide how they wanna pack their bags for their trip.

The tradeoff is that SR's already take 5 EMU. BR's take 1... Essies for later spells can take up  to 30 ess Also, when I have a full set up inventory as a fighter, I currently leave about 16 slots in, 15 if you don't include the gold, 14 if you don't include empty vials. Now 14 slots do not take long to fill in an invasion or regular training at all. Maybe an hour max training. Having these conglomerates, they could even weigh 1.5x of all the essence, and it is just making it easier. At some point or another these will obviously cost a bunch more, are only player made, and essentially the work to produce them also outweighs their benefit. As both ways are still useable. One is simply mashing the ings together.

The start of this was about conserving inventory space and EMU, but did you see that a single matter congo also weighs 30 EMU? (about 1/4 total ings) EMU is gonna be the biggest limiting factor here, just as it is now. NOT inv space.

I'm not sure why you wish everything to be so 'limited'. This will give no extra gain and will still take up the same EMU at least. You can't destroy mass, so it must be incorporated into it. Each ing takes 1 EMU, the congo will end up taking ings total for spells. So for the previous TTR example, the Congo for TTR would be 3 EMU. And really, inventory space only plays in for fighting roles, so the 'limited inventory space' I assume is more for limitations on spawns and not infinite training/harvesting, rather than playstyle. I feel that 'issue' shouldn't even play a factor. I've never once deemed my inventory slots- set up based on how I played. All builds have the same layout, and never fill using the regular ings- just takes up so much more spaces. Either way, with spell congo's people are more likely to carry moreav  spells to battle. Their inventory  will just have more variety. Currently I only ever carry Restore, and TTR ings. But with using the congo's, I could carry poison, LD, MD, and more for this and have more tactile play based opon just that. With could further enhance the ideas in place already, and help team work later.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users