So, I'm just curious now... will enchantments be usable on forged weapons? And, is it possible that we might get the option to leave our mark on the weapon, the way a forger might? Since we are etching/inscribing things onto the metal, would it be possible that, once we've etched the sigils/runes, but before mending, we could add our personal/magical mark to it?
After all, the weapon will now be carrying our magical essence - seems only fitting that our essence might be recognizable by another MU, the way they can recognize our familiars and such. Though, the ability to leave a visual mark, in addition to just having an MU focus on it and get the impression that the enchanter must have been <whomever>, would be rather nice. I mean.. I might never have the skill required to forge a weapon that outclasses a barbarian forged weapon, something worthy of having a mark and getting name recognition. But, becoming a highly skilled enchanter ought to get a similar sort of marking ability, shouldn't it?
Well, anywho, just a thought.
FCB205
WEILM
Re: Questions
09/23/2004 12:51 AM CDT
>>So, I'm just curious now... will enchantments be usable on forged weapons?
Yes, but non-damage enhancing enchantments will probably be a better thign to put on a good forged weapon rather than a damage enhancement which wouldn't add much, if at all, to the capability of the weapon. There are supposed to be global caps in place on how high the damage cap for a weapon is, and one near the cap just won't get much, if any, benefit from an enhancement at that point. Then again, there is no reason one shouldn't be able to get it to provide a ranged attack, or shed light, or some such...
>>And, is it possible that we might get the option to leave our mark on the weapon, the way a forger might? Since we are etching/inscribing things onto the metal, would it be possible that, once we've etched the sigils/runes, but before mending, we could add our personal/magical mark to it?
This idea was brought up at the seminar, but no real concrete ideas were proposed, since the Mend spell was supposed to return the weapon to pristine, which would also wipe out anything besides the magical "residue" from the etching process.
~Kyn (Kynevon)
Kynevon's DR Links Page: http://kynevon.info/index.html
Mac OS X FE: http://www.play.net/software/warlock-info.asp
Amagaim's What to Hunt list: http://kynevon.info/What2Hunt.xls
Yes, but non-damage enhancing enchantments will probably be a better thign to put on a good forged weapon rather than a damage enhancement which wouldn't add much, if at all, to the capability of the weapon. There are supposed to be global caps in place on how high the damage cap for a weapon is, and one near the cap just won't get much, if any, benefit from an enhancement at that point. Then again, there is no reason one shouldn't be able to get it to provide a ranged attack, or shed light, or some such...
>>And, is it possible that we might get the option to leave our mark on the weapon, the way a forger might? Since we are etching/inscribing things onto the metal, would it be possible that, once we've etched the sigils/runes, but before mending, we could add our personal/magical mark to it?
This idea was brought up at the seminar, but no real concrete ideas were proposed, since the Mend spell was supposed to return the weapon to pristine, which would also wipe out anything besides the magical "residue" from the etching process.
~Kyn (Kynevon)
Kynevon's DR Links Page: http://kynevon.info/index.html
Mac OS X FE: http://www.play.net/software/warlock-info.asp
Amagaim's What to Hunt list: http://kynevon.info/What2Hunt.xls
FCB205
Re: Questions
09/27/2004 07:21 PM CDT
Thanks for the response...
>>which would also wipe out anything besides the magical "residue" from the etching process
Uh oh, does that mean that the original forger's mark would also be removed? And, how can Mend do that? Wouldn't it remove the sigils as well, if it's completely wiping the blade of any other marking on it? I had thought the forger's mark was something left on the appearance of the weapon, not the state of repair. One would imagine the sigils will also be visible in the appearance of the weapon, even after Mend has brought its state of repair back to pristine. Therefore, could not the enchanter's mark be part of the appearance, same as any forger's mark?
>>which would also wipe out anything besides the magical "residue" from the etching process
Uh oh, does that mean that the original forger's mark would also be removed? And, how can Mend do that? Wouldn't it remove the sigils as well, if it's completely wiping the blade of any other marking on it? I had thought the forger's mark was something left on the appearance of the weapon, not the state of repair. One would imagine the sigils will also be visible in the appearance of the weapon, even after Mend has brought its state of repair back to pristine. Therefore, could not the enchanter's mark be part of the appearance, same as any forger's mark?
WEILM
Re: Questions (long response, partly off-topic)
09/27/2004 08:25 PM CDT
>>Uh oh, does that mean that the original forger's mark would also be removed?
No, the Maker's Mark is a separate object from the actual weapon itself, from what I understand.
>>And, how can Mend do that? Wouldn't it remove the sigils as well, if it's completely wiping the blade of any other marking on it?
Mend removes the physical damage caused by etching, including the physical markings caused by the etching. At least, that is what I gathered from how Valdrik explained it during the seminar. However, it doesn't affect the actual spell matrix now imbued in the weapon. Actually, if I understood Valdrik's comments on Mend, it would, in the sense of how long the enchantment would last.
The better the Mend spell works, up to the limit of complete repair in a single cast, the longer the enchantment will last on the weapon. In other words, if you can barely cast a minimum mana Mend, your enchantment isn't going to last very long. On the other hand, Valdrik mentioned the possibility of permanent enchantments, which would probably have at least something to do with a complete repair in a single cast of Mend.
>>I had thought the forger's mark was something left on the appearance of the weapon, not the state of repair.
Mend, just like repairing the weapon, shouldn't affect things like the Maker's Mark.
>>One would imagine the sigils will also be visible in the appearance of the weapon, even after Mend has brought its state of repair back to pristine.
No, as the Mend spell repairs the physical state of the weapon, removing the damage caused by etching. Unfortunately, from the seminar, it sounded like the sigils and runes would be invisible after the weapon was repaired.
It would also reduce the chance of having a formerly-enchanted weapon going around still being sold at enchanted weapon prices.
It also would reduce the difficulties involved in re-enchanting a weapon after the previous enchantment wears off/gets used up.
>>Therefore, could not the enchanter's mark be part of the appearance, same as any forger's mark?
We asked for it, it makes some sense, and it would help reduce the ability of scam artists to take advantage of the non-magically aware out there by selling fake "enchanted" weapons.
Of course, if they were really going to be like Maker's Marks, most of the Warrior Mage population able to enchant still wouldn't be able to include them, since Maker's Marks are a "special" rather than standard part of the forging system.
IMO, limiting Maker's Marks actually hurts forging in general, as it makes people tend to only want to buy equipment with a Maker's Mark, even though there are almost certainly forgers out there able to make equipment just as good as the "Marked" forgers.
Especially since the GM behind Charlie is no longer active, and no new Maker's Marks have been given out in some time.
Then again, I would prefer a different system of having a piece of forged equipment marked, and that would entail using two slots for the marking, or maybe just a more ornate marking, as the mark would include both a unique portion to represent the actual forger, and another, more generic symbol to represent the craftsmanship level of the product (which could be different for different items made by the same smith).
"Oh, yes, according to the markings on this sword, it was forged by Kynevon while he was still an apprentice in this type of weapon." or "Oh, yes, this weapon was forged by Magdar as a grandmaster smith."
It would reduce the level of scamming by a significant amount, and the actual craftsmanship level would be determined by the actual product itself, which would obviate the problems caused by someone with a Maker's Mark using it on someone else's finished product...
My apologies for the digression...
~Kyn (Kynevon)
Kynevon's DR Links Page: http://kynevon.info/index.html
Mac OS X FE: http://www.play.net/software/warlock-info.asp
Amagaim's What to Hunt list: http://kynevon.info/What2Hunt.xls
No, the Maker's Mark is a separate object from the actual weapon itself, from what I understand.
>>And, how can Mend do that? Wouldn't it remove the sigils as well, if it's completely wiping the blade of any other marking on it?
Mend removes the physical damage caused by etching, including the physical markings caused by the etching. At least, that is what I gathered from how Valdrik explained it during the seminar. However, it doesn't affect the actual spell matrix now imbued in the weapon. Actually, if I understood Valdrik's comments on Mend, it would, in the sense of how long the enchantment would last.
The better the Mend spell works, up to the limit of complete repair in a single cast, the longer the enchantment will last on the weapon. In other words, if you can barely cast a minimum mana Mend, your enchantment isn't going to last very long. On the other hand, Valdrik mentioned the possibility of permanent enchantments, which would probably have at least something to do with a complete repair in a single cast of Mend.
>>I had thought the forger's mark was something left on the appearance of the weapon, not the state of repair.
Mend, just like repairing the weapon, shouldn't affect things like the Maker's Mark.
>>One would imagine the sigils will also be visible in the appearance of the weapon, even after Mend has brought its state of repair back to pristine.
No, as the Mend spell repairs the physical state of the weapon, removing the damage caused by etching. Unfortunately, from the seminar, it sounded like the sigils and runes would be invisible after the weapon was repaired.
It would also reduce the chance of having a formerly-enchanted weapon going around still being sold at enchanted weapon prices.
It also would reduce the difficulties involved in re-enchanting a weapon after the previous enchantment wears off/gets used up.
>>Therefore, could not the enchanter's mark be part of the appearance, same as any forger's mark?
We asked for it, it makes some sense, and it would help reduce the ability of scam artists to take advantage of the non-magically aware out there by selling fake "enchanted" weapons.
Of course, if they were really going to be like Maker's Marks, most of the Warrior Mage population able to enchant still wouldn't be able to include them, since Maker's Marks are a "special" rather than standard part of the forging system.
IMO, limiting Maker's Marks actually hurts forging in general, as it makes people tend to only want to buy equipment with a Maker's Mark, even though there are almost certainly forgers out there able to make equipment just as good as the "Marked" forgers.
Especially since the GM behind Charlie is no longer active, and no new Maker's Marks have been given out in some time.
Then again, I would prefer a different system of having a piece of forged equipment marked, and that would entail using two slots for the marking, or maybe just a more ornate marking, as the mark would include both a unique portion to represent the actual forger, and another, more generic symbol to represent the craftsmanship level of the product (which could be different for different items made by the same smith).
"Oh, yes, according to the markings on this sword, it was forged by Kynevon while he was still an apprentice in this type of weapon." or "Oh, yes, this weapon was forged by Magdar as a grandmaster smith."
It would reduce the level of scamming by a significant amount, and the actual craftsmanship level would be determined by the actual product itself, which would obviate the problems caused by someone with a Maker's Mark using it on someone else's finished product...
My apologies for the digression...
~Kyn (Kynevon)
Kynevon's DR Links Page: http://kynevon.info/index.html
Mac OS X FE: http://www.play.net/software/warlock-info.asp
Amagaim's What to Hunt list: http://kynevon.info/What2Hunt.xls
ORRJ
Re: Questions (long response, partly off-topic)
09/27/2004 10:04 PM CDT
You'd have to have a different system than maker's marks unless you want to have to forged the item yourself recently, or perhaps have someone forge it right then for you. I know it has to have been recently finished to put the makers mark on the item thats one of the requirements, I dunnoe if you have to have finished it yourself or anyone could, I think anyone could though.
However I think it would be really great if there were unique enchantments that could only be applied during the forging process.
~Worrclan, Dwarf of the Realms-
Forger of almost heavy slice HEs.
However I think it would be really great if there were unique enchantments that could only be applied during the forging process.
~Worrclan, Dwarf of the Realms-
Forger of almost heavy slice HEs.
KULUM
Re: Questions (long response, partly off-topic)
09/28/2004 12:36 AM CDT
As far as I know, makers mark goes on before you put a hilt/shaft on a weapon.
Sylme, the brutal Gnome.
Sylme, the brutal Gnome.
FCB205
Re: Questions (long response, partly off-topic)
09/28/2004 03:26 PM CDT
>>"Oh, yes, according to the markings on this sword, it was forged by Kynevon while he was still an apprentice in this type of weapon." or "Oh, yes, this weapon was forged by Magdar as a grandmaster smith."
Excellent suggestion - someone flag down the GM in charge of this so we can have this implemented? I, for one, vote in favor of that sort of marking system.. and I really wish this Charlie person would come back and create some more markers since.. I dunno, diversity is the spice of life and we need more diverse looking weapons out there. :D
Back on topic, though.. I definitely feel that enchanters should be able to mark their own work. Perhaps the mark should fade as soon as the enchantment wears off, or if another enchanter comes after and does a new enchantment on the weapon, so that all that remains on the weapon is the mark of the person who's done the most current or currently effective enchantment.
I think in a past post, someone stated that one of the reasons Valdrik was making some enchantments temporary was to encourage repeat customers. Word of mouth is all fine and good, but I think a marked weapon would speak for itself. If the purchaser can tell by using it that the enchantment is a strong one and/or lasts long, then he's more inclined to return to the same maker. And, I dunno about you guys, but most people don't always remember every singler trader they buy from, or forger, or know where something came from so... it's the surest way to make sure the buyer and the maker will be able to continue to do business.
It sure would be nice to hear Valdrik's take on all this, now that we've been discussing it on the board for a bit. *hint hint*
Excellent suggestion - someone flag down the GM in charge of this so we can have this implemented? I, for one, vote in favor of that sort of marking system.. and I really wish this Charlie person would come back and create some more markers since.. I dunno, diversity is the spice of life and we need more diverse looking weapons out there. :D
Back on topic, though.. I definitely feel that enchanters should be able to mark their own work. Perhaps the mark should fade as soon as the enchantment wears off, or if another enchanter comes after and does a new enchantment on the weapon, so that all that remains on the weapon is the mark of the person who's done the most current or currently effective enchantment.
I think in a past post, someone stated that one of the reasons Valdrik was making some enchantments temporary was to encourage repeat customers. Word of mouth is all fine and good, but I think a marked weapon would speak for itself. If the purchaser can tell by using it that the enchantment is a strong one and/or lasts long, then he's more inclined to return to the same maker. And, I dunno about you guys, but most people don't always remember every singler trader they buy from, or forger, or know where something came from so... it's the surest way to make sure the buyer and the maker will be able to continue to do business.
It sure would be nice to hear Valdrik's take on all this, now that we've been discussing it on the board for a bit. *hint hint*
WEILM
Re: Questions (long response, partly off-topic)
09/28/2004 04:46 PM CDT
>>>>"Oh, yes, according to the markings on this sword, it was forged by Kynevon while he was still an apprentice in this type of weapon." or "Oh, yes, this weapon was forged by Magdar as a grandmaster smith."
>>Excellent suggestion - someone flag down the GM in charge of this so we can have this implemented? I, for one, vote in favor of that sort of marking system.. and I really wish this Charlie person would come back and create some more markers since.. I dunno, diversity is the spice of life and we need more diverse looking weapons out there. :D
Thanks. :) The main problem is that, IIRC, Charlie was being run by our dearly beloved, but now retired, Maelona. :(
~Kyn (Kynevon)
Kynevon's DR Links Page: http://kynevon.info/index.html
Mac OS X FE: http://www.play.net/software/warlock-info.asp
Amagaim's What to Hunt list: http://kynevon.info/What2Hunt.xls
>>Excellent suggestion - someone flag down the GM in charge of this so we can have this implemented? I, for one, vote in favor of that sort of marking system.. and I really wish this Charlie person would come back and create some more markers since.. I dunno, diversity is the spice of life and we need more diverse looking weapons out there. :D
Thanks. :) The main problem is that, IIRC, Charlie was being run by our dearly beloved, but now retired, Maelona. :(
~Kyn (Kynevon)
Kynevon's DR Links Page: http://kynevon.info/index.html
Mac OS X FE: http://www.play.net/software/warlock-info.asp
Amagaim's What to Hunt list: http://kynevon.info/What2Hunt.xls
STEVEH999
Re: Questions (long response, partly off-topic)
09/29/2004 01:35 AM CDT
>>now retired, Maelona
Say what? When'd I miss this? Doh!
Say what? When'd I miss this? Doh!
WEILM
Re: Questions (long response, partly off-topic)
09/29/2004 02:52 AM CDT
>>>>now retired, Maelona
>>Say what? When'd I miss this? Doh!
Well, she missed VegasCon, and then didn't show up for SimuCon, and Solomon anounced that she had decided to leave outright instead of just going on a "leave of absence". Or maybe my memory is bad, and Maelona showed up to announce her leave-taking herself, instead of just going on an extended absence.
Complicate that by Rigby having time issues due to starting his own business (painting custom minis, IIRC) and therefore concentrating his DR GM time to Necro development, and that answers why Team Magic is being run by Valdrik, and why Valdrik is also acting SGM for magic. And several other groups have the same kind of thing going on, several GMs acting as SGM in their area of responsibility, but all still beig overseen by Solomon.
~Kyn (Kynevon)
Kynevon's DR Links Page: http://kynevon.info/index.html
Mac OS X FE: http://www.play.net/software/warlock-info.asp
Amagaim's What to Hunt list: http://kynevon.info/What2Hunt.xls
>>Say what? When'd I miss this? Doh!
Well, she missed VegasCon, and then didn't show up for SimuCon, and Solomon anounced that she had decided to leave outright instead of just going on a "leave of absence". Or maybe my memory is bad, and Maelona showed up to announce her leave-taking herself, instead of just going on an extended absence.
Complicate that by Rigby having time issues due to starting his own business (painting custom minis, IIRC) and therefore concentrating his DR GM time to Necro development, and that answers why Team Magic is being run by Valdrik, and why Valdrik is also acting SGM for magic. And several other groups have the same kind of thing going on, several GMs acting as SGM in their area of responsibility, but all still beig overseen by Solomon.
~Kyn (Kynevon)
Kynevon's DR Links Page: http://kynevon.info/index.html
Mac OS X FE: http://www.play.net/software/warlock-info.asp
Amagaim's What to Hunt list: http://kynevon.info/What2Hunt.xls
KULUM
Re: Questions (long response, partly off-topic)
09/30/2004 12:05 AM CDT
Didn't Maelona post about resigning in the Talk to simu, gm announcments folder about 4-6 months ago? Lots of folks were really sad about it, myself included.
Sylme, the brutal Gnome.
Sylme, the brutal Gnome.
MARGASH
Re: Questions (long response, partly off-topic)
09/30/2004 01:34 AM CDT
yes, she made offical resignation post
A Player named Tessaa
A Player named Tessaa
