Blessed Items should break from damage [reposted]

[Hicha]

95% of people who can afford it will not pay that much money for a wearable that they're not going to wear, or that they have to take off every time theres a chance they're gonna get melee'd..

People who can afford it already pay a ton of money for crap they can't/don't use; this includes statues/rares/serverbirths which sit in their bank box, or castles and keeps that are empty because, well, they can spend money on dumb crap like that.

Era-accuracy > 4 people complaining

[yossarian]

^^ +1

[MatronDeWinter]

How much an item cost, who can afford it, who currently has one/some, and where those items were obtained have nothing to do with this.

Blessed items should break.

Yes, that's a bold-underlined period.

[BlackFoot]

so this is about 5 pages and i diddnt read it all so sorry if i say things alreayd said

What do you mean Blackfoot?

There were 'Bless Deeds' and 'Clothing Bless Deeds' back in the day.

what i meant to say by 'they arent the same item' as they were on osi is we have confused to name of the prize from the beginning and its causing confusion. We need to change the name of the trophy turn in prize to somthing else.

- the prize we get as a trophy reward here does not contain the same properties as a clothing bless deed did on osi. When I or anyone else turned in for this prize it was on the ackowledgment and understanding that the item that this prize was used on will never break and it will stay on your body when you die. This is clearly not how 'clothing bless deeds' work on osi. The only thing similiar with this prize and the item on osi was the name. It doesnt have the same properties and it isnt squired the same way.

How many times have people about to trade in for a bless prize asked 'Will this item break eventually' before they traded in for it? Changing peoples prizes from one thing to a completely different item down the road isnt fair to them. People turned in for unbreakable clothing items that dont fall on their corpse.

If you want to remove particular prizes from the trophy turn in list, or switch them with different prizes it needs its own thread but retroactively changing peoples prizes down the road to somthing they didnt turn their trophys in for isnt right.

- introducing real era accurate ' clothing bless deeds' as they were on osi should be done the same way as it was done on osi seperate from these trophy reward deeds which are not the same item. It should have its own thread titled - introducing clothing bless deeds. These deeds should not create indestructible items.

Speaking for myself I have 4 or 5 items I have used the trophy turn in prize on. I knew on osi clothing bless deeds items broke. I made sure that the items I used this prize on would not break down the road and I was assured they wouldnt ever break. I didnt turn in for an osi clothing bless deed. I turned in for a UOSA custom trophy turn in prize that happened to share a name with an osi item.

[Faust]

Did these people get an item called 'a clothing bless deed'?

To be honest the item doesn't really matter... the game mechanic isn't tied to this item directly. The deed or item simply modified a bless property to true or false. The only thing that would be tweaked would be that mechanic and not the clothing/bless deed itself. However, just because someone said blessed items didn't break at one point shouldn't really be of concern here.

The only solution that seems logical here would be to add a pre-patch option to return the item bless tag for the same amount of silver that it's worth for those that do not want the property anymore. This way you won't be having gimped items that last forever and ever that should be destroyable in the first place lying around but not screw those in the situation you described Blackfoot.

Solution solved.

[MatronDeWinter]

That seems the most reasonable of all the solutions so far, faust.

I don't agree that they are different items, and I highly doubt that staff ever said "these [blessed] items will never be breakable". I can believe that they answered no, when asked "do blessed items break", because at the time they did not. Though they should.

Realistically I see no reason to refund silver, grandfather in, or create an entirely new breakable clothing bless deed. Nor do I think this is a valid reason to start distributing them more widely than they already are. Particularly grandfathering, and creating a new item type, they only create further inaccuracies in the game.

The deeds are not era accurate, it would be a simple fix, it's not unfair, I don't see the problem. There have been MANY changes that decrease the value/use of things without a special grandfathering for individuals. Why should this be any different? Because a few "veterans" of the shard are interested in it?

[BlackFoot]

We were told in fact when trading in for this prize that the item would never be able to break.

It is pretty obvious to me that the items are completely different despite having the same name.
The properties of the item should determine what it is, not what it looks like or what it is called.

Not many people would consider a ring of teleportation to be the 'same item' as a normal non magic ring.
They look the same sure.. but have completely differnet properties.

The prize as we got them, when we got them, were understood to not have the same properties as osi's clothing bless deeds. As such would have been a custom prize to the turn in system.

If you did a one time reprieve of all people this would be blindsiding you would have to include every hued mask/item affected by this. I would think 90% of people getting a cbd in the last years were doing so to hue a custom item. A custom item they would not have bothered to get knowing it wasnt a permanent addition to their avatar.

[Kaivan]

Having discussed this with Derrick last night, this is the reason why blessed clothing has operated in this fashion up until now:

Under the RunUO default system, clothing was not designed to give AR or take damage. As a result, blessed items acquired at that time could not be destroyed. Once clothing AR was introduced into the system, a special provision was allowed for any blessed clothing that would allow it's AR to drop to zero while preventing the item from being destroyed to preserve the items acquired before this change. This was to protect items acquired before the change in the system from being destroyed.

Essentially, what we have is an inaccurate system compounded on an inaccurate system starting with the default RunUO system. However, despite this, we do need to make a change to the mechanics (and the way that clothing bless deeds operate is very much a mechanic) in order to make blessed items break. Also, we have also been discussing, in house, a reasonable method of compensation for those who have acquired blessed items over the last 2+ years, but we have not made any significant decisions as of yet.

[MatronDeWinter]

Keep in mind that the majority of all clothing bless deeds likely came from CUB. Do these still apply.

[Teknix]

i agree with the idea that people would not have pursued fancy masks/sandals/sashes if the deed didn't work in the way we were told. when i used mine, i asked if the item (i.e. my sandals) would break. answer was no, durability would go to zero and the item would never break.

[Hicha]

when i used mine, i asked if the item (i.e. my sandals) would break. answer was no, durability would go to zero and the item would never break.

Derrick told you this, or some random person in IRC?

[Ardos]

It is absolutely true that blessed items broke during this era. I remember more than once breaking someones blessed sandles with my macer. However the system here to receive bless deeds is not era accurate. To say blessed items should break here is understandable, but if you implement that then you must remove the entire silver system so that no one can obtain items from a system that is not era accurate. Either you keep the system and the rewards which control the economy making blessed items have no damage, because they are the most sought, or you remove the entire system and reward no monies or further items making silver a useless item. So either the current system stays and blessed items remain at 0 durability or the entire system goes and players are not allowed to do anything with their silver the date that patch is released. Either that or if blessed items were made breakable the existing ones should be grandfathered. I was told by Derrick when I blessed my sandles that they would not be breakable.

[Ardos]

[quote="MatronDeWinter"]If the server is moving towards the direction of total era-accuracy (well, close to), and we all know that blessed items broke in t2a, then this should have been expected.

I don't think the staff would ever say "clothing blessed will never be breakable", it was probably more along the lines of "[currently] clothing blessed items will not break".

I have a vested interest in this as well (as owner of blessed clothing), but I don't think it's fair to grant veteren players special items (in a sense). I don't think they should be grandfathered at all. A patch changed the other day introducing a bug allowing a player to get into my otherwise secure castle-courtyard (no not by teleporting off a tower), some of us spent a great deal of time/effort making thief characters only to find stealth-snoop nerfed, and many people owned expensive 10 charge black dye tubs prior to the distribution of infinite-charge tubs. Why should this really be any different??

It shouldn't.

quote]

I was told when I blessed one of my items that it would not ever break by Derrick. Things constantly change that give veteran players an advantage. It happens all the time in UO. Examples include unique rares being released early on, the clean up of Britian system, items not decaying in castle courtyards that were placed before the patch, etc. I was told that my item would not break and I made an investment of several million gold because of this.

[Ardos]

I think it would be nonsensical to "grandfather" unbreakable blessed items when in reality there is nothing to grandfather. It's not like they have some sort of property on them called "unbreakable" and the change is going to be to stop spawning "unbreakable" items.

What you have are "blessed" items. Blessed items have certain characteristics, the unbreakable characteristic was never supposed to be a part of blessing and should be fixed. So then you want derrick to specifically code in some new feature, (unbreakable), and apply it to all currently blessed items just as a special privilege to some people? As has already been pointed out that would be like coding in two separate systems for skills and allowing pre-patch characters to operate under a different ruleset for their skills.

Grandfathering is already taken way too far on this shard. On OSI when they turned on decay in houses they just went ahead and turned it on, they didn't make it so things won't decay until they are moved like Derrick did here.


The one thing that unfortunately is hard to replicate is the strictness of OSI staff. If this were my shard I would be deleting all the items people acquired through bugs, like sandals hued dye tub colours. I would also be handing out bans for people who wear or possess items acquired through exploits.

All that has to happen is that the blessed deeds handed out from this point forward make blessed items that are breakable and the ones prior maintain their 0 durability. Just as castles with shit in their courtyard before the patch have shit in them now. But if u place something in a courtyard now it decays.

[Sandro]

All that has to happen is that the blessed deeds handed out from this point forward make blessed items that are breakable and the ones prior maintain their 0 durability. Just as castles with shit in their courtyard before the patch have shit in them now. But if u place something in a courtyard now it decays.

qft