UO Second Age

Before we begin any debate on this topic, I know this will be a heated topic, but nonetheless is not the trash talk thread so please do not attack/offend any players .

Patch notes:
- All Newbied and Blessed clothing has had it's durability restored. Going forward all noobie and blessed closthing will lose durability and be destroyed like any other clothing.
- All previously blessed clothing is grandfathered for now as non-destroyable.

I bring this up to the suggestions & era accuracy thread (as I see this is the most appropriate thread for this subject) to keep the subject up for debate about grandfathered blessed items. My reason is because the patch states the items are grandfathered for NOW, meaning there is still room for debate on the subject. So on with the debate...

As to inform the readers of this topic, I do have grandfathered blessed black sandals so I could hold a bias to keep them. For the sake of era accuracy and for the sake of all that is fair (considering I do not care for trammel goods or money in this game), I would vote against grandfathered blessed items being non-destroyable. For the sake of the large majority of the shard, we notice that a very minute amount of players currently hold grandfathered, non-destroyable items (for the sake of not attacking anybody, I will keep names out of this post).

I do expect a rebuttal from owners of grandfathered, blessed items; but please do not defend because you possess the items. Defend the items because you truly believe that a minuscule percentage of players should own items that no other play will have the privilege of owning.

I dont think we should favor the 2% that bitched moaned and complained about this. Thats Favoritism...

"Keep it Era Accurate" isn't that what the shard is about?

I'm anti changing properties of existing items. Let the old items be.

Paradox wrote:I dont think we should favor the 2% that bitched moaned and complained about this. Thats Favoritism...

"Keep it Era Accurate" isn't that what the shard is about?

Please refrain from trash talking in this thread.

Facts:
Derrick told the players who bought CBDs they wouldn't break.
They broke on OSI.
The silver system is an inaccurate policy.
The CBDs introduced on Christmas and the CBDs introduced from the silver system are the same exact item.
CBDs are no longer available from the silver system.

Opinions:
All clothing should break. The only argument against is that Derrick told players their items wouldn't break. I'm sure at the time he meant it. However, there is no way to differentiate clothing blessed with silver systems CBDs and Christmas CBDs. The era accurate mechanic is that CBDs were introduced on Christmas on OSI and clothes blessed with them were breakable. Grandfathering these items does nothing but cater to the few trammelites who have silver blessed items and inaccurately make unbreakable items that were blessed with Christmas CBDs before the patch. Personally, I'd prefer to see a few feelings get hurt than inaccurate items ingame.

I am confused at how (supposedly) staff has told people specifically that "blessed items will be unbreakable forever". I was also told by staff that a clothing bless deed makes an article of clothing blessed. By extension, it would be logical to assume that using a bless deed on an item makes the item unbreakable, and we already established that this characteristic would be positive for futurity.

Since that logic (staff told me x) is valid for the grandfathering of certain said items, why is the same logic not valid for the clothing bless deed itself? I could say that "staff told me that bless deeds bless items, and that blessed items will never break", yet this most recent patch goes against the words of the uosa staff specifically by failing to grandfather in the clothing bless deeds themselves.

While I do completely respect any decisions made by the staff, and fully appreciate the privilege of playing on this server that has been extended to all of us, I cannot overlook what I feel is the non-logic in this decision. Either each of the deeds should be grandfathered to extend the magically-unbreakable characteristic to all items, or all of the deeds (and items) should have been allowed breakable. Furthermore, I am curious why all previously newbiefied clothing has not been extended this unbreakable honor as well.

Since the goal of the server is era-accuracy, I would assume that the broad-range grandfathering of all existing blessed and newbie items, and the grandfathering of all clothing bless deeds would work against the mission statement of the shard at large. I don't find "staff told me X" as any indication that a function that would last indefinitely given the variable nature of UO in whole, and the constant patches that we encounter.

On the subject of grandfathering, I am curious why this given situation is any different than situations in the past. An example I have used in the past (that still holds), is that I have several katanas from a time when the katana was the fastest weapon. I was told that the katana was the fastest weapon (I can reference this at request), yet a patch corrected not only newly created/looted/crafted katanas, but my older editions as well. I don't find the severity or costliness of items to be a weighing factor in the decision to (or to not) grandfather. If katanas were not grandfathered before, I would have expected these items to be no different.

Recall that back in patch 133 we were told that "The effect of durability on weapon damage output is now as per OSI, and is substantially increased for weapons in full repair". Since this was changed at this most recent patch, should weapons from yesterday not also be grandfathered?

Before I am met with defamatory criticism, I do own dozens of blessed items, and I don't think that my distaste for a certain style of item (masks etc) has any further weight in this discussion. I would also like to add that, despite this one particular note in the series, I am greatly happy with the rest of the patches that were applied today and feel that it is a great leap towards a more accurate UOSA.

could you make this a poll?

personally i would prefer ALL blessed items breakable, however derrick does say they're grandfathered 'for now' which implies it may change.

marmalade wrote:could you make this a poll?

personally i would prefer ALL blessed items breakable, however derrick does say they're grandfathered 'for now' which implies it may change.

The only reason I've opened up the debate is because Derrick stated 'for now,' assuming that he meant to leave it open for debate.

Matron said pretty much what I was going to say. The staff said something that unfortunately, was wrong. They believed that blessed items would not break. That's why the server was built that way. However, after further investigation, it was found that blessed items did indeed break. That mechanic should be changed. It happens. There have been many things that have been changed. Some twice (chaos can't kill chaos, then they can, now they can't again). Grandfathering something simply because the staff was incorrect about a mechanic is a bad policy to adopt. As stated, where does it end? With blessed items? With katanas? Should vendor deeds purchased prior to this patch be grandfathered and weigh less? etc, etc. If it's inaccurate, it needs to change.

The spirit of UO is to leave f-up's in game in a way that lets them not ruin it. Leaving the blessed items as-is doesn't hurt anyone.

Panthor the Hated wrote:The spirit of UO is to leave f-up's in game in a way that lets them not ruin it. Leaving the blessed items as-is doesn't hurt anyone.

The bigger spirit of UO is that the items you own are in danger of being taken from you.

A poll would be nice.

Decision is consistent with every other decision regarding the grandfathering of items in the past.
You can probably rely and trust that decisions regarding grandfathering will remain consistent going forward.

edit: decision is consistent with every custom item in the shards history.

BlackFoot wrote:Decision is consistent with every other decision regarding the grandfathering of items in the past.
You can probably rely and trust that decisions regarding grandfathering will remain consistent going forward.

That does not hold true with the things I outlined in my above post (among many many other things).

MatronDeWinter wrote:

BlackFoot wrote:Decision is consistent with every other decision regarding the grandfathering of items in the past.
You can probably rely and trust that decisions regarding grandfathering will remain consistent going forward.

That does not hold true with the things I outlined in my above post (among many many other things).

Its not reasonable to expect they would.