The smashing of things

[perfecto]

Just occured to me that alot of the jewelry in the game is quite delicate and seems easily broken.

Then wouldn't it make sense that if you wounded me on the hand that some of my rings might shatter?

I'm not sure how much trouble this would be to implement, and I'm sure it would upset people more than anything that their precious things just got smashed... but wouldn't it be more realistic?

[BlackMagic0]

+1

I want this.

Would stop people from going to hunt, or war, with a ton of jewelry on.

I mean if its UNDER armored gloves, sure, maybe not.

Though you got bare hands those rings should shattered.

If you got something about the throat, it can be RP'd as under the collar and protected.

Just a lot of things gotta think on.

[Chettaman]

One ring to rule them all...

[Cutthroat]

It makes sense. Items on the locations you can get hit in during combat break, so it is possible, but I don't think the game recognizes that things worn on fingers are also on the hands, that things on the face/ears are still on the head, etc. You'd have to link body parts together and account for protection over pretty things.

[Kalai]

*reflectively* We were always supposed to remove earrings for soccer so we didn't get our ears torn open, but that sounds like a bit random of a thing to codedly implement.

[Ashes]

This is something players could do without staff coding it in.

The massive, scar-etched half-giant brutally bludgeons you on the hand.

[fight ends]

You remove a glowing ring of green schwartz.

Cursing as he notices the crumpled mess, you junk a ring of green schwartz.

[Qzzrbl]

This is something players could do without staff coding it in.

The massive, scar-etched half-giant brutally bludgeons you on the hand.

[fight ends]

You remove a glowing ring of green schwartz.

Cursing as he notices the crumpled mess, you junk a ring of green schwartz.

As far as realism goes, this would be one of those things that would need to be coded.....

Because no matter how many blows to their unguarded hands, nobody will ever junk a 1000 'sid ring.

Ever.

[Yam]

I don't think this is something that needs to be coded. Weapons shattering is already fruststrating/stupid enough.

[Qzzrbl]

It would certainly give more people who wear rings more incentive to wear gloves-- rather than avoid giving their opponents a boost to disarm. x]

[original]

This is something players could do without staff coding it in.

The massive, scar-etched half-giant brutally bludgeons you on the hand.

[fight ends]

You remove a glowing ring of green schwartz.

Cursing as he notices the crumpled mess, you junk a ring of green schwartz.

You haven't played with me
I junk characters if it's damn funny.
As far as realism goes, this would be one of those things that would need to be coded.....

Because no matter how many blows to their unguarded hands, nobody will ever junk a 1000 'sid ring.

Ever.

[Saellyn]

I would so junk that 1,000 sid ring if somebody got an exceptionally harsh bludgeon to my hand!

(Rave about being a better player while there is still a very expensive bracelet on his wrist after a Mek viciously stomps it)

[BlackMagic0]

I just wanna stop seeing people go to war, hunt, or fight some threat with a ton of jewelry on.
I mean like the fragile noble priced jewelry on every single wear location, few pieces sure, though every wear loc with 10k shit?!
And coding this would stop that.

Always made me go....   ....

[Saellyn]

Some day, some noble will get attempt-ganked, escape by the skin of his teeth, look down and say "WTF MY 100K METAL UBERBRACELET BROKE OMG WISH ALL MY 100k METAL UBERBRACELET BROKE OMG!!!"

Staff:  We added code.

[BlackMagic0]

Some day, some noble will get attempt-ganked, escape by the skin of his teeth, look down and say "WTF MY 100K METAL UBERBRACELET BROKE OMG WISH ALL MY 100k METAL UBERBRACELET BROKE OMG!!!"

Staff:  We added code.

Metal wouldn't break.

I also do not really see this being implemented at all. Just does not seem worth coding.
For little to no repay value for the coding effect.

Just leave it up to the players that want their shit smashed, to junk after a fight.
Or others to stop wearing jewelry hunting/warring.

Eh.. Just my thought thinking coding all this..

edit for gdb friendly-ness

[Sephiroto]

I'd love to see items break even more than they do now, with a few exceptions.  This would stimulate the economy and might help to prevent PC's from amassing so much wealth.  Currently there is a lack of expendature to repair clothing/tools/weapons/armor/jewelry because they hardly wear down or break unless under the most extreme conditions.  Weapons should definitely break more often, but I believe the code that works it should be rebalanced. 

Weapons breaking while parrying strong attacks = okay and could stand to happen a little more than current.  Bonus to save breakage with high parry skill = good.  Breaking while clubbing/slashing/hacking/piercing hardened targets = doesn't seem to happen enough.  I'd like to see more of this.  Currently weapons, particularly piercing weapons, seem to break too often even against unarmored NPC's.  I find this strange.  Usually the harder you hit a soft target, the less damage there is to the implement of destruction.

[BlackMagic0]

I think I would rather see items get damaged more often.

Weapons get chipped and start to get battered - add a weapon repair craft so people can repair these, coin for indie merchants with it! Give to weapon smith subguild at lower cap then merchant!
Make armor get beat up, and damaged far more often though not destroyed out right - start market for armor repairs then too, through salarri or that indie merchant guy.

[Thunkkin]

I wish weapon damage was more incremental except in the most extreme of cases.  It would be nice if, say, a sword got damaged and needed repairs to be as effective (and was also one step closer to completely breaking).  But it's always a bit sad when a weapon seems to vaporize and just vanishes from your inventory/equipment.

[Saellyn]

Metal breaks all the time, n00b, especially if it's a bracelet and you hit it hard. Metal 'does' crack, it 'does' break. Nice try, though.

[Sephiroto]

Metal breaks all the time, n00b, especially if it's a bracelet and you hit it hard. Metal 'does' crack, it 'does' break. Nice try, though.

Except for the more malleable metals, like gold and silver.  Then they bend or deform instead.  I'm not sure if that was an attempt at a troll or what, but please be more thoughtful about your tone and calling others n00bs during a debate.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ductility  "The malleability of the same metals are then ranked from greatest to least: gold, silver, lead, copper, aluminium, tin, platinum, zinc, iron, and nickel."

[BlackMagic0]

And no. Metal would not simply 'break' like stones or the like. They would bend, deform, and dent.
So adding them to the list of items that 'shatter' from hard hits would be rather 'eh' to me.

See this? HG hits your metal jewelry what it will look like around your wrist. More likely your wrist will get cut off from bent/dented edge, jaggedly cutting into the flesh.

[Saellyn]

Hence, metal breaks. Your point is moot.

EDIT:  Also, if an HG hits your wrist, I'm pretty sure the metal is going to break, depending on the metal, and malleability only goes so far. How many of you guys walk around with gold bracelets? And how many of those bracelets are pure gold, and not just alloys?

[Saellyn]

Metal breaks all the time, n00b, especially if it's a bracelet and you hit it hard. Metal 'does' crack, it 'does' break. Nice try, though.

Except for the more malleable metals, like gold and silver.  Then they bend or deform instead.  I'm not sure if that was an attempt at a troll or what, but please be more thoughtful about your tone and calling others n00bs during a debate.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ductility  "The malleability of the same metals are then ranked from greatest to least: gold, silver, lead, copper, aluminium, tin, platinum, zinc, iron, and nickel."

Also he started it. But alright. I'll scale back a little bit.

[BlackMagic0]

Hence, metal breaks. Your point is moot.

No. Is a big difference between 'breaks' and 'bends/dents'.

Stone will shatter and basically should 'junk' from a hard hit.
Metal will bend/dent and would not be 'junk'. It'd look like crap, need repairs, but not be junk.

So my point is still valid. Seeing as how we were talking about a code that junks items for you, to break them.

If we look at the picture. Said car is fucked up by a truck and cement block dividing road.
I doubt a HG can hit harder then a truck going down a highway (which think that is), the metal is still intact. Not broken into tiny pieces or such. (talking the solid metal, doors/etc missing, but not pieces of a body) See what I a getting at?

I'd prefer metal jewelry to get tags, bent, battered, dent, etc... then 'zomg auto-junk' like a sandstone or soapstone ring should get from combat.

[hyzhenhok]

Hence, metal breaks. Your point is moot.

EDIT:  Also, if an HG hits your wrist, I'm pretty sure the metal is going to break, depending on the metal, and malleability only goes so far. How many of you guys walk around with gold bracelets? And how many of those bracelets are pure gold, and not just alloys?

If a HG hits your wrist, chances are you lose your hand but the metal comes out just fine.

[Sephiroto]

Though a bit of a derail, I was also thinking that increasing weapon/armor/item damage rates and making it a more progressive thing for weapons would actually be a perk for playing some of the other 2.Arm races like Dursa.  Just a thought.