i just think that his MUD' date=' while pretty dang nice for a full complement of merchant/nonPK classes wouldnt work here, and neither would a tinker soley because it devalues the equipment already in place here. that in turn screws up the motivation for at probably half or maybe more of the action that goes down in the world. i'm not even sure i'd be down for the effect it would have.[/quote']
If you have the Tinker's equipment be owner only, or at the very least Tinker only, it's not a problem. It's not like you're going to screw up the equipment economy by adding a qclass, or even base class, that can modify armor and weapons.
Tinker Idea
You may very well screw up the power economy though - for example, making weapon unbreakable etc weakens icestorm/weapon cleave. Armors that grant hit/dam or save at the expence of ac could now be 'upped'...
To me, it raises some serious balance issues that should be looked into...
I'm not going to go into the abuse angle of players, friends and OOC etc. We all know it would happen....
It does sound like a cool idea, but I'm not at all sure it would be feasible without some seriouly balance considerations....
L-A
That is all already a problem that won't go away anyhow. People will always cheat. OOC will happen, be it giving someone an upgrade on a breastplate or simply giving their rank 15 buddy a bunch of goodies. It happens. It would umbalance things if they are made unique, made difficult to create, and not allowed to be "too good". In other words, the only balance issue would be making armored smithed by this conceptual class good, but not so good that it makes it better than everything else.
I don't think the rest of the concerns are a problem, though, honestly. Especially if they cannot modify something easily (it should take a long time, be very draining, and be hard to get what is needed to do so).
You may very well screw up the power economy though - for example, making weapon unbreakable etc weakens icestorm/weapon cleave. Armors that grant hit/dam or save at the expence of ac could now be 'upped'...
To me, it raises some serious balance issues that should be looked into...
I'm not going to go into the abuse angle of players, friends and OOC etc. We all know it would happen....
It does sound like a cool idea, but I'm not at all sure it would be feasible without some seriouly balance considerations....
L-A
I like the idea of a Tinker as a quest race for any gnome.
When I think of tinker, I think of a gnome who can build things.
Almost like an advanced scientist for the given time period. This
gnome could build traps, build cool weapons, they could also build
equipment for certain slots. Down the line they could start to
learn to brew potions and enchant their armor, but never better
than a druid or crusader or an invoker. Tinkers would be more
about mechanical superiority. They could build a net thrower that
entangles people, a poison dart thrower, a flame thrower, little
grenades, remote mines, and proximity mines. You could have little
wrist shooters for extra combat damage, and boot knives with three
different kicks for mid section - dmg+bloodloss, head - damage +
chance of blind, and legs - low damage + chance to lag + even less
chance to enfeeble. He could build a tube that makes a sound wave
and shocks the enemy with sound. If it was stormy he could build a
conducter that summoned a lightning storm. About half of the potions
and armors the Tinker makes would be like average non rares, and they
could be sold in any town and worn by any player. The other half would
be Tinker only, and would be the cool stuff he could make that only he
knows how to use. The gnome would be abandoning their previous guild
but it would be cool if each class brought one skill with them.
I thought of a few for fun.
Thief-Steal
Warrior-Riposte
Ranger-Herb
Invoker-Trance
Battlemage-Mirror Image
Blademaster-Blood Vow
Bard-Sneak
well, i didnt see the "only one tinker item per non-tinker PC." think this is doable then. no flooding the open market with a lot of armors per character. now maybe flooding with the potions.. dunno. also yeah if any skill he does puts a burnproof flag on a weapon, it's definately tinker-only item then. other than that i dont see why they couldnt trade anything else they make. and mos def they would make some money. and alleviate the pure melee consumables problem.(provided the melee has the $$$$). and you get a neutral qclass out of the deal. so to me that last sentence about the one tinker item only saves them. dont know what would be the limiter on potions. OOC would definately allow for some people to just get a dumptruck of free quaffs for sure. but all OOC could get you armor-wise is one piece.
but there's a way to solve OOC: just code in all tinker items are nodrop and that a tinker item cant be "given." the only way a tinker could transfer his item off his own person is by entering a transaction mode whereby the other PC gives him a minimum amount of gold.
I liked the original idea, but brewing/smithing... Have to agree with L-A on that one. Would screw over the power economy totally.