Locked RP Item Restrings

I've been exploring that RP merchant town and noticed something I find well. Dumb.

You must restring and pay to restring:

    Short Description

    Long Description

    Name

If any one of these are changed without the other, the item has some big issues. These are not "perk" issues but rather game mechanics issues. All of these areas must line up for the item to interact with the world in any manner consistent with the game world.

Think about it.

Short desc: An ugly brooch

Long desc: A long flowing cloak of silly unicorns lay here, collecting dust.

Name: cloak unicorn

Imagine interacting with that object as a player, whether you're the one who created it or not. It is unacceptable. These correlate not to make it convenient, but because the player doesn't have to think of it's "name" in order to touch it. The character just sees it as it is and picks it up. It is an OOC interface issue.

Either restring all of them or none at all. If this truly must be a cost for all of these, add the price into one big purchase that requires all these fields be set appropriately. I suggest also informing the imms so they can smack down any fool that tries to be sneaky.

I don't really have any RP points so I haven't even begun to pretend to try this. If I am massively misinformed, well then I am sorry.

Completely agreed. That's been bugging me for a long while but never bothered to report it. 

When a merchant changes the name of an item, it changes all three. When you use the RP tool though, you basically make the item untargettable, untakebale, unlootable unless you actually know the real item.

[edit] There was a demon bard recently. He had some restrung instrument. The instrument was a normal flute. He gave it to me to identify it and I wasn't able to return it to him until he actually told me what the thing was before it was restrung. Completely freaked me out.

Would have been awesome if it really was a cursed demon flute that had no name and no way to handle (see: get rid of) it!

Mudder, you're right on the money with this one. I completely agree.

Personally, I think the cost is appropriate (30) to take care of all 3.

This has been changed to that suggested.