Best Of

Esei said:

While I'm not well-versed in trades enough to offer much of an opinion on the rest of it: why would you name a languages skill/miniskill 'lingualism'? It's not, at a glance, a word in English. Why not Linguistics, or possibly just Languages?

By the way, linguistics is the scientific study of how languages work, not learning new languages. The best way to upset a linguist is to confuse the two.

I'm not sure if you meant this as a good thing or bad, but essentially, yes. Those of us that have worked RL years to gain multiple trades don't want to lose all that hard work. It also would allow for anyone to maintain 3 trades without losing proficiency. I don't like proficiency overall, but if it's the way we're going, I feel like it needs to be looked at as losing a small amount to change trades. A good point I heard from someone else was just because I bake a cake doesn't mean I forget how to water my plants. So just because I decide I want to make a set of weapons for a novice, doesn't mean I should forget how to sew that same novice a set of clothing. That's my take on it.

Saran said:

Ashipedia said:

RE: Proficiencies and trade flexing

Instead of making you lose all proficiency for flexing trades, you get 1 free trade flex per weave. Any additional trade flexing costs you 10% loss to that trade. I think this is something people like me, who have a ton of trade skills, could live with. I don't mind being locked into 2 active trades at once so long as I can still use trades I've worked RL years for.

That looks like it would let you maintain 12 trades with a single slot as long as you switch one per day and craft one thing from each of them once you do so? In theory, with a second slot you'd be able to maintain all 16 we'd have after the overhaul even with that loss because you could have the remaining four on a three-day rotation which would be enough to recoup the 10% loss.

Given discussions about consolidating the trades which could leave us with just 13 trades after the overhaul, you could maintain all of them without loss by having one in your second slot and rotating the other slot daily. Which seems like... you just need to top up one thing in a shop each day and there is no negative.

i bet if he had been giving away something useful, like curatives or kirigami or a candy, it would have been snapped up. Trades are not made equal and this is known. if anything, keeping a limit on which trades people can have keeps the discrepancy - choose what will sell (consumables) or what if crafty and fun but no one needs to buy it (food, furniture).

RE: Proficiencies and trade flexing

Instead of making you lose all proficiency for flexing trades, you get 1 free trade flex per weave. Any additional trade flexing costs you 10% loss to that trade. I think this is something people like me, who have a ton of trade skills, could live with. I don't mind being locked into 2 active trades at once so long as I can still use trades I've worked RL years for.

My tam is 100% for trade swapping.

Also remove brewmeister entirely, it's lacklustre. Split it between cooking (drinks/teas/malts) and alchemy (magicink), seems much better than preserving a very blah trade already, and solves the mess of cooking cartels.

Edit: Also tinkering, just merge it with enchantment. Let's be real, both brewmeister and tinkering were the ugly cousins of alchemy and spellcraft.

I noticed all drinks are getting moved from cooking to brewmeister, how is that going to work with private designs that are part of a cooking cartel? Cooking is mostly just a fun rp skill with very little mechanical need, kind of sad to see things being taken away from it.

And I saw others ask above, but I'll echo again asking how the existing trade artifacts are going to factor in.

Being limited to just two trades seems extremely limited. Especially if 2 more trades are being added (a total of 16 trade skills!) I can just imagine how difficult this is going to make things even for somebody wanting to specialize.

Edit: I also wonder how many people bought a cord/tam not to swap class skills but just to play around with trades.

Another suggestion, but in a separate post for emphasis:

Cooking proficiency should affect portions and satiation - cooking artifacts/pieman can be adjusted to influence preservation time/balance loss between uses.

Artifacts retain some utility and use but are no longer the main focal point for profit in cooking - instead, keeping and maintaining your proficiency is the surest means of boosting your ability to generate profit from your inputs.

I'm not even a cook for money, I just like to make stuff and give it to people

so basicly if I want to be able to make food AND beverages like Arix has done for a long ass time I would have to drop bookbinding for Brewmeister and I would also lose tailoring, will I be allowed to get a refund for my trade artis?

One thought I had regarding aethertrading and the need for new characters to be able to get goop (gnome weapons for instance are pretty much essential). Rather than trying to find a way to fit in goop generations, maybe all existing ASHOP goop costs could be converted to credits and leave goops as a skin transformation only mechanic. Or even just axe goop entirely and use credits for skin transformations.