Larian Studios Forums Divine Divinity (English) Suggestions Charms charms, more charms

Hydra ? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/biggrin.gif" alt="" />

Because the magics of the jewelery would interfere with each other if they were placed too close together. That's the official reason. It's mostly there for balance reasons.

Jurak,



Mr.T is beyond all limits - he might not be a good example. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/winkwink.gif" alt="" />



Well, I can imagine that (my imagination is capable of many things) but it doesn't look very sensible. On the other hand, was anyone talking of hundred? I'd settle for two. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/winkwink.gif" alt="" />

I think it woulod be a good idea to have Charms which are able to enghance Weapons and other items with spells - like in <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/div.gif" alt="" /> 1 , only that there were only Charms for resistances.

But then again, that was balanced with gaining enough skillpoints to put into spells.
Although I like the idea... Enchanted jewelery.
<img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Next time they could just change rings to bracelets.
- would probably make no difference to Mr.T, but to most normal ppl it would.
<img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/biggrin.gif" alt="" />

"I wouldn't advise wearing a ring on your thumb..."

i DO - both recommend and do wear a ring on my thumb... yes, yes, i am a flashy bastardo <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/biggrin.gif" alt="" />


a future game could benefit from what's being discussed here concerning multiple rings/necklaces/amulets...

diablo 2exp had a "charms" feature where one sacrifices carrying capacity by walking around with "lucky charms" which give bonuses (an intresting feature that kept things balanced by reducing backpack space when carried but could have been cooler with the inclusion of charm bracelet chains or baggies)... perhaps instead of that - or in addition to that there could be a multiple rings/finger feature or multiple necklaces or multiple amulets/charms on necklaces...

a person could realistically wear up 2-3 rings on a single finger although it would realistically affect a person's grip... thus i propose a skill which would allow a character to wear 5 to 8 rings per hand by improving the character's hand eye coordination and grip... an ordinary character who has not selected this skill would be able to wear 4 rings per hand initially (index, middle and third fingers + thumb - or possibly excluding thumb, 3) but with subsequent advances one will find oneself with more slots to work with... i say 5 to 8 because realistically there are different sizes for different rings and one could realistically wear multiple small rings on one finger (one slot for pinky and thumb each, two for the rest)...


there would of course then be oddball rings like a minor ring of merchantile skill which would take up 2 slots and offer a measly .5% bonus on interactions with merchants (logical explanation: the appearance of the ring give's it's bearer a distinguished look that lets merchants know this isn't a dude to screw with... i guess a more oddball ring would be the ring of gaudy appearance which would flash when worn on the character's hand but offer a -300% bonus towards merchants who see the ring and realize that this is a guy with a lot of money and very little sense :P )


or of course if y'all don't like the multiple ring/finger idea then the skill could simply allow a character to wear more rings on each hand

level 0: 1 ring per hand, 1 necklace
level 1: 1 ring per hand, 1 necklace, 1 charm on necklace
level 2: 2 rings per hand, 1 necklace, 2 charms on necklace
level 3: 3 rings per hand, 1 necklace, 3 charms on necklace
level 4: 4 rings per hand, 2 necklaces, 3 charms on necklace
level 5: 5 rings per hand, 3 necklaces, 3 charms on necklace (this guy will look like an impressive king or commander - or look impressively gaudy like mr t... i threw in the charms stuff just because :P)

of course to keep things balanced, rings and necklaces (and possibly detachable or carry-with charms?) would offer only slight advantages... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/silly.gif" alt="" />

EDIT: course, more powerful rings might feature some restriction so that it's effects will only affect the player when worn alone on a hand... idunno... maybe i AM unneccesarily complicating things here... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/silly.gif" alt="" /> serious playtesting would be necessary to balance things out if such a thing is attempted...

Ladies ... Gentlemen ....
It is a historical fact that primitive tribes’ magicians were simply healers and they are also called shamans.
This is not fantasy but history, and in South America as well as in Africa we can find some till this day.
Many such characters wear bone rings and wild animal teeth necklaces; they wear head decorative covers with brilliant feathers, wild animal skulls or preserved skins. The Aztec sacrificial priests did wear gold and jewellery. On the other hand, warriors rarely wear rings and gaudy amulets as they encumber holding weapons and swift movements with stealth.
However, nowadays soldiers do wear a necklace with a name/ number tag and also occasionally bracelets of the same sort.
What I am getting at is that the item of rings could be divided into two categories, the defensive/ protective category and the offensive/ casting category.

Warriors should be allowed to wear a single protective amulet only because the hands are very busy with weapons and their power is in ranged or melee articles. OTOH, mages should be able to wear only two protective rings and weapon slots could take as many as four rings of offence per hand with spells that could be cast instantly. A mage may also hold a sceptre with an orb on top or even a double-orb-ended-sceptre with one on each side. A mage should be able to wear multiple amulets and necklaces as well as cloaks because they cannot wear weapons of melee or ranged weapons’ backpacks. A mage does not need a legging but a leg-bracelet of protection per leg, to balance the bracelets of offence on each wrist and each biceps.
A true fantasy mage does not carry a physical shield or wear any traditional armour but enchanted belts and shirts of protection that fit a set topped with a cloak of disappearing; the shirt of deflection or illusion and the belt of antigravity for example.

A warrior would be much more interested in seeking a charmed sword that is augmented with lightning strike and cold metal frost, a sword so sharp that it could split an air born feather without disturbing its flight yet so durable that it could cut down a small tree trunk in one blow.

I also think that warriors may not resist fire with other than shields and fireproof wear. Imagine a footwear called the boots of magma with which the warrior can literally walk on molten rocks, or chest-armour that resists fire and cools the wearer and finally shields with huge surface area but very light in weight and made of special materials that resist fire, which may include magically charmed materials of course.

Now considering that RR has no such classes and it is a very open system, the rules of equipment should be the key to classing by the player. On wearing the third ring, the left hand can carry no shield and on wearing the seventh ring the right hand can wield no weapon. Every extra necklace more than the allowed emulate for the warrior should come with a penalty for tactical engagement with melee and ranged weapons.

This system of logical charming should be expandable to cover survivors/ assassins/ thieves class too.
This reminds me of an interesting issue; a thief would pick the lock of a locked chest but a mage would unlock it by magic while a warrior would simply smash the chest’s lock to open. It should be against the dignity of a powerful mage to sit beside a box on his knees with a pair of lock picks and it is disgraceful for a mighty warrior with a war hammer in his hand to pick a lock he could break to pieces in one single blow.

{Sight} That is why it is not that simple to make the ultimate RPG any way but those were my six pence and a bit of suspense. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/biggrin.gif" alt="" />

Realistically, sure. But this game isn't real. There is a much bigger issue of game balance. One ring can potentially raise your attributes by about 4 character levels (20 points), plus charms. If you were wearing 10 rings, that would make your character 40 levels higher by the end of the game. That's would almost double what most people managed at the end of Divine Divinity!

The game becomes a lot more interesting when you have to choose over the Ring of Demi-Immortality and the Ring of Elemental Immunity. Both very nice, but you can only have one!

Or he would look like 50 Cent with a sword

haha imagine 50 with a sword, aproaching an Orc saying "I'm gonna chop you up, you biatch" than the music starts and he sings the line "Cause I'm madafakin P.I.M.P."

haha priceless <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Why would it be 5 necklaces and then with the 5 rings on each finger that it ok i guess, sure why not but 5 necklaces that would be more weight and well i see there bein' 2 but not 5

oops sry man nvrm i think that 3 necklaces are good!!!