The RNG Problem, Enchantment System Vs Gem System (Major Edits)

[StivenHunt]

This is very interesting idea. I would definitely like current enchantment system to die. Yesterday i was creating new character for scythe build. I’ve lost like 50 stag antlers, which i’ve been collecting since last 4 characters (around 150 hours playtime) to craft a dark leather set, just to have a nice looking outfit. And this very nice lady Eleanor, time after time butchered my items making them blue. I swear once i finish my grim reaper build im gonna pay her a visit to collect her soul as a payment for all those poor deers that had to die for my new outfit

As for this gem system, below are my thoughts.

GENERAL OVERVIEW

• there should not be too many sources of gem drops, or inflation kicks in
• gems should not drop too often to prevent a player from having all slots filled with best in slot options for his build early in the campaign
• extracting a gem should cost a fallen ember and destroy an item to prevent easy gem acquisition from ground items with multiple slotted gems
• destroying a gem to create a slot should have some cost too, but not destroy an item
• game difficulty would have to be rebalanced to accommodate the situation that every player would have a good amount of useful gems slotted

CURSED GEMS

• items should have fixed number of slots for normal gems and 1 slot for cursed gem
• cursed gems should have a strong and or unique positive effects to make them worth slotting in, it should be almost always an aspiration to do so
• each cursed gem positive effect should be different, +2 slots is kinda boring and places player focus in a choice on filtering which negative effect player does not want to have in his build, instead of which positive effect he wants and thus how he should overcome the negative

GEM TIERS

• gems should have tiers, which would increase both minimum and maximum values of an effect and possibly add some other benefits
• effect value of a gem should be randomized between possible minimum and maximum value upon slotting into an item
• slotting same type of gem repeatedly on an item that already has it should randomly increase its value up to a maximum for its tier, this would be a new “exalting” that players would engage even during campaign
• slotting higher tier gem on a lower tier one would upgrade it and randomize its value within its tier range
• lower tier gems could not be slotted on items that already have its higher tier version
• each major area (beach and surroundings, nameless pass, lowland meadows and marin woods) should drop higher gem tiers to introduce a new progression axis, where each time player enters new zone he is excited to farm more powerful versions of gems he’s using in his build

---

Now i see two possible ways of handling gem drops.

PRIMARY SOURCE IS RAW GEM DROPS

• raw gem drops should be a reasonable occurrence
• items should drop without gems slotted or be it a rare occurrence to balance out raw drops
• Negative: item drops without slotted gems could feel less rewarding

PRIMARY SOURCE IS EXTRACTING FROM ITEMS

• raw gem drops should be very scarce to balance out item drops with multiple gems slotted
• Negative: making items primary source of gems could lead to players hoarding each item for potential future gem extraction
• Positive: finding an item with multiple good gems slotted would pose a choice, either extract one gem from it or maybe use the item instead

---

That’s it for now, cuz i have to catch Eleanor

[Lombix_4]

@StivenHunt

• there should not be too many sources of gem drops, or inflation kicks in
• gems should not drop too often to prevent a player from having all slots filled with best in slot options for his build early in the campaign

Yes, but I don’t have access to the drop rate data so I don’t know how to propose the change, but ultimately it’s the kind of thing that needs to be tested empirically to be balanced.

My intention is that in the early game the player has to do the best he can with what he has, in the mid game the player has access to many builds, in the late game he has access to almost all builds, in the post game he has access to all builds

@StivenHunt

• extracting a gem should cost a fallen ember and destroy an item to prevent easy gem acquisition from ground items with multiple slotted gems
• destroying a gem to create a slot should have some cost too, but not destroy an item

It depends on the amount of gems found, if they can be removed without destroying the item then there should be less gems in the items found around, and if the item is destroyed then there should be more gem drops.

@StivenHunt

game difficulty would have to be rebalanced to accommodate the situation that every player would have a good amount of useful gems slotted

If you look at the values of the gem system and the values of the current enchantments, you see that they are very similar, currently it is easy to find a good weapon by changing one or two enchantments and using the armor not based on the appearance but based on the enchantments and have a very strong build for the mid game, the problem is that the player is not encouraged to try new builds, this system may seem easier to you since I suppose you are the type of player who decides not to use an armor set because you do not like the drip (I do it too) but all the players who ignore the aesthetic aspect until the post game will find that the systems have the same level of difficulty, obviously the system needs to be tested and balanced since I also added some new effects.

@StivenHunt

CURSED GEMS

• items should have fixed number of slots for normal gems and 1 slot for cursed gem
• cursed gems should have a strong and or unique positive effects to make them worth slotting in, it should be almost always an aspiration to do so
• each cursed gem positive effect should be different, +2 slots is kinda boring and places player focus in a choice on filtering which negative effect player does not want to have in his build, instead of which positive effect he wants and thus how he should overcome the negative

The system I wrote is heavily inspired by the current system and I decided to hold back on making some variations. These are some of those variations I considered.

The old system I wrote used them but I decided not to include them to stay more in line with what the devs have done so far. However, I made sure that curses are always something the player must keep in mind and not something to ignore or counterbalance with the opposite effect.

Enchantments Rework Detailed Suggestion (OLD) - Google Docs, If you go to the curses section you will see that in principle they follow your idea, and nothing prevents them from being added as gems in the future.

@StivenHunt

GEM TIERS

Everyone wants this feature XD, Sublimation could be improved, and this is a way to do it within the framework of the gem system I proposed, and I like the idea. But I won’t work on it because this post is already long and complicated. If the devs incorporate the gem system into the game then I will definitely try to develop this idea, But I’m against variable values. If I added the terars, I wouldn’t make values that vary from 5% to 20% like they are in the game now. I’d rather have the values always be the same for each terar, so they’re easier to balance and not based on RNG. In fact, the gems I’ve indicated always have the value on the left, and I get the one on the right with sublimation. There are no intermediate values, and you can’t get lucky and immediately find the sublimated value.

@StivenHunt

Now i see two possible ways of handling gem drops.

PRIMARY SOURCE IS RAW GEM DROPS

• raw gem drops should be a reasonable occurrence
• items should drop without gems slotted or be it a rare occurrence to balance out raw drops
• Negative: item drops without slotted gems could feel less rewarding

PRIMARY SOURCE IS EXTRACTING FROM ITEMS

• raw gem drops should be very scarce to balance out item drops with multiple gems slotted
• Negative: making items primary source of gems could lead to players hoarding each item for potential future gem extraction
• Positive: finding an item with multiple good gems slotted would pose a choice, either extract one gem from it or maybe use the item instead

I think there is actually a middle ground, simply the items that contain gems often do not have all the slots occupied, This would work well with the ability to remove gems without destroying items.

In any case, whatever direction is chosen to balance this system, it is a system that solves all the main problems of the current system, and it is more fun. Thanks for the detailed feedback .

[Hacefal]

@Lombix_4

Why is this system supposed to be More clear, Easier to Understand, Easier to Explore?
Because With the Current system to know all the enchantments, you need to have extensively tested the entire system and take notes, and even once you have done that you can’t be sure that you have seen all the enchantments before you could be unlucky and by chance some enchantments have never shown up. So you’ll never really be sure you know most of your options until the postgame when you can afford to do these experiments. Or until you read a list online. Even after doing this, it can take more than 40 embers a piece to make a perfect intro build (and that’s not even considering the time it takes to find some rare weapons and armor, which must also be Blue or Purple depending on the spells you’ve chosen).
With the gem system, on the other hand, you just have to find all the gems, which always happens even before the end of the game. And you don’t have to take notes since the effects are written on the gems.

Best part in my opinion. Too much RNG at the moment. I don’t know if this is the best solution, but we have some ideas to explore here, for sure.

[Hacefal]

If a lot of “wiki research” are required to help your theory-crafting process, sorry not sorry, but some of your in-game systems are broken.

[StivenHunt]

@Lombix_4

Yes, but I don’t have access to the drop rate data so I don’t know how to propose the change, but ultimately it’s the kind of thing that needs to be tested empirically to be balanced.

You don’t have to write everything in such detail. I even think it is actually worse than writing just the outliers of the idea. For example detailed list of gems and their effects you wrote is unimportant implementation detail in the grand scheme of gem system as a whole.

I simply wanted to highlight that if this system was to be implemented in the current game version, then it should have some guardrails to prevent gem inflation, because items with 3-5 mods drop quite often.

@Lombix_4

My intention is that in the early game the player has to do the best he can with what he has, in the mid game the player has access to many builds, in the late game he has access to almost all builds, in the post game he has access to all builds

Yes, that’s exactly how i thought about it too.

@Lombix_4

It depends on the amount of gems found, if they can be removed without destroying the item then there should be less gems in the items found around, and if the item is destroyed then there should be more gem drops.

I think it is better to drop items with higher number of gems slotted and let player extract just one, than to drop items with 1-2 gems slotted and allow extraction of all gems. This way players have bigger pool of gems to choose from and the choice itself is more important if there are 2 or more good gems slotted in some item and players can extract just one.

@Lombix_4

If you look at the values of the gem system and the values of the current enchantments, you see that they are very similar, currently it is easy to find a good weapon by changing one or two enchantments and using the armor not based on the appearance but based on the enchantments and have a very strong build for the mid game, the problem is that the player is not encouraged to try new builds, this system may seem easier to you since I suppose you are the type of player who decides not to use an armor set because you do not like the drip (I do it too) but all the players who ignore the aesthetic aspect until the post game will find that the systems have the same level of difficulty, obviously the system needs to be tested and balanced since I also added some new effects.

What i meant mostly is that during mid game most players would have a good chunk of powerful mods on every item, like reduced damage taken. Im not sure if this is the case in current game version. I would assume that the campaign was balanced on players not having such amount of good mods.

And remember guys, drip is always more important than stats

@Lombix_4

The system I wrote is heavily inspired by the current system and I decided to hold back on making some variations. These are some of those variations I considered.

The old system I wrote used them but I decided not to include them to stay more in line with what the devs have done so far. However, I made sure that curses are always something the player must keep in mind and not something to ignore or counterbalance with the opposite effect.

I quickly went through the gems you proposed, but didn’t analyze them much, because it’s unimportant implementation detail and im more concentrated on the idea itself.

The most important thing for me is to make cursed gems really worth slotting in. Curses should be paired with interesting good positive mods to make players consider using the gem primarily based on positive mod. With currently implemented system and one you proposed (+2 gem slots), players are only making choice based on negative mods - “I don’t want this curse, and that curse, so i’ll pick this one instead”. So naturally they go with curse they either can completely ignore or somewhat easily play around. It would be better if they choose cursed gems based on positive mod instead - “Oh, i really want this positive mod, but can i handle the negative?”.

@Lombix_4

Everyone wants this feature XD, Sublimation could be improved, and this is a way to do it within the framework of the gem system I proposed, and I like the idea. But I won’t work on it because this post is already long and complicated. If the devs incorporate the gem system into the game then I will definitely try to develop this idea, But I’m against variable values. If I added the terars, I wouldn’t make values that vary from 5% to 20% like they are in the game now. I’d rather have the values always be the same for each terar, so they’re easier to balance and not based on RNG. In fact, the gems I’ve indicated always have the value on the left, and I get the one on the right with sublimation. There are no intermediate values, and you can’t get lucky and immediately find the sublimated value.

In current game version and the gem idea you proposed players add mods they want to an item and are essentially done with it for the rest of the game. If they are extremely lucky this could happen even in the first zone. The tier system is simply to add another layer of progression between each zone.

Variable values serve the same purpose as gem tiers, but on micro scale. It is meant to add a small progression opportunity within each zone. It would create a limited sink for duplicated gems.

Example:
A player drops five first-tier gems in Marin Keep. These gems grant increased health, with a randomized effect ranging from 2% to 5%. The player slots one gem into their body armor. The game rolls a random value within the range, and they receive a +3% health bonus. To improve this effect, the player uses more of the same gem to randomly increase value of socketed gem. For example the second slam could increase the effect to +4%, and the third slam to +5% reaching the maximum value for this gem tier. Or maybe the player was lucky and second slam increased the effect straight to +5%.

Later, the player progresses to the next zone and begins finding second-tier health gems, which provide 6% to 10% increased health. When the player slots a second-tier gem into their armor, regardless of whether they previously had a first-tier gem in that slot the effect is rerolled randomly within the new tier’s range. For instance, they might now get +7% health.

This ensures that duplicate gems within each zone remain useful not only when player wants to change his build or change items for fashion purposes.

[Lombix_4]

@StivenHunt

The most important thing for me is to make cursed gems really worth slotting in.

Yes, in fact I made it so that the negative effects only punish you when you play badly and not punish you just for Existing. I want cursed gem items to be stronger if you make fewer mistakes, and weaker if you make a lot of mistakes.

@StivenHunt

urses should be paired with interesting good positive mods to make players consider using the gem primarily based on positive mod. With currently implemented system and one you proposed (+2 gem slots), players are only making choice based on negative mods - “I don’t want this curse, and that curse, so i’ll pick this one instead”.

The idea is that after the player has inserted 3 gems, if the player wants more he must add a curse, he can choose based on his way of playing or based on the build like "I really want this extra positive mod to complete the build, What negative effect should I choose?”

@StivenHunt

So naturally they go with curse they either can completely ignore or somewhat easily play around.

The idea is that all curses offer the same difficulty, just in different ways so that each player makes different choices and we don’t always see the same curses like “lose health over time” or “irreparable” and devs should have a way to control how much individual gems are used, and balance them so that they are all used,

@StivenHunt

if they choose cursed gems based on positive mod instead - “Oh, i really want this positive mod, but can i handle the negative?”.

For more unique effects this is a nice approach and in fact I added two unique gems that do just that: “Unstable Minerals” and “Heavy Metals”.

@StivenHunt

You don’t have to write everything in such detail. I even think it is actually worse than writing just the outliers of the idea. For example detailed list of gems and their effects you wrote is unimportant implementation detail in the grand scheme of gem system as a whole.

I agree but adding the details allows for a better understanding of how the system works. I don’t expect everyone to read all the details but I hope that those who aren’t convinced and want to know more can read them to understand better.
I also think it was necessary to demonstrate that gems can replace enchantments (without it being a forced change), and in fact all the interesting enchantments are present within the system and there are also many new additions and some reworks.