Talk:Item specificity

Plus error
Hey guys, cant seem to start a link or title page with +, is there any workaround for this besides spelling it out? Big Gino 17:55, February 13, 2006 (PST)
 * Personally I would call it half plate +1 of lesser lightning resistance. Thats not even a workaround It is usually armor +plus like Leather +3 or Long sword +2 -- koolkat 19:58, February 13, 2006 (PST)
 * That was my initial reaction, too, koolkat, but I assumed that Gino was putting it in exactly as it is in-game? Dedridd 20:09, February 13, 2006 (PST)
 * Eek - somebody tell xevo! That's crap, that should work; we need it especially bad for this particular wiki! 08:47, February 14, 2006 (PST)

Random anonymous view
A page on this specific of an item seems to be WAY too much information. I mean, if this thing gets it's own page, that would imply there will also be a page for the Crippling Adamantine Longsword +1 of Lesser Halfling-Bane, Halfling-Only (No, I did not just make that one up). As you get to higher-level gear, the number of possible combinations explodes exponentially. What about the Necklace of Deep Slumber? Will you have one page for the version with caster level 5 and 5 uses, and one for the caster level 7 and 3 uses?? That'd be insane. Only unusual or named items may deserve their own page. DDO creates most items by randomly mixing together base items and assortments of magic bonuses. For those, list off the properties they can have, and tell how those properties combine to give an item a required level and base price. Which basically means, copy over the Item Creation info from D&D. One "plus" is worth 1d6 elemental damage, a racial restriction counts as -2 pluses, etc etc. 24.62
 * Poster, please indent and sign your posts similar to what I did for your post (registering would be great, too). Eventually, yes, it'd be nice to have a list of possible affixes and suffixes. There's nowhere near enough information to come up with that at this point, and unless Turbine releases a list of them for us, the only way we'll compile that information is to get a good sampling of the items in the game. I think creating specific pages for these is the way to go initially, because then they'll be categorized and we can scan for the different types of enchantments that exist for half plate armors, for example, when compiling the enchantments list. Dedridd 05:35, February 14, 2006 (PST)
 * My comment was in response to the page as a whole, not to the pre-existing other comments, yet indenting would have falsely created the latter impression. I am disinclined to misdirect.  And yes, I am aware of the standard, but also know that it is misleading.  Notice that when I de-indent the comment right now, you can see that this talk page has two independent threads of conversation.  Structure has provided logical information that was previously lacking (and also saved this paragraph from becoming a thin peninsula of text alongside an ocean of whitespace).  Now, as towards creating a list of suffixes: there is more than enough information to do begin it.  Each time you complete a mid-level quest will inform you of about 25 more suffixes.  I have screenshots of scores of DDO item names, but will not input them in the one-item-per-page format you suggest, because I won't burden the Wiki with something counterproductive.  Do you know how many times the same blurb about "This armor is a combination of chainmail and metal plates..." would be duplicated if this pattern is followed?  More than 10,000 times, before you even reach a level 4 item!   Don't even start down that road.  An inaccurate list of suffixes a reader can use to help guess what some random item does is better than an incomplete list of items.24.62


 * The standard isn't misleading - you actually followed it correctly because you considered your comment to be a new thread, and started over. Sorry that I didn't understand your comment to be such. As for the 'burden' of items, I'll leave that to others to comment on before proceeding. Dedridd 06:54, February 14, 2006 (PST)


 * Scratch the waiting - I think I understand the difference of what we're talking about. I keep thinking of specially named magic items, while you're talking about randomly generated treasure items (ex, Pastemaker and General Dryden's Mace versus a longsword +1 reptile bane). Special pages should be created in the case of the unique, named items, while randomly generated stuff shouldn't. Sorry that I didn't catch the difference earlier (need more caffeine!). Can you create a page of the enchantments that you know of based on your screenshots? Even a small list with short blurbs describing the effects would be enough to get the ball rolling, and give others a starting place to add on to. Dedridd 07:02, February 14, 2006 (PST)


 * Yeah that makes sense to me. I figured that the results were fixed for eqch quest, and eventually you would get all of the items.  Maybe a page called Armor enhancements and also a page called Weapon enhancements with links to the known enhancements would be better. -- koolkat 07:29, February 14, 2006 (PST)


 * Ok, instead of un-indenting - un-indenting is reserved for replying to an earlier post - for instance this is in reply to the post starting "The standard isn't misleading...". What you should be doing is titling new conversations with a second-level header - I need to get these standards down on paper as soon as I can... if you are replying to me, you would use 4 indentations, but if you are replying to him, you'd use 5 indents and put it ABOVE my post - things are odrered in a chronological order SECOND, after a conversation threading order. Make sense? 08:47, February 14, 2006 (PST)


 * Agreed. We should not create a page for items with standard prefixes / suffixes, but instead create a list of prefixes / suffixes. As Dedridd said, only named unique items may deserve their own topic -- Tihocan 10:02, February 14, 2006 (PST)


 * Agreed, Tihocan. Should this page be deleted then? Dedridd 10:31, March 1, 2006 (EST)


 * Yay. But the discussion may be useful for everyone to see. Tihocan 11:31, March 1, 2006 (EST)