Difference between revisions of "User talk:Bartavelle"

Latest revision as of 13:27, 5 October 2009

IRC question[edit]

No, I havn't yet looked at that stuff, sorry. --Rick 20:59, 8 December 2007 (EST)

Ok, I did it

Metal ID[edit]

You probably already know this, but I just noticed on your user page about metal IDs, just to let you know, this isn't a static list and is built from raws data, this list probably works for a default install, it'd be better to read out the metal data from memory (these 'Metal ID' are actually indexes into this list). --Rick 19:10, 13 December 2007 (EST)

Yup, it's either in the order of the metalgloss thing file, or you can read it into memory. I started writing the list until i realized how to do it.

Item quality question[edit]

Hi, in the Item quality article it says:

>First, a skill level is computed, apparently directly related to the dabbling...legendary indicators. No skill or dabbling is 0, legendary is 15. It's capped at 20.

Let's say I had a Legendary+5 armorsmith with a preference for Steel. If I order him to make steel plate, will his effective skill be 20 or 21?

Gairabad 13:22, 7 December 2008 (EST)

We don't know the answer, as we have not had Holy Writ handed down from On High. When I reverse-engineered the item quality calculations, there were some inputs that I could not determine the source of. It is quite possible that the maker's preferences play a role, but that is not known with certainty.

Despite this, I strongly suspect that the skill cap is applied after all modifiers have been summed. So I think the answer is 20.
—0x517A5D 18:37, 7 December 2008 (EST)

I believe the contrary, but it has been shown that I tend to believe wrong things when I've not been looking at something for a while. Bartavelle 13:27, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Item quality question II[edit]

In this edit, you changed the wording of the formula. Does that mean that, if the first roll fails, the other rolls do not occur? --Savok 12:20, 8 March 2009 (EDT)

yes! Bartavelle 19:39, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Item quality question III (IQQ III)[edit]

If d5 < skill level, quality is bumped.
If d10 < skill level, quality is bumped.
If d15 < skill level, quality is bumped.
If d20 < skill level, quality is bumped.
If d25 < skill level and d3 == 1, quality is set to 5.

The result of a d5 roll is an integer 1-5 randomly picked, right? --Savok 20:56, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

It is 0-5, randomly choosen (and of course not all values are as likely to be rolled). Bartavelle 08:26, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Wait, what? Do you mean that 2 might be more or less likely than 8 for a d10? Or do you mean that +table+ might be more or less likely than *table*?

And are you saying that the randomly chosen number is a real from 0-5, not an integer? --Savok 16:34, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

I certainly hope he isn't. "d5", "d10", etc. are almost universally considered notation for the rolling of a die with that many sides. So d5 would mean possible results of 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5, with an equal chance of each, for instance. If the mechanics of the game do not do that, then the page must be changed because d5, d10, etc. would be flat-out wrong. --LegacyCWAL 20:37, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

This formula is wrong, the rolls are independant, check the page it's clearer now. Bartavelle 10:33, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

@@ Line 23: / Line 23: @@
 :We don't know the answer, as we have not had Holy Writ handed down from On High.  When I reverse-engineered the item quality calculations, there were some inputs that I could not determine the source of.  It is quite possible that the maker's preferences play a role, but that is not known with certainty.
 :Despite this, I strongly suspect that the skill cap is applied after all modifiers have been summed.  So I think the answer is 20.<br/>&mdash;[[User:0x517A5D|0x517A5D]] 18:37, 7 December 2008 (EST)
+::I believe the contrary, but it has been shown that I tend to believe wrong things when I've not been looking at something for a while. [[User:Bartavelle|Bartavelle]] 13:27, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 == Item quality question II ==
@@ Line 40: / Line 42: @@
 :It is 0-5, randomly choosen (and of course not all values are as likely to be rolled). [[User:Bartavelle|Bartavelle]] 08:26, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
-::Wait, what? Do you mean that 2 might be more or less likely than 8 for a d10? Or do you mean that +table+ might be more or less likely than *table*? --[[User:Savok|Savok]] 16:33, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
+::Wait, what? Do you mean that 2 might be more or less likely than 8 for a d10? Or do you mean that +table+ might be more or less likely than *table*?
+::And are you saying that the randomly chosen number is a real from 0-5, not an integer? --[[User:Savok|Savok]] 16:34, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
+:::I certainly hope he isn't.  "d5", "d10", etc. are almost universally considered notation for the rolling of a die with that many sides.  So d5 would mean possible results of 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5, with an equal chance of each, for instance.  If the mechanics of the game do not do that, then the page must be changed because d5, d10, etc. would be flat-out ''wrong''. --[[User:LegacyCWAL|LegacyCWAL]] 20:37, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
+::: This formula is wrong, the rolls are independant, check the page it's clearer now. [[User:Bartavelle|Bartavelle]] 10:33, 16 March 2009 (UTC)