I agree. Like a monk trade skill.

details plz? I like this but details plz?

And just for those who are saying they agree, just to suck up or please the crowd.....shoo

Uh...likewise with the "no new stuff" crowd, then.

I started the crowd, Kthx

I have to wonder, people have stated quite a few valid concerns about why it shouldn't be put in, but so far no one has really stated a good reason why this should be done. Is it just people want to roll with whatever the admin choose, or that there isn't any, all I really see is, this will give us more alchemists, or, it will give us the chance to do city vs commune, to that I say, ever heard of Kegs and Cubes people?

There is one critical reason why it should be done: kegs and cubes are not sufficient to supply all the functions of enchantments to an org without the skillset at any time, much less under a tradeban. If you don't have access to an enchanter a cube isn't doing -anything- for you. Nor is it going to help with your sigils, sigil dissolution (!!!), statues, paintings and greatrobes. Kegs do fill all alchemy's functions but with a tradeban or similar it's not going to last.

Now I know people then keep going on about how this makes orgs the same (it doesn't: Serenwilde and Magnagora would still be more different with each others' trade skillsets than Celest and Magnagora are now with the same one) or how you can get around tradebans with "interesting" black markets and sending novices to get your equipment and blah blah blah but this flimsy "it adds RP" thing simply does not justify this level of inconvenience and restriction on dynamic org relationships. Frankly with people clamouring for a communes vs. cities war all the time you'd think that'd be good enough RP for them in the absence of "wiccans and druids are the only ones that can make health-curing items" RP. It also helps integrate bards into their orgs more, which both new archetypes sorely need more of. I will mention that even with this a communes vs. cities war would be retarded right now because of the differing conflict levels, but at least the potential would be there sometime in the future without hassling everyone to the benefit of no one except the unscrupulous alchemists and enchanters who don't actually care about their org to begin with.

Most of this falls down if this isn't done such that cities and communes -actually- get access to alchemy instead of enchantments though, and as mentioned I don't understand why a half-way approach would be desirable, but I guess we'll see about that.

Sure, it seems like an interesting enough idea. And I think that limited potions/enchantments out of their home orgs would mean both less headaches and potentially more conflict.

But there's been a lot of good points raised on the other side. I don't want more healing balances to worry about: I don't want this subtracting from effort that could be going towards revamping monks, fixing lag, and going through the rest of the game for things to fix.

I seem to remember Roark being a firm believer in the truism that the more coders you put on a project, the slower it will finish. Are there enough coders to work on this and the other projects as well?

I think Fain/Morgfyre dismissed the concerns about the healing balances, and the teas would be unique effects.

Could you shiribot and show me where they talked about healing balances?

Sure. It's identical effects for those that heal. I guess there could be some kind of sparkleberry/healing-scroll like tea on a seperate balance but I wouldn't want to assume that.

I love the idea! Bards really should have their own trade skill.

I'm hopping aboard Nejii's train, adding to his argument my own little selection about equilibrium.

Bards can already select High Magic. Why, then, couldn't they use their knowledge of the higher arcane powers to enchant if that's all that the cities have against communes? Why wouldn't the Harbingers be able to manipulate the "High" powers to create something with them? That's what bards do. They create something from nothing. The same with Low Magic.

I don't see the problem with allowing communes and cities to become "independent" of one another, either, despite what Morgfyre's said about that never happening. I'm a tailor now, and was an artisan before that and an alchemist before that, and the only people that I ever served, aside from the estranged few that heard my market ads, were in the Glomdoring. This will make absolutely no more of a difference.

Consider also the low numbers of the bardic guilds. If this will somehow increase their population, something the already stable bard guilds need, then why not give it a try? My bandwagon is pretty comfy already, but as the Harbinger GM, I wouldn't mind seeing a new shuttle of incoming craftsmen. At least we might be able to have a guild rite more than once a week.

Does this mean I can throw away my mandolin and play the tuuba? I'll settle for a trumpet.

I'm trying to figure out what kind of bards would switch to this trade or get this trade. Forget the RP reason-- someone will always like the RP reason to get a skill. I'm trying to figure out what it would take for someone like me to switch to enchantment. I don't know if basic enchantments would make me switch. I'd give a little more thought to potions, but my understanding is you won't be able to make things like healing/mana/bromide kegs or anything -really- useful. (And i think it should stay that way, because I like the commune-city conflict). An interesting thing may be like potions that enhance the effectiveness of other potions. I donno, by itself neither sound too compelling (of course I don't have full information), but overall I think a separate, highmagic tradeskill would be a useful addition for bards.

:crickets:

What does that other mean thread mean for this one?

I havn't read the thread however...

Certain enchantments and potions will have to be must to be shared. Off the top of my head I'm thinking of

Kingdom, mercy, perfection, beauty, cleanse, the enchantment for debating.
healing, mana, mending, regeneration

My main concern for giving alchemy and enchantment to bards would be just making sure that it is unique enough that it isn't a carbon copy. I can't really comment in regards to diluting the identity of cities versus communes, I think you can certainly make an argument for either skill, modified appropriately, for existence in any org. I've always felt the exclusion of the respective trade skills lent something interesting to politics, but if it's going to be changed we might as well make is as interesting as possible as opposed to complaining.

Make no mistake, there will be a lot of overlap (which is why we are *considering* a specialization but I don't know if that's how we'll go), and some potions and enchantments may still be needed that can only obtained in a commune or city (like some purgatives or cleanse). The teas/ales would not be *necessary* for combat or be curatives, nor would the music boxes and magic horns.

Oh

The idea has me less excited then.

There is *necessary* like a health pot and there is *necessary* like a mercy enchant. I think any buff is going to become "necessary" just because combat will have to be balanced around assuming both sides take full use of the buffs available to them.

If the teas/ales/boxes/horns have no affect on NPC combat and only limited affect on PC combat (like say gust or icewall) they might fall into the "not necessary" category, is that the type of thing you are talking about?

Would the bards gain new trans skill abilities/items or would they be the same as basic enchant/pots?