Confectioner VS Alchemy. Are they headed the right way?

[Adwene Blightstalker]

The big topic of debate is the confectioner changes. My view is that Stage 1 of the changes, the food the DP's ect has already been debated to death and they will make those changes with due consideration. My concern is for the Stage 2 and 3 implementations.

My feelings are that they should look at alchemy as well as confectioner at the same time and rebalance both in a more appropriate manner. Stat buffs seem a things that should be handled by food. The 'racial portals' which are talked about should be handled by alchemy. This is what I think the break downs should roughly be.

Confectioner
Main: DP removal via food
Main: Stat Buffs
Hitpoint rewenal buffs.

Alchemy
Main: Reapers
Main: Recall potions to racial towns
Dmg shield potions
Increased dmg potions (which make weapons or spells hit harder)
Explosives

I'm sure people can come up with more interesting ideas that fit into both fields but I fully believe something like thiswould bebalanced solution and a more pratical one in the long run.

For discussion.

[LaughingOtter]

Alchemy should cover everything that is an individual performance enhancing buff. Confectioner should cover buffs that are intended for use in a group, or non-performance enhancing individual effects.

Recallitems are not performance-enhancing, therefor should be foods; health regen is, unless it is something that is most effective in a group. If a food's effect can only be gained in a tavern or when out of combat and sitting, then I don't have any issue with stat buffs or such being possible via foods.

Some foods have stat buffs now, placing them in direct conflict with the Bolster line of potions. As long as they don't overwrite or conflict with one another or with potion buffs, I don't see a huge issue since buffs from bolster potions and spell buffs currently stack. Still, I think I'd rather see stat buffs from food to be limited unless eaten in a tavern with a group.

Using foods for cosmetic changes is not performance enhancing and should not be in conflict with alchemy.

Adding or changing a damage type should be alchemy, as it's both individual and performance enhancing. The Balit's Island potions established that precedent. Smear oil on an axe to make it flame? Sure. Smear a muffin on an axe to make it flame? Mmm...no.

Dragons eating a size-reduction food that allows them to fight & fly at hatchie-size sounds good.

Meh, enough random thoughts...

[AA0]

Fire muffin!

[Guaran]

Some festival foods stack with potions (which they should IMHO) like the Festival Cookies, but the Festival Punch directly conflicts with Vestia's Soothing Remedy V.

In fact the effects look identical. Now on the surface it appears to me that Tulga to a shortcut and copy-pasted Vestia's effect onto the punch. but because of that they dont stack (when they should).

If they can fix that, and keep conflicts from arising in the next waves, then rollout will go ok.

[LaughingOtter]

In fact the effects look identical. Now on the surface it appears to me that Tulga to a shortcut and copy-pasted Vestia's effect onto the punch.

Not to get off on a tangent, but this perfectly illustrates why being forced to buy resources off the Vielo is fundamentally wrong. Getting the resources for a Vestia's together is very easy and none of it has to be bought. The Granny Nuffle punch should be made significantly better than a Vestia's and the conflict removed if we are going to be forced to buy the resources to make it.

Actually, come to think of it, it's not a tangent at all.

Alchemists don't have to buy ANY resources from NPCs.

If confectioners are forced to do so, anything madeusing purchased ingredients should totally outclass itsalchemical counterpart, if any. Making confectioners pay for an effect which alchemists canproduce for free is an offense against reason.

[PJ]

As an alchemist, consumable food buffs are a matter of concern. People have a limited amount of cash available for consumable buffs. So it goes to the most important and useful ones. They by far most powerful/useful combat consumable is already a confectioner product. More confectioner buffs that are better or as useful as existing potions will hurt sales in an already poor market for combat potions.

If food is going to give buffs, shouldn't potions remove death points?

[Guaran]

Good points. One thing to remember tho, is how often does someone actually use a Vestia's soothing remedy? I use them sometimes because a guildmember makes them for free. If I had to pay for one at a typical tier 5 potion price (500c) I'd just skip it. The effect simply isn't worth it in 99.99% of the fights.

The overlapping benefits does seem to be taking away from Alchemists.

However, if it's in a manner that makes sense, then I'm ok with it. Example:

A Recall potion (to a specific place, no bind shrine needed) [Alchemy]

Stat increases Potion or Food, so Both [Alchemy] and [Confectioner]
!!! AS long as effects are complementary and non-conflicting !!! <-important

Alacrity (delay, recycle modifiers) seems should be [Spell] or [Alchemy]
we already have Gummi Maggots [Confectioner] for this, but to me it seems the effect belongs in the realm of alchemy.

Attack converter, effects like flame attack [Spell] or [Alchemy]
nothing exists like this in the alchemy realm, but I could see a market for a flame attack, ice attack, etc buff that was granted from a potion. Very useful for dragons soloing, or groups without a mage or conjuror.


This is my general line of thinking, of how BOTH of these schools should progress.

I'm glad food is finally being completed. However encroaching onto alchemical territory should be limited.

I believe BOTH schools could be improved. I'd love flame attack potions and ice attack potions. These effects if they came from foods, don't seem to make alot of sense.

In cases where the food has an effect that seems to encroach on alchemical territory, instead of having one of the ingredients Vielo purchased, have it be an Alchemically produced ingredient. Sort of like mixing a special potion into the food. Then lore/fantasy/common sense can be satisfied. Alchemists aren't left out in this way either. One example where this would make sense are the gummi maggots. I like using them, but the effect "feels" to me like it should be Alchemical in origin. The vielo could even be retained as providing an ingredient, but this would be used to make a potion, with is then mixed into the food.

Downside: another formula needs created. existing formula for the gummi maggots need modified. Gummi maggot production a bit more complicated.

Upside: ease of implementing: the same vielo ingredient in gummi maggots (gelatin?) could be needed to make the alchemical potion. 1 potion could be enough to make 5 or 6 of the gummi maggots (reduce the amount of vielo purchased comps to about 1/5th the current ratios). This could offset the added trouble.

My defintion of an Alchemist (in a fantasy setting): Magical Chemistry
Confectioner: Cooks food

Those lines of thought used to determine where a new consumable buff should come from. For foods that will have a magical buff effect of some sort, the Alchemist can produce 1 of the ingredients.


maybe that was long and drawn out, just trying to point out where I am coming from.

I think both confectioner and alchemists could be improved and made more interesting, and could easily complement each other, if a little thought put into the formulas.

[LaughingOtter]

I don't think food should not be allowed to provide buffs; I do think they should compliment and stack with alchemical and spell buffs. If they are comparable in benefit to alchemical buffs, then there should be no purchased ingredients required.

I'm actually OK with gummi maggots because the trade-off for being forced to buy most of the ingredients is a vastly useful combat buff. I'd rather not see that be the standard pattern, though, because it does gimp alchemist. Of course, reviewing alchemy and punching the potions up so they are superior to spell buffs works, too... [;)]

Moving this further, imagine that dragons become able to manufacture crystals that confer buffs of their own, like a tech in crystal form. This provides dragons with a product they can market to bipeds, so let's assume - for discussion - that it is A Good Thing and everyone accepts it. Now, we have spells, potions, food, and manufactured crystals, all of which need to have some effect associated with them and need to be useful enough to attract a consumer base.

Is it logical to expect that each effect will be 100% unique? Is it logical to expect no overlap?

I'm asking this because right now, we have crystals that provide stat buffs, and if dragons could suddenly make them, they would be infringing on alchemy as well. So, is it required that food have no common benefit with alchemy? I think that food can be created to co-exist with potions, but I don't think both can be totally unique and non-overlapping.

[imported_Frith-Rae]

However, if it's in a manner that makes sense, then I'm ok with it. Example:

A Recall potion (to a specific place, no bind shrine needed) [Alchemy]

I don't pretend to understand this discussion as I've never played a biped and I know zippo about these schools, and actually most of these potions I've never heard of....

However, with lairshaping being the big activity right now - A potion or food item or whatever that provided them with a recall loation to a specific place (not their bind shrine)...would be MOST APPRECIATED!!!

And even if you didn't charge much for such items, a veritable gold mine.

(esp. from players like me who don't go make alts to get them stuff and are perfectly happy paying the populace for things they need...)

(hrm, editor is acting wierd...)