New repair discussion

[TheKobold]

After using it a bit, I do have a slight complaint that i almost broke several pieces of gear trying to refortify it with 5-6 sewing skill… That seems silly if im a competent or better seamster then i shouldnt be ruining gear so easily.

[kevin.granade]

Just fyi, “this uses too much thread” or “this damages items too often” is useless unless you include what you think the correct rate or chance of failure is and why.

[Zireael]

I’d halve the current thread usage.

[Random_dragon]

I’d halve the current thread usage.

That pretty much what I already suggested, yeah. :V

[Rokmonkey]

Halving it would be a good middle ground to start from.

Another thought would be to have a fixed thread cost for repairing and reinforcing and then a % chance of using a thread when failing an attempt.

[BadAssMcGhee]

Came here to say this. I get the new system and I don’t want to complain just because it’s new. But, should a 5 or 6 skill tailor really be destroying like-new clothing just because they are trying to reinforce it?

In an attempt for realism, you’ve made it completely unrealistic. At some point destroying the item simply by tailoring skill shouldn’t even be possible. If you want realism, you should make clothing ripped/destroyed in combat have a chance to not be repairable (it’s still wearable, just beyond repair without using duct tape or something).

If I had decent enough skills as a tailor and I were trying to reinforce, say, a pair of pants - yeah, I might screw up some of the seams on the first go 'round, but I’d know how to reverse the stitch to minimize damage and certainly wouldn’t destroy the item. I’d probably get it right (and completely reinforce the item, btw) on the second attempt (i.e., the first attempt would be a -1 on the item, but the second attempt would be a +2).

I get that 5 or 6 skill isn’t exactly mastering it, but it’s still fairly competent and destruction of clothing is simply not something that a “fairly competent” tailor would do.

After using it a bit, I do have a slight complaint that i almost broke several pieces of gear trying to refortify it with 5-6 sewing skill… That seems silly if im a competent or better seamster then i shouldnt be ruining gear so easily.

[Random_dragon]

I’ve had a similar issue. Usually I try to reinforce something and the condition decides to fluctuate back and forth between damaged and repaired

I suspect someone messed up in translating the odds of success from the old system to the new system. I don’t know how exactly it works, but I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s something insane like “enough failed rolls lead to failure result” or something instead of rolling once when a repair cycle has completed, which is going to skew the odds.

If it DOES work by only making the roll once per repair cycle, then I have no idea how the odds got messed up so severely.

[BeerBeer]

I’m opposed to the idea of damaging an item further just because of low skill. At the very least the damage should stop at the brink of destruction. I don’t mind the thread/battery/rag/plastic consumption. You can always find more. Failure should simply result in thread/battery/rag/plastic/material consumption, which at the current rate is penalty enough. Eventually, after enough failures, you would understand that you’re not gonna be able to repair the item with current skill level. Also, XP gain from repair failure should then be very low or disabled as to not be an exploit. Let failures consume Focus, too, possibly Morale as well. If Morale gets low, then you’re too bummed out and unable to continue. Also report after several failures that “Your fabrication/tailoring/mechanics/electronics may not be high enough” (choose one), just like the game reports “You don’t seem to be damaging the wall” when unsuccessfully trying to break down a wall with a blunt item. That is just so the player is aware which skill is the problem, because it is not always apparent.

[Malkeus]

You should be able to destroy an item at low skill level (0-2), because you are unskilled. You don’t know when to stop and you keep trying till the piece is in ruins. At higher skill levels there should be a check when you are about to destory something and you will have progressively better odds of stopping short of total destruction. I think it should reach 100% odds of not destroying the item around level 8 or so. Thoughts?

[Coolthulhu]

Eventually, after enough failures, you would understand that you’re not gonna be able to repair the item with current skill level.

Making an item un-repairable because of enough failures would be really hacky.
Not informing the player of lack of progress until it’s too late would be quite bad.

Making repairs require higher level could be a thing, though.
Say, level 3 to repair 1 damage, level 4 to repair 2 damage etc. Level 8 to reinforce.

No morale/focus loss. That would be too specific. Out of all things that drain morale, long crafting would be incredibly benign.
Focus is drained by training.

If it DOES work by only making the roll once per repair cycle, then I have no idea how the odds got messed up so severely.

Old roll was a single roll that would result in success or failure depending on value.
New one is a separate success and failure roll, to make material consumption a thing and make repairs not guaranteed so that once in a while you have to get a new armor piece rather than indefinitely “refreshing” the existing one.

[Zireael]

I agree that at higher skill levels destroying an item should no longer happen. Damaging, maybe, but destroying at tailoring 5? Nope.

[BadAssMcGhee]

[quote=“Coolthulhu, post:70, topic:11181”]Making repairs require higher level could be a thing, though.
Say, level 3 to repair 1 damage, level 4 to repair 2 damage etc. Level 8 to reinforce.[/quote]
This makes more sense to me. You can’t reinforce until Level 6 or 7 or something (or maybe it’s tied to the level of the item itself - i.e., you can reinforce simple clothing like underwear but not more complex clothing like a jacket or backpack). After Level 5 you can’t destroy items through “repair.” Levels 1-4 increase odds of repair and decrease waste.

[Malkeus]

This makes more sense to me. You can’t reinforce until Level 6 or 7 or something (or maybe it’s tied to the level of the item itself - i.e., you can reinforce simple clothing like underwear but not more complex clothing like a jacket or backpack). After Level 5 you can’t destroy items through “repair.” Levels 1-4 increase odds of repair and decrease waste.

I like this idea. Then we might see fewer day 1 tanks without giving up points in combat ability for tailoring skill. As is, I can spend the first day making all my things fitted and reinforced with nothing but scraps of wood from a shattered bench and the curtains off the windows. The increase thread cost has made this a day 2 prospect, unless you can find some leather for slings…Still too soon to have a fully reinforced trenchcoat with tailoring only at level 3.

[pisskop]

Why? what an arbitrary distinction, to need such a high level of tailoring when the system you have now works.’

These penalties arent unbearable. I dont even know if its impossible to reinforce armor at lvl 0, its just functionally unlikely afaik.

Im seeing a lot if people trying to minimize risk. But there’s 1 sure way to ensure something isnt destroyed or isnt damaged by a repair attempt.
Dont do it. You level up so fast that settling for partial repairs while you learn to reinforce your less valuable stuff isnt unreasonable.

Youre supposed to practice on Zclothing beforehand, and setting an arbitrary minimum on the clothing to justify never losing items is silly. And it hurts people who are taking risks.

[BeerBeer]

[quote=“Coolthulhu, post:70, topic:11181”]Making an item un-repairable because of enough failures would be really hacky.
Not informing the player of lack of progress until it’s too late would be quite bad.[/quote]
I didn’t say to render items unrepairable because of failures, if that’s the way you understood it. An item would just be beyond the character’s current skill. My vision is that repeated failure would just consume materials, and damage the item to a degree, but not destroy it.

What exactly counts as “too late” of a warning, or “early enough”, is debatable. The “you’re likely not gonna succeed” message could be displayed after 5 consecutive failures, for example. Or if the predicted chance to succeed is 5% or less. 10%. Or if you’ve damaged the item twice in a row. Up for a debate.

And it hurts people who are taking risks.

With my suggestion there would still be plenty of risk, if there’s a risk of ruining a slightly damaged item to nearly-destroyed condition. Wearing it would be a constant risk as one hit could destroy it. I just don’t think it’s realistic that you can destroy a clothing item with lack of skill while you’re trying to repair it. Also, it’s bloody annoying when it does happen. Either way, if I feel I’m not skilled enough to repair a clothing item, I put it away until I’m more skilled and not risk getting it damaged further, or worse. To me it’s not a pleasant or a meaningful risk. I take other kinds of risks.

How a character is supposed to gain his skill is debatable. Grind it on zombie clothing… or find a book. Receive NPC training.

[pisskop]

Ive just sat and destroyed a fully repaired sheath, desstroyed fully repaired socks, fully repaired a | sweater, and fitted out |/ leather pants.

Its a bit more random with results than I think it could be, but we’re talking about a lvl 2 drunk tailor with 5-7 dexterity. Its strictly dickly rng so far as I can see.

I repaired the thermal socks from |/ too. Most of that stuff was refitted by me, on level 2.

This isnt a character primed for tailoring. And he’s fine with his tailoring. Im not trying to reinforce the stuff, because that takes too long or will waste my thread or will damage my stuff. Its a thing Im willing to wait for.

Same is for soldering too. That steel spear was damaged by hallucinations, and we fixed it fine.

---

I dont mean to say the mechanics cant change. Just that these arent nearly as broken as people seem to think. You certainly have interesting ideas.

[TheKobold]

Found typo, says i can’t solder when i am trying to use the sewing kit or tailors kit and can’t do so because of reasons.

[kevin.granade]

Cross-posting an informative post from the bay12 forums:

[quote=“n9103”]I’m kinda curious what they’re using as the unit length for a charge of thread.
If it’s only 1cm/charge, then I think the new numbers would be much more appropriate.
I use a couple feet of thread when I IRL thoroughly repair just a moderately sized rip/tear (say between 3-6")
The reinforcing process would basically involve stitching on top of most existing stitches, as well as adding a few cross-panel stitches on the more vulnerable non-seam areas.

Rough estimate for me to fully reinforce a t-shirt, the low end I would put at probably… ~35-50’ depending on size.

3’/sleeve (cuff and inseam)
3’/shoulder (cuff and topseam)
2’ for collar (don’t want too reinforced for possible choking situation)
6-8’ for waist opening
6-8’ for side stitching
12-16’ for general reinforcement (across chest and back, sleeve outseams)[/quote]

[TheKobold]

I would like to add to that, when refitting something, you will often have to disassemble the parts that dont fit(if not the entire thing) and remove material or add it.

But as for the 1cm a charge, if you get 50 threads from unraveling a short string which is 6 inches wouldnt that make each charge of thread 6 inches?

[Random_dragon]

Hmm. I’m not really entirely sure that the guesswork for how much a unit of thread is worth is being estimated from the right direction.

I would assume that 50 units of thread is comparable to a small spool, like you might have in a travel-sized sewing kit. Which is a decent amount, but it likely varies depending on where the spool’s from and the type of thread.

On the other hand, this makes me realize something. While I’ve never had to do major repairs of half-tattered items, for all the regular smaller-scale sewing I’ve been, nice thick button thread is a lot better than thinner thread, to the point of needing less length of thread for something secure.