There's something about a MMO that lets players share gear, older players passing on older armor sets and weapons to newer guildies just gives me that fuzzy feeling.

what do you guys think? do you like the idea of a non player bound system where you can share old armor and weapons?

Would you rather items be bound to character? Or maybe your in the middle where you think level up items could be shared and the hard to get items should be player bound.

I personally feel all items should be shareable. why have a old armor set that you no longer have use for sitting in a bank? hand it to a buddy thats new to the game or one that just can't dedicate the amount of hours to the game as you.

What do you guys think?

It really depends, I could see this possibly becoming a huge problem for crafters trying to keep up. But if they could craft gear just as good if not better, I think it would be a great Idea. Would definatly improve my interest in playing alts as well. Or passing down gear to a new player/friend when I no longer need it.

I think that in a game like WoW where the ultimate goal was really to obtain gear, this wouldn't be good. Obtaining gear was your progression and how you unlocked more content that was viable for you to be able to participate in. It's a sort of right of passage really... everybody has to go through the experiences to obtain certain pieces of gear in order to show how far they have progressed. While it would be logical to pass down gear you don't need anymore, those people aren't really deserving of that gear as they haven't gone through the necessary tasks required of them in order to obtain that gear. I really enjoy collecting gear and all that as they are sort of trophies, and in a way metaphors, for all the progress you have made and the things you've been through.

I think there should be a mix.  Anything you have used you should keep, and newly dropped stuff some should be sellable and some not.  Probably the decent drops (equivalent to crafteds) should be sellable and the outstanding drops soulbound on pickup.

edit: maybe i misunderstood the question.  Absolute no on passing on used gear.

For starters I do not like having my appearence dictated by the items I wear I like to have full creative control over what my character looks like.  So that means that all items you have, not counting clothing pieces, are non visual.

Second I don't think gear should ever be powerful enough so that you would need to bind it to someone, which is a big reason why soulbound items exist.  So I say let people trade gear, it shouldn't make that big a difference in the first place.

The only exception is gear you got for achievements or holidays or something and clothing, which is just visual, so that people have to collect their own.

Another problem with gear being really is to transfer is then instead of only a few people in a group that need a item trying to get it, everyone will be trying to get it because they can just try and give it to their alts. This would just make those that only play one character have a harder time getting gear or equiptment.

Originally posted by BloodDuality

Another problem with gear being really is to transfer is then instead of only a few people in a group that need a item trying to get it, everyone will be trying to get it because they can just try and give it to their alts. This would just make those that only play one character have a harder time getting gear or equiptment.

Now thats interesting. I normally play mmos that don't totally revolve around gear.

In the games I play it's normally about a skill system gear is just there.

I think with a game that 100% revolves around obtaining items a non-player bound system wont work.

Even in the games I play if you can share gear it doesnt matter since you lose that gear on death or we have a decay system that makes sure that armor/weapon breaks sooner or later so crafters are still needed.

I think in a game like WoW sharing items while leveling could be cool but once you hit max level it would be a very bad idea. Same goes for other item focused games.

With no item loss/decay and 100% item focused game soulbound systems are needed because it would trivialize the game.

Originally posted by BloodDuality

Another problem with gear being really is to transfer is then instead of only a few people in a group that need a item trying to get it, everyone will be trying to get it because they can just try and give it to their alts. This would just make those that only play one character have a harder time getting gear or equiptment.

Yeah but there are so many times where gear drops and no one in the team can use it so it gets sharded or what not anyway, so it all can be balanced out if drop rates are adjusted.  Also the fact that the amount of gear is ciculation is now greater, you acn buy other younger players gear or such balances it out.

To OP yeah I really prefer non bounded gear, it just adds this whole new player of immersion and connectivity with the world.

EQ1 used to have almost all gear non soul bound and from experience they realized it needed to change.

Originally posted by metalhead980

There's something about a MMO that lets players share gear, older players passing on older armor sets and weapons to newer guildies just gives me that fuzzy feeling.

what do you guys think? do you like the idea of a non player bound system where you can share old armor and weapons?

Would you rather items be bound to character? Or maybe your in the middle where you think level up items could be shared and the hard to get items should be player bound.

I personally feel all items should be shareable. why have a old armor set that you no longer have use for sitting in a bank? hand it to a buddy thats new to the game or one that just can't dedicate the amount of hours to the game as you.

What do you guys think?

 

 

That feeling of guilding or passing down an item to a guildy or a needy newbie is great. Unfortunately as many (ie ALL) of the first generation MMORPG's learned, it is ultimately very very bad for the game as it eventually kills the underlying in game economy. There has to be something taking items out of the economy, otherwise the total availability of items in game escalates to the point where they are at best trivial, insane twinking occurs and imbalances rapidly start to escalate.

This was very obvious in AC1, EQ1 and UO. Soulbound items started to begin the norm in large part to compensate for the economic damage caused by the older style "give anything to anyone" loot mechanisms.

It really all depends on the type of game yor're playing and the type of armor you are trying to pass onto another new younger player.Yes,in certain ways CERTAIN armor and weapons should be tradable but,their should still be some limits because,think about it,lets say your guild leader is a level 2000 or something he could just go and give everyone in the guild thats level 1 level 2000 armor and it would be a 1 guild dominated game therefore,making it no fun for any other guild or players equalling a unhappy fanbase which equals an unsucessful game.

Originally posted by metalhead980

Originally posted by BloodDuality

Another problem with gear being really is to transfer is then instead of only a few people in a group that need a item trying to get it, everyone will be trying to get it because they can just try and give it to their alts. This would just make those that only play one character have a harder time getting gear or equiptment.

 

Now thats interesting. I normally play mmos that don't totally revolve around gear.

In the games I play it's normally about a skill system gear is just there.

I think with a game that 100% revolves around obtaining items a non-player bound system wont work.

Even in the games I play if you can share gear it doesnt matter since you lose that gear on death or we have a decay system that makes sure that armor/weapon breaks sooner or later so crafters are still needed.

I think in a game like WoW sharing items while leveling could be cool but once you hit max level it would be a very bad idea. Same goes for other item focused games.

With no item loss/decay and 100% item focused game soulbound systems are needed because it would trivialize the game.

 

Yeah what I was really getting at with my post was more directed at WoW and its endgame gear grinds. So many times when I played WoW I heard people saying that they should be able to gve their items to their alts, and I am just used to telling them what I considered the bad things with it, so thats what I brought up here. Not all games would have this problem such as something like eve-online where items do not matter as much and everything can be bought.

Personally, I feel this sort of system can only work in a game that has full loot and item decay. Soul binding is an artificial way to remove items from the economy in games without full loot.

The problem that a system like this can create is two fold.

First, it develops a problem of have and have nots for lower levels. People without higher level friends, or generous guilds, will be drastically better equipped at all times than those playing through the game without hand-me-downs.

Secondly, without some way, outside of the players control to permanently remove items from the economy, eventually the economy will become completely diluted with items. The economy suffers and crafters eventually become unnecessary

Originally posted by svann

EQ1 used to have almost all gear non soul bound and from experience they realized it needed to change.

^^ This.   It's not like EQ was like, "Oh, we should implement some totally arbitrary restriction on players, for no reason!"

When gear is progression being able to trade gear skips over huge chunks of content, ruining the intended balance of the game. (And in EQ's case, making the game extremely vulnerable to gold/item farmers.)

When gear isn't progression, it's fine.  It's only customization at that point.

Ive always been oposed to bound items, its specially disapointing in games where pvp gives you a chance to drop gear. I do realize some people think bounding is justified because it somehow helps the economy, but really there must be creative solutions to that issue.

Originally posted by Caleveira

Ive always been oposed to bound items, its specially disapointing in games where pvp gives you a chance to drop gear. I do realize some people think bounding is justified because it somehow helps the economy, but really there must be creative solutions to that issue.

Agreed.  I would be more in favor of full loot and unbound items.  All they'd need to do is limit the amount of items available, thus making those with "epic" gear, "epic" targets.

I liked what DAoC had done with their items.  None was bound to you and you'd be able to give it all away to anybody you choose.  The kicker was that a newbie could equip the highest level items but they'd degrade at an astronomical rate when compared with items his level.  If the difference between item level and player level was great enough you might get maybe 5 minutes of use out of a weapon and it would be damaged to the point that it gave no bonuses and did pathetic damage.  Also your items had a sort of "hit point" for repair.  Every time you repair the item these "hit point" would go down.  Once they reached about 70% the item was more or less useless because once again it would stop providing any kind of bonuses.  Assuming you're using items that are level appropriate to you, you could fight for days and not have to repair them.  Since repairs were few and far between at that point your item would last more then enough for you to outlevel it and get newer drops or in most cases if you had the money for it crafted items.

In short, I think the "soul" binding is something that only fits games like WoW where you are measured by the gear you wear.  Any other games should work on abolishing this mechanic... if you ask me.

Originally posted by madeux

Originally posted by Caleveira

Ive always been oposed to bound items, its specially disapointing in games where pvp gives you a chance to drop gear. I do realize some people think bounding is justified because it somehow helps the economy, but really there must be creative solutions to that issue.

 

Agreed.  I would be more in favor of full loot and unbound items.  All they'd need to do is limit the amount of items available, thus making those with "epic" gear, "epic" targets.

I also like this idea.  In a lot of these games the items deemed "epic" start to lose their "epic status" simply because sooner or later everybody gets them.  I think there should be items so rare that once you get your hands on one it should really mean something.  Walk into a town with one of these either strapped to your back or equipped and people should start whispering in the shadows with wild stories trying to explain to others where they THINK that stuff came from simply because it's so rare that not many have seen it.

I think this may destroy some of the economies of games, especially for crafters.  If people are always just passing down their gear, then the crafters have no one to sell their goods to.

I think the reason they took hand-me-down gear out of the early games was more to curb the gold sellers than because it was trivializing the game. In my opinion the change caused the games to become overly gear-focused which has ruined the communities.