gem-eating armor script

Are these all the possible gem options for gem-eating armor?


If you know about any others, can you post on to this list? Thx


Diamonds - VHCP
Uncut Ruby - VHDP
Black opal - impact resistance
Blue Moonstone - vaccum resistance
Fire Pearl - puncture protection
a deep blue mermaid's tear sapphire - crush resistance
orange imperial topaz - fire resistance
emerald - slash resistance
rainbow quartz - lightning resistance
a chunk of pale blue ice stone - vacuum resistance


Here is what the analyze reports:
The creator has also provided the following information:
A variety of gems will add up to 15 different abilities to use with this armor. Some gems will shatter as they cannot be used, while other gems may tell you they need to have a higher value to be able to work.

The command is PUSH "NOUN" of the armor to mount a gem in the setting.



I read that resistance level was between 40-60 points. I haven't tested yet.

This script is bugged. Tonight I put in a high value black opal, then immediately went hunting (I mean this occurred about 3 minutes after I inserted the black opal). Shattered on the first hit (which was crush damage, not impact damage, anyway).

A storm giant swings a morning star at you!
AS: +247 vs DS: +253 with AvD: +32 + d100 roll: +96 = +122
... and hits for 8 points of damage!
Broken finger on your right hand!
A black opal's set into some gem-encrusted double leathers chest piece glows brightly then suddenly shatters!



Also, in a separate incident earlier today, I had a bard wearing the armor. Bard purified a gem, which exploded, and the armor should have resisted since a purifying gem explosion is impact damage (and all my other resist armor does show a message on a gem explosion). No activation, even though the armor was set on impact resist.


Any suggestions on how to get this fixed? Bug item, or report?

Well I put another black opal in the armor, and this time things worked:

Some gem-encrusted double leathers partially deflects the onslaught of the impact attack.
... 20 points of damage!
Good blow to your left leg!
You are stunned for 3 rounds!
Roundtime: 5 sec.

I replied to your officials thread, but not sure if you'll see it any time soon. Good news though, Wyrom said today this script is getting rebuilt in response to a post of mine on it. I own the chain set from the auction and am looking forward to what results. Its a great idea but never seemed to work right even after Wyrom worked on it a few years back.

"There is a GM working on it. It was a complete rebuild. These can be some of the hardest projects to take on. I'll see if the GM who is working on it can post about it." Wyrom

A complete rebuild huh, sounds like something a mechanic would say. Thanks for cross posting this!

NP, its something I've been keeping up with since the auction in the hopes it would get ironed out. Wyrom posted another tidbit which also sounds interesting:

"I think the armor is going to be a lot better with the rework. Unfortunately, the original concept was created by a GM who left us shortly after it was created, and it ended up being riddled with bugs. But I promise it's getting some godly treatment."

An update on the officials if anyone else is interested in this armor script. I think its pretty neat. Resistances are 40-60% based on gem value (with the current/old script anyway) and the padding is 12 CER. I have a black pearl in my chain set and it sings as 49% puncture resistance, so not bad. The bad news is its currently set as Magic Resistant, my feedback was to remove that tag so it could at least be enchanted and ensorcelled. The current item enhancement paradigm means that level of restrictive balancing just isn't needed. The script also blocks at least Cat C padding since it can create its own, but it might be able to take some other Cat C enhancements (I've asked for clarification in the thread). It can also take Cat B enhancements. So if just Cat A is opened up by removing the magic resistance I'll be happy.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Gem-eater Armor Status - update

For those patiently waiting on the Gem-eater Armor Re-write to happen, it is nearing completion.

I accepted the Gem-eater Armor script rewrite because I was confident that my experience with the Gem-eater Runestaff script would be directly applicable. The only downside was that initially, you needed to be holding the armor in your right hand and have about ten ranks of magical skills per level in order for the armor to work.

Of course, the rewrite effort has been more involved than originally anticipated, but the unresolved issues are now down to two and are being worked on as a top priority.

Some facts about the present incarnation of the rewritten script (some are original, some are changes):

1. The script was and is built to only differentiate based on a gem's noun. This was done to eliminate a level of complexity and significantly reduce conditional logic.

2. A gem can be inserted into the armor's socket when the armor is either worn or held.

3. An unwanted gem in the armor can be PULLed to shatter the gem and empty the socket for another gem to be inserted.
(Thank you for posting this suggestion. We do read the forum posts.)

4. A gem with a value less than 100 silvers will effectively be valued as a 100-silvers gem by the armor, ie. it will fit into the setting and will provide four hits/charges of resistance or 100 sec. of resistance duration, whichever occurs first. So more gems are usable, but the lower-end gems are only very marginally useful, ie. 100 seconds of duration ain't hardly nothin'.

5. Gem types that don't work with the armor will simply not fit into the setting. They won't shatter if they're not usable.

6. At present the script retains its "gem-value = seconds of resistance duration" limiter. Whether this aspect will be retained in the final version isn't set in stone yet, but the code is complete and is working, so if this changes it will be simple to remove. However, retaining it may be deemed necessary for game/item balance reasons.

7. The suggestion of retaining the duration timer but removing the (value = charges) aspect is counter-intuitive enough to me that I don't see it happening. For gems to provide runestaves with a variable number of flares based on value, but when set in armor they provide a resistance regardless of the number of flares (or strikes) blocked seems gratuitously inconsistent.

Additionally, I am interested in your input with regard to the assignment of which gem(s) provide which resistance within the script. I don't presume that the present assignments are the "best" possible, but maybe they are, so here's your chance to weigh in on the topic. Please keep in mind that any gem designated to support one type of resistance cannot be used to support any other type of resistance. That should be obvious, but sometimes it's helpful to state every qualifier.

The current list of gem types that are acceptable for use in any gem-eater armor are as follows:

No code has to be inserted here.


I realize that current owners of existing gem-eater armors may potentially be negatively impacted by a change to which gem type provides which resistance type, but I am guessing that the potential for improvement is also significant. If, however, the current assignments are regarded as optimal, please comment to that effect. Now is the time to tweak, before the rewrite reaches its conclusion.

Thanks,
- Mikos

"The script also blocks at least Cat C padding since it can create its own, but it might be able to take some other Cat C enhancements"

Well voln armor creates its own padding, and voln armor doesn't block Cat C. Voln armor script only uses up category D, and with only that category they can have phantom padding stack onto whatever base padding you have on the armor.

That's a good point, although there's probably a difference in that the script actually fills that slot at the point you put the gem into the armor and the voln script only creates the padding during the attack resolution calculations.

Meaning you can sing and assess the padding on the armor when you have a diamond or ruby in it. I think that's the difference, probably like other scripts that create flares in the Cat B slot and block flare adding, ie Ironwright or GEF.

I know its a good point, the opportunity cost of blocking everything else out is way too high. Currently I can't even add ranger resistance to gem-eating armor. Thats a huge opportunity cost, especially since ranger resist will be permanent reistance soon.


"So if just Cat A is opened up by removing the magic resistance I'll be happy."

You should re-think that. I posted on the officials, if thats how this armor is going to be, then it should support using 3 different gems all at once.

I don't disagree with you, I am however not overly optimistic in what we can expect other than having a functional script in the end.

I would be immensely happy if Cat A opens up on it and it functions normally otherwise ... because neither of those things exists currently. Better = happy. In fact, if the magic resistant tag is not removed I'll definitely be posting negative feedback about it. There's simply no reason for that tag anymore, especially not with the Cat C restrictions.

I would also be more happy if Cat C opens up completely, I just don't think it will. That being said, I did post feedback supporting what you said about Cat C. Maybe we'll get lucky. :)

OK fingers crossed. We will see if Wyrom was talking out of his ass when he said the armor was going to be "godly" soon.

I don't really think they could handle doing the script to support using 3 gems at a time. They can barely get 1 working. But if they did, this is how they should do it:
- t1 - OTS, socketed for 1 gem at a time
- t2 - rare unlock, does 2 gems at a time
- t3 - auction grade unlock, does 3 gems a time


If they did the above, then they could get more use out of the script. As hard as they made it sound for someone to fix, its been years, they might as well get some revenue in the door for it.

I think one basic balance point they probably never thought about is the difference between weapons and armor. For a gem-eater weapon, being able to put a gem in that gives bless is akin to a permabless weapon. Very valuable, not to mention being able to switch it to crit weighting against the living, or certain flares to guys that have flare vulnerability. Very practical with 1 gem at a time!

Armor is completely different... you dont want 1 thing on armor, you want a few things because you have some many defenses that you need to shore up with armor. Thats why this armor will be unpractical if it stays incompatible with everything else and can only do 1 thing at a time

Yeah this armor is from 2016 which predates the Monty Hall jump in power we've seen in the intervening time.

I still think it will have its uses even if Cat C doesn't open up, but I think it would be a specialist armor likely for squares with high redux where it would be better than damage padding in some places. Likely better on chain or possibly just plate. I might convert the torso chain to mbp or full plate with my warrior if the psm 3.0 changes come through and the free armor conversion happens (mbp to make it usable by a few more classes).

I also had sorta the same idea regarding tiering, I think it would do well as a DR tiering script from what you described.