Curse

Drelias Melaku · Mar 03, 2008, 10:43 PM // 22:43

/notsigned

This would just promote more elitism, such as "mi reqs less thn urs so im betta cuz i cen a4d it, u cant, 101z!!1!one!1eleven" ...Or however people type because they think it's cool...

Tyla · Mar 03, 2008, 11:46 PM // 23:46

Lolwut?
/notsigned
/flame
/incinerate

Shayne Hawke · Mar 04, 2008, 01:26 AM // 01:26

/signed

Only because this might create a market for high req. items for people that use builds with that high of attributes. Might be able to add a little balance against people who seek r8 and r7 req. weapons.

And it'd be funny to look at.

Yawgmoth · Mar 04, 2008, 05:51 AM // 05:51

How big would you want a q13 Colossal Scimitar to be?
And how tiny would a q6 (nonmax) one be?

Seriously, this idea doesn't make sense. Nothing wrong with the sizes of most weapons. Don't forget that weapon sizes scale with character size, and the differences are already quite massive. Adding clrearly visible size differences based on req. would make things just gross. Think of a biggest warrior destroying a smallest female monk with a huge oversized q13 weapon twice as big as she is.

/not signed, it's not the way to go

Axel Zinfandel · Mar 04, 2008, 06:18 AM // 06:18

I think it'd be more interesting if it scaled with your -current- attribute, not the requirement of the weapon. It makes less sense, but does less damage to the economy.

Anyone for -that-? XD