|
Once a rune if equipped onto a piece of gear, it can’t be taken off. I think having some permanence to gear is a good design choice, but should not be absolute. I would like to propose to the developers to add an option to destroy the rune upon replacement.
This adds flexibility with rune bonuses as we change gear pieces to satisfy defense requirements and allows people to experiment with runes and help avoid locking in a mistake. Destroying the rune is enough of a deterrent. The devs could even add a small chance to lose the socket as an additional consequence if deemed necessary.
Last edited by CharlesJT#7681 on Jan 4, 2025, 9:57:23 PM Last bumped on Jan 9, 2025, 2:28:46 AM
|
Posted byCharlesJT#7681on Jan 4, 2025, 9:39:10 PM
|
|
+1
|
Posted byacbx#4314on Jan 4, 2025, 9:40:41 PM
|
|
That is much better
|
Posted byStrykerxS77x#8221on Jan 4, 2025, 10:27:21 PM
|
"
Agreed, and hope GGG adds in next patch.
|
Posted byCharlesJT#7681on Jan 5, 2025, 9:24:50 AM
|
"
The devs could even add a small chance to lose the socket as an additional consequence if deemed necessary.
I agreed with everything EXCEPT this point. unless they buff the drop rates for the item needed to add a socket back (and I mean substantially), I don't see the point of this penalty. except to be yet another instance of the game randomly punishing me for trying to optimize gear.
crafting is bad enough right now. leave this part out, but let runes be replaceable at the cost of destroying the rune.
|
Posted bycidriel#4564on Jan 5, 2025, 9:46:35 AM
|
"
crafting is bad enough right now. leave this part out, but let runes be replaceable at the cost of destroying the rune.
Agreed, destroying the rune should be enough of a penalty.
|
Posted byCharlesJT#7681on Jan 6, 2025, 8:17:18 AM
|
"
"
The devs could even add a small chance to lose the socket as an additional consequence if deemed necessary.
I agreed with everything EXCEPT this point. unless they buff the drop rates for the item needed to add a socket back (and I mean substantially), I don't see the point of this penalty. except to be yet another instance of the game randomly punishing me for trying to optimize gear.
crafting is bad enough right now. leave this part out, but let runes be replaceable at the cost of destroying the rune.
these are free. just pickup socketed items and disenchant.
|
Posted byWipiid#6762on Jan 6, 2025, 8:50:53 AM
|
|
Someone posted a thread earlier. Saying runes should roll its values like normal affixes do.
That way there is a reason to keep spending runes rather than stash them away. To get that perfect roll.
|
Posted bymrfox123#7595on Jan 6, 2025, 8:57:34 AM
|
"
"
The devs could even add a small chance to lose the socket as an additional consequence if deemed necessary.
I agreed with everything EXCEPT this point. unless they buff the drop rates for the item needed to add a socket back (and I mean substantially), I don't see the point of this penalty. except to be yet another instance of the game randomly punishing me for trying to optimize gear.
crafting is bad enough right now. leave this part out, but let runes be replaceable at the cost of destroying the rune.
I think destroying the current rune is potentially not enough, but I do agree potentially losing the socket is too much. You have extra sockets from Vaaling, there should be no chance of losing it and completely bricking it especially. Although in the instance of these items I would argue there is good reason to just not let the replacement allowed to happen
Since this is part of the bench crafting replacement, removing/replacing also requires a scour. There should be something else needed. I'm not sure if another currency (rune removal currency?) would be in line with poe2 design philosophy but a slightly higher cost would be appropriate.
Maybe you need to use a second of the original rune to remove it, or runes are cancelled by a certain other rune. Maybe a gold cost at the salvage or reforging bench and give it another use? There should be something, but much less severe then losing the socket
|
Posted byRkHalo#3908on Jan 6, 2025, 9:23:08 AM
|
"
"
"
The devs could even add a small chance to lose the socket as an additional consequence if deemed necessary.
I agreed with everything EXCEPT this point. unless they buff the drop rates for the item needed to add a socket back (and I mean substantially), I don't see the point of this penalty. except to be yet another instance of the game randomly punishing me for trying to optimize gear.
crafting is bad enough right now. leave this part out, but let runes be replaceable at the cost of destroying the rune.
I think destroying the current rune is potentially not enough, but I do agree potentially losing the socket is too much. You have extra sockets from Vaaling, there should be no chance of losing it and completely bricking it especially. Although in the instance of these items I would argue there is good reason to just not let the replacement allowed to happen
Since this is part of the bench crafting replacement, removing/replacing also requires a scour. There should be something else needed. I'm not sure if another currency (rune removal currency?) would be in line with poe2 design philosophy but a slightly higher cost would be appropriate.
Maybe you need to use a second of the original rune to remove it, or runes are cancelled by a certain other rune. Maybe a gold cost at the salvage or reforging bench and give it another use? There should be something, but much less severe then losing the socket
I'm fine with a small additional cost
|
Posted byluck_my_fife#6854on Jan 6, 2025, 9:25:37 AM
|
