Tasslehoff wrote:
Allow crafted items to be re-rollable.
Any cube recipe that results in a crafted item needs a unique set of inputs to determine what extra mods appear on the item, so we can't just use a glyph, hammer, or 3 crafted items of the same craft type because the cube won't know if you're after emerald-craft mods or something else. We could re-roll crafted items by copying their recipe and replacing "mag" (magic input item) with "crf" (crafted input item), while leaving everything else alone. It wouldn't be hard, but would take some time. The only benefit of this is that you wouldn't need to find a new magic base item, which might seem pretty nice to some folks. For the person implementing this change: consider copy-pasting the crafting rows into a new spreadsheet, then using Find-Replace-All (i.e. swap ",mag," with ",crf,"), and then adding them back to cubemain.txt.
Tasslehoff wrote:
Allow more than 1 MEGA potion to be bought from vendors that sell them.
Due to hardcoded limitations, this appears only possible if the vendor has this type of potion in stock in Normal difficulty. I don't see a problem with that since the potions are level-limited. It would just look funny to see Akara selling such 1337 goods.
Tasslehoff wrote:
Allow class-specific items to be gamble-able.
Certainly would make it easier to find a magic item for crafting or get a particular set item, but might frustrate people because these would reduce the odds of other items appearing. Consider removing some entries from gamble.txt that people rarely want to gamble (the base items people rarely want to gamble, like armor, slow or low-damage weapons, etc (some community polls could be taken)). If an item appears multiple times in gamble.txt, then it is simply more likely to appear in the gamble window (but rings and amulets are special). Last I knew, people mostly wanted to gamble jewels, rings, amulets, and circlets (to roll a rare of their character level), but occasionally I wanted to gamble some set piece.
As mentioned, it's probably a bit late for this patch to insert these changes. The file edits wouldn't take too long I think, but getting the rest of the community to consider the changes would. That aside, I suppose you can't be blamed for not taking part in the original discussion around May, since you didn't exist on the forum at the time