Usability flagging, meet... common sense?
![djc](https://forums.beamdog.com/applications/dashboard/design/images/defaulticon.png)
There seems to be lots of item descriptions suffering of the following problem:
"Whoa, I found a weapon. Let's see the description!"
DAGGER OF A MAGE
...
Not usable by:
Fighter
Bard
Cleric
Druid
Ranger
Paladin
Kensai
Barbarian
Fighter/Mage
Fighter/Thief
Et Cetera
Et Cetera
Et Cetera
...
Why not
DAGGER OF A MAGE
...
Usable by:
Mage
instead? It would probably be a bit more player-friendly.
"Whoa, I found a weapon. Let's see the description!"
DAGGER OF A MAGE
...
Not usable by:
Fighter
Bard
Cleric
Druid
Ranger
Paladin
Kensai
Barbarian
Fighter/Mage
Fighter/Thief
Et Cetera
Et Cetera
Et Cetera
...
Why not
DAGGER OF A MAGE
...
Usable by:
Mage
instead? It would probably be a bit more player-friendly.
5
Comments
And the multiclasses in the description are a pain.
For a lot lot of items, it should be: Usable by:
Multi/dual/single class:
- figters
- paldins
- rangers
- barbarians
- bards
Exept
- beastmasters
- multi/dualclass clerics
- Multi/dualclass druids
All clear? So its unusable by:
- clerics,
- cleric/thieves,
- cleric/fighters,
- cleric/ranger,
- cleric/mage,
- mage
- druid
- fighter/druid
- sorcerer
- beastmaster
- thief
- thief/mage
- Figter/cleric/thief
But that's no excuse at all, as it's a very lazy implementation. At least they could have determined if a 'usable' or 'not usable' list would be shorter and then use this.
Still it's a cool feature request if implemented correctly.
Hence what I said before.