Ah, so it's only un-ID'd items that your looking to safeguard. OK, I get it now. I still think you're being too protective of the player, but I get it.
Let me throw this at you. Players will ID stuff by use, even if it's risky, because there's an incentive/reward to do so (speedier gameplay, excitement, less GP spent on ID). It's always been this way. I'd say that you're removing most of if not all the risk and leaving only the reward, making the decision a no-brainer. I thought you wanted less of that.
I think that if we were to change the quote so that the word chance read reasonable chance then we'd be in agreement.
Let me throw this at you. Players will ID stuff by use, even if it's risky, because there's an incentive/reward to do so (speedier gameplay, excitement, less GP spent on ID). It's always been this way. I'd say that you're removing most of if not all the risk and leaving only the reward, making the decision a no-brainer. I thought you wanted less of that.
I think that if we were to change the quote so that the word chance read reasonable chance then we'd be in agreement.
Comment