Oblivion talk:Magic Items

Archives
Archive 1: April 2006 - July 2006

sorcerer's ring

this may sound stupid but does any1 know where to find uber drops chests? ive been searching for sorcerer's ring for ages and had no luck up to now. i really want the ring so can someone please help me out? — Unsigned comment by Wtf (talk • contribs)

First, your character has to be at least level 20 to have any chance of finding that ring. Boss Chests summarizes what the chances are finding loot in all the various boss chests in the game. Your best chance for finding an enchanted ring is in boss chests in monster lairs, so you want to target the locations at Oblivion:Places that say they're inhabited by monsters. Other than that, almost every boss chest (except bandit boss chests) in the game gives you a 10% chance of finding a ring. But if you're looking for just one ring it could take a long time... there are hundreds of possible rings that could appear any time you find a ring. --Nephele 23:23, 16 February 2007 (EST)

Need Help

I have been looking for Ring of Perfection forever could someone help me out on where to find it? THANKS — Unsigned comment by 24.231.189.86 (talk)

It's random loot so there is no guaranteed place to find it, and it's not supposed to be something that is easy to obtain. First, you have to level 20 to have any chance of finding it. You can check Oblivion:Dungeons#Boss Chests to see what types of boss chests have good chances of containing enchanted jewelry. You have to at least be looking in places where it's possible for enchanted jewelry to appear. But even there having any ring appear isn't guaranteed, and if one does appear you only have about a 1% chance of the ring being the Ring of Perfection. The only place I know of with marginally better chances is the Blind Moth Prelate at the end of the Temple of the Ancestor Moths; see Oblivion:Turning a Blind Eye#Notes for details. --Nephele^Talk 13:47, 29 July 2007 (EDT)

boreal

is there any connection between boreal and boreal stone cave

Random loot. I found it when i did Raid on Greyland for the first time, and i thought it was exclusive to the skooma dealer.

Ring of Treachery and Ring of Perfection

OMG!! These are killah rings!! The wiki says that the rings are just random loot, but I was wondering if they are generally found in specific areas, like caves, forts, etc. I found the Ring of Treachery just after I reached level 20 in a cave and I found Ring of Perfection in Shivering. Any thoughts? — Unsigned comment by TobyD (talk • contribs)

Umm, random loot = random loot. See other discussions on this page (e.g., #Need Help) and the various dungeons pages (Dungeons, Conjurer Dungeons, Monster Dungeons) for information on what where magic jewelry can randomly appear. --Nephele^Talk 01:56, 20 November 2007 (EST)

Obsolete Page?

The page found at Generic Magic Apparel actually has all the items listed here, and many that are not. This is easy to see if one looks at the amulets. There are far more than 3 amulets in the game of oblivion which can be found in random loot. My concern is that someone will look for "Magic Items" which is a pretty basic term, see this, and be misinformed as to other possibilities because this page simply doesn't list them, and is in some cases a redundant copy of a far more informative and valuable page found elsewhere.

We should either update this page, or take it down. --Alaston

The short answer is no, this page is not obsolete. None of the information on the page is redundant; none of the items listed here are listed on other pages.

The long answer is... well, more than I have time to get into right now.

But to give you a different long answer.... From your comments here, plus your previous comments here and here I'm basically left with the impression that you think that all of our item pages are disorganized and chaotic. Who knows. But I'm very reluctant to get involved in the discussion unless it's clear that in the end it will be possible to fix any perceived problems. Which means that there have to be editor(s) who are willing to tackle any resulting reorganization, and there have to be some clear proposals for what would actually be done differently. It's a huge amount of work, but when I look at your questions all that I can see is the very real possibility that if I respond I'm going to end up being compelled to do some if not all of that huge amount of work. So before entering the discussion I'd like to first know what's going to come of the discussion, whether it's really likely that the discussion is going to lead to something, and whether I'm unlikely to be the person doing all of the work.

In other words, it would be far more helpful to have some specific suggestions "do X, Y, and Z" instead of an open-ended general criticism such as "this page needs to be updated." --Nephele^Talk 00:26, 27 February 2008 (EST)

Fair enough Nephele, I see your point. Perhaps I worded it poorly above. How about this then, "Why are the magical amulets spread out over two different pages? I think it would make more sense if they were all on one page, or even if they were all on both pages, but they're in different places with 3 amulets listed on this page, and the rest listed on the Generic Magic Apparel page - How come they're not all listed together, even if that means they'd be listed twice?" That's what I would recommend - is a comprehensive list of the amulets. I'll even do it myself if I can get a guide on how to update the tables correctly.

For the "who is doing all the work" part, as I've said before I'm willing to help, so long as all Hell doesn't break loose over minutia.

To the comments you linked to with the argument with Rpeh, I don't have much to say. It was an unfortunate circumstance, and I think Rpeh and I have dealt with it. In regards to the artifacts definition, I stand by that statement, and still believe that we (on the wiki) should define "artifacts" the same way the game does. Does the game not have a set list of "artifacts" built into it? This is the impression I was under based on the conversation - if that's not the case let me know. If this is the case, then I don't see why our definition should be different from the game's.

The end result is I am perfectly willing to do all the crap I'm recommending/critiquing as well as criticize/recommend it. That's not the issue here. The issue has been the past experiences we've had when that was done - and is why I am reluctant to do anything but "advise" since then. I found it much easier to just tell you guys the things I was having trouble with and let you make the changes, rather than make the changes myself and have a massive fight about it.

I'm pefectly willing to help, and even made a small change to an article today - and have done so in the past. I'm absolutely willing to do the work myself, and that's what I started off doing - I could return to putting my own effort into it fairly easily; but I don't want all Hell breaking loose when I do then either.

I've edited this entry like 5 times now... Anyway, what I'm trying to say is that I know the things I am recommending are a lot of work; work I will gladly help with. The last time I tried that it didn't go so well and caused a huge mess though. Since then I have taken some baby steps and time to feel you all out, and let you all feel me out too. Today I made some small change to one article. As we get "re-acquainted" I'm certain I'll be more handy than I currently am. I am right now however, once bitten; twice shy. If you help me and I don't have a similar experience, I'm willing to help. Let's go slow and start small. --Alaston

If you put take all the amulets and put them on a separate page, how can you then go to a single place to, for example, get a list of all the random items with Fortify Attribute items? If you delete all of the amulets from this page and Generic Magic Apparel, what do you then do with the rings that are still here? And then what do you do with the cuirasses, shoes, and helmets? Do you move all of the artifacts to these new pages, too, and delete the existing article? What's the advantage of sorting by item type instead of item enchantment?

If you think you have a better way of organizing everything, then come up with a list of all the item-related articles you think there should be, and what specifically would be on each of those pages. And each item should only appear on one page. Having an item appear on four separate pages, each of which eventually ends up containing different details about the item, is the worst possible system, because readers have to read four separate articles to get all the information. Every item must have a single place, i.e., the place where its redirect (Fleetfoot Boots for example) takes you, which is clearly the primary article on that item. --Nephele^Talk 01:24, 27 February 2008 (EST)

"If you put take all the amulets and put them on a separate page, how can you then go to a single place to, for example, get a list of all the random items with Fortify Attribute items?" That's why it should be in both places, which is how I'd do it personally. A person wants to look up "Fortify Attribute" and find out everything there is to know about it, right? That's what a Wiki is for, right? Likewise, someone wanting to know about Amulets wants to look up "Amulets" and find our everything there is to know about amulets. Why shouldn't it be in both places? The actual Wikipedia site does indeed have redundant information if it pertains to the topic at hand. Try it. Look up "Professional Baseball." There's a list of all the American League (and National League) Baseball teams in MLB. Then do a search for "American League." You'll find the same list on two different pages. It really is okay to have information in two places as long as it pertains to the topic in my opinion.

If you leave this to me, that's exactly what I'll do with it. There will be one complete list of Amulets on the "amulets" page. There will be one complete list of amulets on the "magic items" page, there will be one complete list on "magic apparel" and.... No, I think that about covers it. It's not that hard to cut and paste a list, even in Wikipedia.

"I'm will If you delete all of the amulets from this page and Generic Magic Apparel, what do you then do with the rings that are still here?" Well, I wouldn't actually recommend deleting the amulets or rings from this page. If you guys want them here as well as on the other page, that's fine and makes sense. Is a ring a magic item? Yes. Therefore it should be present on this page. Is a ring magical apparel? Yes. Therefore it should be present on that page too.

And to answer your other questions, they should be treated the same way. "Does this item pertain to this topic?" If yes, then put it there. If no, then remove it. It's okay to have it in two places at once. I really don't understand where the notion of not ever providing the same information in two places under any circumstances came from. We're having a significant disconnect here and maybe there's something I don't understand going on. Is this taking up someone's server space, bandwidth or other resources? Why is it not okay to have the same information in two places if the information deserves to be in both places? Some of the people I spoke to tonight about the Sigil Stones and how many Oblivion gates there were in the game NEVER knew how to find all 60 gates, or that the Great Gate had to be closed before the last random gate, or else the player wouldn't get credit for 60 gates. They never knew that. Know why? Because it wasn't on the page about Oblivion Gates. It was only on the page about 100% completion. They didn't know this, even though they had looked for it. They searched for all the knowledge they could find on Oblivion Gates, and could not find their answers.

I don't understand why the information cannot be in two spots if it's appropriate for it to be in two spots. Let's meet up on that one, and then I can answer your questions better. I simply am not seeing why we have to choose between the lesser of two bad notions - I'm not understanding why we have to back ourselves into a bad decision and providing incomplete information one way or the other. Why can't both pages have all the info the person is likely looking for? --Alaston

Once information is in two places, it will start to be edited seperately, resulting in redundancy. The style of this wiki has always been to present detailed information on one page only. Every other page links to that article, has only a small summary or transcludes that information. Transclusion in this case is not practical, as it is embedded into tables.

There are several ways to sort a set of items, and making a new page for every sort option is a bad idea; it will cause the information to turn out of synchronization and will start to contradict itself. What is wrong with adding the Amulets to the [[:Category:Oblivion-Clothing-Amulets|Amulets Category]]?

You use Wikipedia as style guide for this wiki several times, so let me stress that this is 'not Wikipedia. This policy is not because we like to boss around, but because we differ in sheer size. Both in scope and in amount of articles. It is possible for editors to know the infrastructure by heart. And while that may be disadvantageous for them to see some readers have difficulty with it, they do have the ability to maintain that infrastructure, to try to keep it clear and unequivocal.

Even then editors still have difficulty reviewing all the content. They rely alot on the knowledge that if they find a section with information, they know they have found the most detailed source, or else they will find a link to it.

Your example with The 100% Completion Guide doesn't help your point. First of all it is generally considered not to be a good quality article (there are some editors who opt to delete it instead). Information present there should not be the main source. Second, the information you mentioned is covered by a main stream article: Oblivion:Oblivion Gates. Which is easily accessible, through various index articles (e.g. Oblivion:Places). --Timenn < talk > 13:45, 27 February 2008 (EST)

That's fine, Timmen. It's not that I expect this wiki to mimic the real wiki, but I do kind of have an expectation inside my head that when I go to find out how to close all 60 Oblivion Gates that all the information on how to do that would be on a page titled "Oblivion Gates." Likewise with the amulets - I kind of expect to see all the amulets there. This is obviously a fundamental difference in our philosophies, and I don't think it makes anyone right or anyone wrong - but it does indeed make us very different.

I was simply asking what the reasons were behind it. I had been asking questions and seeking answers, and Nephele (in a round-about way) raised the issue of why he was the one doing the work. This is part of the answer - because I don't know how you guys do things, so I asked. It's clear that the system you use doesn't make sense to me and it's probably not worth the frustration on either of our ends to keep banging our heads against walls. I think it's probably in our mutual best interest if I just go back to being a regular user who asks questions. When I see something I'll ask about it and let you guys decide what - if anything - to do about it. I think that probably would work better for everyone - and that's kind of why I wasn't editing to begin with, but Nephele raised the point or at least touched a nerve of guilt in me, so I thought I'd explore that option more. Thanks for taking the time to clarify it with me and for giving a thorough response. --Alaston

Yes, information on Oblivion Gates should all be on the Oblivion Gates article. Which is why when you pointed out that there was missing information, Eshe immediately added it to the article. (She did not try to duplicate all of the Oblivion Gates articles on 100% Completion, because 100% Completion is not supposed to be the primary source of information on Oblivion Gates).

As for amulets, Timenn actually gave an out-of-date link. The correct link is Category:Oblivion-Jewelry-Amulets, where you should find every single enchanted amulet (and many of the unenchanted amulets) in the game. We don't have an Oblivion:Amulets article, so that nonexistent article is not supposed to provide complete information on amulets. On the other hand, the category that we created to provide a listing of all the amulets should be. If you find an amulet that is missing from that category, point it out and we will make sure it gets added.

And I'm sorry you don't consider our site to be a "real" wiki. I'll readily admit that the site is not perfect (one reason why I have a todo list that will take me until next year to complete). So when missing information or inconsistencies within our current organizational system are pointed out, we make every effort to fix them. But just trying to get the current system relatively complete is a big enough task, without trying to change the entire system midstream. --Nephele^Talk 02:12, 28 February 2008 (EST)

OK, I've done some reorganization. I basically chose the easiest possible route that fits within our current organization system. I'm not saying that the current item page organization is necessarily the best possible. But given that just the small chunk that I did here took a solid day's worth of work, anything more substantial would be a major project.

In any case, hopefully it is now clear that this page does not list all of the magic amulets in the game (because it doesn't list any amulets at all!). And hopefully it is now easier for everyone to figure out what amulets will appear in random loot, since they are all now listed on a single page, namely Generic Magic Apparel (along with all the rings, all the robes, all the cuirasses, etc). The Magic Items article could probably still use a lot more work, to make sure that it covers all of the general information about the game's magic items. I just did the basic minimum so that it's not an empty or hideously incomplete page.

Oh, also it's very likely that in adding even more content to Generic Magic Apparel and Generic Magic Weapons I made them even more susceptible to the blank page glitch. I have one idea for a magic behind-the-scenes CSS/template tweak that will hopefully go some small way to making the pages less likely to glitch (but will take a few days to implement). But in the meantime the risk of broken pages is the price that has to be paid for trying to stuff so much information onto one page. --Nephele^Talk 15:20, 1 March 2008 (EST)

Necklace of Swords

I have never ever found this necklace :(. I have found the amulet of axes many times, and i have logged thousands of hours at 20+ with different characters. Has anyone actually found this item? I suspect that a Silver Necklace is a rarely spawned item, or something... any insight? --Scxe 23:51, 27 February 2008 (EST)

I've picked up a few in my time. It's a very rare item though - you just have to get lucky. –Rpeh^{•T•C•E•} 02:10, 28 February 2008 (EST)