Morrowind talk:Enchant

Archives
Archive 1: May 2006 - Feb 2011

medusas gaze enchant

i recently(ok it was five minutes ago) made an enchantment which goes paralyze/blind/damage speed 100 points 1 ft on target when i used it i had to pay 40 gold for assaulting an ordinator but as far as i know he`ll be standing there indefinetly cos i didnt set a time pretty cool huh? — Unsigned comment by Retsam (talk • contribs) at 09:33 on April 23, 2011

actually i think that just means it wont last, the only thing is his speed might not recover (Eddie the head 15:26, 23 April 2011 (UTC))

If there is no time set, it is either 0 or 1 seconds. Can't remember which, as I haven't played Morrowind in a long time. So the Paralyze and Blind last almost no time at all. But Damage is permanent (until Restored at least). I am not sure if a Speed of 0 will make an actor unable to move or just move very slowly... --DKong27 ^{Talk Cont} 15:38, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

possibly, im pretty sure it doesnt matter about how long the attribute wont recover no matter how long the duration (Eddie the head 15:54, 23 April 2011 (UTC))

Just tried it. The target moves really slowly, but certainly isn't frozen in place. rpeh •T•C•E• 15:59, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

question

what if you were to combo divine and almsivi intervention — Unsigned comment by Retsam (talk • contribs) at 10:40 on April 25, 2011

The effects would take place in order. So you would be taken to one, and then immediately to the next. --DKong27 ^{Talk Cont} 15:53, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Okay, I tried it and DKong is right. You appear at whichever destination is "first" in the spell order, then immediately zap off to the other one. Ie, if you put Almsivi first, you appear at a temple then at a fort; if you put Divine first, it's the other way around. rpeh •T•C•E• 16:03, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Enchant success formula

I recently decided to start up Morrowind again with the determination to never abuse the various benefits one can get from massive potion drinking or 1 second fortification spells. Having the desire to enchant some gear, I realized that it was literally impossible to succeed with a higher level enchantment, even with 100 in the corresponding attributes and skills. I resolved that using the construction set to establish a reasonable enchantment ratio would be the best move, and attempted to use the formula listed on the enchant page to modify the variables under settings and gameplay called fEnchantmentChanceMult and fEnchantmentConstantChanceMult to suit my needs.

After a bit of fiddling, finding no real connection between the 2.5 and 5.0 values in the formula, I learned that the constant variable modifies the normal chance one, which fit along with the 5.0 and 2.5 numbers. Unfortunately, going by what's written on the formula (and having no idea where the 3 next to fEnchantmentChanceMult came from), I was unable to get better odds by increasing the value. Instead, only by lowering it did my success rate go up.

The next step, I figured, was to see if anyone else had better data than I did, and perhaps avoid reinventing the wheel too much. A quick google search yielded: http://www.gamesas.com/enchant-related-gmst-t9742.html

On the site, someone who claims to have taken part in the original "formula" claimed that it was a simplification of yet another set of variables, and was instead 7.5 as a base divided by 3 (fEnchantmentChanceMult) for regular enchantments, and 7.5 divided by (3 (fEnchantmentChanceMult) times .5 (fEnchantmentConstantChanceMult)for constant effect enchantments.

Further fiddling in the construction set indicates that this isn't the case, but rather it's something along the lines of 0.83*3 (fEnchantmentChanceMult) for the 2.5 value they found, and .83*(3 (fEnchantmentChanceMult) DIVIDED by .5 (fEnchantmentConstantChanceMult)) to get 5.0.

I've gone through several values and found modifying fEnchantmentChanceMult to 0.3 and fEnchantmentConstantChanceMult to .8 yields a reasonable rate for a regular player looking to play without having to abuse a bug to enchant on their own. At 100 intelligence, luck, and enchant, constant enchantments on 120 enchantment value rings and amulets never fails at full fatigue, use enchantments on daedric tower shields has roughly an 80% success rate, and constant enchantments on a daedric tower shield has roughly a 66.7% success rate.

If anyone who has any better grasp of higher mathematics than I wishes to compose a formula for the enchant skill using what I've learned, please feel free to do so, because I would not do a proper job attempting to do it myself.

Likewise, if anyone finds fault with my theories, please comment on this and explain where, as I'm somewhat curious about the whole thing. For now, however, I'm content simply having a nice balance to the skill so I can play legit.

About order of effects

I've read in the Oblivion article on enchanting that "weakness to x" should go after its corresponding damage effect (so if you wanted a 10 shock dmg, 10% weakness to shock weapon, you would have to put the damage effect first, weakness second). Is this rule also applicable for Morrowind, or is that just an Oblivion thing? I couldn't find any info in this article that would suggest the order of effects makes any difference (other than the part about effects that cost more charge to be put later on). So basically would a weapon with 10 shock damage on strike, 10% weakness to shock be just as effective as a 10% weakness to shock, 10 shock dmg on strike weapon? 78.2.17.141 19:05, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Nope, that would be an Oblivion thing. Like you said, the order of effects affects only the enchantment points necessary to enchant your item. Both of the examples you mentioned would deal the same amount of damage. -- kertaw48 15:26, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Mining Souls

The article claims:

<< For example, trapping an Ogrim's soul (sized at 165) in a petty soul gem caps its size at 30, so even though you have captured a greater-level soul you can only put 18% of it to use >>

That won't work. . .you can't trap an Ogrim in a petty gem, can you? You hafta have a Greater or Grand soul gem for the soul to be trapped o_O 75.58.146.211 07:53, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

You're quite right. Thanks for pointing that out. rpeh •T•C•E• 08:42, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Based on this info, I also removed the following snippet:

If no soul gems in your inventory are this large then the soul will go into the largest one. Souls will only be forced into gems otherwise too large for them if there are no others in your inventory. Salamangkero 15:50, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Constant Effect.

I tried to apply constant effect of poison resistance to an item but this effect wasn't available. Which spells do have it?

You probably don't have a large enough soul to do a constant effect. Try a Golden Saint soul.

Spell effect magnitude vs. uses

When enchanting items, is their charge fixed or variable depending on the magnitude of the applied effect? For example, if enchanting a a sword with an Absorb Health Cast on Strike effect, would using a deliberately lower magnitude result in more uses, or would the uses remain the same? Also, how greatly is an item's charge affected by it's enchantment points? --87.114.212.107 19:07, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

The "total charge" is fixed on the size of the soul used. If you lower the magnitude of the spell, its charge-per-use would be lower, so that would result in more uses before you need to recharge it. The item's enchantment points limits the magnitude of the spell you can enchant it with. --Brf 22:59, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

OK, thanks. Would this be worth adding to the article? --87.115.205.26 10:22, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

It should be pretty evident to most after a short time enchanting, but still, it's probably worth clarifying. I don't see any place on the page where it's clearly articulated (except as can be deduced by the formulas). Minor Edits 09:24, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Bows and "Cast When Used"

Does enchanting a bow with a Cast When Used spell cause the spell to be cast when you shoot an arrow, or do you still have to cast the spell as you would with a similarly enchanted ring/piece of clothing/etc.?

If it's enchanted with Cast when Used it will have to be casted like it would have on weapons or apparel, as a spell. If it's enchanted with Cast on Strike, it won't function as a normal, melee weapon would, because you don't actually attack with your bow, but rather with your arrows. Hope this clears things up. -- kertaw48 22:49, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Posted Enchant Success Formula

Hey guys, I noticed that the formula posted for the chance to successfully enchant something yourself makes no differentiation between "On Touch" and "On Target" spells - is this an oversight, or is the chance actually the same? DextroWombat 17:29, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Chance to craft something is directly proportional to Enchantments Points. Those are increased by a factor of 1.5 if On Target is used. -- kertaw48 18:10, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

oh yeah, i guess that would be it - my bad :p DextroWombat 20:17, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

MCP and Enchanted Item Rebalancing

Note that if you have this feature of the MCP installed, it both gives Cast when Used enchantments a 4-second cooldown time (to prevent you from spam-casting) and raises the charge cost based on your Enchant skill level. In the vanilla game, as the article says, if you have an Enchant skill of 110 or more, then all enchantments cost a single charge, regardless of effect. With the MCP installed, the minimum Enchant skill you need is exactly 400 before all enchantments cost a single charge. It's impossible to raise it this high using CE enchanted items, so you'll need to use a spell with a sufficient duration to raise it to 400. FrozenWolf150 (talk) 11:10, 27 January 2013 (GMT)

Grand Soul Gem Hotspot

I found like 7 or so grand soul gems in Shurinbaal. I don't know if it's just leveled loot, but that's a lot of grand soul gems. Just mentioning cause you have a list of GSG locations in the article, and Shurinbaal isn't listed.

If the soul gems in Shurinbaal were from containers with randomly generated contents, their occurrence isn't reliable. The same applies to many other locations with excellent, but randomly-generated loot. Downstrike (talk) 10:21, 23 February 2013 (GMT)

Creating Soul Gems?

From the Mining Souls section:

"In order to enchant an item you will need a filled soul gem, which you can buy from enchanters (see above) or create yourself."

I have never encountered a method for creating soul gems. Was this statement meant to say that we can fill empty soul gems ourselves, rather than creating them? Downstrike (talk) 10:08, 23 February 2013 (GMT)

I've now edited this sentence to say what I believe it was meant to say. Downstrike (talk) 00:05, 21 March 2013 (GMT)

Constant Restore Health

While using the Helm of Tohan I frequently enchant it with CE Restore Health. Based on the CE tip in this article, it lead me to believe that I could enchant it from 1-11 instead of the 5-5 it allows and unequip/reequip until I get a high number of restore. It wasn't until lately I discovered that the restore health (and possibly other restore-based CEs) are constantly cycling the effect and thereby resetting the value that it restores. So if I equip it and get Restore Health 10pts, it will restore 10 health then 'reset' the enchantment and might then be Restore Health 2pts the next time I check it (without reequiping). I suppose I'm saying the value that's restored is not constant, but should balance out over time to be an average of the (max + min - 1) / 2 (in this case, 5.5). This seems to cycle very rapidly, at least multiple times a second. This article doesn't mention this happening and I feel that it should. 130.184.79.91 16:37, 5 March 2013 (GMT)

Wait, what? Are you saying that the health it restores changes every time it heals? I'm pretty sure this is not how it works, but if someone else can confirm this I guess we can change the article accordingly. -- Kertaw48 (talk) 17:25, 5 March 2013 (GMT)

Not sure if this is exactly what you are experiencing but did you have other CE Restore Health items? I've just encountered this problem where I have an exquisite amulet with CE Restore Health 1-7pts and 2 rings with the same enchantment. Basically, equipping or re-equipping any of these three enchanted jewelry also resets the enchantment stats of the other two. So even if I did get a CE Restore Health 6pt from the amulet via trial-and-error, that will be rendered moot if I wear any other enchanted item with CE Restore Health. Hmmmn... gotta check, though, if this happens only for identical CE enchantments (exactly 1-7pts of Restore Health) or also for similar ones (just CE Restore Health, any number of points) Salamangkero (talk) 06:03, 6 March 2013 (GMT)

OK, this whole question is possibly mis-informed on my part. I just realized I'm using Morrowind Code Patch 1.9 (for the higher screen res) which may be the source of the unusual behavior. It allows different equip rules and its way around that might be to cycle the enchantments several times a second. This is likely just an issue with my config and I should take it up with the devs. 130.184.79.91 17:29, 6 March 2013 (GMT)

I take back what I just said about the MCP. Apparently this has come up before and no one commented. This post predates the earliest mention of MCP that I can find by a few months so it's not likely the culprit. So to answer the questions: @Kertaw48, yes, that's what I'm saying is happening. It probably happens with Restore <x> effects too; @Salamangkero, No I did not have other Restore Health items. 130.184.79.91 21:06, 6 March 2013 (GMT)

I made CE Restore Health enchantments und can verify that not only on one item, but on all items the values for Restore Health constantly change. Reequipping gives you no control about the Restore Health values. The rate of change for the values is pretty fast, so confining the range should give no real benefit, as long as the randomness in this process is not broken. I made the CE enchantments with Sanctuary on multiple items and the only way to change the value of sanctuary for one particular item is by reequipping said item. All the values of the other CE Sanctuary items stay fixed. I was kind of pumped about CE Restore Health and equipping the items until the desired high value is reached, because I am facing Gedna Relvel with the HP bug (level 50*800 HP + 700 HP, playing as an Altmer) right now. So having a constant Restore Health would come in handy.--37.120.0.239 16:54, 7 March 2014 (GMT)

Facing the Recharging Learning Curve

I've known for years that I'm supposed to be able to use soul gems to recharge enchanted items, but never found the functionality until I read this article. (I was trying to drop the soul gems onto the enchanted items instead of onto the PC.)

Now that I've gotten that straight, I don't observe any sensible relationship between the value of the soul in the gem and the recharge the item receives from it. In fact, I seem to be getting less recharge from a Common Soul Gem than from a Petty Soul Gem. Am I having an odd glitch, or does this sort of thing happen?

My Enchant skill is 43 and my Int. and Luck are casted and potioned to abnormally high levels, so I wonder if I've shoved some variable in the recharging formula into a range where the result of the formula tries to climb out of one of its own ears in order to burrow back in where the sun doesn't shine?

Also, do any of the formulae displayed on the page apply in any way to recharging? Downstrike (talk) 00:42, 30 March 2013 (GMT)

I always thought it was dependent on your enchanting skill. If you don't have a high enough enchanting skill, the higher level souls don't work as well. Based on the gems, I would assume that 0-25, petty only works reliably, 26-50, lesser, 51-75, common, 76-100, greater, and 100 is needed for reliably using grand soul gems. That's how I always viewed it. Jeancey (talk) 00:58, 30 March 2013 (GMT)

Perhaps that accounts for it; or at least partially so. If we could confirm that, I think it would be good content for the article.

In that case, my skill level of 43 would place the common soul gems just out of my range of effectiveness, but as quickly as my Enchantment skill is progressing while doing Petty soul gems, it shouldn't be long before I can test your observation.

Silly me! (Facepalm.) I just sold my Ring of Transcending Wisdom to the Urshilaku trader, and by now I'm almost to Tel Aruhn! Oh well; at least I remember where it is, unlike most times that I've sold off something that I afterward realized I needed. Downstrike (talk) 02:07, 30 March 2013 (GMT)

Infinite charge

Out of curiosity, would assigning an enchantment a charge of 0 in the Construction Set make its charge infinite, or non-existent? MCGONN (talk) 22:19, 25 August 2013 (GMT)

no only if you set the charge COST to 0. then it would have infinite charges. but then you can aswell cheat via console. no difference at all. — Unsigned comment by 77.184.78.237 (talk) at 22:01 on 10 September 2013

Trick or Cheat?

this so called TRICK ist just another abuse of the system. it should be listed under cheats instead.

Constant Effect Tip

When making a Constant Effect Enchantment always set lowest to one (which costs the same as zero, eliminating the chance that you'll get 0 pts.) and the highest to maximum. i.e., when enchanting a Daedric Shield with a Constant Effect Fortify Strength you can make something like: Fortify Strength 30-30 pts.

A better way to make it is: Fortify Strength 1-60 pts.

when i see this posted as a TRICK i get mad. its not a trick its clearly an ABUSE of the system that allows way more powerful effects than normally would be possible. face it : there is not a SINGLE item in the WHOLE game that has a similar constant fortify effect like this. this to me makes it clear this was never working as intended bethesda just was lazy and forgot to add a check at the end to make sure values are equal.

it should be listed under cheats not as a legit method. just because the game allows something doesnt mean its balanced or working as intended. this is nothing else than the alchemy abuse or the soultrap glitch. the game allows these effects too but there is no way in hell either is intended. — Unsigned comment by 217.186.214.248 (talk) at 15:46 on 22 September 2013

I don't think it really matters whether the word trick or cheat is used... what annoys me is that someone posts it as if you SHOULD be using it; which is frankly stupid. If someone wants to game the system by sitting there re-equipping an item over and over and over until they tweak a little more out of their lame trick-enchantment they're free to, but acting like that is the way the game should be played is pretty pathetic. 142.59.29.202 15:07, 23 October 2013 (GMT)

It amazes me sometimes how much I still play and enjoy this 10 year old game. Anyhow IMO, "cheating" is relative, because each player establishes their own line between "smart play" and "breaking the rules". I think a "trick" is using the game's mechanics to min/max a desired result while "cheating" is going outside those rules to garner a result (e.g., dividing by zero, the console and construction set, etc.). Both can be classified as "abusive", but it's up to each player to decide when tricking becomes cheating. (Chew on this: In some ways, simply reading on this site is cheating. Why? Because this wiki isn't an integral inclusion to the game.) --159.182.1.4 18:11, 23 December 2013 (GMT)

Bonemold Long Bow

I don't know if this belongs here. It took me a bit of time to realize this but, maybe enchanting the Bonemold Long Bow needs it's own page?

1st) it's enchant value

2nd) it's low weight

You can make a Levitate Long Bow

You can make an Underwater Breathing Long Bow (the desire to replace the water spear is when I started thinking about this...the water spear is pretty awesome for a low level char, I was wishing for slaughter fish every time I had to dive into the water)

you can make a Water Walking Long Bow

You can me a Recurve Long Bow (+strength)

Granted it does need to be repaired, but it totally would remove having to waste magicka to get to a ledge, or run between islands.

The only other enchanting items which really make life incredibly easier for me has been the Ebony Scimitar since you can put 67 absorb health/3 sec.

All of this you can get at a relatively low level. — Unsigned comment by 47.16.86.49 (talk) at 13:10 on 9 October 2014

The Bonemold Long Bow has a relatively high enchantment value, and that is already mentioned in the page. You still need a sufficiently sized soul and some skill in order to create decent enchantments, which both aren't availabe at a low level. There's no need for a larger documentation than we already have. -- SarthesArai ^Talk 13:35, 9 October 2014 (GMT)

My personal favorite is a Demon Bone Bow - Bound Longbow for 146 seconds. Fiwiji (talk) 13:43, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Maximum Value on Variable Range CE Item

Your article states that the maximum value cannot be given on a variable ranged constant effect (i.e. sanctuary 1-23). At the moment my pc has a skirt of sanctuary ce 1-23 that is giving me 23 points of sanctuary (for the record, i didn't go out of my way to get this, i luckily got it on my 2nd try; needless to say, i haven't taken off the skirt). i have no mods installed other then patches and the script extender, so unless one of these actually changes the game in this way, the article is wrong.

The Only Enchanted Item You Really Need to Buy

The only enchanted item you need to buy is a ring or amulet with fortify enchant 350 + fortify enchant 500 for 2 seconds (actually i think you can actually get a few more points on the first effect. you could also make it enchant 500 + enchant 500 for 1 second if you wish). This item should cost less then 70,000. I have yet to fail making any other enchantment i want after purchasing this. I am not using any mods other than patches and the script extender (sorry if these change settings from vanilla).

Fortify Enchant 800 points

Wouldn't this be by far the best way to guarantee enchant success (assuming you don't have the "vanilla" Morrowind)? Because unlike intelligence and luck, enchant skill isn't divided? Or am I misinterpreting the formula?174.70.134.236 16:37, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

Looking at the formula you can see that fortifying Enchant by 800 points nearly guarantees a 100% success rate in most situations, regardless of Ingelligence and Luck. This really appear to be the best way. — Unsigned comment by 185.220.101.203 (talk) at 10:22 on 30 May 2020

Dubious: "Ammunition such as arrows and bolts cannot be enchanted."

Ammo has an enchantment value, though most of it is very low (Daedric Arrows are one exception). I have a several paralyze arrows in my inventory right now that I home-enchanted. I'm using OpenMW, though (and am not on MS Windows). Someone running Bethesda's original engine in Windows should try a test-enchant of a Daedric or Bonemold Arrow, with something low-cost, like Light. Since OpenMW is taking pains to exactly duplicate the Bethesda mechanics (and uses all the original game data), it seems very likely to me that "Ammunition such as arrows and bolts cannot be enchanted" is an error inserted by someone who tried to enchant low-quality ammo. — Darklocq ^☎ ¢ 17:20, 17 August 2017 (UTC) Another thing. Are you supposed to enchant ammo one by one? Isn't it possible to enchant them in bulk, like making potions? — Unsigned comment by 185.220.101.203 (talk) at 10:22 on 30 May 2020

Dubious: "Cast When Strikes, ... enemy has to be within Touch range"

The text presently claims:

"Touch" is calculated relative to the PC, not the weapon, and has a reach of 1. With "Cast When Strikes", the enchantment will be fired when the weapon connects, but the enemy has to be within Touch range for the effect to hit them. To take advantage of the greater reach of spears and some staves and hammers, a Target not Touch effect should be used.

If this were actually true, then Cast When Strikes projectiles with an On Touch effect could never work, yet that is what almost all of them are enchanted with, other than the On Target, area-of-effect ones added by the Area Effect Arrows add-on. Furthermore, I've been playing this game for months, and have never even once used a long-reach weapon with a Cast When Strikes, On Touch effect and had the effect fail to go off when I landed a blow (other than resistance by the would-be victim, which is specifically reported to the player in the GUI). This alleged problem certainly does not affect OpenMW, and I think that someone has imagined it. — Darklocq ^☎ ¢ 17:26, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

Adding negative (or side)effects

In Daggerfall it's possible to add negative effects to an item to increase its enchant potential. This does not work in Morrowind then? — Unsigned comment by 199.249.230.84 (talk) at 13:53 on 17 November 2019

No. Every effect is considered beneficial, and therefore adds to the total enchantment cost. There is no way to have an effect deduct from the enchantment cost. -- SarthesArai ^Talk 21:15, 19 November 2019 (GMT)

Recharging soul gems with fortified skill

Is Fortify Enchant supposed to impact recharging soul gems?— Unsigned comment by 185.220.100.248 (talk) at 16:22 on 8 May 2020

Verified. OpenMW does not appear to use the fortified skill value when recharging items. Tried this with spells only, not with a CE effect. — Unsigned comment by 185.220.101.203 (talk) at 10:22 on 30 May 2020

Worth mentioning Paper and Notes Enchantment values?

As the article mentions, Enchanting paper provides a zero-cost, instant-action spellcasting to Alchemy. This is actually useful for anyone taking the Atronach birthsign, as it provides a way to cast lower effect spells without exhausting their Magicka pool at the start (and unlike spells, they do not depend on a player's skill level, Willpower or Fatigue). I would like to know if it should be pointed out that Paper and Rolled Paper provide 5 Enchantment points, while Notes provide 10 Enchantment points. If this should be mentioned, would it be convenient to make a small article listing the Notes that can be enchanted (because not all of them can)? I am cataloging them now so it wouldn't be a problem for me. --Badnik (talk) 15:20, 17 September 2020 (UTC)Badnik

Formula Incorrect?Or MCP messing up things it shouldn't?

My success chance,in vanilla morrowind+MCP, is not even close to the one that the formula gives me.When I try create a constant 24 point fortify attribute enchantment for for an exquisite ring with 120 capacity with my current stats I have a -177 chance.According to the formula I would have a -517 chance.I have no idea why this would be different andI have unchecked and patched so that the MCP doesn't change anything related to enchanting with the exception of the success chance display.Stats are 48 Enchant,110 int and 60 luck.

I have also noticed that stamina affects the success chance which is NOT adressed in the formula found here at all.

I first thought this was just a display error but I can actually create enchantments that I should never be able to make with my current stats. --94.134.181.115 16:21, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

Formulas in OpenMW are a bit different, maybe that's it ? ~Darween — Unsigned comment by 83.199.30.114 (talk) at 22:59 on 27 January 2021 (UTC)

The OP is using vanilla Morrowind + MCP, so OpenMW wouldn't be relevant here. — Wolfborn↝^(Howl) 23:30, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

I also noticed this and tested it yesterday.. It seems the Steam GOTY version (1.6.1820) of the game follows the same formula as the OpenMW formula. With a max fatigue of 20, and current fatigue of -30 -- Open console (`), player->setfatigue 20, create a drain fatigue spell, use "getfatigue" to check the PC's fatigue -- it should be impossible to self-enchant anything with OpenMW's formula. Where does the original Vanilla formula come from? And why does it not apply to the Steam GOTY version? I'm inclined to think Steam (and perhaps, Vanilla) follows the exact same formula as OpenMW. Here is a graphing calculator to simulate success chance yourself: https://www.desmos.com/calculator/r4nkszqe7o Mush (talk) 06:02, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Relevance of OpenMW formulas?

By reading the OpenMW development blog, I read that they have re-established the vanilla formula for a few years now. Actually, given their proclaimed mission, I always found surprising that they were changing the formula in the first place. So, should those parts be removed from the wiki? On a side note, what is the source for the vanilla formula? I can't seem to reproduce it with the new enchantment calculator I'm making. --DeBeauharnais (talk) 10:20, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

Removed erroneous text

There was a sentence "In addition to enchantment cost, all non-constant-effect enchantments have a casting cost, taken from the item's soul charge, which slowly replenishes over time (as long as the item is in inventory)[...]". I've removed the parenthetical as it's not correct; items placed in the world (for example, in chests, or on tables) will regain charge over time. However I only have OpenMW right now, so if this turns out to be correct for vanilla it should be restored. --67.247.12.46 09:56, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

The old text is indeed correct for vanilla. I changed it back. Iolrgalt (talk) 22:34, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Luck and Constant Effect Testing Data

I tested the claim that Luck affects the probability distribution of effect magnitudes you get with Constant Effect enchantments. TL;DR: it's a myth.

I used the construction set to make a mod adding an amulet with the effect Feather 0-100 points on self. First I set my Luck to 0, then repeatedly equipped and unequipped the item to get 100 samples. Then I did the same with Luck 100. I'm a bit rusty on proper statistical terminology but hopefully this will be understandable.

For my confidence intervals I used 2 standard deviations, so they are 95% confidence intervals. This means that there is at least a 95% chance that if the entire process is repeated and another 100 samples are taken, the mean of the new data set will be within the confidence interval.

Luck 0

Samples: 88, 31, 58, 44, 99, 50, 28, 66, 1, 92, 91, 92, 66, 0, 45, 25, 83, 26, 74, 27, 75, 36, 27, 59, 13, 99, 41, 99, 37, 30, 73, 19, 9, 27, 32, 86, 79, 36, 90, 12, 34, 62, 91, 49, 65, 69, 82, 79, 38, 31, 16, 71, 23, 13, 26, 17, 17, 35, 89, 78, 45, 54, 53, 31, 64, 88, 90, 36, 31, 58, 65, 91, 50, 36, 10, 19, 59, 11, 2, 50, 22, 34, 43, 67, 71, 40, 67, 80, 77, 12, 57, 38, 25, 94, 88, 2, 8, 80, 71, 3

mean = 49.72

variance of samples = 804.3216

standard deviation of samples = 28.3606

standard deviation of mean = 2.83606

confidence interval lower bound = 44.04

confidence interval upper bound = 55.40

---

Luck 100

Samples: 62, 6, 22, 61, 53, 77, 5, 2, 85, 3, 42, 38, 34, 1, 53, 80, 75, 78, 25, 56, 6, 65, 18, 95, 21, 28, 44, 12, 63, 52, 69, 35, 5, 60, 49, 28, 54, 96, 24, 91, 72, 29, 25, 49, 28, 89, 51, 65, 41, 66, 9, 60, 56, 31, 81, 58, 68, 60, 89, 30, 22, 58, 2, 53, 66, 72, 45, 56, 72, 95, 94, 98, 28, 9, 7, 53, 74, 24, 36, 78, 14, 32, 20, 95, 45, 74, 56, 61, 89, 68, 56, 94, 60, 19, 23, 76, 47, 91, 55, 2

mean = 49.49

variance of samples = 754.1499

standard deviation of samples = 27.4618

standard deviation of mean = 2.74618

confidence interval lower bound = 43.99

confidence interval upper bound = 54.98

Feel free to check my work and gather additional data if you want to test it yourself.

Iolrgalt (talk) 16:50, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

Your work deserves more recognition, thank you for such a complete set of data. I have been wanting to see an example of how to approach these kind of hypotheses and I think this is excellent.

This would be an interesting test to perform with Fortify Fatigue. Chill fridge (talk) 07:47, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Calculating Enchantment Cost

I've been using the formulas for enchantment cost and compounding effects to optimize (a.k.a. min-max) my enchantments and I've always been dissatisfied at their inaccuracy. The enchantment costs I have calculated do not always match those computed in-game, especially when the enchantment has multiple effects.

So I started comparing the enchant formulas, both old and current. Note that the old formula is the basis of the enchant simulator linked in the main page. Both are wrong. Then I began recording the discrepancies I have noticed, which led me down a rabbit-hole of misguided trial-and-error. Finally, I've stumbled upon the research of the folks at OpenMW, which I have independently confirmed only recently.

Conclusion? There is no "formula"; just an algorithm, a chain of conditional / piece-wise functions. Also, there is no order-based "multiplier"; just an integer accumulator in a process that works on floats.

Now, I'm wondering what's the implication (and the next step) for the sections about calculating enchantment costs?

• Keep the current formulas — a compromise. They're not 100% accurate but they're close enough. Also, personally, I think they're understandable enough... enough for me to build my own enchant simulator based on it, only stew in frustration for over a year because the results do not match in-game values... but that's just me.
• Upgrade. Go for 100% accuracy — a noble cause... but a difficult undertaking as well. Neither are accessible to the regular user but, between the two, formulas are more intuitive than algorithms. It will be very challenging to describe a computational process in layman's terms (or as close to it as possible). I tried; it did not turn out well.
• Downgrade. No more numbers — a down-to-earth approach. Remove inaccurate / misleading formulas. Explain in more general terms (e.g. On Target effects cost 50% more, Constant Effect assume a duration of 100, increasing duration raises the cost more than increasing the area, the first effect doubles (even triples) in cost as you add more effects, etc.) Less theory, more concrete examples. This should result in content, which is more readable and less cluttered with specifics. Personally, I think majority of the wiki's readers (are no longer playing Morrowind, but that's beside the point) are not as fixated as me.

I don't really intend to make any edits in this regard any time soon... but any feedback would appreciated. Or a discussion. Maybe other options I haven't thought of. Otherwise, after more than a year of on-and-off research, I'd be more than happy to give it a rest :P Salamangkero (talk) 18:32, 8 August 2024 (UTC)