That's a good point. I didn't originally think about the **save, enchant, "crap", reload, enchant, "crap", reload, enchant, "sweet I got it"** problem. Come to think of it, I may even fall victim to that myself. I guess I was just trying to think of a way to add some suspense to the crafting process, but maybe it doesn't need it. :ermm:
It would be nice to have some randomness, but maybe have the souls that you trap have greater effect. Instead of just petty, common, etc... maybe a petty slaughterfish soul would give you one value while a petty wolf soul would give another. Allowing differentiation (?sp) withing a set catagory of souls. Higher level souls give more and more consistant enchantments (grand souls) giving the same stats since it would require being high level to get the soul and high enchantment skill to use the grand soul gem, I'm assuming. Just an idea I'm sure I'm missing something.
Edit: A more complicated approach might be that certain souls give bonuses to certain enchants. Like if you were enchanting using an skeleton soul you might get a bonus to frost resistance (frost shield) but it might not be as good for a healing/restore enchant. While a different soul may give a better value for fire damage, but lesser value for shock damage. Would take more study into what souls have what effect bonuses to give more depth to enchanting. Or it could just be too much work.
iNo more stupid batteries. I just want to be able to shoot lightning out of a stick like I can with my hands. Also, I'm not a big fan of having to equip spells to your hands. Why can't you take one hand off of your claymore for 2 seconds to shoot lightning? Seems like a strange system with some issues.
Just shoot lightning like you can do with your hands? Then why use a staff? If you are using magicka to do it instead of the soul (battery) then it would be just for show with no real difference than using your hands. I would like to see staves having properties you don't have using your hands. Since soul gems have been around and supported by lore I don't see any reason to change it.
Have you ever baked?
If you went right now and got out a cookbook and looked up a recipe and baked something, do you think it would turn out perfect even once, much less every time?
Do you think that baking is more or less complicated than enchanting?
If I was training to cook I would probably make mistakes, sure. But I don't know if, as a player, I would want the same applied to a game. At the same time, as a novice I wouldn't be trying to compete with the Iron Chef or the Ace of Cakes either. How much randomness do you put in a fire damage dagger when you have an enchanting skill of 5? I never had a problem though with morrowinds chance of failure. Though I did save before enchanting just incase. Which I think would be the thing players would do if you put randomness into enchanting. Especially if at low levels of enchant the randomness had a wide range. Do you really want to settle for the fire dagger that has only +1 fire damage when it could have been 5 or 10 pts without taking into account the "perfect" success?
Edit: Maybe the randomness could come with the use of the enchanted item dependent on your enchantment skill. Make a dagger that does +5 fire and if your enchantment skill is low it might do only 3 or 4 or you get lucky and it does a crit and does 8pts. The higher your enchant skill the greater the chance for a crit with the enchantment and a less likely chance of doing less damage than the enchantment. Maybe have a critical failure where the enchant fails. Kind of like spell failure in MW.
Or just include it in the perk system with perks that allow for a chance of getting the perfect enchant, but with also the randomness to do less than normal. Take the perk several times could increase the chance for the "perfect" success and minimize the chance of a lower score. Or skip taking the perk and just do normal vanilla enchants.