Thank you for remembering to get back to me! With the limited time we had we weren’t able to address this bug in the first hotfix unfortunately. Look for it in the next upcoming patch.

Sorry for the inconvenience!

Sorry, I consider the petals a quest drop.

No, the only ones that can’t get LP are the quest rewards.

I understand that everyone wants to know the specifics of it but I’m a little confused. Have we given out the formula or chances for any other aspect of item stat rolling? Like exalted affixes or even just the relative rarity of each affix on an item. As far as I know, we’ve never given out that sort of information. Please correct me if I’m wrong on this one though.

I think that there are two separate issues here, the quest speciffic items being able to roll legendary potential or not and the relative rarity of legendary potential in the rest of the uniques.

The quest uniques being able to drop LP is something that should have been more clearly communicated. That one falls squarely on me. I’m sorry it wasn’t in the legendary reveal dev blog and isn’t clearly communicated in game. It’s something that we are still discussing if we want to have an alternative acquisition method which can have LP or something like that. The 200 is just instead of having an extra variable t...

Thanks for the report! I’ve made a note of this issue internally.

We have a likely fix for this in 0.8.4b. Please let us know if it’s still happening and include your logs if so. Thanks!

Hmm, I don’t know why that’s happening for you. I’m able to type Z into the Character Name field just fine. What is Z bound to in your input settings? Can you post your log file after this happens?

This should be fixed now in 0.8.4b, please post your log again if it’s still happening.

Yes, they’re planned. We didn’t have enough time to finalize them before the initial release and we’re focusing more on bug fixes.

There’s only so many hours in a day

We do have a potential fix for this as well but it wasn’t evaluated in time for this hotfix.

It is, since it is restoring rage specifically. It’s just a way to create more synergies.

Changes

• Adjusted forging potential of new items
  • +3 minimum forging potential for normal items.
  • +2 minimum forging potential for magic items.
  • +2 maximum forging potential for normal items.
  • +3 to 4 minimum forging potential for rare items based on level.
• Reduced the maximum forging potential cost of adding a second affix to 14 (from 15).
• Reduced the maximum forging potential cost of adding a third or fourth affix to 18 (from 20).
• Controller Keybinds
  • Left D-Pad now triggers the dungeon ability.
  • Right D-Pad press is still bound to portal usage, but a long press will now toggle ground items.
  • A controller binding reset should be enforced automatically. If the actionba...

We are sure you guys will figure it out in time.

Probably within a day or so.

Does this happen from a fresh reload into the game? We have a number of fixes coming in the next hotfix, so it might fix that too.

Fractured Crown is still obtainable and can have legendary potential.

1. suggestion: Glyph of despair should not cost any forging potential. Given how the forging range is now any craft could be the last. Sealing an affix and then not having enough fp to add another affix feels bad. Glyph of despair is already not guaranteed to work. Removing fp for it would ensure you can at least make one craft afterwards.

Playing around to try to find the best place to start using Glyphs of Despair is one of the “risk/reward” layers of the glyph. Attempting to use it frequently or early and then min/maxing affixes after is probably not the best approach.

Glyph of Despair would lose a large portion of its depth and risk/reward if we allowed it to be used at 0 FP. One of the interesting parts about the glyph is the more I try to increase the affix I want to seal the less likely it would be for me to seal it but more rewarding if I seal a higher affix; the more you attempt and fail you might lose that opportunity. You...

Thanks for the reports. We’ll take a look.