[The Goddess Swords Discussion] 19th Jan, 2018: Volume has been fixed; Writing The Goddess

"
VideoGeemer wrote:


The things that had been suggested, that were on the right track, but which were ignored or forgotten about, were in reference to Stanza 2.


"
Rhys wrote:
Spoiler
I suppose I should emerge from my post-crunch lair of languor to throw another bone or two this way...

The first stanza has pretty much been figured out by the community.

The second stanza is similar, in the sense that the community has realized how trivial it is to brute-force, even though a hilariously large number of people are mistaken on certain specifics.


The third stanza, which is intentionally difficult, is still eluding most people. There have been some good guesses, and even one or two that would actually work perfectly well, if they hadn't been ignored.

Spoiler
The last line, in particular, has thrown people for a loop for longer than I expected. Mostly due to overthinking "imperfect sum" and being completely lost on "of two". I've given a few hints already on the latter, but I guess another is needed. Try thinking along the lines of "The Rule of Two".
PoE Origins - Piety's story http://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/2081910
"
VideoGeemer wrote:

The things that had been suggested, that were on the right track, but which were ignored or forgotten about, were in reference to Stanza 2.

For instance, we've been on this corrupted gem idea for a while, and that specific could be way off.


-VG-

Edit: Doesn't "Two exalt and one encored" imply two (of maybe the same) high level items (swords?) and TGB ... but not necessarily Scorned?


No it wasn't, that was the 3rd.
"
VideoGeemer wrote:

Edit: Doesn't "Two exalt and one encored" imply two (of maybe the same) high level items (swords?) and TGB ... but not necessarily Scorned?


Just a reminder, Rhys corrected this stanza, due to a grammar error, now it reads:

"Two exalted, one encored"

Speculation has it that Two is Scorned and One Bound...
...and stay dead!
It's the last stanza that's the problem because people seem to not understand the "imperfect sums of two". Well, time to make my contribution to it i guess. I assume the "imperfect sum" would mean adding two numbers separately(example 13 => 1 + 3 = 4); "of two" meaning the two numbers of quality that can be on support gems. Now, we see a lot of rolls are connected to numbers such as 33,66, and 99, all of which are both multiples of 3 and 11 respectively. If we take into consideration you have to use 3 support gems(hinted by the riddle), the very likely amount of quality you have to put on the gems is exactly 11 on all 3. Could be wrong, but after a long thought, this seems like a pretty realistic demand, not ridiculously expensive and pretty difficult to find out.

edit: quality crafted like this on gems, also adds up to 33, which also makes sense for all those rolls.
Last edited by Helvenn on Mar 8, 2016, 6:43:19 AM
"
Completed 15 ChallengesWazz72 wrote:

Just a reminder, Rhys corrected this stanza, due to a grammar error, now it reads:

"Two exalted, one encored"

This was changed back to "two exalt", check the first post.
FilterBlast - a web-hub with up-to-date item filters and extra features
http://filterblast.oversoul.xyz
Last edited by Dissolator on Mar 8, 2016, 9:11:17 AM
with help of 212 jewelers, 739 fusings and 193 chromatics (total 259c equiv) now i'm ready to search the recipe:


also my guess that recipe checks for exact quantity of orbs in stacks
FilterBlast - a web-hub with up-to-date item filters and extra features
http://filterblast.oversoul.xyz
"
Completed 16 ChallengesDalaiLama wrote:

Spoiler
The last line, in particular, has thrown people for a loop for longer than I expected. Mostly due to overthinking "imperfect sum" and being completely lost on "of two". I've given a few hints already on the latter, but I guess another is needed. Try thinking along the lines of "The Rule of Two".

"

No it wasn't, that was the 3rd.


Yeah, you're right. My bad, guys.

My brain was on the part where he said that the second has been mostly understood in that we realize we can't just brute force it, but that "a hilariously large number of people are mistaken on certain specifics."

Trying to think about which specifics we all seem to just assume, because those are probably wrong.



-VG-
Invited to Beta 2012-03-18 / Supporter since 2012-04-08
Last edited by VideoGeemer on Mar 8, 2016, 11:00:25 AM
We were told that this recipe checks for objects in a way that no other recipe has checked.

We are also told "one encored", my conclusion is then:

One of the gems required, or perhaps the only gem required may need to be in a socket.

From what I've read thus far I haven't heard of this being tried.
"
Dissolator wrote:
"
Completed 15 ChallengesWazz72 wrote:

Just a reminder, Rhys corrected this stanza, due to a grammar error, now it reads:

"Two exalted, one encored"

This was changed back to "two exalt", check the first post.


No it wasn't, it's just that whenever Charan edits his first post, it reverts. It's "Two exalted, one encored". Neither actually make a difference, it's just the grammar and meter that change slightly.
Last edited by Tilted47 on Mar 8, 2016, 6:39:09 PM
"
Dissolator wrote:
with help of 212 jewelers, 739 fusings and 193 chromatics (total 259c equiv) now i'm ready to search the recipe:


also my guess that recipe checks for exact quantity of orbs in stacks


I don't think it does - Rhys's most recent comment hints at this:

"
Rhys wrote:
Spoiler
I suppose I should emerge from my post-crunch lair of languor to throw another bone or two this way...

The first stanza has pretty much been figured out by the community.


The second stanza is similar, in the sense that the community has realized how trivial it is to brute-force, even though a hilariously large number of people are mistaken on certain specifics.

Spoiler
The third stanza, which is intentionally difficult, is still eluding most people. There have been some good guesses, and even one or two that would actually work perfectly well, if they hadn't been ignored.

The last line, in particular, has thrown people for a loop for longer than I expected. Mostly due to overthinking "imperfect sum" and being completely lost on "of two". I've given a few hints already on the latter, but I guess another is needed. Try thinking along the lines of "The Rule of Two".
PoE Origins - Piety's story http://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/2081910

Report Forum Post

Report Account:

Report Type

Additional Info