TOPIC: RFID on future Dragon Orbs?

I am surprised to hear all this talk about high failure rate on passive rfid...

I have been working with passive rfid chips, multiple frequencies and differing encryption for years.

The only real failures I have had are on the reprogrammable chips...

There must be something about this I just don’t know... some unknown or type.

If the failure rate really is that high, the inventory control system I have worked with would be trash... not even a 0.01 percent failure would be acceptable...

Hmm...

Mongo wrote: I am surprised to hear all this talk about high failure rate on passive rfid...

I have been working with passive rfid chips, multiple frequencies and differing encryption for years.

The only real failures I have had are on the reprogrammable chips...

There must be something about this I just don’t know... some unknown or type.

If the failure rate really is that high, the inventory control system I have worked with would be trash... not even a 0.01 percent failure would be acceptable...

Hmm...

I'm with Mongo. I've been working with passive RFID for the day job for many years and don't see this kind of failure rate. In fact, I don't see any measurable failure rate in the "contact" RFID world. (Touching a token to a reader.)

So I do think adding this tech to adventures could unlock a lot of fun possibilities.

Look at Disney’s Sorcerers of the MagicKingdom game or Universals Harry Potter wand for what might be possible.

What if we had new chip enabled gear tokens, that actual did things in the dungeon if you held them up to the right stuff.

How fun would it be to:

- find out placing a flint next to a torch lights the room, or lights a black light revealing and extra clue!

- using a prybar to spring open a box

- 3 ropes against the wall lights up an LED ladder that the party pretends to take.

- Hold a magnifying glass to the bookshelf to open a hidden compartment.


It would up the level of immersion and fun in the dungeon.

I've worked with RFID chips for years. The failure rate is primarily initial failures, meaning if they pass initial testing, the failure rate past that is less than 1 in a 1000. We used to sell tape cartridges with RFID tags, thousands per month. Cartridge returns for failed tags were less than 10 per year. Once validated and programmed, they are very reliable.

If the plan eventually puts these into every token, a phone app might be a good idea. iPhone 8 and X have an active reader built in. (it's part of the Apple Pay library) The reader hardware is available to developers. I have not investigated Android, but if not already present, it has to be coming. So, you could create an app, waving the phone over the tokens on the table, and read them all in. Set the next character class and pass over the next group of tokens. Not sure if this is faster than what is available today with spreadsheets, web pages and apps, but it is possible.

Cranston wrote: iPhone 8 and X have an active reader built in. (it's part of the Apple Pay library) The reader hardware is available to developers. I have not investigated Android, but if not already present, it has to be coming.

If I recall correctly (which may not be the case), the Apple functionality that was added basically just let's you read the NFC flavor of RFID tags. Something that many Android phones have had for several years.

My guess is it’s only going to be cost effective to do UR and higher. I’m all for having RFID for anti counterfeiting and a theft deterrent. I just don’t think it’s practical for most tokens. Heck it might be best to keep it to only relics and higher to prevent people from using RFID scanners to search packs without opening them.

Wayne Rhodes wrote: My guess is it’s only going to be cost effective to do UR and higher. I’m all for having RFID for anti counterfeiting and a theft deterrent. I just don’t think it’s practical for most tokens. Heck it might be best to keep it to only relics and higher to prevent people from using RFID scanners to search packs without opening them.

I'm not sure how practical that would be with multiple tokens packed together. Worst case we could always look at those little metal strips they use to make amibos unreadable in the packages.

Wayne Rhodes wrote: My guess is it’s only going to be cost effective to do UR and higher. I’m all for having RFID for anti counterfeiting and a theft deterrent. I just don’t think it’s practical for most tokens. Heck it might be best to keep it to only relics and higher to prevent people from using RFID scanners to search packs without opening them.

Depends on several factors. I don't think UHF chips will fit inside the token, but it's hard to say. UHF tags are cheaper and can be less than $0.10. HF tend to be a bit more expensive, but most of the cost is memory. With a 1 KB chip, costs could be sub $1. (NFC tags look to be about $0.25/tag) HF would probably be better anyway to keep anyone from trying to read the chips in the treasure boxes. Given the price of a 10-pack, you may be right, since the tag price per 10-pack is likely to be $2-$3.

Great news, and it seems to open up a lot of neat options for the future.

Regarding the Charms of Avarice, it should give Jeff great data on how often each is used, and some insight on whether there is a lot of loaning going on. It would show, for instance, if there are ever instances of them being used on overlapping runs.

I wonder if this would give Jeff the ability to "soul bond" TE or other tokens, so they would only work for a single individual at a convention (or forever).

Mike Steele wrote: Great news, and it seems to open up a lot of neat options for the future.

Regarding the Charms of Avarice, it should give Jeff great data on how often each is used, and some insight on whether there is a lot of loaning going on. It would show, for instance, if there are ever instances of them being used on overlapping runs.

I wonder if this would give Jeff the ability to "soul bond" TE or other tokens, so they would only work for a single individual at a convention (or forever).

I would hate to see TE’s to be soul bonded. That would kill the value of them and was never explained when created.
If they wanted to reissue 5th level tokens with RFID and track them per player that would make sense because they should be soul bonded.
That being said I am not against the tracking idea at all. It has many good uses. I also would be in favor of giving legendary items serial numbers.

Wayne Rhodes wrote:

Mike Steele wrote: Great news, and it seems to open up a lot of neat options for the future.

Regarding the Charms of Avarice, it should give Jeff great data on how often each is used, and some insight on whether there is a lot of loaning going on. It would show, for instance, if there are ever instances of them being used on overlapping runs.

I wonder if this would give Jeff the ability to "soul bond" TE or other tokens, so they would only work for a single individual at a convention (or forever).

I would hate to see TE’s to be soul bonded. That would kill the value of them and was never explained when created.
If they wanted to reissue 5th level tokens with RFID and track them per player that would make sense because they should be soul bonded.
That being said I am not against the tracking idea at all. It has many good uses. I also would be in favor of giving legendary items serial numbers.

I wouldn't want the traditional soul bond, but Jeff might like the option to limit how many different people can use a TE token at a given convention. He didn't really have any way to track or enforce that, maybe he now has that option to consider. I'm not sure if the system will/can track which person is using it on a run, or can just tell which runs it's used on but can't track who is using it.