TOPIC: RE-PRINT Ideas?

It seems like it would be easier to have a new Red Fez of Intellect (Rare) and not bother with changing the old Hat of Intellect token. Does a reprint need to use the same name?

Orion Wiseman wrote: Does a reprint need to use the same name?

It depends on your semantic preferences.

• Reprint: In TD parlance, this generally connotes the same name and same effect (perhaps with a slight rewording, e.g., Ring of Stunning Fist ), but often with new artwork.
• Functional Reprint: The same (or very similar) effect with a different name.

Picc wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote:

Brad Mortensen wrote:

macXdmg wrote: Hat of Intellect - make it +4 int and no additional bonuses. Allow trade ins for the new hat and a single token draw. Invalidate the old version. This should be done in the future when there is an intelligence stat bonus.

A trade-in for rares would be unprecedented, and adding a token draw would be even more so. There must be hundreds of them out there.

Why is this being proposed in the first place?

What problems exist with the token as written?

I personally dont see a problem with hat of int granting 2 int break points even if int is OP. We would just have to accept that a few old timers would be one int break point higher then others who would likely catch up with a single UR int hat.

That said if it was decided a recall of a rare (or lower) was warranted (which in general I imagine would be more trouble then it was worth) I would personally rather that it was just errata that said rare banned from play and worth a single treasure chip in compensation. It would be less of an expense/ hassel for TD then having to manage an ongoing trade in program for a potential large number of tokens.

I don’t understand the problem!
INT has no in game effect and the +2 is only for spells requiring a slide. I didn’t double check but maybe half the spells so a rare gives +2 but only for half the time so effectively +1.
Is there anything I’m missing?

Also replacing it with Just +4 INT is useless, No in game effect and unlike gear, you can’t even do something creative with it.

Bob Chasan wrote:

Picc wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote:

Brad Mortensen wrote:

macXdmg wrote: Hat of Intellect - make it +4 int and no additional bonuses. Allow trade ins for the new hat and a single token draw. Invalidate the old version. This should be done in the future when there is an intelligence stat bonus.

A trade-in for rares would be unprecedented, and adding a token draw would be even more so. There must be hundreds of them out there.

Why is this being proposed in the first place?

What problems exist with the token as written?

I personally dont see a problem with hat of int granting 2 int break points even if int is OP. We would just have to accept that a few old timers would be one int break point higher then others who would likely catch up with a single UR int hat.

That said if it was decided a recall of a rare (or lower) was warranted (which in general I imagine would be more trouble then it was worth) I would personally rather that it was just errata that said rare banned from play and worth a single treasure chip in compensation. It would be less of an expense/ hassel for TD then having to manage an ongoing trade in program for a potential large number of tokens.

I don’t understand the problem!
INT has no in game effect and the +2 is only for spells requiring a slide. I didn’t double check but maybe half the spells so a rare gives +2 but only for half the time so effectively +1.
Is there anything I’m missing?

Also replacing it with Just +4 INT is useless, No in game effect and unlike gear, you can’t even do something creative with it.

I think the fear is that if int/wis/cha become stats that do something in the same way as str/dex/con +4 may be considered OP for a rare and thus result in int/wis/change getting sub par powers since since there are already rares that make getting a high stat to easy.

I think those fears are unfounded but I could be mistaken.

Picc wrote:

Bob Chasan wrote:

Picc wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote:

Brad Mortensen wrote:

macXdmg wrote: Hat of Intellect - make it +4 int and no additional bonuses. Allow trade ins for the new hat and a single token draw. Invalidate the old version. This should be done in the future when there is an intelligence stat bonus.

A trade-in for rares would be unprecedented, and adding a token draw would be even more so. There must be hundreds of them out there.

Why is this being proposed in the first place?

What problems exist with the token as written?

I personally dont see a problem with hat of int granting 2 int break points even if int is OP. We would just have to accept that a few old timers would be one int break point higher then others who would likely catch up with a single UR int hat.

That said if it was decided a recall of a rare (or lower) was warranted (which in general I imagine would be more trouble then it was worth) I would personally rather that it was just errata that said rare banned from play and worth a single treasure chip in compensation. It would be less of an expense/ hassel for TD then having to manage an ongoing trade in program for a potential large number of tokens.

I don’t understand the problem!
INT has no in game effect and the +2 is only for spells requiring a slide. I didn’t double check but maybe half the spells so a rare gives +2 but only for half the time so effectively +1.
Is there anything I’m missing?

Also replacing it with Just +4 INT is useless, No in game effect and unlike gear, you can’t even do something creative with it.

I think the fear is that if int/wis/cha become stats that do something in the same way as str/dex/con +4 may be considered OP for a rare and thus result in int/wis/change getting sub par powers since since there are already rares that make getting a high stat to easy.

I think those fears are unfounded but I could be mistaken.

That ship has already sailed. Charm of Enlightenment gives +8 to WIS at Rare.

Bob Chasan wrote:

Picc wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote:

Brad Mortensen wrote:

macXdmg wrote: Hat of Intellect - make it +4 int and no additional bonuses. Allow trade ins for the new hat and a single token draw. Invalidate the old version. This should be done in the future when there is an intelligence stat bonus.

A trade-in for rares would be unprecedented, and adding a token draw would be even more so. There must be hundreds of them out there.

Why is this being proposed in the first place?

What problems exist with the token as written?

I personally dont see a problem with hat of int granting 2 int break points even if int is OP. We would just have to accept that a few old timers would be one int break point higher then others who would likely catch up with a single UR int hat.

That said if it was decided a recall of a rare (or lower) was warranted (which in general I imagine would be more trouble then it was worth) I would personally rather that it was just errata that said rare banned from play and worth a single treasure chip in compensation. It would be less of an expense/ hassel for TD then having to manage an ongoing trade in program for a potential large number of tokens.

I don’t understand the problem!
INT has no in game effect and the +2 is only for spells requiring a slide. I didn’t double check but maybe half the spells so a rare gives +2 but only for half the time so effectively +1.
Is there anything I’m missing?

Also replacing it with Just +4 INT is useless, No in game effect and unlike gear, you can’t even do something creative with it.

This should be done in the future when there is an intelligence stat bonus benefit. I missed the “benefit” the last time which may have confused folks.

The purpose of the proposal is that I would like int to have an in game effect that would invalidate this token. There is a ur crown of might that I am using as a comparison. Essentially +2 strength and part of a might set at a ur level. This does grant access to the MEC though although I’m guessing the robes helped replace this hat in some builds. I don’t know what benefits are incoming, but I think this particular token should be considered out of bounds when the benefits discussions are being had. Above the curve cards are taken out of print, or put on restricted lists in some games, they are changed in video games. Our game has an ability to correct, however TPTB decide to do so, and so I made an early suggestion. If stat bonuses in stats that are currently unused become useful, there is a fix suggestion that can be utilized.

macXdmg wrote:

Bob Chasan wrote:

Picc wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote:

Brad Mortensen wrote:

macXdmg wrote: Hat of Intellect - make it +4 int and no additional bonuses. Allow trade ins for the new hat and a single token draw. Invalidate the old version. This should be done in the future when there is an intelligence stat bonus.

A trade-in for rares would be unprecedented, and adding a token draw would be even more so. There must be hundreds of them out there.

Why is this being proposed in the first place?

What problems exist with the token as written?

I personally dont see a problem with hat of int granting 2 int break points even if int is OP. We would just have to accept that a few old timers would be one int break point higher then others who would likely catch up with a single UR int hat.

That said if it was decided a recall of a rare (or lower) was warranted (which in general I imagine would be more trouble then it was worth) I would personally rather that it was just errata that said rare banned from play and worth a single treasure chip in compensation. It would be less of an expense/ hassel for TD then having to manage an ongoing trade in program for a potential large number of tokens.

I don’t understand the problem!
INT has no in game effect and the +2 is only for spells requiring a slide. I didn’t double check but maybe half the spells so a rare gives +2 but only for half the time so effectively +1.
Is there anything I’m missing?

Also replacing it with Just +4 INT is useless, No in game effect and unlike gear, you can’t even do something creative with it.

This should be done in the future when there is an intelligence stat bonus benefit. I missed the “benefit” the last time which may have confused folks.

The purpose of the proposal is that I would like int to have an in game effect that would invalidate this token. There is a ur crown of might that I am using as a comparison. Essentially +2 strength and part of a might set at a ur level. This does grant access to the MEC though although I’m guessing the robes helped replace this hat in some builds. I don’t know what benefits are incoming, but I think this particular token should be considered out of bounds when the benefits discussions are being had. Above the curve cards are taken out of print, or put on restricted lists in some games, they are changed in video games. Our game has an ability to correct, however TPTB decide to do so, and so I made an early suggestion. If stat bonuses in stats that are currently unused become useful, there is a fix suggestion that can be utilized.

Look if INT does do something in the future and I would LOVE that..... token development is so far behind there would have to be an entire years tokens dedicated to just INT increasing tokens.
There are 45 tokens increasing Strength, 39 for Dexterity, and 21 for Constitution.

Bob Chasan wrote:

macXdmg wrote:

Bob Chasan wrote:

Picc wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote:

Brad Mortensen wrote:

macXdmg wrote: Hat of Intellect - make it +4 int and no additional bonuses. Allow trade ins for the new hat and a single token draw. Invalidate the old version. This should be done in the future when there is an intelligence stat bonus.

A trade-in for rares would be unprecedented, and adding a token draw would be even more so. There must be hundreds of them out there.

Why is this being proposed in the first place?

What problems exist with the token as written?

I personally dont see a problem with hat of int granting 2 int break points even if int is OP. We would just have to accept that a few old timers would be one int break point higher then others who would likely catch up with a single UR int hat.

That said if it was decided a recall of a rare (or lower) was warranted (which in general I imagine would be more trouble then it was worth) I would personally rather that it was just errata that said rare banned from play and worth a single treasure chip in compensation. It would be less of an expense/ hassel for TD then having to manage an ongoing trade in program for a potential large number of tokens.

I don’t understand the problem!
INT has no in game effect and the +2 is only for spells requiring a slide. I didn’t double check but maybe half the spells so a rare gives +2 but only for half the time so effectively +1.
Is there anything I’m missing?

Also replacing it with Just +4 INT is useless, No in game effect and unlike gear, you can’t even do something creative with it.

This should be done in the future when there is an intelligence stat bonus benefit. I missed the “benefit” the last time which may have confused folks.

The purpose of the proposal is that I would like int to have an in game effect that would invalidate this token. There is a ur crown of might that I am using as a comparison. Essentially +2 strength and part of a might set at a ur level. This does grant access to the MEC though although I’m guessing the robes helped replace this hat in some builds. I don’t know what benefits are incoming, but I think this particular token should be considered out of bounds when the benefits discussions are being had. Above the curve cards are taken out of print, or put on restricted lists in some games, they are changed in video games. Our game has an ability to correct, however TPTB decide to do so, and so I made an early suggestion. If stat bonuses in stats that are currently unused become useful, there is a fix suggestion that can be utilized.

Look if INT does do something in the future and I would LOVE that..... token development is so far behind there would have to be an entire years tokens dedicated to just INT increasing tokens.
There are 45 tokens increasing Strength, 39 for Dexterity, and 21 for Constitution.

I think we all want the same-ish things with regard to INT.

I think planning to errata a token before that conversation gets off the ground is really putting the cart before the horse.

If it's announced in 6 months that INT and WIS will both grant an additional Tome and Bead slot at 16, just like CHA does for figurine, it will have been harmful.

TD has made it clear they will balance tokens when they think there is a problem - no reason to get ahead of them on this.

Reprinting some of the big-ticket transmutation ingredients might help some of the new blood like me

Perhaps one of:
Ring of Riches (2011)
Charm of Good Fortune (2013)

Or:
Girdle of Frost Giant Strength (2012) (this one probably makes little sense with the themes of the dungeons this year though, maybe something similar that could also be used in the recipe?)
Mithral Coin of Fate (2012) obviously the years would be adjusted
Viper Strike Belt (2014)

Daniel White wrote: Reprinting some of the big-ticket transmutation ingredients might help some of the new blood like me

Perhaps one of:
Ring of Riches (2011)
Charm of Good Fortune (2013)

Historically there has only been one URTE printed every two years. The schedule is set until 2023.

But because of the CoA recipe, I don’t see either of these being reprinted without changing that recipe. There could be a functional reprint to avoid that drama. E.g. Ring of Lootz - +3 TC, no CoA or RoR. Maybe it could be added to the recipe as 1-point. There’s no way a new PYP would or should be allowed to count as three points towards a CoA, IMO.

Or:
Girdle of Frost Giant Strength (2012) (this one probably makes little sense with the themes of the dungeons this year though, maybe something similar that could also be used in the recipe?)

Frost is a relic. The only transmute to ever be reprinted, AFAIK, is Potion of Condensed Healing. It seems unlikely, but in general I would be in favor of new relics that could be turned into legendaries. However, Surtr’s may be the most common legendary out there - at least it’s one of the cheapest on the secondary market. It would probably be cheaper to buy one than make it, even if Frost were reprinted.

Mithral Coin of Fate (2012) obviously the years would be adjusted

This was never in packs or a PYP (Treasure box and possible Golden Ticket reward only). Today it might as well just be “trade for a HoP,” so I don’t see it happening unless the 2007 start year is upped to 2014 or so - and I don’t think it would ever be a PYP.

Viper Strike Belt (2014)

Could happen. I like the idea of making it easier to equip existing sets instead of creating new sets.

Daniel White wrote: Mithral Coin of Fate (2012) obviously the years would be adjusted

adjusted how ?

Druegar wrote:

Daniel White wrote: Mithral Coin of Fate (2012) obviously the years would be adjusted

adjusted how ?

Presumably by making it start later than 2007.

For example, maybe 2014- or something like that?