TOPIC: Build Diversity:"Give us Choices.No Not like That"

Raven, thank you for starting this thread.

Picc wrote: I think one thing we also need to be mindful of is nonBIS uncommon/Rare level players. They make up most of the population and are often forgotten during design because we're so hyper focused on the UR+ items.

+1 to this. Two people in my guild started playing TD in 2013. I joined them in 2014. At Gen Con 2017, my guild had 10 level 4 players. At Origins 2018, we were mostly level 5. At Gen Con 2018, we'd gotten everyone up to level 5 through a mix of RoH, Might Set, and Charm Set. We've moved from having some URs and mostly Rares to a decent number of URs, with a few Relics, 3 & 4-point transmutes, and a few Rares. Some folks still have UCs in pretty important slots. We've got one Charm of Avarice in the whole guild, which was made at Gen Con 2018, and 6 ISSN among us. None of us have any Eldritch items yet. (We do have full Synergy, though!)

So, we're a little further along than the UC/Rare type players, but we're nowhere near BIS. We missed the boat on making the RoSP and Supreme Ring, and given their current prices, it's extremely unlikely we'd ever buy them. Some of us might shell out ~$1000 for Boots of the Four Winds, but there's no way all 10 of us will get them. The introduction of the Kilts and the Teeth, and the availability of a 2-item Eldritch Set to all classes, is the first real chance for any of us to get to level 5 via an Eldritch set bonus.

Anyway, the point of this background is that it can be a little intimidating to read discussions that assume "everyone" has the 3 existing Eldritch items, along with numerous Relic and Legendary tokens. Some of us are just getting into the game--or getting more serious about the game--right about now. It's nice to have entry points to new Eldritch items, as well as new TEs and Rare tokens that provide meaningful benefits. Three and four-point transmutes are a great introduction to the concept of transmuting and can provide real benefits at a reasonable cost to players who aren't quite ready to take the UR+ plunge. So if possible, please try to keep those of us who aren't yet (or may never be) at BIS in mind when talking about things like build diversity.

Rob F wrote:

Brad Mortensen wrote: I don’t understand why some people want to impose their idea of “fun” on everyone else.

If you want to limit the number of slotless tokens you carry, then you absolutely should. If you want to carry a steamer trunk full, go for it. As long as it doesn’t have wheels, of course.

I’m going out on a limb and say most trunk players are not in PUGs. Set limits in your prefab parties if you want. Challenge yourself if you choose. If your friends annoy you, speak up.

But the game is supposed to be fun. You do you. Can I just do me?

I'm more concerned about the game balance aspect and adding a bit more realism to it. I don't think Slotless Tokens should have ever been created in the first place, but that's just me. Maybe Jeff should let us use 10 rings, one for each finger? And two pairs of shoes, one for each foot? If I proposed adding 8 rings to the game because it would make it more "fun" for me what do you think would happen? Would a coach in the room allow it? Why have slots in the first place?

And if I do what I do then maybe I do want the transmuted Kilt with +10 to all stats so I can go through the dungeon and show up the lower level players. Maybe we should make it +20.

I'd have to think about this myself, but how many other games allow you to play them with an unlimited number of anything, with no restrictions? I don't play Magic, never have, but can you bring as many cards as you want to play against someone? What about co-op games? Can you start with unlimited anything?

And for those against the limit, outside of "I like to play the game my way" or "this is just how it's been and I don't like change" what real in game concerns would you have? if Jeff did impose a limit of say 15 "Gear" Tokens, would that really make it "less fun" for you?

But maybe I'm overlooking something here, maybe I should try some builds with some limits and see how things shake out...

Don’t be ridiculous

Picc wrote: I think one thing we also need to be mindful of is nonBIS uncommon/Rare level players. They make up most of the population and are often forgotten during design because we're so hyper focused on the UR+ items.

I agree. Strongly.
Myself, I really try to advocate for the "HardCore level" builds... which is kinda where I see the players who've decided that they're going to actually spend money on tokens (instead of just collecting their 10-packs and treasure from year to year.) I will admit I don't pay terribly much attention to the Uncommons, but I want a solid set of Rares, and some really good-for-newbies URs. And unfortunately, I often find the Relic & Legendary-level players have very different priorities at the UR level.

Fiddy wrote: I'm a bit concerned with the choice of the Neck slot for the class-specific Legendaries, for the exact reason that currently that is where I see people with the most variations in their builds.

(snip)

Having read your list, I understand where you're coming from. Using the neck for Legendaries will (slowly) cause a lot of players to drop those items from their builds, and that's kinda sad. But I think they still make excellent options for the hundreds (thousands?) of players who can't afford to play at Legendary levels.

I also look at it this way: Whatever slot Class Legendaries are in will become insanely powerful. I'd rather use a slot which is already strong, than have 2 super-strong slots.

Rob F wrote: I think Jeff should seriously consider a cap on all Slotless items. It's a great decision for the long term health of the game. Limits power creep, promotes build diversity, etc. etc. And it's more realistic. There's always been some sort of "encumberence" system in place for D&D.

(snip)

That's a very interesting take on it.

I also think it's a ?dangerous? idea to enforce without a lot of very careful consideration. Just looking at how traumatic it's being for people to change the LoDS and Wands, I wouldn't really want to do it unless it was necessary. But if it becomes necessary... then who knows?

For now, what I'd really, really like to see is: No More Slotless Items being created,
and No New Slots being created.

That said.... I'd love to see some Challenge Runs where people limit their Slotless tokens, and see what kind of difference it makes in builds and play style.

BeLinda Mathie wrote: Raven, thank you for starting this thread.

BeLinda, thanks for commenting!

I've been replying to several comments all in one post, but wanted to address your independently.

+1 to this. Two people in my guild started playing TD in 2013. I joined them in 2014. At Gen Con 2017, my guild had 10 level 4 players. At Origins 2018, we were mostly level 5. At Gen Con 2018, we'd gotten everyone up to level 5 through a mix of RoH, Might Set, and Charm Set. We've moved from having some URs and mostly Rares to a decent number of URs, with a few Relics, 3 & 4-point transmutes, and a few Rares. Some folks still have UCs in pretty important slots. We've got one Charm of Avarice in the whole guild, which was made at Gen Con 2018, and 6 ISSN among us. None of us have any Eldritch items yet. (We do have full Synergy, though!)

Excellent choice on the Synergy tokens!

Believe it or not, your group is more representative of most groups which play True Dungeon, than the forum regulars are. We are - as I've said elsewhere - a very skewed demographic.

So, we're a little further along than the UC/Rare type players, but we're nowhere near BIS. We missed the boat on making the RoSP and Supreme Ring, and given their current prices, it's extremely unlikely we'd ever buy them. Some of us might shell out ~$1000 for Boots of the Four Winds, but there's no way all 10 of us will get them. The introduction of the Kilts and the Teeth, and the availability of a 2-item Eldritch Set to all classes, is the first real chance for any of us to get to level 5 via an Eldritch set bonus.

Anyway, the point of this background is that it can be a little intimidating to read discussions that assume "everyone" has the 3 existing Eldritch items, along with numerous Relic and Legendary tokens. Some of us are just getting into the game--or getting more serious about the game--right about now. It's nice to have entry points to new Eldritch items, as well as new TEs and Rare tokens that provide meaningful benefits. Three and four-point transmutes are a great introduction to the concept of transmuting and can provide real benefits at a reasonable cost to players who aren't quite ready to take the UR+ plunge. So if possible, please try to keep those of us who aren't yet (or may never be) at BIS in mind when talking about things like build diversity.

Very well put!

i apologize for the echo-chamber we occasionally create in here. Although we're aware that most players don't have multiple Legendaries, or multiple Eldritch items, the truth is that those who do are incredibly passionate players, and often quite ... enthusiastic ... in our viewpoints and opinions. It's great to have a reality check now & then, and see the token creation process through someone else's eyes.

So, what are some things you & your crew would like to see?

What do you think would help you create fun & diverse builds, at the level you can afford?

OK, last post in a row. Then I have to go to sleep, and might not be online for the next 24 hrs *gulp* as our family gets some camping in.

Kirk Bauer wrote: Raven, great post and I think I agree with everything you have said. Looking at the current proposed 2019 token set, what do you think should be changed based on your recommendations?

Honestly, I'd like to see the whole process shaken up a little.

I'd love to see the C/U/R sets be released 3-4 days before the URs and transmutes. That would give us (in all our obsessive glory) a chance to really go over those sets with a fine-tooth comb, before launching into pages worth of discussion about URs & Transmutes : )

I'd also like to see some well thought-out guidelines put forward for future years development.

This year, it was great to see Jeff expound on some of the difficulties surrounding OP tokens, and make some real changes to address those problems, however painful. What I'd like to see coming out of that, is suggestions for how we can keep from doing it in the future! Guidelines like... say... "tokens shouldn't have stat bumps higher than X ... except in these slots." Or... "there should be 3 ways to get X ability at UR and lower, before we make a Relic or Higher which combines that ability with another ability (or stat bump.)" Or "Let's deliberately put these 2 cool powers in conflicting slots, and all practice backing away slowly."

I'd definitely like to see rules about "No More Slotless tokens" and "Let's not try to solve Slot Lock by making Franken-tokens which pull all the cool abilities into a single Slot." and then (politely, 'cuz I'm Canadian) carding folks who write repeated posts advocating those "fixes."



And on top of that, I want a stunning multi-sapphire Rogue token which slices & dices & Julliennes fries, because I'm also human, and want things which aren't always good for me to have.

@raven regarding the newer groups.

I've been pulling about 2 people per year into my group since 2015, and we had 7 for one adventure this year at Gen Con and 5 for the other two.

The first two of us have the most tokens - i have 4 purple because I pulled the charming ioun stone out of a booster in 17 and decided to spring on the earcuff and ring to level up. The other guy that started with me picked up the cheapest purple 2 hander he could get for a barb build, a medallion of heroism, and troll hide armor. The remainder of our tokens are red or green, as well as the entirety of the rest of the group.

Budget for most of the group is <$5 per token, and I bought a large batch of reds for everyone to use.

Build diversity is roughest in the charm slots and ioun stones as there just aren't many options at that price. Everyone has a charm of health and a sip quick in the charm slot with varying random commons in the last slot, and me with a charm of enlightenment. The ioun stone layout is beryl prism, norse opals, agate orb, copper cube and ruby cube. No real options mean no real variety.

The neck slot is another mediocre slot at cheap red - its certainly not the power slot I see referenced here. I've filled everyone with +2 ac neck. Cloak is all +2 cloak of protection.

Most interesting slots are rings, armor, helm, and waists.

Rob F wrote: I think Jeff should seriously consider a cap on all Slotless items. It's a great decision for the long term health of the game. Limits power creep, promotes build diversity, etc. etc. And it's more realistic. There's always been some sort of "encumberence" system in place for D&D.

100% agree.

In addition to curbing power creep and promoting build diversity, putting a cap on miscellaneous gear also opens the door to printing items like bags of holding to expand those caps.

Timothy Lopez wrote:

Rob F wrote: I think Jeff should seriously consider a cap on all Slotless items. It's a great decision for the long term health of the game. Limits power creep, promotes build diversity, etc. etc. And it's more realistic. There's always been some sort of "encumberence" system in place for D&D.

100% agree.

In addition to curbing power creep and promoting build diversity, putting a cap on miscellaneous gear also opens the door to printing items like bags of holding to expand those caps.

Just mentioning for fun, there already is a bag of holding token it just doesn't really do anything.

Raven, thank you for getting this started. The whole “I want to gain everything but give nothing” attitude is exactly why I’ve almost entirely stepped away from token development the past few years.

Everyone wants to be in the middle to top for DPS or healing but no one wants to be the bottom. Well, unfortunately someone has to take that role, but that doesn’t necessarily make your class less fun. I like doing rogue puzzles and getting extra treasure. I don’t need to be middle of the pack on damage. What do I look like, a bard?

Conflict in slots is necessary otherwise we all end up the same.

Regarding slotless tokens, by definition we cannot slot them - what about some type of point-buy system? Arbitrary examples: 50 point limit, commons 1, uncommon 2, rare 3, transmutes 4, URs 5, relics 7, legendary 10, artifacts zero, etc. Or 100 points. Whatever. It would still allow quite a bit of tokens but not unlimited tokens.

Brad Mortensen wrote:

Rob F wrote:

Brad Mortensen wrote: I don’t understand why some people want to impose their idea of “fun” on everyone else.

If you want to limit the number of slotless tokens you carry, then you absolutely should. If you want to carry a steamer trunk full, go for it. As long as it doesn’t have wheels, of course.

I’m going out on a limb and say most trunk players are not in PUGs. Set limits in your prefab parties if you want. Challenge yourself if you choose. If your friends annoy you, speak up.

But the game is supposed to be fun. You do you. Can I just do me?

I'm more concerned about the game balance aspect and adding a bit more realism to it. I don't think Slotless Tokens should have ever been created in the first place, but that's just me. Maybe Jeff should let us use 10 rings, one for each finger? And two pairs of shoes, one for each foot? If I proposed adding 8 rings to the game because it would make it more "fun" for me what do you think would happen? Would a coach in the room allow it? Why have slots in the first place?

And if I do what I do then maybe I do want the transmuted Kilt with +10 to all stats so I can go through the dungeon and show up the lower level players. Maybe we should make it +20.

I'd have to think about this myself, but how many other games allow you to play them with an unlimited number of anything, with no restrictions? I don't play Magic, never have, but can you bring as many cards as you want to play against someone? What about co-op games? Can you start with unlimited anything?

And for those against the limit, outside of "I like to play the game my way" or "this is just how it's been and I don't like change" what real in game concerns would you have? if Jeff did impose a limit of say 15 "Gear" Tokens, would that really make it "less fun" for you?

But maybe I'm overlooking something here, maybe I should try some builds with some limits and see how things shake out...

Don’t be ridiculous

Change can be good Brad, it can.

Sure I'm going off the deep end on some of the scenarios I listed but if people object to a limit on Slotless items I'm curious why they have issues with it from a game mechanic standpoint. How impactful would it be to the game? To the coaches? To the DM's? If there was a limit Jeff could always create a Token to expand the "Gear" Slot if he wanted to. I'll admit I haven't pondered this in depth but initial thoughts I only see upside potential.

Picc wrote:

Timothy Lopez wrote:

Rob F wrote: I think Jeff should seriously consider a cap on all Slotless items. It's a great decision for the long term health of the game. Limits power creep, promotes build diversity, etc. etc. And it's more realistic. There's always been some sort of "encumberence" system in place for D&D.

100% agree.

In addition to curbing power creep and promoting build diversity, putting a cap on miscellaneous gear also opens the door to printing items like bags of holding to expand those caps.

Just mentioning for fun, there already is a bag of holding token it just doesn't really do anything.

Picc, that is my favorite Token that I own today. Had one back in my D&D days.

Raven wrote: Very well put!

Thanks! /blushes

Raven wrote: i apologize for the echo-chamber we occasionally create in here. Although we're aware that most players don't have multiple Legendaries, or multiple Eldritch items, the truth is that those who do are incredibly passionate players, and often quite ... enthusiastic ... in our viewpoints and opinions. It's great to have a reality check now & then, and see the token creation process through someone else's eyes.

No apology necessary. Most of the vets I've interacted with here have been nothing but helpful and encouraging. There's just the occasional disconnect when the discussion assumes everybody has all the toys already, and the only useful tokens are the ones that do MOAR! (And are going to cost >$500 in materials to make.)

Raven wrote: So, what are some things you & your crew would like to see?

I'm going to give this some serious thought this weekend. initial impressions before heading off to work. Our Cleric, Dwarf Fighter, and Paladin are wearing the Defender Set. It's probably too soon to reprint Redoubt items, but keeping that path or an equivalent open to folks joining now could be good. It might be nice to see an equivalent Rare set for the lighter armor classes. (I've spent the last couple of years getting myself the Blessed Redoubt Set, but I suspect Barbarians who don't want to go that far would still appreciate something like Defender Set.) A bunch of us were using the Charm of Health until quite recently when we acquired better charms--it was one of our first transmutes. (Oh, you can free up a ring slot and a neck slot by combining these two common tokens plus 50 GP? Sign us up!) Maybe reissue that transmute, or a functional equivalent, every couple of years? Similarly, Ioun Stones are often a slot that goes unfilled for UC/Rare players. Maybe a 3-point transmute of some kind for an IS? Not sure what mechanic to put there, though. Saves are also an area newer players may not fully understand or know how to improve. Keeping options open for people to boost their saves, without a Charm of Brooching and a Relic+ Cloak, or UR IS, would also be helpful.