TOPIC: Update on Multi-Year Transmute Recipes

I think it could lead to near mutiny if the Codexes DO stack with the familiar.

There will be even more demand for them, than for the Path to Enlightenment, because they actually have an in-game effect.

A slotless +2 to a stat is an extremely good bonus, even without them being part of a cool transmute, so lots of folks who get only a single one will keep it, instead of trading it away later, when people are trying to build their transmutes.

Players who run HIGH END Builds would want one for transmute, and a spare for their build, meaning there will be fewer available on the secondary market, after the big buyers put in their big orders for themselves.

This will drive the price up (probably over $1000) and multiple people will want to run 8K auctions just to get *themselves* a Codex, never mind getting more onto the secondary market

A lot of those auctions will fail to fund, because the price of other goods will drop due to the number of 8K auctions, leaving many people annoyed with failed auctions and still unable to get the tokens they actually want

And it'll breed resentment towards the folks who run auctions, who run high end builds, and/or collect Codexes (Codices?)


I think it's a very bad idea all around.


Please: Whatever the Familiar does, build the +2 Str/ +2 Dex/ +2 Con into the final token if you must, and make a ruling that they do not stack with any single Codex. Please don't make them any rarer than we have to.

Not allowing the components to stack would also be quite consistent with some other high-end transmutes. I think it’s a good suggestion.

I seem to recall earlier this year that someone at TD was worried that it was too cheap to make a Charm of Avarice due to how inexpensive PYPs had become. By making the Codexes stackable with the Familiar, thus increasing their value and desirability, you are going to continue to push down the values of PYPs on the 8k auctions. This will exacerbate the "cheap" CoA issue.

Now, part of me loves this scenario, because I don't have a CoA and want to make three for me and my kids. However, I recognize that this is unhealthy for the player community in a broader sense. Please don't set a new precedent by making them stackable with the Familiar. Additionally, please make the announcement about this before the 2027 tokens go in sale next month. If people spend $$$ on multiple Codexes in the first few auctions and THEN learn they won't be stackable with the Familiar, there's going to be a huge blowback.

Raven wrote: This will drive the price up (probably over $1000) and multiple people will want to run 8K auctions just to get *themselves* a Codex, never mind getting more onto the secondary market

If the price of these is anywhere close to a $1000 I don't see a problem. The Path to Enlightenment fragments went for significantly more. My fear is we're looking at $2000+ if these stack. Seriously, the alternate recipe that allows any 4 Codex to make the Regal Familiar will be enough to keep the prices stable. We don't need stacking.

Dave wrote: If the price of these is anywhere close to a $1000 I don't see a problem. The Path to Enlightenment fragments went for significantly more. My fear is we're looking at $2000+ if these stack.

The Paths were going for over $1000? Wow.
Apparently I wasn't paying much attention to those prices... I saw them going in the $800 range early on, and just ignored it after that, because that's already pretty crazy.

But yeah - if the Paths were going for over $1000, I could see the Codexes going for $2000 easy.

Raven wrote:

Dave wrote: If the price of these is anywhere close to a $1000 I don't see a problem. The Path to Enlightenment fragments went for significantly more. My fear is we're looking at $2000+ if these stack.

The Paths were going for over $1000? Wow.
Apparently I wasn't paying much attention to those prices... I saw them going in the $800 range early on, and just ignored it after that, because that's already pretty crazy.

But yeah - if the Paths were going for over $1000, I could see the Codexes going for $2000 easy.

Raven, even with the super low prices in later auctions they averaged about $1200 with a high price of over $1700. I agree I could see $2000+ easily for the Codexes.

Mike Steele wrote:

Raven wrote:

Dave wrote: If the price of these is anywhere close to a $1000 I don't see a problem. The Path to Enlightenment fragments went for significantly more. My fear is we're looking at $2000+ if these stack.

The Paths were going for over $1000? Wow.
Apparently I wasn't paying much attention to those prices... I saw them going in the $800 range early on, and just ignored it after that, because that's already pretty crazy.

But yeah - if the Paths were going for over $1000, I could see the Codexes going for $2000 easy.

Raven, even with the super low prices in later auctions they averaged about $1200 with a high price of over $1700. I agree I could see $2000+ easily for the Codexes.

I highly doubt the Codexes will go for anywhere near 2K regardless of if they stack or not. Just because a rarity of an item increases doesn't mean people all of a sudden have more money.

I really don't see what the problem is with them stacking other then people can't afford to get a second one. No one has given any in game negative for the Codexes stacking. Its just the "I don't have money for both argument". The only downside is it will increase power creep but that ship has sailed.

If Jeff wants to sell more 8K's he should let them stack.


EDIT: Just because something was done one way in the past doesn't mean it shouldn't be changed in the future. Case in point the Path Fragments required one of each, now that's changed with the Codexes - One of each or four of any.

If people can actually give a good reason why stacking is bad for the game then let's hear it. But "because precedent" is a weak argument.

Something else to think about. If the Codexes stack it will keep their value high in the auctions which means other items in the auctions will be more affordable. Which one could argue is a good thing, especially for newer players. This would help keep prices on hard to get TG's like Oil, Bismuth, etc. lower.

Allowing the Codexes to stack will also help fund more auctions, which is more money for TD. This in turn would help temper any future price increases from TD on Tokens and tickets.

If they don't stack less money for TD because people will only go for one. If they do stack there will be people who shoot for 2 so more money for TD.

Lots of upside, no downside other than power creep.

Bryan (Calandros) wrote: I definitely feel like they do not need to stack. The fact that they have a stand alone ability, and can use any four to Transmute makes them not obsolete. I look at it like Rod parts, each is useful on it's own, but do not stack with the completed rod.

+1 - let's stay consistent with how these have been handled in the past (ie no stacking components and the whole.)

Looking ONlY at Trent’s auctions (which exclude the recent dip), the 2025 and 2026 full-year average cost of the path fragment is just north of $1350. Stable.

Whatever Jeff decides to do, I’d second the vote to decide before auctions and presales start.

Raven wrote:

Dave wrote: If the price of these is anywhere close to a $1000 I don't see a problem. The Path to Enlightenment fragments went for significantly more. My fear is we're looking at $2000+ if these stack.

The Paths were going for over $1000? Wow.
Apparently I wasn't paying much attention to those prices... I saw them going in the $800 range early on, and just ignored it after that, because that's already pretty crazy.

But yeah - if the Paths were going for over $1000, I could see the Codexes going for $2000 easy.

Marc D made a pretty cool site that tracks all the auction information:

td-auctions.com/

To me what the Familiar does determine is stacking a problem. My guess is whatever the familiar does will be disconnected from the 3 codex’s. And while I think the codex’s are good I don’t think they are nearly as big an area of power creep as something like slot expanders.