TOPIC: Transmute Token Ideas

Cross post from Rare thread. Building on the idea earlier in this thread or the original 2021 thread for a pair of 4* transmute gloves, I think from Endgame.

Rare items:
Dwarven Miner's Gloves
+1 STR / +1 DEX alternate +1 STR / +2 HP

Transmute path to 4*:
+2 STR / + 2 DEX alternate +2 STR / +1 CON

Meant as a companion to the 4* Belt of Ogre Mage Power.

Ioun Stone of Focus: Rare +1, UR +2, Relic +3

Lequinian wrote: Greaves of Resisting- turn in 4 unique or 5 non-unique Greaves for -2 from all damage.

The non-unique to allow newer players access.

Oh, I like this one. Useful for veterans, great 'intro to transmuting" for newer players.

Fiddy wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote:

Fiddy wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote: Breaking with all precedent and requiring an eldritch transmute to require lots of trade goods and/or additional URs also seems like a bad idea to me.

Breaking with all precedent? This isn't an Eldritch Relic, this is a Grand Eldritch. There has been exactly one other transmute like this. 7 years previous. And unlike that one, the components of this one have required along the way that you had an additional token in order to use the pieces. The prior one's components could be used all by themselves.

There is one direct precedent. It had one of each trade good.

There are three related precedents. Each has one of each trade good and maybe a GF. If you declare these to not be precedent, then you're left only with the RoSP.

So yes, a proposal to include numerous other trade goods and/or URs breaks all existing precedent - whether you consider that precedent to include all Eldritch tokens, or only RoSP. I'm not sure why that seems to be something people are struggling to understand or agree with - it's very straightforward.

It doesn't follow that:
1. because the Teeth had a mechanic that required other token enablers
2. therefore the transmuted item should have a different form of transmute recipe than every other Eldrtich/Grand Eldritch token.

That's a non sequitur.

Can you think of a single example of any transmute where the thing being transmuted required token enablers, and the recipe also required those same enablers? I can only think of counterexamples (Io's, Thor's and their relics don't require DEX boosters in their recipes).

Why do you want to go against all precedent by adding a power not part of the components into the Eldritch transmute without including the component that gives that ability?

In other words, I simply see the imbuer as part of the whole. Since we've needed an imbuer before the transmute, I believe most people aiming to do the transmute probably have one (or more).

Ok, let's take a step back. I see that you mentioned "numerous other trade goods". You apparently took a leap on what I meant when I said the recipe with the UR enabler would be cheaper. That may be on me for not giving a specific example. What if the recipes were simply:

Recipe 1: 7 teeth, one rare enabler (assuming one is printed in 2021) plus one of each trade good, including GF.

Recipe 2: 7 teeth, plus a UR enabler. Nothing else.

That gives you a recipe pretty close to what you're expecting, and still matches my criteria of the UR recipe using fewer trade goods.

There was a 2017 Rare neck that gave Psychic power, though adding one to 2021 would likely be useful if they're going to offer that route.

NightGod wrote:

Fiddy wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote:

Fiddy wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote: Breaking with all precedent and requiring an eldritch transmute to require lots of trade goods and/or additional URs also seems like a bad idea to me.

Breaking with all precedent? This isn't an Eldritch Relic, this is a Grand Eldritch. There has been exactly one other transmute like this. 7 years previous. And unlike that one, the components of this one have required along the way that you had an additional token in order to use the pieces. The prior one's components could be used all by themselves.

There is one direct precedent. It had one of each trade good.

There are three related precedents. Each has one of each trade good and maybe a GF. If you declare these to not be precedent, then you're left only with the RoSP.

So yes, a proposal to include numerous other trade goods and/or URs breaks all existing precedent - whether you consider that precedent to include all Eldritch tokens, or only RoSP. I'm not sure why that seems to be something people are struggling to understand or agree with - it's very straightforward.

It doesn't follow that:
1. because the Teeth had a mechanic that required other token enablers
2. therefore the transmuted item should have a different form of transmute recipe than every other Eldrtich/Grand Eldritch token.

That's a non sequitur.

Can you think of a single example of any transmute where the thing being transmuted required token enablers, and the recipe also required those same enablers? I can only think of counterexamples (Io's, Thor's and their relics don't require DEX boosters in their recipes).

Why do you want to go against all precedent by adding a power not part of the components into the Eldritch transmute without including the component that gives that ability?

In other words, I simply see the imbuer as part of the whole. Since we've needed an imbuer before the transmute, I believe most people aiming to do the transmute probably have one (or more).

Ok, let's take a step back. I see that you mentioned "numerous other trade goods". You apparently took a leap on what I meant when I said the recipe with the UR enabler would be cheaper. That may be on me for not giving a specific example. What if the recipes were simply:

Recipe 1: 7 teeth, one rare enabler (assuming one is printed in 2021) plus one of each trade good, including GF.

Recipe 2: 7 teeth, plus a UR enabler. Nothing else.

That gives you a recipe pretty close to what you're expecting, and still matches my criteria of the UR recipe using fewer trade goods.

There was a 2017 Rare neck that gave Psychic power, though adding one to 2021 would likely be useful if they're going to offer that route.

I really hope the Tooth recipe doesn't include Golden Fleece. I don't think there's any glut of them now. I recently offered to buy extra monster bits or GF and only had one person respond with extras. The Rod recipe didn't include GF, I don't think the Tooth recipe should either.

Matthew Hayward wrote:

Nick S wrote: I've mentioned it before but in the UR category last year. I had some good feedback for the token.

Tomb of battle mastery - relic
May use any weapon regardless of class restrictions.

Might have a shot if you limit it to Rare only?

This I think would be too much of an impediment to future UR+ weapon design (if it's not already too much of a problem) if it was a permanent free for all.

It would probably also need to spell out what happens to any effects other than to-hit, damage wheel, and unconditional damage bonuses.

E.g. does Ava's let a non-paladin do Grace? Does it let a non-paladin Guard or do Lay on hands? Does Dagger of Arcane Luck allow everyone to reslide, or just Wizards?

So what about if we limit it to relics.
Rares could work as well

Mike Steele wrote: I really hope the Tooth recipe doesn't include Golden Fleece. I don't think there's any glut of them now. I recently offered to buy extra monster bits or GF and only had one person respond with extras. The Rod recipe didn't include GF, I don't think the Tooth recipe should either.

I would expect that it will. Other eldritch pieces didn't, the kilt did.

Also, it seems that VTD will result in a lot more treasure being pulled than usual, or, at least, a higher %age of people getting max treasure.

You've heard the saying, "hope in one hand, **** in the other, and see which one fills up first."

Quick idea on the +1 level transmute mentioned earlier in the thread.

Make it a neck item to give an alternative awesome transmute for players who are not going to make their class relics / legendaries, and have it give a bonus beyond +1 level, such as +2 all attributes or +3 all saves.

Alternatively, just make it an Earcuff of Heroism or a Ioun Stone of Heroism.

Endgame wrote: Quick idea on the +1 level transmute mentioned earlier in the thread.

Make it a neck item to give an alternative awesome transmute for players who are not going to make their class relics / legendaries, and have it give a bonus beyond +1 level, such as +2 all attributes or +3 all saves.

Alternatively, just make it an Earcuff of Heroism or a Ioun Stone of Heroism.

+1 to earcuff or ioun stone of heroism.

I love the idea of a +1 level transmute. It's been awhile since ring of heroism was an option to make.

I think we need to be very careful about using tokens that aren't PyP in the legendary. People could get upset (and rightly so, imo) if a token they traded away all.of a sudden has a new use.

Jeff was very careful to make sure people knew the +2 Holy Avenger would be the starting point for the Paladin legendary.

This could definitely upset some people. Let's proceed with caution.

Wade Schwendemann wrote: I love the idea of a +1 level transmute. It's been awhile since ring of heroism was an option to make.

I think we need to be very careful about using tokens that aren't PyP in the legendary. People could get upset (and rightly so, imo) if a token they traded away all.of a sudden has a new use.

Jeff was very careful to make sure people knew the +2 Holy Avenger would be the starting point for the Paladin legendary.

This could definitely upset some people. Let's proceed with caution.

There is some precedent - the bard and Paladin transmutes had options to use old UR instruments or the holy great sword.

Endgame wrote:

Wade Schwendemann wrote: I love the idea of a +1 level transmute. It's been awhile since ring of heroism was an option to make.

I think we need to be very careful about using tokens that aren't PyP in the legendary. People could get upset (and rightly so, imo) if a token they traded away all.of a sudden has a new use.

Jeff was very careful to make sure people knew the +2 Holy Avenger would be the starting point for the Paladin legendary.

This could definitely upset some people. Let's proceed with caution.

There is some precedent - the bard and Paladin transmutes had options to use old UR instruments or the holy great sword.

As did rogue and druid. The difference, to me at least, is that the older tokens were much, much older. If we create this and allow ring of fateful heroism, for example, some might feel a little slighted.

Many relics allow for either year of a UR as we.

I'm not saying we shouldnt allow it, just to consider that view.