TOPIC: Elemental Eldritch Set with Lenses of Divine Sight

Incognito wrote: While I definitely think the Eldritch set abilities need to be changed eventually, I do not think the current revision goes far enough nor is the timing appropriate.

I personally think it would be better to delay the revision until next year, when the new Eldritch boots are available.

Since the Eldritch set came out, I have argued that it was extremely overpowered:

1. The +10 HP heals (working on 0-level spells) has always been excessively strong. And that was the case well before the Lenses of Divine Sight entered the picture.

2. Completely bypassing Damage Reduction and Spell Resistance is also IMHO a mistake. Probably should have been something like bypasses the first 10 points of damage reduction and -50% Spell Resistance. Heck, even -100% Spell Resistance is preferable.

3. While the overpowered nature of the Eldritch set was initially contained by the scarcity of the RoSP, that will no longer be the case next year with the Boots. As the Boots (and eventually the Cavadar) items are added the two-piece set will become increasingly common.

4. Not to mention that with the current bar set with the 2-piece Eldritch, imagine what the 3-piece is going to have to look like in comparison.



So I am definitely in favor of the 2-piece set getting revamped next year so that they have more flexibility to develop a strong but balanced 3-piece set. Furthermore, if this results in a desirable 3-piece set power, then the Supreme Ring and the RoSP would still retain value (even if the 2-piece set was toned down).

The bolded statement above would be a copy of the Monk's 5th level ability. As it is now the RoSP pretty much tramples that ability, so if it is going to be changed please have it not step on a current character ability, as we have already bit hit this year hard by the rules due the no weapon swap from bracers or set items rules.

Arcanist Kolixela wrote: Is this new or was I completely blind when I looked?

not new
The only pages that were changed last night were Ro7P and SRoEC.

Incognito wrote: While I definitely think the Eldritch set abilities need to be changed eventually, I do not think the current revision goes far enough nor is the timing appropriate.

I personally think it would be better to delay the revision until next year, when the new Eldritch boots are available.

Since the Eldritch set came out, I have argued that it was extremely overpowered:

1. The +10 HP heals (working on 0-level spells) has always been excessively strong. And that was the case well before the Lenses of Divine Sight entered the picture.

2. Completely bypassing Damage Reduction and Spell Resistance is also IMHO a mistake. Probably should have been something like bypasses the first 10 points of damage reduction and -50% Spell Resistance. Heck, even -100% Spell Resistance is preferable.

3. While the overpowered nature of the Eldritch set was initially contained by the scarcity of the RoSP, that will no longer be the case next year with the Boots. As the Boots (and eventually the Cavadar) items are added the two-piece set will become increasingly common.

4. Not to mention that with the current bar set with the 2-piece Eldritch, imagine what the 3-piece is going to have to look like in comparison.



So I am definitely in favor of the 2-piece set getting revamped next year so that they have more flexibility to develop a strong but balanced 3-piece set. Furthermore, if this results in a desirable 3-piece set power, then the Supreme Ring and the RoSP would still retain value (even if the 2-piece set was toned down).

Out of curiosity, why is -100% Spell Resistance preferable to bypasses Spell Resistance? Functionally they seem the same. Are there situations where the spell resistance is greater than 100%?

Druegar wrote:

Arcanist Kolixela wrote: Is this new or was I completely blind when I looked?

not new
The only pages that were changed last night were Ro7P and SRoEC.

Yeah, I realized that after the fact.

It does mean all of my calculations are slightly off but it's easily fixable.

Mike Steele wrote: And to be honest, it seems a bit ironic that there is this effort to further downgrade healing, right after a token generation cycle where damage spells by the Wizard got a huge boost with the Staff, that wasn't allowed to also affect healing. Even with the +10 healing that combines with the Lenses of Divine Sight, I'd argue that it still hasn't quite caught up with the Wizard's damage spells, especially since damage to the monster is much more "game breaking" than character healing.

*Blinks*

I...

...
...

I would love to live in whatever world you live in where Spell Damage (capped at +14 on self buffs) is better than healing (capped at +23? 24?) especially considering that the token which affects healing has no activation cost and the one that affects damage costs 10 HP per use.

If you would like to discuss the state of Spell Damage in the game right now I am happy to give you a small dissertation followed up with pages of math to back it up...

Eversuede wrote: If you remember Orb of Might ruling change and the year where treasure box started pull out UR, Relic. As soon as George's posted the issue the token/s, I knew for a facts that it was going start a debate automatic like clockwork because Jeff work habit hasn't broke it tradition pattern and then to relate it to the comparisons as he has before with relate issue. The Orb of Might has taken a longer than this issue because at the times of the Orb, he had dual duty for TD and Dwarven Forge and little times to deal with it and also with this issue is shorter is without Dwarven Forge. But the same result as expect into the same debate different ruling apply.

Dial, thanks for reminding me of the Orb of Might change.

Let me revise my list to:

WORST CHANGES

1. Reversing the HoP reprint policy with the CoA

2. Disallowing equipment swapping in the dungeon (which rendered a lot of cornercase UR's suddenly obsolete. At the time, the Ring of Focus went from "must have" to "not worth it.").

3. Orb of Might change (prohibiting it from being equipped in the ranged off hand slot for melee builds but still allowing it to be used in the melee offhand slot for missile builds)

4. Gloves of the Cabal completely changing their functionality between the token design process and tokens being released.

*** This current change

5. The "healing pool" concept hosing the Ring of Focus.

6. The Shield of the Scholar change (which I think might have be re-reversed).

LESS WORSE CHANGES

Mike Steele wrote: That is the difference, in that I mentioned the Staff as a point of reference, but I'm not asking Jeff to revisit it to change the rules on it, as some are now doing to the Eldritch Set / Lenses of Divine Sight. The staff also had extensive discussions regarding it, and while I don't agree with the outcome, I'm not going to try to get it changed now that it is finalized.

Well, for all we know, it could be changed in the future to allow additional classes.

Don't forget the original Orb of Might did not allow Monks to use it as a secondary weapon (though that was probably an oversight). When the Orb got reprinted in 2013, it got changed to allow Monks to use it as a weapon. Yet I don't recall *anyone* complaining about this "change"!

Alvin Oliver wrote: The bolded statement above would be a copy of the Monk's 5th level ability. As it is now the RoSP pretty much tramples that ability, so if it is going to be changed please have it not step on a current character ability, as we have already bit hit this year hard by the rules due the no weapon swap from bracers or set items rules.

If that were to be the change, it would be simple enough to add a clause (stacks with the 5th level Monk to ignore the first -20 damage reduction).

Yes, that portion of the RoSP ability is currently useless to monks.

Then again, the + healing and anti-spell resistance is useless to most of the classes. And only 2 classes get the +1 level.

Mike Steele wrote: Out of curiosity, why is -100% Spell Resistance preferable to bypasses Spell Resistance? Functionally they seem the same. Are there situations where the spell resistance is greater than 100%?

Yes, in theory a monster could maybe have more than 100% spell resistance. Which is why -100% spell resistance would be slightly different than bypasses spell resistance.

Similarly, theoretically, a -200% fire damage might be different than immune to fire damage, IF the game mechanics allow the fire damage to then actually heal the player or monster (depends how the game system deals with negatives).

I don't really have a dog in this fight, since I am not a healing class and I don't have any eldritch items , (I will be getting the boots next year). But I think this is a fairly minor change. A one point heal spell becomes two 9-point heal spells (with RoF, LoDS, and eldritch set) - still seems pretty cool to me.

Has Jeff said there would be a 3-item eldritch bonus?

bpsymington wrote: I don't really have a dog in this fight, since I am not a healing class and I don't have any eldritch items , (I will be getting the boots next year). But I think this is a fairly minor change. A one point heal spell becomes two 9-point heal spells (with RoF, LoDS, and eldritch set) - still seems pretty cool to me.

Has Jeff said there would be a 3-item eldritch bonus?

The problem is that this change is not affecting the Eldritch items which very few people have. It's changing the function of how an existing, out of print ultra rare token functions. It will affect EVERY SINGLE SPELL duplicated by the Lenses of Divine Sight as the ruling changes the effect of the lenses from the printed EXACT DUPLICATION effect to an errata'd Single Target to Multi-Target effect. This change means any spell effected by the Lenses now has to use the healing pool. Effectively cutting all bonus healing items power in half for healers.

bpsymington wrote: I don't really have a dog in this fight, since I am not a healing class and I don't have any eldritch items , (I will be getting the boots next year). But I think this is a fairly minor change. A one point heal spell becomes two 9-point heal spells (with RoF, LoDS, and eldritch set) - still seems pretty cool to me.

Has Jeff said there would be a 3-item eldritch bonus?

I'm not sure where this assumption came from that everyone using the Lenses and Eldritch Set would have at least the Relic version of the Ring of Focus. I'm sure that's not the case. Assuming additional bonus items like that throws the calculations off and makes it look worse than it is, in my opinion.

Arcanist Kolixela wrote:

Mike Steele wrote: And to be honest, it seems a bit ironic that there is this effort to further downgrade healing, right after a token generation cycle where damage spells by the Wizard got a huge boost with the Staff, that wasn't allowed to also affect healing. Even with the +10 healing that combines with the Lenses of Divine Sight, I'd argue that it still hasn't quite caught up with the Wizard's damage spells, especially since damage to the monster is much more "game breaking" than character healing.

*Blinks*

I...

...
...

I would love to live in whatever world you live in where Spell Damage (capped at +14 on self buffs) is better than healing (capped at +23? 24?) especially considering that the token which affects healing has no activation cost and the one that affects damage costs 10 HP per use.

If you would like to discuss the state of Spell Damage in the game right now I am happy to give you a small dissertation followed up with pages of math to back it up...

Believe me, I have no desire to engage in those lengthy discussions again. I do recall your calculations of max spell damage was pretty impressive, but I don't have the numbers at hand.

Incognito wrote:

Eversuede wrote: If you remember Orb of Might ruling change and the year where treasure box started pull out UR, Relic. As soon as George's posted the issue the token/s, I knew for a facts that it was going start a debate automatic like clockwork because Jeff work habit hasn't broke it tradition pattern and then to relate it to the comparisons as he has before with relate issue. The Orb of Might has taken a longer than this issue because at the times of the Orb, he had dual duty for TD and Dwarven Forge and little times to deal with it and also with this issue is shorter is without Dwarven Forge. But the same result as expect into the same debate different ruling apply.

Dial, thanks for reminding me of the Orb of Might change.

Let me revise my list to:

WORST CHANGES

1. Reversing the HoP reprint policy with the CoA

2. Disallowing equipment swapping in the dungeon (which rendered a lot of cornercase UR's suddenly obsolete. At the time, the Ring of Focus went from "must have" to "not worth it.").

3. Orb of Might change (prohibiting it from being equipped in the ranged off hand slot for melee builds but still allowing it to be used in the melee offhand slot for missile builds)

4. Gloves of the Cabal completely changing their functionality between the token design process and tokens being released.

*** This current change

5. The "healing pool" concept hosing the Ring of Focus.

6. The Shield of the Scholar change (which I think might have be re-reversed).

LESS WORSE CHANGES

Mike Steele wrote: That is the difference, in that I mentioned the Staff as a point of reference, but I'm not asking Jeff to revisit it to change the rules on it, as some are now doing to the Eldritch Set / Lenses of Divine Sight. The staff also had extensive discussions regarding it, and while I don't agree with the outcome, I'm not going to try to get it changed now that it is finalized.

Well, for all we know, it could be changed in the future to allow additional classes.

Don't forget the original Orb of Might did not allow Monks to use it as a secondary weapon (though that was probably an oversight). When the Orb got reprinted in 2013, it got changed to allow Monks to use it as a weapon. Yet I don't recall *anyone* complaining about this "change"!

Alvin Oliver wrote: The bolded statement above would be a copy of the Monk's 5th level ability. As it is now the RoSP pretty much tramples that ability, so if it is going to be changed please have it not step on a current character ability, as we have already bit hit this year hard by the rules due the no weapon swap from bracers or set items rules.

If that were to be the change, it would be simple enough to add a clause (stacks with the 5th level Monk to ignore the first -20 damage reduction).

Yes, that portion of the RoSP ability is currently useless to monks.

Then again, the + healing and anti-spell resistance is useless to most of the classes. And only 2 classes get the +1 level.

Mike Steele wrote: Out of curiosity, why is -100% Spell Resistance preferable to bypasses Spell Resistance? Functionally they seem the same. Are there situations where the spell resistance is greater than 100%?

Yes, in theory a monster could maybe have more than 100% spell resistance. Which is why -100% spell resistance would be slightly different than bypasses spell resistance.

Similarly, theoretically, a -200% fire damage might be different than immune to fire damage, IF the game mechanics allow the fire damage to then actually heal the player or monster (depends how the game system deals with negatives).

I think it would be problematic for the spell resistance to exceed 100%. How would you explain to someone that had obtained tokens that granted (for example) 20% reduction in spell resistance that they still had zero percent chance of success?

Mike Steele wrote:

bpsymington wrote: I don't really have a dog in this fight, since I am not a healing class and I don't have any eldritch items , (I will be getting the boots next year). But I think this is a fairly minor change. A one point heal spell becomes two 9-point heal spells (with RoF, LoDS, and eldritch set) - still seems pretty cool to me.

Has Jeff said there would be a 3-item eldritch bonus?

I'm not sure where this assumption came from that everyone using the Lenses and Eldritch Set would have at least the Relic version of the Ring of Focus. I'm sure that's not the case. Assuming additional bonus items like that throws the calculations off and makes it look worse than it is, in my opinion.

That's true re: the RoF, although I would guess most people with an eldritch set would have the relic ring, but it wouldn't be everyone.