TOPIC: Elemental Eldritch Set with Lenses of Divine Sight

And, that's the problem. Jeff just f*cked $5000 worth of tokens for no good reason. We inputted all of this information years ago, and now with no warning or even letting the players know, it is suddenly different. At the very least, Jeff should have posted in the Token Declaration section.
Better would have been a discussion between the players that this affects. (Those of us with the Ro7P and SRoEC)

Incognito wrote: So I find it rather amusing that there are so many people complaining about this UR getting hosed due to a rule change, yet usually those people are silent when similar UR's are getting hosed due to power creep.

Not funny, really, just how people are wired. People argue about things in proportion to the impact. No one cares about obsoleting 10-cent commons, are nostalgic about uncommon Knock scrolls, are annoyed with $10 rares, complain about $100 URs, but lose their minds when a $3000 RoSP is involved. Who can blame us?

bpsymington wrote:

Arcanist Kolixela wrote:
That's totally not an inconsistent ruling that requires room DMs to know another errata.

As an AC (sort of a DM supervisor), I don't feel this is going to be much of an issue for DMs. I think people with an UR and an eldritch set are going to be in the minority of cases. The DMs major roles in the spell is to mark it off the card and to do the bead test. Most players will know how much healing to apply - those that don't are unlikely to be carrying a 2-piece eldritch set.

Players control their own HP so it should never be a DM issue either way...unless that changes.

Also the number of people who will have Eldritch 2 piece set next is going to jump hugely next year.

Adeya wrote: Power creep is annoying but expected in a game like TD. If every year the new tokens weren't any better than the last it wouldn't help sales at all. It's sad that URs are slowly devalued over time because of this, but we can all see it coming, it happens slowly, and it makes sense. So there is not as much outcry over it. (There is still some.)

I still maintain that there are ways to avoid or at least minimize power creep and that it is NOT inevitable. However, I will concede that the majority of CCG's out there do succumb to power creep.

Yet the majority of CCG's also undergo regular errata, which is FAR more common than the occurrences in TD.

Is this all that different from when CCG players buy an expensive, overpowered card and then the game company decides to errata the card because it is unbalanced?

The reason I am complaining so much about this change is because it happened out of the blue for seemingly no reason.

Which could be said about other past changes.

Why did the CoA get printed this year, when there had been prior attempts to get around the HoP policy? Why was the "no swapping" rule introduced when it was?

Brad Mortensen wrote: Not funny, really, just how people are wired. People argue about things in proportion to the impact. No one cares about obsoleting 10-cent commons, are nostalgic about uncommon Knock scrolls, are annoyed with $10 rares, complain about $100 URs, but lose their minds when a $3000 RoSP is involved. Who can blame us?

Which is why I argue that TD would be better off errata'ing the Lenses of Divine Sight instead of the Eldritch set. You would have a similar end effect, but would only be errata'ing a UR rather than Eldritch Relics.

Arcanist Kolixela wrote:

Druegar wrote: In these examples, the healer passed the skill test. The same principles apply if the skill test is not passed, but the per-target total (not the pool) will be -3, not including CMW as that has no skill test.

Because I am lazy and a tool, I probably f'd something up with all the copy/pasting I did for these examples. Please feel free to calmly point out my error without assuming the sky is falling. I'm looking at you CL!

---

Cure Minor Wounds (1 HP on 1 target)
Lenses of Divine Sight (single target becomes 2 targets)
Ring of Focus (1 HP per target)
Eldritch healing bonus (pool of 10)
=
two targets each heal 2 HP, plus a pool of 10 HP to be divided among the two targets.

Cure Minor Wounds (1 HP on 1 target)
Lenses of Divine Sight (single target becomes 2 targets)
Ring of Greater Focus (3 HP per target)
Eldritch healing bonus (pool of 10)
=
two targets each heal 4 HP, plus a pool of 10 HP to be divided among the two targets.

Cure Minor Wounds (1 HP on 1 target)
Lenses of Divine Sight (single target becomes 2 targets)
Relsa's Ring of Supreme Focus (5 HP per target)
Eldritch healing bonus (pool of 10)
=
two targets each heal 6 HP, plus a pool of 10 HP to be divided among the two targets.

---

Cure Light Wounds (8 HP on 1 target)
Lenses of Divine Sight (single target becomes 2 targets)
Ring of Focus (1 HP per target)
Eldritch healing bonus (pool of 10)
=
two targets each heal 9 HP, plus a pool of 10 HP to be divided among the two targets.

Cure Light Wounds (8 HP on 1 target)
Lenses of Divine Sight (single target becomes 2 targets)
Ring of Greater Focus (3 HP per target)
Eldritch healing bonus (pool of 10)
=
two targets each heal 11 HP, plus a pool of 10 HP to be divided among the two targets.

Cure Light Wounds (8 HP on 1 target)
Lenses of Divine Sight (single target becomes 2 targets)
Relsa's Ring of Supreme Focus (5 HP per target)
Eldritch healing bonus (pool of 10)
=
two targets each heal 13 HP, plus a pool of 10 HP to be divided among the two targets.

---

Cure Moderate Wounds (16 HP on 1 target)
Lenses of Divine Sight (single target becomes 2 targets)
Ring of Focus (1 HP per target)
Eldritch healing bonus (pool of 10)
=
two targets each heal 17 HP, plus a pool of 10 HP to be divided among the two targets.

Cure Moderate Wounds (16 HP on 1 target)
Lenses of Divine Sight (single target becomes 2 targets)
Ring of Greater Focus (3 HP per target)
Eldritch healing bonus (pool of 10)
=
two targets each heal 19 HP, plus a pool of 10 HP to be divided among the two targets.

Cure Moderate Wounds (16 HP on 1 target)
Lenses of Divine Sight (single target becomes 2 targets)
Relsa's Ring of Supreme Focus (5 HP per target)
Eldritch healing bonus (pool of 10)
=
two targets each heal 21 HP, plus a pool of 10 HP to be divided among the two targets.

---

Cure Serious Wounds (24 HP on 1 target)
Lenses of Divine Sight (single target becomes 2 targets)
Ring of Focus (1 HP per target)
Eldritch healing bonus (pool of 10)
=
two targets each heal 25 HP, plus a pool of 10 HP to be divided among the two targets.

Cure Serious Wounds (24 HP on 1 target)
Lenses of Divine Sight (single target becomes 2 targets)
Ring of Greater Focus (3 HP per target)
Eldritch healing bonus (pool of 10)
=
two targets each heal 27 HP, plus a pool of 10 HP to be divided among the two targets.

Cure Serious Wounds (24 HP on 1 target)
Lenses of Divine Sight (single target becomes 2 targets)
Relsa's Ring of Supreme Focus (5 HP per target)
Eldritch healing bonus (pool of 10)
=
two targets each heal 29 HP, plus a pool of 10 HP to be divided among the two targets.

Does that sufficiently illustrate the process?

So this change specifically means that + to healing is duplicated for every effect in the game except for the 2 piece Eldritch set bonus?

That's totally not an inconsistent ruling that requires room DMs to know another errata.

If the intent is to fix the OP mix why not just nerf the 2 piece bonus instead of making a specific one off ruling like this.

If this ruling stands (which I hope it doesn't) I can foresee some confusing discussions with DM's regarding how much healing is done, since now some healing is doubled and some is in a pool. And the point that it doesn't matter because the players control their HP's isn't always true, because some DM's require you to show the tokens and do the calculations in order to get the proper amount of healing.

Incognito wrote: Which is why I argue that TD would be better off errata'ing the Lenses of Divine Sight instead of the Eldritch set. You would have a similar end effect, but would only be errata'ing a UR rather than Eldritch Relics.

I think you wouldn't have any different situation if you did it from the UR POV. If you did errata for the Lenses of Divine Sight saying that all healing bonuses are doubled along with the healing spell except for eldritch bonuses - which are put into a pool and divided instead (which is what I think you're suggesting), you're still significantly reducing the Eldritch power, you're just capturing the rules change in a different location. A difference which makes no difference isn't a difference.

Incognito wrote:

Adeya wrote: Power creep is annoying but expected in a game like TD. If every year the new tokens weren't any better than the last it wouldn't help sales at all. It's sad that URs are slowly devalued over time because of this, but we can all see it coming, it happens slowly, and it makes sense. So there is not as much outcry over it. (There is still some.)

I still maintain that there are ways to avoid or at least minimize power creep and that it is NOT inevitable. However, I will concede that the majority of CCG's out there do succumb to power creep.

Yet the majority of CCG's also undergo regular errata, which is FAR more common than the occurrences in TD.

Is this all that different from when CCG players buy an expensive, overpowered card and then the game company decides to errata the card because it is unbalanced?

The reason I am complaining so much about this change is because it happened out of the blue for seemingly no reason.

Which could be said about other past changes.

Why did the CoA get printed this year, when there had been prior attempts to get around the HoP policy? Why was the "no swapping" rule introduced when it was?

Brad Mortensen wrote: Not funny, really, just how people are wired. People argue about things in proportion to the impact. No one cares about obsoleting 10-cent commons, are nostalgic about uncommon Knock scrolls, are annoyed with $10 rares, complain about $100 URs, but lose their minds when a $3000 RoSP is involved. Who can blame us?

Which is why I argue that TD would be better off errata'ing the Lenses of Divine Sight instead of the Eldritch set. You would have a similar end effect, but would only be errata'ing a UR rather than Eldritch Relics.

You can't say the printing the CoA, or the introduction of the "no swapping" rule, were "out of the blue" in the same way that this change was. Those were both done after extensive public discussions. The original rulings for the Eldritch Bonuses and the Lenses were the result of extensive public discussion, but weakening them overnight was very much "out of the blue".

For the record, I'm actually OK with the introduction of the Charm of Avarice. It seemed like the HoP was going to be reprinted in some form pretty soon due the pressure put on Jeff, and this was a way that really rewarded the HoP owners by giving them a cheaper recipe for the CoA, and gave them a path to being able to use the neck slot for other tokens (as well as a Ring slot). I do think the Amulet of Treasure Finding was a mistake though. I think Jeff found a nice middle-ground solution for the CoA.

Mike Steele wrote: I think you wouldn't have any different situation if you did it from the UR POV. If you did errata for the Lenses of Divine Sight saying that all healing bonuses are doubled along with the healing spell except for eldritch bonuses - which are put into a pool and divided instead (which is what I think you're suggesting), you're still significantly reducing the Eldritch power, you're just capturing the rules change in a different location. A difference which makes no difference isn't a difference.

Hypothetically, if they errata'ed the Lenses to remove the "(with bonuses)" clause then it wouldn't specifically be targeting the Eldritch set. (It would also affect Legendary Rings of Foci, Relic Rings of Foci, UR Rings of Foci, Rare Gloves of Healing, and Uncommon Pearls of Prayer).

At the end of the day, it seems like it would mainly be nerfing a single UR rather than singling out an Eldritch set.

Incognito wrote:

Mike Steele wrote: I think you wouldn't have any different situation if you did it from the UR POV. If you did errata for the Lenses of Divine Sight saying that all healing bonuses are doubled along with the healing spell except for eldritch bonuses - which are put into a pool and divided instead (which is what I think you're suggesting), you're still significantly reducing the Eldritch power, you're just capturing the rules change in a different location. A difference which makes no difference isn't a difference.

Hypothetically, if they errata'ed the Lenses to remove the "(with bonuses)" clause then it wouldn't specifically be targeting the Eldritch set. (It would also affect Legendary Rings of Foci, Relic Rings of Foci, UR Rings of Foci, Rare Gloves of Healing, and Uncommon Pearls of Prayer).

At the end of the day, it seems like it would mainly be nerfing a single UR rather than singling out an Eldritch set.

If you did that though, you'd be reducing the Clerics and Druids healing ability even more than you were already doing. I can't imagine anyone who plays either of those classes that would be happy with that solution. Especially since the change would be made for no valid reason, since nobody has still showed any examples of this healing "breaking the game" or causing any significant problems. It certainly doesn't create the degree of balancing problems that combat bonuses do.

my first thought was that it is really crappy to change something after it has been decided for more than a year. but some token effects severely alter the design of the dungeon and monsters. when having or not having one or two tokens makes the difference of cake-walk vs near impossible, there is a problem. not saying that I think that is the case here, but if jeff is feeling the impact of this when designing the dungeon, maybe it is.

Mike Steele wrote: Scaling the Eldritch Set bonus back at this point is just as bad. It has been established for quite awhile now, and people spent quite a bit of money to procure them based on the current powers. I clearly remember the discussion specifically in regards to the one point healing spells and the 10 point Eldritch bonus, with some people pushing to exempt the minor healing spell from the Eldritch Set bonus, and Jeff chose to leave the bonus as it was (10 points affecting all spells including the one point healing spell.

Both the Eldritch Set Bonus and the interaction with the Lenses of Divine Sight been discussed and ruled on in the past, with all the pros and cons discussed in depth, and those rulings should remain in place.

and a decision made the first time is always the correct decision. there will never be a situation where someone looks back and thinks 'dang, I should have done that differently.' /sarcasm

Mike Steele wrote: I'm pretty disappointed, with all the rampant power growth that has been happening, especially in regards to combat bonuses for both melee/ranged and spells, that this is the item that suddenly seems to be "game breaking". I think any problems that this healing might cause pale next to the balance problems caused by the super-high combat bonuses that are available. And personally, given the massive increases in character max hit points, combat bonuses, and monster stats, this amount of healing is pretty in-scale with those increases. Characters can heal 10 points with healing potions now, this isn't that much more than that.

it isn't game breaking if everyone has it, but at some point will TD need a disclaimer on certain levels of play saying 'if you don't have the eldritch set, don't play this level, you cant survive'? ive also come to the opinion that the supreme ring of elemental command is too powerful. not that it is really too powerful, but the fact that it exists changes dungeon design. any elemental damage of 10 or less and the designer has to acknowledge that anyone with the supreme ring is immune. do they bump it up higher? which severely punishes anyone who doesn't have the ring? that just seems crappy all around. especially on a difficulty where you 'know' that damage of 15 is just to make sure to hit all of us with the supreme ring, and that one guy without one is taking the full damage every round.

maybe we could errata the supreme ring of elemental command to only be 5 damage prevention, but increase the retribution damage to 20? (it should at least be 10...for 3 retribution I don't even bother to remind the DMs when I get hit).

Arcanist Kolixela wrote: So this change specifically means that + to healing is duplicated for every effect in the game except for the 2 piece Eldritch set bonus?

That's totally not an inconsistent ruling that requires room DMs to know another errata.

If the intent is to fix the OP mix why not just nerf the 2 piece bonus instead of making a specific one off ruling like this.

Incognito wrote: Which is why I argue that TD would be better off errata'ing the Lenses of Divine Sight instead of the Eldritch set. You would have a similar end effect, but would only be errata'ing a UR rather than Eldritch Relics.

it sounds like it needs to be decided what exactly is overpowered; is the +10 healing from the eldritch set too much, or is the spell duplication of the lenses including boosting too much?

the current ruling seems to be saying that neither of the two is too powerful, but using them together IS too powerful. ...I don't like that. if something needs to change for the balance/future of the game, fine, make that call and change it. but make the change across the board rather than cherry-pick a single interaction. if neither of those two is too powerful on their own, then just let it be too powerful if you go the extra step and use both.

for the record, I would be on board with reducing the eldritch set bonus if there is just too much healing (and jeff is having to design around that much healing at high levels). also, I really would support that errata to the supreme ring I mentioned above.
I would prefer not to see the lenses change, especially since they effectively take up two slots to get the duplication ability.

Mike Steele wrote: If you did that though, you'd be reducing the Clerics and Druids healing ability even more than you were already doing. I can't imagine anyone who plays either of those classes that would be happy with that solution.

Uh, I play both Cleric and Druid, and I would be happy with that solution. So imagine away!

Especially since the change would be made for no valid reason, since nobody has still showed any examples of this healing "breaking the game" or causing any significant problems. It certainly doesn't create the degree of balancing problems that combat bonuses do.

I and others (like Arcanist) disagree with you in that we think that excessive healing creates more balancing problems than excessive combat bonuses do.

It is really interesting to see how this whole change started and then evolved. George asked the question regarding how it worked. Two hours later I replied, and confirmed that it worked the way George had said it did.

11 minutes later, Druegar posted the new ruling - just over two hours after George asked the question.

There wasn't one single comment on the thread to that point indicating that this was a problem of any sort, or that it was causing balance problems in the Dungeon. And yet we got rules change within a couple of hours addressing a supposed game breaking situation "giving overpowering healing abilities to low-level spells." And even more interesting was that the solution didn't just weaken the low-level spells, but all healing spells using the Eldritch bonus and Lenses of Divine Sight, which was a solution much broader than the defined "problem".

It just kind of seems that this was made into a really big deal when it really wasn't, and when probably no rules change was actually needed. I hope Jeff comes to that conclusion when he's able to review all the inputs (and I hope he's still open to inputs). Even now, eight pages into the thread, nobody has posted any examples of where this healing combo has caused any problems. What is the huge problem that is requiring abilities defined years ago of tokens costing thousands of dollars to be significantly weakened?

And, when you think about it, is it really a concern that a one point healing spell is getting a huge boost? We're talking about groups with multiple Eldritch Items, probably most or all fifth level, probably outfitted very well with tokens and probably playing Hardcore and Nightmare. Is there really any room in a group like that for a Cleric or Druid to cast a one point healing spell? It needed a massive boost just to be worth casting. I don't see it as game-breaking or imbalancing, more as an increase that helps keep the healing in balance with the massive power creep across the board.