TOPIC: Completion Token Transmute?

Harlax wrote: If there is a slotless limit, who is going to police the limit? Coaches? Please, no. The proliferation of slots in recent years has added enough work.

I would assume they might just leave it to the same people responsible for policing HP or what 1/room and 1/dungeon items you've already used.

Azzy wrote:

Harlax wrote: If there is a slotless limit, who is going to police the limit? Coaches? Please, no. The proliferation of slots in recent years has added enough work.

I would assume they might just leave it to the same people responsible for policing HP or what 1/room and 1/dungeon items you've already used.

There aren’t many I can think of that affect the party card (RoSP, segments or complete, and ???) so I think that’s fair.

So at that point, I think you just let everyone follow whatever rule they want. It’s not a competition, so no one is “losing” if they decide to cap themselves at some number, and let everyone else play however they want to.

Brad Mortensen wrote:

Azzy wrote:

Harlax wrote: If there is a slotless limit, who is going to police the limit? Coaches? Please, no. The proliferation of slots in recent years has added enough work.

I would assume they might just leave it to the same people responsible for policing HP or what 1/room and 1/dungeon items you've already used.

There aren’t many I can think of that affect the party card (RoSP, segments or complete, and ???) so I think that’s fair.

So at that point, I think you just let everyone follow whatever rule they want. It’s not a competition, so no one is “losing” if they decide to cap themselves at some number, and let everyone else play however they want to.

+200

TD is not a PVP game. You are not trying to balance yourself against other players. You play it to enjoy it. If you need to do something specific to enjoy it, then please do that. We don't need to add ridiculous levels of complexity.

Few points in response to the previous page,

Everything is slotless until they may a second item enough like it and it isn't.

Real life also provides an excellent encomberance system. If we really want to start enforcing it a little more all we have to do is get serious about the no rolling carts rule


Finally, I'm ok with people having as many slotless tokens as they can remember. Honestly I carry less then I could just because I know I won't remember and they get heavy.

jpotter wrote:

Brad Mortensen wrote:

Azzy wrote:

Harlax wrote: If there is a slotless limit, who is going to police the limit? Coaches? Please, no. The proliferation of slots in recent years has added enough work.

I would assume they might just leave it to the same people responsible for policing HP or what 1/room and 1/dungeon items you've already used.

There aren’t many I can think of that affect the party card (RoSP, segments or complete, and ???) so I think that’s fair.

So at that point, I think you just let everyone follow whatever rule they want. It’s not a competition, so no one is “losing” if they decide to cap themselves at some number, and let everyone else play however they want to.

+200

TD is not a PVP game. You are not trying to balance yourself against other players. You play it to enjoy it. If you need to do something specific to enjoy it, then please do that. We don't need to add ridiculous levels of complexity.

It may not be a pvp game, but some / too many slotless tokens should not make balancing the dungeon difficult. Maybe 30 slotless items makes it easy for someone with them, but nearly impossible for someone without them...

jpotter wrote:

Brad Mortensen wrote:

Azzy wrote:

Harlax wrote: If there is a slotless limit, who is going to police the limit? Coaches? Please, no. The proliferation of slots in recent years has added enough work.

I would assume they might just leave it to the same people responsible for policing HP or what 1/room and 1/dungeon items you've already used.

There aren’t many I can think of that affect the party card (RoSP, segments or complete, and ???) so I think that’s fair.

So at that point, I think you just let everyone follow whatever rule they want. It’s not a competition, so no one is “losing” if they decide to cap themselves at some number, and let everyone else play however they want to.

+200

TD is not a PVP game. You are not trying to balance yourself against other players. You play it to enjoy it. If you need to do something specific to enjoy it, then please do that. We don't need to add ridiculous levels of complexity.

Sorry but I dont agree with this at all. If this were the case then why have any limits on Tokens? Everybody can just equip what they want. Right? I'll pop on 5 earcuffs because my character likes to show his ear pieces and it makes it fun for me. Yes, I'm being sarcastic. But if people can equip what they want then it becomes a haunted house and not a game. I don't understand in general why there's push back on a slotless cap. I haven't seen one thread advocating for more ring, ear, bead, etc. slots? Why not? Sure, under the current system I can equip what I want...up to a point. If I want to do a run with just a head item I can. I get that. But per the RULES I can't do a run with two head items, and a coach would call me on it. And I think it's great from a game design standpoint. Token limits help with game balance.

Addition: I also don't think a slotless cap would "add additional levels of complexity". 20 Token max. Coach counts more then 20 and he tells a player to pair down. That's it. Simple. Most slotless items don't effect the party card anyway.

Endgame wrote:

jpotter wrote:

Brad Mortensen wrote:

Azzy wrote:

Harlax wrote: If there is a slotless limit, who is going to police the limit? Coaches? Please, no. The proliferation of slots in recent years has added enough work.

I would assume they might just leave it to the same people responsible for policing HP or what 1/room and 1/dungeon items you've already used.

There aren’t many I can think of that affect the party card (RoSP, segments or complete, and ???) so I think that’s fair.

So at that point, I think you just let everyone follow whatever rule they want. It’s not a competition, so no one is “losing” if they decide to cap themselves at some number, and let everyone else play however they want to.

+200

TD is not a PVP game. You are not trying to balance yourself against other players. You play it to enjoy it. If you need to do something specific to enjoy it, then please do that. We don't need to add ridiculous levels of complexity.

It may not be a pvp game, but some / too many slotless tokens should not make balancing the dungeon difficult. Maybe 30 slotless items makes it easy for someone with them, but nearly impossible for someone without them...

With only three difficulties but a near-infinite number of possible builds, there is really no way to scale dungeons perfectly to fit everyone. That’s one reason Epic was added, but it’s just a stopgap until power creep rears its head again.

I think the pushback on the cap is because different people want to play different ways. Personally, I like equipping everything the rules allow.

Another reason for pushback is that the people who don’t like the lack of a cap can easily solve the problem on their own and leave everyone else out of it. If you think 1 or 10 or 20 slotless token is enough, then that’s what you should do. Why do you have to force everyone else to play your way in order to play the way you want to? Just do it.

Rob F wrote:
Sorry but I dont agree with this at all. If this were the case then why have any limits on Tokens? Everybody can just equip what they want. Right? I'll pop on 5 earcuffs because my character likes to show his ear pieces and it makes it fun for me. Yes, I'm being sarcastic. But if people can equip what they want then it becomes a haunted house and not a game. I don't understand in general why there's push back on a slotless cap. I haven't seen one thread advocating for more ring, ear, bead, etc. slots? Why not? Sure, under the current system I can equip what I want...up to a point. If I want to do a run with just a head item I can. I get that. But per the RULES I can't do a run with two head items, and a coach would call me on it. And I think it's great from a game design standpoint. Token limits help with game balance.

Addition: I also don't think a slotless cap would "add additional levels of complexity". 20 Token max. Coach counts more then 20 and he tells a player to pair down. That's it. Simple. Most slotless items don't effect the party card anyway.

So here are some reasons why I think this isn't a good idea. My argument is essentially that adding a limit like this does not actually do anything except (maybe?) annoy coaches. Like you stated yourself, none of the slotless tokens affect the party card.

1. Coaches already do a lot. Asking them to count something else seems like more on their plate and the plate is already full. When a group of 1%ers come into the room, they are counting 200 tokens. I suppose you could argue that a group of 1%ers are already going to have stuff ready and coaches won't have to do much other than check slotless, but I don't believe coaches will be happy with it.

2. Just like HPs, this would all be done on the honor system. There is no way the coach is going to list all 20 items each person has on the back of the party card, and then each GM is going to cross-reference that list when you exclaim "I have so and so token!" and pull it out

3. I don't think this is a big enough deal that affects enough people to warrant a change. The people with a lot of slotless tokens are a small minority.


But hey, Jeff did say he was essentially annoyed at Cloak of Shadowskin and Lenses of Divine Sight and that's why those got changed. Maybe if slotless tokens become something he's actually having to balance around then it would warrant a change. I just don't see that currently though. It seems like Vets who want more of a challenge are finding their own ways to do that.



If any of my arguments come across as snarky please know it is not intended and I apologize. I'd welcome ideas that might change my mind.

jpotter wrote:

Rob F wrote:
Sorry but I dont agree with this at all. If this were the case then why have any limits on Tokens? Everybody can just equip what they want. Right? I'll pop on 5 earcuffs because my character likes to show his ear pieces and it makes it fun for me. Yes, I'm being sarcastic. But if people can equip what they want then it becomes a haunted house and not a game. I don't understand in general why there's push back on a slotless cap. I haven't seen one thread advocating for more ring, ear, bead, etc. slots? Why not? Sure, under the current system I can equip what I want...up to a point. If I want to do a run with just a head item I can. I get that. But per the RULES I can't do a run with two head items, and a coach would call me on it. And I think it's great from a game design standpoint. Token limits help with game balance.

Addition: I also don't think a slotless cap would "add additional levels of complexity". 20 Token max. Coach counts more then 20 and he tells a player to pair down. That's it. Simple. Most slotless items don't effect the party card anyway.

So here are some reasons why I think this isn't a good idea. My argument is essentially that adding a limit like this does not actually do anything except (maybe?) annoy coaches. Like you stated yourself, none of the slotless tokens affect the party card.

1. Coaches already do a lot. Asking them to count something else seems like more on their plate and the plate is already full. When a group of 1%ers come into the room, they are counting 200 tokens. I suppose you could argue that a group of 1%ers are already going to have stuff ready and coaches won't have to do much other than check slotless, but I don't believe coaches will be happy with it.

2. Just like HPs, this would all be done on the honor system. There is no way the coach is going to list all 20 items each person has on the back of the party card, and then each GM is going to cross-reference that list when you exclaim "I have so and so token!" and pull it out

3. I don't think this is a big enough deal that affects enough people to warrant a change. The people with a lot of slotless tokens are a small minority.


But hey, Jeff did say he was essentially annoyed at Cloak of Shadowskin and Lenses of Divine Sight and that's why those got changed. Maybe if slotless tokens become something he's actually having to balance around then it would warrant a change. I just don't see that currently though. It seems like Vets who want more of a challenge are finding their own ways to do that.



If any of my arguments come across as snarky please know it is not intended and I apologize. I'd welcome ideas that might change my mind.

Another complication: define “slotless.”

RoSP is. So is 50ft rope. Would they both count towards the limit? People talk about wanting to encourage clever use of gear. Any limit is going to work against that. People will pack their Soul Coffers instead of their decoys.

Do we limit potions? Wands? Scrolls? Do runestones count?

We could debate all these questions. We could create lists of limited vs unlimited slotless tokens, I suppose. But why spend all that time and energy? I don’t see the payoff.

Jeff defined four levels of difficulty, plus “Sealed Newbie” (or whatever Viper was last year.) He hasn’t decreed how to play “Green With (or without) Envy” or any of the other Challenge Versions. I don’t see why he needs to waste time defining “Limited Slotless.”

That doesn’t mean other people can’t work it out as an option.

I agree coaches should not be responsible for counting slotless tokens.

If we are not recording it on the party card, by definition its not our responsibility.

Rob F wrote: How come my character can lug a Coffer, Scepter, Lamps, Jars, Horns, etc. along in the dungeon but only wear two rings? Or weave only one tiny Bead into his hair/beard? Makes no sense.

My first answer can be expressed in four words. To learn what those four words are, read/watch this .

Past editions of D&D (3rd?) gave an in-game reason why, for example, you couldn't wear more than two rings--one on each hand. If you absolutely need an explanation, that would be a good research project for you. If that's not something you're interested in doing, see previous paragraph and the post it references.

Druegar wrote:

Rob F wrote: How come my character can lug a Coffer, Scepter, Lamps, Jars, Horns, etc. along in the dungeon but only wear two rings? Or weave only one tiny Bead into his hair/beard? Makes no sense.

My first answer can be expressed in four words. To learn what those four words are, read/watch this .

Past editions of D&D (3rd?) gave an in-game reason why, for example, you couldn't wear more than two rings--one on each hand. If you absolutely need an explanation, that would be a good research project for you. If that's not something you're interested in doing, see previous paragraph and the post it references.

There's a thread link that's a blast from the past for me. That guy is great!!

"It's magic... &^%*$ you!!!!"


As to magic items. The esteemed and genius Gary Gygax decreed decades ago in 1st Edition D&D only one magic ring can be worn on each hand. IIRC, the rule even states for a maximum of 2. Meaning a Type V Demon with multiple arms couldn't wear more than 2 rings. But don't quote me on that last part.

I guess enough people whined and got their way in later lackluster editions of D&D... Munchkin-like PCs were born. I even played a 4th Edition D&D demo at GenCon years ago where I learned that rolling a Crit Miss (1) is no longer an auto-miss. Now PCs could have some sort of ability that allows them to re-roll. BLASPHEMY I say.