TOPIC: Power Creep Discussion

Rob F wrote: Your reasoning that people would be dying with a stat cap on Normal is flawed, at least how I invision the caps working. They would be set to cap people at the upper end of gear for the challenge level, not the lower end. If parties died on Normal with caps it would mean they still weren't sufficiently geared.

Ok, I've thought some more about these stat caps. If the point of stat caps at each level is to "gear down" high stat players in a group of players with a wide range of stats so that the high stat players can still participate in combats without being overpowering, that could make sense, but only if these stat caps are very carefully set based on data. I'm concerned that they will get set wrong. Maybe one of the three modules is way harder than the other ones, maybe then people do die with stat caps at normal. This is why I think some serious data should be collected and analyzed.

Yes, I think it's important to think about power creep and how that affects the play experience of mixed parties. I also think it's important to think about power creep and the tokens you have vs. the level you can play at. I shouldn't be dying on normal with mostly rares, a few URs, and being 5th level. That's ridiculous. That happened last year. Then, we had a run where we came out without a scratch, but the coach at the beginning strongly recommend normal and said not to play hardcore. Did we have a bad coach? Maybe, but that's why it would be nice to have at least some guidelines as to what mix of tokens/stats you need to play each level. There's 4+ levels of tokens, but (from my experience) now you can't play the game on a higher difficulty until you get into the very top levels of tokens. That doesn't make sense.

I'm not new to this. I've read up on how the stats work and carefully craft my party to optimize stats based on the tokens we have and the role that character is playing in the party. Maybe my group is this weird outlier because I'm outfitting a whole party the best I can with a pool of tokens. We're not 10 individuals who each have been focusing on crafting one or two characters. Maybe we're so underpowered because we don't use a lot of consumables? I don't know, but it's frustrating to put so much time, effort, and money into something and feel like we're falling behind (due to the difficulty levels continually adjusting for power creep) instead on leveling up and moving forward.

I have another thought on why my party feels stuck. Through collecting tokens over the years, once we got to the point of equipping mostly rares, we started just replacing rares with other rares. We're not getting URs fast enough to make a difference. We've done a bit of transmuting, and that's maybe helped a little bit, but I feel like a lot of the transmutes aren't great for us lately. Either they're not helping us get better or the recipes are too hard. It would be really helpful for a party like mine, if transmutes were a meaningful way to reasonably "trade up" to UR level tokens.

Michelle wrote: I have another thought on why my party feels stuck. Through collecting tokens over the years, once we got to the point of equipping mostly rares, we started just replacing rares with other rares. We're not getting URs fast enough to make a difference. We've done a bit of transmuting, and that's maybe helped a little bit, but I feel like a lot of the transmutes aren't great for us lately. Either they're not helping us get better or the recipes are too hard. It would be really helpful for a party like mine, if transmutes were a meaningful way to reasonably "trade up" to UR level tokens.

Hmm..this is very interesting to hear. And I can see how this must be frustrating. I think Rare's for the most part are pretty stable from year to year so if you are swapping those then not much gain. I've often thought that some of the transmutes (below Relic) in the past seemed like a weak bridge to the UR level. Recently they seem to have gotten better. Maybe TD should come up with a way to allow for some combination of 3 and 4 star Relics to transmute into a UR. This might help out people in this situation and get them to that UR power level over time.

Rob F wrote:

Michelle wrote: I have another thought on why my party feels stuck. Through collecting tokens over the years, once we got to the point of equipping mostly rares, we started just replacing rares with other rares. We're not getting URs fast enough to make a difference. We've done a bit of transmuting, and that's maybe helped a little bit, but I feel like a lot of the transmutes aren't great for us lately. Either they're not helping us get better or the recipes are too hard. It would be really helpful for a party like mine, if transmutes were a meaningful way to reasonably "trade up" to UR level tokens.

Hmm..this is very interesting to hear. And I can see how this must be frustrating. I think Rare's for the most part are pretty stable from year to year so if you are swapping those then not much gain. I've often thought that some of the transmutes (below Relic) in the past seemed like a weak bridge to the UR level. Recently they seem to have gotten better. Maybe TD should come up with a way to allow for some combination of 3 and 4 star Relics to transmute into a UR. This might help out people in this situation and get them to that UR power level over time.

The current transmutes are pretty awesome with the Enchanter's Whetstone and Belt of Ogre Mage power. Last year's Blessed Tempest Gloves were pretty awesome too.

The 4* Transmutes really seem like they should be the bridge between rare and UR. Maybe I need to go petition for some upgrades on the Ring of Stamina, since it is pretty lacking compared to Blessed Tempest Gloves and Belt of Ogre Mage Power

Endgame wrote:

Wade Schwendemann wrote:

jedibcg wrote:

Fiddy wrote: Just like we require a unanimous vote for difficulty, I'd think a unanimous vote to ignore the caps should be allowed. That addresses the concerns around solo'ing the dungeon on a lower difficulty or the "no, we really want a cakewalk" concerns.

ICK!!! So a number of players end up on a pug run, they are 'forced' to play normal by 1 player (okay, sure) and they are 'forced' to neuter their builds by 1 player.

I actually think this is ok. The message is.

New player, we welcome you to true dungeon. While you may be playing with seasoned veterans, your experience is important enough to us that we will make sure you can play on normal and participate in the run, rather than just standing around while these other players dominate everything.

This is an extreme example of course, but I think it sends a powerful message to the newer players.

Agree with Wade here.

Sorry but I just cannot agree if the new player is a 'bad actor' as well then I don't think giving them the possibility of ruining a group a 'vets' fun either. I agree we should attempt to protect new players but giving them a complete pass without accepting that there may be bad actors in that as well. It may be rare but if 1 person ended ruining fun for group regardless of if they are new are not I do not like.

jedibcg wrote:

Endgame wrote:

Wade Schwendemann wrote:

jedibcg wrote:

Fiddy wrote: Just like we require a unanimous vote for difficulty, I'd think a unanimous vote to ignore the caps should be allowed. That addresses the concerns around solo'ing the dungeon on a lower difficulty or the "no, we really want a cakewalk" concerns.

ICK!!! So a number of players end up on a pug run, they are 'forced' to play normal by 1 player (okay, sure) and they are 'forced' to neuter their builds by 1 player.

I actually think this is ok. The message is.

New player, we welcome you to true dungeon. While you may be playing with seasoned veterans, your experience is important enough to us that we will make sure you can play on normal and participate in the run, rather than just standing around while these other players dominate everything.

This is an extreme example of course, but I think it sends a powerful message to the newer players.

Agree with Wade here.

Sorry but I just cannot agree if the new player is a 'bad actor' as well then I don't think giving them the possibility of ruining a group a 'vets' fun either. I agree we should attempt to protect new players but giving them a complete pass without accepting that there may be bad actors in that as well. It may be rare but if 1 person ended ruining fun for group regardless of if they are new are not I do not like.

I agree that no one should be able to ruin someone else's fun. I don't see how a new player playing with a group of vets and saying "I planned to play this game, as advertised, on normal with only my 10 pack" would be doing that though.

Personally I don’t think that power creep is really the issue. If you guys want to spend all that money and time to get all that gear then by all means let them.
One thing that it seems people do want from this post is some guidelines on what they should have in order to go to the higher level, I know I for one would love to know the recommended stats to go to each level and why. Like I have no idea what my AC actually does , does it make it so the monster misses me , take less damage or something else.

I for one agree with stat caps for the normal level even though I have only ever run into people who made sure that all the new characters had fun mainly because I feel that this also will provide the guidelines for people, if you have a character that is being capped you are probably ready to move up

A lot of people have also mentioned that they don’t enjoy getting into pugs and I wonder if for gencon they could sell x number of tickets as one ticket for 800$ so that means that no matter who buys it the tickets are together and will limit the chance of all groups buying 2 tickets in a bunch of the runs diminishing the number of full runs available

And if a guy with no friends is so over headed that he wants to ruin the other 9 people’s experience, maybe he dosent have any friends because he is willing to ruin their experience and still think that the “gang “ is in the wrong instead of going on the forums.

Wade Schwendemann wrote: I agree that no one should be able to ruin someone else's fun. I don't see how a new player playing with a group of vets and saying "I planned to play this game, as advertised, on normal with only my 10 pack" would be doing that though.

So the next planned epic run someone let me show up and say No we are playing normal. Also all your cool tokens, yeah you are not going to get to benefit from them because I am I am putting a cap on them. Maybe if you have multiple runs it won't bother you too much. If it is your only run? Odds of this happening slim. If it happened just once, you can bet there would be pitchforks and torches on the forums.

Don't get me wrong I LOVE PUG's. I would rather play with a group of new folks on normal that I would with forumites on a harder difficulty for anything that is not their first run through. I pick my character last and play whatever will help the group and don't slide if I don't have to. I hook everyone up with max treasure if they want it and have a good time experiencing the dungeon with folks that the dungeon is new to. Again I play a lot so I get enjoyment out of seeing the dungeon through someone else's eyes.

When the day comes that I only play through the dungeon once and am told I cannot use my tokens because 1 person doesn't want me to (without knowing if I would be a good ambassador for the new players) I will be done with tokens.

And how quickly this thread has turned into how most of the rules changing threads that I have followed lately.

Insert initial multi-faceted problem that poses multiple points

The discussion that follows:

one side wants to limit everyone because of the actions of a few...

one side wants no oversight or telling them what their fun is wrong...

one side wants to protect their investments and look at decisions financially...

one side wants advocate as a PUG protector for new players at the sake of vets..


None of these positions are inherently wrong. I see and value each posters points that they bring to the table. These are all based on each individual's experiences, perspectives, and motivations to impact the game that they love. The problem I am seeing currently is that it becomes difficult for a majority to land on a common ground solution due to the broad nature of the topic and question. Also there is a current issue of defining who the proposed audience or subject is. This game and the people playing it is extremely stratified with levels of difficulties, gearing, and player expectations.

The OP states " where we feel challenged" and "sense of earned victory if we win"

Who is us?

Now this may sound silly but are we talking about the Epic level vets? Is this emerging veteran? How about the New player?

I say that because if you look at different posters their "subject" may be different.There are people advocating and looking to change different aspects of the game based on a different audience.

What are we trying to accomplish?

Yes we are addressing power creep which is real, here, and is inevitable. It feels like we are all just playing splatoon with the numerous underlining influences and causations of the topic instead of pinpoint precision.

Yes there is a ton to discuss and much of the minutia will lead to rabbit trails and spiraling the discussion onto different talking points.

Now I want to be clear. I am not bashing anyone's viewpoint. I am merely suggesting that we can further the conversation by narrowing the conversation if we can get on the same page.


Is the conversation about...

Having the long-standing community at large lobbying to regress / cap the advancement of stacking stat-boosting tokens?

Addressing Epic level content for high end collectors?

Talking about limiting emerging veteran / veteran options and ability through stat-caps in non-organized play?

Addressing the new player experience and cultivating that through inclusive and empowering play?

Addressing Veteran play at the Hardcore / Nitemare levels?


I feel that if we address one issue we will get somewhere because if it is about all of the above then the conversation is not going to go far.

This is very well thought out, and very accurate.

Things are far, far more complicated than any single issue.

Endgame wrote: The current transmutes are pretty awesome with the Enchanter's Whetstone and Belt of Ogre Mage power. Last year's Blessed Tempest Gloves were pretty awesome too.

The 4* Transmutes really seem like they should be the bridge between rare and UR. Maybe I need to go petition for some upgrades on the Ring of Stamina, since it is pretty lacking compared to Blessed Tempest Gloves and Belt of Ogre Mage Power

Yeah, I was super excited when I saw the Enchanter's Whetstone, but the recipe was problematic. Aragonite is very slow for us to come by (we could make one for our whole party) and it didn't seem worth it to spend an Aragonite for an effect I could get with +2 STR that I could get from a rare token. Slotless would be nice, but I just couldn't justify spending an Aragonite on it.

The Belt of Ogre Mage Power was also awesome, but I didn't get a Belt of Ogre Power in my token order. I thought about trading on the forums, but honestly I don't have 10 Mystic Silk. I have 4.

I was able to make 1 Blessed Tempest Glove. I can usually make a few of the 3* transmutes each year, but can only make 1-2 of the 4* transmutes each year. Again, this is for my full party, not just one character.

So there's a glimpse into transmuting for a whole party, pooling their tokens, who has been buying extra tokens (300-600 per year) for four years, playing for for 6-8 years (depending on the player), doing 2-3 runs per year at Gen Con playing 1-2 runs per year with a full 10 people and 1-2 runs per year with more like 4-6 people.

Matt, welcome to the game and to the forums!

Matt Robisch wrote: As an observation - as a new player at GenCon 2018, one of the obvious problems I saw with the token system in general was that there is a pay-to-win element to the game, and that power creep means the barrier to entry is only going to get higher. Whether that problem is real or perceived is another matter entirely - we ended up running a sealed quest with no problems on normal, then the rest of our runs were relatively smooth as well. I've heard from a few friends that the 2018 dungeons were a jump in difficulty over previous years, so if our group of <40 tokens to our name - mostly commons at that - was able to stumble through with just a couple people in better gear, maybe there's less paywall than it seems.

Glad to hear you had a good experience with normal sealed quest; that's definitely the way it should be.

It is interesting that TD's paywall perception may be substantially worse than the reality (well, aside from the event ticket price paywall which unfortunately is quite real).

the vagueness of what constitutes "enough" gear is problematic. Where am I bringing the party down? Where am I trivializing this for someone else? I would personally advocate stat caps, down-sync'ing, or some system to that effect, but in their absence I would strongly request clearer guidance on recommended gear levels.

I agree! It would be super cool if TPTB were willing and able to offer quantitative guidance for calibration based on stats, i.e. "when tuning modules for Hardcore, we assume characters typically have somewhere around X HP, Y saves, Z to-hit bonus, deal ZZ damage per round of combat, etc." Of course these would be rough ranges, and would also vary between classes, but anything of this form would allow you to throw your build into an online character generator and check your stats against the rough guideline to see if you're near, way below, or way above the notional median. Maybe the format could be as simple as publishing a sample party card for a hypothetical Hardcore group?

In case you haven't seen it, "Pick a Difficulty Level" in the Players' Handbook available at truedungeon.com/resources does attempt to offer some guidance, though many people feel that Hardcore especially has become significantly harsher than its current PHB description:

Hardcore: This is for people who have some TD experience and at least three bags of tokens. Monsters hit harder, have more health, and are more likely to resist your spells.

The "TD experience" aspect of this is extremely important. But on the equipment side, three bags of tokens isn't much at all: just 3 rares, 6 uncommons, and 21 commons. By contrast, I've seen people on the forums suggest that maybe HC is for people who have a full rare build with "just a few" URs and/or transmutes including something to gain 5th level, and I've seen other people advocate for pushing HC even higher than that (I strongly disagree with those people).

How it should be calibrated (based on equipment), in my opinion:

* Normal should be comfortably playable as sealed

* Hardcore should be comfortably playable using a good rare+uncommon build -- achievable simply by playing for a few years, drawing from the treasure box, and trading around to get the specific rares you need. Hardcore should NOT be calibrated to assume even a single high-dollar (UR+ or transmute) token; it should be a good place for experienced players who love the game and spend their money on tickets but don't have extra money to spend on tokens. I was such a player for many years.

Once you do own some UR+ gear, you can choose between continuing to play HC and having an easier time of it, or starting to think about Nightmare. I won't try to offer any specifics for that because I only just got there last year myself.