TOPIC: Last Chance to Give General Token Guidance

Perhaps the charges are Rares, just like the Wand itself?  Or, we could just keep it simple and keep it the way it is (and trust people not to erase the checkboxes).<br />

oh I hear there will be NO CHANCE at erasing what they have in store for chippie charges!

Yep, it is pretty perminant.

<br />

<br />

<br />Create a token that allows wands to be recharged.  Perhaps this is something that could be specifically available for purchase.<br /><br />Kim<br />

<br /><br />I like (was it Gary's idea?) the idea of having some "Charge/recharge/1-charge" tokens so that you can show the DM your want and hand over the Charge token as a consumable, but keep the Wand.  Of course, this might mean needing chargers for each type of want (a magic missle recharge may be easier to obtain than a lightning recharge) instead of an all purpose recharge.<br /><br />

<br /><br />I don't remember...but it is kinda cool, if we want to keep with charges and burners...no one misses a bolt or bullet...so charges could be uncommon or something.  But this does make wands VERY powerful...with essentially an unlimited number of uses!<br />

<br /><br />That was my idea - have wands be permanents from now on, and have "charge" tokens for them that you turn in when using the wand.  One really neat thing for that is - for a Wand of Fireball for instance - you can have charge tokens that are common, uncommon, and rare, that do a different amount of damage (the higher the rarity, the higher the damage).  And it does eliminate the need for any charge counters. 

I just think that it would make more people want to use wands rather than letting it just sit in their collection.<br /><br />Kim

I think Wands need a face lift - make them "chargless" and have wand charges be C, U and/or R...<br /><br />Getting Wands into the game - and out of collections might be a good thing...I mean what Wizard didn't have a couple of wands on them in D&D?

Reprinting some of the wands that were in earlier token sets might not be a bad idea.<br /><br />Kim

If they did charge tokens I think they should be yearless.  I also think selling them separately might be a good idea as well. <br /><br />Kim

<br />I think Wands need a face lift - make them "chargless" and have wand charges be C, U and/or R...<br /><br />Getting Wands into the game - and out of collections might be a good thing...I mean what Wizard didn't have a couple of wands on them in D&D?<br />

<br /><br />I like this idea. I think it makes wands more on par with their D&D counterparts which had something like 50-100 charges.

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />Create a token that allows wands to be recharged.  Perhaps this is something that could be specifically available for purchase.<br /><br />Kim<br />

<br /><br />I like (was it Gary's idea?) the idea of having some "Charge/recharge/1-charge" tokens so that you can show the DM your want and hand over the Charge token as a consumable, but keep the Wand.  Of course, this might mean needing chargers for each type of want (a magic missle recharge may be easier to obtain than a lightning recharge) instead of an all purpose recharge.<br /><br />

<br /><br />I don't remember...but it is kinda cool, if we want to keep with charges and burners...no one misses a bolt or bullet...so charges could be uncommon or something.  But this does make wands VERY powerful...with essentially an unlimited number of uses!<br />

<br /><br />That was my idea - have wands be permanents from now on, and have "charge" tokens for them that you turn in when using the wand.  One really neat thing for that is - for a Wand of Fireball for instance - you can have charge tokens that are common, uncommon, and rare, that do a different amount of damage (the higher the rarity, the higher the damage).  And it does eliminate the need for any charge counters.  <br />

<br /><br />But all this does is replace scrolls, which are like one shot wands. <br /><br />Why complicate the matter when scrolls do just fine now?  <br /><br />Instead of creating wands that require charge tokens why not just simply use scroll fireball, etc.  <br /><br />Because right now there are only a couple of wands that are not wizard specific (cure lt wnds and detect magic).  <br />And what you are asking is for wizards to carry 1 extra token above and beyond what they would need to carry for just using scrolls.   Not very efficient if you ask me.  <br /><br />And correct me if I am wrong, wands and scrolls both require verbal capacity (so you can't use either in a zone of silence), so what is the efficency gain for charges.  The whole advantage of wands over scrolls is having to tote fewer tokens around as well as having different effects than what scrolls are available. <br /><br />But if you are going to institute charges, then all those charges are nothing more than scroll: wand effect.  If thats the case, why bother with the wand at all, just have scrolls of X, instead of Rare Wand of X which requires the use of Rare charges.  <br /><br />I mean thats what I am seeing here, if you have a wand of X and lets say its a rare, then the only charges it can use are rare charges.  <br /><br />So what would really suck is if a party of new players gets together and viola the rare they pull is a wand of X, but no charges, or worse yet, a charge with no wands.  Can you imagine how that would feel.  An item that is totally useless to all members of the party.  <br /><br />I am sorry, but there should be no such thing as a rare that is totally dependant on pulling another rare to be useful.  A rare may not be useful to you, but when you sit down at a table of new players, someone there should be able to use it (the only exception I have seen to this is when a weapon is class X only, and no one is playing class X of which the odds are 3/11, which is why I am little bummed that the direction of so many threads is to create class X only items, even though I have done so to support this direction).<br /><br />In fact I am going to stand on my soapbox and say that no non-ammo token should be totally dependant on pulling another token to be useful.  But this is really true for rares.  Yes it would suck to get Slingshot of impact and not have a sling at the table, but thank goodness there are Player Coaches whom, if you are wise to their generous nature, you can certainly ask for a sling or a shortbow or some such minor weapon to use that ammo you got.  (Crossbows I think would be the big exception there).  And if you pull a ranged weapon without ammo, it is still perfectly useful.  But you pull a wand in this new scenario and if you don't get a charge it is useless.<br /><br />So while charges did initially sound cool to me, I think it over complicates something that scrolls take perfectly good care of and creates the dangerous slope of creating non-ammo tokens that are totally dependant on another to be useful.<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />Create a token that allows wands to be recharged.  Perhaps this is something that could be specifically available for purchase.<br /><br />Kim<br />

<br /><br />I like (was it Gary's idea?) the idea of having some "Charge/recharge/1-charge" tokens so that you can show the DM your want and hand over the Charge token as a consumable, but keep the Wand.  Of course, this might mean needing chargers for each type of want (a magic missle recharge may be easier to obtain than a lightning recharge) instead of an all purpose recharge.<br /><br />

<br /><br />I don't remember...but it is kinda cool, if we want to keep with charges and burners...no one misses a bolt or bullet...so charges could be uncommon or something.  But this does make wands VERY powerful...with essentially an unlimited number of uses!<br />

<br /><br />That was my idea - have wands be permanents from now on, and have "charge" tokens for them that you turn in when using the wand.  One really neat thing for that is - for a Wand of Fireball for instance - you can have charge tokens that are common, uncommon, and rare, that do a different amount of damage (the higher the rarity, the higher the damage).  And it does eliminate the need for any charge counters.  <br />

<br /><br />But all this does is replace scrolls, which are like one shot wands. <br /><br />Why complicate the matter when scrolls do just fine now?  <br /><br />Instead of creating wands that require charge tokens why not just simply use scroll fireball, etc.  <br /><br />Because right now there are only a couple of wands that are not wizard specific (cure lt wnds and detect magic).  <br />And what you are asking is for wizards to carry 1 extra token above and beyond what they would need to carry for just using scrolls.   Not very efficient if you ask me.  <br /><br />And correct me if I am wrong, wands and scrolls both require verbal capacity (so you can't use either in a zone of silence), so what is the efficency gain for charges.  The whole advantage of wands over scrolls is having to tote fewer tokens around as well as having different effects than what scrolls are available. <br /><br />But if you are going to institute charges, then all those charges are nothing more than scroll: wand effect.  If thats the case, why bother with the wand at all, just have scrolls of X, instead of Rare Wand of X which requires the use of Rare charges.  <br /><br />I mean thats what I am seeing here, if you have a wand of X and lets say its a rare, then the only charges it can use are rare charges.  <br /><br />So what would really suck is if a party of new players gets together and viola the rare they pull is a wand of X, but no charges, or worse yet, a charge with no wands.  Can you imagine how that would feel.  An item that is totally useless to all members of the party.  <br /><br />I am sorry, but there should be no such thing as a rare that is totally dependant on pulling another rare to be useful.  A rare may not be useful to you, but when you sit down at a table of new players, someone there should be able to use it (the only exception I have seen to this is when a weapon is class X only, and no one is playing class X of which the odds are 3/11, which is why I am little bummed that the direction of so many threads is to create class X only items, even though I have done so to support this direction).<br /><br />In fact I am going to stand on my soapbox and say that no non-ammo token should be totally dependant on pulling another token to be useful.  But this is really true for rares.  Yes it would suck to get Slingshot of impact and not have a sling at the table, but thank goodness there are Player Coaches whom, if you are wise to their generous nature, you can certainly ask for a sling or a shortbow or some such minor weapon to use that ammo you got.  (Crossbows I think would be the big exception there).  And if you pull a ranged weapon without ammo, it is still perfectly useful.  But you pull a wand in this new scenario and if you don't get a charge it is useless.<br /><br />So while charges did initially sound cool to me, I think it over complicates something that scrolls take perfectly good care of and creates the dangerous slope of creating non-ammo tokens that are totally dependant on another to be useful.<br /><br />

<br /><br />You make a lot of good points, Nathan.  A couple of clarifications.  One - like I said earlier, the Wand could use charges from common to Rare, and the higher the rarity charge, the more powerful the effect.  So if you get a Wand, it is VERY likely you'll at least have some common and uncommon charges.  The Rare effects could be more powerful than a scroll effect, since it is being enhanced by a Wand.  <br /><br />I had thought that you didn't need to say anything verbal to use a wand, you just point and shoot.  But I'm not a D&D expert, so I may be wrong.  <br /><br />The Wands and Charge counters don't have to replace Scrolls, you can have both. 

Page 53 of token guide: Each of these wands require a spoken word to activate and thus cannot be used in areas of magical silence or while sneaking.