TOPIC: This is not the Post you are looking for Henwy. Move along.

<br />Turning this from something the players control (some are quite good at hitting a 20, and even doing so without knocking others out...) to something that happens maybe 5% of the time, and then it has to be your luck to be the one in 8 targeted...well I think we just saw something change from maybe tripping once or twice per combat room to now something that may not ever get tripped on a run.<br /><br />I'm not crazy about this, but I can't ignore a potential change coming way late in the process on something that has been hashed over several times (thought this one was a good fix also...) and it is easily nerfing this UR in both in-game usability and in-game value.  <br /><br />Personally, I don't see the negative side Eric pointed out...I mean yes folks are none too happy to have a 20 knocked out...but is adding one token to the mix going to make it worse?  I seriously doubt that, but I will give up that point.  This is just an opinion about knocking something way down and taking out some of the fun that was built into the design of it.  The token was a nice bene or boon for some folks...turning it into a monster generated thing, takes all the fun out in my opinion.   <br /><br />Going with Eric's advice change advice is better than the nerf = make any 20 slid count as a score - as soon as one is slide - credit the hit.  At least this way - it is fun extra perk for those players who slide well.  (might be a tad over powered if that is adopted...but it is better than the monster 20 IMHO.) <br />

<br /><br />Overall, I do agree with Gary on this matter.<br /><br />I still think people *are* going to make a fuss over a single token, especially given the value of the dungeon-only tokens. We've already seen how valuable Ingredients can be, not to mention the Alchemist Pouch from 2007 and Part 1 of the Rod in 2008. And there's always a chance to get a new shiny UR. And now that the treasures have been bumped up to mainly uncommons/rares, I do think it's a much more valid concern.<br /><br />But it's pretty easily remedied just by letting 20's count even if they are later bumped. Getting hit on a "20" is so rare that the Charm would be barely usable. And I agree that the Charm adds in a little bit of extra fun and excitement for the players, with everyone trying to go for the 20.<br /><br />So my intention of pointing out that negative side was because it could be alleviated with a slight tweak - I wasn't intentionally advocating for a complete overhaul!

<br />Has the idea of making the charm a weaker version of the HoP already been proposed and shot down? That would side-step the whole "have to get a critical" to get the extra token per room. The only additional thing would have to be to specify that the HoP and charm "do not stack".<br /> <br />Admittedly I am joining this token's design late (I have been focused on the weapons).<br />

I think we should train a bat to deliver the extra token to the lucky player in its mouth.

Are you guys done yet?

<br />Are you guys done yet?<br />

<br /><br />*flog* *flog* *flog* (checks scraps of barely recognizable dead-horse) *flog* *flog* *flog*

Don't take it personally Whiskeyjack, you are clearly well intentioned and determined to do what you can to optimize the outcome on this. I just like trained bats. <br />

<br />Hey, don't worry... I am not taking it personally.  =D The problem is I enjoy talking about this stuff and if I *am* going over-board, someone just needs to let me know. <br /><br />And trained bats *would* be cool. 

<br />IF the charm changes to a mini-HoP...why not allow it to stack?  Why alienate those with the HoP?<br /><br /><br />

<br /><br />Because some of us came too late to the game to get their own HOP, and now are viscerally opposed to buying one from the "exuberantly capitalistic" for $200+.

It begs the question- is the Charm meant to be the replacement (a refactored version) of the HoP? The base effect (gain tokens) is similar, so we have to consider stacking as part of evaluating the token. I remember in M:tG (and believe me, this design process is similar to how cards were developed) when cards were rotated out and less-strongly powered versions would take their place. Maybe I was looking at the Charm for a replacement for the HoP in the printing line-up... when I shouldn't be. <br /> <br />*flog* =D

Well, it would be extra tokens for no slot - I think that would make it valuable as a mini-HoP.<br /><br />I think I would have to agree with Gary on this, and say leave it as is.  If nerfed to "monster rolls 20," I don't think it would be UR-worthy (esp. since a nat 20 for a monster does not do crit damage).<br />

<br />I think I would have to agree with Gary on this, and say leave it as is.  If nerfed to "monster rolls 20," I don't think it would be UR-worthy (esp. since a nat 20 for a monster does not do crit damage).<br />

<br /><br />I agree too- I wouldn't want it if it was changed that way either.<br />

Questor's Charm of Luck<br /><br />Lest we forget, let us remember where this token started from.  Originally it was designed to turn an unfortunate event (character taking damage) into something good (character who took damage found treasure (2 tokens worth!)).<br /><br />

<br /><br />I think if we stick to these guidelines we would be ok-<br /><br />1. The charm has to be valuable enough to merit being on the UR list. (currently TRUE)<br />2. The charm should be "fun" to have, in addition to being useful. (currently TRUE)<br />3. The charm shouldn't mess with the mechanics of the game too much at the expense of it's effect. (not sure)<br />4. The charm shouldn't have a loophole which can be abused (currently mostly TRUE, I think)<br /><br />and I would like to add a 5th item- the charm should have a mechanic which fits with its name/image/intent.<br />

<br /><br />The original version meets WhiskeyJack's 5th criteria.<br /><br />However in its current form (character must slide a 20), I respectively disagree with 1 and 2 above.  <br /><br />With Jeff's proposed change to a 20 monster roll, item one (above) is even more false (if that's even possible).<br /><br />This token went from a must have multiple copies (IMHO) to one (to complete a set) (or for those people like Henwy who can hit a 20 one out of every 4-5 slides).<br />And now Henwy (probably) wouldn't want one.<br /><br />What are we trying to accomplish with this token?<br /><br />If we again examine WhiskeyJack's 5 key points and return to the original version of the token:<br /><br />Criteria 1,2,3 and 5 are met (again in my opinion).  The problem came with people trying to "game" number 4.  Especially true with a room like the stirge room (where everyone is attacked).   I propose we go back to the original version with the caveat that the character must take damage from a room with a single monster in it (and take damage from that monster).  This will limit some of the "gaming" (those who want to lower their AC to improve their chances only help reduce power creep).<br /><br />