TOPIC: FINAL Notes about 2019 Tokens

I'm happy with all of the changes. I do believe that we will see more out of WIS and INT than simply increasing the number of Tome slots in 2020, but obviously nothing is definite yet.

Fiddy mentioned that for wands you really needed a wand-focused build. I think that will generally be true, however I think wands will still play a part in a nice backup option for when spells have run out or you want to deal some really specific types of damage.

Thanks Jeff for continuing to improve this great game.

kurtreznor wrote: IF there were to be an increase in the comp offered for the swap, i would suggest that it be for a copy of the new version AND 1 PYP. Not 2 PYPs.

My thought on treasure chips on the old for new swap (nerfed token) is not that they are buying back the token they are saying sorry for the inconvenience and we appreciate your understanding.

I can't think of a game this size that when an errata comes they provide any form of game merchandise during the change. I have seen Magic and D&D both do erratas - they don't give you new cards nor any merchandise. I don't get a discount on my D&D books that I purchased or a discount for new books due to them changing my favorite class abilities.

I think TD is leading the industry in this regard. I don't think we should have our hand out here. If we don't agree with the change we should politely express that but regardless we should just say thanks.

Ed

MasterED wrote:

kurtreznor wrote: IF there were to be an increase in the comp offered for the swap, i would suggest that it be for a copy of the new version AND 1 PYP. Not 2 PYPs.

My thought on treasure chips on the old for new swap (nerfed token) is not that they are buying back the token they are saying sorry for the inconvenience and we appreciate your understanding.

I can't think of a game this size that when an errata comes they provide any form of game merchandise during the change. I have seen Magic and D&D both do erratas - they don't give you new cards nor any merchandise. I don't get a discount on my D&D books that I purchased or a discount for new books due to them changing my favorite class abilities.

I think TD is leading the industry in this regard. I don't think we should have our hand out here. If we don't agree with the change we should politely express that but regardless we should just say thanks.

Ed

First up I'm not asking for anything more. Jeff is certainly under no obligation.

The big difference between this and say a wizards of the cost errata is that wizards will just say your card is banned in competitive play or now does X but your still allowed to keep your old card. Its yours but you cant use it in official games. This on the other hand feels more like a buy back then a recall or errata since Jeff wants the old tokens back.

And again he is under absolutely no obligation but I could see why he might want to offer some level of kickback equivalent to the value people will feel they are loosing to cut off customer service complaints before they happen. That's 100% his call though.

Picc wrote:

MasterED wrote:

kurtreznor wrote: IF there were to be an increase in the comp offered for the swap, i would suggest that it be for a copy of the new version AND 1 PYP. Not 2 PYPs.

My thought on treasure chips on the old for new swap (nerfed token) is not that they are buying back the token they are saying sorry for the inconvenience and we appreciate your understanding.

I can't think of a game this size that when an errata comes they provide any form of game merchandise during the change. I have seen Magic and D&D both do erratas - they don't give you new cards nor any merchandise. I don't get a discount on my D&D books that I purchased or a discount for new books due to them changing my favorite class abilities.

I think TD is leading the industry in this regard. I don't think we should have our hand out here. If we don't agree with the change we should politely express that but regardless we should just say thanks.

Ed

First up I'm not asking for anything more. Jeff is certainly under no obligation.

The big difference between this and say a wizards of the cost errata is that wizards will just say your card is banned in competitive play or now does X but your still allowed to keep your old card. Its yours but you cant use it in official games. This on the other hand feels more like a buy back then a recall or errata since Jeff wants the old tokens back.

And again he is under absolutely no obligation but I could see why he might want to offer some level of kickback equivalent to the value people will feel they are loosing to cut off customer service complaints before they happen. That's 100% his call though.

In the end it's all up to Jeff. Wouldn't feel so bad if we weren't having a +3 at rare same year this is happening. I could live with the replacement plus a pyp but that's even more wishful thinking then getting any bonus on this.

Really wonder if this year seems to be as aggravating as it is due to speed and to all the changes feels like. Between the anticipated transmutes plus the nerf bats just doesn't seem to feel balanced in any direction.

I disagree. I think thos year were actually trying to keep power creep down a bit, and fixing some broken tokens.

Are we overcorrecting? Maybe.

There are definitely arguments to be made for several changes.

I feel worst for clerics.

Wade Schwendemann wrote: I feel worst for clerics.

Don't feel bad for Clerics feel bad for the entire party. I may be odd person but most of my healing is not for combat damage but for puzzle damage. At hardcore level, I could undo two puzzles worth of damage (Between push and failed attempts) . Now I can heal 50% less. A lot less of my pickup groups will get everyone to room 7.

kurtreznor wrote:

Ian Lee wrote:

Jeff Martin wrote: We will also be reprinting these tokens as 2019 Ultra Rares with the corrected text and new artwork. Starting at Origins 2019, you will have to turn in the old tokens for the new 2019 versions. If you would prefer to replace the old token with a completely different UR token, you may turn your old token in for any 2018/2019 Ultra Rare. Either way you will receive a 10x treasure draw chip as a thank you for your understanding during this rebalancing. The old versions of these tokens will no longer be usable after Jan 31st, 2020; you must exchange your old token before that date. The old tokens will have the new power starting at Origins 2019.

Talked to my friend last night who doesn't follow the discussions here much. Also happens to be someone who bought one of these two tokens after GC this year so hasn't used it, yet.

Occurs to me that having the option of two URs instead of one UR and 10x chip would be closer in value to how much the tokens have gone for in recent years. I realize it's not necessary to protect people from their choices (like buying an OOP token). Just came to mind. Of course, UR and 2x 10x chips also closer to recent prices, but, as much as I'm throwing this thought out there of changing the trade in, I dread a 200 post argument on what's more fair or whatever. I take solace in thinking that this topic would have come up anyway closer to Origins 2019.

Of course, it also struck me that 1 for 2 is more UR-multiplicative than may be desirable. Also, as much as the changes may impact one token more than the other, I would not want to see the arguing over which is more valuable to where one deserved a different trade in than the other.

IF there were to be an increase in the comp offered for the swap, i would suggest that it be for a copy of the new version AND 1 PYP. Not 2 PYPs.

I'd be 100% behind that, or 2 PYPs, or 1 PYP and 20x Treasure Chips. But I'm also glad we're getting any kind of bonus at all, even if it's far less than the loss in value that's happening.

Wade Schwendemann wrote: I disagree. I think thos year were actually trying to keep power creep down a bit, and fixing some broken tokens.

Are we overcorrecting? Maybe.

There are definitely arguments to be made for several changes.

I feel worst for clerics.

George wrote:

Wade Schwendemann wrote: I feel worst for clerics.

Don't feel bad for Clerics feel bad for the entire party. I may be odd person but most of my healing is not for combat damage but for puzzle damage. At hardcore level, I could undo two puzzles worth of damage (Between push and failed attempts) . Now I can heal 50% less. A lot less of my pickup groups will get everyone to room 7.

Echo Valettuto: Sweet a combat room we won't take damage. I rarely fear combat (though that changes now) i dread getting bled on puzzle rooms and a big reason why i ran combat runs much as i could.

I'm honestly bitter and unhappy especially since a hypothetical +3/bead +2 for UR cloak is over powered but we have plus +3 on a rare cloak?!

I know as much as this sucks for me at least i don't play cleric, with the nerf on cloak and healing though i can forget higher difficulties unless i plan the added expense of consumables now which i rarely use.

Poor clerics, least the druids can now pick up the slack.

Wade Schwendemann wrote: I disagree. I think thos year were actually trying to keep power creep down a bit, and fixing some broken tokens.

Are we overcorrecting? Maybe.

There are definitely arguments to be made for several changes.

I feel worst for clerics.

Druids were hit really hard too, but I agree Clerics were hit the hardest since their focus is healing. I do wish the LoDS had been reduced in power to some middle ground instead of all the way down to being borderline worthy of even being played. I'd think it would have still been OK to have been somewhat more powerful but not game breaking.

It kind of feels like living in a Bizarro universe where the MEC is seen as "balanced" but the LoDS can't be more powerful than +2 heals and splitting spells.

Kirk Bauer wrote: I'm happy with all of the changes. I do believe that we will see more out of WIS and INT than simply increasing the number of Tome slots in 2020, but obviously nothing is definite yet.

Fiddy mentioned that for wands you really needed a wand-focused build. I think that will generally be true, however I think wands will still play a part in a nice backup option for when spells have run out or you want to deal some really specific types of damage.

Thanks Jeff for continuing to improve this great game.

Well, it's a matter of opinion whether some of these changes improved the game or not.

I'm not sure you need a special Wand-focused build to make Wands viable, as long as you have Medallion Mystic Mouth. That's a lot of bonus damage in a round for one consumable Wand with just that one token, and even better if you have IS Fluorite Cube.

Matt wrote:
I'm honestly bitter and unhappy especially since a hypothetical +3/bead +2 for UR cloak is over powered but we have plus +3 on a rare cloak?!

Sorry attempting to understand this. What rare cloak is +3?

jedibcg wrote:

Matt wrote:
I'm honestly bitter and unhappy especially since a hypothetical +3/bead +2 for UR cloak is over powered but we have plus +3 on a rare cloak?!

Sorry attempting to understand this. What rare cloak is +3?

The new 2019 one that damages you if you pass a save. I'm pretty sure the damage makes the +2 cloak the better pick for builds that actually consider a red in the back slot.