TOPIC: Rare Token Thoughts?

Wade Schwendemann wrote:

Wayne Rhodes wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote: Try's Ring - Ring - All

+1 AC, +1 max HP

Purely better then ROP +1

As hood of shadows was to hood of elvenkind.

I think it's ok to obsolete some tokens from time to time.
Would this ring as proposed even make it into any rare builds? With ring of dark health recently, plus ting of the hallowed, greater holly ring (granted those 2 are completion) and others I'm forgetting, I think the proposed ring would need a 2nd HP to have any chance of seeing play. The ptoblem.would be of course that the revision would make it too close to the ring of the dire boar.

I'm not sure ac makes much sense at this point, so I certainly wouldn't recommend it unless you had an empty ring slot. It seems like the real threatening monsters are "everyone make a save" types. If the monster is making a melee attack, it seems like a win for everyone in the room.

Wade Schwendemann wrote:

Wayne Rhodes wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote: Try's Ring - Ring - All

+1 AC, +1 max HP

Purely better then ROP +1

I think it's ok to obsolete some tokens from time to time.
Would this ring as proposed even make it into any rare builds?

It might not make BIS red builds, but it seems like a viable use of a slot and something a new player would be reasonably satisfied to get in one of their packs.

Endgame wrote:

Wade Schwendemann wrote:

Wayne Rhodes wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote: Try's Ring - Ring - All

+1 AC, +1 max HP

Purely better then ROP +1

As hood of shadows was to hood of elvenkind.

I think it's ok to obsolete some tokens from time to time.
Would this ring as proposed even make it into any rare builds? With ring of dark health recently, plus ting of the hallowed, greater holly ring (granted those 2 are completion) and others I'm forgetting, I think the proposed ring would need a 2nd HP to have any chance of seeing play. The ptoblem.would be of course that the revision would make it too close to the ring of the dire boar.

I'm not sure ac makes much sense at this point, so I certainly wouldn't recommend it unless you had an empty ring slot. It seems like the real threatening monsters are "everyone make a save" types. If the monster is making a melee attack, it seems like a win for everyone in the room.

I expect more rooms with multiple monsters and/or AOE attacks,. like the frost trolls last year.

Matthew Hayward wrote:

Wayne Rhodes wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote: Try's Ring - Ring - All

+1 AC, +1 max HP

Purely better then ROP +1

Yup - Tyr's Bracers were purely better than +1 Bracers of Defense .

Ring of Protection was first printed 12 years ago. Compare with Ring of the Anointed which is +1 to AC, Relfx, and ranged to-hit for most players who would consider equipping it.

I agree with the rest of your comparison and think the suggested ring is ok.

However, I think in general it may be more appropriate to use the most recent printing date as a gauge for how quickly we are obsoleting something than when it was first printed. Especially if the earliest printing was at a higher rarity than the most recent.

Fiddy wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote:

Wayne Rhodes wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote: Try's Ring - Ring - All

+1 AC, +1 max HP

Purely better then ROP +1

Yup - Tyr's Bracers were purely better than +1 Bracers of Defense .

Ring of Protection was first printed 12 years ago. Compare with Ring of the Anointed which is +1 to AC, Relfx, and ranged to-hit for most players who would consider equipping it.

I agree with the rest of your comparison and think the suggested ring is ok.

However, I think in general it may be more appropriate to use the most recent printing date as a gauge for how quickly we are obsoleting something than when it was first printed. Especially if the earliest printing was at a higher rarity than the most recent.

I agree with what Fiddy said.

If you look at the current price on RoP +1 it seems they are sought out by some groups of players. I know when I first started playing I picked one up, and used it for probably the first 10ish times I played after getting it, before upgrading past it.
I basically purchased a charm of Heroism and used one ring as RoP +1 and was borrowing a RoP +2 for the other.

I think this token would be fine, but also feel a direct reprint would be fine. I don’t think +1 hit point is that bad on the power creep side, but it might obsolete the old version.

Fiddy wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote:

Wayne Rhodes wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote: Try's Ring - Ring - All

+1 AC, +1 max HP

Purely better then ROP +1

Yup - Tyr's Bracers were purely better than +1 Bracers of Defense .

Ring of Protection was first printed 12 years ago. Compare with Ring of the Anointed which is +1 to AC, Relfx, and ranged to-hit for most players who would consider equipping it.

I agree with the rest of your comparison and think the suggested ring is ok.

However, I think in general it may be more appropriate to use the most recent printing date as a gauge for how quickly we are obsoleting something than when it was first printed. Especially if the earliest printing was at a higher rarity than the most recent.

The UR version is not the date I was quoting - that was 14 years ago. Also, the UR and Rare versions are not quite the same - as you can equip both at the same time (which you couldn't do if they were actually the same).

I'm not sure about the general principle you're stating - I would think the first printing is the more relevant date. Thinking about it just now I'm not sure really there would be a convincing argument as to why either of those two dates was more relevant to power level discussions (I can make a case for both)

For red builds for melee builds that aren't using a +1 level ring, I would recommend a ring of dark health and a ring of saves or ring of the annointed. If we allow for completion tokens, I would go dark health and ring of the hallowed.

For anyone using ranged, it's Holly Ring and ring of anointed all the way.

For wizards, druids and maybe clerics, double ring of saves or ring of saves and ring of the anointed.

In baulders gate, all the ring of protections are +1 ac and +1 all saves. Now that would be a ring I might be interested in over the other options.

Overall, a ring of protection will get used by anyone that is new and using current release tokens, but it's not really very competitive in the slot for tokens that have come out recently.

Endgame wrote: In baulders gate, all the ring of protections are +1 ac and +1 all saves. Now that would be a ring I might be interested in over the other options.

Possibly reprint RoP +1 or something similar.
Traransmute to +1 AC and +1 Saves
Could be a low level transmute like FoP Dog.

Wayne Rhodes wrote:

Endgame wrote: In baulders gate, all the ring of protections are +1 ac and +1 all saves. Now that would be a ring I might be interested in over the other options.

Possibly reprint RoP +1 or something similar.
Traransmute to +1 AC and +1 Saves
Could be a low level transmute like FoP Dog.

I like this idea. I think it would be a good entry level transmute.

Wade Schwendemann wrote:

Wayne Rhodes wrote:

Endgame wrote: In baulders gate, all the ring of protections are +1 ac and +1 all saves. Now that would be a ring I might be interested in over the other options.

Possibly reprint RoP +1 or something similar.
Traransmute to +1 AC and +1 Saves
Could be a low level transmute like FoP Dog.

I like this idea. I think it would be a good entry level transmute.

I like this as well. Since the original suggestion said hp, maybe a transmute with 1ac, 1hp, 1 all saves?

Composite Long Bow

Requires 17 Str

Damage wheel

4 4 5 6 7 10 11 12

The goal - make a rare version of the mighty long bow with a upper cap to damage and no +1 to hit.

Endgame wrote: Composite Long Bow

Requires 17 Str

Damage wheel

4 4 5 6 7 10 11 12

The goal - make a rare version of the mighty long bow with a upper cap to damage and no +1 to hit.

I don’t think there should be STR requirements for rares, I think that should be UR and up (even then I’m not a fan in general)