TOPIC: Rare Token Thoughts?

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.

Well, we have a mighty sling, with no +1 to hit at rare, so I would think a mighty short bow or mighty longbow could work.

Of course, that wasn't your intent with this token.

Wayne Rhodes wrote:

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)

You could just make it a mighty long bow then, much like the mighty sling

Matthew Hayward wrote:

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)

My logic being, if we had just reprinted the token last year, it would really seem too soon to obsolete it, no matter how long ago it was first printed. In this case, we last reprinted it five years ago, so I'm less concerned with obsoleting it.

Fiddy wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote:

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)

My logic being, if we had just reprinted the token last year, it would really seem too soon to obsolete it, no matter how long ago it was first printed. In this case, we last reprinted it five years ago, so I'm less concerned with obsoleting it.

I agree with that - makes perfect sense.

Endgame wrote:

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?

I like this too - maybe my Tyr's Ring was aiming too low.

The various Rare +4 saves rings seem to imply you could have a +1 saves ring that also give a little extra (+4 to save of choice is better than +1 to each I believe).

I could see any of these at rare:

+1 to saves
+1 to saves and +1 AC
+1 to saves and +1 HP

A three year cycle of Rare, usable by all, rings like:

+2 FORT, +2 WILL
+2 WILL, +2 RFLX
+2 FORT, +2 RFLX

Maybe with matching +1's at uncommon.

Matthew Hayward wrote: A three year cycle of Rare, usable by all, rings like:

+2 FORT, +2 WILL
+2 WILL, +2 RFLX
+2 FORT, +2 RFLX

Maybe with matching +1's at uncommon.

I like this a lot, possibly with a pre announced +3 (or 4, or 5) to all saves transmute.

Matthew Hayward wrote: A three year cycle of Rare, usable by all, rings like:

+2 FORT, +2 WILL
+2 WILL, +2 RFLX
+2 FORT, +2 RFLX

Maybe with matching +1's at uncommon.

+2 to this

macXdmg wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote: A three year cycle of Rare, usable by all, rings like:

+2 FORT, +2 WILL
+2 WILL, +2 RFLX
+2 FORT, +2 RFLX

Maybe with matching +1's at uncommon.

+2 to this

I could get behind this

Snipping over from the Transmute thread:

Rare - Gloves of the Sage, +2 to Scroll Damage/Healing

Or how about:
Rare - Earcuff of the Sage, Add Bardsong bonuses to damage scrolls (To Hit for scrolls requiring a slide)

Well Organized Sack
Scroll wielders
Slotless
-2 spell damage and healing, +1 scroll damage and healing to all targets

Assuming the spell damage bonuses are a field on the party card, this just had abuse written all over it. That said, I think it is an appropriate power, I think it highlights scrolls for what I believe TPTB want them to shine in, and it seems like an appropriate trade for a slotless scroll booster that isn’t +1 point. One could probably leave healing off or damage off and it would maybe be okay also, half as powerful but with a mighty penalty still.

macXdmg wrote: Well Organized Sack
Scroll wielders
Slotless
-2 spell damage and healing, +1 scroll damage and healing to all targets

Assuming the spell damage bonuses are a field on the party card, this just had abuse written all over it. That said, I think it is an appropriate power, I think it highlights scrolls for what I believe TPTB want them to shine in, and it seems like an appropriate trade for a slotless scroll booster that isn’t +1 point. One could probably leave healing off or damage off and it would maybe be okay also, half as powerful but with a mighty penalty still.

I don't know if it is me, but I'm not sure I'm following what this does. Is it intended to subtract 2 from the effect of a single-target spell, and apply a +1 effect to all potential targets?

So, a 8-pt single-target healing scroll would heal one target 6 and everyone else in the party 1?

Am I properly understanding? Or missing what you intended?