Chris Wiemer wrote:
Matthew Hayward wrote: Word to the wise: adding lower rarity more powerful new tokens to single slot that are worse than several existing BiS options is not “power creep.”
In fact it directly addressed one of the harmful aspects of power creep - which is a large gap between BiS players and everyone else.
.
+1 This is an excellent point.
If 2/10 players in a party are BiS players, to take the wording, and the other 8 are only red players, improving Rare still increases their power individually and of the party as a whole. Same if they are green players and UCs get better. It is even true if it is 9 BiS players and only one red player. The overall power for the level the player is at is creeping up, as is the total power of the party.
And not every purple player is BiS player, either; if a rare meets or surpasses their UR just because there is another UR that is better, that is still power creep. We are not there yet, but as so many anti-power creep proponents say, it is a slippery slope. You can't just design rares based on the best URs. You have to consider the existing rares (if outdated) and the lowest power URs as well. And to a degree other slots.
I am not necessarily opposed to the Amulet of Vigor as written, I just worry that it is jumping to far.
What if we said if was just +3 to STR? Then it is the rare equivalent of a belt slot, and half the total bonus of Stu's/Champion. What if it was +3 to ability of choice? Still half, but you get flexibility.
Applications programming is a race between software engineers, who strive to produce idiot-proof programs, and the Universe, which strives to produce bigger idiots. <br /><br />So far, the Universe is winning.