TOPIC: 2020 Transmuted Beta Images

OrionW wrote:

Mike Steele wrote: On a side note - I had a feeling it was bad luck that the Druid was one of the first Class tokens, it seems like they are increasing in power.

The Druid item was always a little under powered, but become a lot less interesting when they changed the rules on how often you could polymorph. I hope that at some point they remove the one creature per room restriction.

As far as damage it is hard to see how a polymorphed Druid using the legendary would ever match damage with any other legendary wielding class, but if they can stay close in damage that is likely good enough.

I also hope that rule is changed, to help bring the Druid Legendary at least close to the other classes. Fortunately it's not written on the token, so it would be very easy for Jeff & Co. to change it.

Wade Schwendemann wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote:

Wade Schwendemann wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote:

Kirk Bauer wrote: 5) Holy Avengers: big question is: does the guard ability stack with the Amulet of Guarding? In other words, with the +5 Holy Avenger, can the Paladin guard a total of 3 other players? If so I think that's a problem. Either way I see this as more powerful than all of the other Legendaries. For the other three classes, they have to give up the most powerful slot in the game. The +5 Holy Avenger actually frees up that slot instead. It is also a great weapon. And you can also swap weapons. So basically you get a (1) great weapon, (2) free up a neck slot, (3) doesn't really take a slot if you don't want it to, and some other cool effects. It might just be too many.

In other words, for the other classes they have to use up their neck slot for their Legendary (as designed). For the Paladin, they effectively have a slotless Legendary that gives you a +5 to-hit and allows you to use it or any other melee weapon.

Another question: if the Paladin switches weapons do they lose these stated abilities?

PS - I'm not saying we should change the slot. I like the +5 Holy Avenger. I just think it might need to be less powerful than the others to make up for it being effectively slotless.

I think the Avenger needs to be toned WAY down based on this line of reasoning, it is:

1. A slotless Amulet of Guarding. (neck slot UR)
2. A slotless +5 to saves. (Back slot Relic/Legendary)
3. A bunch of other stuff

Is there any doubt that if we printed a slotless legendary token that said:

+5 to saves, You may equip an additional neck item that does not effect the party card or expand slots.

It would be the best legendary token ever printed?

Because what this is is better than that.

Creating mythical tokens and then arguing against them is not exactly a fair comparison.

The token isn't slotless. Period. It requires being equipped in the Melee mainhand slot, preventing the use of a 2 handed weapon, or an existing legendary with a higher damage cap (and slightly higher average). Doing so means a Paladin can't equip (without cheating of course) a 2 handed melee weapon that is much better.

+5 Saves is a lot. It would be reasonable to drop down to +2/+3.

Adjusting power levels is fine. Let's not take it back to where we had it in the L+L section, which is essentially useless, particularly if Guard doesn't stack.

Edit:

Matthew Hayward wrote: What is Fury?

No one seems to know

I'm sorry you didn't like my illustration - I'm trying to clarify the point. I can do it purely in terms if the proposed token:

By equipping this token during character building, you get +5 to saves on the character builder. This is better than a relic level back slot, and it's been tacked on as an afterthought.

By game rules, you are not required to wield this weapon at any point in the dungeon, so you can indeed switch into any weapon you prefer. You could switch to avernon's deathcleaver, and you could then use it with the new expanded crit range bracers.

Technically you lose the +5 to saves if you do, but it will still be included on the party card. This puts the paladin and the dm in the annoying position of having to talk about saves which uses up time and making the dm remember to do subtraction.

You are right that you have to choose between the +5 to saves during coaching and and party card two handed buffs.

This is simply too good. If this weapon did nothing else but be a decent +5 weapon and confer +5 to saves it would be too good - especially with a Cloak of Shadowskin in print. Instead it also comes with a variety of other Effects, one of which is a neck slot UR.

I will concede that the +5 saves is too good. I think deciding on how much to tune the weapon absolutely depends on whether or not the guard will stack with Amulet of Guarding.

Also, I think that using the argument that one can equip one thing in coaching that adds to the party card, then switch into something that isn't on the party card isn't unique to Paladins and this proposed weapon. There is nothing stopping a wizard from equipping a Relsa's Ring and Greater Ring of Focus, for example, then "switching" into a Ring of Spell Storing.

Granted, the rules don't allow for switching rings like they do for weapons.

"The rules" matter a great deal.

I'm not concerned with players who cheat - they cheat only themselves, as it were.

The scenario I described for the paladin is allowed by the rules, so pointing to a scenario where someone has cheated to justify the power level is a bad look in my opinion.

OrionW wrote:

Mike Steele wrote: On a side note - I had a feeling it was bad luck that the Druid was one of the first Class tokens, it seems like they are increasing in power.

The Druid item was always a little under powered, but become a lot less interesting when they changed the rules on how often you could polymorph. I hope that at some point they remove the one creature per room restriction.

As far as damage it is hard to see how a polymorphed Druid using the legendary would ever match damage with any other legendary wielding class, but if they can stay close in damage that is likely good enough.

After seeing Beertram's polymorph build with the legendary at Origins, I now know that a properly built polymorph build with that token is bonkers.

Everyone saying the druid legendary is underpowered really need to either see it in action or try it out themselves. The ability to pick your damage type to match the opponent is extremely under-rated.

Matthew Hayward wrote:

Wade Schwendemann wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote:

Wade Schwendemann wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote:

Kirk Bauer wrote: 5) Holy Avengers: big question is: does the guard ability stack with the Amulet of Guarding? In other words, with the +5 Holy Avenger, can the Paladin guard a total of 3 other players? If so I think that's a problem. Either way I see this as more powerful than all of the other Legendaries. For the other three classes, they have to give up the most powerful slot in the game. The +5 Holy Avenger actually frees up that slot instead. It is also a great weapon. And you can also swap weapons. So basically you get a (1) great weapon, (2) free up a neck slot, (3) doesn't really take a slot if you don't want it to, and some other cool effects. It might just be too many.

In other words, for the other classes they have to use up their neck slot for their Legendary (as designed). For the Paladin, they effectively have a slotless Legendary that gives you a +5 to-hit and allows you to use it or any other melee weapon.

Another question: if the Paladin switches weapons do they lose these stated abilities?

PS - I'm not saying we should change the slot. I like the +5 Holy Avenger. I just think it might need to be less powerful than the others to make up for it being effectively slotless.

I think the Avenger needs to be toned WAY down based on this line of reasoning, it is:

1. A slotless Amulet of Guarding. (neck slot UR)
2. A slotless +5 to saves. (Back slot Relic/Legendary)
3. A bunch of other stuff

Is there any doubt that if we printed a slotless legendary token that said:

+5 to saves, You may equip an additional neck item that does not effect the party card or expand slots.

It would be the best legendary token ever printed?

Because what this is is better than that.

Creating mythical tokens and then arguing against them is not exactly a fair comparison.

The token isn't slotless. Period. It requires being equipped in the Melee mainhand slot, preventing the use of a 2 handed weapon, or an existing legendary with a higher damage cap (and slightly higher average). Doing so means a Paladin can't equip (without cheating of course) a 2 handed melee weapon that is much better.

+5 Saves is a lot. It would be reasonable to drop down to +2/+3.

Adjusting power levels is fine. Let's not take it back to where we had it in the L+L section, which is essentially useless, particularly if Guard doesn't stack.

Edit:

Matthew Hayward wrote: What is Fury?

No one seems to know

I'm sorry you didn't like my illustration - I'm trying to clarify the point. I can do it purely in terms if the proposed token:

By equipping this token during character building, you get +5 to saves on the character builder. This is better than a relic level back slot, and it's been tacked on as an afterthought.

By game rules, you are not required to wield this weapon at any point in the dungeon, so you can indeed switch into any weapon you prefer. You could switch to avernon's deathcleaver, and you could then use it with the new expanded crit range bracers.

Technically you lose the +5 to saves if you do, but it will still be included on the party card. This puts the paladin and the dm in the annoying position of having to talk about saves which uses up time and making the dm remember to do subtraction.

You are right that you have to choose between the +5 to saves during coaching and and party card two handed buffs.

This is simply too good. If this weapon did nothing else but be a decent +5 weapon and confer +5 to saves it would be too good - especially with a Cloak of Shadowskin in print. Instead it also comes with a variety of other Effects, one of which is a neck slot UR.

I will concede that the +5 saves is too good. I think deciding on how much to tune the weapon absolutely depends on whether or not the guard will stack with Amulet of Guarding.

Also, I think that using the argument that one can equip one thing in coaching that adds to the party card, then switch into something that isn't on the party card isn't unique to Paladins and this proposed weapon. There is nothing stopping a wizard from equipping a Relsa's Ring and Greater Ring of Focus, for example, then "switching" into a Ring of Spell Storing.

Granted, the rules don't allow for switching rings like they do for weapons.

"The rules" matter a great deal.

I'm not concerned with players who cheat - they cheat only themselves, as it were.

The scenario I described for the paladin is allowed by the rules, so pointing to a scenario where someone has cheated to justify the power level is a bad look in my opinion.

I'll concede that as well.
If we take the saves off the weapon, this scenario is avoided. I don't think this is necessary.
I don't see how it is any different than a player who is using a 1 handed weapon on the party card, then switches to a 2 handed weapon and has to remind the DM about the AC they lost from a shield though, or why it would be any more difficult.

Should we never print a weapon with saves on it? That's an option of course.

If it were me I would go with something like

Relic
+3 damage vs evil creatures (same wording as the holy greatsword)
Can Gaurd against ranged (since it makes the most iconic pali ability more useful)
+3 retribution damage (since it avenges the hit )

Legendary
+5 damage vs evil creatures
Can Gaurd against all attacks
+5 retribution damage
Lay on hands also removes status effects (ties thematically back to d&d pali`s disease immunity)


But I dont play a pali so I have minimal skin the game.

Can the monk relic and legendary get something different instead of additional stuns per room and auto-kill please? I really dislike these effects, and I feel like I am not the only monk player with this opinion.

Can we also revisit balancing the "budget" of the token? The relic in particular just reads +3 damage. There's no way I'll ever slide a 20/20 or more than one 20 a combat.

jpotter wrote:

OrionW wrote:

Mike Steele wrote: On a side note - I had a feeling it was bad luck that the Druid was one of the first Class tokens, it seems like they are increasing in power.

The Druid item was always a little under powered, but become a lot less interesting when they changed the rules on how often you could polymorph. I hope that at some point they remove the one creature per room restriction.

As far as damage it is hard to see how a polymorphed Druid using the legendary would ever match damage with any other legendary wielding class, but if they can stay close in damage that is likely good enough.

After seeing Beertram's polymorph build with the legendary at Origins, I now know that a properly built polymorph build with that token is bonkers.

Everyone saying the druid legendary is underpowered really need to either see it in action or try it out themselves. The ability to pick your damage type to match the opponent is extremely under-rated.

I had +30 damage when polymorphed at Orgins, so I have a good idea of how powerful it can be. Top damage was not close to the Rogue in the party who also had the new legendary. With that said, It is close enough to where I think the curve should be, that I am happy with the damage. My request is not to boost the damage, but rather give us the ability that most thought the token would have when it was designed (the ability to polymorph into multiple creatures in a room). This would be a roll back of a recently implemented rule and not a change to the token.

Edit 1 for clarity.

Edit 2: The ability to pick your damage type is a 2 sided blade. If you pick before you know what the creature is resistant to, you have no way to change your damage type.

OrionW wrote:

Mike Steele wrote: On a side note - I had a feeling it was bad luck that the Druid was one of the first Class tokens, it seems like they are increasing in power.

The Druid item was always a little under powered, but become a lot less interesting when they changed the rules on how often you could polymorph. I hope that at some point they remove the one creature per room restriction.

As far as damage it is hard to see how a polymorphed Druid using the legendary would ever match damage with any other legendary wielding class, but if they can stay close in damage that is likely good enough.

I made the Druid item - I don't think the first year items were that underpowered: the bard and rogue one both combine multiple ur effects and have the practical outcome of granting additional standard actions.

The Druid item is powerful for a very, very specific build, and has some general utility outside that build (perhaps not worth giving up charm necklace or MMM or even amulet of focus though).

Flavor / rp wise it is also very strong - but that doesn't have a big appeals to everyone.

I do feel a bit bad for druids here wrt legendaries. Maybe we could give them back really really for real no polymorph restrictions in tdb? Or 2 forms per room?

Philip Goodman wrote: Can the monk relic and legendary get something different instead of additional stuns per room and auto-kill please? I really dislike these effects, and I feel like I am not the only monk player with this opinion.

Can we also revisit balancing the "budget" of the token? The relic in particular just reads +3 damage. There's no way I'll ever slide a 20/20 or more than one 20 a combat.

Maybe throw out a few ideas? You have good ones.

Really like the ring of fervor - it's been a long journey to normalize the idea that +1 focus on a ring should be a rare effect and this aims a good step.

Matthew Hayward wrote: Flavor / rp wise it is also very strong - but that doesn't have a big appeals to everyone.

On this note, I did survive the The AveryGorgon. She ended up keeping the river otter I polymorphed into as a pet.

I just want to throw out my own opinion here that the paladin sword seems great as is. I see the argument that it might be too good with +3/+5 saves. Maybe tone that down a bit.

Currently it adds something interesting that no other weapon does (saves) and adds to the paladin class abilities. It makes me think "hey that's neat, I'd want that if I were a paladin". Seems like that should be the sweet spot for a class legendary.


And it seems like almost everyone is in agreement that insta-kill effects are 'meh' at best. Any chance to go from insta-kill on the monk items to "bypasses all stun immunity", and go back to 1/maybe 2 per room stuns?