TOPIC: 2020 Ultra Rare Token Images

Cary Kelly wrote:

OrionW wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote: So.... the Rod of the Meek can't even be used to full effect by a level 4:

Barbarian, Drwarf Fighter, Fighter

Who are otherwise straight out of the bathtub?

Each of those classes innate bonuses plus the +3 on the Rod take their to-hit to over +5.

I love this token, but I just don't understand what the secondary limits beyond STR max of 18 help with. They box it in and remove a fun puzzle element. This token will never be part of a BiS melee build. But it might be a fun RP quest to see how good you can make it: Melvin the Meek who is at +8 / +17 or whatever after having scoured the world for unloved URs like Gloves of Weapon Finesse and Celestial Girdle.

By limiting on more than just max STR the puzzle/quest element of this token goes away and it becomes so bad that several au naturale level 4 characters are already being limited.

+1

+2 I don’t see how more hindrances on this item are necessary beyond the Strength cap. If a new player pulls this it can make for a fun attempt at building your character around its specific requirements.

+3

No melee character with 18 max strength will be likely to have sufficient damage or hit bonuses to make this a broken token. And if they do, they’ll have to make serious token sacrifices in other slots. Which I think is kind of awesome. Removing the limiters will help the game, not hurt.

Matthew Hayward wrote:

Xavon wrote:

WaterSomePlants wrote: Hmmm.... Can the Lenses of Vital Insight be swapped for Lenses of Seer Sight?

I don't see why this keeps coming up. I would not expect to be able to swap my old Woody +1 Plate Mail be swapped for Lucky Plate Armor.

Because of TD's prior generosity in allowing 2 URs that I can think of to be traded in when they were eclipsed.

Yep. And I think this is a similar situation. If not a straight swap, at least allow spending a few trade goods or dex item or something to do an upgrade.

Boilerplate wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote:

Xavon wrote:

WaterSomePlants wrote: Hmmm.... Can the Lenses of Vital Insight be swapped for Lenses of Seer Sight?

I don't see why this keeps coming up. I would not expect to be able to swap my old Woody +1 Plate Mail be swapped for Lucky Plate Armor.

Because of TD's prior generosity in allowing 2 URs that I can think of to be traded in when they were eclipsed.

Yep. And I think this is a similar situation. If not a straight swap, at least allow spending a few trade goods or dex item or something to do an upgrade.

I don't agree with most of Xavon's ideas, but I'm with him 100% on this one. This is ridiculous.

LoDS and CoS were nerfed for game balancing. Those tokens were changed and retroactively made null in their original printing.

The same thing happened with Druid's Wild Vestments.

We have clear parameters for when trade-ins were previously offered. These tokens were straight-up errata'd.

Anyone with Lenses of Vital Insight still has a Lenses of Vital Insight. They can still equip them and still utilize the token exactly as printed on the text.

If you want the +2 dex, sell off your Vital Insight to a red player and put the funds towards a 2020 PYP.

I love the Charm of Glory and would definitely add it to my collection but it is too OP, especially with Legendary Rings. Previously you had to give up your Neck slot (Hand of Glory) or your Hands (Gloves of Glory) to get an extra Ring. Now you only have to give up 1 of your 3 (or 5 or 8 or 10) Charm slots (Charm Bracelets, Charm Necklace and new Arcane Earcuff).

I still feel we need to set maximum numbers on each slot where there is or is introduced a slot expander (e.g. you can never have more than 9 IS, 8 Charms, etc. - just arbitrary numbers there).

This way we can print tokens with slot expanding but know that it helps build diversity rather then significant power creep.

Ed

Matthew Hayward wrote: My thoughts on the overall slot expanders... wow! This will really shake up some builds!

Matthew Hayward wrote: As excited as I am about all this, I worry a bit about how many are happening at once, and what collecting will be like for those who miss out on this bonanza.

I hope the 6 slot expanders can be put into a reprint rotation or something starting in 2022 with 1 of each of the 6 tokens above being reprinted each year so long as there's demand.

This has been my main concern with the 2020 class of URs. It's too much front-loading. If we move forward as-is, I like your idea of a rotating reprint schedule. I'd personally prefer to see one in every year starting in 2022. Throw in Orbits, Charm Bracelets, and Charm Necklace if you have to, but having 2 options every year seems like a good idea.

Didn’t read all posts so didn’t link to quote if already posted,

Bracers of Reckless fury, if the purpose is for it to be used by all classes, it probably should be worded:

-2 AC (no AC penalty for Barb)
+6 damage w/ 2 hand melee weapon
+4 damage w/ 1 hand melee weapon

(Needs abbreviations)

Kakitahan wrote: Didn’t read all posts so didn’t link to quote if already posted,

Bracers of Reckless fury, if the purpose is for it to be used by all classes, it probably should be worded:

-2 AC (no AC penalty for Barb)
+6 damage w/ 2 hand melee weapon
+4 damage w/ 1 hand melee weapon

(Needs abbreviations)

I like this.

Philip Goodman wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote:

Rob F wrote:

Jeff321 wrote:

Flik wrote:

Matt Goodman wrote: The barbarian bracers should probably have 2H weapons only.

I’m inclined to agree, otherwise they become BIS for all melee classes? Maybe not for ranged ranger or most rogues that actually want to sneak attack.

Agreed

Also agree

Also agree.

Alternatively, just limit it to: Barbarian, Fighters, Paladin.

Another agreement from me and class limiting would also work.

I'd go for either suggestion, but I'd prefer the class limitation.

Still think the -1 con should be put on the arcane items, and then add the +3 con should be part of the set bonus.

Let's starting making a cost to slot expanders. In this case either pay a con penalty or lock in 3 slots for the set (not much of a penalty considering it has 2 expanders and an awesome belt)

MasterED wrote: I love the Charm of Glory and would definitely add it to my collection but it is too OP, especially with Legendary Rings. Previously you had to give up your Neck slot (Hand of Glory) or your Hands (Gloves of Glory) to get an extra Ring. Now you only have to give up 1 of your 3 (or 5 or 8 or 10) Charm slots (Charm Bracelets, Charm Necklace and new Arcane Earcuff).

I still feel we need to set maximum numbers on each slot where there is or is introduced a slot expander (e.g. you can never have more than 9 IS, 8 Charms, etc. - just arbitrary numbers there).

This way we can print tokens with slot expanding but know that it helps build diversity rather then significant power creep.

Ed

I agree this could work as well.

Endgame wrote: Still think the -1 con should be put on the arcane items, and then add the +3 con should be part of the set bonus.

Let's starting making a cost to slot expanders. In this case either pay a con penalty or lock in 3 slots for the set (not much of a penalty considering it has 2 expanders and an awesome belt)

Do you not feel that putting a cost on slot expanders now is unfair to newer players? Essentially the older players got all of their slot expanders w/out a negative side-effect, but we aren't giving that option to the new players? I totally get what you are saying, but I feel negatives on the tokens now would more adversely affect new players. Old players will just stick with their out of print tokens that didn't hurt them.

jpotter wrote:

Endgame wrote: Still think the -1 con should be put on the arcane items, and then add the +3 con should be part of the set bonus.

Let's starting making a cost to slot expanders. In this case either pay a con penalty or lock in 3 slots for the set (not much of a penalty considering it has 2 expanders and an awesome belt)

Do you not feel that putting a cost on slot expanders now is unfair to newer players? Essentially the older players got all of their slot expanders w/out a negative side-effect, but we aren't giving that option to the new players? I totally get what you are saying, but I feel negatives on the tokens now would more adversely affect new players. Old players will just stick with their out of print tokens that didn't hurt them.

Completely agree as a new player who has to pay huge prices on old out of print tokens. Though honestly I wouldn’t mind the penalty if you didn’t have the set.

Just pleaser don’t print all these good tokens now and then put slot expander limitations. Only hurts new players.