TOPIC: Almost Final Transmuted Token Images! Please give these your look-see!

Justice wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote:

Rob F wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote: It appears to me that the reason the Avenger conversation is not converging is because people are valuing the fact that it's in the mainhand slot differently.

Might I suggest we end this discussion by:

1. Move the legendary to the neck slot.

2. Give it powers similar to:

+6 STR
May guard 3 players total
Grace 2/game
+15 LoH 1/game
Auto-kill evil outsiders om 20 while wielding +2 Holy Avenger

3. In the recipe, have one of the ingredients be:

One of +2 Holy Avenger or Amulet of Guarding


I think the above neck may seem "looks" a lot more like a legendary than the current weapon (also it makes the guard buff permanent).

To those concerned about "now 40% of the party uses the Paladin's AC!!!" - just have monsters balanced to have: 1/3 attacks melee, 1/3 ranged, 1/3 spell/AoE. Problem solved.

What about the Relic +3 Holy Avenger?

Drop it and similar middle ground:

Amulet of Nimh:

+3 STR
Guard 2
Grace 1/game
+10 to LoH

So you suggest no guard added to the relic?

If this is the case, in your runs, which would you have your pally use to protect you and your team (if you are not the pally) Amulet of guarding or the proposed relic?

Whoops - no - 2 guard on the relic, 3 on the legendary.

I suppose it is a matter of degrees. Since damage is what were talking about, I would either add damage to evil, or let guard cover the whole run.

Otherwise, we will be saving it for the last room anyhow.

Monk is still ridiculous, and can now stun virtually every combat.

Kirk Bauer wrote: The idea of special tokens having two sides is pretty cool, but it will likely require a special mold. And the stickers are put on by hand so that would increase cost as well. So not good for a general solution but it would be cool for something really special or unique (which makes the mold cost prohibitive I'm sure).

I've long thought a double sided token would be perfect for something like a Deck of Many Things token, where the reverse side would list the various effects.

Hi Jeff and Druegar,

I think the Ranger and Paladin Legendary tokens are more balanced now, thanks. I do have concerns about the cumulative amount of extra damage the Barbarian and Monk have from their Legendaries plus URs. It seems like huge increases for classes that were already doing a ton of damage.

Personally I think it's a mistake to allow the Monk to apply his melee attacks to ranged as well, it makes the Monk the best at dealing damage at both ranged and melee. Since the Monk is the best at Melee damage, it seems more balanced to have the Monk be more limited in ranged attack ability.

Most of the other transmutes aren't very exciting. I really preferred the +6 Fort Saves Ring to the current version. The Gem of Last Hope transmute is great as an Elixir of Life reprint, I hope the recipe is almost entirely a ton of mystic silk, darkwood plank, and philosophers Stone, maybe it can act as a sink for those plentiful trade item tokens.

Matthew Hayward wrote: Might I propose for Grace, the effect be: Roll a d20 twice, keeping the higher result?

This:

a. Is better than +3
b. Is more fun, who doesn't love rolling dice
c. Has a built in reason why it needs to be declared before the roll

The expected roll is 13.8, around 3.3 higher than one d20.

+1

I keep trying to think of a good balance for the Paladin legendary path because clearly our Paladin friends want more out of the token (insert irony here).

What I keep coming back to is the Paladin token doesn't occupy the neck slot. If you don't think that is relevant to the balancing ask yourself this question. After we print the Paladin token we say ALL other classes besides Bard/Paladin get +1 Neck slot (e.g. can wear two different Neck items - their legendary and one other). That is a significant power.

Secondly, the DPS on the Avenger weapon series is on par with the top DPS weapons of other glass cannon DPS classes (Monk/Ranger). This isn't as strong of a power as say an extra Neck slot but it also shouldn't be ignored.

I am hoping that TPTB can find a good balance but right now I am guess a few Paladins are going to be unhappy. All I can suggest is be Paladin-like.

Ed

Matthew Hayward wrote: It appears to me that the reason the Avenger conversation is not converging is because people are valuing the fact that it's in the mainhand slot differently.

Might I suggest we end this discussion by:

1. Move the legendary to the neck slot.

2. Give it powers similar to:

+6 STR
May guard 3 players total
Grace 2/game
+15 LoH 1/game
Auto-kill evil outsiders om 20 while wielding +2 Holy Avenger

3. In the recipe, have one of the ingredients be:

One of +2 Holy Avenger or Amulet of Guarding


I think the above neck item "looks" a lot more like a legendary than the current weapon (also it makes the guard buff permanent).

To those concerned about "now 40% of the party uses the Paladin's AC!!!" - just have monsters balanced to have: 1/3 attacks melee, 1/3 ranged, 1/3 spell/AoE. Problem solved.

I would support this concept. I would rather have a good neck slot item then the current Holy avenger. Maybe make the extra damage sacred and if the auto kill was kept just change it to any holy sword to give room to improve in the future.

Wayne Rhodes wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote: It appears to me that the reason the Avenger conversation is not converging is because people are valuing the fact that it's in the mainhand slot differently.

Might I suggest we end this discussion by:

1. Move the legendary to the neck slot.

2. Give it powers similar to:

+6 STR
May guard 3 players total
Grace 2/game
+15 LoH 1/game
Auto-kill evil outsiders om 20 while wielding +2 Holy Avenger

3. In the recipe, have one of the ingredients be:

One of +2 Holy Avenger or Amulet of Guarding


I think the above neck item "looks" a lot more like a legendary than the current weapon (also it makes the guard buff permanent).

To those concerned about "now 40% of the party uses the Paladin's AC!!!" - just have monsters balanced to have: 1/3 attacks melee, 1/3 ranged, 1/3 spell/AoE. Problem solved.

I would support this concept. I would rather have a good neck slot item then the current Holy avenger. Maybe make the extra damage sacred and if the auto kill was kept just change it to any holy sword to give room to improve in the future.

I agree that this actually wouldn't be a bad option. It might appease all the non-paladin players arguing the "free neck slot", and paladin players might be motivated to make it.

The real irony is, most of the powers on the token benefit any player in the party other than the paladin.

Raven wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote: Might I propose for Grace, the effect be: Roll a d20 twice, keeping the higher result?

Another +1. Like this idea a lot.
This:

a. Is better than +3
b. Is more fun, who doesn't love rolling dice
c. Has a built in reason why it needs to be declared before the roll

The expected roll is 13.8, around 3.3 higher than one d20.

+1

PalaDan wrote:

Wayne Rhodes wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote: It appears to me that the reason the Avenger conversation is not converging is because people are valuing the fact that it's in the mainhand slot differently.

Might I suggest we end this discussion by:

1. Move the legendary to the neck slot.

2. Give it powers similar to:

+6 STR
May guard 3 players total
Grace 2/game
+15 LoH 1/game
Auto-kill evil outsiders om 20 while wielding +2 Holy Avenger

3. In the recipe, have one of the ingredients be:

One of +2 Holy Avenger or Amulet of Guarding


I think the above neck item "looks" a lot more like a legendary than the current weapon (also it makes the guard buff permanent).

To those concerned about "now 40% of the party uses the Paladin's AC!!!" - just have monsters balanced to have: 1/3 attacks melee, 1/3 ranged, 1/3 spell/AoE. Problem solved.

I would support this concept. I would rather have a good neck slot item then the current Holy avenger. Maybe make the extra damage sacred and if the auto kill was kept just change it to any holy sword to give room to improve in the future.

I agree that this actually wouldn't be a bad option. It might appease all the non-paladin players arguing the "free neck slot", and paladin players might be motivated to make it.

The real irony is, most of the powers on the token benefit any player in the party other than the paladin.

If there isn’t enough time to make the changes it might be best to drop the paladin legendary for 2020 all together. I don’t think many of us expected 4 legendary tokens this year so moving back to 3 to me is better than the paladin legendary not being good.

Wayne Rhodes wrote:

PalaDan wrote:

Wayne Rhodes wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote: It appears to me that the reason the Avenger conversation is not converging is because people are valuing the fact that it's in the mainhand slot differently.

Might I suggest we end this discussion by:

1. Move the legendary to the neck slot.

2. Give it powers similar to:

+6 STR
May guard 3 players total
Grace 2/game
+15 LoH 1/game
Auto-kill evil outsiders om 20 while wielding +2 Holy Avenger

3. In the recipe, have one of the ingredients be:

One of +2 Holy Avenger or Amulet of Guarding


I think the above neck item "looks" a lot more like a legendary than the current weapon (also it makes the guard buff permanent).

To those concerned about "now 40% of the party uses the Paladin's AC!!!" - just have monsters balanced to have: 1/3 attacks melee, 1/3 ranged, 1/3 spell/AoE. Problem solved.

I would support this concept. I would rather have a good neck slot item then the current Holy avenger. Maybe make the extra damage sacred and if the auto kill was kept just change it to any holy sword to give room to improve in the future.

I agree that this actually wouldn't be a bad option. It might appease all the non-paladin players arguing the "free neck slot", and paladin players might be motivated to make it.

The real irony is, most of the powers on the token benefit any player in the party other than the paladin.

If there isn’t enough time to make the changes it might be best to drop the paladin legendary for 2020 all together. I don’t think many of us expected 4 legendary tokens this year so moving back to 3 to me is better than the paladin legendary not being good.

Good point

I wanted to respond with some positive feedback for the Monk relic and legendary. I think they look great. Adding in the Psychic power and +1 use is especially cool. I think the damage could be reduced by 1 or 2 and they would still be pretty great.

I will break down my interpretation of it and discuss a few things:

Monk Relic

• +5 Sacred dmg FoB
  
• Stun Fist works 19-20
  
• may hit Ranged target with Flurry of Blows

Monk Legendary

• +7 Sacred dmg FoB
  
• Stun Fist works 18-20
  
• May hit Ranged target w/ FoB
  
• Imbues Psychic power w/ +1 additional use
  
• Unlocks up to power 7

I like segmenting the effects into other recognizable tokens, if I can, and have done so below:

Monk Relic

• +5 melee damage
  
• Ring of Stunning Fist
  
• Gloves of the Flying Fist

Monk Legendary

• +7 melee damage
  
• +1 Ring of Stunning Fist (if an ultra rare version of Ring of Stunning Fist were to exist)
  
• Gloves of the Flying Fist
  
• Dark Disciple’s Shirt
  
• The effect of having 7 teeth

I was initially apprehensive about seeing the legendary gaining the effects of all 7 teeth. I felt that it detracts from my tooth investment so far and only grants me access to power 7 one year early.

But then I considered how annoying it would be for someone to obtain or create this legendary in several years and then have to chase down difficult-to-find teeth to power it up. I think granting access to 7 teeth powers is okay and one of the less messy ways to make it work.

I really like the granting psychic power and +1 additional use similar to Dark Disciple’s Shirt without the restriction of using a different power. Very flavorful.

It is nice to see Gloves of the Flying Fist in the monk relic and legendary.

The damage of the relic and legendary is on the higher end, as I mentioned before. Reducing the damage by 1 or 2 may be appropriate and would still have the relic and legendary token on my "must make" list.

All in all, I am really excited about the current state of the monk relic and legendary tokens and am happy with changes made over the revision iterations.

Thank you again, TD, for letting us be a part of token development and listening to our feedback!