Welcome, Guest
Username: Password: Remember me

TOPIC: Build Diversity

Build Diversity 7 months 6 days ago #85

I agree with Wade that I hate the idea of merging classes by giving INT/WIS bonus allowing other classes abilities.
I also agree with Jedibcg that I really enjoy working out the puzzles.
I dislike the idea of INT/WIS providing a bonus because Jeff’s puzzles are sometimes so obtuse I have to run a dungeon 2 or 3 times to figure them out.
Although the stats don’t do anything currently, it would feel like a waste for this type of effect.
Please visit my fledgling token store.
truedungeon.com/forum?view=topic&catid=583&id=247486

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Build Diversity 7 months 6 days ago #86

I like the idea for Int/Wis/Cha being linked to allowable slots. For example, beads, tombs, and figurines. Possiblly 1 extra for every 4 points above 14. Example: 22 charisma allows 3 figurines, 22 intelligence allows for 3 tombs, and 22 wisdom allows for 3 beads.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Build Diversity 7 months 6 days ago #87

My definition of diversity as it pertains to RPG systems and TD is: Where BiS is a discussion not a given for every slot on every character type.
I think TD has an easy path to victory there by using slots for not just combat bonuses but for puzzle room bonuses as well.
Also any token in design that is being considered to be slotless needs to be heavily thought over because the slot count limit is a good way to force choice.

I will be entering the discussions for future tokens as soon as I am off vacation in a week so you will be able to see examples of puzzle room tokens there.
Spoooooooooooooooon!

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Build Diversity 7 months 6 days ago #88

Happy Thanksgiving!
I would like to chime in with; I firmly believe that although it’s easy to think everyone else is just like us, I believe the Vast Majority of players will never have what us crazy collectors call BIS.
Certainly empirically some tokens are better than others and unless one is willing to spend a significant amount of money, they will never have those BIS tokens
Therefore those folks have more choices for tokens and therefore more build diversity.
Please visit my fledgling token store.
truedungeon.com/forum?view=topic&catid=583&id=247486

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Build Diversity 7 months 6 days ago #89

There are a lot of countervailing forces at play.

There’s a strong lobby for build diversity.
There’s another strong lobby to reprint older BIS tokens. There are a few who want it both ways, but I think it’s not possible to do both.

The bad news is, they are at odds. People demand reprints of older tokens instead of alternatives, no matter how good they are. When Jeff acquiesces, that BIS token is more firmly locked in, and the cheaper price makes it more so. Worse, it takes up a spot in that year’s release that could have been used for a diversity token.

If we truly want diversity, then we should stop reprinting old stuff. If we want cheap reprints, then we should concede we’re not going to have diversity.

I don’t think you can make them both happy in the current environment. We have to pick one. For now, the de facto consensus appears to be that diversity is just not that important. It’s a shame, really.
barkley.neo.rr.com -->see my trade thread HERE , my eBay store HERE or my web store HERE
"Ceci n'est pas une pipe" - Magritte

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Build Diversity 7 months 6 days ago #90

Brad Mortensen wrote: If we truly want diversity, then we should stop reprinting old stuff. If we want cheap reprints, then we should concede we’re not going to have diversity.

Negative. We covered this earlier in the thread.

We have 4 different melee gloves that do different things

+5 Str -2 Dex
+5 2H damage
+3 Melee hit
+4 Str

They fit different roles.

None is decidedly best.

They are hardly available (if at all)

Sure, you COULD make new tokens, but why when you have variety in existing (yet unavailable) tokens?

*Edit*

Note, that we previously had a 5th interesting glove option for melee types, Gloves of Glory.

They could have been used for Ring of the Eel, Ring of Brilliance, whatever.

Since we got a NEW token (as requested) in the Charm of Glory, Gloves of Glory are almost certainly forever obsolete (excluding the rare instance where you have all your charm slots filled, can't fit another expander in a different slot, AND still want a 3rd ring).

In the case, the new token damaged diversity. This is bad. We do not want this.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Last edit: by Endgame.

Build Diversity 7 months 5 days ago #91

Omg not again

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Build Diversity 7 months 5 days ago #92

  • Harlax
  • Harlax's Avatar
  • Away
  • 8th Level
  • Supporter
  • Baruk Khazad!
  • Posts: 7167

Endgame wrote:

Brad Mortensen wrote: If we truly want diversity, then we should stop reprinting old stuff. If we want cheap reprints, then we should concede we’re not going to have diversity.

Negative. We covered this earlier in the thread.

We have 4 different melee gloves that do different things

+5 Str -2 Dex
+5 2H damage
+3 Melee hit
+4 Str

They fit different roles.

None is decidedly best.

They are hardly available (if at all)

Sure, you COULD make new tokens, but why when you have variety in existing (yet unavailable) tokens?

*Edit*

Note, that we previously had a 5th interesting glove option for melee types, Gloves of Glory.

They could have been used for Ring of the Eel, Ring of Brilliance, whatever.

Since we got a NEW token (as requested) in the Charm of Glory, Gloves of Glory are almost certainly forever obsolete (excluding the rare instance where you have all your charm slots filled, can't fit another expander in a different slot, AND still want a 3rd ring).

In the case, the new token damaged diversity. This is bad. We do not want this.


Who is “we”? Since you acknowledge it was a token that “was requested” and went through the feedback process.
D&D teaches all the important lessons in life - the low blow, the cheap shot, the back stab, the double cross. - Jerry Marsischky

Let them trap us. We have our swords. - Elric of Melnibone.

You try to get them to play the game, but all they want to do is play the rules. - Ardak Kumerian

I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend - Faramir

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Build Diversity 7 months 5 days ago #93

Harlax wrote:

Endgame wrote:

Brad Mortensen wrote: If we truly want diversity, then we should stop reprinting old stuff. If we want cheap reprints, then we should concede we’re not going to have diversity.

Negative. We covered this earlier in the thread.

We have 4 different melee gloves that do different things

+5 Str -2 Dex
+5 2H damage
+3 Melee hit
+4 Str

They fit different roles.

None is decidedly best.

They are hardly available (if at all)

Sure, you COULD make new tokens, but why when you have variety in existing (yet unavailable) tokens?

*Edit*

Note, that we previously had a 5th interesting glove option for melee types, Gloves of Glory.

They could have been used for Ring of the Eel, Ring of Brilliance, whatever.

Since we got a NEW token (as requested) in the Charm of Glory, Gloves of Glory are almost certainly forever obsolete (excluding the rare instance where you have all your charm slots filled, can't fit another expander in a different slot, AND still want a 3rd ring).

In the case, the new token damaged diversity. This is bad. We do not want this.


Who is “we”? Since you acknowledge it was a token that “was requested” and went through the feedback process.

If we are focusing on the last bit there, we (the token consuming community) received the token “charm of glory”. It falls under the category that Brad wants (new token) , but it does not have the desired effect (reduced build variety). Better variety would have been achieved with a hand of glory reprint.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Build Diversity 7 months 5 days ago #94

I’m sorry, but I don’t understand how a new token reduces diversity. I do understand that you believe it. So that’s all I have on the subject.
barkley.neo.rr.com -->see my trade thread HERE , my eBay store HERE or my web store HERE
"Ceci n'est pas une pipe" - Magritte

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Build Diversity 7 months 5 days ago #95

  • Harlax
  • Harlax's Avatar
  • Away
  • 8th Level
  • Supporter
  • Baruk Khazad!
  • Posts: 7167

Endgame wrote:

Harlax wrote:

Endgame wrote:

Brad Mortensen wrote: If we truly want diversity, then we should stop reprinting old stuff. If we want cheap reprints, then we should concede we’re not going to have diversity.

Negative. We covered this earlier in the thread.

We have 4 different melee gloves that do different things

+5 Str -2 Dex
+5 2H damage
+3 Melee hit
+4 Str

They fit different roles.

None is decidedly best.

They are hardly available (if at all)

Sure, you COULD make new tokens, but why when you have variety in existing (yet unavailable) tokens?

*Edit*

Note, that we previously had a 5th interesting glove option for melee types, Gloves of Glory.

They could have been used for Ring of the Eel, Ring of Brilliance, whatever.

Since we got a NEW token (as requested) in the Charm of Glory, Gloves of Glory are almost certainly forever obsolete (excluding the rare instance where you have all your charm slots filled, can't fit another expander in a different slot, AND still want a 3rd ring).

In the case, the new token damaged diversity. This is bad. We do not want this.


Who is “we”? Since you acknowledge it was a token that “was requested” and went through the feedback process.

If we are focusing on the last bit there, we (the token consuming community) received the token “charm of glory”. It falls under the category that Brad wants (new token) , but it does not have the desired effect (reduced build variety). Better variety would have been achieved with a hand of glory reprint.


My sons Druid build uses Gloves of Glory. He regularly plays Nightmare and epic. I do not find them obsolete. Not usable in a lot of builds, but not obsolete.
D&D teaches all the important lessons in life - the low blow, the cheap shot, the back stab, the double cross. - Jerry Marsischky

Let them trap us. We have our swords. - Elric of Melnibone.

You try to get them to play the game, but all they want to do is play the rules. - Ardak Kumerian

I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend - Faramir

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Build Diversity 7 months 5 days ago #96

Brad Mortensen wrote: I’m sorry, but I don’t understand how a new token reduces diversity. I do understand that you believe it. So that’s all I have on the subject.

imagine new gloves: +10 spell damage, + 10 str and +10 dex.

It’s a new token. It will reduce build diversity because It’s better than most (all?) other gloves.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Last edit: by Endgame.
Time to create page: 0.213 seconds