TOPIC: 2021: RE-PRINT Ideas?

I'd hold off on Earcuff of Orbits till 2022.

It doesn't make sense (to me) to have Arcane Bracelets, and Earcuff of Orbits all in print for PyPs at the same time - I believe they will cannibalize purchases from each other leading to lower demand for each than there would be otherwise. As slot expanders, I want as many of these in circulation as possible so new players can get their hands on them down the line.

I do think they should be reprinted in 2022 or shortly thereafter, as they are hard to find and work well in a lot of builds.

Arcanist Kolixela wrote:

Fiddy wrote:

Wade Schwendemann wrote: As for the other glove proposal, would we want them to be useful if someone doesn't equip a shield? I suppose that would broaden their appeal.

If you don't require the shield, then you actually help dual-wielding Rangers and Monks more than sword-and-board. It'd be nice if that gap didn't keep growing.

"While equipping only one usable 1 hand melee weapon"
"(May use shields or off hand items that are not weapons)"

That should eliminate the issue of Monk/Ranger power creep?

Could also just require a shield and make it not be able to be equipped by Monk or Ranger. A tad less flexible but also much easier to understand how it works.

Daniel White wrote:

Arcanist Kolixela wrote:

Fiddy wrote:

Wade Schwendemann wrote: As for the other glove proposal, would we want them to be useful if someone doesn't equip a shield? I suppose that would broaden their appeal.

If you don't require the shield, then you actually help dual-wielding Rangers and Monks more than sword-and-board. It'd be nice if that gap didn't keep growing.

"While equipping only one usable 1 hand melee weapon"
"(May use shields or off hand items that are not weapons)"

That should eliminate the issue of Monk/Ranger power creep?

Could also just require a shield and make it not be able to be equipped by Monk or Ranger. A tad less flexible but also much easier to understand how it works.

I do like the original wording - if nothing else it means that Rogues aren't locked out of equipping the token due to not being able to equip any shields, and melee Rogues can be pretty tough to play at low rarity levels due to the low STR so a set of gloves which are easy to find and provide one-handed hit bonuses would definitely help.

Iross wrote:

Daniel White wrote:

Arcanist Kolixela wrote:

Fiddy wrote:

Wade Schwendemann wrote: As for the other glove proposal, would we want them to be useful if someone doesn't equip a shield? I suppose that would broaden their appeal.

If you don't require the shield, then you actually help dual-wielding Rangers and Monks more than sword-and-board. It'd be nice if that gap didn't keep growing.

"While equipping only one usable 1 hand melee weapon"
"(May use shields or off hand items that are not weapons)"

That should eliminate the issue of Monk/Ranger power creep?

Could also just require a shield and make it not be able to be equipped by Monk or Ranger. A tad less flexible but also much easier to understand how it works.

I do like the original wording - if nothing else it means that Rogues aren't locked out of equipping the token due to not being able to equip any shields, and melee Rogues can be pretty tough to play at low rarity levels due to the low STR so a set of gloves which are easy to find and provide one-handed hit bonuses would definitely help.

I envisioned these gloves at UR, but that's just me. I think Gauntlets of Ogre Power would be a pretty good staple rare level hand item.

I was thinking UR as well, "easy to find" may not have been the best choice of wording, I was thinking more along the lines that it would be in print and doesn't involve transmuting so would be an easy choice of starting UR for anyone who isn't in a position to spend too much on their tokens.

Looking around the forums I'm not seeing any available +2 Staff of Power.

It's come up for reprint a few times and been replaced with new tokens each time.

I'd say it should hit the reprint window this year, it's getting FAR too rare.

Daniel White wrote:

Arcanist Kolixela wrote:

Fiddy wrote:

Wade Schwendemann wrote: As for the other glove proposal, would we want them to be useful if someone doesn't equip a shield? I suppose that would broaden their appeal.

If you don't require the shield, then you actually help dual-wielding Rangers and Monks more than sword-and-board. It'd be nice if that gap didn't keep growing.

"While equipping only one usable 1 hand melee weapon"
"(May use shields or off hand items that are not weapons)"

That should eliminate the issue of Monk/Ranger power creep?

Could also just require a shield and make it not be able to be equipped by Monk or Ranger. A tad less flexible but also much easier to understand how it works.

Rogues would be out too.

Also this is exactly the kind of good intentioned meddling that will lead to calls for a mithral reprint 2-3 years down the line again.

Nightshade’s +2 Shortsword (it and the viper strike set are the only ways for the rogue to get double sneak attack damage on a Crit)

Gauntlets of Linked Fury

Matthew Hayward wrote: Nightshade’s +2 Shortsword (it and the viper strike set are the only ways for the rogue to get double sneak attack damage on a Crit)

Yes please god. Been looking for one for years now. One got auctioned off last year and it was the only one seen since. Actually I gave up on looking for one and bought a +2 flaming blade instead this year.

Picc wrote:

Daniel White wrote:

Arcanist Kolixela wrote:

Fiddy wrote:

Wade Schwendemann wrote: As for the other glove proposal, would we want them to be useful if someone doesn't equip a shield? I suppose that would broaden their appeal.

If you don't require the shield, then you actually help dual-wielding Rangers and Monks more than sword-and-board. It'd be nice if that gap didn't keep growing.

"While equipping only one usable 1 hand melee weapon"
"(May use shields or off hand items that are not weapons)"

That should eliminate the issue of Monk/Ranger power creep?

Could also just require a shield and make it not be able to be equipped by Monk or Ranger. A tad less flexible but also much easier to understand how it works.

Rogues would be out too.

Also this is exactly the kind of good intentioned meddling that will lead to calls for a mithral reprint 2-3 years down the line again.

I'm totally onboard though with some sort of restriction on future tokens to keep the Monk & Ranger gap from increasing. Maybe somehow just give half of the bonus to Monks & Rangers, so that it evens out for both of their weapons?

Mike Steele wrote:

Picc wrote:

Daniel White wrote:

Arcanist Kolixela wrote:

Fiddy wrote:

Wade Schwendemann wrote: As for the other glove proposal, would we want them to be useful if someone doesn't equip a shield? I suppose that would broaden their appeal.

If you don't require the shield, then you actually help dual-wielding Rangers and Monks more than sword-and-board. It'd be nice if that gap didn't keep growing.

"While equipping only one usable 1 hand melee weapon"
"(May use shields or off hand items that are not weapons)"

That should eliminate the issue of Monk/Ranger power creep?

Could also just require a shield and make it not be able to be equipped by Monk or Ranger. A tad less flexible but also much easier to understand how it works.

Rogues would be out too.

Also this is exactly the kind of good intentioned meddling that will lead to calls for a mithral reprint 2-3 years down the line again.

I'm totally onboard though with some sort of restriction on future tokens to keep the Monk & Ranger gap from increasing. Maybe somehow just give half of the bonus to Monks & Rangers, so that it evens out for both of their weapons?

Character card redesign that starts the ranger at str 7?

Mike Steele wrote:

Picc wrote:

Daniel White wrote:

Arcanist Kolixela wrote:

Fiddy wrote:

Wade Schwendemann wrote: As for the other glove proposal, would we want them to be useful if someone doesn't equip a shield? I suppose that would broaden their appeal.

If you don't require the shield, then you actually help dual-wielding Rangers and Monks more than sword-and-board. It'd be nice if that gap didn't keep growing.

"While equipping only one usable 1 hand melee weapon"
"(May use shields or off hand items that are not weapons)"

That should eliminate the issue of Monk/Ranger power creep?

Could also just require a shield and make it not be able to be equipped by Monk or Ranger. A tad less flexible but also much easier to understand how it works.

Rogues would be out too.

Also this is exactly the kind of good intentioned meddling that will lead to calls for a mithral reprint 2-3 years down the line again.

I'm totally onboard though with some sort of restriction on future tokens to keep the Monk & Ranger gap from increasing. Maybe somehow just give half of the bonus to Monks & Rangers, so that it evens out for both of their weapons?

Several suggestions were submitted about character card redesign that would apply +melee damage bonuses to only 1 weapon per attack round, if both hit, one weapon would be token damage only. That'd pull Ranger and Monk back in range with other classes, more consistent hits, less overwhelming damage.

That change would probably be too severe of a change to keep the classes good but something on these lines would be the way to close that damage gap.