TOPIC: Transmute Token Ideas

Matthew Hayward wrote:

edwin wrote:

Matthew Galambus wrote: I know this is the year of class legendaries/relics, but there is no +3 Ranged weapon that isn't thrown.

If you are referring to not thrown and able to attack at range, there is the legendary bow and other tokens that add to hit at +3 or more.

I think he's saying there is no Relic, ranged, non-thrown weapon with a to-hit of +3.

So making something like a +3 relic sling or a +3 relic shortbow might be nice for people.

You could start with this 2019 UR +2 stunning lt crossbow and work out a receipe to make it a relic +3 stunning lt crossbow. Or come out with an UR +2 weapon to convert

I don't think precedent should drive transmutes and recipies.

Your points about leaving URs around for teeth are valid, but less compelling given that the skull will be a PyP next year.

I agree that adding in a rare or not makes little difference to most of those making the grand eldritch item.

I think its fine to adjust reciies as time goes on. More components, more tokens, whatever.

I think Fiddy's idea deserves consideration.

A once per year ability from RO7P is not comparable to an every run power (from Grill), at least not IMO.

Wade Schwendemann wrote: I don't think precedent should drive transmutes and recipies.

Your points about leaving URs around for teeth are valid, but less compelling given that the skull will be a PyP next year.

I agree that adding in a rare or not makes little difference to most of those making the grand eldritch item.

I think its fine to adjust reciies as time goes on. More components, more tokens, whatever.

I think Fiddy's idea deserves consideration.

A once per year ability from RO7P is not comparable to an every run power (from Grill), at least not IMO.

If an in-print rare were included in the recipe, I wouldn't object too strongly.

Mike Steele wrote:

Wade Schwendemann wrote: I don't think precedent should drive transmutes and recipies.

Your points about leaving URs around for teeth are valid, but less compelling given that the skull will be a PyP next year.

I agree that adding in a rare or not makes little difference to most of those making the grand eldritch item.

I think its fine to adjust reciies as time goes on. More components, more tokens, whatever.

I think Fiddy's idea deserves consideration.

A once per year ability from RO7P is not comparable to an every run power (from Grill), at least not IMO.

If an in-print rare were included in the recipe, I wouldn't object too strongly.

Again, I assume no one would.

Its more about imbuing the Grand Eldritch item with an ability the individual teeth dont have, that would be useable every play.

Doing so should require a higher cost, IMO.

The only differences between the individual rod segments and the completed rod are
1. Part of an eldritch set (very valuable)
2. Ability to play a sub class once oer year (value far more questionable)
These 2 powers cost one of e aza h trade good.

We know the completed teeth will be part of the eldritch set, so one of each trade good is a reasonable cost for this value plus access to a subclass.

If we want to allow the teeth to access the subclass, then I'm ok with the current recipe.

If we want more than that (imbuing psychic power for example), the recipie should cost more.

Wade Schwendemann wrote:

Mike Steele wrote:

Wade Schwendemann wrote: I don't think precedent should drive transmutes and recipies.

Your points about leaving URs around for teeth are valid, but less compelling given that the skull will be a PyP next year.

I agree that adding in a rare or not makes little difference to most of those making the grand eldritch item.

I think its fine to adjust reciies as time goes on. More components, more tokens, whatever.

I think Fiddy's idea deserves consideration.

A once per year ability from RO7P is not comparable to an every run power (from Grill), at least not IMO.

If an in-print rare were included in the recipe, I wouldn't object too strongly.

Again, I assume no one would.

Its more about imbuing the Grand Eldritch item with an ability the individual teeth dont have, that would be useable every play.

Doing so should require a higher cost, IMO.

The only differences between the individual rod segments and the completed rod are
1. Part of an eldritch set (very valuable)
2. Ability to play a sub class once oer year (value far more questionable)
These 2 powers cost one of e aza h trade good.

We know the completed teeth will be part of the eldritch set, so one of each trade good is a reasonable cost for this value plus access to a subclass.

If we want to allow the teeth to access the subclass, then I'm ok with the current recipe.

If we want more than that (imbuing psychic power for example), the recipie should cost more.

We'll agree to disagree - that's the beauty of these token debates, Jeff gets to see lots of sides of issues.

Wait, is there talk of the teeth giving accesses to a sub class? Hopefully a Psionicist?

Matthew Hayward wrote: For those of you with feelings about the Wizard Legendary, I encourage you to Please put your preferences in the informal poll by picking a column, labeling it with your name, and filling in the options by end of day Saturday August 8th

docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1L_b-2cnyVo3Qfx0y0L4pmz5UFBBjDBEEaf805H9VzcE/edit#gid=0

I will summarize the results and post them here on Sunday.

NOTE: This document is intended as a simple way to aggregate sentiment from Wizard players around the stunning variety of proposed mechanics for the Wizard Legendary, for TPTB to consider as input. It is not intended to settle the matter of how the Wizard legendary should be, or represent the opinions of everyone who didn't contribute.

What do Wizards and Elf Wizards want in our Legendary?

Thank you to everyone who contributed!

In the final analysis:

• 16 Wizard interested people put in their thoughts
• Which evaluated a summary of ideas from the hundreds post long What do Wizards and Elf Wizards want in our Legendary? thread

There were 71 general ideas considered, and each rated each idea on the scale:
1 - Very Undesirable
2 - Undesirable
3 - Neutral
4 - Desirable
5 - Very Desirable

The ideas, where possible were generalized, so placeholder values like +X or (1/frequency) stand in for actual values (e.g. +5, or 1/combat).

---

Desirable Features:

The 6 features the largest percentage of respondents found Very Desirable or Desirable are:

Ordered from most to least desirable:

+X Damage with spells (87.5% overall, 50% very desirable, 37.5% desirable) - Most "Very Desirable" votes, zero Undesirable or Very Understandable votes.

INT based bonus to spell damage (87.5% overall, 43.75% very desirable, 43.75% desirable) - zero Undesirable or Very Understandable votes.

Spell damage bonus applies to spells "cast as a scroll" (87.5% overall, 18.75% very desirable, 68.75% desirable)

Cast a level X or lower spell from your card without marking it off (1/frequency) (81.25% overall, 6.25% very desirable, 75% desirable) - Most "Desirable" (but not Very Desirable) votes, zero Undesirable or Very Understandable votes

Spell Damage bonus applies to scrolls (75% overall, 25% very desirable, 50% desirable)

Spell damage bonus applies to wands (68.75% overall, 18.75% very desirable, 50% desirable)

There were a few additional effects whose overall Very Desirable + Desirable percent of respondents fell into the 50-62.5% range, they are:

Bardsong modifies spell damage
May set spell damage type to an elemental damage type
Elf Wizard and Wizard have the same item and effects
May equip X additional rings
Free action: Cast spell from character card
+X damage on AoE spells to all effected monsters
Mad Evoker Effect
Negate all 50% miss chances on spells
Slid spells critical (double total damage including bonuses) on natural 20
Spell resistance: reduced
Cast spells regardless of what is in your hands - zero Undesirable or Very Understandable votes
Free action: Cast a non-damage spell from the card
Mad Evoker but does not require HP sacrifice

---

Undesirable Features:

The following features had 80% or more respondents say they were Undesirable or Very Undesirable.

Polymorph: -X damage from melee/missile/spell when polymorphed - zero Very Desirable, Desirable votes
Polymorph: +X AC when polymorphed - zero Very Desirable, Desirable votes
At start of a round place an empty puck on the combat board (1/frequency)
Mad Evoker with 3x damage if two other players offer 10 HP each
Cast all remaining spells at once as a free action (1/game)
You may copy 1 attribute from your line on the party card onto another players if you are both psychic and they are willing
You may copy 1 stat from the party card of another player onto your line if you are both psychic and they are willing
Polymorph damage bonus

The following features fell into the range of 50-75% Undesirable or Very Undesirable:

Elf Wizard Only: Your melee attacks use your spell damage modifier instead of melee damage modifier
Puzzles: 1/2 damage from puzzles
+X to AC
Damage to physical ranged and spell slides (not other spells)
Use 2 rare wands per round, no turn in at end of room, (1/frequency) - zero Very Desirable, Desirable votes
Scrolls are exhausted like wands: unlimited uses in one room - zero Very Desirable, Desirable votes
Elf Wizard and Wizard have different items and effects
Redirect damage from attack to willing Fighter or Paladin (1/frequency)
-X damage from push damage for entire party
+X damage to polymorph
Elf Wizard Only: Make melee slide when casting a spell, spell damage is modified by weapon damage wheel
Puzzles: -X damage from puzzles for entire party
Wizard only Psionic ability: X points force damage to Y creatures
Skill check: make a planar knowledge check, if successful enemy monsters get -X to hit for Y rounds (1/frequency)
Skill check: Spells do max damage without planar skill check
Unlimited unmodifiable spell (e.g. 15 fire damage)
Gain any wish ring effect except the 25 treasure pulls (1/frequency)
Bonus to ranged to-hit
Use X additional psychic powers
+X to will saves

---

Raw Data and Analysis:
You can see all the raw data and analysis at:

docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1L_b-2cnyVo3Qfx0y0L4pmz5UFBBjDBEEaf805H9VzcE/edit#gid=154774791

Mike Steele wrote: We'll agree to disagree - that's the beauty of these token debates, Jeff gets to see lots of sides of issues.

Yes he does. Hopefully he and everyone on the team feel free to just do what they think is best for the game, whether that is what you think, what I think, or some other, completely different thing.

Greaves of Resisting- turn in 4 unique or 5 non-unique Greaves for -2 from all damage.

The non-unique to allow newer players access.

Matthew Hayward wrote:

edwin wrote:

Matthew Galambus wrote: I know this is the year of class legendaries/relics, but there is no +3 Ranged weapon that isn't thrown.

If you are referring to not thrown and able to attack at range, there is the legendary bow and other tokens that add to hit at +3 or more.

I think he's saying there is no Relic, ranged, non-thrown weapon with a to-hit of +3.

So making something like a +3 relic sling or a +3 relic shortbow might be nice for people.

That was exactly it. There is Io's at +4, but the relic version of that is still a +2 to hit. The only +3 ranged weapon is the throwing hammer relic. Those bows are also not usable by rogues. Of course there is Thor's, but there is no relic option. A short bow or lite crossbow would be cool for rogues (though I hate to shaft the clerics with those).

I've mentioned it before but in the UR category last year. I had some good feedback for the token.

Tomb of battle mastery - relic
May use any weapon regardless of class restrictions.

Nick S wrote: I've mentioned it before but in the UR category last year. I had some good feedback for the token.

Tomb of battle mastery - relic
May use any weapon regardless of class restrictions.

Might have a shot if you limit it to Rare only?

This I think would be too much of an impediment to future UR+ weapon design (if it's not already too much of a problem) if it was a permanent free for all.

It would probably also need to spell out what happens to any effects other than to-hit, damage wheel, and unconditional damage bonuses.

E.g. does Ava's let a non-paladin do Grace? Does it let a non-paladin Guard or do Lay on hands? Does Dagger of Arcane Luck allow everyone to reslide, or just Wizards?