TOPIC: 2021 Ultra Rare Feedback

kurtreznor wrote:

Arcanist Kolixela wrote:

kurtreznor wrote:

Arcanist Kolixela wrote: In the vein of wanted reprints and functional reprints maybe we could potentially convert two wanted tokens into 1 functional reprint?

Remove the Bracers of Power and in their place print instead


Nightshade's Crystal - Slotless
Sneak Attack critical hits double sneak attack damage bonus
May cast a first level spell as a scroll without expending 1/room
May not equip +2 Staff of Power

Gets 2 highly wanted reprints that are currently functionally slotless into a single token that is slotless, does not allow the +2 SoP to stack. (Don't think it needs to mention Nightshades as stacking them wouldn't do anything big?)


Just a thought on a way to get 2 wanted reprints in a single token

So, instead of reprinting nightshade's, you want to print something that is better, but forces the player to ALSO buy an expensive weapon to pair with it to make it better.

I may be incorrect but what I was interpreting is that the current use with nightshares is to hold it while using sneak attack with a the assassin's crossbow to gain the x3 crit and the boost to sneak attack damage.

I may be incorrect and misinterpreting how the current design is run for sneak attacks.

Nope, you have to USE nightshade's to get the bonus. People were suggesting that rogues would use it for the sneak attack, then swap to a better weapon after. Though, I still question what better UR weapon they switch to.

Ah, then my suggested token is not of use. I was under the impression that it was used in a similar manner where only the token effect was getting used not the actual weapon.

Totally my mistake and definitely not a good suggested token based on that information. Sorry everyone!

Harlax wrote:

Picc wrote:

Endgame wrote: In any case, nightshade and staff of power are so old you could do a lot with Changing them. For example, On reprint, you could add a qualifier called Bound - you may not swap this weapon while in the dungeon.

I take issue with this. Just because an item is old isn't a great reason to change the way it works, sure clarify rules but I would go so far as to say it what your suggesting undermines confidence and is a bit of a slap in the face to the people who acquired the old item. If your gonna reprint something "so old" with a stealth nerf just create a new item with a similar name don't break people existing toys. Its really just the mitral gauntlets all over again. If people want a reprint give it to them or don't, but don't change things and pretend they are the same.

There is a whole separate thread where people are asserting that changing tokens retroactively is problematic and should be very very rare.

Although ironically many of these same people were very strongly advocating changing the Lenses of Divine Sight as well as the Eldritch Bonuses. So, it seems somewhat situational that they don't want tokens changed unless it's the tokens that they want changed.

Arcanist Kolixela wrote: I may be incorrect but what I was interpreting is that the current use with nightshares is to hold it while using sneak attack with a the assassin's crossbow to gain the x3 crit and the boost to sneak attack damage.

I may be incorrect and misinterpreting how the current design is run for sneak attacks.

As others have said, this is incorrect. To get the Nightshade bonus, the weapon must be used to sneak attack. The only other weapons to offer a similar bonus (doubling all damage) are the Viper Strike Fangs, but they must be wielded under influence of the Viper Strike Set. The +2 Assassin's Crossbow offers a different bonus (3x weapon and bonus damage, but the 15/20 points of sneak attack damage is unmodified, and again, the weapon has to be used for the sneak attack). There aren't that many UR+ weapons a Rogue can use. I suppose someone could switch weapons after their 1-2 rounds of sneak attacking, but I don't think there are a lot of scenarios where that provides a big advantage. (Short of a game mechanic where the weapon is dropped/damaged or ineffective against a certain type of monster.)

ETA: I see the point has been acknowledged while I was typing.

Mike Steele wrote:

Harlax wrote:

Picc wrote:

Endgame wrote: In any case, nightshade and staff of power are so old you could do a lot with Changing them. For example, On reprint, you could add a qualifier called Bound - you may not swap this weapon while in the dungeon.

I take issue with this. Just because an item is old isn't a great reason to change the way it works, sure clarify rules but I would go so far as to say it what your suggesting undermines confidence and is a bit of a slap in the face to the people who acquired the old item. If your gonna reprint something "so old" with a stealth nerf just create a new item with a similar name don't break people existing toys. Its really just the mitral gauntlets all over again. If people want a reprint give it to them or don't, but don't change things and pretend they are the same.

There is a whole separate thread where people are asserting that changing tokens retroactively is problematic and should be very very rare.

Although ironically many of these same people were very strongly advocating changing the Lenses of Divine Sight as well as the Eldritch Bonuses. So, it seems somewhat situational that they don't want tokens changed unless it's the tokens that they want changed.

Lenses of Divine Sight were far too strong as an UR token as initially printed.

Eldritch set gain FAR too much bonus healing and was preferential in it's treatment of classes, specifically Druid and Ranger.

The change of the Lenses of Divine Sight was for the longterm health of the game.
The change of the Eldritch set was for the longterm health of the game in lowering the +healing bonuses and in making the Eldritch set more universally fair to all classes.


I think generally when the changes being proposed are in response to Jeff stating that a current design is negatively affecting dungeon design it's a good change to make. That's what prompted the healing overhaul.

Arcanist Kolixela wrote:

Mike Steele wrote:

Harlax wrote:

Picc wrote:

Endgame wrote: In any case, nightshade and staff of power are so old you could do a lot with Changing them. For example, On reprint, you could add a qualifier called Bound - you may not swap this weapon while in the dungeon.

I take issue with this. Just because an item is old isn't a great reason to change the way it works, sure clarify rules but I would go so far as to say it what your suggesting undermines confidence and is a bit of a slap in the face to the people who acquired the old item. If your gonna reprint something "so old" with a stealth nerf just create a new item with a similar name don't break people existing toys. Its really just the mitral gauntlets all over again. If people want a reprint give it to them or don't, but don't change things and pretend they are the same.

There is a whole separate thread where people are asserting that changing tokens retroactively is problematic and should be very very rare.

Although ironically many of these same people were very strongly advocating changing the Lenses of Divine Sight as well as the Eldritch Bonuses. So, it seems somewhat situational that they don't want tokens changed unless it's the tokens that they want changed.

Lenses of Divine Sight were far too strong as an UR token as initially printed.

Eldritch set gain FAR too much bonus healing and was preferential in it's treatment of classes, specifically Druid and Ranger.

The change of the Lenses of Divine Sight was for the longterm health of the game.
The change of the Eldritch set was for the longterm health of the game in lowering the +healing bonuses and in making the Eldritch set more universally fair to all classes.


I think generally when the changes being proposed are in response to Jeff stating that a current design is negatively affecting dungeon design it's a good change to make. That's what prompted the healing overhaul.

And differences in how many pieces you had to equip to be 5th level so that it was uniform across all classes.

Arcanist Kolixela wrote:

Mike Steele wrote:

Harlax wrote:

Picc wrote:

Endgame wrote: In any case, nightshade and staff of power are so old you could do a lot with Changing them. For example, On reprint, you could add a qualifier called Bound - you may not swap this weapon while in the dungeon.

I take issue with this. Just because an item is old isn't a great reason to change the way it works, sure clarify rules but I would go so far as to say it what your suggesting undermines confidence and is a bit of a slap in the face to the people who acquired the old item. If your gonna reprint something "so old" with a stealth nerf just create a new item with a similar name don't break people existing toys. Its really just the mitral gauntlets all over again. If people want a reprint give it to them or don't, but don't change things and pretend they are the same.

There is a whole separate thread where people are asserting that changing tokens retroactively is problematic and should be very very rare.

Although ironically many of these same people were very strongly advocating changing the Lenses of Divine Sight as well as the Eldritch Bonuses. So, it seems somewhat situational that they don't want tokens changed unless it's the tokens that they want changed.

Lenses of Divine Sight were far too strong as an UR token as initially printed.

Eldritch set gain FAR too much bonus healing and was preferential in it's treatment of classes, specifically Druid and Ranger.

The change of the Lenses of Divine Sight was for the longterm health of the game.
The change of the Eldritch set was for the longterm health of the game in lowering the +healing bonuses and in making the Eldritch set more universally fair to all classes.


I think generally when the changes being proposed are in response to Jeff stating that a current design is negatively affecting dungeon design it's a good change to make. That's what prompted the healing overhaul.

I think you have cause and effect backwards here. The same people now saying tokens shouldn't be changed were largely the same ones strongly advocating for quite some time to change the Lenses of Divine Sight, long before Jeff decided to make the change or make any statements about how it needed to be changed.

The Eldritch change didn't actually lower the healing bonuses at all, it just spread them out more fully across the levels. Five Eldritch tokens still provide the exact same amount of healing bonus that they did before the change. It's a misconception to say that +10 healing from Eldritch Tokens was unacceptable, because it is still there, just at a higher item level.

Mike Steele wrote:

Arcanist Kolixela wrote:

Mike Steele wrote:

Harlax wrote:

Picc wrote:

Endgame wrote: In any case, nightshade and staff of power are so old you could do a lot with Changing them. For example, On reprint, you could add a qualifier called Bound - you may not swap this weapon while in the dungeon.

I take issue with this. Just because an item is old isn't a great reason to change the way it works, sure clarify rules but I would go so far as to say it what your suggesting undermines confidence and is a bit of a slap in the face to the people who acquired the old item. If your gonna reprint something "so old" with a stealth nerf just create a new item with a similar name don't break people existing toys. Its really just the mitral gauntlets all over again. If people want a reprint give it to them or don't, but don't change things and pretend they are the same.

There is a whole separate thread where people are asserting that changing tokens retroactively is problematic and should be very very rare.

Although ironically many of these same people were very strongly advocating changing the Lenses of Divine Sight as well as the Eldritch Bonuses. So, it seems somewhat situational that they don't want tokens changed unless it's the tokens that they want changed.

Lenses of Divine Sight were far too strong as an UR token as initially printed.

Eldritch set gain FAR too much bonus healing and was preferential in it's treatment of classes, specifically Druid and Ranger.

The change of the Lenses of Divine Sight was for the longterm health of the game.
The change of the Eldritch set was for the longterm health of the game in lowering the +healing bonuses and in making the Eldritch set more universally fair to all classes.


I think generally when the changes being proposed are in response to Jeff stating that a current design is negatively affecting dungeon design it's a good change to make. That's what prompted the healing overhaul.

I think you have cause and effect backwards here. The same people now saying tokens shouldn't be changed were largely the same ones strongly advocating for quite some time to change the Lenses of Divine Sight, long before Jeff decided to make the change or make any statements about how it needed to be changed.

The Eldritch change didn't actually lower the healing bonuses at all, it just spread them out more fully across the levels. Five Eldritch tokens still provide the exact same amount of healing bonus that they did before the change. It's a misconception to say that +10 healing from Eldritch Tokens was unacceptable, because it is still there, just at a higher item level.

The two piece item bonus for the Eldritch set was +10 to healing.

The set requires all 5 pieces to gain +10 to healing now. That is a much larger investment than previously required and it was doubled by the Lenses at the time.

There is a whole lot of difference between 4 tokens giving +20 to healing and 5 tokens giving +10.

It was NOT uncommon for a healer with 2 eldritch pieces and the lenses to be healing for 40+ health off cantrip heals. That was absolutely not sustainable.

Arcanist Kolixela wrote:

Mike Steele wrote:

Arcanist Kolixela wrote:

Mike Steele wrote:

Harlax wrote:

Picc wrote:

Endgame wrote: In any case, nightshade and staff of power are so old you could do a lot with Changing them. For example, On reprint, you could add a qualifier called Bound - you may not swap this weapon while in the dungeon.

I take issue with this. Just because an item is old isn't a great reason to change the way it works, sure clarify rules but I would go so far as to say it what your suggesting undermines confidence and is a bit of a slap in the face to the people who acquired the old item. If your gonna reprint something "so old" with a stealth nerf just create a new item with a similar name don't break people existing toys. Its really just the mitral gauntlets all over again. If people want a reprint give it to them or don't, but don't change things and pretend they are the same.

There is a whole separate thread where people are asserting that changing tokens retroactively is problematic and should be very very rare.

Although ironically many of these same people were very strongly advocating changing the Lenses of Divine Sight as well as the Eldritch Bonuses. So, it seems somewhat situational that they don't want tokens changed unless it's the tokens that they want changed.

Lenses of Divine Sight were far too strong as an UR token as initially printed.

Eldritch set gain FAR too much bonus healing and was preferential in it's treatment of classes, specifically Druid and Ranger.

The change of the Lenses of Divine Sight was for the longterm health of the game.
The change of the Eldritch set was for the longterm health of the game in lowering the +healing bonuses and in making the Eldritch set more universally fair to all classes.


I think generally when the changes being proposed are in response to Jeff stating that a current design is negatively affecting dungeon design it's a good change to make. That's what prompted the healing overhaul.

I think you have cause and effect backwards here. The same people now saying tokens shouldn't be changed were largely the same ones strongly advocating for quite some time to change the Lenses of Divine Sight, long before Jeff decided to make the change or make any statements about how it needed to be changed.

The Eldritch change didn't actually lower the healing bonuses at all, it just spread them out more fully across the levels. Five Eldritch tokens still provide the exact same amount of healing bonus that they did before the change. It's a misconception to say that +10 healing from Eldritch Tokens was unacceptable, because it is still there, just at a higher item level.

The two piece item bonus for the Eldritch set was +10 to healing.

The set requires all 5 pieces to gain +10 to healing now. That is a much larger investment than previously required and it was doubled by the Lenses at the time.

There is a whole lot of difference between 4 tokens giving +20 to healing and 5 tokens giving +10.

It was NOT uncommon for a healer with 2 eldritch pieces and the lenses to be healing for 40+ health off cantrip heals. That was absolutely not sustainable.

You're not actually disagreeing with anything I just said.

How could a Cleric with just 2 Eldritch Pieces and Lenses of Divine Sight heal 40+ points on a 1 point healing spell? It would take a lot more bonuses than that.

I'm not resurrecting the debate on if it LODS should be nerfed, that's settled. I was just saying that it didn't happen because Jeff told the community it was broken and looked for suggestions on how to fix it. It happened because people advocated strongly for quite some time before Jeff ever weighed in on it. And many of the same people that are now saying tokens shouldn't be changed, were back then saying tokens were always open to review for change.

The more I reflect on this set of URs, the more I feel we should put off the Earcuff of Orbits reprint another year.

Maybe take that out and add in a foot item?

There are a LOT of slot expanders available for PYP in 2021, Including a new head for eyes swap (with kicker).

Having an expander planned for next year feels better.

If not a foot item, maybe either MEC, Nightshade's, or some other sought after reprint?

I'd prefer a new token, as there are plenty of reprints and functional reprints already, but that's just me.

Also, +1 to Raven's reasoning behind not using potions. Time is too valuable.

Wade Schwendemann wrote: Also, +1 to Raven's reasoning behind not using potions. Time is too valuable.

In addition to potions, I also do not use any tokens that are not automatically factored on the party card. For instance, tokens that add damage only when sneak attacking, or when using a specific weapon type. The DM will not factor that in, and calculating and bringing up the extra damage takes more time than its worth, most of the time the DM is not giving us feedback on whats happening with DMG anyways, so its better to ignore it and get people back to sliding.

Guedoji wrote:

Wade Schwendemann wrote: Also, +1 to Raven's reasoning behind not using potions. Time is too valuable.

In addition to potions, I also do not use any tokens that are not automatically factored on the party card. For instance, tokens that add damage only when sneak attacking, or when using a specific weapon type. The DM will not factor that in, and calculating and bringing up the extra damage takes more time than its worth, most of the time the DM is not giving us feedback on whats happening with DMG anyways, so its better to ignore it and get people back to sliding.

I also don't use many (almost zero) consumables because the token backpack for the group is already heavy enough without them. And I've got my pockets full of two token wallets the the tokens for the group the DM might want to see, so no room for them. I'm sure I'd feel differently if I was just carrying around the tokens for one class.

I used potions in VTD in conjunction with Pouch of Tulz.. The only time taken was my own.

With the exception of healling potions post combat or mid puzzle, I typically don't use potions. It takes the DMs time and they don't always remember. I'm not criticizing the DMs, they have a lot to juggle.