TOPIC: FINAL 2021 Transmuted Token Images!

Arcanist Kolixela wrote:

Mike Steele wrote:

Arnold wrote:

Mike Steele wrote:

Arnold wrote:

Mike Steele wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote:

Mike Steele wrote: Jeff, Mage Medallion seems massively overpowered. It gives MEC bonuses to all spells now (including multiple per room) plus allows doubling of spells with the free action. The HP limit seems minor, especially since MEC damage is no longer a factor. As more free action spells are added from future tokens this will be more overpowered.

Adding 3rd level spells to free action with Legendary is just more doubling of spells per room. And, if it's now OK to auto succeed on skill tests, maybe we can bring back the UR from last year that let all classes do it.

I'd be interested in seeing a couple of max build analyses to see what the spell damage potential is incorporating these two Wizard tokens.

I don’t think the wizard token auto succeeds skill tests.

The last iteration granted 6 free action damage spells, and let you swap into as many more as you had higher level spells - but limited to 1/room so effectively 3 or 4.

This iteration grants 3 free action damage spells, and lets you swap into 1 more.

I think this version is less powerful than the last one, but only a little, and it’s much simpler to reason about.

Matthew, you're right, it's auto slide, not auto skill check.

Any chance you can do your magic analysis to see max damage incorporating these? It seems like this is OP to me, but it's hard to tell without crunching the numbers.

Why do you never do the math yourself?

assume 35 dmg modifier, multiply that by the total number of damage spells.

then go through the card and simply multiply each spell's listed dmg totals x2, and presto. You're done!

Then if you want to be really thorough, count each non-damage spell as a damage spell the level below, repeat the last step. Multiply that total number of non-dmg spells (hint, it's 2) by 35, add the result to your running total and donezo.

Partly because I have no idea what a BIS Wizard build looks like, and I don't know if 35 is the appropriate modifier, and I'm not sure how many bonus spells are being granted from various tokens & token set abilities. There are several people that have BIS Wizard builds done, and can just apply these tokens to it.

I suspect that this is why Wizards take issue with you saying a lot of their toys are OP.

If you don't understand their builds, you should perhaps delve deeper into it to get real perspective on how and why they are able to achieve the numbers they get to. I think it's best to formulate an opinion on a firm understanding of what goes into the math rather than looking at end results and misinterpreting the data.

I think the clearest example of this would be your co-opting Mattthew's 900 damage number but not really considering the HP cost (in MEC), nor the requirements of that build (lots of items dedicated to CON / HP bump) that present real opportunity cost to other things they could be doing.

Not trying to attack you, but I think it would make your stance stronger if you understood more fully the class and build you're offering your opinion on.

I just posted a detailed analysis of Wizard damage, doing nearly as much in 7 turns as a Barbarian can do in 10 (per Matthew's analysis of the Barbarian, which I trust). There is no MEC damage to consider anymore with the Legendary, so no cost for doing all that damage. So, whatever tokens Matthew put in to address the MEC damage can be reallocated elsewhere and make it even more powerful. If there is a fault in my analysis, please point it out to me.

The double-standard on these development threads for Wizard and Druid damage is pretty evident. When Matthew was able to show that the Druid could do about 900 points of damage over 10 turns when the Ring of Quick Prayer was unlimited doing max polymorph and spell damage combined, that was widely stated that it was an unacceptably high amount (it's now 140 points lower due to the nerfing of Ring of Quick Prayer). On the other hand, when I can show that the Wizard can now do nearly that much in three fewer turns, it's seen as an acceptable number. The Wizard can do about 100 more points of spell damage in 7 turns than the Druid can do in 10 combining Polymorph and spells, and about more than 300 more points in spell damage in 7 turns (with damage spells left over) than the Druid can do in total spell damage even maxing out the Charm of Spell Swapping (and again, let me know if that detailed analysis I did has any errors). To me, that is problematic. I recognize I'm in the minority thinking that is a problem.

An Ultra Rare token giving Druids 5 castings of 46 point damage Frozen Orbs = 230 damage not 140.

That's an Ultra Rare Token.

The Wizard Class Specific Legendary adds 3 castings of spells as Free Actions. One of which for the Wizard must be a level 1 spell, 2 of which must be at the Elf Wizard if spell swapped spells don't get the free action.

Assuming we can maximize and get 3 FA level 2 spells for the Wizard off their Class Specific Relic it's a net damage gain for the Wizard of

Ray spell - 18 + MEC 18 + spell damage 35 = 61
61*3 = 183

So the Relic token is giving Wizards 183 damage when calculating in the class specific spell doubling bonus on a Class specific necklace at the Relic level

The UR ring, designed for Clerics is giving Druids 11+35 = 46 * 3 = 138 damage on a non Druid specific Ultra Rare over that same 3 rounds of combat.

BUT the Druid still has 2 castings of FA Frozen Orb granted from the Ring for round 4 and 5, bringing their total damage bonus to 230 off an UR Ring.

Wizards do not have the capability of gaining an additional 2 castings of level 2 spells to use off the Relic as they have already used Stoneskin/Lesser Maze to perform the existing conversions.


So the UR ring is stronger than the Class Specific Relic Necklace when calculating it all of it's effects.

I notice you're very intentionally avoiding any discussion about the actual point of my post, which is the very significant total damage point discrepancy between Wizard and Druid. Which gets significantly worse if you also nerf further the Ring of Quick Prayer.

Bob Chasan wrote:

Mike Steele wrote:

Arnold wrote:

Mike Steele wrote:

Arnold wrote:

Mike Steele wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote:

Mike Steele wrote: Jeff, Mage Medallion seems massively overpowered. It gives MEC bonuses to all spells now (including multiple per room) plus allows doubling of spells with the free action. The HP limit seems minor, especially since MEC damage is no longer a factor. As more free action spells are added from future tokens this will be more overpowered.

Adding 3rd level spells to free action with Legendary is just more doubling of spells per room. And, if it's now OK to auto succeed on skill tests, maybe we can bring back the UR from last year that let all classes do it.

I'd be interested in seeing a couple of max build analyses to see what the spell damage potential is incorporating these two Wizard tokens.

I don’t think the wizard token auto succeeds skill tests.

The last iteration granted 6 free action damage spells, and let you swap into as many more as you had higher level spells - but limited to 1/room so effectively 3 or 4.

This iteration grants 3 free action damage spells, and lets you swap into 1 more.

I think this version is less powerful than the last one, but only a little, and it’s much simpler to reason about.

Matthew, you're right, it's auto slide, not auto skill check.

Any chance you can do your magic analysis to see max damage incorporating these? It seems like this is OP to me, but it's hard to tell without crunching the numbers.

Why do you never do the math yourself?

assume 35 dmg modifier, multiply that by the total number of damage spells.

then go through the card and simply multiply each spell's listed dmg totals x2, and presto. You're done!

Then if you want to be really thorough, count each non-damage spell as a damage spell the level below, repeat the last step. Multiply that total number of non-dmg spells (hint, it's 2) by 35, add the result to your running total and donezo.

Partly because I have no idea what a BIS Wizard build looks like, and I don't know if 35 is the appropriate modifier, and I'm not sure how many bonus spells are being granted from various tokens & token set abilities. There are several people that have BIS Wizard builds done, and can just apply these tokens to it.

I suspect that this is why Wizards take issue with you saying a lot of their toys are OP.

If you don't understand their builds, you should perhaps delve deeper into it to get real perspective on how and why they are able to achieve the numbers they get to. I think it's best to formulate an opinion on a firm understanding of what goes into the math rather than looking at end results and misinterpreting the data.

I think the clearest example of this would be your co-opting Mattthew's 900 damage number but not really considering the HP cost (in MEC), nor the requirements of that build (lots of items dedicated to CON / HP bump) that present real opportunity cost to other things they could be doing.

Not trying to attack you, but I think it would make your stance stronger if you understood more fully the class and build you're offering your opinion on.

I just posted a detailed analysis of Wizard damage, doing nearly as much in 7 turns as a Barbarian can do in 10 (per Matthew's analysis of the Barbarian, which I trust). There is no MEC damage to consider anymore with the Legendary, so no cost for doing all that damage. So, whatever tokens Matthew put in to address the MEC damage can be reallocated elsewhere and make it even more powerful. If there is a fault in my analysis, please point it out to me.

The double-standard on these development threads for Wizard and Druid damage is pretty evident. When Matthew was able to show that the Druid could do about 900 points of damage over 10 turns when the Ring of Quick Prayer was unlimited doing max polymorph and spell damage combined, that was widely stated that it was an unacceptably high amount (it's now 140 points lower due to the nerfing of Ring of Quick Prayer). On the other hand, when I can show that the Wizard can now do nearly that much in three fewer turns, it's seen as an acceptable number. The Wizard can do about 100 more points of spell damage in 7 turns than the Druid can do in 10 combining Polymorph and spells, and about more than 300 more points in spell damage in 7 turns (with damage spells left over) than the Druid can do in total spell damage even maxing out the Charm of Spell Swapping (and again, let me know if that detailed analysis I did has any errors). To me, that is problematic. I recognize I'm in the minority thinking that is a problem.

Someone else mentioned it earlier but YOUR IGNORING that MEC can only be used on 1 spell per round. You're erroneously stating that Wizards can do all this horrendous damage yet you're inflating that number by at LEAST 33%
STOP IT

Bob, I've already explained this, but I was just using MEC as shorthand for the MEC effect, which the Wizard Legendary grants to all spells now with zero HP cost for using it. My apologies for not making that more clear in the original post. My numbers are accurate, I'm using the Legendary MEC-like bonus for all spells which has no HP penalty.

This is probably too late, but I want to bring it up so people are aware.

Fighter relic:
+7 strength
+3 dex
+4 con
melee shield adds to reflex saves

compare that to ranger relic:
+4 con
+6 ranged damage
use a druid scroll 1/game

Seems to me that the Fighter relic is way above the ranger relic.

The fighter legendary seems fine if the relic is toned down. Just eliminating the +3 dex I think would do it.

Mike Steele wrote:

Arcanist Kolixela wrote:

Mike Steele wrote:

Arnold wrote:

Mike Steele wrote:

Arnold wrote:

Mike Steele wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote:

Mike Steele wrote: Jeff, Mage Medallion seems massively overpowered. It gives MEC bonuses to all spells now (including multiple per room) plus allows doubling of spells with the free action. The HP limit seems minor, especially since MEC damage is no longer a factor. As more free action spells are added from future tokens this will be more overpowered.

Adding 3rd level spells to free action with Legendary is just more doubling of spells per room. And, if it's now OK to auto succeed on skill tests, maybe we can bring back the UR from last year that let all classes do it.

I'd be interested in seeing a couple of max build analyses to see what the spell damage potential is incorporating these two Wizard tokens.

I don’t think the wizard token auto succeeds skill tests.

The last iteration granted 6 free action damage spells, and let you swap into as many more as you had higher level spells - but limited to 1/room so effectively 3 or 4.

This iteration grants 3 free action damage spells, and lets you swap into 1 more.

I think this version is less powerful than the last one, but only a little, and it’s much simpler to reason about.

Matthew, you're right, it's auto slide, not auto skill check.

Any chance you can do your magic analysis to see max damage incorporating these? It seems like this is OP to me, but it's hard to tell without crunching the numbers.

Why do you never do the math yourself?

assume 35 dmg modifier, multiply that by the total number of damage spells.

then go through the card and simply multiply each spell's listed dmg totals x2, and presto. You're done!

Then if you want to be really thorough, count each non-damage spell as a damage spell the level below, repeat the last step. Multiply that total number of non-dmg spells (hint, it's 2) by 35, add the result to your running total and donezo.

Partly because I have no idea what a BIS Wizard build looks like, and I don't know if 35 is the appropriate modifier, and I'm not sure how many bonus spells are being granted from various tokens & token set abilities. There are several people that have BIS Wizard builds done, and can just apply these tokens to it.

I suspect that this is why Wizards take issue with you saying a lot of their toys are OP.

If you don't understand their builds, you should perhaps delve deeper into it to get real perspective on how and why they are able to achieve the numbers they get to. I think it's best to formulate an opinion on a firm understanding of what goes into the math rather than looking at end results and misinterpreting the data.

I think the clearest example of this would be your co-opting Mattthew's 900 damage number but not really considering the HP cost (in MEC), nor the requirements of that build (lots of items dedicated to CON / HP bump) that present real opportunity cost to other things they could be doing.

Not trying to attack you, but I think it would make your stance stronger if you understood more fully the class and build you're offering your opinion on.

I just posted a detailed analysis of Wizard damage, doing nearly as much in 7 turns as a Barbarian can do in 10 (per Matthew's analysis of the Barbarian, which I trust). There is no MEC damage to consider anymore with the Legendary, so no cost for doing all that damage. So, whatever tokens Matthew put in to address the MEC damage can be reallocated elsewhere and make it even more powerful. If there is a fault in my analysis, please point it out to me.

The double-standard on these development threads for Wizard and Druid damage is pretty evident. When Matthew was able to show that the Druid could do about 900 points of damage over 10 turns when the Ring of Quick Prayer was unlimited doing max polymorph and spell damage combined, that was widely stated that it was an unacceptably high amount (it's now 140 points lower due to the nerfing of Ring of Quick Prayer). On the other hand, when I can show that the Wizard can now do nearly that much in three fewer turns, it's seen as an acceptable number. The Wizard can do about 100 more points of spell damage in 7 turns than the Druid can do in 10 combining Polymorph and spells, and about more than 300 more points in spell damage in 7 turns (with damage spells left over) than the Druid can do in total spell damage even maxing out the Charm of Spell Swapping (and again, let me know if that detailed analysis I did has any errors). To me, that is problematic. I recognize I'm in the minority thinking that is a problem.

An Ultra Rare token giving Druids 5 castings of 46 point damage Frozen Orbs = 230 damage not 140.

That's an Ultra Rare Token.

The Wizard Class Specific Legendary adds 3 castings of spells as Free Actions. One of which for the Wizard must be a level 1 spell, 2 of which must be at the Elf Wizard if spell swapped spells don't get the free action.

Assuming we can maximize and get 3 FA level 2 spells for the Wizard off their Class Specific Relic it's a net damage gain for the Wizard of

Ray spell - 18 + MEC 18 + spell damage 35 = 61
61*3 = 183

So the Relic token is giving Wizards 183 damage when calculating in the class specific spell doubling bonus on a Class specific necklace at the Relic level

The UR ring, designed for Clerics is giving Druids 11+35 = 46 * 3 = 138 damage on a non Druid specific Ultra Rare over that same 3 rounds of combat.

BUT the Druid still has 2 castings of FA Frozen Orb granted from the Ring for round 4 and 5, bringing their total damage bonus to 230 off an UR Ring.

Wizards do not have the capability of gaining an additional 2 castings of level 2 spells to use off the Relic as they have already used Stoneskin/Lesser Maze to perform the existing conversions.


So the UR ring is stronger than the Class Specific Relic Necklace when calculating it all of it's effects.

I notice you're very intentionally avoiding any discussion about the actual point of my post, which is the very significant total damage point discrepancy between Wizard and Druid. Which gets significantly worse if you also nerf further the Ring of Quick Prayer.

I'm not avoiding it. I don't think it exists but I am also not doing a detailed analysis of max damage round per round of the Wizard vs the Druid in order to validate your feeling that Druid is severely behind the Wizard.

My comments are SPECIFICALLY about the power level of two vastly different tokens and specifically showing that, as written, the UR non class specific Ring provides Druids MORE damage than the Class Specific Relic Necklace.

That is the totality of my argument in this instance.


If you want to argue that a BIS spell damage Druid is FAR behind the Wizard on spell damage then present a build, run the analysis over 10 rounds of combat and present it against the same 10 rounds of combat run by the Wizard.

The requirement of proof is in your court of that's your claim. I provided the proof of mine.

I’m decently powerful, but not elite right now. My spell damage next year will be +20 with the Skull, but before doing any other purchase. I have MMM, MEC, Arcane set and charm of spell swapping. I love sliding spells and use all of them. I essentially use 4 level 2 spells.

My quick math for 7 rounds of combat:
Current MEC and MMM: 482 damage (-70 to myself)
Proposed relic; 568 damage (+1 charm slot assuming MEC does not stack)
Proposed Legendary: 604

Jump to relic is huge because of doubling base on my 4 level 2 spell casts (Arcane and spell swapping assumed to be free action spells too)
Jump to legendary is way too small because if you’re still marking off the level 3 when cast as a free action, all you’re really getting is a level 0 spell added on somewhere in the mix.

Matt’s proposed relic is 550 (assuming a MEC doesn’t stack); legendary is 672. Do those feel right for the kind of jumps we would expect, as I’m not sure what the jumps should really be? Still take 70 damage and free up 1 charm slot. If MEC stacks, it could get worse, though I’d die many times over.

Arcanist Kolixela wrote: It's also worth noting that BIS 35 spell damage Wizard DOES NOT have the 3 piece Cabal set as Blessed Tempest Gloves conflict with the Cabal Gloves.

So all of those damage numbers needs to drop by 3 (6 per round)

This is correct. I've lowered all my analysis to 32 bonus damage per round and assume Cabal. FA spells are more powerful than anything else in this game (far superior to MEC).

Also, I'd argue that the Ring of Expertise is great for low and mid level wizards, but depending upon playstyle is at best the 3rd best ring and could be considered only the 5th best ring (I have it 4th on my list) and thus don't plan to ever equip it. But then I have Staff of Power and don't need it for alertness. If you're running the legendary and Cabal, your only choice to equip a 3rd ring is Charm of Glory and the charm slot is very, very tight, especially since we need to drop the Charm Necklace. I only bring up this up here because I see this assumption being used in a lot of analysis related to the transmutes.

Matt Goodman wrote: This is probably too late, but I want to bring it up so people are aware.

Fighter relic:
+7 strength
+3 dex
+4 con
melee shield adds to reflex saves

compare that to ranger relic:
+4 con
+6 ranged damage
use a druid scroll 1/game

Seems to me that the Fighter relic is way above the ranger relic.

The fighter legendary seems fine if the relic is toned down. Just eliminating the +3 dex I think would do it.

How is +3 or +4 melee or thrown damage "way above" +6 ranged damage?

And as has been explained through multiple threads the DEX is mostly there to keep allowing Thor's Hammer to be wielded.

Dave wrote:

Arcanist Kolixela wrote: It's also worth noting that BIS 35 spell damage Wizard DOES NOT have the 3 piece Cabal set as Blessed Tempest Gloves conflict with the Cabal Gloves.

So all of those damage numbers needs to drop by 3 (6 per round)

This is correct. I've lowered all my analysis to 32 bonus damage per round and assume Cabal. FA spells are more powerful than anything else in this game (far superior to MEC).

Also, I'd argue that the Ring of Expertise is great for low and mid level wizards, but depending upon playstyle is at best the 3rd best ring and could be considered only the 5th best ring (I have it 4th on my list) and thus don't plan to ever equip it. But then I have Staff of Power and don't need it for alertness. If you're running the legendary and Cabal, your only choice to equip a 3rd ring is Charm of Glory and the charm slot is very, very tight, especially since we need to drop the Charm Necklace. I only bring up this up here because I see this assumption being used in a lot of analysis related to the transmutes.

Yep. I've also followed the same thoughts you have and will not be adding the Ring of Expertise to my Wizard Main build.

For my Elf Wizard I will take the hit and equip it for Alertness because it's a staple Elf Wizard spell and I don't have the +2 Staff of Power.

Arcanist Kolixela wrote:

Dave wrote:

Arcanist Kolixela wrote: It's also worth noting that BIS 35 spell damage Wizard DOES NOT have the 3 piece Cabal set as Blessed Tempest Gloves conflict with the Cabal Gloves.

So all of those damage numbers needs to drop by 3 (6 per round)

This is correct. I've lowered all my analysis to 32 bonus damage per round and assume Cabal. FA spells are more powerful than anything else in this game (far superior to MEC).

Also, I'd argue that the Ring of Expertise is great for low and mid level wizards, but depending upon playstyle is at best the 3rd best ring and could be considered only the 5th best ring (I have it 4th on my list) and thus don't plan to ever equip it. But then I have Staff of Power and don't need it for alertness. If you're running the legendary and Cabal, your only choice to equip a 3rd ring is Charm of Glory and the charm slot is very, very tight, especially since we need to drop the Charm Necklace. I only bring up this up here because I see this assumption being used in a lot of analysis related to the transmutes.

Yep. I've also followed the same thoughts you have and will not be adding the Ring of Expertise to my Wizard Main build.

For my Elf Wizard I will take the hit and equip it for Alertness because it's a staple Elf Wizard spell and I don't have the +2 Staff of Power.

Is cabal being counted at +1 or +3? Assuming a full cabal party, there is no damage loss from using it over blessed tempest gloves.

Note - it’s only a 2 point Damage loss at worst, because cabal always adds at Least 1.

Fiddy wrote:

Matt Goodman wrote: This is probably too late, but I want to bring it up so people are aware.

Fighter relic:
+7 strength
+3 dex
+4 con
melee shield adds to reflex saves

compare that to ranger relic:
+4 con
+6 ranged damage
use a druid scroll 1/game

Seems to me that the Fighter relic is way above the ranger relic.

The fighter legendary seems fine if the relic is toned down. Just eliminating the +3 dex I think would do it.

How is +3 or +4 melee or thrown damage "way above" +6 ranged damage?

And as has been explained through multiple threads the DEX is mostly there to keep allowing Thor's Hammer to be wielded.

Ooo! Good point on Thor's. I stand corrected. Not "way above". I should have stated "Doing more things than a similar power level relic".

The + to strength is +3.5 to hit and +3.5 to damage. Thus, in my view, a +7 benefit. This would be on par with the +6 damage to range, I feel. The +4 cons are equal. Ranger gets a scroll 1/game, fighter gets more reflex saves. Fighters come out ahead on this. Fighters get +3 dex. Fighters also come out ahead.

Endgame wrote:

Arcanist Kolixela wrote:

Dave wrote:

Arcanist Kolixela wrote: It's also worth noting that BIS 35 spell damage Wizard DOES NOT have the 3 piece Cabal set as Blessed Tempest Gloves conflict with the Cabal Gloves.

So all of those damage numbers needs to drop by 3 (6 per round)

This is correct. I've lowered all my analysis to 32 bonus damage per round and assume Cabal. FA spells are more powerful than anything else in this game (far superior to MEC).

Also, I'd argue that the Ring of Expertise is great for low and mid level wizards, but depending upon playstyle is at best the 3rd best ring and could be considered only the 5th best ring (I have it 4th on my list) and thus don't plan to ever equip it. But then I have Staff of Power and don't need it for alertness. If you're running the legendary and Cabal, your only choice to equip a 3rd ring is Charm of Glory and the charm slot is very, very tight, especially since we need to drop the Charm Necklace. I only bring up this up here because I see this assumption being used in a lot of analysis related to the transmutes.

Yep. I've also followed the same thoughts you have and will not be adding the Ring of Expertise to my Wizard Main build.

For my Elf Wizard I will take the hit and equip it for Alertness because it's a staple Elf Wizard spell and I don't have the +2 Staff of Power.

Is cabal being counted at +1 or +3? Assuming a full cabal party, there is no damage loss from using it over blessed tempest gloves.

Note - it’s only a 2 point Damage loss at worst, because cabal always adds at Least 1.

I'd never assume 4 other players are wearing the cabal bracers on an analysis of the Wizard. Statistically unless i'm going for a "cabal" run it's less than a 10% chance I will find someone else running the cabal bracers instead of Arcane Bracers, Charm Bracelets of Bracers of the Zephyr.

You are correct tho that I failed to account for the +1 from the Cabal Bracers. That'd be a 2 damage loss for Cabal set, not 3

Arcanist Kolixela wrote:

Mike Steele wrote:

Arcanist Kolixela wrote:

Mike Steele wrote:

Arnold wrote:

Mike Steele wrote:

Arnold wrote:

Mike Steele wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote:

Mike Steele wrote: Jeff, Mage Medallion seems massively overpowered. It gives MEC bonuses to all spells now (including multiple per room) plus allows doubling of spells with the free action. The HP limit seems minor, especially since MEC damage is no longer a factor. As more free action spells are added from future tokens this will be more overpowered.

Adding 3rd level spells to free action with Legendary is just more doubling of spells per room. And, if it's now OK to auto succeed on skill tests, maybe we can bring back the UR from last year that let all classes do it.

I'd be interested in seeing a couple of max build analyses to see what the spell damage potential is incorporating these two Wizard tokens.

I don’t think the wizard token auto succeeds skill tests.

The last iteration granted 6 free action damage spells, and let you swap into as many more as you had higher level spells - but limited to 1/room so effectively 3 or 4.

This iteration grants 3 free action damage spells, and lets you swap into 1 more.

I think this version is less powerful than the last one, but only a little, and it’s much simpler to reason about.

Matthew, you're right, it's auto slide, not auto skill check.

Any chance you can do your magic analysis to see max damage incorporating these? It seems like this is OP to me, but it's hard to tell without crunching the numbers.

Why do you never do the math yourself?

assume 35 dmg modifier, multiply that by the total number of damage spells.

then go through the card and simply multiply each spell's listed dmg totals x2, and presto. You're done!

Then if you want to be really thorough, count each non-damage spell as a damage spell the level below, repeat the last step. Multiply that total number of non-dmg spells (hint, it's 2) by 35, add the result to your running total and donezo.

Partly because I have no idea what a BIS Wizard build looks like, and I don't know if 35 is the appropriate modifier, and I'm not sure how many bonus spells are being granted from various tokens & token set abilities. There are several people that have BIS Wizard builds done, and can just apply these tokens to it.

I suspect that this is why Wizards take issue with you saying a lot of their toys are OP.

If you don't understand their builds, you should perhaps delve deeper into it to get real perspective on how and why they are able to achieve the numbers they get to. I think it's best to formulate an opinion on a firm understanding of what goes into the math rather than looking at end results and misinterpreting the data.

I think the clearest example of this would be your co-opting Mattthew's 900 damage number but not really considering the HP cost (in MEC), nor the requirements of that build (lots of items dedicated to CON / HP bump) that present real opportunity cost to other things they could be doing.

Not trying to attack you, but I think it would make your stance stronger if you understood more fully the class and build you're offering your opinion on.

I just posted a detailed analysis of Wizard damage, doing nearly as much in 7 turns as a Barbarian can do in 10 (per Matthew's analysis of the Barbarian, which I trust). There is no MEC damage to consider anymore with the Legendary, so no cost for doing all that damage. So, whatever tokens Matthew put in to address the MEC damage can be reallocated elsewhere and make it even more powerful. If there is a fault in my analysis, please point it out to me.

The double-standard on these development threads for Wizard and Druid damage is pretty evident. When Matthew was able to show that the Druid could do about 900 points of damage over 10 turns when the Ring of Quick Prayer was unlimited doing max polymorph and spell damage combined, that was widely stated that it was an unacceptably high amount (it's now 140 points lower due to the nerfing of Ring of Quick Prayer). On the other hand, when I can show that the Wizard can now do nearly that much in three fewer turns, it's seen as an acceptable number. The Wizard can do about 100 more points of spell damage in 7 turns than the Druid can do in 10 combining Polymorph and spells, and about more than 300 more points in spell damage in 7 turns (with damage spells left over) than the Druid can do in total spell damage even maxing out the Charm of Spell Swapping (and again, let me know if that detailed analysis I did has any errors). To me, that is problematic. I recognize I'm in the minority thinking that is a problem.

An Ultra Rare token giving Druids 5 castings of 46 point damage Frozen Orbs = 230 damage not 140.

That's an Ultra Rare Token.

The Wizard Class Specific Legendary adds 3 castings of spells as Free Actions. One of which for the Wizard must be a level 1 spell, 2 of which must be at the Elf Wizard if spell swapped spells don't get the free action.

Assuming we can maximize and get 3 FA level 2 spells for the Wizard off their Class Specific Relic it's a net damage gain for the Wizard of

Ray spell - 18 + MEC 18 + spell damage 35 = 61
61*3 = 183

So the Relic token is giving Wizards 183 damage when calculating in the class specific spell doubling bonus on a Class specific necklace at the Relic level

The UR ring, designed for Clerics is giving Druids 11+35 = 46 * 3 = 138 damage on a non Druid specific Ultra Rare over that same 3 rounds of combat.

BUT the Druid still has 2 castings of FA Frozen Orb granted from the Ring for round 4 and 5, bringing their total damage bonus to 230 off an UR Ring.

Wizards do not have the capability of gaining an additional 2 castings of level 2 spells to use off the Relic as they have already used Stoneskin/Lesser Maze to perform the existing conversions.


So the UR ring is stronger than the Class Specific Relic Necklace when calculating it all of it's effects.

I notice you're very intentionally avoiding any discussion about the actual point of my post, which is the very significant total damage point discrepancy between Wizard and Druid. Which gets significantly worse if you also nerf further the Ring of Quick Prayer.

I'm not avoiding it. I don't think it exists but I am also not doing a detailed analysis of max damage round per round of the Wizard vs the Druid in order to validate your feeling that Druid is severely behind the Wizard.

My comments are SPECIFICALLY about the power level of two vastly different tokens and specifically showing that, as written, the UR non class specific Ring provides Druids MORE damage than the Class Specific Relic Necklace.

That is the totality of my argument in this instance.


If you want to argue that a BIS spell damage Druid is FAR behind the Wizard on spell damage then present a build, run the analysis over 10 rounds of combat and present it against the same 10 rounds of combat run by the Wizard.

The requirement of proof is in your court of that's your claim. I provided the proof of mine.

I've already provided a detailed analysis that shows the Wizard in just 7 turns far outdamages the Druid in 10. If you've decided to ignore that analysis and continue to say I'm basing what I'm saying on "feelings", I think that's on you.