TOPIC: Final MEC, Mage Medallion and Arch-Mage Medallion

Mage Powers - Thoughts

Intensify - I don't like the idea of making Spell Resistance relevant again. I don't like this consuming the Free Action so the SR drop can only affect 1 spell. I don't like that it must be used in the same round.

I don't think bringing back Spell Resistance is a good idea for the life of the game. It's a really shitty mechanic to encounter and it's already had tokens designed to combat it which were changed to no longer ignore SR and it's basically gone away.

IF spell resist comes back all spellcasters need some non relic level token to get around it. Preferably built into the character cards.

If it does stay I would Greatly prefer Intensify to be changed to reduce spell resistance by 50%(15HP)/100%(30HP) for all spells this combat. So that the properly equipped Wizard can make the call on dealing with SR enemies. I would be fine with this Mage Power not adding any damage to spells this round.

Arcane Slide - This is cool, as a Wizard who likes to slide some times I love this idea. It being a free action and costing 15HP to trigger makes me hope it adds damage to the spell so I am not burning a free action and HP on increasing my small chance of critting. Especially given other classes getting 19-20 18-20 or even 17-20 crit without any HP cost or the 1/room limitation. If my interpretation of the Relic wording does mean this would boost the spell by 30 damage for the 15HP and the crit range doubling I am 100% on board with this power. If it adds no damage to the spell the HP cost needs to be lower and the Relic is very underwhelming.


Arch-Mage Powers

Spell Savior - Love it, Free action non consumed spell. Very nice. Massive HP cost for l2 or l3. If this also boosts the spell bonus damage pool I am all in. If it does not I think the HP cost is too high, 10/level might be a better spot.

Spell Mastery - Meh? it's useful but in practice changing the element is likely to add +5 to the spells damage at a cost of 15HP. (If this also adds 30 bonus for the channeled HP I'm ok with it)

Boost Ally - another Massive HP cost. 10 per spell level would be more appropriate (if the AMM doesn't boost the damage with the Channel, if it does 15/SL is fine) Thematically this is a cool design. It's something that happens in fantasy in the form of weapon imbues, etc. The ability to channel scorching ray into a slide attack for 30 HP and have it potentially add 40ish base damage to a swing is cool. With Barbarians 1/game auto crit that's a nice 2 player combo power hit. I like it.



I'll wait for Jeff to specifically identify if the current design means that any Mage Power channeling adds damage to spells or not. That's the biggest thing that affects if this is a badass token or a weakass token in my mind right now.

Anthony Barnstable wrote:

Arcanist Kolixela wrote:

Kaelten wrote:

Ian Lee wrote: I would imagine Jeff could say something like "We plan on doing additional class legendaries in the future to highlight different aspects of classes." to give druids not into polymorph, rangers not into ranged, fighters not into one-handed weapons, wizards not into cutting themselves hope for another go at it.

I both understand how basing around MEC mechanics is unappealing to some and view this game as one not served well if tokens are universally appealing as that consumes design space. Widseth's Legendary was a rather obvious way to go, but will a bard legendary that does stuff not involving bardsong feel right?

Of course, I think we'd all love to know if such things are being planned.

I think the root of the problem with Wizard is it's more controversial than most classes' quintessential flavor.

Unlike Polymorph Druid, Ranged Rangers, and Singing Bards, MEC is not built into the class's concept.

Those who feel MEC is that quintessential aspect of the class are really just being gaslit by the fact it's been one of the few viable Wizard builds at the high end for so long it became a defacto expectation among them. If the class was "Blood Mage" and not "Wizard" it'd be a very different situation if no less controversial out of game.

Wizards have used their life essence to cause overly powerful magical effects in combat in fantasy lore for as long as i remember. How many times has Wizard X cast a massive elemental fire spell to save the party from imminent death and walked away bleading, having be struck blind with magefire in the eyes, had their hair gain a large streak of white or gone white all together.

The design of the Mad Evoker's Charm didn't invent the idea of sacrificial blood magic, it was inspired by it.

And Dwarves were antisemitic and Orcs were racist in fantasy lore for substantial lengths of time. WotC still finally acknowledged it and is correcting them in newer editions because “it always worked that way” was NOT a valid justification for maintaining hurtful social messages.

Sacrificing HP is not synonymous with self harm. It's more akin to exerting additional energy to power up a spell and lowering your overall stamina/reaction speed/etc etc.

Jeff explained his view on what spending HP is representing. It's also the explanation given in Dungeons and Dragons for what HP realistically represent.

Many players have interpreted the Mad Evoker's Charm as a self harming token but that's not what it is based on design, based on the concept of HP in fantasy gaming and based on the design intent of Jeff for the token.

The token art has no references to self harm.

I understand you are seeing a negative message from TD based on the token but that's not a message that TD is sending, it's one you are interpreting. There's not much Jeff and co can do about your personal interpretation.

And the token has existed for 6 years. Players who use and enjoy the token are not going to be OK with it's core concepts being destroyed because some players may see a negative message in it.

Jeff Martin wrote: I wanted to speak about the concerns some good folks here expressed about the hp for damage mechanic. I can understand where they are coming from, but I wanted to tell you where I am coming from with this.

In D&D hit points represent only a tiny fraction of the brute force your body can withstand. It mostly represents luck, grit and skill to avoid bodily damage. A 12th level fighter can take on a dragon because of luck, grit and skill -- not because their body has become diamond hard. Hit points are used to drive this mechanic, and it will work well for our Wizard channeling idea, too.

I can think of many Jedi power scenes that left the heroes weak, shaken and unable to perform additional Jedi powers. This is best tracked in D&D with hit points. Almost every fantasy series that comes to mind has some scene where the hero has to exerted supreme effort to cause a special magical effect to happen -- and is left weak, weary and unable to defend themselves.

Thanks for listening.

Almost every fantasy movie from the glory days has sexism and racism too, but we can strive to be better and cut out the concepts that are not sending positive messages.

There is also a difference of “Jedi is unable to do more Jedi magic (because he spent his magical energies)” and “Jedi is unable to do his Jedi magic (because he spent his physical life force and is now dead)”. Sometimes complex storytelling can try to paint the picture of using the magical energies without it looking like self harm. TD is not set up in a way where that storytelling has the ability to paint the Wizard’s slashing of her own wrists to bleed out for a giant fireball in a less gruesome light, and numerous people here have also demonstrated they have no interest in roleplaying it in any light other than self-harming blood magic triggering their fellow players who have recovered from a traumatic past of cutting themselves to feel like they are in power over their own lives, fighting their own inner monsters back. I will likely switch classes if these relic and legendary tokens are printed and I will kindly tell players and GMs in my pick up groups with strangers I am uncomfortable with any of them using these tokena (I have actually never played with anyone using MEC and reluctantly accepted it as “a token of its time”, not accounting for things like this, but this reprint gives the chance to acknowledge it and potentially even correct it). I frequently play in a partial party (not a full group of 10) that will be triggered by someone using this effect, and that is not okay for True Dungeon to encourage. So, either I’ll be playing a lot less with people I like, or I’ll be playing a lot less of the class I like. Because of these tokens.

Anthony Barnstable wrote:

Jeff Martin wrote: I wanted to speak about the concerns some good folks here expressed about the hp for damage mechanic. I can understand where they are coming from, but I wanted to tell you where I am coming from with this.

In D&D hit points represent only a tiny fraction of the brute force your body can withstand. It mostly represents luck, grit and skill to avoid bodily damage. A 12th level fighter can take on a dragon because of luck, grit and skill -- not because their body has become diamond hard. Hit points are used to drive this mechanic, and it will work well for our Wizard channeling idea, too.

I can think of many Jedi power scenes that left the heroes weak, shaken and unable to perform additional Jedi powers. This is best tracked in D&D with hit points. Almost every fantasy series that comes to mind has some scene where the hero has to exerted supreme effort to cause a special magical effect to happen -- and is left weak, weary and unable to defend themselves.

Thanks for listening.

Almost every fantasy movie from the glory days has sexism and racism too, but we can strive to be better and cut out the concepts that are not sending positive messages.

There is also a difference of “Jedi is unable to do more Jedi magic (because he spent his magical energies)” and “Jedi is unable to do his Jedi magic (because he spent his physical life force and is now dead)”. Sometimes complex storytelling can try to paint the picture of using the magical energies without it looking like self harm. TD is not set up in a way where that storytelling has the ability to paint the Wizard’s slashing of her own wrists to bleed out for a giant fireball in a less gruesome light, and numerous people here have also demonstrated they have no interest in roleplaying it in any light other than self-harming blood magic triggering their fellow players who have recovered from a traumatic past of cutting themselves to feel like they are in power over their own lives, fighting their own inner monsters back. I will likely switch classes if these relic and legendary tokens are printed and I will kindly tell players and GMs in my pick up groups with strangers I am uncomfortable with any of them using these tokena (I have actually never played with anyone using MEC and reluctantly accepted it as “a token of its time”, not accounting for things like this, but this reprint gives the chance to acknowledge it and potentially even correct it). I frequently play in a partial party (not a full group of 10) that will be triggered by someone using this effect, and that is not okay for True Dungeon to encourage. So, either I’ll be playing a lot less with people I like, or I’ll be playing a lot less of the class I like. Because of these tokens.

These tokens have existed for SIX YEARS. There is NO TIME to redesign the Wizard necklace AGAIN because you might be triggered by a person playing a fantasy wizard choosing to use a token that's been used in most Relic+ Wizard builds for SIX YEARS. If you truly have this much of an issue with it I would highly suggest forming your own groups and avoiding PUG groups at all because honestly there's a large section of the Wizard players who enjoy this token and it's interactions and if you come into a random group and tell someone you want them to change their entire class build concept because you have a problem with THEM using a token you dislike you're probably not going to like the answer they give you.

I can say with 100% certainty that if you told me you wanted me to not use my MEC charm because you dislike the negative connotations I'd tell you I was sorry but I was not altering MY playstyle to make YOU feel better.

And if you ever tried to tell a GM to deny me the right to use MY tokens as I see fit we'd have a serious issue.

YOU are intentionally reading things into this token and this playstyle that are not intended by true dungeon. If you have an issue with it then change YOUR play style but don't expect others to bow to your wants because you don't like your perceived notion of what the token represents. Especially after you've been given the explanation as to what the token ACTUALLY represents by the game's designer

Arcanist Kolixela wrote:

Anthony Barnstable wrote:

Arcanist Kolixela wrote:

Kaelten wrote:

Ian Lee wrote: I would imagine Jeff could say something like "We plan on doing additional class legendaries in the future to highlight different aspects of classes." to give druids not into polymorph, rangers not into ranged, fighters not into one-handed weapons, wizards not into cutting themselves hope for another go at it.

I both understand how basing around MEC mechanics is unappealing to some and view this game as one not served well if tokens are universally appealing as that consumes design space. Widseth's Legendary was a rather obvious way to go, but will a bard legendary that does stuff not involving bardsong feel right?

Of course, I think we'd all love to know if such things are being planned.

I think the root of the problem with Wizard is it's more controversial than most classes' quintessential flavor.

Unlike Polymorph Druid, Ranged Rangers, and Singing Bards, MEC is not built into the class's concept.

Those who feel MEC is that quintessential aspect of the class are really just being gaslit by the fact it's been one of the few viable Wizard builds at the high end for so long it became a defacto expectation among them. If the class was "Blood Mage" and not "Wizard" it'd be a very different situation if no less controversial out of game.

Wizards have used their life essence to cause overly powerful magical effects in combat in fantasy lore for as long as i remember. How many times has Wizard X cast a massive elemental fire spell to save the party from imminent death and walked away bleading, having be struck blind with magefire in the eyes, had their hair gain a large streak of white or gone white all together.

The design of the Mad Evoker's Charm didn't invent the idea of sacrificial blood magic, it was inspired by it.

And Dwarves were antisemitic and Orcs were racist in fantasy lore for substantial lengths of time. WotC still finally acknowledged it and is correcting them in newer editions because “it always worked that way” was NOT a valid justification for maintaining hurtful social messages.

Sacrificing HP is not synonymous with self harm. It's more akin to exerting additional energy to power up a spell and lowering your overall stamina/reaction speed/etc etc.

Jeff explained his view on what spending HP is representing. It's also the explanation given in Dungeons and Dragons for what HP realistically represent.

Many players have interpreted the Mad Evoker's Charm as a self harming token but that's not what it is based on design, based on the concept of HP in fantasy gaming and based on the design intent of Jeff for the token.

The token art has no references to self harm.

I understand you are seeing a negative message from TD based on the token but that's not a message that TD is sending, it's one you are interpreting. There's not much Jeff and co can do about your personal interpretation.

And the token has existed for 6 years. Players who use and enjoy the token are not going to be OK with it's core concepts being destroyed because some players may see a negative message in it.

Players were “not okay” with WotC “destroying the core concepts” of “all fake elves are evil (because racism)”, but they did it anyways.

You can say all day long “WotC never intended for dark elves to be a racist depiction” and “some players chose to interpret it negatively, but WotC could do nothing about their choice to interpret it that way”. And yet, WotC still acknowledged “wow, if some people are claiming this sends a negative social message, it doesn’t matter what our intent is or how we want to spin this, it is still fundamentally true that this sends a negative social message and we can either respond with that mindset or perpetuate the problem”. And they changed things for the better. I understand Jeff doesn’t /intend/ for this to be triggering to some players and cause them to remember when they self-harmed, but these tokens still do that whether he intends it or not. I understand Jeff wants the tokens to be interpreted differently, but several players have made it clear “if this goes to print, I am going to roleplay it as self-harming blood magic and commit suicide in front of strangers who are battling suicidal thoughts themselves! Yippee!” I understand some people “want to have fun and enjoy this style of play”, but I want those players to all ask themselves: is their fun worth making others players uncomfortable? (For example, is it acceptable for one player to “have fun” by making inappropriate sexual advances at party members they do not personally know, because it is how they have fun? Or is it unacceptable?)

I just want Jeff to think long and hard about how comfortable he is creating an environment that encourages that behavior and creating an environment that will (not may, will) be uncomfortable to some players of the game.

And if these tokens go to print, I will just continue to hold out hope someday, Jeff sees what they do to the mental health of community members and/or potential community members and either bans them or erratas them to create a better environment.

Some great ideas I loved for MEC tossed out in the one round I missed commenting on before it was locked:

UR MEC: May elect to take a second skill test for double skill check damage, but if you get it wrong the wizard takes the damage.
That doesn’t feel like it is “powered by self harm”, while still creating a risk/reward system based on HP.

Otherwise, instead of using HP as mana, use Int, or Wis, OR THE BUILT IN EXISTING MANA SYSTEM: SPELL BOXES. Check off an extra box to activate a Mage Power, or Arch-Mage Power, check off an extra box to up the damage of a spell, or to cast more spells in one round (maybe even 3 spells in one round by marking them off! That’s pretty darn mad). Burn through your spell casting ability faster and be left feeble by putting all of your magical abilities into one massive spell or a few relatively big spells.

MEC could even just be the greatly coveted theorized ability: Wizard can make a ranged attack damage spell that deals 1 damage (can be modified).
That seems pretty Mad for them to Evoke a whole new cantrip just to hit you with it when you upset them. And I am quite confident many people would enjoy this token that ensures they can keep casting after burning through their more powerful spells too quickly.

Having followed the back and forth most of the day and having caught up on the thread, I have to say that though I started out a bit down about the tokens, they've really started to grow on me as I've seen people hash over the potential in ways I hadn't thought of.

Like a few others, I have concerns about spell resistance returning. I can't think of many tokens that exist to get around that, and I'm not sure if that is because they don't exist or because it's nearly 4am where im at lol. My main fear with spell resistance returning is that in order to get around it how much of the build I've been putting together for so many years would need to be scuttled to remain useful to my team?

I also have come around to the hp costs to boost damage and access mage powers. MEC was one of those tokens that I ignored at first because I was new to the game and my general thought was 'holy hell, it costs HOW much HP??'. Having played the wizard for going on eight years now my build has changed juuuuust a teeny bit from those early days and I see how versatile an HP to damage boost can be, and I can see it fitting with my party's game style. My role with them is to do the biggest amount of damage in the last combat room to as many things as possible. The damage boosts allow for a whole new level of supernova, and that is exciting so long as our cleric keeps me standing. And the mage powers are an interesting concept. I really like the idea of being able to power up another party member, and I'll be interested to see where mage powers go from here.

Anthony Barnstable wrote:

Arcanist Kolixela wrote:

Anthony Barnstable wrote:

Arcanist Kolixela wrote:

Kaelten wrote:

Ian Lee wrote: I would imagine Jeff could say something like "We plan on doing additional class legendaries in the future to highlight different aspects of classes." to give druids not into polymorph, rangers not into ranged, fighters not into one-handed weapons, wizards not into cutting themselves hope for another go at it.

I both understand how basing around MEC mechanics is unappealing to some and view this game as one not served well if tokens are universally appealing as that consumes design space. Widseth's Legendary was a rather obvious way to go, but will a bard legendary that does stuff not involving bardsong feel right?

Of course, I think we'd all love to know if such things are being planned.

I think the root of the problem with Wizard is it's more controversial than most classes' quintessential flavor.

Unlike Polymorph Druid, Ranged Rangers, and Singing Bards, MEC is not built into the class's concept.

Those who feel MEC is that quintessential aspect of the class are really just being gaslit by the fact it's been one of the few viable Wizard builds at the high end for so long it became a defacto expectation among them. If the class was "Blood Mage" and not "Wizard" it'd be a very different situation if no less controversial out of game.

Wizards have used their life essence to cause overly powerful magical effects in combat in fantasy lore for as long as i remember. How many times has Wizard X cast a massive elemental fire spell to save the party from imminent death and walked away bleading, having be struck blind with magefire in the eyes, had their hair gain a large streak of white or gone white all together.

The design of the Mad Evoker's Charm didn't invent the idea of sacrificial blood magic, it was inspired by it.

And Dwarves were antisemitic and Orcs were racist in fantasy lore for substantial lengths of time. WotC still finally acknowledged it and is correcting them in newer editions because “it always worked that way” was NOT a valid justification for maintaining hurtful social messages.

Sacrificing HP is not synonymous with self harm. It's more akin to exerting additional energy to power up a spell and lowering your overall stamina/reaction speed/etc etc.

Jeff explained his view on what spending HP is representing. It's also the explanation given in Dungeons and Dragons for what HP realistically represent.

Many players have interpreted the Mad Evoker's Charm as a self harming token but that's not what it is based on design, based on the concept of HP in fantasy gaming and based on the design intent of Jeff for the token.

The token art has no references to self harm.

I understand you are seeing a negative message from TD based on the token but that's not a message that TD is sending, it's one you are interpreting. There's not much Jeff and co can do about your personal interpretation.

And the token has existed for 6 years. Players who use and enjoy the token are not going to be OK with it's core concepts being destroyed because some players may see a negative message in it.

Players were “not okay” with WotC “destroying the core concepts” of “all fake elves are evil (because racism)”, but they did it anyways.

You can say all day long “WotC never intended for dark elves to be a racist depiction” and “some players chose to interpret it negatively, but WotC could do nothing about their choice to interpret it that way”. And yet, WotC still acknowledged “wow, if some people are claiming this sends a negative social message, it doesn’t matter what our intent is or how we want to spin this, it is still fundamentally true that this sends a negative social message and we can either respond with that mindset or perpetuate the problem”. And they changed things for the better. I understand Jeff doesn’t /intend/ for this to be triggering to some players and cause them to remember when they self-harmed, but these tokens still do that whether he intends it or not. I understand Jeff wants the tokens to be interpreted differently, but several players have made it clear “if this goes to print, I am going to roleplay it as self-harming blood magic and commit suicide in front of strangers who are battling suicidal thoughts themselves! Yippee!” I understand some people “want to have fun and enjoy this style of play”, but I want those players to all ask themselves: is their fun worth making others players uncomfortable? (For example, is it acceptable for one player to “have fun” by making inappropriate sexual advances at party members they do not personally know, because it is how they have fun? Or is it unacceptable?)

I just want Jeff to think long and hard about how comfortable he is creating an environment that encourages that behavior and creating an environment that will (not may, will) be uncomfortable to some players of the game.

And if these tokens go to print, I will just continue to hold out hope someday, Jeff sees what they do to the mental health of community members and/or potential community members and either bans them or erratas them to create a better environment.

The sheer number of logical fallacies and intentional misinterpretations of the intentions of others in your post is unsettling.

Not using a token because you and your friends have an issue with it is perfectly fine.
Asking other players not to use a token because you and your friends choose to interpret it in a way that does not match it's design intention is not OK.
Asking the DM to intervene and force other players to not play their tokens because you do not like them is NOT OK.


The Mad Evoker's Charm has existed for six years. You have been registered on the site for 9 years.

You've known about the existence of the Mad Evoker's Charm for six years and chosen to continue playing Wizard even tho the token exists.

Coming into the token creation thread at literally the last few hours and asking Jeff to completely redesign a token that has existed without controversy for six years because you have a personal issue with it is not OK.

No matter what is done some players will be uncomfortable. That may be you or your friend because you are triggered due to the existence of a token or that may be the players who've spent years building their character and token collection around the identity of their form of Wizard and you've ruined the game for them by pressuring Jeff into destroying their favorite token.

Not one single person has come close to stating “if this goes to print, I am going to roleplay it as self-harming blood magic and commit suicide in front of strangers who are battling suicidal thoughts themselves! Yippee!”

No one has ever mentioned they intend to use their roleplay to intentionally trigger another person.

Before you try to guilt trip players into feeling their roleplaying is bad I want to ask YOU if you feel it's OK to make other players upset and uncomfortable with your actions, because calling for the destruction of a token that is a core identity of the class and has been a cornerstone of their build for years due to your negative feelings about that token is definitely making other people upset and uncomfortable.

The sad reality is that there is no solution that will not leave some group upset, that's just the unfortunate reality of the situation.

Using the false equivalence fallacy of comparing intentional creepy behavior of one person to the unintentional triggering of a player due to a personal issue with self harm are not the same thing.

With 100% sincerity I will say to you that if the mere existence of the Mad Evoker's Charm is a danger to your mental health as you've indicated. I would highly suggest you retire from True Dungeon to protect yourself. No one wants you or another member of your party to come to harm due to a reaction to the existence of tokens that remind you of self harm. But to ask the entire community to remove the tokens and ban them from use because of your personal issues with the token is an extremely self centered point of view.

I would definitely suggest you build your own adventuring parties with your own personal group and recruit others to fill your remaining spots with players who are OK with your request to have no players in the party use any of the tokens you have an issue with in order to protect yourself and the health of your co-players. But I would not expect to join a random group and force existing players to adapt their game to your personal needs.

I've a very close friend who loves the concept of True Dungeon and wants to participate in the game with me and my group, but she has a trauma that makes any interactions with flashing lights extremely harmful. She'd play any time that it was possible for her to do so but she's never played a single game. Because there's no way to accomodate her medical condition in such a way that she can participate and not fundamentally alter the experience for other players.

Do what you need in order to protect yourself and your fellow players, just don't try to impose your restrictions on the rest of the group.

Kitkumi wrote: Having followed the back and forth most of the day and having caught up on the thread, I have to say that though I started out a bit down about the tokens, they've really started to grow on me as I've seen people hash over the potential in ways I hadn't thought of.

Like a few others, I have concerns about spell resistance returning. I can't think of many tokens that exist to get around that, and I'm not sure if that is because they don't exist or because it's nearly 4am where im at lol. My main fear with spell resistance returning is that in order to get around it how much of the build I've been putting together for so many years would need to be scuttled to remain useful to my team?

I also have come around to the hp costs to boost damage and access mage powers. MEC was one of those tokens that I ignored at first because I was new to the game and my general thought was 'holy hell, it costs HOW much HP??'. Having played the wizard for going on eight years now my build has changed juuuuust a teeny bit from those early days and I see how versatile an HP to damage boost can be, and I can see it fitting with my party's game style. My role with them is to do the biggest amount of damage in the last combat room to as many things as possible. The damage boosts allow for a whole new level of supernova, and that is exciting so long as our cleric keeps me standing. And the mage powers are an interesting concept. I really like the idea of being able to power up another party member, and I'll be interested to see where mage powers go from here.

per tokendb the only tokens in the game that provide any level of spell resistence boosts are the +2 Rod if Disjunction, printed in 2011 and never reprinted, and the Charm of the Cabal printed in 2013 and never reprinted.

the Rod of Disjunction allows Bard, Cleric, Druid or Wizard to lower a target's spell resistance by 10%, to a max of 30% on any successful MELEE hit.

The Charm of the Cabal automatically provides 10/15 or 20% spell resistance reduction based on the number of charms equipped in the party.

These are the only currently existing sources of Spell Resistance in the game.

Still generally happy with the new token designs, Jeff. Just looking forward to clarification on some of the questions that have been asked in this thread.

Jeff Martin wrote: Thanks for all the great questions and feedback. I can see I need to sit down and write this thing up properly. I will do that tomorrow afternoon. I am going on very little sleep over this week, and I think I need a good night's sleep to do my best work. So...thanks for your patience!

BTW, here are the latest versions of the 3 tokens. More and better things tomorrow!

Just offering up a possible rewrite for the current token abilities. I believe that I am reflecting the current design accurately, but I could be wrong.

I think reusing the term "channel" throughout the tokens is a strong design element, it may be a longer word than what its replacing but I think it will help reinforce how the token functions.

I think you can break down the abilities on the new MEC into 3 parts, I'll be using bullet points to represent those part, but you make not actually have room on the token for bullet points.


New MEC Text:

• For every/each 1 hp you channel into a dmg spell gain 1 pt of bonus dmg.
• If 15+ hp is channeled, you may use a Mage Power.
• Gain Quicken Spell as Mage Power (1/room) OR Gain Mage Power: Quicken Spell (1/room)

Then on TokenDB you can clarify:
Quicken Spell - Allows the spell being channeled to be cast as a Free Action.

New Text for Mage Medallion:

• As MEC but gain 2 bonus dmg per 1 hp channeled.
• Gain Intensify and Arcane Slide as Mage Powers.

Again, you clarify the specific powers on TokenDB.

New text for Ashenne's Arch-Mage Medallion:

• As MM but if 15+ hp is channeled, you may use an Arch-Mage Power instead.
• Gain Spell Savior, Spell Mastery & Boost Ally as Arch-Mage Powers.

Again, you clarify the specific powers on TokenDB.

Milambus (Jake) wrote:

Jeff Martin wrote: Thanks for all the great questions and feedback. I can see I need to sit down and write this thing up properly. I will do that tomorrow afternoon. I am going on very little sleep over this week, and I think I need a good night's sleep to do my best work. So...thanks for your patience!

BTW, here are the latest versions of the 3 tokens. More and better things tomorrow!

Just offering up a possible rewrite for the current token abilities. I believe that I am reflecting the current design accurately, but I could be wrong.

I think reusing the term "channel" throughout the tokens is a strong design element, it may be a longer word than what its replacing but I think it will help reinforce how the token functions.

I think you can break down the abilities on the new MEC into 3 parts, I'll be using bullet points to represent those part, but you make not actually have room on the token for bullet points.


New MEC Text:

• For every/each 1 hp you channel into a dmg spell gain 1 pt of bonus dmg.
• If 15+ hp is channeled, you may use a Mage Power.
• Gain Quicken Spell as Mage Power (1/room) OR Gain Mage Power: Quicken Spell (1/room)

Then on TokenDB you can clarify:
Quicken Spell - Allows the spell being channeled to be cast as a Free Action.

New Text for Mage Medallion:

• As MEC but gain 2 bonus dmg per 1 hp channeled.
• Gain Intensify and Arcane Slide as Mage Powers.

Again, you clarify the specific powers on TokenDB.

New text for Ashenne's Arch-Mage Medallion:

• As MM but if 15+ hp is channeled, you may use an Arch-Mage Power instead.
• Gain Spell Savior, Spell Mastery & Boost Ally as Arch-Mage Powers.

Again, you clarify the specific powers on TokenDB.

I think at this point the safest thing for print is to leave the actual powers blank on the token so they can change as needed over the next 2-3 weeks of class redesign.

I do love the idea that we can gather additional tokens that "slot in" to the relic or legendary and modify what Mage Powers we bring to a given run.

I envision myself having a small locked 20ish slot token vault that contains the "true power" of my Class necklace to modify at my whim.

But I'm a bit overly dramatic