TOPIC: All the Final 2026 Token Images!

edwin wrote: Normal just needs starter packs to have fun and enjoy.

Hardcore just needs rares, uncommon, commons and to have fun and enjoy.

Nightmare just needs URs and below to have fun and enjoy.

How about limiting Hardcore to 2 URs, rares and below and treasure enhancers? Or do folks want to have overly powered characters?

How about limiting Nightmare to 2 relics, URs and below and treasure enhancers? Or do folks want to have overly powered characters?

How about limit legendary, eldritch and arcaeum(sp?) to Epic DR and above?

Why do so many feel the need to tell others what to do? That is the number one complaint of new and existing players.

Who knows maybe I can buy a few single tickets to random runs and force normal level play and not borrow tokens or treasure enhancers and get just 4 treasure? If people try to push tokens then that will be registered as a complaint on feedback along with the zoom name(s). Will that help drive more ticket sales?

I have never agreed to those descriptions of tokens needed for different difficulty levels. I've outfitted my group with a ton of UR and above tokens, and we enjoy playing Hardcore level, and the group still has scars (and many departed players) from the SMOAK years on Nightmare Level. A couple of years ago I polled the group to see if they wanted to switch back to Nightmare, and it was a unanimous vote to stay on Hardcore.

True, my group (other than me) are extremely casual players, don't think of True Dungeon other than when they are playing it, and certainly don't make close to full use of character or token abilities. And are just as likely to break out into song with the Bard as they are to slide in combat in a timely manner.

The point is, there are all kinds of different groups, who enjoy True Dungeon in different ways, and to try to force difficulty levels based on token builds will just lead to a lot of very bad customer experiences for True Dungeon.

Count me in the group that thinks that power creep within a rarity is bad for the game. Once people realize that the tokens they are buying today are going to be relatively worthless in a few years because they are made obsolete by more powerful tokens in the same rarity, that will discourage future token buying. It also messes up the next level of rarity. I think it is even more discouraging for players when tokens they have bought are made obsolete by tokens of a lower rarity. Girdle of Frost Giant Strength at Relic has now been equaled by a UR with a set bonus. I think for players to advance to more powerful tokens it should be enabled by increasingly higher token levels (Rare to UR to Relic to Legendary to Mythic) and not be continually increasing the power levels at existing rarity levels.

Plus, of course, True Dungeon is constantly putting out slotless tokens and new slots, which provide the ability of players at all token build levels to add tokens to their builds.

OrionW wrote: Slight creep is what keeps this game going. If items don’t continue to evolve the token market will crash. We are almost to this point now. Fragments have been propping up Auction prices for a while now. This doesn’t mean that every year needs to obsolete the past, but marginal items are probably a mistake.

I hope I am wrong and TD sells a lot of these tokens, even if I am skeptical of the usefulness of some of the final images. The legendaries remind me a lot of Vim’s.

Let's look at a couple of 2025 top end melee builds:

Melee Ranger:
tdcharactercreator.com/#/character/edit/6a279d72-1b27-4a7f-853e-3bd70cd557bf

Melee Fighter
tdcharactercreator.com/#/character/edit/8d7c8ab9-0ffe-4d9d-868d-516c10633057

Given builds at this level we would never expect URs to upgrade the build, but I can totally see the case for the following:

*Bumping FoP Cat for FoP Pilgrim in both builds. Self heal and remove negative effects is better than rerolling saves when you're probably passing on a 2+ anyway.

*The goblet is slotless so every "no budget" build should get one on principal

*The ranger build should probably drop Cranston's for Hat of Critical thinking, and just drop goggles of the Deadshot. That would boost melee damage AND allow crits with Thor's.

Beyond URs, this set also has plenty to offer:

*Both builds drop Ring of the Eel for Craven's Vampire Ring.

*Both builds Add SH1

*Both builds drop Orbits to add EGG. The extra ring slot is filled with Arcanum Ring.

*Both builds use the extra Ioun Slot to add Ioun Stone of the Champion.

*Both builds add Deathward Greaves

*Both builds add Mark of Enlightenment

7 or 8 upgrades in a year for builds that already have top end everything is -a lot-. I'm not sure why we need even MORE creep.

OrionW wrote:

Endgame wrote:

edwin wrote:
Take time and money elsewhere is what content means.

And no growth. New players don't need tokens beyond starter packs and longer term players at some point move on leaving those in the middle holding the bag.

If TD combine Nightmare and Epic that would result in the middle either stepping up and putting their money where their mouth is or force them down to hardcore. But the middle was and continues to be vocally against what would cause growth. And bad behavior is rewarded.

Creep kills games. period. Why spend money today when things get better tomorrow for the same cost?

If we contain creep, eventually a player will have no URs left to buy to make their build better and will have to graduate to relics, then legendary if they want to keep making their build better. Once they have a legendary build, they will start picking up things for other characters. If a player eventually acquires all the legendary and all they have left to acquire is the annual legendaries and multi years, congrats! You've got someone who has spent more than a car playing the game. Keep them engaged with events and pickup new players that want grow into higher rarity builds. The best part is, those very invested, very engaged players are likely to want to go out and help get new players - look at Trent as an example.

Slight creep is what keeps this game going. If items don’t continue to evolve the token market will crash. We are almost to this point now. Fragments have been propping up Auction prices for a while now. This doesn’t mean that every year needs to obsolete the past, but marginal items are probably a mistake.

I hope I am wrong and TD sells a lot of these tokens, even if I am skeptical of the usefulness of some of the final images. The legendaries remind me a lot of Vim’s.

I would argue we are not at that yet, there is literally nothing for me this year other than the FoP but I still think the set is very solid. Slight creep is good and eventually this creep will make UR's better than old relics. This is bound to happen even at the legendary level. I would like to see more diversity happen first though.

I think this will be a very successful year for tokens, having a strong theme tied to the adventure really helps me be excited for the set. Even if they aren't "good" for me I'll pick up a few to remember the module.

edwin wrote: Who knows maybe I can buy a few single tickets to random runs and force normal level play and not borrow tokens or treasure enhancers and get just 4 treasure? If people try to push tokens then that will be registered as a complaint on feedback along with the zoom name(s). Will that help drive more ticket sales?

I would like to formally request that you not do this. I do not have a high tolerance for folks being intentionally belligerent in a way that negatively impacts the experience of players who are not involved in whatever they're upset about. Do not be the reason a DM has to ask me to pop into a run to curtail behavior. I can currently count the number of times I've had to do that on one hand, and I do not want that number to increase. Plus, this is the type of thing I would wind up tagging Lori in on, and nobody wants to make mama bear angry.

On the chance that this might have been intended as a joke I'd like to remind everyone that sarcasm does not come across well in text medium. Multiple people reached out to me concerned about this post before I came here to reply. You might think your comments are funny, but not everyone will have the same sense of humor.

Dave wrote: True Dungeon is based off of D&D. D&D is all about power creep. Why don't we just max out D&D characters at level 2 or 3?

I think this is a good insight, but somewhat obscures things due to ambiguity in the term "power creep."

I'd say D&D is all about "progression" or "advancement" - not "power creep."

"Power Creep" in True Dungeon tokens is a many-faceted phenomena.

It does offer a sense of progression or advancement, but the different facets of power creep can have some negative effects on gameplay and collectability.

The trick is to add a sense of progression/advancement for players while managing the negatives.

"Power Creep" at large may refer to any of these things (and probably a bunch of other stuff too):

1. Power increases with rarity:

* Rare Boots are better than Common Boots

2. Increased power within a slot by adding desirable effects not currently available in that slot into it.

Consider the history of the Ioun Slot with regard to damage boosting:
* Created in 2007, with purely defensive tokens
* First 6 years (2007-2013): No +damage or STR boosting Iouns, overwhelmingly Iouns are defensive
* Next 4 years (2014-2017): Two STR boosting Iouns, but still overwhelmingly Iouns are defensive
* Next 4 years (2018-2021): Five +Damage Iouns
* Next 4 years (2022-2026): Seven +Damage Iouns, Five STR boosting Iouns, Two +hit & damage Iouns

3. Additional slots

* TD creating new slots like Mark in 2024, Bead in 2018, Charm in 2009
* Slot Expanding and swapping tokens

4. Slotless tokens

5. Increased power in the same slot, at the same rarity

* Stu-Pendous Pendant compared with Amulet of the Folkvangr
* Belt of Ogre Power compared with Belt of the Brave

6. Lower rarity tokens which match or exceed higher rarity tokens in the same slot

* Rare Ioun Stone Jasper Ellipsoid (+2 melee dmg) vs. UR Ioun Stone Infernal Fire Prism (+2 fire melee dmg)

I think "Power Creep" tied to rarity levels (e.g. URs are better than Rares) has overall been a great way of offering TD players that sense of progression or advancement that D&D thrives on. It's also good for collectability.

I think all of the types of power creep above can be used judiciously in ways that improve the game.

However, several of them have can negative consequences to fun/gameplay/collectability that may outweigh their benefits when it comes to particular designs or design trends.

When I (and I suspect many other people) express concerns around "power creep" I think we're saying a particular design or design trend is creating more negatives than positives; not that builds should never progress or advance.

Matthew Hayward wrote: "Power Creep" in True Dungeon tokens is a many-faceted phenomena.
...

5. Increased power in the same slot, at the same rarity
* Belt of Ogre Power compared with Belt of the Brave

6. Lower rarity tokens which match or exceed higher rarity tokens in the same slot
* Rare Ioun Stone Jasper Ellipsoid (+2 melee dmg) vs. UR Ioun Stone Infernal Fire Prism (+2 fire melee dmg)

I think "Power Creep" tied to rarity levels (e.g. URs are better than Rares) has overall been a great way of offering TD players that sense of progression or advancement that D&D thrives on. It's also good for collectability.

Curious about your take on something. How should TDA handle "mistakes" in token power? The examples I snipped above are examples of what I mean. TDA has access to PYP data that we don't, so it may inform their decisions a bit.

Two scenarios.

Scenario 1: Underpowered tokens
UR Ioun Stone Infernal Fire Prism vs. Ioun Stone Ruby Orb. Both offer +2 fire damage at Melee.

Compare also Ioun Stone Banshee Prism vs. Ioun Stone Kyanite Cube.

There could be sales data that suggest Fire Prism and Banshee Prism weren't desirable, so a kicker (-2 cold damage) got added to Kyanite Cube. It's a case of creep, yes, but also maybe correction to where players feel an UR should be?

Scenario 2: Overpowered tokens
Belt of Ogre Power vs Belt of the Brave

I think almost everyone agrees that Belt of the Brave is a mistake. The sales for that VTD certainly suggest people running multiple times to acquire it. Unfortunately, it seems to be a new baseline in token dev.

What's the solution for a token like that? A buyback program, perhaps through transmutes? Just call it an outlier and not use it as a baseline?

Just curious how those scenarios should get handled.

It's also worth noting that all those Rare tokens are completion tokens.

Marc D wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote: "Power Creep" in True Dungeon tokens is a many-faceted phenomena.
...

5. Increased power in the same slot, at the same rarity
* Belt of Ogre Power compared with Belt of the Brave

6. Lower rarity tokens which match or exceed higher rarity tokens in the same slot
* Rare Ioun Stone Jasper Ellipsoid (+2 melee dmg) vs. UR Ioun Stone Infernal Fire Prism (+2 fire melee dmg)

I think "Power Creep" tied to rarity levels (e.g. URs are better than Rares) has overall been a great way of offering TD players that sense of progression or advancement that D&D thrives on. It's also good for collectability.

Curious about your take on something. How should TDA handle "mistakes" in token power? The examples I snipped above are examples of what I mean. TDA has access to PYP data that we don't, so it may inform their decisions a bit.

Two scenarios.

Scenario 1: Underpowered tokens
UR Ioun Stone Infernal Fire Prism vs. Ioun Stone Ruby Orb. Both offer +2 fire damage at Melee.

Compare also Ioun Stone Banshee Prism vs. Ioun Stone Kyanite Cube.

There could be sales data that suggest Fire Prism and Banshee Prism weren't desirable, so a kicker (-2 cold damage) got added to Kyanite Cube. It's a case of creep, yes, but also maybe correction to where players feel an UR should be?

Scenario 2: Overpowered tokens
Belt of Ogre Power vs Belt of the Brave

I think almost everyone agrees that Belt of the Brave is a mistake. The sales for that VTD certainly suggest people running multiple times to acquire it. Unfortunately, it seems to be a new baseline in token dev.

What's the solution for a token like that? A buyback program, perhaps through transmutes? Just call it an outlier and not use it as a baseline?

Just curious how those scenarios should get handled.

It's also worth noting that all those Rare tokens are completion tokens.

My recommendation is to use "mistake" tokens like Belt of the Brave as an outlier, and basically ignore it. I think it would be a huge mistake to boost all power levels of similar tokens by using it as some sort of a baseline. I wouldn't be surprised if the existence of Belt of the Brave is one of the reasons the current waist item is so much more powerful this year.

Marc D wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote: "Power Creep" in True Dungeon tokens is a many-faceted phenomena.
...

5. Increased power in the same slot, at the same rarity
* Belt of Ogre Power compared with Belt of the Brave

6. Lower rarity tokens which match or exceed higher rarity tokens in the same slot
* Rare Ioun Stone Jasper Ellipsoid (+2 melee dmg) vs. UR Ioun Stone Infernal Fire Prism (+2 fire melee dmg)

I think "Power Creep" tied to rarity levels (e.g. URs are better than Rares) has overall been a great way of offering TD players that sense of progression or advancement that D&D thrives on. It's also good for collectability.

Curious about your take on something. How should TDA handle "mistakes" in token power? The examples I snipped above are examples of what I mean. TDA has access to PYP data that we don't, so it may inform their decisions a bit.

Two scenarios.

Scenario 1: Underpowered tokens
UR Ioun Stone Infernal Fire Prism vs. Ioun Stone Ruby Orb. Both offer +2 fire damage at Melee.

Compare also Ioun Stone Banshee Prism vs. Ioun Stone Kyanite Cube.

There could be sales data that suggest Fire Prism and Banshee Prism weren't desirable, so a kicker (-2 cold damage) got added to Kyanite Cube. It's a case of creep, yes, but also maybe correction to where players feel an UR should be?

For underpowered tokens, I think it's fine for TD to just print more power in the slot at that rarity (or a lower rarity depending on how underpowered it is).

Doing that would be "power creep" - but that doesn't make it inherently bad.

It's not good if the first tokens in a slot are the most powerful, as it undermines that slot going forward (that happened with the legs slot which saw an announced Kilt of Dungeonbane transmute in the 2nd year the slot existed) - the flip side of that rule of thumb for design would be that slots need to be able to grow in power some.

TD has a good history of letting slots develop over time, by ramping up the power within the slot. I think this is a good way to add progression. See, for example, the first usable by all UR Shirt: Shirt of the Underdark: +5 to max HP.

I also think it's desirable to have a range of power within a slot and rarity - which inherently means there will be some underpowered tokens.

Specifically for Fire Prism, Banshee Prism, and Kyanite Cube it sure looks like TD decided +2 damage for a single mode of combat is a rare Ioun effect in 2020 and doubled down on that in 2023.

Scenario 2: Overpowered tokens
Belt of Ogre Power vs Belt of the Brave

I think almost everyone agrees that Belt of the Brave is a mistake. The sales for that VTD certainly suggest people running multiple times to acquire it. Unfortunately, it seems to be a new baseline in token dev.

What's the solution for a token like that? A buyback program, perhaps through transmutes? Just call it an outlier and not use it as a baseline?

Just curious how those scenarios should get handled.

I don't have great ideas about what to do about overpowered tokens. It's a bad situation where the cure can easily be worse than the disease.

TD has infrequently banned overpowered tokens by reprinting them with a reduced effect, or simply changing the effect in the case of set bonuses.

This has happened only a few times by my recollection with: Cloak of Shadowskin, Lenses of Divine Sight, Mad Evoker's Charm, and an older version of the Eldrtich Set bonus. (Other tokens have been deprecated due to changes in underlying rules or class abilities.)

When TD has banned UR tokens they've usually allowed a trade in of the banned token for a UR of your choice in the following year. I think that's a decent way to handle cases where things are so out of hand that they are warping gameplay in undesirable ways, and quite generous to affected players/collectors.

For things that are overpowered, but not warping the gameplay in a negative way, it's very tricky. Overall I think the best approach is probably to leave it be for people who have it, and not reprint it. Sometimes things that are, or seem to be, overpowered lose their edge over time anyhow as the token environment changes - so the situation may be corrected without direct intervention.

With regard to Belt of the Brave in Particular, I'd prefer it not to have been printed in the first place, but don't think anything needs to be done about it now.

TD could just ignore overpowered tokens for the purposes of power level comparisons of other designs. That seems to have happened this year, with the reprint of 2026 Rare Belt of Ogre Power.

I'd also be OK with Belt of the Brave becoming the new power level associated with the waist slot at Rare.

Considering these points:

1. The waist slot power was established by 2005 - UR - +3 Strength (Girdle of Hill Giant Strength)

21 year old power levels can be eclipsed without creating a ruinous pace of power creep.

Let's look at some other 2005 URs and more recent rares:



Waist slot going from:

+3 STR at UR in 2005, to:
+2 to hit and damage with melee at Rare in 2021

Is a glacial pace of power creep, and not to my mind a big problem - even if it ripples up the rarity tree to give us a +3/+3 UR, a +4/+4 relic, and a +5/+5 Legendary someday.

Of course, I'd prefer it never have been printed: but if TD is granting me power-creep-token wishes, I'd address the fact that we've added 10 slots (3 Beads, a Mark, a Spirit Pet, 2 Hirelings, an Underling, a Follower, and a Henchman) since 2017 with another Underling on the way and making 3 Treasure Iouns Slotless when Safehold I arrives rather than worry about a UR caliber belt being printed at rare.

It's also worth noting that all those Rare tokens are completion tokens.

You're right a lot of the tokens that seem to be outside the typical power ranges for their slot are completion, or treasure only tokens.

Maybe those kind of tokens, and volunteer tokens, shouldn't be considered when trying to balance power of standard set C-UR tokens and transmutes.

I think it's OK for Belt of the Brave to not be looked at as a Rare. It was a completion token instead of a rare in the regular set, and there have been some really nice completion tokens over the years. Plus, the secondary market has been compensating, the current price for Belt of the Brave is equal to some of the lower priced URs now.

Oh nooooo I missed this year's token design!

Apologies if this has already been addressed, but is there a reason why Cleric is not restricted from using Hunter Crossbow, +1 Hunter Crossbow, +2 Darkbane Crossbow, +3 Fellbane Crossbow, Val's +4 Keen Fellbane Crossbow? These (along with the Craven Crossbow, which does prohibit Cleric) are, as far as I can tell, sharp weapons, which Clerics traditionally cannot wield.

If it isn't too late, is it possible to add "All except Cleric" to each of the above?

Ho-Yi Fung wrote: Oh nooooo I missed this year's token design!

Apologies if this has already been addressed, but is there a reason why Cleric is not restricted from using Hunter Crossbow, +1 Hunter Crossbow, +2 Darkbane Crossbow, +3 Fellbane Crossbow, Val's +4 Keen Fellbane Crossbow? These (along with the Craven Crossbow, which does prohibit Cleric) are, as far as I can tell, sharp weapons, which Clerics traditionally cannot wield.

If it isn't too late, is it possible to add "All except Cleric" to each of the above?

It was intentional - there was some c design flavor notes you can probable still find from Jeff talking about the Cravenwood setting. These crossbows are the work of an artificer in the setting I think.

In any event, they were intentionally usable by all from a mechanical perspective.

As far as self limiting my token builds for the difficulty, what is the general consensus for Nightmare? Would limiting myself to 2-3 relics and maybe 1 legendary be okay? Or will a legendary be overpowered?

For example, I usually run Cleric at GenCon. Thinking of doing it on NM this year. Would Drueger's Sacred Necklace be too strong on NM?