TOPIC: 2021 Rare Feedback

Iross wrote:

Marc D wrote:

Endgame wrote:

Guedoji wrote: Love how Amulet of Flawsight keeps getting stronger

If I read it correctly, the rogue can’t ignore immune to sneak attack ability now, so I think it lost a pretty big advantage.

If you can sneak it, you can crit it. However, there are a bunch of things you can’t sneak attack.

IMO, this should be reversed

The way I read it, the Rogues now ignore immunity only when making a sneak attack. It's a bit difficult to piece together from the PHB, but the key bit for both sneak attack and crits is "vital anatomy". It seems that:
Sneak Attack Immune == Critical Immune

My (admittedly hopeful) reading of Amulet of Flawsight is that it removes sneak attack immunity AND critical hits for monsters otherwise immune due to lack of vital anatomy. It still wouldn't allow sneak attack due to "immune to surprise".

I like the change because it really targets the core issues I see with sneak attack at Rare and lower level: low melee To Hit on Rogues and half the monsters are outright immune. This targets both those issues while preserving space for UR items, since it's Rogue only and only when you sneak.

For consistency it would be good to state this directly on the token, otherwise I agree with Arnold and Endgame that it would be better to reverse the effect, letting Rogues ignore Sneak Attack immunity instead of Critical immunity. A new player would likely be disappointed to learn that it only negates something which will very rarely happen (since without the legendary necklace, Rogues will only crit on a natural 20).

Thanks for the feedback, but I can think of only 2 monsters in the history of TD that were able to be Crit'ed but were not able to be Sneak Attacked. I think removing the Crit issue will be a big boon to Red-level rogues.

Arcanist Kolixela wrote:

Endgame wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote:

Jeff Martin wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote: Necklace of Carnage - Whoa... under VTD rules where with sufficient to-hit bonuses (e.g. +10 or so on HC, +15 or so on NM) this is worth 8 points of damage a round.

What this puck is worth in terms of average damage, given this to-hit chance:

Puck hit % : Both pucks hit % : Expected dmg per rnd : Comparison - expected dmg/rnd from Barb token

20% :  4% : 0.4 : 0.6
33% : 11% : 1.1 : 1
50% : 25% : 2.5 : 1.5
66% : 44% : 4.4 : 2
75% : 56% : 5.6 : 2.25
80% : 64% : 6.4 : 2.4
90% : 81% : 8.1 : 2.7

This token trounces the Barbarian one once the per-puck hit rate crosses around 40%.

I'd scale this down to 4 or 5, or make it 1 room / game, or 1 or 2 per game.

Please take into consideration that the Ranger has to hit TWICE to get any of this benefit.

The 2nd column is the probability of the ranger hitting twice, given the odds that either puck hits as set in the first column.

The 3rd column are the average damage per round given the odds that each puck hits with the chance of the value in the first column, or both pucks hit with the value in the 2nd column.

For what it’s worth, here is a level 4 ranger build using 4*s, rares, and uncommons that has +13 hit. Pretty sure this could manage carnage every round on normal and maybe even hardcore with a bard and cleric.

truedungeon.com/forum?view=topic&catid=568&id=248764#349113

I wonder. Would an existing Best in Slot Ranger benefit from dropping their existing UR necklace in favor of this rare?

Seems pretty strong. It seems like all the guys on epic say that +to hit is not needed because they hit on everything but I guess that’s only +5 dam.

Arcanist Kolixela wrote:

Endgame wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote:

Jeff Martin wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote: Necklace of Carnage - Whoa... under VTD rules where with sufficient to-hit bonuses (e.g. +10 or so on HC, +15 or so on NM) this is worth 8 points of damage a round.

What this puck is worth in terms of average damage, given this to-hit chance:

Puck hit % : Both pucks hit % : Expected dmg per rnd : Comparison - expected dmg/rnd from Barb token

20% :  4% : 0.4 : 0.6
33% : 11% : 1.1 : 1
50% : 25% : 2.5 : 1.5
66% : 44% : 4.4 : 2
75% : 56% : 5.6 : 2.25
80% : 64% : 6.4 : 2.4
90% : 81% : 8.1 : 2.7

This token trounces the Barbarian one once the per-puck hit rate crosses around 40%.

I'd scale this down to 4 or 5, or make it 1 room / game, or 1 or 2 per game.

Please take into consideration that the Ranger has to hit TWICE to get any of this benefit.

The 2nd column is the probability of the ranger hitting twice, given the odds that either puck hits as set in the first column.

The 3rd column are the average damage per round given the odds that each puck hits with the chance of the value in the first column, or both pucks hit with the value in the 2nd column.

For what it’s worth, here is a level 4 ranger build using 4*s, rares, and uncommons that has +13 hit. Pretty sure this could manage carnage every round on normal and maybe even hardcore with a bard and cleric.

truedungeon.com/forum?view=topic&catid=568&id=248764#349113

I wonder. Would an existing Best in Slot Ranger benefit from dropping their existing UR necklace in favor of this rare?

BIS Ranger is probably using class legendary... but around 8 Damage / round for a melee ranger.

Endgame wrote:

Arcanist Kolixela wrote:

Endgame wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote:

Jeff Martin wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote: Necklace of Carnage - Whoa... under VTD rules where with sufficient to-hit bonuses (e.g. +10 or so on HC, +15 or so on NM) this is worth 8 points of damage a round.

What this puck is worth in terms of average damage, given this to-hit chance:

Puck hit % : Both pucks hit % : Expected dmg per rnd : Comparison - expected dmg/rnd from Barb token

20% :  4% : 0.4 : 0.6
33% : 11% : 1.1 : 1
50% : 25% : 2.5 : 1.5
66% : 44% : 4.4 : 2
75% : 56% : 5.6 : 2.25
80% : 64% : 6.4 : 2.4
90% : 81% : 8.1 : 2.7

This token trounces the Barbarian one once the per-puck hit rate crosses around 40%.

I'd scale this down to 4 or 5, or make it 1 room / game, or 1 or 2 per game.

Please take into consideration that the Ranger has to hit TWICE to get any of this benefit.

The 2nd column is the probability of the ranger hitting twice, given the odds that either puck hits as set in the first column.

The 3rd column are the average damage per round given the odds that each puck hits with the chance of the value in the first column, or both pucks hit with the value in the 2nd column.

For what it’s worth, here is a level 4 ranger build using 4*s, rares, and uncommons that has +13 hit. Pretty sure this could manage carnage every round on normal and maybe even hardcore with a bard and cleric.

truedungeon.com/forum?view=topic&catid=568&id=248764#349113

I wonder. Would an existing Best in Slot Ranger benefit from dropping their existing UR necklace in favor of this rare?

BIS Ranger is probably using class legendary...

Bis melee ranger isn’t using the legendary. It only boosted ranged

Miathan wrote:

Endgame wrote:

Arcanist Kolixela wrote:

Endgame wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote:

Jeff Martin wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote: Necklace of Carnage - Whoa... under VTD rules where with sufficient to-hit bonuses (e.g. +10 or so on HC, +15 or so on NM) this is worth 8 points of damage a round.

What this puck is worth in terms of average damage, given this to-hit chance:

Puck hit % : Both pucks hit % : Expected dmg per rnd : Comparison - expected dmg/rnd from Barb token

20% :  4% : 0.4 : 0.6
33% : 11% : 1.1 : 1
50% : 25% : 2.5 : 1.5
66% : 44% : 4.4 : 2
75% : 56% : 5.6 : 2.25
80% : 64% : 6.4 : 2.4
90% : 81% : 8.1 : 2.7

This token trounces the Barbarian one once the per-puck hit rate crosses around 40%.

I'd scale this down to 4 or 5, or make it 1 room / game, or 1 or 2 per game.

Please take into consideration that the Ranger has to hit TWICE to get any of this benefit.

The 2nd column is the probability of the ranger hitting twice, given the odds that either puck hits as set in the first column.

The 3rd column are the average damage per round given the odds that each puck hits with the chance of the value in the first column, or both pucks hit with the value in the 2nd column.

For what it’s worth, here is a level 4 ranger build using 4*s, rares, and uncommons that has +13 hit. Pretty sure this could manage carnage every round on normal and maybe even hardcore with a bard and cleric.

truedungeon.com/forum?view=topic&catid=568&id=248764#349113

I wonder. Would an existing Best in Slot Ranger benefit from dropping their existing UR necklace in favor of this rare?

BIS Ranger is probably using class legendary...

Bis melee ranger isn’t using the legendary. It only boosted ranged

IMO, The best possible token for that slot is a +5 con, +9 Ranged Damage token, even if your build is a primary melee build.

also IMO, hybrid ranger best ranger. This discussion is for a Different thread though.

Jeff Martin wrote:

Iross wrote:

Marc D wrote:

Endgame wrote:

Guedoji wrote: Love how Amulet of Flawsight keeps getting stronger

If I read it correctly, the rogue can’t ignore immune to sneak attack ability now, so I think it lost a pretty big advantage.

If you can sneak it, you can crit it. However, there are a bunch of things you can’t sneak attack.

IMO, this should be reversed

The way I read it, the Rogues now ignore immunity only when making a sneak attack. It's a bit difficult to piece together from the PHB, but the key bit for both sneak attack and crits is "vital anatomy". It seems that:
Sneak Attack Immune == Critical Immune

My (admittedly hopeful) reading of Amulet of Flawsight is that it removes sneak attack immunity AND critical hits for monsters otherwise immune due to lack of vital anatomy. It still wouldn't allow sneak attack due to "immune to surprise".

I like the change because it really targets the core issues I see with sneak attack at Rare and lower level: low melee To Hit on Rogues and half the monsters are outright immune. This targets both those issues while preserving space for UR items, since it's Rogue only and only when you sneak.

For consistency it would be good to state this directly on the token, otherwise I agree with Arnold and Endgame that it would be better to reverse the effect, letting Rogues ignore Sneak Attack immunity instead of Critical immunity. A new player would likely be disappointed to learn that it only negates something which will very rarely happen (since without the legendary necklace, Rogues will only crit on a natural 20).

Thanks for the feedback, but I can think of only 2 monsters in the history of TD that were able to be Crit'ed but were not able to be Sneak Attacked. I think removing the Crit issue will be a big boon to Red-level rogues.

This is huge for Rare-level Rogues, thank you for this.

Guedoji wrote:

Jeff Martin wrote:

Iross wrote:

Marc D wrote:

Endgame wrote:

Guedoji wrote: Love how Amulet of Flawsight keeps getting stronger

If I read it correctly, the rogue can’t ignore immune to sneak attack ability now, so I think it lost a pretty big advantage.

If you can sneak it, you can crit it. However, there are a bunch of things you can’t sneak attack.

IMO, this should be reversed

The way I read it, the Rogues now ignore immunity only when making a sneak attack. It's a bit difficult to piece together from the PHB, but the key bit for both sneak attack and crits is "vital anatomy". It seems that:
Sneak Attack Immune == Critical Immune

My (admittedly hopeful) reading of Amulet of Flawsight is that it removes sneak attack immunity AND critical hits for monsters otherwise immune due to lack of vital anatomy. It still wouldn't allow sneak attack due to "immune to surprise".

I like the change because it really targets the core issues I see with sneak attack at Rare and lower level: low melee To Hit on Rogues and half the monsters are outright immune. This targets both those issues while preserving space for UR items, since it's Rogue only and only when you sneak.

For consistency it would be good to state this directly on the token, otherwise I agree with Arnold and Endgame that it would be better to reverse the effect, letting Rogues ignore Sneak Attack immunity instead of Critical immunity. A new player would likely be disappointed to learn that it only negates something which will very rarely happen (since without the legendary necklace, Rogues will only crit on a natural 20).

Thanks for the feedback, but I can think of only 2 monsters in the history of TD that were able to be Crit'ed but were not able to be Sneak Attacked. I think removing the Crit issue will be a big boon to Red-level rogues.

This is huge for Rare-level Rogues, thank you for this.

Agreed. Thank you for helping Rogues get full use of their signature ability at Red level!

Jeff Martin wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote: Could Pendant of Surging gain:

You may equip when also equipping Shaman's Greater Necklace or Iktomi's Shaper Necklace

?

We will tweak all the class Relics and Legendaries after this process is over. It would have been better to design all of these at one time, but that is something a smart person would have done. Stay tuned.

Thanks, Jeff! Hopefully the Druid Legendary gets more than a tweak.

Marc D wrote:

Guedoji wrote:

Jeff Martin wrote:

Iross wrote:

Marc D wrote:

Endgame wrote:

Guedoji wrote: Love how Amulet of Flawsight keeps getting stronger

If I read it correctly, the rogue can’t ignore immune to sneak attack ability now, so I think it lost a pretty big advantage.

If you can sneak it, you can crit it. However, there are a bunch of things you can’t sneak attack.

IMO, this should be reversed

The way I read it, the Rogues now ignore immunity only when making a sneak attack. It's a bit difficult to piece together from the PHB, but the key bit for both sneak attack and crits is "vital anatomy". It seems that:
Sneak Attack Immune == Critical Immune

My (admittedly hopeful) reading of Amulet of Flawsight is that it removes sneak attack immunity AND critical hits for monsters otherwise immune due to lack of vital anatomy. It still wouldn't allow sneak attack due to "immune to surprise".

I like the change because it really targets the core issues I see with sneak attack at Rare and lower level: low melee To Hit on Rogues and half the monsters are outright immune. This targets both those issues while preserving space for UR items, since it's Rogue only and only when you sneak.

For consistency it would be good to state this directly on the token, otherwise I agree with Arnold and Endgame that it would be better to reverse the effect, letting Rogues ignore Sneak Attack immunity instead of Critical immunity. A new player would likely be disappointed to learn that it only negates something which will very rarely happen (since without the legendary necklace, Rogues will only crit on a natural 20).

Thanks for the feedback, but I can think of only 2 monsters in the history of TD that were able to be Crit'ed but were not able to be Sneak Attacked. I think removing the Crit issue will be a big boon to Red-level rogues.

This is huge for Rare-level Rogues, thank you for this.

Agreed. Thank you for helping Rogues get full use of their signature ability at Red level!

Yes, thanks for this So if I understand correctly, you're saying that Critical Attack immunities generally auto-include Sneak Attack immunities and therefore the Amulet negates both? My previous post could probably have been better worded, I was suggesting that it should negate either both or just Sneak. If it negates both, that's a great thing for Red players. I do think it would be good to state on the token itself that it negates Sneak immunity, as otherwise it doesn't match the wording on the other Rogue tokens like Artificer's Bracelets, Bracers of Guided Strike, etc so could be confusing to players who own both.

Jeff, I see that there isn't a Rare Polymorph Potion in the set currently. How about a Potion Polymorph Fairie with Flying or a Polymorph Potion that grants Leaping Attack (which shouldn't be a problem since there is already a Potion of Leaping Attack). It would be nice to have some unique Polymorph Potions to pick from.

Iross wrote:

Marc D wrote:

Guedoji wrote:

Jeff Martin wrote:

Iross wrote:

Marc D wrote:

Endgame wrote:

Guedoji wrote: Love how Amulet of Flawsight keeps getting stronger

If I read it correctly, the rogue can’t ignore immune to sneak attack ability now, so I think it lost a pretty big advantage.

If you can sneak it, you can crit it. However, there are a bunch of things you can’t sneak attack.

IMO, this should be reversed

The way I read it, the Rogues now ignore immunity only when making a sneak attack. It's a bit difficult to piece together from the PHB, but the key bit for both sneak attack and crits is "vital anatomy". It seems that:
Sneak Attack Immune == Critical Immune

My (admittedly hopeful) reading of Amulet of Flawsight is that it removes sneak attack immunity AND critical hits for monsters otherwise immune due to lack of vital anatomy. It still wouldn't allow sneak attack due to "immune to surprise".

I like the change because it really targets the core issues I see with sneak attack at Rare and lower level: low melee To Hit on Rogues and half the monsters are outright immune. This targets both those issues while preserving space for UR items, since it's Rogue only and only when you sneak.

For consistency it would be good to state this directly on the token, otherwise I agree with Arnold and Endgame that it would be better to reverse the effect, letting Rogues ignore Sneak Attack immunity instead of Critical immunity. A new player would likely be disappointed to learn that it only negates something which will very rarely happen (since without the legendary necklace, Rogues will only crit on a natural 20).

Thanks for the feedback, but I can think of only 2 monsters in the history of TD that were able to be Crit'ed but were not able to be Sneak Attacked. I think removing the Crit issue will be a big boon to Red-level rogues.

This is huge for Rare-level Rogues, thank you for this.

Agreed. Thank you for helping Rogues get full use of their signature ability at Red level!

Yes, thanks for this So if I understand correctly, you're saying that Critical Attack immunities generally auto-include Sneak Attack immunities and therefore the Amulet negates both? My previous post could probably have been better worded, I was suggesting that it should negate either both or just Sneak. If it negates both, that's a great thing for Red players. I do think it would be good to state on the token itself that it negates Sneak immunity, as otherwise it doesn't match the wording on the other Rogue tokens like Artificer's Bracelets, Bracers of Guided Strike, etc so could be confusing to players who own both.

He said it does not negate sneak attack immunity, but does negate critical attack immunity, stating monsters with both sneak attack and crit immunities are extremely rare, so the crit immunity piece will cover most cases.

Guedoji wrote:
He said it does not negate sneak attack immunity, but does negate critical attack immunity, stating monsters with sneak attack immunities are extremely rare.

Thanks, I was having a bit of trouble parsing all the quotes.