TOPIC: Colorblind Friendly Token Request

I am a fairly severely colorblind person, not completely colorblind thankfully but enough that it kicks my butt fairly consistently. Last night I went through and tried to sort my tokens and essentially I had to look up every possible uncommon and common on tokendb to see what its rarity was and sort it accordingly. It took forever and sucked.

I'd like to ask if it would be possible to add a shape on the token to denote its rarity somewhere. Maybe under or right beside the transmute item abbreviation. Just something like square for common, circle for uncommon and triangle for rare would make things infinitely more readable for me.

Edit: Throwing my suggestion that was inspired by Kresimir's example up here in hopes more people see it
Essentially have two types of token markers, type and rarity. Type is for things such as if this is a normal token, volunteer, completion, etc. And rarity is Common, uncommon, rare, etc.

Keep type and rarity on a consistent side, i.e. Type on left, rarity on right.

As for placement the year symbol could be edited to include it and I think it would look very nice that way, or we could just clutter up the top of the token where transmute item is. Both examples below:


And a quick suggested key based off Unicode characters:
◆ Standard/Treasure Pull
✪ Completion
♥ Volunteer
♪ Appreciation (Alternatively, $ but I can see this joke landing wrong)

---

● Common
⯅ Uncommon
■ Rare
✦ Ultra-Rare
✷ Relic+ (May not be needed, but I like consistency)

+1

I've requested a change for this multiple times over the course of years. Rares aren't a problem for me, but I can't tell the difference between the commons and uncommons and my wife is tired of me asking.

I am not colorblind and it can be very difficult to sort the green and the black.

+1

+1. Even as someone who isn't color blind, when I first started playing I had no idea that the color of the name indicated the rarity as opposed to color of the token back, expansion symbol, +1/+2 in the name, etc. A rarity symbol would be a very familiar concept to anyone who plays other collectible games.

Its probably to late to do anything for a while since the 2023 set has been off to print for a while now, but definitely something to bring up again when the next design cycle starts.

This would be my suggestion:

Put pack rarity icons on the right side of the transmute letters

Square: common
Triangle: uncommon
Circle: Rare

So a rare weapon would look like:
AG o

For special tokens, put the symbol on both sides of the transmute, like completion tokens are now. Volunteer tokens could get stars.

It is hard to distinguish common from uncommon. Actually in 2020, I had several commons that totally looked purple in print.
For weapons and armor, the transmute code tells common from uncommon, OE or EB versus DS of MH,
But for tokens that exchange for units, it does get a bit tricky.

How about replacing one of the year symbols with a rarity symbol?

I very much like Kriesimir's idea, this would be my suggestions. Either clutter up the top or edit year symbols to fit rarity markers inside of them. I'd suggest two rarity markers per token, one relating to the type of token: Standard, Completion, Volunteer. And another relating to rarity: Common, Uncommon, Rare, and Ultra-rare
Put the type symbol on the left, and the rarity symbol on the right and I think we got a really readable token!

Both examples of layout attached in image


And a quick suggested key based off Unicode characters:

And a quick suggested key based off Unicode characters:
◆ Standard/Treasure Pull
✪ Completion
♥ Volunteer
♪ Appreciation (Alternatively, $ but I can see this joke landing wrong)

---

● Common
⯅ Uncommon
■ Rare
✦ Ultra-Rare
✷ Relic+ (May not be needed, but I like consistency)

100% support but why use symbols vs just a Letter that would be easier to understand? C, U, R. Or if you want to do more rarities you can use two letters. Seem more obvious than a symbol to me.

jedibcg wrote: 100% support but why use symbols vs just a Letter that would be easier to understand? C, U, R. Or if you want to do more rarities you can use two letters. Seem more obvious than a symbol to me.

Nothing against letters, comes down to two things to me though which are size and clarity. Some abbreviations become very long in order to be clear, such as COMMON and COMPLETION. Since those have many common letters you must use more of them to ensure which one is which is clear. So this would be CMN, and CMPLT. Which just requires more space dedicated to it on the token. And if you were to use uncommon abbreviations such as CN and CT for COMMON and COMPLETE people need to look those up, so why not just use symbol at that point, save space and obtain a cleaner look.

I would be happy to have this implemented in any way, I just choose the symbol approach since that was the clearest and cleanest one I personally could visualize