TOPIC: Thoughts on the New Tokens....

Maybe regular for the new players, Hardcore for the Red Monster Groups, and Super-Duper Hardcore for the Purple Monster Groups?<br /><br />Mike<br /><br />

<br />

<br />But isn't part of that why Jeff is really turning up the difficulty on Hardcore mode?<br />To challenge those who max out. While people may want the best, part of the draw is also the difficulty. That is one thing about the puzzle aspect, half plate, and shiny weapons are no good against that.<br /><br />But then I know nothing and should probably keep quiet. *flits off back to work*<br />

<br /><br />Joyus,<br /><br />You are right partially.  Hardcore is to challenge experienced players that have a lot of tokens, yes, but there is even a spread currently among Harcore players.  There is a huge difference between the Red Monster groups (lets call them RMGs for short) and the Purple Monster groups (PMGs).  If True Dungeon starts creating extremely powerful Ultra Rares, this spread will widen and then you are stuck with "How difficult should Hardcore be?"  If you aim for the RMGs, then the PMGs will find it to easy.  If you aim in the middle then as the gap widens, the RMGs will find the dungeons getting more difficult each year.  <br /><br />You are also right that puzzles are more of an equalizer but there is also a spread in the amount of healing between RMGs and PMGs to help recover from traps.  PGMs tend to have better saves and the ability to bounce back from a bad trap room.<br /><br />Anyway, those are my thoughts.  =^)<br /><br /><br /><br /><br />

Could just collect tickets from the super-duper group, escort them into the first room, and tell them that the ceiling collapses and they each take 453d20 damage. Reflex save for half.

Mike,<br /><br />I understand what you are saying about Standard vs. Vintage although that might get a little complex.  I think TD resolves the new player vs. experienced player with Normal/Hardcore.  <br /><br />As for Magic, I'm not sure you can say they are avoiding the power creep issue though.  The first set is the exception and things like Black Lotus, Ancestral Recall, and even Lightning Bolt were printed out of a lack of experience with just how powerful they would eventually be.  I even recall in one interview Richard Garfield called these cards a "mistake".  But in recent years, I have seen cards that shift the power curve.  "Shatter" for example has been made obsolete with superior options.  And just looking at Green; Eternal Witness, Sakura-Tribe Elder, Ohran Viper, Call of the Herd, even Wild Mongrel (over the Grizzly Bear) all push the power envelope in Magic, granted slowly.  And Cruicible of the Worlds went straight into my Vintage deck.  <br /><br />As for this years batch of tokens, I would contend that while certain tokens make certain classes more powerful, there are no unbalanced tokens.  If you look at the game impact for groups, which is really what creates the gap between groups, I think you might see what I am talking about.<br />Wizards are in my opinion the weakest class so the Cloak of the Mage does nothing to the power curve.  <br /><br />Here is an interesting thought exercise.<br /><br />I think about game impact this way.  One point of AC means that if you are attacked, there is a 5% chance that this 1 point of AC could come into play (i.e. a hit becomes a miss).  As an example, if you have say 3 combats per dungeon, each combat lasts say 8 rounds (although I think this is a bit long but for arguments sake, lets go with it), and say 6 people average during each combat (7 for the first, 6 for the second, and 5 for the 3rd).  There are 24 attacks split between 6 people so on average everyone will be attacked 4 times per dungeon.  There is only a 19% chance (roughly) that this one point of AC will make a difference on any of the attacks.  If each attack roughly 5-8 points of damage, 1 point of AC roughly translates to preventing 1 point of damage per dungeon, which isn't quite unbalancing.  <br /><br />Now weapons:  The main benefit of dealing more damage is that you end combat sooner and take less damage.  For arguments sake, Monsters have say 160HPs.  For 8 rounds of combat, the group collectively needs to fo 20HPs per round.  If one person deals 1 more point of damage more per hit and hits say 40% of the time, then the delta in damage is 0.4 points of damage per round over 8 rounds or 3.2 points of damage per combat.  This by itself typically wouldn't end combat a round early.  If everyone in the group had this +1 bonus, then combat on average would end a round early sparing the group from one blow 5-8HPs of damage which might or might not hit.  But even so, this isn't unbalancing.  <br /><br />Of course, this is a simplified example but sort of illustrates the point that even "power tokens" for one player don't have that much influence on the game.  This also illustrates why healing is so powerful.  A handful of Cure Minor Wound Potions can erase a substantial deficiency in AC.<br /><br />Its an interesting concept though and one that I think could be quantified.  I was thinking of coming up with a "power" sheet to ranking in game influence of tokens.  Hmm... thoughts?<br /><br /><br />

i have a token that just might help me out of that situation. DM's discretion of course.  =|

<br /> I was thinking of coming up with a "power" sheet to ranking in game influence of tokens.  Hmm... thoughts?<br />

<br /><br />I don't know about ranking all the tokens, but I think it would be neat to get people's opinions on the "Power 9" of the token world.

I'd put Dragonscale armor and Horn of Plenty on that list.<br /><br />Brian<br />

Hi Douglas,<br /><br />Thanks for the response.  I agree that in some areas Magic has become more powerful - particularly with creatures - but I think that's to bring the game into balance rather because in some areas Magic was underpowered.  And they certainly have made mistakes, like with Skullclamp, in making overpowered cards even in recent sets.  I still think they are trying to avoid power creep though, and the changes like going from counterspell to cancel (depowering), or making creatures more powerful, is to balance the game.  I know that True Dungeon and Magic are so different though that comparisons between the two only go so far.  <br /><br />I love True Dungeon and I love the tokens, I'm certainly not unhappy with it at all.  I'm just concerned about the obvious power creep that is happening - although I understand why it is.  I agree with your percentages, although your numbers are thrown off when the change in AC is 5-6 instead of 1 (like with a Druid that has Dragonscale Armor and Shield vs. one without those) - that starts becoming a significant change.  <br /><br />On the other hand - I also see the desire for all players to have an equal chance at survival regardless of what character classes they play.  There is a reason lots of people like to play the "lobster" or "tank" classes - Cleric/Fighter/Paladin (and now Druid?) - they have more hit points, and historically more AC, which makes them more survivable.  Obviously in combat, but even with traps they have an advantage - because if everyone in the group is taking 2 pts. damage per failed puzzle or sprung trap, a Fighter can survive a LOT longer taking that damage than a Wizard.  So, if the new tokens are an effort to balance the classes more by evening out the AC level so that players have an equal chance to survive the dungeon no matter what class they take, I can certainly support that.  <br /><br />And hey, if TD comes out with a +5 Broadsword, +4 Shield with Reverse Missiles, and +15 Armor of Invulnerability - I'll be the first in line to get them!!<br /><br />Mike<br /><br />

<br />Mike,<br /><br />I understand what you are saying about Standard vs. Vintage although that might get a little complex.  I think TD resolves the new player vs. experienced player with Normal/Hardcore.  <br /><br />As for Magic, I'm not sure you can say they are avoiding the power creep issue though.  The first set is the exception and things like Black Lotus, Ancestral Recall, and even Lightning Bolt were printed out of a lack of experience with just how powerful they would eventually be.  I even recall in one interview Richard Garfield called these cards a "mistake".  But in recent years, I have seen cards that shift the power curve.  "Shatter" for example has been made obsolete with superior options.  And just looking at Green; Eternal Witness, Sakura-Tribe Elder, Ohran Viper, Call of the Herd, even Wild Mongrel (over the Grizzly Bear) all push the power envelope in Magic, granted slowly.  And Cruicible of the Worlds went straight into my Vintage deck.  <br /><br />As for this years batch of tokens, I would contend that while certain tokens make certain classes more powerful, there are no unbalanced tokens.  If you look at the game impact for groups, which is really what creates the gap between groups, I think you might see what I am talking about.<br />Wizards are in my opinion the weakest class so the Cloak of the Mage does nothing to the power curve.  <br /><br />Here is an interesting thought exercise.<br /><br />I think about game impact this way.  One point of AC means that if you are attacked, there is a 5% chance that this 1 point of AC could come into play (i.e. a hit becomes a miss).  As an example, if you have say 3 combats per dungeon, each combat lasts say 8 rounds (although I think this is a bit long but for arguments sake, lets go with it), and say 6 people average during each combat (7 for the first, 6 for the second, and 5 for the 3rd).  There are 24 attacks split between 6 people so on average everyone will be attacked 4 times per dungeon.  There is only a 19% chance (roughly) that this one point of AC will make a difference on any of the attacks.  If each attack roughly 5-8 points of damage, 1 point of AC roughly translates to preventing 1 point of damage per dungeon, which isn't quite unbalancing.  <br /><br />Now weapons:  The main benefit of dealing more damage is that you end combat sooner and take less damage.  For arguments sake, Monsters have say 160HPs.  For 8 rounds of combat, the group collectively needs to fo 20HPs per round.  If one person deals 1 more point of damage more per hit and hits say 40% of the time, then the delta in damage is 0.4 points of damage per round over 8 rounds or 3.2 points of damage per combat.  This by itself typically wouldn't end combat a round early.  If everyone in the group had this +1 bonus, then combat on average would end a round early sparing the group from one blow 5-8HPs of damage which might or might not hit.  But even so, this isn't unbalancing.  <br /><br />Of course, this is a simplified example but sort of illustrates the point that even "power tokens" for one player don't have that much influence on the game.  This also illustrates why healing is so powerful.  A handful of Cure Minor Wound Potions can erase a substantial deficiency in AC.<br /><br />Its an interesting concept though and one that I think could be quantified.  I was thinking of coming up with a "power" sheet to ranking in game influence of tokens.  Hmm... thoughts?<br /><br /><br /><br />

It would be fun to see some sort of power sheet ranking the tokens - or the equivalent of a Power 9  =D<br /><br />

<br />

<br /> I was thinking of coming up with a "power" sheet to ranking in game influence of tokens.  Hmm... thoughts?<br />

<br /><br />I don't know about ranking all the tokens, but I think it would be neat to get people's opinions on the "Power 9" of the token world.<br />

<br />

<br /> I was thinking of coming up with a "power" sheet to ranking in game influence of tokens.  Hmm... thoughts?<br />

<br /><br />I don't know about ranking all the tokens, but I think it would be neat to get people's opinions on the "Power 9" of the token world.<br />

<br /><br />Perhaps the Gem of Healing is high on that list?  Healing is key, and the Gem of Healing can heal up to 35 points of damage (40 if the group has the Barbarian as an 8th member). 

Going back to the AC vs weapon thing for a minute...as this is one of my FAV debates...<br /><br />I think one of the reasons why I like a shield over a two handed weapon is that the shield is a "non-luck based bonus" - it adds 2 or 3 to your AC...granted the luck of the monster roll is a factor on IF the monster hits or misses you, but that luck is totally random (d20 roll+any monster bonus).<br /><br />Now that said - rolling - um, sliding to hit a monster is not totally random...some players know they have problems getting a slider over the line, let alone in a certain area to wield a hit.  For these players - I say take the most AC you can get.  Likewise a player knows if they are streaky (hot/cold) or consistent on the boards...<br /><br />So players that can slide 20's 2 times or more in any given combat - these players need to think about damage productivity and taking on the harder hitting classes - even at a cost of AC, while the streaky or poor sliders should consider armoring up.  <br /><br />While I understand that a swift combat is to the players advantage...we do need to weigh in the options and skills of the players.  If those are weighted and well known factors to the group - AC and damage dealers can easily decide what things they use and how they outfit.  Heck a party can form around the sliding skills and use of weapons and armor if they wanted - and thought it would be a benefit to do so.<br /><br />G

<br /><br />Perhaps the Gem of Healing is high on that list?  Healing is key, and the Gem of Healing can heal up to 35 points of damage (40 if the group has the Barbarian as an 8th member).  <br />

<br /><br /><br />No consumable rates highly for me. Spend a VR just to save my teammates? HA! As if. They can just go buy another ticket if they want to go on. I'm keeping my purp.<br />

<br />Going back to the AC vs weapon thing for a minute...as this is one of my FAV debates...<br />I think one of the reasons why I like a shield over a two handed weapon is that the shield is a "non-luck based bonus" - it adds 2 or 3 to your AC...granted the luck of the monster roll is a factor on IF the monster hits or misses you, but that luck is totally random (d20 roll+any monster bonus).<br />Now that said - rolling - um, sliding to hit a monster is not totally random...some players know they have problems getting a slider over the line, let alone in a certain area to wield a hit.  For these players - I say take the most AC you can get.  Likewise a player knows if they are streaky (hot/cold) or consistent on the boards...<br />So players that can slide 20's 2 times or more in any given combat - these players need to think about damage productivity and taking on the harder hitting classes - even at a cost of AC, while the streaky or poor sliders should consider armoring up.  <br />While I understand that a swift combat is to the players advantage...we do need to weigh in the options and skills of the players.  If those are weighted and well known factors to the group - AC and damage dealers can easily decide what things they use and how they outfit.  Heck a party can form around the sliding skills and use of weapons and armor if they wanted - and thought it would be a benefit to do so.<br />G<br />

<br /><br />Yup, the old Great Sword vs. Shield Debate.  The reason that I'd pick the the damage is that it applies every time you swing.  While its true that your sliding skill should be taken into consideration, I think even with an average slider will hit more often than not and those 2 extra points per hit will add up.<br /><br />As for the AC, you may never get attacked.<br /><br />Its interesting though.  Forgetting for a moment how this would happen logistically, imagine there are 1,000,000 people in the group.    The chance that you would be attacked on any given round is 1 in a million, right?  So its clear that you would opt for more damage vs. AC.  Afterall, the AC only has a 1 in a million chance of even having a chance of coming into play and you know the extra damage will.  <br /><br />At the other end, you are alone.  Its just you against the monster.  I think I would probably favor AC over Damage but its close.  +2 AC has a 10% chance per attack of preventing like 5-8 points of damage.  Over 8 rounds, this could make the difference between life and death.  <br /><br />So somewhere in the middle is the inflection point, or the point at which you would opt for Damage instead of AC.  For me, I think with 3 or more people in the group, go with the Damage over the AC.<br /><br />Haha!  But then again, this assumes that you are doing what is best for the group and not what is best for you.  And if your goal is simply to survive well, then maxing out your AC is the way to go.