TOPIC: Possible Omni Issues

OrionW wrote: I don’t see a problem with say someone using an Omni to replace #37 in the totem. For random treasure draw Legendaries there are always going to be a folks that don’t know what they pulled and the community is going to end up with an imbalance.

The way I look at it Marble is the new Orange so letting folks start to build items (legendaries) that are going to be components for new transmute paths is a good thing.

Maybe just a blanket rule that if a legendary has two transmute paths Omni’s must be used in the path with the most TGs and we are good?

I think that’s a great idea. It might cause too much book keeping problems but only TD knows that.

I guess the only problem with that is the point of this is to fill in holes where one token is very hard to track down.

Grizwald wrote: Can I use Omni Items to create a Legendary as soon as the recipe is announced, but before the tokens are available?

This has been bouncing around in my head. Could there be any unforeseen future problems, in say 2025 and going forward, where someone is stocked up on Omni Cubes, and on the first day Legendary recipes go live on the website, just orders a Legendary at the start? Because they could feel like the cost of the Cube they already have is less bother than to transmute a new Relic, wait for it to come back to them, and then transmute the Legendary? I guess it would come down to costs of each Token.

I may be missing something, and heaven knows my logic isn’t always sound, but could this cause any problems with the market for future Relics and future Legendaries? Would making the Cubes/Orbs only work to replace Out Of Print Tokens be wise? Good thing there is plenty of space on a TokenDB entry for terms and conditions.

It would save you a few weeks maybe and allow you to be first to market if it really makes a difference....I see the cost to make these as more than the current cost of construction for relics or value of Ur's.

It would be a pain to mange restrictions based on value. Instead it would easier to based on rarity and source. To do otherwise you may be forced to explicitly list all allowed cases where nothing else is allowed.

This has been bouncing around in my head. Could there be any unforeseen future problems, in say 2025 and going forward, where someone is stocked up on Omni Cubes, and on the first day Legendary recipes go live on the website, just orders a Legendary at the start? Because they could feel like the cost of the Cube they already have is less bother than to transmute a new Relic, wait for it to come back to them, and then transmute the Legendary? I guess it would come down to costs of each Token.

I may be missing something, and heaven knows my logic isn’t always sound, but could this cause any problems with the market for future Relics and future Legendaries? Would making the Cubes/Orbs only work to replace Out Of Print Tokens be wise? Good thing there is plenty of space on a TokenDB entry for terms and conditions.

Maybe the easiest solution to this problem is to limit the Omni tokens to only replacing out-of-print tokens? That way they can be used as intended (to replace an OOP token) and wouldn't interfere with the current transmutes. This rule wouldn't require any value determinations.

Manimal wrote:

This has been bouncing around in my head. Could there be any unforeseen future problems, in say 2025 and going forward, where someone is stocked up on Omni Cubes, and on the first day Legendary recipes go live on the website, just orders a Legendary at the start? Because they could feel like the cost of the Cube they already have is less bother than to transmute a new Relic, wait for it to come back to them, and then transmute the Legendary? I guess it would come down to costs of each Token.

I may be missing something, and heaven knows my logic isn’t always sound, but could this cause any problems with the market for future Relics and future Legendaries? Would making the Cubes/Orbs only work to replace Out Of Print Tokens be wise? Good thing there is plenty of space on a TokenDB entry for terms and conditions.

Maybe the easiest solution to this problem is to limit the Omni tokens to only replacing out-of-print tokens? That way they can be used as intended (to replace an OOP token) and wouldn't interfere with the current transmutes. This rule wouldn't require any value determinations.

I like that solution.

Mike Steele wrote:

Manimal wrote:

This has been bouncing around in my head. Could there be any unforeseen future problems, in say 2025 and going forward, where someone is stocked up on Omni Cubes, and on the first day Legendary recipes go live on the website, just orders a Legendary at the start? Because they could feel like the cost of the Cube they already have is less bother than to transmute a new Relic, wait for it to come back to them, and then transmute the Legendary? I guess it would come down to costs of each Token.

I may be missing something, and heaven knows my logic isn’t always sound, but could this cause any problems with the market for future Relics and future Legendaries? Would making the Cubes/Orbs only work to replace Out Of Print Tokens be wise? Good thing there is plenty of space on a TokenDB entry for terms and conditions.

Maybe the easiest solution to this problem is to limit the Omni tokens to only replacing out-of-print tokens? That way they can be used as intended (to replace an OOP token) and wouldn't interfere with the current transmutes. This rule wouldn't require any value determinations.

I like that solution.

+1

Rob F wrote:

Mike Steele wrote:

Manimal wrote:

This has been bouncing around in my head. Could there be any unforeseen future problems, in say 2025 and going forward, where someone is stocked up on Omni Cubes, and on the first day Legendary recipes go live on the website, just orders a Legendary at the start? Because they could feel like the cost of the Cube they already have is less bother than to transmute a new Relic, wait for it to come back to them, and then transmute the Legendary? I guess it would come down to costs of each Token.

I may be missing something, and heaven knows my logic isn’t always sound, but could this cause any problems with the market for future Relics and future Legendaries? Would making the Cubes/Orbs only work to replace Out Of Print Tokens be wise? Good thing there is plenty of space on a TokenDB entry for terms and conditions.

Maybe the easiest solution to this problem is to limit the Omni tokens to only replacing out-of-print tokens? That way they can be used as intended (to replace an OOP token) and wouldn't interfere with the current transmutes. This rule wouldn't require any value determinations.

I like that solution.

+1

Perhaps only the Omni Cube should be limited to OoP relics (and leave Omni Orb unrestricted)? Otherwise, if a token used in a Legendary was reprinted in a later year (like 2023's +2 Sacred Sling , used in 2014's Io's +4 Ultra Keen Slayer Bow ; or the planned 2024 Bracers of Fire, used in 2012's Surtr's Girdle of Fire Giant Strength ), someone who doesn't frequent the design threads might not realise they have a previously unannounced time limit.

Of course, this assumes Relics will never see a reprint.

Ho-Yi Fung wrote:

Rob F wrote:

Mike Steele wrote:

Manimal wrote:

This has been bouncing around in my head. Could there be any unforeseen future problems, in say 2025 and going forward, where someone is stocked up on Omni Cubes, and on the first day Legendary recipes go live on the website, just orders a Legendary at the start? Because they could feel like the cost of the Cube they already have is less bother than to transmute a new Relic, wait for it to come back to them, and then transmute the Legendary? I guess it would come down to costs of each Token.

I may be missing something, and heaven knows my logic isn’t always sound, but could this cause any problems with the market for future Relics and future Legendaries? Would making the Cubes/Orbs only work to replace Out Of Print Tokens be wise? Good thing there is plenty of space on a TokenDB entry for terms and conditions.

Maybe the easiest solution to this problem is to limit the Omni tokens to only replacing out-of-print tokens? That way they can be used as intended (to replace an OOP token) and wouldn't interfere with the current transmutes. This rule wouldn't require any value determinations.

I like that solution.

+1

Perhaps only the Omni Cube should be limited to OoP relics (and leave Omni Orb unrestricted)? Otherwise, if a token used in a Legendary was reprinted in a later year (like 2023's +2 Sacred Sling , used in 2014's Io's +4 Ultra Keen Slayer Bow ; or the planned 2024 Bracers of Fire, used in 2012's Surtr's Girdle of Fire Giant Strength ), someone who doesn't frequent the design threads might not realise they have a previously unannounced time limit.

Of course, this assumes Relics will never see a reprint.

I get where you are coming from but I don’t think that truly doesn’t matter. The reprinted items will have a cost of between $80-$110 depending on when in the year they were bought, the moment they become “ OOP “ they can create an Omni Orb. This in theory will act in the same fashion. The Omni Orb will cost roughly the same ( Ideal of $100 in trade goods / others ) which will make it act the same as a normal PYP. I’m this method no matter wether I’m print or OOP will be ideally the same in cost. The difference is that the Orb can only be used in the recipe where as thr PYP can be used as an item in your build and as the item in the recipe. Further more, the Orb can be moved depending on the crafter. What I mean is if I buy the pyp for a crafted item it can only ever be used for that, whereas the orb can be used for any OOP token. If I wanted to make Io’s and don’t have the UR, I can use the orb. If I decide I don’t want it and I want a Asher’s Viper, the orb can be moved to that recipe.

Rob F wrote:

Mike Steele wrote:

Manimal wrote:

This has been bouncing around in my head. Could there be any unforeseen future problems, in say 2025 and going forward, where someone is stocked up on Omni Cubes, and on the first day Legendary recipes go live on the website, just orders a Legendary at the start? Because they could feel like the cost of the Cube they already have is less bother than to transmute a new Relic, wait for it to come back to them, and then transmute the Legendary? I guess it would come down to costs of each Token.

I may be missing something, and heaven knows my logic isn’t always sound, but could this cause any problems with the market for future Relics and future Legendaries? Would making the Cubes/Orbs only work to replace Out Of Print Tokens be wise? Good thing there is plenty of space on a TokenDB entry for terms and conditions.

Maybe the easiest solution to this problem is to limit the Omni tokens to only replacing out-of-print tokens? That way they can be used as intended (to replace an OOP token) and wouldn't interfere with the current transmutes. This rule wouldn't require any value determinations.

I like that solution.

+1

But why? This just seems to be solving a problem that doesn't exist. So what if Billy gets his legendary in hand on Jan 10th instead of Jan 24th? It's not like the resale market of TD is something like MTG where having an item two weeks ahead of someone else might actually make a difference in anything other than maybe bragging rights?

I can't think of any real reason not to let someone use them for current transmutes

I agree that this is making the process more complicated for no meaningful gain. Just let it replace any token of the type it will replace

You could use them to hedge against TG inflation. Make 100 cubes and orbs now and cash them in / sell them later. Not really something I’d get very concerned about thouh