TOPIC: 2025 Ultra Rare Tokens

Ho-Yi Fung wrote:
Shield of Guarding:
Is this choice made in coaching? Or does the Paladin call for their AC to be dropped (and the party card edited) after actually getting damaged (not simply hit) for the first time while Guarding? Is the ability so powerful that Paladins need their AC reduced to choose it?
Given it uses similar wording to the 2022 Uncommon Lenses of Guarding , I presume the once per game ability can only be used on redirected hits, not any Melee hit while Guard is active.

I am just going to take out the "or" and +3 as it is confusing to folks. It was put in so players won't think Paladins would get "+4 AND +3 to AC. Now it does not matter. Thanks.

Jeff Martin wrote:

OrionW wrote:
Picc's Grindstone
Is it still a rune stone or is it just a slotless +2 damage item?

It is the UR version of the Enchanter's Whetstone, but instead of +1 to hit and +1 to damage it gives +2 to damage and removes the Rare restriction.

I like it! Seems perfectly reasonable and a logical number based off its counterpart. Nice addition 😊

Jeff Martin wrote: Thanks for your good feedback and fair points. We start class re-design next month....and then the Legendary stuff after that. Stay tuned.

I think that they way the plans are set, it will help the confusion with Rouges. What seems to be a more predominant concern of what’s going on with the new crit gloves, the crossbow and the Rouge class Legendary will be settled during the redesign period before any tokens even have a chance of being altered in any form wether be nerfed or enhanced.

Endgame wrote:

OrionW wrote: Based on Thor's Mug of Melee vs the Death Knight Shield a +4 strength helm with no class restrictions, as a future PYP, would be appropriate.

No, That would not be appropriate for all classes. The point is that the heavy armor classes should have an edge beyond just AC from having access to heavy armor. Everyone currently has access to crown of might, the edge here is DK helm.

We could certainly talk about a heavy armor class limited Cranstons for a future set, but at the moment DK helm is fine and Thor’s mug needs a small drop in damage for something else.

I don't follow you here.

+3 Strength
Set Bonus
+2 AC

Is a lot more than +4 Strength.

+4 Strength feels like a pretty low bar for a new helm in the future to clear.

Matthew Hayward wrote:

Dougout wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote:

Angroch wrote:
Thor's Mug of Melee:

Makes sense that rangers can't use it, but what about monks? Seems like they wouldn't be able to, either, or wouldn't want to, unless it can be used as a FOB? Then it would be pretty (over) powerful for a monk. Unless I'm missing something?

Monks are not obligate melee dual wielders (Rangers are).

Monks can use some two handed melee weapons, and can use one handed melee weapons and not use Flurry of Blows (because the one handed weapons disallows it, or because they choose not to).

Thus Monks can use off-hand, non weapon melee boosters that Rangers can't such as the Brawler's Mug ( tokendb.com/token/brawlers-mug-rare/ ).

Note: Thor's Mug of Melee isn't FoB compatible, because it's not a weapon, and therefore Monks can't slide this in their off-hand when making a melee attack.

Rangers don't have to be dual wielders..

This is false, although I used to think this as well.

From the Players Handbook, page 24-25:

---

"Dual-Wielding Melee Fighting Style

Players choosing the ranger practices a special double
weapon slide representing the ranger’s two weapon
melee attack. Both pucks are slid at the same time,
one in each hand. (Players who are unable to use both
hands may slide both pucks in the same hand, but
they must be slid at the same time.)

During the adventure, if for any reason a ranger loses
one of their melee weapons and doesn’t have access
to a suitable back-up, the ranger may attack with one
weapon, but must still slide two pucks—one of which
is empty. The empty puck cannot deal damage. The
empty puck slide is not considered an attack and does
not trigger things that are triggered by attacks. It can,
and is very likely to, bump other pucks.

Note: Ranger players use one weapon puck when
making ranged attacks.

Ranger Melee Weapon Requirements

A ranger’s main-hand weapon can be any melee
weapon a ranger can use. However, a ranger’s offhand melee weapon must be usable by both ranger
and rogue.

During coaching, if you don’t have a second melee
weapon that fits this criterion, notify your coach so
they can get one for you. "

---

In summary: Rangers melee using both hands of the character is a "must" ability, not a "may" ability - they must equip two weapons in coaching, and must always slide two pucks, even if game scenarios have caused them to lose a weapon.

Ah ha! I figured I was missing something. Thank you for the info! I just like sliding two pucks, so non-FOB is incomprehensible to me.

Jeff Martin wrote: Thanks for your good feedback and fair points. We start class re-design next month....and then the Legendary stuff after that. Stay tuned.

Jeff,
Thank you for reading all of our sometimes long winded and sometimes charged posts. As much as I'm a bit nervous about where things will land, I'm still following these threads with some excitement for the future.

I think all the rogues (other classes too) are o.k. with getting rebalanced and we all just hope that our classes and chosen builds continue to be fun.

I for one really enjoy doing BIG burst damage on sneak attacks some of the time and doing middle-of-the road damage or flanking at other times. It feels very sneaky-sneaky rogue. It will be ok if BIG burst damage gets tweaked to just Big burst damage, but I'm really hoping the ranged build doesn't have to change too too much.

I'd also really like to see Melee Rogues be brought back into play more.

Again, thanks for including us and listening to all of our differing opinions.

Dergidan wrote:

Jeff Martin wrote: Thanks for your good feedback and fair points. We start class re-design next month....and then the Legendary stuff after that. Stay tuned.

Jeff,
Thank you for reading all of our sometimes long winded and sometimes charged posts. As much as I'm a bit nervous about where things will land, I'm still following these threads with some excitement for the future.

I think all the rogues (other classes too) are o.k. with getting rebalanced and we all just hope that our classes and chosen builds continue to be fun.

I for one really enjoy doing BIG burst damage on sneak attacks some of the time and doing middle-of-the road damage or flanking at other times. It feels very sneaky-sneaky rogue. It will be ok if BIG burst damage gets tweaked to just Big burst damage, but I'm really hoping the ranged build doesn't have to change too too much.

I'd also really like to see Melee Rogues be brought back into play more.

Again, thanks for including us and listening to all of our differing opinions.

All good...no worries. Thanks for putting up with my chaotic processes. One of these years I will have more time to do the token design in a more considered fashion.

Jeff Martin wrote:

Dergidan wrote:

Jeff Martin wrote: Thanks for your good feedback and fair points. We start class re-design next month....and then the Legendary stuff after that. Stay tuned.

Jeff,
Thank you for reading all of our sometimes long winded and sometimes charged posts. As much as I'm a bit nervous about where things will land, I'm still following these threads with some excitement for the future.

I think all the rogues (other classes too) are o.k. with getting rebalanced and we all just hope that our classes and chosen builds continue to be fun.

I for one really enjoy doing BIG burst damage on sneak attacks some of the time and doing middle-of-the road damage or flanking at other times. It feels very sneaky-sneaky rogue. It will be ok if BIG burst damage gets tweaked to just Big burst damage, but I'm really hoping the ranged build doesn't have to change too too much.

I'd also really like to see Melee Rogues be brought back into play more.

Again, thanks for including us and listening to all of our differing opinions.

All good...no worries. Thanks for putting up with my chaotic processes. One of these years I will have more time to do the token design in a more considered fashion.

Jeff, you've got a thousand things on your plate, it is wonderful of you given how little time you have to get everything done to take the time to involve the entire community into the token (and class card & legendary balancing) process. It is greatly appreciated.

I completely agree. All the things you have going on plus all the things on the schedule for this year, which I am betting are happening much sooner than you had planned due to how this year is rolling out... plus life at home.. I would say you need a vacation and some time on a beach somewhere just enjoying some peace and quite, but I am not sure you would enjoy it as much as I would:laugh: You handle much more than I could right now and I know I appreciate all you and the others at TDA do

Jeff Martin wrote:

OrionW wrote:
Picc's Grindstone
Is it still a rune stone or is it just a slotless +2 damage item?

It is the UR version of the Enchanter's Whetstone, but instead of +1 to hit and +1 to damage it gives +2 to damage and removes the Rare restriction.

The thing is, no mid level player on up uses the Enchanter's Whetstone. And unless someone points it out to a newbie I doubt they do either. UR weapons can be had on the cheap nowadays and every player commenting on these posts is UR+ so effectively your adding +2 damage for most regular players. A better comparison IMO would be to compare it to the Orb of Annihilation which is a Relic level slotless unmodifiable +5 damage once per game. Compare it to the Relic Orb (which by the way had to be acquired by playing 8 games of VTD so roughly $600 in ticket purchases plus Trade goods) and I'd argue that +2 slotless damage every attack for the cost of a PYP is too good. Even though I didn't like it much as a Runestone I'd much rather see it go back to one and take up a slot then have it as a Slotless. If it has to stay a Slotless then make it +1 damage. +1 Slotless damage will be a Token in huge demand at PYP prices. Just look at the market. Auri's Candles (+2 slotless hp) are going for over $100, the +4 hp Volunteer UR's are selling for $300. Save the +2 slotless damage for a future Relic Token of some sort, maybe a 2026 VTD completion Token.

Rob F wrote:

Jeff Martin wrote:

OrionW wrote:
Picc's Grindstone
Is it still a rune stone or is it just a slotless +2 damage item?

It is the UR version of the Enchanter's Whetstone, but instead of +1 to hit and +1 to damage it gives +2 to damage and removes the Rare restriction.

The thing is, no mid level player on up uses the Enchanter's Whetstone. And unless someone points it out to a newbie I doubt they do either. UR weapons can be had on the cheap nowadays and every player commenting on these posts is UR+ so effectively your adding +2 damage for most regular players. A better comparison IMO would be to compare it to the Orb of Annihilation which is a Relic level slotless unmodifiable +5 damage once per game. Compare it to the Relic Orb (which by the way had to be acquired by playing 8 games of VTD so roughly $600 in ticket purchases plus Trade goods) and I'd argue that +2 slotless damage every attack for the cost of a PYP is too good. Even though I didn't like it much as a Runestone I'd much rather see it go back to one and take up a slot then have it as a Slotless. If it has to stay a Slotless then make it +1 damage. +1 Slotless damage will be a Token in huge demand at PYP prices. Just look at the market. Auri's Candles (+2 slotless hp) are going for over $100, the +4 hp Volunteer UR's are selling for $300. Save the +2 slotless damage for a future Relic Token of some sort, maybe a 2026 VTD completion Token.

Maybe make it +1 as a UR, and add a Relic this year at +2 (maybe Picc's Epic Grindstone).